taylor made Posted March 3, 2019 Share Posted March 3, 2019 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Calvert28 said: Jason Peters worked out with the TE's and ran a 4.9 something in the 40 and only put up 21 reps on the bench. That's extremely poor and he went undrafted but still somehow managed multiple all-pro seasons and arguably has a HOF like career. Yes, good for him. But he is what you call an outlier and so are some of the guys you mentioned above. That doesn't mean it happens all the time. You have a greater chance of picking a great player who is superior athletically than not. It's all about percentages. Sure, there are outliers but I'd rather play the percentages. Have fun with your Jachai Polite's Edited March 3, 2019 by taylor made Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvert28 Posted March 3, 2019 Share Posted March 3, 2019 10 minutes ago, taylor made said: Yes, good for him. But he is what you call an outlier and so are some of the guys you mentioned above. That doesn't mean it happens all the time. You have a greater chance of picking a great player who is superior athletically than not. It's all about percentages. Sure, there are outliers but I'd rather play the percentages. Have fun with your Jachai Polite's That percentage argument made the Raiders a laughing stock for years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted March 3, 2019 Share Posted March 3, 2019 28 minutes ago, taylor made said: And lots of mistakes get made when teams undervalue the combine. It goes both ways. Sure you can, it’s all part of the process. When teams imply they don’t care about “how they run in shorts”, they’re lying. They wouldn’t host this spectacle every year if they didn’t care. I think the combine should confirm what you already know for the most part and perhaps make you go back and rewatch some guys if the testing numbers surprised you. I do believe in playing percentages though for the most part. For example, Bosa didn’t wow anyone with his 40 time, but it’s more than acceptable for his position. No issues. On the flip side, my man fat Danny Shelton ran a 5.6 or something atrocious. People may ask, “but when does a DT run 40 yards in a straight line?”. (They don’t, it’s a great catch by those clever bastards) But that’s not really the point. The point, imo, is he’s below the normal or acceptable numbers on the bell curve. You’re expecting everything else he does to make up for being almost unreasonably slow. Can it happen? Sure, Snacks comes to mind, but it’s also a risk factor that can’t be ignored. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taylor made Posted March 3, 2019 Share Posted March 3, 2019 8 minutes ago, Calvert28 said: That percentage argument made the Raiders a laughing stock for years. I'm not sure of the Raiders philosophy totally - but I think they put heavy stock into just forty times. I think SPARQ and other types of comparative athletic scoring has proven more successful. Some current teams still use this in some form or another. I know the Seahawks do for certain positions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted March 3, 2019 Share Posted March 3, 2019 1 minute ago, taylor made said: I'm not sure of the Raiders philosophy totally - but I think they put heavy stock into just forty times. I think SPARQ and other types of comparative athletic scoring has proven more successful. Some current teams still use this in some form or another. I know the Seahawks do for certain positions. Some positions speed/athleticism simply have a stronger correlation with success iirc. Cornerback comes to mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvert28 Posted March 3, 2019 Share Posted March 3, 2019 Just now, taylor made said: I'm not sure of the Raiders philosophy totally - but I think they put heavy stock into just forty times. I think SPARQ and other types of comparative athletic scoring has proven more successful. Some current teams still use this in some form or another. I know the Seahawks do for certain positions. No it was just the over athletic ability. They just became a punchline because any fast 40 is considered athletic so they would match it to the Raiders. But Al Davis rarely watched any game tape if at all. And still decided to take the most athletic player times and time again. Regardless what was shown on tape, never bothered to think about how said player would gel with the current team. It was just physical ability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvert28 Posted March 3, 2019 Share Posted March 3, 2019 1 minute ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said: Some positions speed/athleticism simply have a stronger correlation with success iirc. Cornerback comes to mind. The Sparq does help some in deciding whether or not you think the player may have what it takes to succeed in a certain scheme. I usually look at the 3 cone drill first when I look at the tracker for the CB position. 10 yard shuttle and and BP for DL, but that's not everything I go on nor overall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted March 3, 2019 Share Posted March 3, 2019 Just now, Calvert28 said: The Sparq does help some in deciding whether or not you think the player may have what it takes to succeed in a certain scheme. I usually look at the 3 cone drill first when I look at the tracker for the CB position. 10 yard shuttle and and BP for DL, but that's not everything I go on nor overall. Oh I’m familiar my man. Sashi had the whole Browns forum hip to Spark for some years now. Bottom line is it’s an athletic competition and having the best athletes is never a bad thing. Just need to make sure they’re athletic football players, not athletes trying to play football. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwny Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 2 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said: Some positions speed/athleticism simply have a stronger correlation with success iirc. Cornerback comes to mind. Running backs too. Arian Foster is the only RB since 1999 to have more than 5,000 yards in his first 5 seasons and not have a speed score over 100. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted March 4, 2019 Author Share Posted March 4, 2019 18 minutes ago, pwny said: Running backs too. Arian Foster is the only RB since 1999 to have more than 5,000 yards in his first 5 seasons and not have a speed score over 100. Frank gore had a speed score of 100+? Not going to lie... Shocks me Edit Not sure if this the same, but this has his speed score at 94, and gore had 5k+ in his first five years https://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/frank-gore Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 13 minutes ago, pwny said: Running backs too. Arian Foster is the only RB since 1999 to have more than 5,000 yards in his first 5 seasons and not have a speed score over 100. How high of a bar is that? I'd be curious if Kareem Hunt and Alvin Kamara meet it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwny Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 Just now, jrry32 said: How high of a bar is that? I'd be curious if Kareem Hunt and Alvin Kamara meet it. The speed score? 100 is an average score for RBs. Hunt had a 94.8, Kamara had a 99.0. Assuming he stays on pace, Hunt would be the second player in the last 20 years to hit the pace. It doesn’t count receiving yards, so Kamara is about 400 yards off pace. 10% of the guys who hit 110 on the speed score reach the 5K milestone. So still, it’s not perfect even as you get towards the near elite guys. But it’s far more likely than 1 (maybe 2) in 20 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 1 minute ago, pwny said: The speed score? 100 is an average score for RBs. Hunt had a 94.8, Kamara had a 99.0. Assuming he stays on pace, Hunt would be the second player in the last 20 years to hit the pace. It doesn’t count receiving yards, so Kamara is about 400 yards off pace. 10% of the guys who hit 110 on the speed score reach the 5K milestone. So still, it’s not perfect even as you get towards the near elite guys. But it’s far more likely than 1 (maybe 2) in 20 years. Okay, but Kamara and Hunt are two of the best in football. And I expect there might be a couple others in this draft class who really emerge despite not possessing great speed (David Montgomery, at minimum, and possibly Devin Singletary). What does speed score take into account? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwny Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 19 minutes ago, jrry32 said: Okay, but Kamara and Hunt are two of the best in football. Yeah. Sure. But even if you count them, it's still a below 1% success rate for a guy who doesn't meet the threshold of average. 20 minutes ago, jrry32 said: What does speed score take into account? It's a function of speed and weight. It's effectively measuring a player's horsepower. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 I think the takeaway with things like a speed score is it isn’t a guarantee, but rather a way of using statistical data to stack the deck in your favor. Can a RB succeed if they don’t hit 100? Of course, but the odds are reduced comparatively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.