How should the Combine affect a players draft stock?

[Landon Lads]

We've seen players be way over-drafted because of their combine eg John Ross. But overall do we overweigh a players combine performance?

[BleedTheClock]

I think it’s only useful for getting rid of false narratives. Like, if everyone is terrified of a CB or WR’s speed and then they time well, it can vault you. But I don’t really fall for the freak numbers, especially when everyone knew they were already fast. 

[Rich7sena]

For certain positions it certainly should play a part. For edge rushers, for example, combine testing seems to be more predictive of future success that at other positions. Last year, for example, a guy like Jachai Polite, who was profiled as an explosive athlete before the combine, objectively was not one after testing. I think it plays a part in evaluating corners, as well. Teez Tabor comes to mind.

[jebrick]

EDGE is definite for the test.  Oline...no.  Film is much better for them.  As I think of it, only EDGE is a really good predictor for explosiveness.  Others like CB and WR get judged on their 40 time which is mostly crap.  While speed is nice, being able to learn your position is better.  WR that can run effective routes are effective faster than others.

[Tetsujin]

Being slow is usually a death knell for a CB (or sometimes all DB's). I'll say a 40 time for a DB.

[Rich7sena]

1 hour ago, jebrick said:

EDGE is definite for the test.  Oline...no.  Film is much better for them.  As I think of it, only EDGE is a really good predictor for explosiveness.  Others like CB and WR get judged on their 40 time which is mostly crap.  While speed is nice, being able to learn your position is better.  WR that can run effective routes are effective faster than others.

I think it makes sense for CBs. WRs know where they're going which means they can play fast even if they aren't especially fast. Corners, however, are mostly reactive and they generally have to be faster than the guy they are chasing around the field. The top corners, for example, tend to run 4.50 and under while the top receivers are run in the 4.5s.

Edited February 26, 2020 by Rich7sena

[jebrick]

1 minute ago, Rich7sena said:

I think it makes sense for CBs. WRs know where they're going which means they can play fast even if they aren't especially fast. Corners, however, are mostly reactive and they generally have to be faster than the guy they are chasing around the field. The top corners, for example, tend to run 4.50 and under while the top receivers are run in the 4.5s.

I still remember Deon Sanders commenting at the Combine ( not many years ago) on how the DBs coming out of college did not know how to play the position.  Mostly that they were taught just enough to function in a coach's system.  DBs and WRs were two groups that would have to learn their positions with their NFL team.  WR need to learn to run routes and read defenses.  CBs needed technique to make them more effective.  Both are drafted as athletes with potential ( CBs more than WR). 

 

I also think the 40 is a lot of flash but not showing much as you can get specific training for doing well in that test and it might not reflect your game speed.  It is not without merit but much less so in my eyes than the media like to say.

[MWil23]

Interviews, drug testing, and warning signs that you see on tape that are confirmed via drills and testing are usually cause for falling/concern.

[tom cody]

For me I'd weigh everything with a player; Their college performance, their combine performance as well as their off-field personality. 

[Calvert28]

Interviews and drug tests are by far the most valuable things about the combine.

[Teen Girl Squad]

4 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

I think it’s only useful for getting rid of false narratives. Like, if everyone is terrified of a CB or WR’s speed and then they time well, it can vault you. But I don’t really fall for the freak numbers, especially when everyone knew they were already fast. 

Agreed. Honestly one of the better values I've found for finding "hidden gems" (which by nature is hard) is to find the combine/narrative mismatch. In particular I love when the "skilled guy with limited upside" tests really well. That shows he plays controlled/naturally but has the physical gifts to take it up to the next level in the league. I also pay closer attention to guys who bomb the combine tests but flash on tape. Obviously you need to watch the tape/interview more carefully (often a lack of work ethic) but there you can sometimes find guys who are great athletes but just didn't train super well for combine events.

[HoboRocket]

3-cone and 20 yard shuttle seem to be terrific predictors for WRs who are asked to run complicated routes. At least as far as thresholds go. Only one rookie WR with decent production tested poorly in the 3-cone. That's DK Metcalf. You want good change-of-direction ability moreso than long speed, because change-of-direction is what lends itself best to running routes and making guys miss in the open field. Guys like Hunter Renfrow, Darius Slayton, and Olabisi Johnson exceeded their draft slots and all were near the top at the position with the 3-cone and shuttle. But this is really something that should be used to confirm what's on-tape, and NOT CREATE narratives that people are great wide receivers. 

Now, Miles Boykin wasn't exactly playing in a stacked WR group, but he did barely anything while starting 11 games this year and he tested like a freak in EVERYTHING. To be more precise, he led his position in the vertical jump and 3-cone, and he was second in the 20 yard shuttle and broad jump. That's while running a 4.42 40 at 6'4", 220 lbs. He's an example of someone who was possibly overrated by the Combine - though, to be fair, he was only drafted in the third round.

Edited February 26, 2020 by HoboRocket

[Chiefer]

Well Al Davis is dead so the track fast warriors won’t be drafted top 10 anymore.

I’m sure some teams have a certain threshold that prospects have to hit or they’re taken off the board.

Edited February 26, 2020 by Chiefer

[Daniel]

I think it's mostly there to put asterisks next to your evals of players.  One player you have as a midrounder blew up?  Don't completely reevaluate his grade, but if you ticked him down as a middling athlete, you probably want to re-review tape.

More often, for me at least, I'm putting minuses up for high end prospects who suddenly show some limited athleticism.  If you're making an early round investment in a player, they better not have too many flaws, and not being fast, or quick, or strong enough is a flaw.  It may not be a big one, but it can't be absolutely ignored either.

But I love watching Oline and DB drills.  I think those are actually pretty useful, especially the mirror drill for interior Olinemen.  A lot of the time, tape for them is just watching them smash up on a DL until the camera follows the ball away.  Not very useful.

DB drills are great because it's often really really hard to watch very much tape on a CB.  If they're blanketing a WR that doesn't get the ball, you probably won't even see them on the screen.  Combine gives you a chance to check them out and see how tight they are.

[goldfishwars]

Definitely bench reps. I'm only drafting receivers and corners who ca  put up 30 reps. Everyone else is off the board. Punters too, they need to do 30 reps and jump 36 inches or I'm giving them hell.