Rumblings Draft Scouting: Scouting/Draft Philosophies

by Brian Galliford on Oct 29, 2009 8:45 AM EDT in NFL Draft Comment 38 comments

It's Thursday, which means it's time once again to bust out our 2010 NFL Draft notebooks. We've been talking a lot about prospects recently, and while that type of discussion is perpetually fascinating (to me, at least), I've received dozens of e-mails asking me to take a different approach to this series, at least for one week.

The gist of those e-mails - talk more philosophy than another stock watch. It wasn't worded in exactly that fashion in every e-mail, obviously, but when someone asks me why I might rate Eric Norwood higher than Carlos Dunlap coming out, the philosophy behind the ranking is essentially what's being asked about.

The article you find after the jump is entirely my opinion, and only very tangentially Bills related (we'll have Bills stuff for you today, I promise). I'm certainly no professional, clearly, nor do I consider my personal scouting and draft philosophies the best - or the only - way to go about things. I've got five rules to scouting and to drafting. They're after the jump - and, of course, you're free to completely trash those rules in the comments section.

Need versus Value
Ah, yes - the ultimate NFL Draft argument. Do you take the best player who plays a position you're thin at, or do you just take the best player? Both sides of the argument have been attempted, both have had raging successes, and both have failed miserably.

I'm of the school of value. Need lists are obviously important to discuss from a team standpoint heading into the Draft each year, but ultimately, if you're building for the long-term, you need to find the best football players, period. Clearly, if a team has players graded out similarly, but one's a linebacker (who's graded only slightly lower) and the other's a cornerback, and your team just happens to be thinner at linebacker than corner, you take the linebacker. But, as an example, it can get pretty brutal when you force-select a JaMarcus Russell when Calvin Johnson and Joe Thomas are clearly the best players available.

The Calvin Johnson is an interesting case study too, by the way. Matt Millen is one of the most infamous front office executives of the modern era of football, but that's a selection he did well with - and he did it in the face of intense scrutiny, considering his penchant for drafting receivers early. Johnson is one of the best offensive forces in the game right now, and while he doesn't play a premium position - teams can and do win without elite receivers - he's a difference-maker on the field.

My last need versus value rule, however, is a contradiction. Quarterback is the one position at which you can sacrifice some value to fill a need, because it's the one position that you absolutely have to be good at to field a consistent, contending team. That's a gamble, obviously - that type of move bit the Bills in the butt when they moved up in '04 to get J.P. Losman - but it also is worth the gamble when it turns out that you pick up a Joe Flacco at No. 18.

Production versus Potential
You see it happen every year - a guy heads to February's NFL Combine, drops a ridiculous 40 time, and suddenly he's the greatest thing since sliced bread at his position. The ultimate faux pas to the NFL Draft is to rely too heavily on workout numbers and all-star games, and the poster child for that faux pas is former Philadelphia DE Mike Mamula.

The best draft picks are guys that play well in college. Tom Brady was one of those guys, even if he had to share time with Drew Henson at Michigan - which clearly hurt his draft stock. For a more recent and satisfying example, take a look at Jairus Byrd - dude pumped out a very pedestrian 4.67 40-yard dash in pre-draft workouts, but the Bills took him anyways, because he never had fewer than five picks in a season at Oregon. You don't draft numbers. You draft football players, and Byrd has been clutch for Buffalo this season despite his "pedestrian" athleticism.

That doesn't mean the Combine, all-star games, pre-draft workouts and the like are meaningless. You might be in love with a receiver's college production, but not with his speed on tape. You're looking at him as a guy you might be able to sneak away with in the third round. If he pumps out a 4.4 40, you might move him a notch or two up your board, because you can bet that other teams who may not have noticed this guy on tape will notice that 40 time and re-watch the tape. But ultimately, what a guy does on the college gridiron is infinitely more important than what he does in shorts.

Athleticism versus Approach
Football is a survival of the fittest game. The best players - players that you build your franchise around - are some of the best athletes on the planet. Invariably, every season, scouts encounter players that have tremendous untapped potential based purely on their overall athleticism, and invariably, those players are graded just a bit too high. Unless, of course, their approach to the game is carefully considered.

I put Bengals DE Michael Johnson at the top of this post for a reason - he's a recent example of this type of argument. Johnson came out of Georgia Tech last April as one of the most physically talented defensive linemen available, but his pre-draft hype was completely overblown. Johnson had an excellent senior season at Tech - but he'd been essentially invisible, and more than very inconsistent, up until that point. Couch scouts everywhere saw his body type, his length, and his speed, and heralded him as a first-round caliber talent. He is - but real scouts, wary of past paper tigers, questioned his motivation and work ethic thanks to his lack of production through his first three years. His talent got him drafted No. 70 overall, after many thought he could challenge to be the top pick in the draft. Johnson might end up being a very good pro player, but he was drafted where he should have been drafted.

There are great reasons why players like Charles Rogers are differentiated from players like Andre Johnson. Rogers, one of the ultimate busts of this decade, was drafted a pick ahead of Johnson because it could be rationally argued that he was more talented. He was certainly productive at Michigan State. But Johnson's approach to the game, as compared to Rogers', has made a comparison between the two as professionals an utter joke. Johnson is a man among men. Rogers didn't take football seriously. Approach to the game, as opposed to being content to skate by on pure talent, is a huge factor.

Character versus Perceived character
Character is such a crucial element to finding good draft players - and the Rogers vs. Johnson debate outlined above is a good example of why. The best example of the character debate is, of course, Peyton Manning vs. Ryan Leaf. But you don't need me to tell you that.

But there are ways to differentiate between guys who are good guys but have had issues, and guys who haven't had issues but could cause problems down the road. It's tough to do, but not impossible. Teams conduct personal interviews with every Combine prospect to help them gauge what they hear prior to that even about a player's attitude and work ethic. But what they hear is far more important than what the player says. If you hear a scout say "Player X needs a good interview at the Combine to raise his draft stock," that fact alone carries more weight than what he says to teams at the Combine. Flipped around, if you hear "Player Y had bad Combine interviews" but that player hadn't been mentioned as a character risk beforehand, that interview necessarily carries more weight - but not as much as testimonials from teammates, coaches, and even hearsay.

This is the trickiest part to drafting players from teams, because it's much more beneficial to draft team players than me-first players. It's even harder for us lowly fans, because we don't have access to anything more than rumors, in most cases.

Intelligence versus Football IQ
Michael Oher is the most recent example here, but if you don't know the basic thrust of his incredible story, you might miss the application. He grew up abandoned and mostly on his own, and when the kind family that took him in integrated him into what we might call a "normal kid's setting" - i.e. school, sports, etc. - Oher was completely out of his element. He struggled in school, he struggled socially, and he even struggled on the football field.

But Michael Oher is coachable. He got better as a ball player in high school. He came out of his shell and started acting more like a normal kid. He started passing his classes. He obviously wasn't at the top of his classes, but considering where he came from, the achievement was tremendous. At Mississippi, it was more of the same - steady improvement.

Leading into the pre-draft process this season, many scouts drooled over his physical tools, but questioned his overall intelligence and motivation - and, more importantly, whether or not he'd coast after achieving the ultimate in his sport and turning professional. He's such a unique case study that it was hard to project how he might apply himself at the NFL level.

Many, many teams were turned off by Oher in the pre-draft process based on his personality. He's soft-spoken, honest, and not at all the type of personality that makes great offensive linemen (at least according to reports - I obviously don't know Michael Oher). But again - Michael Oher is coachable. He'd already proven that.

Now, he's filling in at left tackle for the Baltimore Ravens as a rookie. He's playing well - he even dominated Minnesota's Jared Allen at times, and Allen is arguably the best pass rusher in the game right now. Oher is nowhere near the smartest player around. But he's coachable, and he's got great instincts. Those are the building blocks to the ambiguous term "Football IQ". Oher's capable of picking up a playbook because he's got a high Football IQ, and some adaptability. That's the difference that scouts struggle with sometimes - book smarts versus football smarts. Find smart football players, and you're in much better hands.

6 recs | Comment 38 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Good Points and all Valid!

- I agree with most of your points, but I also feel strongly that winning organizations win in the trenches as Bill Parcells always stated. Evidence is that the Bills for the past ten years have signed backups as free agents, like Melvin Fowler, and neglected this position in the draft. The Ravens over the past few years have drafted Ben Grubbs, G, and Michael Oher, Tackle.
- And let’s face it, you better have a great scouting organization, who can find diamonds in the rough at smaller colleges, like Bill Polian stil does to this day.
- I believe the hardest position to draft is probably QB and WR, since their seems to be so many busts in the first round (Tim Couch, Akili Smith, Cade McCown, Ryan Leaf, etc.).
- Bills can really turn this organization around if they start drafting stud defensive lineman and offensive linemen.

by BuffaloWhiner on Oct 29, 2009 8:58 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

CFB Scouting reports Week 8

I fully intent to re-read this article- it’s a super good topic about the draft- I’m starting work right now and won’t be able to do much for a while. But from first look this is pretty good stuff.

Finally well, and he’s my reports from the weekend. Can also be found at the following link, on Mocking the Draft:

Mocking the Draft Fanpost

Florida vs. Mississippi State

I got a real good look at Tim Tebow and focused on his footwork. Tebow’s footwork is terribly inconsistent and I believe it accounts for most of his inaccuracy. He knows he has a powerful arm, and fails to transfer his weight from his left leg (back leg) to his right leg (front leg) on almost every throw. QB’s should end up with their back leg in front of the front leg during the follow through. Tebow’s back leg kicks out to the side and sometimes ends up in front. Often times he just continues to balance on his right leg, but never transfers his weight, as evidenced when a QB steps over during the follow through. When Tebow knows he really has the thread the needle and gun the football, he way oversteps his throw. Instead of planting his right leg just outside his shoulders, he oversteps by about a foot, which sinks his hips, and elongates his stance to the point where he can’t transfer weight and follow through. Good news: this is all easily fixable. Not sure what Scot Loeffler is doing- I have to assume that preparation for games is taking up Tebow’s time, and less time is being spent on footwork and mechanics in-season. After seeing this, I really can’t wait to see Tebow in the Senior Bowl, where he’ll have prep time to fix his footwork. Also, breaking news: Tebow took a snap from under center- just a handoff though.

Carlos Dunlap has the pure athletic ability to be selected first overall in the draft. But he may be the most raw DE I’ve seen all year- pure speed rusher with no moves other than a bull rush (which he rarely uses) and just trying to run around the blocker. Terrible hand use- shows no technique at all and cannot counter. Pursues well to his side, but has trouble finding the ball when team run away from him. Wastes a lot of motion. Most of his big plays came while playing LDE against MSU Soph. RT Addison Lawrence, who’s listed at 6-4/295. Lawrence is not much bigger than Dunlap, and Dunlap manhandled him at times. But when Dunlap lined up at RDE and faced MSU Jr. LT Derek Sherrod (6-6/310) the most he could come up with was a batted pass on a 5-10 QB. Did not face the double teams that I thought were coming his way- Florida played a 40 front almost the entire game but MSU only offered chip help to their OT’s most of the time- and still struggled against the bigger blocker in Sherrod. Played hard for the most part- he did loaf on run plays away from his side, but other than that he seemed to go full bore. Immature. Constantly talking to opponents, especially when they are on the ground. Hits late/cheap a lot- he’ll really lays into ball carriers a second after they hit the ground. Was central to the near-brawl between UF-MSU at the start of the game. The most talent of anyone in the draft- boom or bust player than is still raw playing DE or rushing the passer.

Jermaine Cunningham isn’t as physically talented as Dunlap. Both DE’s come off the ball extremely fast, but Cunningham is much more polished, taking good angles, using his hands well, and showing a pretty good inside counter move, which he beat Sherrod on cleanly. Plays hard all the time, but sometimes gets washed out on plays to his side because he doesn’t have the bulk to hold the edge against bigger OT’s. Fluid in his movements, dropped into coverage a couple times, and could transition to 30 front OLB.

Anthony Dixon played as well as can be expected against the Florida defense. He ran hard but didn’t show a whole lot in terms of elusiveness. Caught the ball well, and I think it surprises the Gators. Looked faster than I expected, which may indicate he’s over some of his weight issues- which in turn may indicate he’s matured a bit.

Jamar Cheney looks back to full strength to me (broke his left legs last year). Looked really fast from his MLB position, getting to Florida’s outside runs easily and also getting deep in his drops. Was somewhat physical in taking on blocks, but only during run blitzes. When he was not blitzing, he slipped a lot of blocks and was nowhere near as physical in taking on blockers. Could do well as a WLB in a 40 front that emphasizes speed over size.

Connecticut vs. West Virginia

Noel Devine was dynamic, but I’m not sure how well his game translated to the NFL. He’s even smaller than Jahvid Best, and isn’t a short back that’s thickly built, like Ray Rice or Jones-Drew. He may have a spot on a power team, a la Chris Johnson, even though Devine isn’t as big as Johnson. What Devine can do is stretch the defense laterally before cutting up field- most defenders can’t even get the right angle to get to him, much less keep up with him. He’s going to have to prove worth to a team as a scat back and special teamer, in addition to being a change of pace back.

Jarrett Brown wasn’t particularly impressive as a passer. Unlike Pat White, Brown is really limited to the Mountaineer system because of his accuracy and ability to throw in a timing offense. Brown’s best bet is to transition to athlete, playing some receiver, some back, and some QB. Could bring value in a Josh Cribbs-type role.

Really impressed with Selvish Capers. The former TE plays RT for West Virginia but is really a LT. Handled UConn star Lindsey Witten when they lined up across each other. Technique was good in terms of footwork but doesn’t have the lower body strength at this point in his career to be a mauling, run blocker. Super athletic and easily got to the second level. May need reps learning a pro style blocking scheme. Has athleticism that can’t be taught though. Future starter at LT, and with time in an NFL weight room, could be special.

Marcus Easley played very well. Looks bigger than UConn lists him, and is more explosive than I expected to see. Could not be covered by WV. Has an impressive YPC and decent stats despite missing the first two games. I don’t know how much of those yards are with the ball in the air, and how much are YAC- his long TD catch against WV was an intermediate throw and Easley took it the rest of the way.

I saw Witten earlier in the year, and he looked good, but was somewhat average in this game. Had a "by the way" sack on Brown on the last play of the second quarter. Handled by Capers when they faced each other- UConn staff began to rush him more from the right side of the defense. WV’s offense- short passing- doesn’t really allow rushers to excel, so this may be an aberration.

North Carolina vs. Florida State

I’d love to see pictures of Levon Kirkland and Marvin Austin side by side. That’s who Austin reminds me of. Squatty build with huge legs, huge upper body, with a thick midsection that looks mostly muscle and not a whole lot of fat. Movement skills are incredible. Runs like a linebacker or a small end, and it’s really noticeable on twists and stunts. It’s almost shocking to see someone his size moving like he does. Holds up against the double team and will split the double teams at times as well. Played hard the whole game- may have been due to the national coverage- and dominated the middle of the FSU OL. Not as disruptive as Suh, but comes close. Good hand fighter. Thick upper body and gets hands off him quickly with rips and chops. Can spin and counter like a pass rushing end. Really impressive; I came away thinking that he would be ideal as a 3 technique DT or 1 technique in a 40 front that played one gap. Unless he shows a trend of lack of hustle, or has some character issues that make teams shy away, I can’t see him dropping out of the top 15 players selected.

Deunta Robinson wasn’t as special as I thought he’d be. Was generally in good position, but the couple times he wasn’t it was a killer. Terrible tackler for a FS who block-tackles, relying on the force of his hit to take the defender down. Needs to learn how to keep his head up and wrap up if he wants to be successful in the NFL. Has the physical skill though.

Really impressed by Christian Ponder. Poised and under control. I’ve seen him three times: in a tight game against Miami, in a blowout against USF, and playing from behind against UNC. His demeanor has been the same in all games. Doesn’t play in a system, so to speak, and is every bit as accurate as Colt McCoy. Ponder was 33-40 but FSU receivers dropped three balls that I saw. Mobile and feels the rush. Smart- consistently makes the right play. Doesn’t have elite arm strength but has more than enough to be effective on deep routes, and I don’t see any throw he can’t make. Jimbo Fisher says he’s the most talented college QB he’s coached, including JaMarcus Russell. On field leadership is evident. Seems to carry himself a bit like Brett Favre, where he doesn’t crush teammates that don’t make plays, but still gets them to play better. I think he has the "it" factor from watching his play and how his team responds to him. Already graduated and could declare.

Patrick Robinson is a great cover corner- that’s what you get though. UNC receivers had a hard time getting much on him passing. Looks like a cover corner in terms of body frame and athleticism. Doesn’t really like the tackling portion of the game. Gives a half-hearted effort to contact, looking like he’s moving away from the ball carrier- almost like he’s bracketing the ball carrier- while waiting for other to make the tackle. Played on the short side part of the night and was on an island the whole game. Played Tampa 2 style a couple times. Each time he did he was out of position, late to diagnose and react, and didn’t support the run well. Man cover corner strictly who is good at what he does.

Stanford vs. Arizona State

This was a really fun game to watch. With so much spread being played, watching the Cardinal play old fashion smash-mouth football was neat. Stanford has reportedly out-muscled most of the teams they’ve played this year (despite not being able to keep leads). That report is very much true. I absolutely love the attitude that the Cardinal players exude. I don’t think Jim Harbaugh has much time left at Stanford- if they keep playing that way, a bigger program or the NFL may come calling.

No Cardinal played more smash-mouth than FB Owen Marecic. The junior is an absolute beast. Hits like a truck. Stanford uses him as a sledgehammer lead blocker, and hit consistently clears out LB’s. Also a factor in the short passing game.

Toby Gerhart is a load as a runner, but I don’t think he’s nifty enough to run every down, and he isn’t quite the hammer that Mike Alstott was. More of a Brian Leonard. Runs with a lot of power and does not go down on first contact. Plays almost exclusively in the I-set or offset in the shotgun, so he gets a good running start at the defense. May have some durability issues with his left knee; wears a knee brace on his left leg that looks almost like an upper shin guard, designed to protect his knee cap. Also may choose to play baseball. Would be perfect for a team designing a running game similar to the Giants, with a couple backs carrying the load. Could also be a FB in a scheme where he’s not asked to be the lead blocker for iso’s and dives a lot. Competitive player who will add toughness to whomever he plays for.

Really liked what I saw from RT Chris Marinelli. Reminds me of Brad Butler- taller RT with some grit to his game. Shuffled his feet well and stayed with rushers, including when Dexter Davis rushed against him. Could be a nice late round pick that develops into a starter.

Andrew Luck needs to be in the conversation regarding future CFB stars. This kid can play. Super accurate. Delivers the ball with a lot of velocity- you can hear the ball striking the receiver’s hands. Can also throw with touch. Mobile. In a couple years this kid’s going to be special, IMO.

Bo McNally was impressive. QB’s the defense from the FS position but is probably a better SS prospect at the NFL level. Takes good angles and arrives with a thud. Not the fastest guy- could be a good special teamer and back-up safety, sort of similar to Coy Wire in those regards, but he’s not the athlete that Wire was/is.

Shawn Lauvao was underwhelming. Playing LT for the Sun Devils but would be better as a guard. Lacks the foot speed to play on the edge. Got run around by some average Cardinal ends, and also got walked back to the QB.

Dexter Davis was also underwhelming. Didn’t hold his ground against the more physical Cardinal blockers. Works really, really hard but doesn’t have the physical tools or the technique to be effective at DE. Often used a spin move where instead of spinning away from the blocker, he just spun in front of the blocker. Not going to hold up as a DE but good bring value as a high energy 30 front OLB.

Chris McGaha has a NFL future. Decent sized, competitive receiver with great hands and great feel for coverage. Won’t beat anyone deep (often) and could struggle against physical cover corners. If used out of the slot, he could be extremely effective as a ball control possession receiver. Could be a great steal in the draft if he goes to a team that runs a lot of spread.

by Der Jaeger on Oct 29, 2009 9:09 AM EDT reply actions 2 recs

Thanks for all that

I really like Ponder. Every time I see FSU, he just looks to be in control, confident and makes accurate passes all over the field. Those are skills we could really use. I don’t think he’s going to be a high round pick, but he could be one of those mid round picks that become good starters in the NFL like a Matt Schaub or Marc Bulger (earlier in his career). He reminds me of both of those two in the way he plays.

I think Devine has Leon Washington written all over him, minus the return ability. He’s so small and as dynamic as he can be, I don’t think his size and lack of interior running skills will translate that well. I didn’t think Steve Slaton would make the transition all that well either, but he’s doing a good job. He’s a much, much, much better receiver than Devine, and much bigger, though. I’d much rather have Dion Lewis from Pitt.

I like Capers as well. He’s probably going to be a mid 1st rounder by April, so he could come into play for the Bills. I’ll be trying to watch him more and more as the college seasons rolls on. I’m worried about his lack of bulk though. I don’t know if he could play in the NFL right away, yet.

Jim Harbaugh is growing on me as a potential HC for the Bills. I love the way Stanford plays too. We need that in Buffalo.

In the future, would you be able to include what team each player plays for in your reviews? I have no idea who any of those plays for Stanford/ASU are other than Gerhardt. And I’m lazy.

I noticed Kiper had Jason Pierre Paul all the way up at #10 on his Big Board last week. That was a pretty quick rise for that kid.

~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."

by Kurupt on Oct 29, 2009 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I really like that Schaub comparison for Ponder.

I don’t think that Devine can handle the workload and inside running either. Washington almost seems generous from a workload comparison. Devine might share his game breaking ability, but I’d say he’s Darren Sproles without the return ability and while that’s still a good player to have, that skill set only has so much value to most teams. I think Devine needs to find his way onto a roster with a bigger workhorse type starter and a quality backup. On a team with a Cedric Benson, Ryan Grant, Clinton Portis type starter, Devine has value, but I can’t imagine him going in the first 4 or so rounds unless we are really understimating his return or receiving ability.

All the guys on the top are Stanford guys and Luavao, Davis and McGaha are ASU players.

I signed up for Second Life about a year ago. Back then my life was so great that I literally wanted a second one. In my Second Life I was also a paper salesman and I was also named Dwight. Absolutely everything was the same. Except I could fly. - Dwight Schrute

by kaisertown on Oct 29, 2009 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks

I agree with your assessment of Ponder and Devine. Ponder may end up rising with the need for QB’s, but you right on.

I’ll add teams to players, easy fix and thanks for the input.

There’s some things JPP needs to work on- not sure if he’s #10 but he’s definitely got the talent. I mentioned him last week- you were the one that led me to take a look at him. He’s raw but skilled. I think he’s first round material when he comes out. Read my assessment of him fron last week, if you don’t mind, and let me know what you think.

by Der Jaeger on Oct 29, 2009 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with your assessment of JPP

You said this:

Has bounced around from college to college, so his knowledge base may be lacking, as he hasn’t benefited from working with a coaching staff over a period of time.

That’s my biggest concern about him. I’ve only seen him 3 times now, obviously not enough to base a really strong opinion on him, but he seems like he still has a ton to learn. He hasn’t played a whole lot, so he’s getting by on raw talent and whatever he’s learned thus far. He could go either way, becoming a dominant force or just another supremely talented player that couldn’t put it all together. With his size, athleticism and raw potential, I’d be more than willing to take the risk. He could become a dominant NFL player.

~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."

by Kurupt on Oct 29, 2009 9:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Imagine if he had the opportunity to go to USF as a freshman? Right now I’m grading him mid-first round if he declares.

by Der Jaeger on Oct 29, 2009 10:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

He could use another year of coaching and seasoning before becoming a pro, but it’d be hard to pass up being a first round pick. Ask Aaron Maybin.

~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."

by Kurupt on Oct 29, 2009 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That’s exactly what I was thinking after you’re last post.

If JPP stays, he’s in my early 2011 draft top 10.

by Der Jaeger on Oct 29, 2009 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nice Post

Good news: this is all easily fixable.

Regarding Tebow and his footwork (and knowing that his mechanics are one of his biggest criticisms) do you have any thoughts on why this hasn’t been corrected yet now that he is in his senior year?

by TJJ on Oct 29, 2009 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sorry, for the terrible blockquote execution.

by TJJ on Oct 29, 2009 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Total opinion with a limited amount to back it up: I think Urban Meyer’s not so much interested in making Tebow an NFL-ready prospect as winning football games. Urban Meyer said he told Scot Loeffler to work with Tebow but “don’t screw him up.”

After the season, I think Tebow and Loeffler really get to the work of fixing Tebow’s flaws. I doubt he’s ready by the Senior Bowl or the Combine, but I predict UF has a special “see, he’s fixed” pro day dedicated to Tebow.

by Der Jaeger on Oct 29, 2009 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’ve never seen a pro prospect step towards his receivers as unoften as Tebow. It’s odd because planting and then stepping towards where you want to throw should be a very natural thing for QBs. I agree that it’s a pretty easy fix. The concern is that Tebow has so many things that need fixing or at least some work on that if he ends up getting forced into game action too early, he could have so many things going through his head that he ends up being a wreck and it could have long term repercussions.

I still need to see more of Dunlap play, I’m all over the place on him.

I’ve always been a big believer in Austin. I havn’t seen him play this year and am pretty excited to check him out tonight.

I saw Stanford play Oregon St. maybe a month ago and came away with the same thoughts as you did. Andrew Luck is going to be a good one. Four years of starting for Jim Harbough is a great way to get ready for the NFL and he’s got all the tools.

Owen Maracic isn’t as well rounded as a ball carrier, receiver and special teamer like Owen Schmitt is, but when I sent the email to Brian and the scouting staff, I said he was the best lead blocker I’ve ever seen in college football and I stand by that. I was blown away with how effective he was in finding a defender and taking him out of the play.

I wasn’t impressed with Gerhardt. I’m not sure where he fits in the NFL. He seems like a backup and inside runner to compliment a smaller player who can’t handle a big workload. The kind of guy who will wind up as the 3rd RB on a roster with a good starter and change of pace guy (ie: behind Jacobs and Bradshaw, Barber and Jones). Basically he’d be a reliable backup for a team that rosters a RB who needs a complimentary back.

by kaisertown on Oct 29, 2009 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

I agree that I’ve never seen a legitimate QB prospect with so many flaws, but I’m not concerned with Tebow mentally being able to handle it. He’s shown too much mental toughness… but I do think it’s going to take a season with an NFL QB coach to really fix him. Whatever happens with Loeffler and Tebow to correct his flaws won’t completely fix anything- just get him ready for his pro day. But it won’t be done in vain, as it’ll set Tebow up nicely to come in an begin the process with his NFL coaching staff.

Good comparison with Marecic- not quite the runner that Schmitt was, but that guy is an animal lead blocker.

I was alluding to the Giants’ 3 RB scheme as ideal for Gerhart, similar to your thought. I’d use him similar to Jacobs, but Gerhart would be the 2nd back in, IMO.

by Der Jaeger on Oct 29, 2009 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

if Ponder does declare

any thoughts on where he would go in the draft? I’m not so much asking which round but where in what round? Early, Mid, Late?

The no huddle is gone, please sign tackles Runyan, Jones or Walker

by poz on Oct 30, 2009 6:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Definitely early. Maybe not first round but a lot depends on how he finishes the season and then the Combine and the FSU Pro Day. It’s a deep draft, but QB’s are in demand, and I could see him sneaking in at the tail end of the first round with the right situation. More likely though, Ponder’s a 2-3 round guy today.

by Der Jaeger on Oct 30, 2009 7:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Could work in our favor

Ponder’s a 2-3 round guy today.

I would not be against picking him up at that point.

"Are the Bills better than we think, or do they just suck the life out of most teams they play and drag them down to their level? - oompaloompa

by Joe P. on Oct 30, 2009 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Me too.

by Der Jaeger on Oct 30, 2009 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You left out the rule that says you have to draft a minimum of 4 CBs each year (or at least 4 DBs, if you want to take a gamble).

"We want to win immediately. To say you're building is an incomplete sentence. ... You're building for a future coach and general manager."
-Marv Levy

by TEMSON on Oct 29, 2009 9:12 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

You win the award for “that comment I knew someone would make.” :)

Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott

by Brian Galliford on Oct 29, 2009 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I also feel compelled to mention that I have no problem with stocking up at corner, considering the vital importance that position carries in today’s NFL. Depth is absolutely crucial there, because teams throw more now than they ever have, and injuries happen there a lot, too.

Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott

by Brian Galliford on Oct 29, 2009 9:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I actually don’t care much about it either, just figured I’d beat everyone else to the punch.

"We want to win immediately. To say you're building is an incomplete sentence. ... You're building for a future coach and general manager."
-Marv Levy

by TEMSON on Oct 29, 2009 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

WOW! Excellent write up.

In my travels around the various SB sites I don’t see such thoughtful, coherent, and well written posts very often. While it is one thing to discuss which prospect is better or which would fit better, discussions over the philosophy of evaluating and drafting players is really much more interesting.

Your article should be required reading for everyone who is interested in the NFL.

Thanks for the post.

by NorthLeft12 on Oct 29, 2009 9:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Yeah DBs are typically the smallest guys on the field...

therefore are some of the most likely to get nicked up. Jauron & Co have largely done a very good job as far as getting talent through the draft, especially in the DB dept. I honestly think we have the deepest defensive backfield in the NFL when you look at the cumulative talent and how deep it goes. There’s even a good chance that Ellis Lankster is going to be an average or better contributor before it’s all said and done. You put our DBs with, for instance, the Minnesota front 7, and that defense is much, much better. The problem with all of this is who’s coaching all of these talented players once they’re in the NFL. That’s where we’re falling short in this whole process. Also, our pro-personnel dept is pretty suspect as well. Here’s hoping that even if we make the playoffs somehow miraculously, our FO and coaching staff is still overhauled.

by live6453 on Oct 29, 2009 9:58 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

As a Lions fan I have witnessed first hand where need/want drafting will lead.

Going into the 2009 draft we had need for talent across the board. There was really no position which did not require an upgrade or depth.
That’s why that draft looks so good right now. We got five starters out of it, which is a testament to how bad we were and how good the draft was.

One question; when teams make up a “big board” do they rank all the players in sequence of value or do they tier them in groups of value?
When I hear and see discussions of overall player rankings I would think in more than a few cases there is almost no difference in value between one player and another or in other cases a significant drop off in value. How are these boards structured?
Anyone know or care to theorize?

by NorthLeft12 on Oct 29, 2009 10:46 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

It obviously varies from team to team. Every player has a unique grade. Most teams do grouping by round grade off of that, with the exception of the first round, where because of pay scale issues, the difference between Top 10 and 10-30 is monumental, and you’d therefore damned well better be right.

I’d imagine that if there’s a sequential element to the ranking – i.e., you have a group of guys with a Round 2 grade, and they’re all graded relatively evenly – the sequence then comes from need. But for pretty much every team, grade plays a far bigger role than need. Only when you’re looking at multiple players with a pick that are graded similarly does need come into play – and that’s obviously a nice problem to have.

Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott

by Brian Galliford on Oct 29, 2009 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thank you Brian.

That makes perfect sense to me.

by NorthLeft12 on Oct 29, 2009 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nice post, with the only remaining question to be asked being:

Is Michael Oher coachable?

by StroudFanClub on Oct 29, 2009 3:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I’d ask a different question about Michael Oher: is Michael Oher “on the table?”

Wanted him then, want him more now.

Twitter: helping to make anti-social people anti-socially social.

by TheAfghanTwilight on Oct 29, 2009 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good post Brian. Oher is an example of how in the NFL, uneducated doesn’t equal stupid. Oher got such a late start learning the basics and foundation of education type stuff that people always thought he was stupid. But those who know him well have said he’s a bright guy who’s just playing catch up. I’m sure there are a lot of bright guys in college football who have the mental capacity to pick up anything that coaches throw at them, but if you talked to them for 10 minutes, you’d think they were stupid based on the way they spoke. Slang and a limited vocabulary can make a smart kid who went to a bad high school and took joke classes at a huge state college look pretty stupid. It’s gotta be a tough job for NFL teams to try and figure out which kids are smart, but don’t show it and which ones are just plain stupid.

One thing to remember with 40 times, splits and agility drills is that scouts are very good at predicting what times those guys will run. So, it’s often a question of which guys surprise and which ones dissapoint. Gary Guyton is an example of a player who was a good player on a good defense, but didn’t really stand out. He probably had the best combine of any LB who wasn’t a first round prospect, but went undrafted. Now he starts for the Pats. I think that when guys who play well in college, but don’t put up gaudy stats have better than expected workouts, it increases value and when guys put up great stats in college and run slower than expected, it’s time to slide them down the draft board (or move them to free safety). I think Brandon Spikes might have a hard time breaking a 4.8 forty at the combine, but he moves around the field pretty quick and scouts aren’t expecting him to run fast, so it won’t hurt him. But if a supposedly fast MLB has a reputation for overpursuing plays and then runs a 4.8 at the combine, then it’s a serious red flag.

I know it’s not relevant, but I still don’t think that Michael Johnson lacks work ethic or takes plays off. I think he lacks football IQ, doesn’t diagnose plays well and finds himself way out of position so often that it looks like he’s not trying.

by kaisertown on Oct 29, 2009 4:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Great Topic

Need vs. Value

Agree with your notes.

This is going to be different for every team. Kiper, McShay, etc. really get after just the talent, but each team may value certain players differently. EG: Buffalo may not have Tyson Jackson rated very highly because there’s really not a use for a 290 pound 5 technique end in their system. So he may drop on Buffalo’s board.

There’s lots of picks that we, as fans, scratch our heads about. Good examples came in the 2002 Draft, with Levi Jones and Dwight Freeney going way higher than anticipated. Jones was likely very high on the Bengals’ board, and some of the players that Kiper had rated ahead of Jones may have been graded lower by Cincinnati.

Freeney is a tremendous fit in Indy’s Tampa 2, which likely increased his value for Indianapolis. During the draft process, Freeney lost some momentum with his height and because he was handled easily by Bryant McKinnie when Syracuse played Miami, and was objectively graded about 5-10 picks lower.

But I totally agree- go with the best player on your board. If players are even, then fill a need.

Production vs. Potential

Couldn’t agree more. The tape leads to the combine look, not the other way around. Sometimes a combine warrior that didn’t produce much pans out, but not as much as they bust.

I also concern myself with level of competition. If the player is facing weaker competition, I may focus on games against stronger opponents more in the grade- eg: Ryan Clady easily cleaned up his conference competition. But his performance in the Fiesta Bowl against Oklahoma comfirmed his talent level.

There are special cases- like Joe Flacco and DRC. Then the Senior Bowl really needs to be focused on, if that player attends. DRC really became a first rounder in Mobile, not his college games. With QB’s, teams really need to be savvy in terms of grading ability, both mental and physical. Lots of QB’s come from lesser colleges, but have the ability. They normally don’t get to the Senior Bowl, so confirming ability during position drills at the combine and their Pro Day are important. But it’s super hit and miss and experience is really needed in making picks like Flacco.

Athleticism vs. Approach

Agree again. It’s really wholistic- does the athlete have a good attitude towards his future profession? Teams that fall in love with athletes with attitude issues are foolish. Again, this takes some experience, particularly in the interview process, and also talking with the college coaching staff, once the player is committed to the draft, and getting their candid opinion.

It also works the other way. Guys like Tedy Bruschi get overlooked all the time because of average athleticism despite tremendous attitudes. At this point, like you mentioned, a team needs to not fall in love with the attitude, and really apply a correct grade to the player. Dwight Clark is a great example of a team, SF, waiting until Clark’s ability matched the draft pick.

Great example with Johnson, BTW.

Character

Agree that this is among the hardest parts of the draft process- there are no measureables. And the players get coached up for their interview. There’s really got to be a whollistic approach to this. Family environment, opinions of college coaches, opinion of those around him in college, etc.

And you’re right- as fans, we never know the specifics. For all we know, Buffalo could have completely taken someone like Brian Orakpo off their board for a character reason. We’ll never know.

Intelligence vs. Football IQ

Great example with Oher. For me, it works football IQ and then intelligence. If the guy is coachable, can digest a playbook, and function, then that’s good enough for me. If he scores 40 on the Wonderlic, even better.

It’s not even though- QB, Center, Tight End, MLB, and FS may have a higher importance for intelligence than other positions- but it still works football IQ and then intelligence, IMO. A good example is Jimmy Clausen, who likely has high football intelligence but may not score as well as some on the Wonderlic. Unless he scores under 20, I’m not concerned. And again, the players get coached up for the Wonderlic.

At the end of the day, we’re not asking players to solve logic problems during the game.

A Word on Draft Board

As fans, we’re not privy to each team’s draft board specifics. No two teams have identical draft boards. Team may assess higher grades to players who are better fits in their current systems. They may pull players completely off their board due to bad fits in the system.

Team will also pull players off their draft board completely due to character risks and injuries.

For all we know, Maybin could have been the Bills’ 5th rated player due to fit in the Bills’ Cover 2. Point is, we have no idea how any team grades and what their board looks like.

Players get picked, and then we instantly compare that pick to Kiper’s Big Board or McShay and Scouts, Inc. And as fans, we’re confused as why a team picked the the 6th best player available and passes over 5 better player. But for that team, the player they selected may have been the best player available on their board.

BTW, this really supports the idea of having a great GM and front office. The scouts can do great work, but if the team’s board isn’t any good, the draft won’t be any good.

Player Ranges

If teams are really doing their homework, they’ve come up with projected ranges for players though mock drafts prior to the draft in an attempt to predict the draft. Bill Polian used to allude to this when he talked about “the draft falling in line just like we thought it would.”

Part of that process is draft range. Through the mock draft process, you can get a range where you expect a player to be picked. This helps determine draft moves, and also who a team can wait on until the next round.

A good example is what Gregg Williams recently talked about referencing the 2001 Draft and Drew Brees. The Bills wanted Brees, but knew they picked too high in the first round to select Brees. They traded down in the first round, added picks, and then tried to get back into the first round, toward the 30th pick. This is likely due to their perception of Brees’ range. Unfortunately, they weren’t able to get the deal done to get Brees.

Overall, great article Brian. This process is coming to the forefront for fans recently, but judging from fan reactions to picks, the finer details that you wrote about aren’t completely understood.

by Der Jaeger on Oct 29, 2009 6:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Can we blame them?

judging from fan reactions to picks, the finer details that you wrote about aren’t completely understood.

Not sure the coaching staff understands it…..if they did, we would have drafted Oher.

"Are the Bills better than we think, or do they just suck the life out of most teams they play and drag them down to their level? - oompaloompa

by Joe P. on Oct 29, 2009 9:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes and No

Yes- my argument here is for fans that don’t understand the process entirely and comment negatively. eg: Eagles fans booing Donovan McNabb. Or complaining about the drafting of Mario Williams over Vince Young and Reggie Bush.

No- The ends justifies the means. If a GM/front office consistently make wrong selections and draft day gaffs, we have every right to question them.

We all do need to keep in mind: no matter how compelling the draft philisophy, no matter how hard we try to grade precisely (I’m very guilty of this), now matter what our understanding of the draft process, this is all a very inexact science.

I’m really careful of grading draft day selection on rookie performance. Some rookie DE performances (from the Maybin thread):

Jared Allen: 9
Andre Carter: 6.5
Trent Cole: 5
Dwight Freeney: 13
KGB: 1.5
Aaron Kampman: 0.5
Patrick Kerney: 2.5
Leonard Little: 0.5
Robert Mathis: 3.5
Julius Peppers: 12
Bruce Smith: 6.5
Will Smith: 7.5
Michael Strahan: 1
Jason Taylor: 5
Justin Tuck: 1
Osi Umenyiora: 1
Kyle Vanden Bosch: 0.5
Mario Williams: 4.5

Oher may do well now and later, and may go on to be an abover-average LT. But if Maybin develops and begins to dominate in three-four years, then who’s the better pick?

by Der Jaeger on Oct 29, 2009 10:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Who's the better pick?

Depends on the Who. If the Who is a very patient fan who enjoys a good pass rusher or coach who was fairly certain he had at least 2 years left with this team, then Maybin is the better pick. Nobody expect Maybin to be anymore than a passing down situational rusher. Oher would have been an every down player. By the way, I like Maybin and think he will be very good to excellent in a few years. If the Who is Jauron, Edwards, and fans who are tired of waiting for a competitive team, then Oher would have been the better pick. Trouble is, the coaching staff wrongly put their faith in Walker being able to play LT, which if they had read this site, they would have known was a baaaad idea destine to fail. Shouldn’t they have considered Walker couldn’t handle the LT position, especially in a no huddle offense. And don’t get me started on the wisdom of trying to run the no huddle with a new O-line consisting of 2 rookie starters at best and a QB who was yet to prove he could run an effective 2 min drill on a regular basis.
They didn’t feel the “need” to draft an LT was great enough. For a coaching staff that needed immediate production because it knew it was on the hot seat, Oher would have been a better pick. Oher would have been an immediate starter at LT and a definite upgrade over Bell. He would have help a running game that they knew would be missing Lynch and helped Edwards better utilize his new toy, T.O. And, wouldn’t we all be more comfortable with Bell penciled in as the backup OT, then starting at RT after Butler went down? Oher could have anchored the LT position on our line for the next 10 plus years. I know it is easier to second guess draft choices after the draft is over, but in this case you didn’t have to be a genius to see the Bills needed an LT in the worst way. Yes, we needed a DE, but it was clear there was not an NFL ready 4-3 DE to be had in this years draft. I described the group as “underwhelming” months before the draft. As your post shows, NFL ready 4-3 DEs are few and far between.

"Are the Bills better than we think, or do they just suck the life out of most teams they play and drag them down to their level? - oompaloompa

by Joe P. on Oct 30, 2009 12:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Totally logical.

It might go back to draft boards. We’ll never see the Buffalo draft board, so this is purely conjecture… but if Buffalo had Maybin at 1.1, and Oher at 1.2, then they picked Maybin as the best player available who also filled a need.

One of the things that I’ve noticed from successful teams is that they often fill their needs prior to the draft, reducing the need to pick an immediate need (LT) over the best player available. Peters really forced Brandon’s hand at a bad time (after the better UFA’s were signed). Had we really known, signing a stop gap type (William Thomas?) would’ve been helpful.

It’s all shoulda, coulda, woulda though.

by Der Jaeger on Oct 30, 2009 7:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No- The ends justifies the means. If a GM/front office consistently make wrong selections and draft day gaffs, we have every right to question them.

There’s a lot of truth in there and Joe is right too. I think the answer is in the middle. Once fans have faith in a team’s management, that team could pick anybody and as training camp begins, fans will love that pick. The Pats or Steelers have earned the faith of their fanbases while Dick Jauron and the Bills have fans turning every little decision into the reason why he’s a bad coach.

Joe is right that the logic behind the pick is super important and you’re also right that when a team drafts a kid as raw and potential filled as Maybin is, fans need to show a little bit of patience. Good posts by you both.

by kaisertown on Oct 30, 2009 12:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That goes double for the Lions.

I was very disappointed when the Lions passed on Oher to take Pettigrew at #20. I assumed that the reasoning behind that choice was coachability or the perception that Oher could not cut it as a Left Tackle. We will never know I guess.
The Ravens sure did not hesitate to move up and get him which makes me think all the more that he was the real deal and a steal at the spot they got him [#24?].

by NorthLeft12 on Oct 30, 2009 6:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs