Game Speed vs. Timed Speed (1 Viewer)

[LawFitz]

I know this is the time of year where the most overrated metric in sports (the 40-yd dash) becomes paramount so I thought I'd discuss why it is almost completely BUNK as a scouting tool.

The 40 is not football. When was the last time a WR (or any player for that matter) was allowed to run 40 yards in a straight line without pads, without the hindrance of a defender and while being completely fresh???

You know the answer. Never!

Why is this metric so talked about when it should be about one tenth or less of the analysis??? How about lateral quickness? How about the strength to beat the jam? How about body control and coordination? How about the desire to fight for the ball? How about work ethic? How about off-the-field character? How about late game stamina???

What made Jerry Rice the best WR of all time even though he ran a 4.7? It was because he excelled in so many of these other areas. In the 4th quarter of games when 4.3 DBs were tired from running all day and suddenly running 4.9s, Jerry was running just as fast as he was on the first snap.

Game speed cannot be measured by the 40-yd dash. Not even close. You want a measure the 40 in a more meaningful way? Make the prospects run 100-yd wind sprints for 20 minutes straight, in pads, then line them up without rest and have them run the 40.

Then we'll see who is fast and who isn't.

Keep this in mind when you knock a guy like Crabtree or Fitzgerald (as many did in 2004). It's not how fast you run in tights on a track when you are not tired. It's how fast you run in the 4th quarter of the 16th game with a playoff spot on the line after being jammed at the line with pads on by an all pro defender.

And even that is just one aspect of the analysis which like I mentioned needs to include hands, smarts, heart, stamina, size, hops, and coordination.

The 40 is a joke. Don't be fooled my friends.

 

[FantasyTrader]

I don't think the 40 is a joke. It's just one more tool to consider. If you think having dudes run 100-yd sprints for 20 min. at the combine and then having them run the 40 would be a more accurate measure, you're kidding yourself. The only thing that would prove is which players remained the most well conditioned leading up to the combine.

I do, however, agree with your bottom line on the subject. Scouts would be better served by watching 4th quarter game film on players running in pads and evaluating their speed when they're winded. But I don't think 40 times are completely bunk. Fast is still fast.

 

[Balance]

Speed is not a joke, sorry.

I don't recall anyone saying it has ever been the sole measure of a player.

 

[FavreCo]

The 40 is a joke on horribly inept management. They draft a guy based on how fast he is (Williamson), not if he has skills at his position (hands, route running). It can seperate good mgmt. from bad mgmt.

The way 40 times are tested is a joke. If they really wanted to run the 40 correctly, WR would run from an upright position with pads. RBs would run from either a 3 pt stance or as they are in a single back set.

 

[-baller]

how do you feel about the bench press?

 

[Cookiemonster]

I don't think the 40 is a joke. It's just one more tool to consider. If you think having dudes run 100-yd sprints for 20 min. at the combine and then having them run the 40 would be a more accurate measure, you're kidding yourself. The only thing that would prove is which players remained the most well conditioned leading up to the combine. I do, however, agree with your bottom line on the subject. Scouts would be better served by watching 4th quarter game film on players running in pads and evaluating their speed when they're winded. But I don't think 40 times are completely bunk. Fast is still fast.

I don't agree with the 100 yard sprints, but I'd like to see players run their 40 in pads. I want to see what a player runs wearing gear that weighs a minimum, set-standard. Some players aren't effected by carrying a few extra pounds, while others are. I remember running 4.75-4.85 in shorts, but outrunning 4.6 guys on the field. Why? Not all players are created equal in that regard. I'd also rather see them run it from a two-point stance. Eliminate some of the advantage of track training. These aren't track athletes, so why should a guy like Manningham who was considered a deep-threat in college have his stock drop so far when he obviously didn't have the training or form that most of the other WRs had at the combine? Secondly, I'd like to make a bigger deal of their 10 & 20 yard splits. I want to be able to see which players are quick vs which ones have build-up speed. DHB reminds me of a build-up speed guy that once he gets a step on you, you won't catch him, but his short-area quicks (and likely separation) are just average. Donald Brown would be the guy that LBs can catch running downfield, but can never get their hands on him 'cause he has world-class acceleration and quicks.

 

[Cookiemonster]

how do you feel about the bench press?

Don't you know a few guys that can K.O. quite a few men that bench twice as much?

 

[LawFitz]

Speed is not a joke, sorry.I don't recall anyone saying it has ever been the sole measure of a player.

I don't disagree. But this is a question of the best way to assess game speed. And I argue that the 40 is far from the most ideal technique. And yet it is still in this day and age of higher level analysis for everything out there, the most widely reported and widely considered measure of whether a player has the speed for the NFL.And even speed itself if assessed in a better way would be only one measure of a player. Hands, strength, coordination, smarts, quickness, balance, etc. Speed by itself tells me almost nothing about a player.

 

[tdmills]

how do you feel about the bench press?

I think its the most overrated lift in football. They should have them do incline press.Do lineman push straight out or do they get their hands inside and push up?

 

[FantasyTrader]

I don't think the 40 is a joke. It's just one more tool to consider. If you think having dudes run 100-yd sprints for 20 min. at the combine and then having them run the 40 would be a more accurate measure, you're kidding yourself. The only thing that would prove is which players remained the most well conditioned leading up to the combine. I do, however, agree with your bottom line on the subject. Scouts would be better served by watching 4th quarter game film on players running in pads and evaluating their speed when they're winded. But I don't think 40 times are completely bunk. Fast is still fast.

I don't agree with the 100 yard sprints, but I'd like to see players run their 40 in pads. I want to see what a player runs wearing gear that weighs a minimum, set-standard. Some players aren't effected by carrying a few extra pounds, while others are. I remember running 4.75-4.85 in shorts, but outrunning 4.6 guys on the field. Why? Not all players are created equal in that regard. I'd also rather see them run it from a two-point stance. Eliminate some of the advantage of track training. These aren't track athletes, so why should a guy like Manningham who was considered a deep-threat in college have his stock drop so far when he obviously didn't have the training or form that most of the other WRs had at the combine? Secondly, I'd like to make a bigger deal of their 10 & 20 yard splits. I want to be able to see which players are quick vs which ones have build-up speed. DHB reminds me of a build-up speed guy that once he gets a step on you, you won't catch him, but his short-area quicks (and likely separation) are just average. Donald Brown would be the guy that LBs can catch running downfield, but can never get their hands on him 'cause he has world-class acceleration and quicks.

The current 40-time system probably won't change anytime soon though. The teams that are able to properly evaluate game speed aren't in any rush to let teams bad at evaluating it in on these facts. And teams out there that are gung-ho about 40-times are the LAST people to request this switch.

 

[LawFitz]

The current 40-time system probably won't change anytime soon though. The teams that are able to properly evaluate game speed aren't in any rush to let teams bad at evaluating it in on these facts. And teams out there that are gung-ho about 40-times are the LAST people to request this switch.

Great point.Personally however, a shift away from relying in any meaningful way on this outdated metric has been a good thing for my fantasy team scouting. I just wish my Raiders would see the light. You'd think Al Davis of all people would know the difference between game speed and track speed. Oh well, thx for the responses. I guess it's just a don't-ask-don't-tell policy when it comes to the 40.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

It's a fine metric. Not the only one, maybe not even the most important one, but still useful. Not perfect by any stretch, it can tell you SOMETHING about a guy's "speed". Yes, there can be a difference between track speed and game speed, and BOTH of those things can be improved.

But, when a guy runs a very slow 40, it IS a decent indication that the player MIGHT not have what it takes to succeed in the NFL. There are often reasons for a slow 40 time that can make it less meaningful, but there have also been a lot of times when a slow 40 did or should have given a hint about a guy who dominated in college. Sometimes big, slow WRs can cut it in the NFL, but a lot of times, they can't. Funny Manningham was mentioned, who was a "deep threat" in college and then couldn't post a decent 40 time. He dropped in the draft, probably at least partially because of those surprising times. Then everybody looked at his college numbers and skills, and said "STEAL!". But guess what, Manningham has done nothing in the NFL so far. Could it be because he is a deep threat WR without the speed to make it work in the NFL?

Conversely, when a guy runs a very fast 40, it tells you that he has a quality that NO amount of faking can reproduce. If you run a 4.3 40, you are a very fast dude, pads or no pads. That doesn't always translate as we know well, but sometimes it does. People were shocked when Chris Johnson went where he did last year, but it turned out that ridiculous speed is a fairly useful asset to have in the NFL.

People are ALWAYS talking about Rice and his 40, and that is a decent counter-point to the usefulness of the 40. Decent, but not great. Because that was long enough ago that guys were not really prepping for the test like they do today. I don't think Rice a was a true burner, but I also think that if he were in his prime and heading into the draft this year, with today's coaching and technique, he'd run a lot faster 40 than a lot of folks seem to think.

All that said, I can agree that THIS community might make 40 time out to be worth more than it really is. Sometimes folks really get caught up in comparing two guys who have negligible difference in timed speed (say 4.43 and 4.48 or something like that) and then giving one the edge based on that timed speed. But that doesn't make the measurement useless in general. It just means some folks misapply it.

 

[Footballhead]

If Speed is a joke, why don't they play big linemens and linebackers as WR's or DB's?

 

[kurtrudder]

It's a fine metric. Not the only one, maybe not even the most important one, but still useful. Not perfect by any stretch, it can tell you SOMETHING about a guy's "speed". Yes, there can be a difference between track speed and game speed, and BOTH of those things can be improved.But, when a guy runs a very slow 40, it IS a decent indication that the player MIGHT not have what it takes to succeed in the NFL. There are often reasons for a slow 40 time that can make it less meaningful, but there have also been a lot of times when a slow 40 did or should have given a hint about a guy who dominated in college. Sometimes big, slow WRs can cut it in the NFL, but a lot of times, they can't. Funny Manningham was mentioned, who was a "deep threat" in college and then couldn't post a decent 40 time. He dropped in the draft, probably at least partially because of those surprising times. Then everybody looked at his college numbers and skills, and said "STEAL!". But guess what, Manningham has done nothing in the NFL so far. Could it be because he is a deep threat WR without the speed to make it work in the NFL?Conversely, when a guy runs a very fast 40, it tells you that he has a quality that NO amount of faking can reproduce. If you run a 4.3 40, you are a very fast dude, pads or no pads. That doesn't always translate as we know well, but sometimes it does. People were shocked when Chris Johnson went where he did last year, but it turned out that ridiculous speed is a fairly useful asset to have in the NFL.People are ALWAYS talking about Rice and his 40, and that is a decent counter-point to the usefulness of the 40. Decent, but not great. Because that was long enough ago that guys were not really prepping for the test like they do today. I don't think Rice a was a true burner, but I also think that if he were in his prime and heading into the draft this year, with today's coaching and technique, he'd run a lot faster 40 than a lot of folks seem to think.All that said, I can agree that THIS community might make 40 time out to be worth more than it really is. Sometimes folks really get caught up in comparing two guys who have negligible difference in timed speed (say 4.43 and 4.48 or something like that) and then giving one the edge based on that timed speed. But that doesn't make the measurement useless in general. It just means some folks misapply it.

very

 

[Doug Drinen]

Here's what I wrote on the topic a couple of years ago.

On the NFL Network’s draft preview show earlier this week, Mike Mayock expressed frustration that more and more prospects — all of them, basically — are spending January through March training specifically for combine drills. This makes it difficult to determine whether those 40 times represent real speed that will translate to the football field, or merely track speed that will disappear as soon as the pads go on and the players are having to think and run at the same time.

As a college professor who occasionally participates in admissions-related activities, I can sympathize. Just as the skills (namely speed, quickness, and strength) that lead to good results in combine drills are closely related to the skills that players need to succeed in the NFL, the skills that cause a student to do well on the SAT are indeed correlated with the skills that cause students to succeed in college. But what a student learns at an SAT prep class serves only to improve the test score itself, not to improve the actual abilities that admissions people hope the test is trying to measure. One test prep center advertises, “Spend a little time getting to know the SAT better and you can find out how to use the structure and format of the test to your advantage.” In other words, it’s not about making yourself more prepared for college. It’s about making yourself appear more prepared for college.

If I had access to an honest account of how many hours of SAT prep each applicant had (and in which program), I think I could make smarter admissions decisions by discounting the scores of those who spent the most effort bolstering their appearance.

I, of course, have no such account. But NFL teams do. They know exactly where all these players have been spending their time since January. So this seems to me like an opportunity for smart teams to gain an advantage. Some of these combine training facilities have been around for a decade now. Figure out how many hundredths each of these camps shaves off the 40 time of a typical player. Then figure out whether those hundredths stayed off when the player reached the NFL. In other words, did they teach him how to run a faster 40, or did they actually teach him some meaningful techniques that he was able to translate to the field? If the former, and then add it back on for the purposes of evaluation.

Suppose a guy “played like a 4.6 guy” in college, but ran a 4.45 at the combine. Go look at his rookie year film and determine whether he played more like a 4.6 guy or a 4.45 guy in the pros. You might find that the guys who worked out at Training Facility A were in general able to maintain their speed gains while those who trained at Facility B were not.

Don’t be frustrated by it, use it.

On the flip side, if I were an agent, I might at this point be tempted to hire a team of ex-NFL coaches and publicly advertise that my players are specifically not training for the combine drills. Instead, they’re getting actual NFL coaching, doing football work, and learning how to train like NFL players train. Essentially, my guys will have a head start in terms of picking up NFL terminology and schemes because they haven’t been wasting their time learning to keep their elbows in while they run, or trying to put on weigh-in pounds that are going to come off after three days of real practice.

 

[az_prof]

The 40 is a joke on horribly inept management. They draft a guy based on how fast he is (Williamson), not if he has skills at his position (hands, route running). It can seperate good mgmt. from bad mgmt. The way 40 times are tested is a joke. If they really wanted to run the 40 correctly, WR would run from an upright position with pads. RBs would run from either a 3 pt stance or as they are in a single back set.

I don't understand why they don't do this. The scouts and GMs are supposed to be football guys--you would think they would see this and that they would want to see the players running in pads.

 

[LawFitz]

Can the 40 can measure speed under ideal conditions? Sure.

Is speed is an asset on the field? Definitely.

But can the 40 measure a player? By itself, not even close. Because in the end it's not about ideal speed. It's more about consistency of speed. Can the player exhibit speed consistently during the game? Everybody is fast in the NFL. It's more about who's fast the longest. A good WR or RB can be shut down for most of the early part of the game, then explode in the 4th quarter to win games and put up monster stats.

What he does on the track is meaningless without an deeper look at how he does when the broader picture of game speed is considered. Does he show explosion on film? Does he do it for the entire game? How does he react to pads and huge men trying to blow him up on every snap?