Another exciting NFL Draft kicked off and we will review how the selections impacted teams for better or worse.
A few days ago, I posted this year's "Who's Screwed? Part 1" (you can read it here). As promised, here is the update article.
Pos(ition) - The player position group.
Supply - The number of top players at this position available.
Demand - The number of players required to fulfill every teams top 5 listed "needs" per NFL.com.
Surplus/ -Shortage - Indicates the percentage in excess (positive) or shortage (negative) of available Top players to fulfill those needs.
ADP - The average draft position of the player position based on an aggregation of the ranking sources used.
The Post Day One info (left) compared to Pre-Draft (right) reveals a few things about the shift in "Critical Positions" where demand is greater than supply.
While shortages remained at DL, TE, LB and OL after day one, we now see a shortage in Corners also.
As would be expected the perceived quality of the remaining players ( represented by ADP) has eroded as top players were taken off the board today.
The quality of DL remaining plummeted as some of the draft's highest regarded players selected where in this category.
There has been little run of in the CB group which represents the parity in the group.
Got it...Now, Who is Screwed?
Criticality is calculated based on a function of the number of critical positions required for each team in relation to their overall needs and the number of picks that team has in the Top 160. For reference, the lower the score the better (meaning the team doesn't have much risk at missing out on a Critical Position); the maximum Criticality score is 500% (in the case a team's top five needs are all Critical Positions and the team only has 1 draft pick) - for this draft the worst score worsened to 200% as one team has 3 high priority critical needs but only 1 pick in the first 160 picks.
Here is a table of the changes in Criticality at the end of Day .
NYG moved from 4th to 1st by addressing most of their critical needs tonight (whether or not they got good deals is another article).
NO remained in the cellar since they have 3 Critical Positions to fill and, with no picks until Round 2, they could only watch as quality players came off the board.
The average criticality score is around 37% so there were only a third of all teams below that line.
Teams with the most dramatic changes:
Atlanta and Minnesota both improved 11 places (pre-draft criticality vs post Round 1) as they each addressed their most pressing critical needs.
Oakland, although having 3 first round picks did not address any position of critical need and even added one with the CB position going critical after Day 1.
Arizona picked up another first round QB which was obviously not a need so they lost ground as they still have four critical needs with just 4 quality picks remaining.
Check back after Day 2 ends to see who is really going to be screwed for the final day of he draft!
Previously, I provided a Football Film Fight for Slot Receivers (see it here) and the winner was surprising. I believe you are in for an even bigger surprise here with the Featured Receivers FFF.
Ground Rules
The rules are simple: of our list of 20 "featured" WR taken from www.drafttek.com, we view three games from WRs #19 and #20. Based on those viewings alone, we determine the better player who then moves on to face the #18 player and so on until we have a final overall winner.. This is more about "floor" than "ceiling" since projection of player developments an inexact science to say the least.
The Prospects
Courtesy of Drafttek.com
Round 1
#20 Travis Fulgham Old Dominion vs Marshall 2018 and East Carolina 2018
Very new to the game; he puts out consistent effort but has a very steep learning curve to be pro-ready. Very willing to block. Will need to develop route tree. Not a lot of footage out there.
Versus
#19 Demarkus Lodge Ole Miss vs. LSU 2018, Vanderbilt 2018 and Mississippi State 2018
Could increase numbers with increased concentration. Not sure if top speed was on display. Didn't get a lot of separation and had to fight for a lot of balls - needs to own the ball on jump balls.
Decision: Lodge - Fulgham is a nice story, but is a clear project.
Round 2
#18 Tyre Brady Marshall vs NC State 2017, Old Dominion 2018 and Miami (OH) 2018
Quick and fast. Can get separation. Claps at the ball (instead of "diamond hands") which can be exploited by DBs at the next level.
Decision: Brady - Definitely had the better video.
Round 3
#17 Miles Boykin Notre Dame Vs LSU 2017, Stanford 2018 and Clemson 2018
Big and strong. Will block anyone. Excellent hand catching. QB play impacted production in 2018; not able to get much YAC. Runs the routes, not sure if all the play elements are understood so there is upside.
Decision: Boykin - Solid. Production may not be indicative of talent. Looking forward to seeing how receptive he is to NFL coaching.
Round 4
#16 Gary Jennings West Virginia vs Virginia Tech 2017, Oklahoma 2018 and TCU 2018
Has the production; not sure how much is him and how much is scheme. Should focus on consistent intensity. Routes are acceptable but switches between hand catching and trapping the ball against his body.
Decision: Boykin - Just more sure of his game at this point.
Round 5
#15 Darius Slayton Auburn vs LSU 2018, TAMU 2018 and Alabama 2018
Good speed after the catch. Up and down in terms of consistency of play. Clap catches the ball leads to lots of PBU.
Decision: Boykin - More pro ready with more solid base of fundamentals.
Round 6
#14 Dillon Mitchell Oregon vs Arizona State 2017, Michigan State 2018 and Stanford 2018
Fast. Finds open space. Rounds his out routes. Has to hold blocks longer. Chest clutch catches lead to bobbles.
Decision: Boykin - His skill set is still solidly ahead.
Round 7
#13 David Sills West Virginia vs Kansas 2017,Tennessee 2018 and Kansas State 2018
Was a matedor blocker in 2017, tightened it up in 2018. He has production but, like Jennings, scheme accounts for a lot of opportunities.
Decision: Boykin - He needed to dominate corners consistently on a play to play basis to overcome Boykin at this point.
Round 8
#12 Antoine Wesley Texas Tech vs Houston 2018, West Virginia 2018 and Oklahoma State 2018
Dynamic off the line. Consistent routes. Solid hands. Aggressive blocker. Does not dance; goes through tacklers for extra yards. Breaks tackles; had a TD catch where he shed 2 defenders who almost had him wrapped. Definitely imposing his will on the opposition. Very aggressive going to get the ball and running over defenders in his way. He punishes them off the ball so they think twice when the ball comes his way. Smart football.
Decision: Wesley - Boykin is solid; I would place Wesley a cut above.
Round 9
#11 Riley Ridley Georgia vs Alabama 2017, LSU 2018 and Texas 2018
Very tentative. Not sure if it is just the Bama D. Against LSU was more involved. The dude throws cut blocks, which is hilarious when he misses. Standard blocking, sometimes he's Hines Ward other times Ward Cleaver. Not sure what the trigger is. Was a different animal in the Sugar Bowl...this is the guy we heard about. Solid heads up play through the whistles. Where was this guy before?
Decision: Wesley - Ridley showed up in his last game before entering the draft but it just magnified how lackluster he was in the other games viewed.
Round 10
#10 Deebo Samuel South Carolina vs NC State 2/17, Clemson 2018 and Vanderbilt 2018
Tragically, had to play defense a bunch vs NCST as his QB was throwing to the wrong jerseys; shows level-headedness. Dude is ice cold with the roll out one handed catch TD. Not a burner and is not creating separation from his routes consistently. May want to be more consistently involved in the blocking game; can be pedestrian or lay a guy out. Too many guys shed him to make the tackle.
Decision: Wesley - Samuel is skilled and will be a higher pick than Wesley, for sure, but from a performance standpoint, it's Wesley.
Round 11
#9 Terry McLaurin Ohio State vs. Michigan State 2018, Michigan 2018 and Washington 2019
I didn't see a lot upon which to base an evaluation. Scoop catches the ball against his chest often. Ran a lot of clear out routes so wasn't featured a whole lot but when targeted did not consistently generate separation.
Decision: Wesley - From the games watched, it was difficult to understand the ranking here; based on the footage, definitely Wesley.
Round 12
#8 Emmanuel Hall Missouri vs Tennessee 2017, Wyoming 2018 and Florida 2018
He had several drops vs. TN due to body catching, ball bounced right off his chest. He was very upset, which is good. 2018, he remembers to catch with hands most of the time. They send him on 3 routes so hard to assess the football IQ. Could be more consistent with blocking. Not breaking a lot of tackles. Big guy, but can be roughed up.
Decision: Wesley - The year over year growth was a good sign so here's hoping Hall can keep it up at the next level.
Round 13
#7 Parris Campbell Ohio State vs Michigan 2017, Michigan State 2018 and Washington 2019
The simplicity of the route tree makes for a tough evaluation. Catches with the hands. Will have to mentally prepared for the increased intensity in the physical game at the next level. Definitely will have to embrace the blocking game. Would like to see more yards after contact.
Decision: Wesley - Campbell is a name tossed around a lot this draft season so he has a great chance of getting a nice contract. Hope he gets picked at a spot where they give him time to develop his skill set.
Round 14
#6 Kelvin Harmon vs Clemson 2017, Florida State 2018 and Boston College 2018
His approach to a block is kind of tentative but when he gets there, he manhandles. Very strong. He moves the pile. Consistent routes. Feels like he's going to take over the game on the next play...then the next play...then the next play...Fights through contact to beat press.
Decision: Wesley - Harmon has all the tools to become the next Megatron but he is not a bully out there. His upside is clear, I just wonder if he has the interest to get there. If he can increase his intensity level, he could be one of the most dominant WRs we've seen in years. Wesley currently has that intensity.
Round 15
#5 JJ Arcega-Whiteside Stanford vs USC 2017, Washington State 2018 and Note Dame 2018
A lot has been written about how good he is at contested catches but it seems that is driven by a lack of separation. Can catch although hands don't form the diamond you want to be intuitive at this level resulting in some avoidable drops. Fast in space but not quick in routes. Open on comebacks. Acceptable blocking.
Decision: Wesley - Not as close as Harmon, but JJ has a lot of upside that can be coached out of him. Would love to see coaches use that speed while he works on suddenness to generate separation.
Round 16
#4 N'Keal Harry Arizona State vs Colorado 2017, Utah 2018 and Oregon 2018
2017 didn't show a lot of the separation that we see in 2018. Very physical at the top of his route stems so will have to avoid push offs at the next level. Fast and quick. Very strong but pushed defenders, didn't drive block and many would shed to make the tackle. Can be a top route runner at the next level with just a touch more reinforcement of route theory (the "why" behind each route segment).
Decision: Wesley - Death threats be damned, I didn't see the intensity of others already in my final four. To advance, I needed to see the ability AND desire to consistently dominate the opponent when it matters most.
Round 17
#3 Hakeem Butler Iowa State vs West Virginia 2018, Iowa 2018 and Texas 2018
Effectively uses those long arms to ward off press coverage to stack CBs. Runs sharp out routes. Pushes defenders more than blocks them so they are disrupted but free to pursuit the ball carrier; also hesitates in approaching the block. Read about "focus drops" but the kid hasn't dropped anything. Outstanding coming back to the ball. Catches with his hands. Big with route discipline to get separation by force or saavy. Has good speed after the catch; always with a mind for YAC. Sick catch in Alamo Bowl. Where are these focus drops?
Decision: Wesley - As much as the guy can catch anything they throw at him he really needs to take over the game and I just didn't see that. He can take a pointer from Wesley who will go after CBs when the play is on the other side to just wear them out. When the intensity and the attitude go up a notch, he will be unstoppable. Still one of my top 3 WRs in this draft, but he won't win this Film Fight. I have been a huge early supporter of Butler so this one especially stings.
Round 18
#2 A.J. Brown Ole Miss vs. Kentucky 2017, Vanderbilt 2018 and LSU 2018
Walks through and doesn't pivot at the top of out and in routes. Very strong but matador blocking sometimes. Had two chances to win the Vandy game but couldn't close- has to seize those opportunities and carry the team on his back. Needs to roll with the QB when scrambling; too often leaves him hanging. Need to see him manufacture more separation; nearly all separation schemed.
Decision: Wesley - Just didn't see a receiver who has that edge you need like a Megatron or TO. I don't see too many huge areas of improvement so if receptive, he should work it all out at the next level.
Round 19
#1 DK Metcalf Ole Miss vs. Arkansas 2017 Alabama 2018 and LSU 2018
Quick off the line, excellent use of hands to get free and separate on deep routes. You can see the NFL pedigree with his proper catch technique (which he doesn't always use). Hitch/stutter in the middle (not off the line) of short routes is unknown to me and it does not seem to work vs. Bama. More consistency on short and intermediate separation would be great. When CB is off, he can't stack and is not as effective deep - that is his kryptonite. Nice footwork; why they didn't target him on intermediate routes off press is beyond me. As big and strong as he is, he needs to come away with more balls through contact. Want to see use his power for YAC. Needs to provide blocking support off the ball. Several times the play worked back to his side and the defender was free.
Decision: Wesley - Metcalf has the pedigree and, presumably, all the inside NFL mentoring growing up, so definitely expected more in terms of his overall game. He will be one of, if not the, top WRs off the board so we'll see if his experience will flatten his learning curve. But today, his overall game videos were not what one would expect given the lead up to the draft. Defenders will see playing off coverage somewhat neutralized him.
Winner of the NFL Draft 2019 Football Film Fight - Featured Receiver
Antoine Wesley Texas Tech
Dude does not have the media support of some of the other big names but some team will get away with robbery where I see him projected. His draft place will only give him an even bigger chip on his shoulder so I fully expect him to wreck the league.
With the NFL Draft just hours away, football enthusiasts of
all walks are busy looking over their lists and numbers and lists of numbers to
make sure our “big boards” and “mock drafts” are as final as they are going to
get.In reviewing my position of focus,
wide receivers, I've been picking apart a particular spreadsheet that brought
some interesting insights based the ideal “size” of potential WR draft
candidates. We have been taught that a
large WR is better for numerous reasons.Especially as Americans, we go by the mantra “Bigger is better” but in
this case, is it?
Density
For the purpose of this article, our data will be pulled
from the top 20 WRs in terms of receiving yards over the past 5 seasons ending
2018.We will define a big receiver as
one whose weight in pounds divided by height in inches (referred to as “Density”
for this article) is greater than one standard deviation from the average of
that group.Looking at the most recently
ended season, we can see the Density ranges from 2.59 lbs/in (Antonio Brown) to
3.00 lbs/in (Mike Evans) with the average at 2.77.
Productivity
How do we measure productivity?Well, if we went simply by receiving yards,
we would see the larger the receiver, the higher up on the rankings:
WRs in 2018 with density of 2.93 lbs/in and above (like Mike Evans, DeAndre Hopkins, Julio Jones, JuJu Smith-Schuster and Davante Adams) had an average Top 20 Receiving Yards rank of 3.6
WRs with density less than 2.65 lbs/in (like Antonio Brown, Brandin Cooks, Tyler Lockett and T.Y. Hilton) placed around 10.8 on the Top 20 list.
And so the answer would not be more clear, the WRs with higher
density are get more yards so they are, therefore,better receivers. Case closed, right?Not so fast, my friend.
Over the last five seasons there is a pretty causal relationship
in between receiving yards and targets among the Top 20 WRs (on average over
the 5 years, about 64.1% correlation, as high as 91.4% in 2015). Each period, larger density players received
more targets, on average, than their smaller league mates ranging from 5.5%
more in 2015 to 24.2% more in 2018. So
if we know the larger receivers have higher receiving yard totals because they
get more targets, the only measure that makes sense is Yards/Target.
Yards per Target
When we look at this number over the last 5 seasons, of Top
20 WRs, those with Density less than 1 standard deviation below the average out
gained those with Density greater than 1 standard deviation above the average
each year based on Yards per Target by at least 12.1%.
When you look at the broader picture and separate the Top 20
into above and below average Density, the lighter receivers as a whole,
outperformed the bigger ones by no less than 3.8%, up to 13.3% for the 2014
season.
So, as the larger WRs received more targets, smaller WRs
provided far greater Yards per Target, based on the Top 20 reception yard
gainers over the last 5 years.
So What?
OK, so what. What if the higher Yards per Target were during
garbage time and were meaningless?Well,
we could go back and pick through each game to determine the importance of the
yards to gain, but we have a simpler way to look at this by comparing results
of players in the Top 20 whose teams made the playoffs compared to those in the
same Top 20 who sat home and watch the playoffs from home.
Over the last five playoff periods, Top 20 receivers who
played on playoff teams had higher Yards per Target than those who missed the
playoffs every year except one year (2016).
Also, Average Density of Top 20 WRs whose teams made the
playoffs was below average each year while density of those who missed the
playoffs is above average.
Conclusion - Play Small Ball?
From the above, it is not unreasonable to be left with the
following beliefs:
Larger WRs (based on “Density”) are typically better represented in the Top 20 WR based on receiving yards although this
would appear because there is a strong correlation between targets and
receiving yards and the larger WRs statistically receive more targets.
Despite the lower share of targets, WRs with
below average density provide higher Yards per Target than those above average
(by at least 3.8% in each of the last 5 years).
The value of the contribution of the below
average WRs is validated by the observation that of the Top 20 WRs used for our
data pool, the average WR density for teams making the playoffs is below
average while that of teams missing is above average.
This is just a rough analysis. Clearly, much more intensive research is
conducted by teams leading up to the NFL draft, but it is pretty clear that “prototypical”
size for a WR is a concept that may not be founded in anything other an what is
intuitive. "Bigger is better" is assumed but the data here can convince otherwise.
The NFL is a business and like any business, they rely on product performance to drive revenues. Performance is driven by players and the players are selected through the player draft.
Nothing new here.
But while everyone is mocking away to figure out which team picks which player, I was wondering will there be enough players to go around so each team can fill their weaknesses?
Here we look at each Team's player needs as listed on NFL.com and, based on aggregate valuation of each position using player rankings on several public big boards, we figure out if there will be a surplus or shortfall in player supply. I took the top 5 position needs multiplied by 32 teams for a total of 160 player needs. The issue of picks being unequally distributed over those 160 selections is accounted in the calculation (see below) Then, I assessed each team's "at risk" level of not fulfilling their most pressing needs considering the supply ("Criticality").
This year, it was determined that the position supply and demand numbers (based on the NFL.com assessment) are as follows:
Pos(ition) - The player position group.
Supply - The number of players at this position in the aggregate Top 160 players.
Demand - The number of players required to fulfill every teams listed "need" per NFL.com.
Surplus/ -Shortage - Indicates the percentage in excess (positive) or shortage (negative) of available Top 160 players to fulfill those needs.
ADP - The average draft position of the player position based on an aggregation of the ranking sources used.
Critical Positions - The Critical Positions this year are Tight End (10 available in the Top 150 but total team need total is 15 for a shortfall of 33%), Defensive Line (which was separate from "Edge" on all sources for consistency), Linebacker and Offensive Line (to eliminate the question of player's OL position in the NFL, all OL positions were consolidated to ensure consistency).
Let's take a look at who is safe and who is screwed for this draft.
Sitting Pretty
Criticality is calculated based on a function of the number of critical positions required for each team in relation to their overall needs and the number of picks that team has in the Top 160. For reference, the lower the score the better (meaning the team doesn't have much risk at missing out on a Critical Position); the maximum Criticality score is 500% (in the case a team's top five needs are all Critical Positions and the team only has 1 draft pick) - for this draft the worst score is 107%.
The four teams above have the lowest Criticality scores (each was greater than one standard deviation above the mean) which means they will really have to try hard to screw up this draft. Remember that here, ADP means the average draft positions of the team's picks through the first 160 selections.
Washington has the lowest Criticality score of 2.7%. They have 5 draft picks in the Top 160 to fill just one at risk position, Offensive Line which is the least critical at -4% overall. Of their top 5 needs, OL is fourth so they are not at dire straits to add the position. Given they have the 12th lowest ADP at 77.2, they should not worry about meeting there draft needs.
Although Chicago has the 2nd lowest average draft position for their 2 selections (average pick is 106.5 within the first 160 picks), the only critical position is Tight End which is fourth in terms of priority.
Looking Good
Half of the teams in the league (16) are set up pretty well for the upcoming draft (Criticality within 1 standard deviation above the mean).
San Francisco is in good shape with low criticality driven by the need for only two critical positions, Defensive Line and Offensive Line (their fourth and fifth most critical needs) and four top 160 picks. Their situation is further enhanced by having the lowest ADP ranked at #1.
My New York Jets are in an envious position with criticality of 20%; the NFL pins OL (second critical need) and Tight End (fourth critical need; which I disagree, but that's another battle) on them but their 4 picks in the first 160 and seventh best ADP reduces the urgency. It will be interesting if they trade back for more picks as has been discussed in the media, but clearly, they have enough draft capital to meet their needs if they stand pat.
Cleveland continues to enjoy an embarrassment of riches, still having 5 picks in the top 160 selections after sending their 1st round pick to the Giants for Odell. Critical Positions include both sides of the Line and Linebacker, which are 3rd, 4th and 5th, in priority so, despite the highest ADP of the draft (at this point; recall, trades could change the team ADP), the Browns have a chance to fill their biggest needs.
Livin' on a Prayer
Each team in this category is looking to fill 3 Critical Positions so the climb will be a bit more challenging.
Arizona has been rumored to be thinking of trading last year's franchise QB selection and picking up a certain 2 sport star first overall but a quick review of their situation shows they have need at 3 of the 4 Critical Positions and 5 selections in the top 160 picks. Going QB might leave them at a disadvantage to pick up key players at positions of need that are already going to be thin.
Kansas City and the Los Angeles teams are copying each other, with equal Criticality scores with need of DL, OL and LB. The Chiefs are in the best shape with the lower ADP of 61.3 over the first 160 picks (4th overall).
Ruh-Roh!
Minnesota has Critical needs at Defensive Line, Offensive Line and Tight End and they are the first team in the group that is more than one standard deviation below average.
The remaining two have need at all four Critical Positions, however, Cincinnati is in the worse position as Linebacker is its priority need which is in shorter supply compared to the OL help needed most by Denver.
This is For My Homiez
For those of you keeping track at home, you should have figured out which team has the most ground to make up regarding addressing their draft needs...which team looks to be getting screwed this upcoming NFL Draft. Well, here they are:
The New Orleans Saints have the worst situation in they have need at two Critical Positions (Offensive Line and Linebacker) but they only have one pick in the first 160. That pick in a potentially advantageous trade position at #62, but not sure they can get enough value to ensure they get decent players especially given their need is at already thin positions. Perhaps best to just sit tight, take the player that falls to them and then roll the dice the rest of the way.
Check me out during Draft Weekend
Last year, I reviewed the second and third days of the draft to determine if the teams with unaddressed needs had any shot at filling those based on remaining players at each day's end. I plan on doing the same exercise this year so keep an eye out for Day 2 and Day 3 updates on who is more or less screwed in the draft based on their needs and the available player pool.
Just 7 days and we will start the most anticipated non-game event in the sport universe, the NFL Player Draft! And although we won't publish the 2019 DraftTwitter Top 100 list just yet (here is the preliminary list for this year...) I've run a Film Fight for slot Wide Recievers based on the top 15 listed on Drafttek.com.
Squaring Off
The rules are simple, we take the # 14 and #15 players and watch up to 3 games for each (with one from 2017 if possible). We determine the better player based on that viewing who moves on to face the #13 player and so on until we have a final overall winner.
Round 1
Terry Godwin - Georgia #14 vs Auburn 2017, Vanderbilt 2018 and Alabama 2018
Willing and tenacious blocker. Fought through press off the line. Determination at goal line. Excellent focus going up for the ball. Nice hard pivot points on routes and doesn't go down on first contact but tries to extend plays when he could just take the yards sometimes resulting in lost yards. Guts. Relishes contact. Pretty round out routes.
Scotty Miller - Bowling Green #15 vs Michigan State 2017, Georgia Tech 2018 and Oregon 2018
Short 3 yards on a 10 yard out resulted in a pick 6 vs MSU. Sharpened up route running in 2018 and that made a big difference. He can separate. Tough kid. Took some big shots. Nice "feel" over the middle. Solid hands and concentration. Willing to block but more like, gets in the way. Kid takes on Jelks vs Oregon...not good for him. Kid has wheels.
Decision: Miller: Godwin is a more effective blocker because he is larger but Miller definitely was more electric on the field for his team.
Round 2
Diontae Johnson - Toledo #13 vs. Akron 2017, Fresno State 2018 and Miami 2018.
Some drops, some round routes. Could be a bit more assertive with blocking effort. Makes some nice plays just wish they were strung together consistently. Showed solid ability to fight off press coverage vs. Miami. 2018 was tough eval year with new QB(s).
Decision: Miller - If Johnson still had NFL QB Logan Woodside, 2018 might have been a better viewing. Miller just made more of his opportunities.
Round 3
Nyqwan Murray - #12 Florida State vs. Virginia Tech 2018 and Boston College 2018
Didn't find a lot of cut ups on Murray, however he clearly has to work in sharpness of cuts at the top of routes to increase separation and opportunities. Perhaps needs better coaches to reinforce blocking. Would like to see more aggressiveness in all phases. Made an outstanding grab vs. BC.
Decision: Miller - Of the games there were on Murray, they lacked evidence of any defining traits.
Round 4
Kavontae Turpin TCU - Disqualified due to Domestic Violence history.
The possibility of a repeat issue is too great to consider spending a draft pick,so Turpin will not be evaluated.
Decision: Miller by DQ.
Round 5
Jovon Durante #10 Florida Atlantic vs. North Texas 2018 and UCF 2018.
Clearly the best blocker of the group so far. Understand plays well as he actually comes off blocks to pick up free defenders when he can. Catches with the body, not the hands. Dances a bit too much, take yards they give you. More yards horizontal than vetical. Soft routes allow DBs to sneak in and get PBUs.
Decision: Miller - I like Jovon's near solid blocking and he is obviously well prepared but Miller has more solid fundamentals.
Round 6
Alex Wesley #9 Northern Colorado
I could not find a single cut-up or complete Northern Colorado game anywhere on the internet. There is one "highlights" post on YouTube and a whole lot of Lex running the 400 meters (he went to Nationals). If anyone has any game footage please let me know.
Decision: Miller due to forfeit (cannot evaluate based on highlight reels).
Round 7
John Ursua #8 Hawai'i vs. Navy 2018, Colorado State 2018
Round out routes. Will give up a lot of pick 6s. Drops. Has to remember to catch with hands. Did not see much blocking demonstrated. Schemed open often.
Decision: Miller - Just more consistency.
Round 8
Greg Dortch #7 Wake Forest vs. NC State 2018, Boston College 2018 and Duke 2018.
Will need to give max effort on each snap, even when the coach calls someone else's number. Could possibly pickup more YAC if he did not focus on anticipated contact. Will enter non-aggressive blocking pacts with DBs.
Decision - Miller: I liked Scotty before, but I would never have predicted this.
Round 9
Johnnie Dixon #6 Ohio State vs. Indiana 2018, Maryland 2018 and Michigan 2018.
Consistent speed coming off the line every time. The man can run routes. Best blocker so far. Knows the playbook - understands his role each play. Goes up and gets the ball. Not a dancer,will go through a defender to get yards. Dude even took on a DL in the trenches.
Decision: Dixon - This is the guy who will sneak up on a lot of us and have a solid career.
Round 10
Hunter Renfrow #5 Clemson vs. Alabama 2017, Texas A&M 2018 and NC State 2018
Seems to be open more because of scheming than ability to separate. Really needs to work on blocking. Good hands. Would like to see him play with more aggressiveness.
Decision: Dixon - Expected Renfrow to take a few rounds but Dixon is too strong.
Round 11
Mercole Hardman #4 Georgia vs Alabama 2018, Vanderbilt 2018 and LSU 2018
Clearly and rightfully concerned about the Bama D, but that may have inhibited his usefulness. Hope that blocking was a point of focus this Pre-Draft. Far more aggressive vs Vandy but not necessarily any more effective. Rounded out routes. Seems to move quickly but not translating into production.
Decision: Dixon - Dixon in a class all his own.
Round 12
Penny Hart #3 Georgia State vs. Arkansas State 2018, Troy 2018 and NC State 2018
More quick than fast. Can run sharp routes but will definitely need to keep working to establish consistency. When he lapses, separation is a concern and DB easily rack up PBUs. Not sure if the QB was on the same page as him; there were times he was wide open yet the throw didn't come his way. Definitely would love to see what we have here but the college situation didn't show me what I had hoped.
Decision: Dixon - Hoping Hart inherits a solid situation so he can thrive but based on the games watched, JD is just more ready.
Round 13
Andy Isabella #2 UMass vs Mississippi State 2017, BYU 2018 and Georgia 2018
Good hands. Needs to get more comfortable with contact. Would like to see him value his contribution to the blocking scheme. Always in the game, doesn't seem to quit even if game out of reach. The boy is fast. Took advantage of opponents mistakes and made them pay.
Decision: Dixon - Isabella has the speed and hands but we will see how quickly he adjusts to the physicality of the pros.
Round 14
Marquise Brown #1 Oklahoma vs. Oklahoma State 2017, West Virginia 2018 and Texas 2018
Wins consistently but, surprisingly, not primarily with speed. This is the most prepared WR in this group. Forget Hollywood, his nickname should be "Art of War". Assuming his cousin taught him all those tricks to gain separation and get "lost" because his knowledge base is way beyond any other WR in this group. Truly amazing how he sets up DBs. Not a big guy but he gets in the mix and will block fearlessly. Tough. Dude took some shots and kept at it. Does not dance... doesn't need to because he sees the entire field at all times. And just when DBs tighten up to watch for a sharp route cut, he blows past them with his speed.
Decision: Brown - Clearly the best in this group and likely the best in the draft. He just knows the manipulation game so well I can't see how DBs at the next level stand a chance.
You Know You're Smarter than the Talking Heads...Prove It!
TWO DAYS LEFT!!
Voting for the 3rd Annual People's Top 100 survey is going on through the week of April 19th (the week before the 2019 Draft)!
Just leave a comment or shoot me an email to boombearfootballmail@gmail.com for an email link to the online Excel worksheet form with dropdown lists for ease of use!
Once is a pipe dream, twice is dumb luck, third time means we know what we are doing. Three years ago, I set out to bring together player evaluators from all walks of life to see if we could evaluate and select players on par with pro scouts. By collecting various opinions, aggregating the results and tracking the production of players on our list vs. those of professional evaluators and the actual draft, we aim to inform and have fun.
So I present to you, the third annual Top 100 Pre-Combine NFL Draft prospect list created for the people, by the people.
" -Prior" represents the difference in Avg Score between a player and the one ranked before him..
"- Pos Leader" represents the difference in Avg Score between a player and the one ranked before him in the same position.
Things to Remember:
This first pre-Combine ballot is based on a smaller sample of responses than we will use for our final Pre-Draft Top 100.
This is an aggregation and variances tend to smooth out as we have more opinions.
Because many evaluators use analytics for their process, the Combine testing scores must be gathered to complete their ballots so those folks cannot submit pre-Combine.
Once we get closer to the draft and have about 4 or 5 times as many ballots making up the sample, the results will look much different.
With fewer ballots, outliers will get magnified and so it's key to have a large data sample to smooth out outliers and reach a consensus.
This is just for fun so don't get all wound up because your favorite prospects are not on the list.
And finally, if you don't like the results, I have a great idea, CONTRIBUTE by getting your own ballot and stop getting mad at the 4 Letter Network's draft "experts" - you know more than they do! The more opinions we have, the better the results of our Aggregated list.
Let's take a look inside the numbers:
# represents the number of players at each respective position in the Top 100.
Edge Rushers and Wide Receivers have the highest representation with 14 while Centers (2) edged out Guards (4) for the fewest.
ADP = average draft position of each position based on their Top 100 players
Offensive Tackles had the best ADP at 37.4 while Quarterbacks are kinda sketchy with ADP of 60.3.
% Favorite = number of players in the top half of the range for that position
Offensive Tackles were highly regarded with 75% favorable ratings. Running Backs were not so lucky with only 2 of 7 being favorable.
Avg Variance = for each position, the average number of picks between selections
The average variance between successive Wide Receiver selections was lowest while LBs had the most space between selections.
StDev = the standard deviation of the average variance
Guards are seen as the most similar as their standard deviation was lowest while Quarterbacks are a crap shoot at 15.07.
This is being written while the 2019 Combine takes place and I can assure you those test scores will, as always, have a huge impact on the final aggregation. If you don't submit your own ballot, just make sure to keep watching this blog for NFL Draft commentary.
You Know You're Smarter than the Talking Heads...Prove It!
Voting for the 3rd Annual People's Top 100 survey is going on through the week of April 19th (the week before the 2019 Draft)!
Just leave a comment or shoot me an email to boombearfootballmail@gmail.com for an email link to the online Excel worksheet form with dropdown lists for ease of use!
It all starts in the "trenches" in football, at the line of scrimmage where behemoths weighting near three bills collide play after play, wearing each other down for that one snap that could mean the difference between defeat and victory.
We're looking at the Defensive Tackle position today on Football Film Fight!
Don't Sweat the Technique
Back when I was kid before things like the internet, smart phones and political correctness, we didn't have 5 Techniques or 1 Techniques, we had Nose Guards and Defensive Tackles. Despite the change in nomenclature, the bottom line is who is effective. We will look at Defensive Linemen as ranked by Bleacher Reports' Matt Miller as posted on Fanspeak.com.
Groundrules
Football Film Fight is simple. We take the #14 and #15 players listed on the rankings and select 3 games to view (with the intent of getting footage over the last 2 seasons, if possible). Based on that viewing ONLY, one player will be deemed winner of that round with the other being dismissed. From there, we will pull video of the #13 player and continue until we have a winner. Sound simple? It is! So let's get it started, shall we?
Round 1: #15 Bledsoe vs #14 Dogbe
Bledsoe vs. West Virginia 2018, TCU 2018 and Alabama 2018 - Lack of desire or ability to separate from blockers. Marginal impact on the game, at best.
Dogbe vs. Maryland 2018, UCF 2018 and - A bit lighter than you would expect to play in the middle but quick, keeps eyes in the backfield and makes plays after shedding blocks. Does not give up on plays. Will take on a double team and make them work. Dude is bundle of energy late in the 4th. Big strong and quick.
Decision: Dogbe- Not as impactful vs UCF's top tier team, Dogbe's work is still very solid and, given where his draft position is projected, will be a steal for his new team.
Round 2: #14 Dogbe vs. #13 Sanders
Sanders vs. NDSU 2018, Youngstown State 2018 and Illinois 2018 - THEY PUT HIM ON THE EDGE AND HE FINESSED A SACK!!! Powerful. Fights through the double teams. Great stamina through 4th quarter. Eyes always in the backfield. Quick feet, hands and very agile. Easily sheds blocks.
Decision: Sanders - Big, strong, agile. What you want in a DT.
Round 3: #13 Sanders vs. #12 Alexander
Alexander vs. Georgia 2018 - Georgia did not need to use a lot of double teams on him. If he could use more active hands, he would have better success shedding blocks.
Decision: Sanders - Not a lot of footage on Alexander but clear difference in ability.
Round 4: #13 Sanders vs. #11 Buggs
Buggs vs. Georgia 2017, Ole Miss 2018 and Texas A&M 2018 - Violent hands. Victim to several cut blocks. Moved up and down the line in 2017, kept him wide in 2018. Hopefully focusing on conditioning for the Combine.
Decision: Sanders - If Buggs can improve his shedding skills and stamina, he can make a lot of noise in the NFL.
Round 5: #13 Sanders vs #10 Beckner Jr.
Beckner Jr. vs. Vanderbilt 2017, Florida 2018 and Kentucky 2018 - Singled up most of the time. Got cut...has to vault those. Can get skinny and penetrate. Could maintain better space and not get enveloped by OL. Stamina?
Decision: Sanders - Beckner Jr. can write a book on getting skinny and splitting blockers, but he may want to work on getting off blocks, avoiding cuts.
Round 6: #13 Sanders vs. #9 Willis
Willis vs. LSU 2018, Boston College 2018, Florida State 2018 - Fast feet, fast hands, eyes in the backfield. Powerful... will push or toss aside OL. Stamina? Gets cut a lot. Singled up.
Decision: Sanders - I really am surprised by this one. Sanders just had better game tape.
Round 7: #13 Sanders vs. #8 Lawrence
Lawrence vs. Auburn 2017, Duke 2018 and Syracuse 2018 - Stamina? Singled up most of the time. Seems to be moving backwards a lot. Fatigue seems to be a big issue.
Decision: Sanders - Lawrence had flashes but not consistency. Definitely will want to focus on conditioning for success at the next level.
Round 8: #13 Sanders vs. # 7 Jones
Jones vs. Oklahoma 2017, TCU 2018 vs Washington 2019 - Lot of energy. Good feet. Must find ways to use his hands. Singled up a lot. Nifty spin move. Eyes in the backfield. Challenged to hold up to doubles.
Decision: Sanders - Surprising turn of events continues.
Round 9: #13 Sanders vs. #6 Tillery
Tillery vs. Boston College 2017, Stanford 2018 and Michigan 2018 - Not always gets to the spot he wants. Lots of energy. Flashes. Stamina through all 4 quarters.
Decision: Sanders - Tillery dominated at the end of one game during garbage time when he faded away the rest of the time viewed. If he can perform at that high level for the full 60 minutes, he's a clear top DT.
Round 10: #13 Sanders vs. #5 Wilkins
Wilkins vs. Auburn 2017, Texas A&M 2018 and Alabama 2018 - Needs consistency with shedding. Inconsistent collapsing the pocket even when singled up. Played with good energy all game. Nice job to get free on goal line for stops. Very solid on goal line D.
Decision: Sanders - It's all about the games watched...Wilkins was solid on goal line but otherwise, Sanders had more impact.
Round 11: #13 Sanders vs. #4 Simmons
Simmons vs. LSU 2017, Florida 2018 and Iowa 2018 - Fires off the line. Holds his position well vs double teams. Strong. Sheds with long arms and quick hands. Eyes in the backfield. Big energy.
Decision: Simmons - Occupies double and triple teams freeing up teammates. Constant effort. Total package.
Round 12: #4 Simmons vs. #3 Oliver
Oliver vs. Arizona 2017, Texas Tech 2018 and Navy 2018 - Quick and very fast. Iffy eyes in the backfield. Blew up several double teams. Collapses pocket through 4th quarter. Chased down running backs. Susceptible to cuts.
Decision: Simmons - Oliver is a handful but Simmons has more consistent impact.
Round 13: #4 Simmons vs. #2 Gary
Gary vs. Wisconsin 2017, Penn State 2018 and Ohio State 2018 - Plays smaller so primary played 5 Tech vs. Wisc where he was absorbed by much larger OLs. Functioned as a DE vs. PSU. Seemed undersized even then. Also DE vs OSU. Neutralized by TEs.
Decision: Simmons - Really baffled by this position placing, but even if viewed as a DE, there are many areas of focus pre-Draft he would have to address to be competitive in that position group.
Round 14: #4 Simmons vs. #1 Williams
Williams vs. Georgia 2017, Ole Miss 2018 vs. Clemson 2019 - Quick off the ball. Fast hands, eyes in the back field. Good at getting skinny to get through gaps. Should use hands more. Brings blockers into his body. Singled up and when doubled did not hold ground.
Decision: Simmons - Williams has a nice foundation to build upon at the next level, but Simmons is clearly the choice.
DT "Draftable"List
Based on the Film Fight results, here are the players who would be on the Boombear Big Board. They have game performance tendencies that resulted in the best results. In evaluation, I place significant weight into non-game videos. They are fairly important to gain insight into the "why" of each player and gauge how successful a player might be despite adversity. These tend to provide validation of the current prospect's work ethic, character and motivation.
