Draft Comparisons

[BleedTheClock]

3 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

It seems like you're just comparing H/W profiles. Ferguson is a heavy-handed power rusher with an explosive first step. Orchard was a speed rusher who had no sand in his pants.

Holyfield has serious leg drive, runs with violence, and is sneaky quick, but nobody knows what sort of passing game target he is. McGuire is a scat back. Plus, Holyfield has excellent vision and footwork; those were two weaknesses of McGuire's coming out.

Humphrey is not a go up and get it down the field target. He's a big slot with great YAC skills who can win contested catches. Moncrief is a speedy outside WR who wins with vertical routes and routes that work off of his ability to get vertical.

Yes to all of these things. 

[BrownLeader]

3 hours ago, jrry32 said:

It seems like you're just comparing H/W profiles. Ferguson is a heavy-handed power rusher with an explosive first step. Orchard was a speed rusher who had no sand in his pants.

Holyfield has serious leg drive, runs with violence, and is sneaky quick, but nobody knows what sort of passing game target he is. McGuire is a scat back. Plus, Holyfield has excellent vision and footwork; those were two weaknesses of McGuire's coming out.

Humphrey is not a go up and get it down the field target. He's a big slot with great YAC skills who can win contested catches. Moncrief is a speedy outside WR who wins with vertical routes and routes that work off of his ability to get vertical.

Clearly I'm comparing both physical builds/athleticism and style of play since I've written both.

I don't see Ferguson as predominantly a power rusher the same as I didn't see Orchard mainly as a speed rusher. Both used quickness, strength and mostly hustle to rack sacks. I think Orchard was a better prospect though. 

Humphrey is sudden and physical but he's a high cut linear runner. I think his best trait is going to be using that length to go get the ball. 

McGuire certainly ran with violence. And pound for pound is a tough runner. I don't have Holyfield as a special anything. Vision is solid but he's not doing any remarkable at the 2nd level.

Edited February 21, 2019 by BrownLeader

[BrownLeader]

3 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

You don't think Holyfield is strong? He's definitely not that big, but....

 

He looks strong and plays strong. Not sure what you don't like about him. 

 

 

That is the guy you compared him to physically.

The guns don't make you a power runner. McGuire ran with similar lean, kept his feet driving and ran over and through guys too for a smaller back.

[jrry32]

6 minutes ago, BrownLeader said:

Clearly I'm comparing both physical builds/athleticism and style of play since I've written both.

I don't see Ferguson as predominantly a power rusher the same as I didn't see Orchard mainly as a speed rusher. Both used quickness, strength and mostly hustle to rack sacks. I think Orchard was a better prospect though. 

Humphrey is sudden and physical but he's a high cut linear runner. I think his best trait is going to be using that length to go get the ball. 

Humphrey's best trait is his ability to run after the catch. If Humphrey is to be successful, it's going to be in the slot. In order to do that, he's going to need to learn how to use his size and strength to create separation against smaller CBs. He already has the athleticism to separate when he's matched up with LBs and safeties. And he's going to need to become a more aggressive and physical blocker. But Humphrey is a big slot. That's where he fits. Moncrief is nothing like him. He's an outside the numbers vertical threat.

Ferguson isn't purely a power rusher. He has the first step and long strides to threaten the corner. He's not very bendy, but if he learns to master the stab, swat, and rip moves, those will allow him to soften the edge enough to be a legitimate threat around the corner. That all said, at this point in time, he's at his best overwhelming blockers with his power after landing his violent punch. Nate Orchard never had a violent punch or a consistent ability to overpower blockers. He was a former WR (IIRC) who won with speed, quickness, savvy, and length. He also only had one year of great production. Orchard was a finesse rusher. Ferguson is a power rusher.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I don't see how those guys are remotely similar. I'm not saying that my comparisons are perfect either. I'm sure you could find some that you don't think are accurate. Still, I feel Humphrey/Moncrief and Ferguson/Orchard are complete opposites stylistically.

[Calvert28]

23 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

Humphrey's best trait is his ability to run after the catch. If Humphrey is to be successful, it's going to be in the slot. In order to do that, he's going to need to learn how to use his size and strength to create separation against smaller CBs. He already has the athleticism to separate when he's matched up with LBs and safeties. And he's going to need to become a more aggressive and physical blocker. But Humphrey is a big slot. That's where he fits. Moncrief is nothing like him. He's an outside the numbers vertical threat.

 

Humphrey can line up outside or in at the next level I think. I agree he is not a vertical threat like Moncrief, but he has displayed a fairly reasonable size route tree when at Texas not to mention all the exotic plays they used him in to take advantage of his versatility from the backfield when he used to play RB. When I think of his capabilities as a WR strictly he reminds me to have the same game style play like Anquan Boldin.

I swear the more I talk about this guy the more I hope we pick him up in the 2nd as crazy as that sounds. Although he may not last that long depending on the combine and other players.

[BrownLeader]

Well...I don't agree that yac is Humphrey's best trait. 

And I don't agree that Orchard was a finesse rusher. He had abusive hands and a bull rush. He could use finesse ...and was quicker and lighter than Ferguson...but I wouldn't label him as a finesse rusher because of that. It was quickness, strength and hustle.

[Calvert28]

3 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

I don't know what his 40 time is, but I got roasted by OSU fans for saying that JK Dobbins was faster than Weber. I have no idea how someone who isn't vision impaired could make that claim.

Dobbins is quicker but there is a difference between quickness and faster. Weber I agree with OSU fans has better top end speed.

[jrry32]

9 minutes ago, BrownLeader said:

Well...I don't agree that yac is Humphrey's best trait. 

And I don't agree that Orchard was a finesse rusher. He had abusive hands and a bull rush. He could use finesse ...and was quicker and lighter than Ferguson...but I wouldn't label him as a finesse rusher because of that. It was quickness, strength and hustle.

I don't know what more to say. Humphrey is known for his ability with the ball in his hands. And Orchard's lack of pro success is because he's a finesse rusher who doesn't have the athleticism to win at the NFL level.

[BrownLeader]

15 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

I don't know what more to say. Humphrey is known for his ability with the ball in his hands. And Orchard's lack of pro success is because he's a finesse rusher who doesn't have the athleticism to win at the NFL level.

Humphrey's made plays as a runner and returner. He's got vision, suddenness and strength, albeit straight line-esh imo. But I think the ability to pluck the ball intermediate and deep, using his length and body to sheild, is what's going to be most difficult to defend as a pro.

Orchard struggled because he had poor length and wasn't quite quick or strong enough. He failed because his game wasn't more finesse.

Edited February 21, 2019 by BrownLeader

[jrry32]

5 minutes ago, BrownLeader said:

Humphrey's made plays as a runner and returner. He's got vision, suddenness and strength, albeit straight line-esh imo. But I think the ability to pluck the ball intermediate and deep, using his length and body to sheild, is what's going to be most difficult to defend as a pro.

Orchard struggled because he had poor length and wasn't quite quick or strong enough. He failed because his game wasn't more finesse.

Orchard measured in with 33.75 inch arms and large hands. That's not perfect length, but that's not poor length. He failed because he's an average athlete with a finesse style of play. If he had a violent punch and great power, he could have succeeded despite his lack of top-shelf athleticism. But speed rushers with average athleticism rarely go far.

[Ragnarok]

1 hour ago, BrownLeader said:

The guns don't make you a power runner. McGuire ran with similar lean, kept his feet driving and ran over and through guys too for a smaller back.

Gotta agree here.  Gimme a RB with some big ole legs and smaller arms compared to the inverse everyday.  

That said, I adore Holyfield.

[BleedTheClock]

5 hours ago, Calvert28 said:

Dobbins is quicker but there is a difference between quickness and faster. Weber I agree with OSU fans has better top end speed.

Don't see this at all. I'll guarantee everything I own that barring a catastrophic injury of some sorts, Dobbins runs significantly faster than Weber.

[BleedTheClock]

4 hours ago, Ragnarok said:

Gotta agree here.  Gimme a RB with some big ole legs and smaller arms compared to the inverse everyday.  

That said, I adore Holyfield.

Holyfield doesn't have small legs though. He's a power runner through and through. McGuire was never labeled as a power back because he doesn't run with power.

 

I like Holyfield, but it's not like I'm projecting him to be the next great RB. He's just better than Elijah freaking McGuire. The comparison does not make any sense.

[Ragnarok]

1 minute ago, BleedTheClock said:

Holyfield doesn't have small legs though. He's a power runner through and through. McGuire was never labeled as a power back because he doesn't run with power.

 

I like Holyfield, but it's not like I'm projecting him to be the next great RB. He's just better than Elijah freaking McGuire. The comparison does not make any sense.

The only point I was agreeing to was that big arms do not equal power or physical runner.  And that I would rather have big legs on a RB than big arms if I had to choose.

That said, I'm not sure how someone can watch McGuire and Holyfield and see much comparison in running style.  McGuire was all finesse.  Holyfield wants you to feel it in the morning.

[BleedTheClock]

1 minute ago, Ragnarok said:

The only point I was agreeing to was that big arms do not equal power or physical runner.  And that I would rather have big legs on a RB than big arms if I had to choose.

That said, I'm not sure how someone can watch McGuire and Holyfield and see much comparison in running style.  McGuire was all finesse.  Holyfield wants you to feel it in the morning.

Agreed with all points.