2009 Rookie Scouting Portfolio Samples: UVA RB Cedric Peerman (1 Viewer)

As promised (and a little early), here is another set of sample 2009 RSP checklists and profiles. This is my way of organizing my notes when I review film. I believe this structure makes it a little easier for me to make sure I'm watching for a player to demonstrate specific skill sets and hopefully easier for a reader to examine what I might have to say about aspects of a player's game.

These samples are from of University of Virginia RB Cedric Peerman against two defenses that send their share of picks to the NFL: Miami and Virginia Tech. These two games made me a huge fan of Peerman as an NFL prospect and one of my picks as a "surprise impact player" in this draft based on what little I've seen of him in the mainstream media. He's probably going to be near the top of my RB rankings and this probably an example of how my rankings will differ from the norm. Regardless of whether I hit or miss on the rankings, you'll see that the work I did to arrive at my views will give a barometer about what I value in a player, which should help you adjust your rankings on draft day either towards mine or away from mine.

Note: Workout times, height, and weight might be absent/incorrect for the samples I post this morning. I wanted to edit the checklist observations and get them online today and then focus on editing everything else for publication.

I'll be checking in to answer any questions or just discuss what your thoughts are about Peerman (re: NFL prospects, comparison to other RBs in the draft class, his small hands, surprising combine performance, etc.).

Links to other samples:

UNC WR Hakeem Nicks

Texas A&M RB Mike Goodson



If you haven't heard, the RSP - a 500-page, online publication will be free to FBGs subscribers. Despite its enormous detail, there are rankings and summaries for each position that you can print or save separately from the main file and use as a handy draft day reference. So it's a versatile reference whether you want to dive into its game film break downs or just get the quick and dirty.

Cedric_Peerman_Vs._Miami.pdf

Cedric_Peerman_vs._VATech.pdf

I've liked Peerman from the few clips I have seen of him. I will certainly be keeping a close eye on him to see where he is drafted.

Two questions.

In the Miami game, you have him for 3 targets, 3 rec, 12 yards but mention that he dropped 2 passes. In the VA Tech game, you have him for 4 targets, 5 rec, 10 yards. Are these just mistakes or am I not reading or understanding these correctly?

It looks like most of the 'scores' are for that particular game yet the durability score is for his whole career. Because of his prior injury, he could only score a 92 on any particular game. What is the reason for scoring them this way (individual game for everything but durability)?

Thanks.

These are simply errors I have not addressed in my editing. I am basically editing the comments in these chosen as samples to make readable the Shark Pool

Once I'm done with posting the last two samples, I'll be be editing the entire publication to typos and errors in the stats, heights, and weights AND the comments. Thanks for pointing them out, but some of the things like targets might be off just from a typo...

I'll have them edited when I publish the full publication.

BuckeyeArt said:

Two questions.

It looks like most of the 'scores' are for that particular game yet the durability score is for his whole career. Because of his prior injury, he could only score a 92 on any particular game. What is the reason for scoring them this way (individual game for everything but durability)?

Thanks.

Click to expand...

Good question - I score the game, but I use it as a projection tool of performance for a player's career. Most of the time, I try to gear the checklist as a tool for taking one game and getting the most I can from it to provide insight to career performance. It's an imperfect process, but I feel with some exceptions - games where receivers have limited targets or an RB like Goodson where I need to do 3-4 games to get enough carry samples - I can see enough from one game to give a portrait of most of his strengths and weaknesses. Therefore, when I view Peerman, a 92 score would be his max. Of course, what may help to make more sense of his is how I structure my scoring. Here's a very basic summary. I explain it in more detail in the book, but the score shows where he is now and the comments help indicate whether he has room to grow or he's maxed his potential. This means I could have a guy like LeSean McCoy with scores in the mid-80s but I think his upside might be higher than Peerman's because if he has issues that are correctable, he'd be a better investment. I don't believe that one score can really encompass everything, but if you use 2-3 factors like scores and comments it can provide a clearer picture:

ETA: In my player rankings and summaries I will provide an idea of upside/maxed out skills so you can see that dynamic quickly within my rankings.

0-59 - Not enough NFL quality skills on display from this game

60-69- A project player. Raw skills, but way too many issues to contribute substantially on the field at this point.

70-79 - Can contribute right away but has some clear deficiencies that will limit him to be effective as a starter if he's forced into a line up.

80-89 - Can start for an NFL team if needed and produce, but has some deficiencies that make it easier for a defense to contain him without doing much away from their normal game plan (the lower the score, the less game planning needed, the higher, more is needed).

90+ - A guy who can start right away if needed and has some skills that force a team to game plan against him and often multiple skills to make a big difference in the ball game.

Bump

How about a bump here?

I haven't heard much camp news regarding Peerman. I realize he's pretty much as buried down the depth chart as one can get, but is there any reason to believe that the cream will rise?