Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
[Dynasty] 2015 Draft Prospects (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Faust
- Start date
EBF
Footballguy
The numbers from today show why you shouldn't value an elite devy prospect on par with an elite NFL prospect who has already been vetted by the combine/draft. A number of players who have at one point been regarded as premium devy assets have been pedestrian in drills so far today (Mike Davis, Melvin Gordon, Duke Johnson, TJ Yeldon). Just goes to show that being one of the best players in your college class doesn't necessarily mean much when weighed against the best players in the NFL.
Vincesanity
Footballguy
RBs were slowwwww today
MAC_32
Footballguy
I thought they were fine.
Zyphros
Footballguy
jurb26
Footballguy
I didn't find it odd at all.
EBF
Footballguy
Maybe that's because Dyer hasn't been valued as an elite devy asset since about three years ago? Not that difficult to comprehend. Most rankings had him as a day three pick-UDFA going into this weekend. When you're already low in the rankings, it's hard to disappoint people. Apart from that, I'd argue that his 4.58 40 at a 33+ BMI and 218 pounds is a lot less damaging to his prospects than the slower times guys like Davis and Yeldon posted on leaner frames. Same more or less applies to Gordon and Duke, who ran disappointing times given their lack of size.
People went into this thinking some of those guys were elite prospects and most of them stunk up the joint. Not only in the 40, but also with sloppy movement in the drills.
jurb26
Footballguy
Agreed. Davis ran about what I expected. Gordon and Johnson a hair slower.
At the end of the day, Gordon's time wasn't that bad. People who thought he was a burner were mislead. His skill set is that he runs with great vision, can move in tight spaces and cuts with very little loss in speed. His not a burner nor a devastatingly powerful runner. His power is adequate. People continually seem to mistake comps to Charles with this blazing speed but that's not what the comp is about at all.
Duke may have slightly disappointed in the 40 (I thought mid to high 4.4 was in him), but his feet were the best on the RBs in drills.
EBF
Footballguy
Didn't much care for Davis or Duke before today. The numbers just add more fuel to that fire. Duke is slow for how small he is. Davis is just sloppy overall. Ran slow and looked terrible moving around in the positional drills.
I thought Gordon's game clips were solid, but not on the "wow" level. Today fuels more skepticism. What type of back is he? He's not fast enough to thrive as a pure speed back. The tape shows it and the numbers from today back that up. Forget the Jamaal Charles comparison when he's clocking 4.52. You can say he's a power back, but he's only 215 pounds on a leggy 6'+ frame. I don't see him being an authoritative runner at the next level. He has some quickness, but not elite quickness like Sproles/McCoy. Add it all up and there's a bit of a 'tweener vibe there. Good all-around skills. No one trait that stands out. That might be enough to become an effective starter. I'd be less worried if the measurables were more encouraging.
Last edited by a moderator:
EBF
Footballguy
Duke is not a huge guy though and he's brittle. Never liked his running style and he doesn't fit the mold on paper. Not optimistic about him.
Davis was never going to blaze the track, but his slow times in conjunction with his sloppy movement in the drills paints him as a mediocre prospect. There are plenty of backs in the NFL who have similar size and much better mobility (Lynch, Stewart, D Martin, etc). Compared with them, he looks like a backup. I thought going into today that Ben Tate was a good comparison for him, but Tate was actually fast and explosive at his combine.
Last edited by a moderator:
jurb26
Footballguy
Which reinforces his great change of direction without losing speed.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
EBF
Footballguy
Sure, but the odds of them being high picks probably dropped with their performances today. Plenty of RBs with crap workout numbers have gone in the 2nd round in recent years, but 2nd round picks historically have a pretty low hit rate. Maybe 35-40%. If you bought high on one of those devy players then you were probably hoping that he had a 1st round ceiling. That seems to be off the table for Duke, Yeldon, and Davis. Gordon's numbers weren't terrible overall and he may yet go in the first, but even so it was just an okay day for him given expectations.
The broader point is that people tend to get caught hyping up the next wave of talent, but then when the numbers come in you see how few of those guys stack up with the god tier (i.e. Graham, Calvin, Tomlinson), much less the next rung down (i.e. D. Martin, Lynch, R Mathews, Dez). It's something to keep in mind when people start pimping Treadwell, D Henry, Collins, and Zeke ahead of next year's draft. You can be one of the top 4-5 players at your position in your draft class, but that doesn't mean you're close to being a top 20 player at your position in the NFL. With members of numerous draft classes competing for starting slots in the league, a lot of these merely good types just don't stick.
EBF,
The truth is that if you decided this class is a bust based on the combine 40 yd dash figures, then you really need to reevaluate your approach. No doubt that there is extreme competition in trying to make it amongst the best from a ten yr span, but it's also true that you have cases like Bell with a 4.60 40 yd dash considered the top dynasty back now and he was drafted in the middle of the 2nd round. These are isolated metrics that don't reflect functional speed in a game, nor numerous other variables that play a role in on the field performance... vision, setting up defenders, toughness, character, drive, lateral agility that allows you to turn without losing speed, etc... it's more about proven traits..
Not saying that these metrics don't matter, but you have to take them more in context as validation or a cause for questioning, but generally speaking, if you have the minimum levels of acceptable athleticism by NFL standards, then the rest of your traits/ game play more of a role in projecting your floor/ ceiling/ capabilities. In fact, Walsh published an article talking about this (I think Bloom tweeted the link) discussing this and pointing out the most important aspect of the combine was in fact the interviews, which allowed you more insight into the player's intangibles.
but if you want to ignore the tape over a few isolated metrics, then please do...I would love to be in the same draft.
the other thing to consider is that we really are heading for a tipping point with RBs in the NFl with most of the studs getting long in the tooth.... I think we're poised for a generational transition, but that's just my opinion.
The truth is that if you decided this class is a bust based on the combine 40 yd dash figures, then you really need to reevaluate your approach. No doubt that there is extreme competition in trying to make it amongst the best from a ten yr span, but it's also true that you have cases like Bell with a 4.60 40 yd dash considered the top dynasty back now and he was drafted in the middle of the 2nd round. These are isolated metrics that don't reflect functional speed in a game, nor numerous other variables that play a role in on the field performance... vision, setting up defenders, toughness, character, drive, lateral agility that allows you to turn without losing speed, etc... it's more about proven traits..
Not saying that these metrics don't matter, but you have to take them more in context as validation or a cause for questioning, but generally speaking, if you have the minimum levels of acceptable athleticism by NFL standards, then the rest of your traits/ game play more of a role in projecting your floor/ ceiling/ capabilities. In fact, Walsh published an article talking about this (I think Bloom tweeted the link) discussing this and pointing out the most important aspect of the combine was in fact the interviews, which allowed you more insight into the player's intangibles.
but if you want to ignore the tape over a few isolated metrics, then please do...I would love to be in the same draft.
the other thing to consider is that we really are heading for a tipping point with RBs in the NFl with most of the studs getting long in the tooth.... I think we're poised for a generational transition, but that's just my opinion.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Why is this post being largely ignored in favor of an almost maniacal focus solely on 40 times?MAC_32 said:
jurb26
Footballguy
Because the 40 always gets the headlines. Looking at the results again, the 40 times really aren't even bad. I think the average 40 time for RBs in the last 5 years is around 4.60. We also didn't get to see 2 of the guys I expected to be the fastest run yesterday, Gurley and Colman.
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
what was LeVeon Bells work out numbers like?
http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/le%27veon-bell?id=2540175
4.60 forty for a guy his size is very good. (Same with Jeremy Hill last year)
Three cone of 6.75 better than any RB this year.
jurb26
Footballguy
His shuttle and jumps pale in comparison to this years group, though.
Absolutely. And a great reminder to not put too much stock in these numbers. You can weed out some guys you were considering from the combine numbers but it's a mistake to do it without watching their film first and considering their other measurables.
A guy like Buck Allen has become more appealing to me after the combine while guys like TJ Yeldon and Duke Johnson have given me less reason to take a chance on them.
Last edited by a moderator:
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
exactly so while I knew a few people who post here would have certain reactions to the RBs workout numbers, I think football skill is in intangible still.
Could someone refresh my memory as to the 3-cone scale, whats considered good, excellent and terrible?
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Guess I'm just surprised to see the FBG community - with so many self proclaimed amateur draftniks - overly focused on 40 times and ignoring all the other data points.
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
JohnnyU
Footballguy
identikit
Footballguy
loose circuits
Footballguy
Silly to significantly change rankings based off how fast a Rb runs in a straight line for 40 yds
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
I don't get this. Are you supporting his comment or arguing it?
I still like Carey and think the jury is still out on him.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Against.
Carey doesn't have the tools to matter in the NFL beyond a role player. Which we found out last year at the combine, and was supported by his subsequent selection in the fourth round.
He could have a year at some point where he stumbles into the starting role in a good offense or behind a great line, but he's not a first-choice starter across multiple years.
MAC_32
Footballguy
Bell isn't the same back now that he was when he went through this process. Totally transformed his body between years one and two.
jurb26
Footballguy
He changed his body but even still, those changes aren't going to drastically alter these numbers.
If you needed the combine to figure out that Carey wasn't a great athlete, then you're not watching enough film.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Ok -- I'll bite. We'll play a game for 2016.
You make your final predictions on where players will be drafted prior to the combine next year.
I'll use nothing but the combine data for every player you choose to rank (I don't watch much college FB and virtually zero highlight packages).
And we'll compare the actual draft to our predictions.
Last edited by a moderator:
EBF
Footballguy
I don't and never have. No point arguing against that straw man. Allen Robinson was my favorite second tier WR in last year's draft and he wasn't anything incredible at the combine. Good jumps, but slow in the 40. I don't draft based solely on workouts. I look at all the variables.
Maybe they're not "ignoring all the other data points" but just interpreting them differently. One of the important things to understand about Gordon is that he's not a very big back. People will cite his 215 pound weight as a plus, but it's on a 6' 05/8" frame. That's not a high weight for a RB at that height. It's a 28.7 BMI. In the last decade, only six backs with a lower BMI score have been drafted in the first round. Here are those players along with their combine/pro day 40 time:
Jahvid Best 28.5 - 4.34
Reggie Bush 28.3 - 4.37
Adrian Peterson 28.3 - 4.40
Darren McFadden 27.7 - 4.33
CJ Spiller 27.7 - 4.27
Chris Johnson 27.5 - 4.24
What you should notice is that all of these guys ran 4.40 or better. To make it as a RB in the NFL at this size, the player needs elite movement and speed. That makes Gordon's 4.52 especially damaging. Of 27 first round RBs in the past ~10 years, only five have run that slow or worse and all of them were big backs (Steven Jackson, Chris Perry, Mark Ingram, Beanie Wells, Cedric Benson). Of the 12 backs to check in with a weight of 215 or fewer pounds, only one ran a 40 time above 4.50 (Mark Ingram at 4.62). The next cluster is guys like Marshawn Lynch, Donald Brown, and Felix Jones who ran in the mid 4.4 range between a 29.6-30 BMI. Even if Gordon's official time is adjusted to a mid 4.4, he'll still come off looking a bit worse than these guys in terms of this variable because of his lean body type. He's simply not very fast for a RB of his body type. To the point where no one that light has been successful at the position in the past 10 years. If you're ready to totally ignore that information then that's your call, but to me it throws up a bit of a red flag. If you add it to other factors like merely "good" but not great film (IMO) and a friendly scheme that has been known to inflate mediocre RB production (Montee Ball, John Clay), suddenly you have a story that suggests Gordon might be more of a "maybe" than a "probably" in terms of his NFL success.
As for the rest of his workout, it was solid without being amazing. 35" is fine in the vertical. Slightly below average for a first round back. 10'5" is good in the broad jump. Above average for a first round back. I can't tell you much about the shuttle times because I generally don't use them in my analysis. Overall, he didn't bomb the combine. However, he didn't ace it either. There's enough here to warrant some skepticism if you were already leaning that way. On the other hand, if you already had bought in completely then I wouldn't expect any of this to sway your opinion.
Last edited by a moderator:
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Weird, I thought it was clear he sucked just based on game film.
http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=703612&hl=
http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=676867&hl=
Looks like I did pretty well in the past, so you can base it off of that if you have to get defensive and create some type of measuring stick.
Football is played on the field with pads on, not on a track in tights. The combine is a tool to use in evaluations, but it's 20% of the formula that is revealed to the public. 70% tape, 20% combine(part of this is accurate sizes too), 10% statistics.
