Matt Waldman

Moderator
  • Content count

    2,900
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

22 Excellent

About Matt Waldman

  • Rank
    Footballguy
  • Birthday 02/06/1970

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.mattwaldmanrsp.com
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Athens, Ga.
  • Interests
    Studying film to learn more about the players and the game. Fiction. Movies.

Recent Profile Visitors

15,338 profile views
  1. BTW - Best pre-draft scouting report on every conceivable guy [at the skills positions] is by @MattWaldman. Very good read - mattwaldman.com -Chris Brown, author of Smartfootball.com and Grantland contributor, via Twitter "I love the RSP because instead of telling you stuff you already know in a way you already know it, @Matt Waldman brings a new paradigm entirely." -Luke Easterling, Editor/Senior Writer, The Draft Report This is a running list of the players I have already studied for the 2015 publication available for pre-order for its April 1 download. My analysis is based on play-by-play analysis and notes of each player (Scroll to the end to take the video tour of the 2014 publication). I'll continue to update this list between now and April 1. Note that some of the players on this list will not be eligible for this year's draft. I'll be revising this list further to reflect who will make the publication as I get closer to April. "The problem is that the RSP represents such an advantage, I can't bear to tell my 22-year-old dynasty league owners about it." - @Ikonoclast (Twitter) QBs Blake SimsBo WallaceBrandon BridgeBrett HundleyBryan BennettBryce PettyChuckie KeatonChris BonnerCody FajardoCole StoudtDylan ThompsonGarrett GraysonHutson MasonJake WatersJameis WinstonMarcus MariotaNick MarshallQuinn EpperlyRakeem CatoSean MannionShane CardenTaylor HeinickeTrevor SiemianRBs Ameer AbdullahCameron Artis-PayneCameron StingilyDavid CobbDavid JohnsonDee HartDevontae BookerDominique BrownDuke JohnsonJahwan EdwardsJalston FowlerJavorius "Buck" Allen"Jawan ChisholmJay AjayiJeremy LangfordJoe BergeronJohn CrockettJosh RobinsonKarlos WilliamsKenny HilliardKevin ParksMack BrownMarcus CokerMarlin LaneMatt JonesMelvin GordonMichael DyerMike DavisRod SmithSynjyn DaysT.J. YeldonTerrell WatsonTerron WardTevin ColemanTodd GurleyTrey WilliamsTyler VargaVenric MarkZach ZennerWRs Amari CooperAndre DavisAntwan GoodleyAustin HillBradley MarquezBreshad PerrimanChris ConleyChris HarperChristion JonesDa'Ron BrownDarius DavisDarren WallerDeAndre SmelterDeAndrew WhiteDeontay GreenberryDevante DavisDeVante ParkerDeVaris DanielsDevin FunchessDevin SmithDevon CajusteDezmin LewisD'haquille "Duke" WilliamsDorial Green-BeckhamDres AndersonDuron Carter (CFL tape)Ezell RuffinFrancisco LlanosGeremy DavisGeronimo AllisonIssac BlakeneyJaelen StrongJamarcus NelsonJamison CrowderJarrod WestJaxon ShipleyJohn HarrisJordan TaylorJosh HarperJustin HardyKasen WilliamsKenny BellKevin Vereen, Jr.Kevin WhiteLeonte CarrooLevi NorwoodLucky WhiteheadMalcombe KennedyMario AlfordMarkeith AmblesMichael BennettMike JohnsonNelson AgholorNick HarwellPaul BrowningPhillip DorsettQuinton DunbarRannell HallRashad GreeneSammie CoatesSean PriceShane WynnShaq RolandStefon DiggsTitus DavisTommy ShulerTony LippettTony JonesTre McBrideTy MontgomeryTyler LockettVenric MarkVince MayleTEs A.J. DerbyBen KoyackBlake BellBraxton DeaveClive WalfordE.J. BibbsEric TomlinsonGabe HolmesGerald ChristianJames O'ShaughnessyJean SifrinJeff HeuermanJesse JamesMaxx WilliamsMyCole PruittNick O'LearyPharaoh BrownTyler KroftWes SaxonTake the RSP Video Tour Short Tour [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRsQwtyOCDM&feature=share] Post-Draft Tour [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8f06wrsHVI&feature=share]
  2. No change on Freeman. Benjamin I'd bump a bit, but look at my overall rankings at FBGs and you'll see where I have them here. Latimer is even with Beckham now that Welker is banged up.
  3. I'm posting tiers based on them, but I haven't published the full projections.
  4. The 2014 Rookie Scouting Portfolio Post-Draft Add-On is ready for download. If you're in a dynasty league, the combination of the 2014 RSP and the RSP Post-Draft will have you prepared for this year and beyond. Want details? Need details? I have 'em right here: 84 pagesHow to use the RSP and RSP-Post Draft togetherOverrated/UnderratedGood/Bad post-draft fitsUDFAs to watchLong-term dynasty waiver wire gemsStrategic overview of 2014 rookie draftsTiered Value Chart Cheat Sheet across all positionsPost-Draft rankings analysis and commentary--including notes about impending contracts years of competition on the depth chartsAverage Draft Position (ADP) Data of 19 dynasty draftsRSP Ranking-to-ADP Value DataRaw Data Worksheets to continue calculating additional ADP data for future draftsTake a video tour of the 2013 post-draft to see what I mean. Seriously, this analysis is worth the price of the 2014 RSP package alone, but you get this as a part of your purchase with the 2014 RSP. Remember 10 percent of each sale is donated to Darkness to Light to prevent sexual abuse in communities across the United States. Download the 2014RSP and RSP Post-Draft here
  5. Lambert--server update....no later than Friday Thanks Matt
  6. To clarify, it's what this thread has devolved into and not your act of posting the topic. I'd like to assume the orginal intent was the desire for substantive discussion. However, by the time I arrived to the thread to make points I saw enough inappropriate behavior that I came to the conclusion that having a productive discussion in this thread would be difficult, at best. The only thing I do regret is not encouraging that kind of discussion that I offered today. However, when you see folks engaging in personal attacks it's easy to write off the thread in its entirety. So yes, your original post--I haven't seen it, but I presume--was fine.
  7. I had no intention to return to this thread because before I posted the first time I saw the vitriol that got personal. I felt that the thread would never be a setting for respectful discussion on this topic. I still feel this is the case because those who truly wanted to have a substantive discussion about this topic could have contacted me via PM or email--and a few have. However, I am going to share my basic points, background, and experiences that contribute to my views so those of you who haven't thought to PM me or email me might feel encouraged to do so. I gave my opinion on Bridgewater and race based on a variety of things. 1. The NFL is just like any other business organization out there. Some are managed well, others are managed poorly. 2. I talk with scouts, former scouts, and consultants with the league. They have or had regular interactions with players, coaches, and upper management. The stories they tell me concerning front office decision-making includes generous amounts of the following: scary-bad armchair psychiatry, subjective wants by one or a few overruling the detailed work of many fear-based decision-making based on image and playing it safe processes that are far more lacking than the public realizes 3. My 20 years of experience in operations management with a lot of experience recruiting, interviewing, training, and supervising employees. This includes seeing my share of HR issues and being asked to travel to locations and help repair and re-train employee teams that experienced these HR issues--race sometimes being a significant factor. 4. My personal experiences of what it means to be white in America. 5. My personal experiences of how that experience changes when you actually have a personal understanding of what non-whites in America can, and still often do, experience in society. My statement is that Bridgewater will fall out of the top 10 and there's a very strong chance that racism will be an unintentional factor. There is a strong psychological component to racism. People see the institutional racism and think politics. I could care less about politics. At its core racism is an interpersonal dynamic. Just like relating to the opposite sex is interpersonal, so is relating to race. Neither types of relationships are taught well at an institutional level (school) and it is at best, hit-and-miss when families teach how to relate. Think about how people learn to relate to the opposite sex. They may be "told" how to do so, but they learn the most from modeling the behaviors of those around them. Johnny is told to be respectful to women, but his dad is an abusive, alcoholic man that he saw verbally and physically abuse his mother and sister. Johnny may not have grown up to be an alcoholic or hit and belittle his wife like his old man, but he has issues communicating to his wife and his wife still feels like he doesn't treat her the way a husband and wife should relate. The behavior Johnny modeled is still unhealthy and it lingered beyond a generation. An example could be Johnny never expressing outright anger to his wife. Instead he's nitpicking her about things that have nothing to do with the real issue and then withdrawing from her and breaking out in some unexplainable rash because his behavior still doesn't compensate for the powerful emotion of anger that he's feeling. Johnny doesn't realize he behaves this way until someone confronts him about it. For awhile, he's also in denial about this behavior until something shakes him to his core just enough that he decides to seek some help/knowledge to learn about this behavior, the root of the behavior, and how to address the expression of this behavior. Once Johnny realizes that the behavior he was showing wasn't healthy and he works on fixing it, he begins to see how he relates to others and how they relate to him in a clearer light. He's no longer in denial. When he begins to recognize a layer of behaviors that other people use to interact that aren't healthy. Racism is like that. You can be told not use epithets or treat people poorly because it's wrong, but you can model behavior that sends the wrong message without knowing it. It's easy to be white, read about the civil rights movement in a history book, see people different skin colors people living on your street or working at your company, and believe everything has changed. A lot has changed. But my parents, in-laws, and grandparents experienced what it took for our country to begin changing first hand. I'm old enough and experienced enough to see a lot change. I'm also old enough and experienced enough to have seen first-hand what hasn't. However, the attitudes of some--not all, but enough--people in power haven't changed a lot. Some have changed on how to play the game of "how do I not be called a racist," even though they may be unwittingly still engaging in racist behavior. This leads to a huge issue our country has. People are deathly afraid to be called racist in America. They think of racism and they think of the White Supremacist movement or images of brutality and hatred. Racism is rooted in ignorance, not hatred. Folks are so afraid of being accused of racism, they'd rather just avoid the issue entirely and they wind up making assumptions about what they know-don't know instead of making an honest inquiry and admitting ignorance. The desire not to look ignorant, but behave ignorantly is the predominant form of racism that's around these days. A lot of America believes racism is over because slavery is over or that the Civil Rights Act passed a half century ago. Institutional racism has been weakened. However ignorance and sometimes hatred still exists. Just like Johnny who doesn't beat up and belittle his wife, but nitpicks her for things that have nothing to do with his real anger, a lot of our country is still in denial about its ignorance or strong, negative feelings about race. I've seen it, worked around it, and lived around it as a single white man with no interpersonal connections to people of color beyond casual friendships. I've seen how companies have added layers of interviews with candidates that are really no more than contrived, but legal a "do they pass the look" test. I've seen individuals in workplaces try to work around people of color when they have to go to them as the designated authority. I've seen managers scared of employees who do great work because they thought they were somehow doing that person a favor by hiring them and then try to sabotage them. This was before I became a member of a black family and I saw more. I saw behaviors of mine that were unintentionally racist. I saw my childhood family reveal its ignorance and either change its behavior or abandon the relationship altogether. I've seen everyday people make decisions and communicate in ways towards my family - often in front of me, thinking I'm someone else waiting in line behind them or mulling around - that are far different than I've been communicated to for the same things. You may not find it easy to understand, but racism is an added layer of society that white people generally don't fully grasp or know how to negotiate. Once you have people--often the same people--treat you differently because they no longer identify you as a white individual but a member of a black family, you begin to see that layer a little clearer. When you begin to see how people of color often have to navigate a white society, you begin to see the unwritten rules of that society that you just accepted because there was nothing inherent about you that chafed against them and created a negative reaction. It doesn't happen everywhere or all the time. But as a white man who has seen how the world treats me as an individual and how it treats me or the people I am in relationships with either up close or from an observable distance, I can tell you it still happens enough to matter. In my opinion, there are three types of racists: 1. People who are truly intolerant and hateful. 2. People who are clearly uncomfortable with diversity and have preconceived, deep-seated fears or discomfort, but are scared to death of confronting the fact that they are behaving this way. 3. People who are against racism/sexism/gender inequality and would be mortified if they were labeled intolerant, but they don't really have a true understanding that their behaviors or others behaviors as individuals and/or institutions are supporting ignorant or intolerant thinking. These people are benevolent racists. So when I talk to NFL people and they have no physical-performance issues with Bridgewater that differ from other prospects, but they are nitpicking "soft skills" like leadership, toughness, and communication skills and some of these criticisms are based on the same arm-chair psychiatry I've seen managers make about black employees in my work places or assumptions I've seen made by teachers, doctors, or everyday business people with whom me and my family interact with, it becomes evident that there's still some sentiment in the NFL -- that's not always intentional -- that doesn't recognize it's bias. And that bias isn't against drafting black quarterbacks. It's a very specific one regarding a top-10 pick being the face of the franchise and not having the game-changing athletic ability that no one can deny. Cam Newton, RGII, McNabb, Vick, Russell, McNair, and Akili Smith were all quarterbacks with enough mobility to be considered threats with their legs. None of them were purely heralded as pocket passers who won on their intellect for the game. Newton "shocked" many for his skill in the pocket. McNabb and McNair had to transition from runners to pocket players. The only black quarterback drafted in the top 10 in the past 20 years that has been drafted for his pocket skill sans mobility is Byron Leftwich. His general manager was James Harris, a dark-skinned black man. Bridgewater relies on his arm and intellect more than his legs. Teams are nitpicking Bridgewater for being soft and using Leftwich as an example. That's like saying, "that cookie isn't sweet--it reminds me of that soft drink." Leftwich might have been a bad starter due to his windup, but saying he isn't tough is like saying he doesn't breath air. The fact that we're hearing glorified PR from folks like Phil Savage that no team had Bridgewater as a high first round pick and that it was media-driven fits into the point former scout Daniel Jeremiah has made weeks ago: "At this final month before the draft, it's time to stop believing most of what you hear or read." Our country still has special biases reserved for dark-skinned black people. One of those biases has long been that dark skinned black people aren't fit for mental work. These overtones still exist in our general society. It's not always the case, but it happens often enough to notice it. It's often ingrained in this form of benevolent racism I described earlier. Top 10 players are often the face of the franchise and earn an extra layer of scrutiny. They want these guys to project a CEO-quality. Nitpicking soft skills and doing so inaccurately is a huge red flag that there are teams that are hung up on what they see in front of them. Using the "Has 'It'" reason is about as subjective of an excuse these teams can invent to stand behind their bias without looking deeply into them. And they don't look deeply into their issues. I know a former scout who had stints with four teams does analytics consulting for numerous teams. He's in demand with them and turns down more work than he takes. He has told me that scouting and decision-making with the draft is still in the dark ages. He went on to tell me that he was shocked to read the RSP in 2007-2008 and see someone who not only saw behind he veil of NFL scouting process but tried to do something to make it better. I'm not saying I'm a better scout. There are great scouts out there that I could learn a lot from. However, he has told me my process and structure is light years ahead of most NFL teams that he has seen -- and he has seen a lot. I was also approached by an NFL exec last month to provide the team analysis on a player that they're interested in and they want to fill in the gaps. I learned that he has been reading my work for two years and agrees with a lot of my analysis. I have media people who are former players and scouts who read and value my work, but cannot give testimonials because of their work commitments. Some of these people see and my points and agree; others disagree but understand how I arrived at that argument. I originally didn't address my opinion on the thread for several reasons. One, it was my opinion and not a part of my RSP analysis. I don't project talent based on draft position. If I did, my takes would be far different. Two, I had been sleeping three to five hours a night for two months to finish writing the RSP. I have three jobs and a family. My immediately priority wasn't to devote to a forum thread--especially when the responses I've gotten outside of this thread have been wholly positive. Three, my opinion is based on a lot of established race theory, 20 years of anecdotal observation, and an understanding of the psychology of this issue that few will respond to with any level of grace, maturity, or openness. Twitter has been almost 100 percent positive and those who disagreed strongly were respectful about how they chose to engage me. This forum from what I'm gathering had a solid mass of criticism for my opinion, which I expected to get some. However when I went to check this thread for the first time on the Saturday(?) before I published the RSP, I read enough of the thread to see that the behavior also included a good bit of hatred or inappropriate commentary that got deleted such as posts about my family. I've made a choice to respond in more detail so that those of you who are reading this thread and are curious as to why I formed my opinion (and the background behind) can have that information. Then if you choose to contact me and engage in a respectful discussion that you'll know that I am open to doing so with those of you coming from a place of respect--whether you agree or not. If anyone thinks that my belief (that Bridgewater's race created a layer of negative bias in 3-5 teams that could pick a quarterback in the top 10) somehow distorts my view of what happens on the field when I grade a player hasn't read the RSP. I don't rank by draft position or character. If I lose credibility to those of you who feel that way, I think it's a ridiculous, emotion-filled jump to make, but so be it. If my reasons are too anecdotal for someone to consider, so be it. I'd think my fairly unique experiences would provide some insights that are worthwhile, but I imagine for some it's easy to dismiss me as biased. If the fact that there are more quarterbacks in the NFL who are black than ever is a data point to make in response to my opinion, then I think they are missing the point of my argument, which is the top-10 and specifically dark-skinned black quarterbacks who don't offer the running back element. It's a very specific point. But all some people heard was "racism", didn't consider the specificity of my point beyond the 75 percent number (which if you're latching onto that and not the explanation then you're missing the point). Bloom and Dr. Octopus have been pretty on-point about my take and still there are folks who saw something very different. I wasn't surprised that some of those reacting had even read any of my work or even listened to the podcast until those two went point-by-point. It's an opinion that I could be wrong about, but I said it because I believe it needed to be said. Those who protest vehemently about it beyond, "I disagree and don't think he's right about it," and they have decided that I've somehow lost credibility for the work that I do they have their own issues to work out. I can't help them. What I tell them will never be enough--especially if it forces some of them to confront something that feels uncomfortable. Then again, I'm not sure why anyone cares so much about what I have to say, I'm just a fantasy writer.
  8. Nope, but you can go here and read takes on players that are free. Maybe some of those QBs are the ones you're seeking.
  9. Hey Plastik, I generally watch 5-7 games per player, but only chart 2-4. I do the thorough charting first. Then I go back and watch the other games to spot-check anything I haven't seen from charting. I'll try to note this in the game details for those interested. I'll say this--a vast majority of the time, 1-2 games is more than enough because of the way I watch the games and grade players. To give you a little more info that might supply more context to the above, I'm careful about how I grow the RSP. I've had offers go about this all in ways different from what I'm doing. The promise of course is to make more money/bigger audience/etc. I'm not against getting a bigger audience, but I'm not overstepping my resources to achieve it for a quick buck. I'm making incremental improvements to the process over time. The editing improved this year (although it will always be a challenge due to writing nearly 300 pages in 30 days - at my day job, we have 6-7 months to write and edit a 68-page magazine) and I anticipate this process will get easier too. While I've added more players to the publication compared to the early years, I have found that 1-2 games with a detailed process does the trick and that spot-checking for consistency to those grades with other games is helpful. When I decide to make a major change to the RSP, I want to do it the way I think it should look. I purposely made the look and feel have an "underground/manifesto" appearance because I knew I wouldn't have the money to devote to a slicker look. Also, I've seen some online publications that look like the equivalent of glamor shots rather than high-end professional photography. I'd rather have the RSP be content heavy and plain Jane than f-ugly with sequins and a feather boa tied around it. And Bengalbuck, I look and (and sometimes) feel like how you characterized me by March of every season.
  10. This is the first time I've come to this thread. It will be the last time. I haven't looked at much of the thread. I've been told that a thread exists, but I knew ahead of time that my statement about Bridgewater and forms of racism that exist in society will elicit criticism and praise -- and it has. You have your right to your criticism of my take just as I have the right to believe that anyone who doesn't see the potential for racism in this situation is wrong. If you dislike like my views that racism exists and that Bridgewater's pre-draft process exhibits some unintentional racial elements as I stated on the podcast it's your right to feel that way. However, it's useless to debate this subject here with you. You will continue to discuss why you believe my points are wrong and I will continue believe in what I stated based on my own personal experiences, conversations with people in the NFL, and experiences of those around me whom I've discussed this topic with in detail.
  11. You bet - follow my blog and this is the kind of coverage you get throughout the year.
  12. Hey Fantasy Chef.... Yes it does. I provide a pre-draft that comes out April 1 and with that purchase, you get my post-draft rankings. The post draft also includes mock draft info, rankings based on NFL Draft selection, and rankings across all positions in a cheat sheet form with tiers. The post draft is free with purchase of the pre-draft. The post-draft is published a week after the NFL Draft. Here's how I explain the difference between pre-draft and post draft rankings and why I do two sets: The Difference Between Pre-Draft And Post-Draft Rankings In most cases, I prefer the pre-draft rankings. They may lack the context of the NFL Draft, but they are the most pure assessment of talent I provide. A player I rank in my top-12 at a position can go undrafted, earn limited reps at the rear of the depth chart, get cut, and bounce around the league for two years before he lands on a team that recognizes his talent and gives him a real shot. The player I just described is Lions running back Joique Bell. The Pre-Draft RSP rankings do not account for character or projected round. The NFL Draft is as much an exercise of risk management and investing as it is talent assessment. The pre-draft rankings are free of those biases. It makes this publication a worthwhile reference in future seasons for players who find new homes, better scheme fits, and gain maturity that teams worried might never come. As much as I favor the pre-draft process, post-draft rankings provide the clearest picture of the way teams see these players and the immediate opportunities they will earn. The post-draft rankings will account for the largest percentage of prospects and how their careers will play out. However, the pre-draft rankings provides a safety net when the NFL over or underestimate talent and fit. Not only does this happen more than one may realize, but it also gives the reader to capitalize on these exceptional cases. Conventionality may prevent colossal failure, but exceptionality is the key to massive success. The rankings and information in each publication is designed to account for both dynamics as they unfold in football.
  13. I haven't missed an April 1 yet in 8 years, looks like we're on track for 9...
  14. That's my belief, but figured I'd entertain the question from that point of view.
  15. Hey Cobalt_27, After year one, I have missed on Wilson. My dynasty advice pre-draft was that if he and Ryan Tannehill were in the same draft, they would be neck-and-neck in perceived fantasy value and the most NFL-ready- QB with enough upside to be a fantasy factor as a quality starter (which I think most of us define as at worst, a QB7-QB14) or at worst, a valuable reserve for several years. In my overview of the position I said that Manuel and Wilson were the two QBs I'd consider in the first round of a dynasty draft, but overall I recommended that folks focus on RBs and WRs because this class as a whole is not some continuation of a trend of great QB play to come based on the results from the top of the 2013 class. This was pre-draft. So yes, if your league drafts before my post-draft comes out then telling a fantasy owner that a player you can now get on most waiver wires for (at least) the next six months was worth a late-first or second round dynasty pick was a miss on my part. That said, your characterization of my report on Wilson as gushing and without context that stated anything about the quarterback class as not being as good as past classes is inaccurate. Page 34 of the Post-Draft: "Quarterback is a late-round proposition" The only four passers I would consider drafting this year in the average size dynasty league are E.J. Manuel, Matt Barkley, Tyler Wilson, and Geno Smith. Manuel and Barkley are the two I think have actual value worth pursuing. I like Wilson and Smith's talent, but the situation is dicey and might be worth skipping." Wilson was ranked 35th overall on my post-draft report and the third QB on the list, not the first. Not sure where you got your information that Wilson was my top-ranked QB post-draft and that I was gushing over him, but it wasn't the RSP-Post Draft. As for why I missed on Wilson? There's a few ways to go here. If I answer the question on your perception that it's a "colossal miss" there's not much of a standard for me to understand as to why it was a colossal miss. I can only guess: a) Is the expectation that the top ranked guy on a list is supposed to carry more weight than everyone else on the list? b) Is one year all the time one needs to judge how a player's career unfolds? c) Is the fact that a team cut him after selecting him in the mid-rounds enough to make a judgment? I'd say a) Yes, the weight of who you rank first is often going to carry more weight for readers than who you rank 4th. b) Based on the careers of quarterbacks that include Warner, Favre, Brady, Bulger, Romo, and Brees, I'm thinking the idea that Wilson getting ranked No.1 may still be a big miss, but the judgment that it is after one year could also turn out to be a colossally rash snap to judgment. c) The fact that Oakland took Wilson and cut him and Tennessee has him tells me there's still some time to regard Wilson's career with some patience - especially given the QB's above and the teams that passed over them. I tend to wait a few years before I make a judgement on how I fared with a player. Does my evaluation of Wilson negate my positive views on Russell Wilson, Jay Cutler over Young/Leinart, Stafford over Sanchez, etc? Or do misses on Wilson and John Beck mean my information is just bad? There are folks who say I had a colossal miss with Knowshown Moreno and Ryan Mathews. There were probably folks who said I missed on Steve Slaton after his strong rookie year or Marshawn Lynch after he struggled post-rookie year for a few years. Scouting is a craft. There are folks who say it can be a science. One day it will have more science to it. I have a colleague who does analytics and scouting for the NFL and has been in scouting for multiple NFL teams who has said publicly that my approach is more detailed and more sound than most NFL scouting departments. He's a trained statistician. He wants to bring analytics to the NFL. He still says that there will always be a need for observational based/non-numerical data and even intuition in scouting. I say this because I recognize the desire for folks to see some sort of "how does one grade or evaluate how someone evaluates talent or grades the draft?" Do you look at one year, two, three, five? Do you grade rankings or how a player is assessed in the analysis? As for things I'm monitoring over the next few years with Wilson in regard to QBs as well as QB criteria in general: a) Is hand size really a big deal? Wilson did have smaller hands and did his go under a baseline that I need to consider? b) Was his recklessness an issue that showed up too early in practice? c) Did he really have issues with the playbook? I've talked with a scout who has shared with me that some stories like these are bogus and an excuse. They also have analytics groups come up with positive stories to feed to major media to prop up a player they don't feel confident in but want to give that player some confidence. d) Will we learn there's an off-field issue associated with Wilson that I would not have known about. e) I'm studying criteria to add to my checklists like anticipation/timing on certain routes as well as placement being a separate sub category of accuracy. Splitting out footwork on drops into subcategories. f) I'm considering some knock-out data that raise red flags even if the overall scores are high. So yes, pre-draft's view of Wilson was high and probably messed some folks up if they draft before the NFL draft. But you were wrong about my take on Post-Draft. Thanks and hope that helps. Matt Team fit is always a big factor.