Mike Mayock's first positional rankings

[Iamcanadian]

17 hours ago, goldfishwars said:

 

 

17 hours ago, goldfishwars said:

 

 

 

The only trouble with this type of analysis is it tells you sip about talent or intangibles.

I can produce a much longer list of college QB's who were more accurate than practically every franchise QB in the NFL yet never saw a day in the league and if drafted, were total flops.

College stats = the least important stat in a pro prospects ranking, talent and intangibles decide success or failure 99% of the time.

 

 

[goldfishwars]

5 hours ago, Iamcanadian said:

 

Actually, accuracy in college is highly predictable in the NFL. But it's very interesting that it's used to beat Lamar Jackson over the head with the significant gifts he possesses, but doesn't seem to have soured Allen's draft stock. 

[Iamcanadian]

4 hours ago, goldfishwars said:

Actually, accuracy in college is highly predictable in the NFL. But it's very interesting that it's used to beat Lamar Jackson over the head with the significant gifts he possesses, but doesn't seem to have soured Allen's draft stock. 

Whenever somebody is out of the norm like Jackson, you are going to get opinions all over the board. I love him, but many organizations will not touch him, as they cannot accept anything out of the norm!

As for Allen. I will have to wait and see how he performs at the Combine and his pro day after being trained for a month by a pro coach and having far better talent around him. I am hoping for the best, since I would love to see that arm on display in the NFL, but you are right, he must show improved accuracy for me to buy in.

[VanS]

8 hours ago, goldfishwars said:

Actually, accuracy in college is highly predictable in the NFL. But it's very interesting that it's used to beat Lamar Jackson over the head with the significant gifts he possesses, but doesn't seem to have soured Allen's draft stock. 

How far back are we talking?  Cause I know Brett Favre's completion percentage in college was piss poor.  52.4%.  And he turned out pretty well.

Also you gotta realize that with all the spread schemes now its apples to oranges when you compares guys completion % in college across such different offenses.  And then you have to take into account the type of talent a guy plays with and his opponents talent level.

Its far easier to just look at film and judge a guy's talent level than to try and use completion % in college.

[goldfishwars]

59 minutes ago, VanS said:

How far back are we talking?  Cause I know Brett Favre's completion percentage in college was piss poor.  52.4%.  And he turned out pretty well.

Also you gotta realize that with all the spread schemes now its apples to oranges when you compares guys completion % in college across such different offenses.  And then you have to take into account the type of talent a guy plays with and his opponents talent level.

Its far easier to just look at film and judge a guy's talent level than to try and use completion % in college.

There was a comprehensive study of every draft prospect since 2002 and only David Garrard has a completion % below 59% that went onto have a moderately successful NFL career. Therefore Josh Allen isn’t in particularly good company. I’m not saying he can’t make it, I’m saying he would be a statistical anomaly if he does.

[Groink]

21 minutes ago, goldfishwars said:

There was a comprehensive study of every draft prospect since 2002 and only David Garrard has a completion % below 59% that went onto have a moderately successful NFL career. Therefore Josh Allen isn’t in particularly good company. I’m not saying he can’t make it, I’m saying he would be a statistical anomaly if he does.

I don't care what "company" Allen is in.  Every case is different, those other examples mean nothing.  You could draft Allen in the first, get him coached up, running a pro offense, and things could completely click for him.  Not saying that's what is going to happen but with his skill set, that's the chance you take.  Same goes for Jackson.

But I think Jackson gets knocked more because he runs more and he's slight of frame.  His running style is not going to work in the league so he has to be better in the pocket.  His body isn't built for the rigors of the NFL.  Allen's is.  Also, you seem to want to push Jackson over Allen, but the statistic you use doesn't make the case for him either.  57% completion over his three years in college, his best year being 2017 at 59.1%.  That wouldn't bode well for Jackson either if we are to go by your study.

[mitch_connor]

I do think that a very low completion percentage is a legitimate red flag. It's on the other end of the spectrum that these stats are often misleading, IMO. For example, I wouldn't get carried away hyping a QB because of an unusually high completion% unless I had an idea what kind of passes he was completing and what his offense looked like.

[goldfishwars]

32 minutes ago, Groink said:

I don't care what "company" Allen is in.  Every case is different, those other examples mean nothing.  You could draft Allen in the first, get him coached up, running a pro offense, and things could completely click for him.  Not saying that's what is going to happen but with his skill set, that's the chance you take.  Same goes for Jackson.

But I think Jackson gets knocked more because he runs more and he's slight of frame.  His running style is not going to work in the league so he has to be better in the pocket.  His body isn't built for the rigors of the NFL.  Allen's is.  Also, you seem to want to push Jackson over Allen, but the statistic you use doesn't make the case for him either.  57% completion over his three years in college, his best year being 2017 at 59.1%.  That wouldn't bode well for Jackson either if we are to go by your study.

They aren't examples, this is statistical data - if you think Allen is a good bet for success, then cool. It wouldn't make him any less of an anomaly if it works out. 

I'm not pushing Jackson over Allen (although I do prefer the former) per se, just that it's interesting that his flaws seem to be hurting his draft stock more. You're right that Jackson hasn't been an accurate passer either (just above the threshold in his final season), but there are gifts in his athletic skill-set which suggest those might not have have such a fatal impact as they could for a more classical drop-back passer like Allen. 

[VanS]

Mike Mayock is sometimes his own worst enemy.  He's great at spotting talent but then he overthinks himself into making mistakes.  Just look at his evaluation of Tennessee RB John Kelly: https://247sports.com/college/tennessee/Bolt/Tennessee-Vols-Football-NFL-Draft-Mike-Mayock-projects-John-Kellys-landing-spot-115609272

Quote

 

NFL Network's talent evaluation guru who is anchoring coverage at this week's NFL Combine in Indianapolis said Kelly gets a mid-round grade, but could've been a Day 2 selection with a stronger finish to his junior season.

“If you put the Florida tape on, you go, ‘Wow,’” Mayock said via the Knox News. “That was a good football game. You see contact balance, a burst and acceleration. His last three games, I don’t know if it was him, his offensive line, or a combination, but they just looked different.

“Best case, third round, but I don’t really think that’s happening. I think he’s, best case, fourth round. Realistically, fourth- or fifth-round running back. I think if he runs well and catches the ball well at his pro day, that could really help him.”

 

 

This is literally the same thing he did last year with Alvin Kamara.  He was quoted last year saying that Alvin Kamara's tape against Texas A&M and Vanderbilt was the best RB tape he's seen in years.  And better than every other RB in the 2017 draft.  And yet, when it came time to rank the RBs, he puts Kamara at #4 or #5 on his RB list behind the consensus top guys (Fournette, McCaffrey, Cook, and Mixon).  The only negative Mayock had on Kamara was the fact he never had more than 18 carries in college and was playing behind Jalen Hurd.

I don't know why people just don't trust what they see.  Mike Mayock in particular has a good eye for talent but then overthinks it too much.  He's doing the same thing here with John Kelly.  The reason his numbers fell off is because the team quit on Butch Jones and the offensive line got decimated with injuries.  You're just asking to be wrong if you don't trust what you see when it comes to a guy's basic talent.  And you try and overthink it by wondering why his production wasn't higher.

 

[Iamcanadian]

7 hours ago, VanS said:

Mike Mayock is sometimes his own worst enemy.  He's great at spotting talent but then he overthinks himself into making mistakes.  Just look at his evaluation of Tennessee RB John Kelly: https://247sports.com/college/tennessee/Bolt/Tennessee-Vols-Football-NFL-Draft-Mike-Mayock-projects-John-Kellys-landing-spot-115609272

 

This is literally the same thing he did last year with Alvin Kamara.  He was quoted last year saying that Alvin Kamara's tape against Texas A&M and Vanderbilt was the best RB tape he's seen in years.  And better than every other RB in the 2017 draft.  And yet, when it came time to rank the RBs, he puts Kamara at #4 or #5 on his RB list behind the consensus top guys (Fournette, McCaffrey, Cook, and Mixon).  The only negative Mayock had on Kamara was the fact he never had more than 18 carries in college and was playing behind Jalen Hurd.

I don't know why people just don't trust what they see.  Mike Mayock in particular has a good eye for talent but then overthinks it too much.  He's doing the same thing here with John Kelly.  The reason his numbers fell off is because the team quit on Butch Jones and the offensive line got decimated with injuries.  You're just asking to be wrong if you don't trust what you see when it comes to a guy's basic talent.  And you try and overthink it by wondering why his production wasn't higher.

 

 

Scouting is a very tough business, you basically have film, the All Star games and the Combine/Pro Days to reach a conclusion on a prospect and second guessing comes with the territory. Judging a prospect off one or 2 games is usually suicide, he played in 8 or 9 more and was watched and judged thoroughly in practices. Why did a player suck for his last 3 games and if he quit on his HC, would he do the same as a pro. Why was he 2nd string???, these are all red flags for a prospect and yet, he made Mayock's top 5 along with a lot of teams, so I would say they did a solid job of appraising him.

It is rather easy for us to ignore red flags, nobody can fire us, so I have great appreciation for scouts and GM's as long as they are relatively successful, it is a tough job deciding when and who to draft, when you are dealing not just with football talent, but with character and injuries as well. After all, we are not under any real strain to be correct, while they must anguish over every pick.

For me, Kelly deserves a mid round grade based on his overall tape. One good game doesn't deserve a whole lot more?

[VanS]

10 hours ago, Iamcanadian said:

Scouting is a very tough business, you basically have film, the All Star games and the Combine/Pro Days to reach a conclusion on a prospect and second guessing comes with the territory. Judging a prospect off one or 2 games is usually suicide, he played in 8 or 9 more and was watched and judged thoroughly in practices. Why did a player suck for his last 3 games and if he quit on his HC, would he do the same as a pro. Why was he 2nd string???, these are all red flags for a prospect and yet, he made Mayock's top 5 along with a lot of teams, so I would say they did a solid job of appraising him.

It is rather easy for us to ignore red flags, nobody can fire us, so I have great appreciation for scouts and GM's as long as they are relatively successful, it is a tough job deciding when and who to draft, when you are dealing not just with football talent, but with character and injuries as well. After all, we are not under any real strain to be correct, while they must anguish over every pick.

For me, Kelly deserves a mid round grade based on his overall tape. One good game doesn't deserve a whole lot more?

John Kelly didn't quit.  The rest of the team did.  And the offensive line got decimated with injuries.  Football is a team sport.  If the rest of your team can't help you, its hard to look good.

 

[Iamcanadian]

1 hour ago, VanS said:

John Kelly didn't quit.  The rest of the team did.  And the offensive line got decimated with injuries.  Football is a team sport.  If the rest of your team can't help you, its hard to look good.

 

Even though John Kelly did not make Mayock's initial top 5 RB's, he has shown a real fondness for Kelly potential and Mayock's initial positional ranking will undergo a steep revision once he finishes studying tape from now till the draft and watches workouts from the Senior Bowl through the Combine and finishing with their pro days, before he will put out a final ranking. He basically does 3, after the Senior Bowl, After the Combine and a final one after the Pro Days and believe me, he is so respected in the draft community, that everybody else adjusts their rankings accordingly. 

You may not agree with everything, but you will have to reexamine the tape of those you prefer against the tape of those he has picked to reach a final conclusion and you will be a stronger draftnik for doing it!!!  

The only other draft analyst who comes close to Mayock is Gil Brandt and I half suspect, he has real access to the Cowboy's actual draft board through his contacts with their scouts and his strong connection to Jerry Jones.

[BleedTheClock]

7 hours ago, VanS said:

 Football is a team sport.  If the rest of your team can't help you, its hard to look good.

Except Leonard Fournette. He sucks.

[VanS]

3 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

Except Leonard Fournette. He sucks.

You really want me to post the other Jaguar RBs YPC on the season last year?

There isn't a statistical measure that makes Leonard Fournette's 3.9 YPC last season look any better. 

[Tugboat]

On 2/23/2018 at 11:59 PM, Iamcanadian said:

First, Mayock made it clear, he has not put in much study time as yet on the current crop of prospects and is likely just going by what he has heard among the scouting community. Second, I agree that Mayock, like a lot of scouts, has his preferences at certain positions which do not always correspond to what another scout or GM may prefer. TE for instance. Mayock loves TE's who can both block and catch the ball and seems to give preference to those types when he ranks prospects. You can bet that GM's and scouts all have their own bias's when it comes to certain positions. 

Anybody ho thinks there is always consensus among GM's and scouts on every prospect, are well off the mark.

People say they would do this or that, but we have zero pressure on us to be correct. a GM whose job is on the line and absolutely must find a QB to keep his job, is far more likely to take a risk based on overall talent and pray, the rest can be developed. Hence, Allen will never get out of round 1.

I do agree all talk of him going #1 overall or possibly even top 10 seems unlikely to me, but I am not a QB coach and therefore cannot judge the odds of Allen developing.

Teams that play in the north, need QB's who have the arm strength to handle the weather conditions late in their seasons. I do not think it is a stretch to believe that Allen will be drafted somewhere in the 15 to 25 range, by a team that needs that type of QB.

Of course, the Combine and his pro day will be crucial for him, but he seems to be on solid ground with his physical ability and intangibles, to go that high.

I think the bolded is an underrated and oft-overlooked point when it comes to comparing rankings.  You can have two different lists that rank different prospects as "better" for their particular needs/fits/preferences...and both be entirely right.  ex//You could have a guy like Gesicki who...if you're looking for a pure move TE like Jimmy Graham, may be the best guy in the draft.  On the other hand, if you're evaluating and putting together a list for an organization where you simply doesn't use that niche role much, and really value versatility and inline ability in a TE because that's what you're going to put on the field every Sunday...you could end up with the same player ranked significantly lower/others ranked a lot higher because it's not a fit.

That's where the idea of these "universal", unaffiliated, blanket prospect ranking lists is just that much trickier to balance.  You have to look at things through a much broader scope across a much wider range of situations.  Which is where you're always inevitably going to end up with some degree of "bias" or preferences and tendencies that run through a particular scouts lists like this.  It's just unavoidable that at some point, you're going to weight certain traits over others.  It's too hard to completely detach for some sort of "totally unbiased dispassionate and curious detached master list of prospects" because situation and fit are so often inherently tied to success and value.

 

On 2/25/2018 at 10:44 AM, VanS said:

How far back are we talking?  Cause I know Brett Favre's completion percentage in college was piss poor.  52.4%.  And he turned out pretty well.

Also you gotta realize that with all the spread schemes now its apples to oranges when you compares guys completion % in college across such different offenses.  And then you have to take into account the type of talent a guy plays with and his opponents talent level.

Its far easier to just look at film and judge a guy's talent level than to try and use completion % in college.

Yeah.  This ties right in with the above too, with regard to systems and fit and all that jazz.  You  have to look at what a guy is actually doing, rather than looking at a raw comp% number without context.  Do we really not believe that Josh Allen playing for say...Mike Leach or Lincoln Riley (like some other QBs in this draft) wouldn't have eeked out a few more percent throwing a handful of extra gimme completion swings to the flats, mesh routes, verticals designed to isolate an athletic mismatch downfield  in whatever air raid/spread system?  Would that really mean suddenly Allen isn't catastrophically inaccurate?  Would we still be pulling out that arbitrary 59% threshold to suggest Allen's accuracy is suddenly not statistically fatal?

 

On 2/25/2018 at 1:02 PM, goldfishwars said:

They aren't examples, this is statistical data - if you think Allen is a good bet for success, then cool. It wouldn't make him any less of an anomaly if it works out. 

I'm not pushing Jackson over Allen (although I do prefer the former) per se, just that it's interesting that his flaws seem to be hurting his draft stock more. You're right that Jackson hasn't been an accurate passer either (just above the threshold in his final season), but there are gifts in his athletic skill-set which suggest those might not have have such a fatal impact as they could for a more classical drop-back passer like Allen. 

The thing is...both of these QBs have accuracy problems, a ton of inconsistency, and low completion percentages.

The difference is, when you watch these two offensive systems in action...those "special gifts" in Jackson's athletic skillset, mean that he's consistently throwing against stacked boxes with extra people pulled out of coverage.  That's fine.  That's how running QBs in a system built around designed QB runs like that works.  But, it introduces two new questionmarks compared to similarly low completion percentage Allen and his respective system.  With Jackson's system...it introduces first and foremost, the question of why the number is still low even throwing against "easier" matchups in the secondary full of single coverage and all that comes along with dragging defenders down into the box.  Secondly, and probably more importantly..we can watch and see that in that system, Jackson can absolutely use his legs effectively to simplify the game downfield for himself as a passer, which we've seen is translatable...but you have to ask the question of whether his frame is going to be able to sustain that style of play longer-term at the NFL level. 

And if your answer is that Jackson's frame isn't going to be able to sustain that sort of thousand yard rusher beating at the next level, you have to start speculating as to how someone like Jackson might fare accuracy-wise (or comp% wise as a proxy for that) in a system that dials that element back.  To something more like the system Josh Allen ran (where he didn't run...nearly as much).

 

A lot of people seem to want to get all up in arms about this "big mobile rocket armed pocket passer" prototype, as though it's there for no reason.  As though the running/dual-threat QB somehow doesn't invite a great deal of additional risk for your signal caller at the NFL level...and with that, potential instability and inconsistency for an organization trying to build around that.

 

Basically in short...the reason Allen's similarly low comp% is looked at differently from Jackson's, is because Allen's statistical inaccuracy is at least coming from within the sort of system that isn't as significantly skewed by the QB run threat.

No different than the way Luke Falk's "big tall white guy" completion percentage is all but tossed out the window because of his specific system concerns.