Posts tagged 2013 RSP

Boiler Room: Oregon St. WR Markus Wheaton

My best three skill players at the Senior Bowl? Markus Wheaton, Quinton Patton, and Tyler Wilson would have earned my votes. Photo by John Martinez Pavliga.
NFL.com/Rotoworld’s Josh Norris had me pegged when he said last fall that Markus Wheaton was my kind of player. Photo by John Martinez Pavliga.

Wheaton is my favorite wide receiver in this draft. There are dozens of plays I’d like to show you and then there’s another dozen of one-on-one moments where he shined against a good class of corners at the Senior Bowl practices. He might not be the best receiver in this class, but I think he’s up there and I’m going to show you why.

A series I started this year at the RSP blog is The Boiler RoomOne of the challenges involved with player analysis is to be succinct with delivering the goods. As the author of an annual tome, I’m often a spectacular failure in this respect.

Even so, I will study a prospect and see a play unfold that does a great job of encapsulating that player’s skills. When I witness these moments, I try to imagine if I would include this play as part of a cut-up of highlights for a draft show at a major network or if I was working for an NFL organization creating cut-ups for a personnel director. Unlike the No-Huddle Series, The Boiler Room is focused on prospects I expect to be drafted, and often before the fourth round.

It’s incredibly difficult to boil down any player with just one play. Yet, if I need a play to add to the highlight reel that will help a team make a decision where to slot Markus Wheaton on its board, this is my nomination despite the play after this one on the video is a beautiful touchdown just inside the end line (make sure to watch it).

Wheaton vs. UCLA 

This target displays just about everything you want to see from a vertical threat because it begins with single coverage and ends with safety help that was good enough to derail a reception, but didn’t. I like physical players – it’s my old, AFC Central roots – and “physical” play is as much about taking the licks and making the play as dishing them out. Wheaton is small, but he plays like he owns you.

Oregon State is in a standard 11 personnel, 1×2 receiver set with Wheaton at the top of the screen with a cornerback pressing the line of scrimmage. The UCLA defense has both corners tight and seven defenders at the line threatening blitz. The strong safety is in the flat and accounting for the slot receiver on the twin side of the Oregon State formation. Here is the play in its entirety and then I’ll break it down with stills.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIs0pFOkR74&start=79rel=0&w=560&h=315]

It’s a nice, garden-variety NFL catch that a player like Domenik Hixon makes all the time.  So why choose it if a reserve NFL wide receiver can make it? For starters, Hixon is a deceptive player. Not all receivers make this play – especially vertical talents with Wheaton’s speed. Many of these players are one-dimensional and get drafted on the promise that they can become fully formed weapons. While not completely one-dimensional, Marquise Goodwin is closer to this negative characterization of his game than Wheaton.

The first thing I like about this play is Wheaton’s willingness to use his hands as the aggressor and to own his space. He doesn’t get jammed at the beginning of the play, but once the receiver works outside the corner that is when the physical play begins.

MWA1Wheaton’s competition turns outside to use his hands, but it is Wheaton who establishes first contact with his inside arm. The intent of this contact is to maintain his space between the flat at the sideline. A receiver who allows the defender to bump him outside creates a narrower target for the quarterback to throw the fade. While I could have shown you some nice hand work from Wheaton in other highlights, I think this aspect of vertical routes is the one that holds back many fast, strong, and stick-fingered prospects.

Wheaton may get bumped off course early in his NFL career because an NFL veteran throws something at him that he didn’t anticipate, but at least I know he understands what he’s supposed to do and how to execute it on the field. If a players illustrates these skills at the college game and has the physical prowess to hang with NFL athletes then I’m optimistic of his chances of making a successful transition.

MWA2Despite some hand fighting, Wheaton has given up little if any horizontal space, but his speed is good enough to gain separation even while engaged in contact and unable to pump both arms or drive down field with his shoulders over his knees.

MWA3As Wheaton lengthens his vertical separation, I especially like that his hands remain low as he uses his eyes to track the ball. Despite having a step on the defender his hands are tipping off how close the ball in its trajectory to the receiver. This is another trick of the trade the separates that raw speedster who impresses fans enamored with stopwatch times from true NFL vertical threats with real potential for a lasting career as a starter.

MWA4

Not two steps later, Wheaton turns to the ball and extends his arms. Although he catches the ball with his hands on most targets, I have heard some criticisms that Wheaton should extend his arms more to attack the ball. This play is a good example. However, I believe the fact that he’s good at hiding his intentions to make a play on the ball until the last moment often compensates. It doesn’t mean this criticism is invalid, but I do believe in many cases it’s less of a concern.

MWA5Note how Wheaton has the luxury of horizontal space to bend away from the defender to make the catch. I cannot emphasize enough how important it is for a receiver to leave space between him and the sideline to make these adjustments. Most games involve establishing and maintaining position and this is just one of countless examples in football.

MW A6Wheaton brings the ball from his helmet to his side and demonstrates good ball security as the cornerback has nothing to grab but the receiver’s forearm. The best hope for UCLA’s defense to dislodge the football is from the safety’s impending hit.

MWA7

No dice. It doesn’t appear this photo reveals much, but take a closer look at the receiver’s feet. The way Wheaton’s feet are pointed you can see that he has turned his body away from the incoming contact so the hit arrives at the receiver’s back rather than his arm. To demonstrate the skill to protect his body and the ball after making an athletic adjustment on a vertical route like this takes awareness and fluidity.

I value these little things about Wheaton’s game and it’s these small details that could make a big difference when he gets to the NFL.

For analysis of skill players in this year’s draft class, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio available April 1. Prepayment is available now. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

2013 RSP Scavenger Hunt Contest – Closed

Catch a free 2013 RSP if you know where to find the key to the lock. Photo by Hank.
Catch a free 2013 RSP if you know where to find the key to the lock. Photo by Hank.

Most of my readers find my contests challenging. I try to make them difficult, but sometimes they wind up easier than I thought. This one could go either way. Ready?

The first three people to email me the link to a page on my blog that has a picture with collard greens wins a 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio. If you already have the 2013 RSP, I’ll award you one of the RSPs of your choice from 2006-2012. Make sure you email me at mattwaldmanrsp@gmail.com otherwise your entry won’t qualify.

Good luck!

Contest Closed!!!

Congratulations to Matthew Freedman, Jared Ladbury, and Etienne Groulx for finding the collard greens and they were tasty, too!

I’ll have another contest soon.

M

Boiler Room: Geno Smith and Gradkowski Tangent

Geno Smith reminds me of Tony Romo. I see it, but I also see the other players on that spectrum of style. See below. Photo by Football Schedule.
Geno Smith reminds many of Tony Romo. I see it, but I also see the other players on that spectrum of style. See below. Photo by Football Schedule.

Geno Smith may not be a quarterback I’m super-excited about as an NFL prospect, but it doesn’t mean he won’t develop into a decent starter. Smith’s game travels to the Boiler Room where I distill what makes him a solid prospect at the position, including a tangent about a player who belongs in the family of quarterbacking styles where Smith resides – Bruce Gradkowski.

A series I started this year at the RSP blog is The Boiler RoomOne of the challenges involved with player analysis is to be succinct with delivering the goods. As the author of an annual tome, I’m often a spectacular failure in this respect.

Even so, I will study a prospect and see a play unfold that does a great job of encapsulating that player’s skills. When I witness these moments, I try to imagine if I would include this play as part of a cut-up of highlights for a draft show at a major network or if I was working for an NFL organization creating cut-ups for a personnel director. Unlike the No-Huddle Series, The Boiler Room is focused on prospects I expect to be drafted, and often before the fourth round.

It’s incredibly difficult to boil down any player with just one play, much less a quarterback. Yet, if I need a play to add to the highlight reel that will help a team make a decision where to slot Geno Smith on its board, this is my nomination. Actually, I’m breaking my own rule and supplying two for Smith. Both plays are displays of pocket presence.

The Gradkowski Tangent

Before I do, I’m leading off this Boiler Room installment with a quarterback who I believe fits in the Tony Romo-Rich Gannon spectrum of quarterbacks where I would place Smith in terms of his playing style. If you’ve read my work at this blog long enough then you know I place great value on a quarterback’s skill to maneuver a pocket. A quarterback can have all the physical tools and accuracy to become an NFL superstar, but if he lacks the feel for the pocket and the mental and physical discipline to make the subtle adjustments in tight quarters to avoid the rush and stay prepared to throw the ball then the gloss of his promise is not as bright in my eyes.

Likewise, if the passer lacks the plus-arm but commands the pocket even as its walls are crumbling at his feet, then I at least know he’ll be a serviceable player. I’m not 100 percent on board with this statement, but I’m close.

This affords me a moment to talk about a player whose game I appreciate – perhaps too much when I first began a formal method of study for the Rookie Scouting Portfolio eight years ago, but in the scheme of quarterbacks that are still standing, perhaps not enough – Bruce Gradkowski. I thought the former Toledo star had as good or better feel for the game – and especially the pocket – than any of his peers in that 2006 quarterback class that included Jay Cutler, Matt Leinart, and Vince Young.

At the time, Gradkowski was the only passer in NCAA history to complete 70 percent of his passes for two seasons and this was in an offense where Gradkowski dropped from center. He also ran a 4.59-second 40 at the combine and was among the better all-around athletes at the position in the drills at the NFL Combine. I had Gradkowski ranked fourth behind Cutler, Young, and Leinart.

He was in a virtual tie with Leinart. The only reason I had the USC quarterback above Gradkowski was at that time, I wasn’t writing an RSP post-draft publication and I had to account for opportunity. What I didn’t expect was Gradkowski doing well enough in the preseason that Jon Gruden opted to start the rookie in Tampa  Bay.

I was tempted to wait on a quarterback in this RSPWP2 Draft, take Gradkowski, put him in a west coast offense, and damn the jeering from the cheap seats. The only thing that Gradkowski lacks is a franchise-caliber arm and if surrounded by great talent, he could have that Rich Gannon presence I believe Gruden saw in Gradkowski when the coach drafted the Toledo Rocket.

[youtube=http://youtu.be/gDWEiHxdw1U]

This was Gradkowski’s third touchdown in the fourth quarter to beat the Steelers in Heinz Field. If you didn’t know, the Steelers signed him in the offseason as Roethlisberger’s backup. In Todd Haley’s quick-decision, short(er)-passing offense, it’s a good fit.

Watch how economical Gradkowski is in the pocket. He’s also willing to step into the pocket and take the hit to make the throw and even the incomplete passes are accurate throws under pressure where he often throws open his target.

2:51, 3:20, and 6:19 to the end of the clip

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1k-EwFiLWM&start=220&w=560&h=315]

It’s a simple-looking throw, but the willingness to stand in the pocket and use his athleticism in tight spots and odd angles to distribute the ball under pressure is something that he has in common with Romo, Gannon, and Smith. These small plays make a difference. If you watched Jon Gruden’s QB camp with Matt Barkley this week, then you saw the coach tutor Barkley on the same basic play that grilled Andrew Luck for messing up at Stanford. The play is a short-to-long read that is practically an automatic dump to the fullback in the flat.

During the episode, Gruden laments that only the Peyton Mannings of the football world seem to realize that you “can’t lose money when you’re always making a profit.”  Young quarterbacks are often too aggressive and overconfident and they don’t know how to balance when to pick apart a team and when to go for the jugular. Gradkowski has this balance – just not the vast arm talent. This touchdown pass is another good example of how a player must be willing to stand in and own the pocket.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1k-EwFiLWM&start=171&w=560&h=315]

This play required some eye manipulation and a pump fake to set up the safety and the patience to hang in the pocket to complete the throw on time. Gradkowski demonstrated this at Toledo and his stints with the Bucs, Rams, Browns, Bengals, and Raiders. The fact that I mentioned five teams in a seven-year career means Gradkowski is an utter failure if you’re a fantasy football owner, but only NFL media and marketing cares about your fantasy interests.

But if NFL operations – specifically individual team operations – values a player who can put his team in position to win. The final two plays on this video below are the type of plays that give a receiver a chance to win the game and Gradkowski has a knack for it.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1k-EwFiLWM&start=379&w=560&h=315]

I’m not touting Gradowski as a future superstar. However, it is important to show that a quarterback can have long-term value in the NFL if arm strength isn’t at the top of his resume, but the top two bullet points are pocket presence and accuracy. He’s a savvy quarterback who I still believe can be an effective starter in the right situation.

Of course, there aren’t many of these situations in the league and fewer would value him as a long-term option. The importance of this tangent is that if Geno Smith were to fail as a starter that his style of quarterbacking will make him a viable long-term backup who can fill a need for several teams. It means Smith has little downside as a talent – even if he doesn’t work out as an initial investment with a team.

Smith in the Boiler

Unlike Gradkowski, Geno Smith has enough arm strength to earn a spot on a draft board for most teams as a future starter. What you just saw from Gradkowski is where I think Smith has potential. I like the Mountaineer’s wherewithal in the pocket.

This is a 3rd-and-18 pass with 9:23 in the third quarter and a 10-point lead at their own 29. Forget about analyzing Smith’s read of the coverage and just watch how he maneuvers a pocket against a four-man rush.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1zqqutj6Uo&start=440w=560&h=315]

Maryland may only send four defenders, but the defense does a good job of constricting the pocket. The end forces the left tackle backfield and in this situation many quarterbacks try to break the pocket inside the right tackle and are dropped before they reach the line of scrimmage. Smith escapes the blind side rush with the intent to throw down field.

Although he his initial climb of the pocket is as fast as most quarterbacks move when they drop their eyes and run for the escape hatch, Smith’s head remains up and his eyes on his receivers. When he feels the defensive tackles collapsing the middle and clogging his passing lane, Smith moves just like the quarterback footwork drills you always see in practice but not performed this textbook in a game.

The West Virginia quarterback slides to his left, remains in a throwing position and find the comeback for positive yards. This leads to a punt, but with a 10-point lead in their own territory, this is a good outcome.

Maryland shows Smith the possibility that it is sending seven defenders on the next play; opting for five at the snap. What I like about this play is Smith’s ability to work though pressure up the middle.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1zqqutj6Uo&start=495w=560&h=315]

This isn’t just a climb of the pocket. While a nice thing to see from all quarterbacks, I especially like the way Smith waits until the last moment to avoid the middle linebacker coming free of the running back up the middle. Although the difference is tenths – or even hundredths – of a second between a quarterback I’d consider patient and one who not, the extra beat that Smith waits to look down field before opting to reduce his shoulder and climb is a critical part of having “feel” for his surroundings.

I also like that he sees the pocket one step ahead and his already working to the inside of the next rusher so he can slide to the open lane and deliver the ball on this 2nd-and-two play. Although the receiver drops this pass in tight coverage and one could make a weak argument that tucking and running was a better recourse, I think if you isolate Smith’s skill to maneuver and deliver on this play and others like it, you see a budding field general.

I’m not as high on Smith as others, but I do believe he has the basic skills to develop into a successful starter and pocket presence tops the list.

For analysis of skill players in this year’s draft class, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio available April 1. Prepayment is available now. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

Futures: OLBs Dion Jordan and Barkevious Mingo

Mingo's skill as a pass rusher tilts the field in favor of his teammates. Photo by Crawford Orthodontics.
Mingo’s skill as a pass rusher tilts the field in favor of his teammates. Photo by Crawford Orthodontics.

Imagine you’re considering two final candidates for a job. Both possess top-drawer talent, which is what you’d expect at this point if their resumes are the remaining two on your desk.

Candidate A is refined, smooth, and versatile. If you needed him to start today, he’d be up to speed and produce with minimal training. If you improved the rest of the surrounding talent in your workplace, Candidate A could become a star.

In contrast, there’s something disconcerting about Candidate B. You see how it could all go wrong if you opt for him – but that’s not what’s nagging you. It’s that his talent leaves you wondering if three years from now you’ll look back on your decision and conclude that you settled for less by taking Candidate A.

What Candidate B lacks in experience is compensated by a singular talent that not only jumps off the page, it grabs you by the neck and squeezes until your eyes bulge from their sockets. Candidate B carries more risk and he may never do everything as well as Candidate A, but he has the potential to do one thing so well that it could elevate the performance of your team’s surrounding talent.

Many organizations would take Candidate A and not look back. However, it is not that that clear cut.

A decade ago, I knew several people who worked for one of the top hospitality organizations in the world. This award-winning company’s philosophy on hiring placed a priority on talent over experience.

“Experience often means you spent more time ‘doing it wrong,’” one director told me. “We would rather hire someone with the basic talent for the job, the capacity to learn, and a personality geared to excel. The last two things we can’t teach. So when we spot it, we know we can teach the rest.”

There’s something appealing about this philosophy, but you have to know how to spot these behaviors beyond an interview. I believe the Baltimore Ravens have this perspective. Before NFL Network’s Daniel Jeremiah worked with the Eagles, he talked about his time with the Ravens in his old podcasts.

I remember him mentioning that one of the qualities Baltimore sought in players was a comfort level with – and penchant for – hitting. If it wasn’t there, they weren’t interested.

I believe the Steelers also have this on their list of fundamentals a player must possess. If these teams discover they were wrong about that player later on, he won’t last long with either team.

But an organization has to have a strong understanding of what they can and cannot teach a player. If they don’t possess this knowledge of what is and isn’t teachable – or worse yet, they lack these teaching skills as a staff – then you have what the Oakland Raiders are trying to work past with some of its personnel decisions.

This philosophical quandary underscores the difference of opinion that I bet a few teams may have when considering the talents of outside linebackers Dion Jordan and Barkevious Mingo. Both are exceptional athletes, but despite playing the same position these two are as Robert Frost once wrote, “two roads diverged in the wood.”

The consensus prefers Jordan, who is the more experienced and versatile of the two. The question is whether Mingo – a player with higher risk-reward potential – represents to one NFL team what Frost meant as, “the road less traveled by will make all the difference.”

Read the rest at Football Outsiders

 

Character, Media, and the NFL Draft: A Sour Cocktail

It's a bad idea to evaluate a smile the way you critique his release. Photo by PDA.Photo
It’s a bad idea to evaluate his smile the way you critique his release. And I dare say that I’m more qualified than most of my peers when it comes to interviewing a perspective employee. Photo by PDA.Photo

I’m 43 years old. Since I was 15, I’ve held 16 types of jobs with 9 different companies. I’m not counting the four soul-sucking hours I spent as a stock boy at a Winn-Dixie.

On my lunch hour at that job, I walked out the door and kept walking. Two miles later, I made a beeline to the manager’s office at the apartment complex where I grew up. The next morning I was collecting trash and cleaning the grounds.

Yeah, I would have rather hauled other people’s garbage and take a blower to a parking lot filled with pollen that made “sinus irritation” an understatement than to stand around a grocery store all day. There’s considerable irony to this story once you learn that my wife and daughter have an ongoing joke that the two grocery stores in town are my mistresses: Kroger my ‘around the way girl’ and Earth Fare my ‘hippy chick’.  Other than work and home, these two places are where you can find me.

Good thing I wasn’t a star quarterback or the way I ended that job might earned this kind of headline:

 NFL Draft Analyst calls star quarterback ‘unreliable.’ Cites behavior of quitting jobs without notice among evidence.  

I’m only half-kidding. Although not a serious example of behavior that would even register amid the range of nitpicking stories on character that we read this time of year, it is an example of how a lack of context can alter the truth. A writer could easily speculate that a guy who walks off the job without notice is not the best candidate to lead a team.

Judging by what has been said about Cam Newton and Geno Smith, some writers relish a challenge. They examine smiles and facial expressions with the same fervor and methodology as tracking short shuttles and dissecting throwing motions. This is where their experiences as a football players fails them.

They fail to consider that the greatest amount of emotional maturation from childhood to adulthood happens between the ages of 16-25. This is when young people are given their first adult-level responsibilities. With new responsibilities comes new experiences.

And if you’ve been a human long enough, then you know that experience is the product of mistakes.

My career in the workplace didn’t start well.  Between the ages of 16 and 21, I walked off three of my first five jobs without notice. I could provide a convincing argument that two of those three walkouts were based on extenuating circumstances. However at the end of the day, I didn’t give notice and that is on me.

If I was a star quarterback and a private investigation firm was looking into my behavior, they might report to a director of scouting that I was unreliable, unprofessional, and immature. If a general manager opted to use these three adjectives to describe me in this context during a phone call or email with a draft analyst, I might be labeled a character risk and potential bust.

But what if I told you that those jobs were taken so I could practice my craft of quarterbacking at the only time of day where I had access to the tools and resources to get better?

What if you knew I woke up at 4:30 a.m. each morning during the summers, worked this part-time job until 1:30 p.m., and then from 2:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., I practiced without fail?

What if I told you that the company hired me after I told them of my scheduling needs and it was only after several weeks or months that the company’s needs changed. Rather than hiring someone for those needs, they gave me an ultimatum to either switch my hours or walk out the door and not come back?

Was I immature or were my priorities based on developing the skills of my future job over being flexible to the new terms of my present one? While I wasn’t a star quarterback, I was a musician who couldn’t practice after 8:00 p.m. without disturbing neighbors and needed my nights free to perform with others.

Even if the right answer is still being flexible, context is important.

If I was a college quarterback and this was a question clouding my character, I could only hope that those team-hired investigators were thorough. Even then, I’d have to wonder if those teams wouldn’t use these questions as a bargaining tool to drive down my stock and ultimately the price of my rookie contract.

Around the same time a college quarterback would be making the transition to a professional career, I was making mine. A couple of years earlier, I stopped performing music and changed career paths. My next five jobs were part of a 12-year career with the same employer.

I began as an entry-level employee while in school. Within a year I was a part-time supervisor and by the time I finished college, I was an assistant manager. Over that four-year period between the final years of my college life and the early years of my full-time professional career, I had probably interviewed, hired, trained, and disciplined a few hundred employees.

I made my share of mistakes. I made poor hiring decisions and I mishandled issues with clients, employees, and customers. In hindsight, most of these mistakes happened because I was young, inexperienced, and often immature.

There was a back I encountered 20 years ago whose physical skills and level of maturity reminds me of Christine Michael. This back ultimately had a successful career. Photo by SD Dirk.
There was a back I encountered 20 years ago whose immense physical skills and level of maturity reminds me of Christine Michael. This back ultimately had a successful career. Photo by SD Dirk.

During my brief time covering football practices a couple of years earlier, I encountered a star running back who was also displaying his own youthful immaturity. He rarely made it to post-practice interviews during his career.

His teammates intimated to me that their teammate was not a guy to be counted on. I got a sense that they didn’t like him very much. It wasn’t what they said, but how they said it. They rolled their eyes, shook their heads, and made dismissive sighs when I asked if this lead dog of the Georgia football team would be coming to the assigned sessions.

What they would say in conjunction with their physical displays of dissatisfaction was He’s never on time. I also had a friend who had a class with the runner. He told me stories about this future first-round pick of the Arizona Cardinals, including how the back spent more time carving his name into the desk rather than listening to the teacher.

I had good info to write about his immaturity before he was drafted, but I didn’t think it was worth discussing. I knew lots of students who came to class hung over, slept through lectures, or did half-hearted work with their assignments and still transformed into quality professionals in their respective careers. Why should Garrison Hearst be any different?

For all I really knew, Hearst’s teammates liked him even if they didn’t like that he was often late or a no-show to after-practice press sessions. It’s not hard to imagine that Hearst cared more about football than an interview or an English class. During my 20’s I thought Hearst was a slacker, but 20 years later and with a lot more life experience and perspective, I have a different view.  One of those experiences happened just a couple of years later.

Imagine being 22 or 23 and months away from earning a first-round contract with a professional football team. Better yet, imagine being 22, winning $5 million in the lottery, and going to work in a job that you don’t like. How difficult it must be to stay focused when what you’re doing won’t make a real difference in how you will earn the majority of your money?

Just like any of these prospects, we know the right answer: keep the straight and narrow. But it doesn’t change how difficult it is to maintain these priorities. Even if the fear of becoming academically ineligible during the season and watching one’s draft stock plummet might seem like a strong enough deterrent, it wouldn’t be easy.

I know it wouldn’t.

When I was 24 and two months from graduating from Georgia with dual majors in English and Spanish, my company promoted me to a full-time position at the time I was also headlong in a serious relationship with a woman who was moving in with me. That 500-level linguistics course that was 2.5 hours per session and taught in the native language by the head of the Spanish department three times a week was the lowest priority in my life.

I was in love. This was one of my last two classes. And I was getting paid.

And if you knew how little I was making, then you would realize the depths of my immaturity. I thought I could juggle it all. Only when I learned (all too late) that the final exam in this course had material on the front and back of each page did it hit me that I wasn’t thinking straight.

I failed the test, earned my first-ever D in the last class of my academic career, and settled for a major in English and minor in Spanish.

Someone I know and trust (and so do you if I told you who it was) with connections to a college program that has a marquee player entering this 2013 NFL class told me that this player barely emerged unscathed from a  similar scenario. When I heard about this, I understood the difficulty of maintaining one’s focus and priorities.  And he really is about to get paid! 

This prospect is dedicated to learning the game of football, but he lacked the maturity to keep his academics from becoming a potential problem that could have hurt him and his team. This probably earned the ire of his teammates and coaches. It’s the type of situation that could have been leaked to the media in a way where a writer could deem the prospect as “not well-liked,” or “lacking a good work ethic.”

Would you take a chance on a player in his early 20’s who works his ass off in practice and the film room, but had issues balancing his priorities with the classroom? In the scheme of things, I’d say it’s non-issue.

It became a non-issue for me. My immaturity as a student and young employee wasn’t fatal to my career. My successes outweighed my failures and I eventually became an operations manager, then a director at this company.

I can safely estimate that by the time I transitioned from a career in management to a writing career, I had interviewed, trained, and managed thousands of people ranging from entry-level employees to middle management. I was one of the few people in our company’s history who had a dual role as an operations manager and primary client contact.

I wasn’t a corporate superstar, but I was good at my job. I bet my career experiences are no different from many of you reading this.

If you have at least 10 years of experience as a manager in an environment that is a mix of blue-collar and white-collar cultures then you have probably faced unusual situations in your jobs where the everyday priorities of production, efficiency, and quality paled in comparison:

  • Bomb threats.
  • Fist fights between entry-level employees.
  • A broken windshield courtesy of a disgruntled former employee who was fired because I wouldn’t allow him to sexually harass employees.
  • Workplace romances.
  • Challenging and dysfunctional client relationships.

Despite the way I make it sound, most of my employees enjoyed working with me and these crazy situations above were rare events. Like most, the workplace has its headaches and if you’ve worked long enough then you’ve seen things you’d never think would happen.

It’s these experiences that add perspective about human nature. The capacity for a young adult to undergo a quick maturation is one of those major lessons.

Whether it’s the NFL, a blue-collar job, or Corporate America, there’s nothing like looking Career Death in the eye  to grow up fast. It happens to everyone. What’s even more profound is when you are given the responsibility as Career Death Incarnate to a soon-to-be former employee.

One of my worst days as a manager came when I had to fire a young woman who was avoiding her assignments. Even when she was working, she mistreated customers. During her firing, this part-time employee told me she had been recently been diagnosed with a treatable form of cancer. She was afraid to tell her mother, who had also been diagnosed just months earlier.

Although paling in comparison to her situation, firing someone dealing with cancer was not a good day in my life.

As unbelievable as it seems, she dropped by the office a few weeks later to ‘thank me for firing her’. Apparently, our conversation motivated her to find a job in an environment better suited to her needs. She told her mother about her cancer and it brought them closer. It was a blessing for them – and a minor, but rare blessing that she took the time to share it with me.

The experience of getting fired helped her make changes in her life. Her mistakes put her on a road towards gaining the maturity needed to make her life more fulfilling. This maturation in the face of a career death – parallels what many young NFL players face.

If there's a player who looked Career Death in the eye multiple times and matured, but still was far from a perfect professional and role model, Favre tops the list. Photo by Elvis Kennedy.
If there’s a player who looked Career Death in the eye multiple times and matured, but still was far from a perfect professional and role model, Favre tops the list. Photo by Elvis Kennedy.

I think Garrison Hearst stared Career Death in the eye a few times. The first-round pick of the Cardinals (third overall) had a rough start to his career. He drew the ire of Buddy Ryan, who once gave Hearst a wheelbarrow filled with sand to tote around practice after his rehab from a knee injury wasn’t going as fast as Ryan believed it should.

Eventually, Hearst had to fight is way from the bottom of the Bengals depth chart to split time with Kijana Carter. Even then he wasn’t offered a contract on par with Eric Bienemy. Hearst’s agent had to fight hard for the 49ers to even give Hearst a shot and when the former Georgia star began camp in San Francisco, Terry Kirby was the starter.

This all happened before Hearst had an ankle injury that was so bad – and complications during recovery that were even worse – that most players would have never seen a field again. Hearst’s experiences made him a battle-tested professional.

[youtube=http://youtu.be/5dgrjrp6jXE]

Physically, Hearst could have made this run early in his career but I believe the adversity he overcame made him mentally prepared to finish a 96-yard run in overtime.

But the maturity to be a prepared professional and a media-savvy one was something that Hearst never learned during his career. When asked about the idea of gays in the locker room, Hearst’s growth as a professional didn’t include dealing with people:

“Aww, hell no! I don’t want any faggots on my team. I know this might not be what people want to hear, but that’s a punk. I don’t want any faggots in this locker room.” 

While I don’t like Hearst’s views (at that time of his life) and perhaps someday these views will (hopefully) pose a greater problem to a team, I’m more concerned about whether a player will show up to work on time and give 100 percent to his job.

If you’ve worked with or led a group of people, you learn that not every member of a team is likable or reliable in situations outside the job. However, when it comes to his specific job, there may be few who are better.

I can think of several examples from my work experiences. These were people who made youthful mistakes before their employment or even had major issues on the job, but grew up and became good at what they did:

  • The trumpet player who removed his wedding ring before every gig, but was always on-time, demonstrated great range, and read everything right the first time. 
  • The short-order cook who would have gotten punched out by a customer if he had to ever deal with one, but never messed up an order and could balance multiple tickets at a time.
  • A former employee, who had a DUI charge reduced and expunged from his record as a teen, but a creative, reliable, and resourceful analyst.
  • A co-worker who was in a string of bad relationships and was once disciplined due to an inappropriate relationship with another co-worker that nearly got her fired before her career began, but eventually became a charismatic manager and teacher.

In a year or two, we might be able to add Christine Michael to this list. His displays of immaturity included sleeping through his Combine interviews. Still, it hasn’t  kept me from ranking him within the tier of future starters in this running back class.

I have no doubt that he can mature into a reliable player with a long, productive career. I also have no doubt that he could get cut and never fulfill his talent. However, based on my experiences with young adults, I would rather count on the likelihood that a young man is going to make mistakes and learn from them. Even commenting on it is a dangerous game because the weight it adds to an evaluation can be heavier than warranted.

Even if you’re a pessimist you have to concede that people often mature just enough to compartmentalize their flaws. At the very least they become good at preventing their issues from bleeding into their work long enough to address the issues and overcome them.  I know this was the case for me.

I shared my career history with you because I feel confident that my skills and experience have helped me become a decent judge of character. And if someone with my qualifications and experience is reticent to evaluate and judge a prospect’s personality and character when my available data is news clippings, press conferences, and second and third-hand reports, then why should anyone give credence to these assessments from other writers or television analysts who lack any real experience interviewing, managing, or leading adults?

Outside of well-documented problems involving drugs, alcohol, and violent crime, any members of media passing significant judgment on an NFL prospect’s character that changes the outcome of his evaluation  – even if they are eventually proven correct – are making a foolish decision on principle.

The fact is unless we look these players in the eye, ask them the tough questions, and have past experience as managers living with a player’s behavior – better or worse – as our employees, then we don’t know.

Sometimes it’s okay to say, I don’t know. 

For analysis of skill players in this year’s draft class, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio available April 1. Prepayment is available now. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

Behind the Scenes Thoughts on Tight Ends in 2013 RSP

Eifert is the one tight end where I have nothing to add behind the scenes. He's good and I feel good about him. Photo by Neon Tommy.
Eifert is the one tight end where I have nothing to add behind the scenes. He’s good and I feel good about him. Photo by Neon Tommy.

With the launch of the 2013 RSP, Sigmund Bloom suggested that I share a behind the scenes retelling of my thoughts and feelings about players – something that delves deeper than rankings and profiles of skills ad potential. A few days ago, I wrote about running backs. Today, it’s tight end – a position where three years from now I can imagine three players I had ranked in the wrong direction. It’s also a class where I could have justified making a good player look great (but didn’t).

The 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio is now available for download. One of my favorite things about this time of year is the reactions I get from new readers. It reflects everything that I want to tell those unfamiliar with the RSP:

“I actually won last yrs RSP in a contest from you last yr. Definitely found out it was worth buying, just got this yrs!!”

-Mark Caneva

“Purchased @MattWaldman RSP last night. Barely scratched the surface. Much more depth than I expected.”

-Nate Hodges

I can tell you that I’m not exaggerating when I describe the RSP, but it’s like telling someone what ‘hot’ feels like if they’ve never experienced the sensation. So if you’re reading these behind the scenes posts and wondering whether to make the jump, what I can tell you is that I’ve been doing this for eight years and other than the rare person who expected this to be an analysis of prospects at every position, most tell me the RSP exceeded their expectations.

What You Should Know About My Rankings Process

I have five steps that help me develop my rankings. They are each a process in their own right.  If I were working for an NFL team as a decision-maker in this capacity it would be six, but I’m a one-man band and I don’t interview prospects that often. I also don’t have resources to hire a PI firm.

These steps aren’t meant to impress you. I don’t have the end-all, be-all rankings. I think they are helpful and entertaining, but the act of ranking players is a troublesome process without a specific team philosophy in mind.

Evaluating player performance is difficult because you have to try to objectify a lot of subjective material. There are also times where you don’t get to see a specific skill from a player because of game situations or the system featuring the player. How to factor this into an evaluation process that ends with a ranking is challenging.

Despite its problematic nature, these processes help me learn more about the game, the players, and my strengths and weaknesses as an evaluator. If you want to learn more about the steps, read the beginning of this post.

Predicting My Errors in Judgment Three Years From Now

If I were to guess three years from now where I will err with my rankings, I believe it will be that I ranked Gavin Escobar too high and both Joseph Fauria and Ryan Griffin too low. I can see reversing the order of their ranking because I think Griffin is more athletic than some realize and Escobar much less when it comes to blocking – an important aspects of the game that many project Escobar will get better.

Griffin made plays as a receiver that I thought were as impressive as Escobar and he’s a better blocker right now. I also thought Griffin was asked to make tougher plays as a receiver where Escobar was often fed the ball in ways that generate easy yards. Not that I could fault Escobar with smart play calling, which is why I have him over Griffin and Fauria. It’s just something I feel and I behind the scenes take that I’m sharing.

From the gut: Fauria is underrated. From my analysis: I had to underrate him. Photo by Neon Tommy.
From the gut: Fauria is underrated. From my analysis: I had to underrate him. Photo by Neon Tommy.

When I first watched Fauria, I had a gut feeling that he would be a good NFL prospect. I think there’s a good chance he’ll prove that he’s athletic enough to block and become an every-down tight end – not just a red zone receiver. There were several plays over the years where I saw Fauria make that one move that I didn’t think he’d be able to make. It was either a cut block, sinking his hips on a hard break, or an adjustment to the ball in an area that belied his size.

Again, this was a gut feeling and not a reason enough for me to rank him ahead of Escobar. I wanted to do it. If Fauria is matched with team where it looks like a good fit, I might make the adjustment.

I Could Have Ranked Him Higher, But My Conscience Wouldn’t Let Me

I’m talking about Zach Ertz. Based on my system of adding skill sets, Ertz has enough starter and committee level skills for me to make a reasonable argument for him 3-6 spots higher in my rankings. The higher it went, the more it would have been a stretch, but I think I could have made a convincing argument to everyone but myself.  The reason is that there were too many skill sets where I could have placed Ertz in the reserve tier instead of the committee tier: vision, balance, blocking, and power.

Ertz may go high, but I did't love his game enough to match that projection in my rankings. Photo by Han Shot First.
Ertz may go high, but I didn’t love his game enough to match that projection in my rankings. Photo by Han Shot First.

His balance is already a skill set that I gave a reserve-caliber ranking and to me that’s a red flag. Great football players – especially those who handle the ball have excellent balance. Ertz is a somewhat high-cut athlete in the first place and most high-cut guys lack great balance.

I think Ertz has potential as a situational receiver, which isn’t a bad thing at all in the scheme of having pro potential. I just have difficulty projecting him as a top-tier prospect at his position in this class despite the fact that he’s likely to earn a that kind of pick.

I Still Like These Guys

Western Kentucky’s Jack Doyle isn’t fast and he looks ungainly for his 6’5″, 253-pound frame. He’ll never be a stud athlete who can become a major threat in the NFL. However, he plays a smart game, he’s tough (he was sick the entire week of practice at the Senior Bowl), and he can catch the football. Fantasy owners will probably never have reason to pick him except as a reserve in the deepest of leagues where tight ends are a premium. Yet, just the fact that I can imagine they might have that future value is another indication that I think he’ll be one of those guys who might force his dreams to die a hard death and carves out a spot.

Zach Sudfeld of Nevada has enough athleticism where I think he could surprise. His 6’7″ frame and soft hands make him a nice option on seams, fades, and corner routes. He’s also a fluid receiver who displays comfort in tight coverage. I also think his blocking is underrated. It’s definitely better than the likes of  Jordan Reed, Chris Gragg, Gavin Escobar, and Zach Ertz – all players I ranked ahead of Sudfeld. If health is no longer a question mark, I wouldn’t be surprised if he becomes a competent reserve who sees time in a starting lineup.

For analysis of skill players in this year’s draft class, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio available April 1. Prepayment is available now. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

Reads Listens Views 4/5/2013

[youtube=http://youtu.be/M0V3M6yM3_w]

Would Josh Gordon have been the top option in the 2013 draft class if his college career wasn’t filled with off-field missteps? I thought he was an option in the late-first to early-second rounds of 2012 rookie drafts, which would have placed him in the conversation with this year’s class. If you wish to take a liberal perspective and count his first year in Cleveland as his “senior year,” considering hadn’t played football the year before, then I think it’s a fair argument to make that Cleveland did well with its supplemental pick. I think they make a good argument that he’s better than any receiver in the 2013 class. It may not be true, but the fact there’s a valid argument makes it good enough.

Listens

[youtube=http://youtu.be/p4ASTMFN-h4]

Roger Ebert

You probably heard that Roger Ebert passed away yesterday. He was a cultural icon. I hope you read his amazing blog, which he was transforming into a project expected to go online next week called Ebert Digital. Actually, if there is one piece I recommend you read this week that is not about football, it’s this Chris Jones profile of Ebert published in Esquire almost 26 months ago. It’s one of the great magazine profiles I’ve read.

Thank You

It has been a few weeks since I’ve posted a Reads Listens Views. For those of you new to the RSP blog, I write this type of post most Friday’s. It’s my chance to link to other fantastic football and non-football content. Most of all it’s a chance to thank you.

And it feels like it has been a while since I’ve posted a Friday piece, so I owe you a long overdue word of thanks. The response to the 2013 RSP has been phenomenal. A lot of kind words via email, Twitter, and a few posted on the blog, too. I will update readers later this year when I send the pledged percentage 10 percent of each saleto Darkness to Light.

If you haven’t bought the RSP before, do yourself a favor. Once you do you’ll understand why it is becoming a Rite of Football Spring for those who want the goods on skill position players entering the NFL draft.

Football Reads


Views

[youtube=http://youtu.be/WfwNmpRB8-4]

For a run-oriented era by comparison of today’s pass-happy NFL, there’s some fancy pitching and catching between Ken Anderson and Isaac Curtis. The YouTube commentary is also worth a read from it’s writer with the handle “The Bengals Mind” :

Isaac Curtis had world class speed running a 9.30 seconds in the 100 yard dash making him faster then the legendary Jesse Owens who ran it in 9.40 seconds. To help put that in a even better prospective Usain Bolt can run the 100 yard dash in the 8.9 range meaning Curtis was only around .4(Four Tenths of a Second) slower than Usain Bolt. He was also a superb clutch catcher but even more importantly was how the soft spoken Curtis handled himself on and off the field. Kenny Anderson made it no secret that Curtis was his favorite target saying that when ever he was in trouble he would throw it to Curtis knowing he would catch it.

In the 1973 draft, most experts had Steve Holden as the best wide receiver coming out of college but Paul Brown had Isaac Curtis as the number one wide receiver prospect. So when Paul selected Isaac Curtis with the 15th overall pick, the Cleveland Browns organization and fans celebrated as it allowed them to draft Steve Holden with the 16th pick. They told Paul Brown that “they couldn’t figure out why he took Isaac” and Brown said “I may be 65 but I think I still know talent when I see it.” By the end of his rookie year, Paul Brown was already comparing him to Paul Warfield. Ironic, since Isaac Curtis had some of his best games against the Browns.

Non-Football Reads

ViewsHow to Truly Listen (H/T to Joe Bryant)

[youtube=http://youtu.be/IU3V6zNER4g]

 For analysis of skill players in this year’s draft class, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio available April 1. Prepayment is available now. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

Behind the Scenes Thoughts on Running Backs in 2013 RSP

Lacy wasn't the back I liked the most, but he was the best fit as the RSP's No.1 back  in 2013. Photo by Mike Pettigano.
Lacy wasn’t the back I liked the most, but he was the best fit as the RSP’s No.1 back in 2013. Photo by Mike Pettigano.

In case you were on a covert mission in the jungles of southeast Asia to save the world from a mad scientist hunkered down in a secret lair who was just a step away from bringing the world to the brink of chemical warfare, the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio is now available for download. The RSP won’t save the world, but it will have draftniks and fantasy owners ready to hunker down in their “war rooms.”

It earned me a seat “On the Couch” to talk shop the other night with my friends Sigmund Bloom and Cecil Lammey. You can listen to the episode here. It’s worth it alone to hear Lammey articulate his thoughts on running backs.

I occasionally get time have off-air chats on the couch with Sigmund Bloom. While his excellent show has a title that smartly plays off his first name, Bloom is more like the Gertude Stein of football talk. Rarely is there a conversation that we don’t arrive at an idea to explore. This ranges from writing about the emotional-intellectual transition players have to make from the college game to the NFL ( Talent and Production: The Great Emotional Divide), to the RSP Writers Project.

Last week I was sharing some of my rankings with Bloom prior to publishing the RSP. He suggested I share my thoughts on the ranking process with specific players – a behind the scenes retelling of my thoughts and feelings about players that delves deeper than their actual ranking and detailing of skills and potential.

What You Should Know About My Rankings Process

I have five steps that help me develop my rankings. They are each a process in their own right.  If I were working for an NFL team as a decision-maker in this capacity it would be six, but I’m a one-man band and I don’t interview people that often. I also don’t have resources to hire a PI firm.

These steps aren’t meant to impress you. I don’t have the end-all, be-all rankings. I think they are helpful and entertaining, but the act of ranking players is a troublesome process without a specific team philosophy in mind.

Evaluating player performance is difficult because you have to try to objectify a lot of subjective material. There are also times where you don’t get to see a specific skill from a player because of game situations or the system featuring the player. How to factor this into an evaluation process that ends with a ranking is challenging.

Despite its problematic nature, these processes help me learn more about the game, the players, and my strengths and weaknesses as an evaluator.

Stepfan Taylor by Han Shot First
I like Stepfan Taylor, but I liked his offensive line a lot more. Photo by Han Shot First.

The Method to the Madness of the Rankings Turnstile 

Sharing what I just did helps me provide some context about my rankings. Especially when I’m about to drop these kind of statements on you:

  • Two running backs were neck-and-neck for the No. 1 spot but one of them could have easily been third on my list and a third player if healthy, would have topped both of my final candiates.
  • One player dropped two over a dozen spots as I cycled through my process.
  • There were no less than five players spent moments at the top of my receiving rankings (This is for another article).

Developing RSP rankings is a series of steps that at first yields a rough ranking that I refine as I complete each process. I’ll eventually get to a point where the differences are small enough that I’m making more subjective calls because the differences in skill are minimal or the styles are divergent enough that you have to make a call on which style is most favorable to the broadest range of teams.

A good example is Eddie Lacy and Giovani Bernard. After note play-by-play detail and complete a position checklist, I perform a skills breakdown. The checklist is designed to say whether or not the player demonstrated an ability to perform these skills of the position to a minimal level of expectation that I estimate is “NFL-worthy.”

The skills breakdown is designed to evaluate “how good” the player performs these skills:

  • Star-caliber
  • Starter
  • Committee/Contributor
  • Reserve
  • Free Agent
  • Deficient

Lacy’s skill ratings by order of these categories was 1-6-3-0-0-0. Bernard’s was 1-7-2-0-0-0. On the surface, Bernard has 8 skills on the high-end of proficiency (star or starter) to Lacy’s 7. However using this info to rank players isn’t just a matter of who has more high-end skills and who has less.

It’s important to know which skills are ranked the highest. If Bernard’s two lowest-ranked skills are essential parts of carrying the football then depending what they are, it could make his rating less attractive to Lacy’s if the Alabama runner’s lowest-ranked skills are not as essential to core productivity.

In this case, Lacy’s lowest scores were his pass protection, receiving, and ball security. Bernard’s were power and pass protection. All of these “low” scores were at what I consider the “committee” tier, which isn’t really that low at all. Still, these were Lacy and Bernard’s weakest points as players.

Once I determine the tiers where these skill sets belong, I note how likely this player can improve upon this skill. This year, I provided charts in the RSP publication that illustrate how likely I think it is for the average pro prospect to improve in each skill area of his position.

As with any process that is trying to distill subjective elements into some level of objectivity, this is just a guideline.

For instance, it’s difficulty for many tight ends to execute hard breaks compared to wide receivers. Those that don’t already demonstrate the ability to do it at the college level often have a tougher time with it at the pro level. However, this is not always the case. If I’m watching a tight end demonstrate skills to make lateral cuts as a ball carrier where he drops his hips to change direction, then he is mimicking a lot of the motion one would see in a hard break.

Since his athleticism will likely translate to learning hard breaks, I’ll consider this as something that he can learn. There has to be some opportunity to account for exceptions.

Back to Bernard and Lacy. In their case, my process brought me to the obvious: They are both talented backs with opposite styles. This might seem like a lot of work for me to arrive at something that my wife and daughter – who aren’t fans – saw just by watching two different highlight videos.

However, the process also helps me make sure there are no major differences in talent level so I can feel sure that I’m at a point where I have to make a call that is more about style and fit than substance and talent. In the case of Lacy vs. Bernard, the Alabama runner does his best work between the tackle and his power is one of his notable strengths while the North Carolina back can dictate a defender’s angle of pursuit and exploit it.

Personally, Bernard appeals more to my sensibilities when it comes to runners. I love what he can do as a receiver and he has enough balance and strength to be a functional runner between the tackles. It’s possible he could get even better. Like Ray Rice, if Bernard adds more weight to his core, which could enhance his strength and explosiveness, we might be looking at a bell cow back in a few years.

What ultimately put Lacy over the top for me was his power. Although not as dynamic as Bernard, Lacy can catch the ball, make defenders miss, and flash some speed in the open field. The strength to run through tackles and bounce off hits at the line of scrimmage made Lacy a more attractive option for the widest range of teams.

So if you assume I like Lacy more you’d be wrong. I like Bernard more. However, the aim of the RSP liked Lacy best. In fact ,Jonathan Franklin and my No.4 runner had enough skill to make my top four players a grouping that is close.

If  Marcus Lattimore’s Health Was Not An Issue

The South Carolina would have easily been the top player on my running back board. I could have easily made Lattimore my No.3 runner. To be honest, I thought about placing him No.1 on my board and telling you guys to figure out how much his injury devalues him in your eyes. I realized that would be a cop-out, so I did my best to gauge the risk-reward.

Within the realism of my pre-draft rankings, one could make a good argument that he’s worth taking higher than where I ranked him.

Ellington's game made me angry. Photo by PDA Photo.
Ellington’s game made me angry. Photo by PDA Photo.

Difficult to Rank

If you think those players were difficult to gauge, try Clemson runner Andre Ellington. I spent 20-30 hours trying to figure out where he belonged in my rankings and the more I watched Ellington, the angrier I got. His low 40-time had nothing to do with my frustration. If anything, it was a backhanded positive that the guy could pull up lame and still run a 4.61.

What irked me was Ellington’s strength, balance, and blocking. In the open field, Ellington has nice displays of balance. I didn’t see the same instances of balance on more ordinary runs where quality backs – even lead backs known most for their skills in space such as C.J. Spiller – earn more yards after contact.

Ellington’s effort as a blocker was high, but his skill was not up to snuff. I had to go back and watch additional games of Ellington to feel I was on solid ground with my assessment. Even now, I can see how he could outplay where I rank him but I’d be even less surprised if I ranked him too high.

Arkansas runner Dennis Johnson was also no fun to rank. I still have concerns that his power will translate to the NFL. A 5-6 bowling ball, Johnson lacks the agility and vision that makes Maurice Jones-Drew special. I had to watch him multiple times beyond my initial research and I wouldn’t be surprised if I have him too high on my board as a contributor with sneaky lead back potential.

Scary-Easy Decisions

Joseph Randle. Cecil Lammey’s assessment of Randle was close to mine and I think Lammey had more equanimity to his assessment than how I felt about the Oklahoma State runner. It was so easy to slot Randle in a group of players who didn’t come close to his production, I’m still a little nervous that I missed something with his game. The problem is that I felt like there was nothing difficult about assessing his skill.

Spencer Ware. I could have ranked him higher because his pass protection is already decent for a college running back and based on what I saw it will improve fast. The scary part is that there is no 40 or shuttle time on him of record. I like to have these, especially when ranking a player as high as I placed Ware. At the same time, watching him get outside on non-pitch plays and use quick cuts to work around SEC defenders tells me that Ware could run the 40 in 4.7 and be an effective back.

Big Drops

Ray Graham. I love watching Ray Graham. You can hear from the podcast I referenced at the beginning that my fellow writers Bloom and Lammey love Graham. I just couldn’t bring put him any higher than I did at the end of the process. There was a point he was about 6-7 spots higher, but the tendency to use – and in my opinion, lean heavily on – cuts where he had to come to a complete stop to change direction hurt his potential.

This is a huge habit of Graham’s and not some small part of his game and I have concerns that he’ll have difficulty eliminating it from his game if he’s not quick enough to make defenders miss. Combined with power that I thought was average at best, I think there’s too much hope I’m feeling for Graham to improve upon than realistically expecting it.

Stepfan Taylor. His lateral agility is excellent and I think Lammey’s take on this is good. I didn’t see enough acceleration to his game to get excited about him. I think Taylor is a good college back capable of producing at the NFL level, but never a fixture as a lead back.

For analysis of skill players in this year’s draft class, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio available April 1. Prepayment is available now. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

The Elusiveness Factor: Patterson-Austin-Woods By Nick Whalen

Who is more elusive, Cordarrelle Patterson or Tavon Austin? Photo by Nashville Corps.
Who is more elusive, Cordarrelle Patterson or Tavon Austin? Photo by Nashville Corps.

If you’re an NFL Draft junkie, this time of year feels like the weeks of anticipation leading to Christmas Day.  When I was a kid, recordings of previous NFL Drafts were my “cartoons before bedtime,” before this blessed event that always brought a sense of euphoria when it finally arrived.

I’m not normal.

But I seek solace in the fact that many of you know what I mean.  The 2013 NFL Draft has two bright, shiny toys in Cordarrelle Patterson and Tavon Austin. Yet like some of the most popular toys kids want for Christmas, they present some risks that are polarizing.

I’m not the Consumer Reports of college prospects. If you want a safety assessment regarding the risk of investing in them, go somewhere else. I want to explore what they do best: making collegiate defenders look silly trying to corral them in when they had the ball.

So for the past few weeks, I dove into film study that took more time than I feel comfortable divulging.  My fiancé literally thinks I’m nuts, but this is her first NFL Draft with me – so better she know now what she’s getting into. This piece has enough data collection on the back end that it could blow Mel Kiper so far back that he’d have no more product left in his hair.

Since Patterson and Austin are so good at making defenders miss, I wanted a third prospect to study that is considered an elusive receiver in the normal sense of the word. I chose Robert Woods. Here are the number of games and plays I watched of each player.*

  • Cordarrelle Patterson: 12 games/67 plays
  • Tavon Austin: 12 games/172 plays
  • Robert Woods: 15 games/138 plays

*Patterson and Austin’s games are from the 2012 season. Woods’ games were from 2011 and 2012 to match Austin’s sample size.

Plays like this one, where Woods has to make a diving effort and drops to the ground were among those discounted in Whalen's analysis. Photo by Neon Tommy.
Plays like this one, where Woods has to make a diving effort and drops to the ground were among those discounted in Whalen’s analysis. Photo by Neon Tommy.

In order to get as accurate of an assessment as I could, I opted to dismiss plays from my sample that put the player in a situation where he had no chance to make a defender miss.  These six types of plays didn’t count in my study (abbreviations in parenthesis for tables below):

  • Catching a touchdown in the end zone (TD-End).
  • Untouched/easy path to the end zone (TD-Easy).
  • Tackled by the defender upon making a reception (T/Rec).
  • Falling catch (F/Rec)
  • Falling out of bounds, slipping, or diving to the ground while making the catch near sideline (Side).
  • Exiting the boundary to preserve the clock in the appropriate game situation (Exit).
  • Designed runs from the backfield between the tackles (Int).

I also opted to dismiss Tavon Austin’s interior running plays when used from the backfield.  This way I could focus on all three players as ball carriers from the receiver position (jet sweeps, end-arounds, and reverses). “Total D” in the table is the number of plays dismissed from the analysis, which is subtracted from the “Watched” column to generate the Adjusted Total.

Name

TD-End

TD-Easy

T/Rec

F/Rec

Side

Exit

Int.

Total D

Watched

Adj. Total

Patterson

6

1

5

1

11

1

0

25

67

42

Austin

4

1

18

5

1

0

38

67

172

105

Woods

20

1

31

13

7

0

0

72

138

66

Woods has a very high number of catches where he was tackled during the catch reception or he fell upon making the catch.  This has to do with his combination of athleticism, the type of targets thrown his way and his lack of separation from defenders in some of these situations.

I counted players that were within a three-yard radius with a legitimate chance of making a tackle.

Clearly there is some subjectivity to how I did this, but I was as uniform with my process as I could:

  • If the defender was three yards behind the ball carrier, he’s not counted as a tackle attempt.
  • If the defender was three yards ahead and with no blocker in his way, I counted it as an attempt.
  • If a defender is being blocked, it had to be a distance of less than half a man and he had to have a true shot to attempt an arm on the ball carrier.

I used this data to calculate elusiveness on pass plays, run plays, punt returns, kick returns, and total plays.

Pass Plays

Name

Eluded

Receptions

Pct.

Patterson

27

16

169%

Austin

25

44

57%

Woods

24

66

36%

I didn’t expect Woods to be on par with Patterson or Austin, but for Patterson to have eluded more defenders on a fraction of the receptions that either Austin or Woods had is a fascinating number to see. It leaves one to wonder how much these numbers reflect the style or location of the play or if Patterson’s style of running after the catch is that much more efficient at making defenders miss.

Run Plays

Name

Eluded

Runs

Pct.

Patterson

23

17

135%

Austin

20

29

69%

Woods

3

2

150%

The number of Patterson’s defenders who missed him equals the total of Austin and Woods combined. Not much of a sample for Woods. For those of you interested in the outcome of Austin’s interior running plays, the Mountaineer made 24 defenders miss on 38 runs between the tackles that qualified.

Punt Returns

Name

Eluded

Returns

Pct.

Patterson

7

2

350%

Austin

27

8

338%

Woods

8

7

114%

Punt returns have been regarded as one of the easiest situations where a ball carrier can make a defender miss and the numbers across the board appear to reflect this notion.

Kick Returns

Name

Eluded

Returns

Pct.

Patterson

15

7

214%

Austin

17

24

71%

Woods

3

2

150%

 The sample size for Woods is too small to draw any reasonable conclusions. It is fascinating how much higher Patterson scores compared to Austin.

Total Plays

Name

Eluded

Eluded/Play

Pct.

Patterson

72

42

171%

Austin

89

105

85%

Woods

38

77

45%

The difference in how efficient these three players are with making defenders miss is startling. It’s hard to believe Austin and Woods combined still made fewer defenders miss than Patterson on a percentage-per-play basis.

Next let’s examine how these receivers made defenders miss.

  • Pressure cut: Fake one way and goes another while maintaining forward momentum.
  • Jump cut: Jumps to a side to avoid defender, but no forward momentum.
  • Speed:  Runs by a defender, outruns pursuit angle, or runs around defender.
  • Power: Runs through a contact tackle attempt by moving forward through defender.
  • Spin: Runs through contact or no-contact tackle attempt by spinning around defender.
  • Hurdle: Jumps over a defenders tackle attempt

On many plays I watched, these receivers used multiple methods in combination to make a defender miss them.  I selected the one method each used that was the biggest factor.

“Power,” may seem like it shouldn’t belong on this list, but I think it’s important to note plays where the ball carrier diminished a defender’s position to reduce the contact to a glancing blow, an arm tackle, or the runner attacked first and made contact with an off-balance defender.

Here are the types of moves this trio of receivers used to make defenders miss tackles.

Pass

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

6

5

3

2

1

10

27

Austin

6

5

7

3

0

4

25

Woods

4

4

7

2

0

7

24

The number of plays where Patterson and Woods bounced off a glancing blow from a defender matches what one might expect from their size compared to Austin. However, Patterson’s repertoire and frequency of other moves is as prolific in every way with the exception of the speed route.

This just speculation, but from what I have seen, Patterson was often targeted in tighter coverage than the likes of Austin. The slot receiver was a frequent target on crossing routes where the speed component of elusiveness would come into play. In contrast, Patterson played in a system where he ran slants, fades, and other perimeter routes breaking back to the quarterback, which forced him to run through glancing shots. Woods, a receiver in a west coast offense, ran a lot of crosses, fades, and slants and the variety of moves falls between Austin and Patterson.

Run

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

7

9

4

0

0

3

23

Austin

3

7

6

0

0

4

20

Woods

3

0

0

0

0

0

3

The use of power in the run game was slightly in favor of Austin. This might be explained by the frequency the West Virginia used Austin as a runner, making the plays a common part of every series so defenses were in better position to force contact.

Punt

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

2

5

0

0

0

0

7

Austin

5

3

15

3

0

1

27

Woods

0

4

3

1

0

0

8

Kick

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

9

2

3

0

0

1

15

Austin

5

1

8

0

0

3

17

Woods

1

0

1

0

1

0

3

It’s no surprise that the nature of a punt return would allow for more jump cuts and spin moves than a kick off.

Total Touches

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

24

16

10

2

1

19

72

Austin

19

16

36

6

0

12

89

Woods

8

8

11

3

1

7

38

Considering what I speculated about the type of moves these players use, I also examined the depth of the zone where these players made receptions:

  • Short: Anything caught from behind the line of scrimmage to 7 yards.
  • Intermediate: Receptions greater than 7 yards but less than 20 yards.
  • Deep: 20 yards or more.

For example, if a player advances a reception from the 5 yard line to the 40 yard line, it will still be counted as a short reception.

Range of Field Where Plays Began

Name

Short

Int.

Deep

Total

Patterson

10

6

0

16

Austin

42

3

1

46

Woods

58

3

2

63

Nothing unexpected thus far, the most opportunity to elude a defender after the catch occurs in the zones of the field with the highest concentration of defenders.

Types of Moves by Range of Field – Short Zone

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

3

4

1

0

0

4

12

Austin

6

5

5

3

0

3

22

Woods

4

4

6

1

0

7

22

The sample for Patterson is roughly half that of his peers, but it appears he leans more on power and jump cuts than Austin in the short range of the field. Again, is this due to style or play? A screen pass or slant would call for more jump cuts than a crossing route. It would also include more power moves.

Types of Moves by Range of Field – Intermediate Zone

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

3

1

2

2

1

6

15

Austin

0

0

2

0

0

0

2

Woods

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

One of the reasons for the difference in elusiveness appears to be use. Austin’s opportunity to make plays in the open field on intermediate routes was limited in this 12-game sample. Woods’ was non-existent. Based on observation, Woods’ intermediate plays tend to be outs, comebacks, corner routes, or fades with either tight coverage or the catch hugging the sideline.

Still, Patterson has had some of these style routes and demonstrated a level of athleticism above and beyond Woods to generate additional yards –not enough to make this a definitive explanation for the difference in this sample, but something to think about.

Types of Moves by Range of Field – Deep Zone

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Austin

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

Woods

0

0

1

1

0

0

2

When successful, deep zone plays offer fewer defenders to beat. At the same time deep plays often require adjustments that either result in an unchallenged run to the end zone or the play is down after the catch due to the adjustment or tight coverage.

Woods may lack the elusiveness factor of Patterson and Austin, but his game translates best to the widest range of NFL teams. Photo by Neon Tommy.
Woods may lack the elusiveness factor of Patterson and Austin, but his game translates best to the widest range of NFL teams. Photo by Neon Tommy.

Takeaway

Patterson has made more defenders miss on fewer plays than Austin and Woods. To the naked eye, the Tennessee wide receiver’s open field skills are at a level above the rest of the wide receiver class. It also appears this way when looking at it from this perspective. However, tracking these players in this fashion has also revealed that the type of plays used have a significant influence on the types of moves these players employ and likely the success.

It also raises questions about the type of moves that will or won’t work against NFL defenses. Patterson’s is neither as polished as Woods nor as versatile as Austin. It means that one of two things will have to happen for Patterson to enjoy similar success in the NFL:

  1. Patterson will need to sharpen his route running.
  2. His seemingly other-worldly, open-field skills at the college level will have to translate to the NFL.

All three receivers are fine NFL prospects. This breakdown goes to show that each player has a stylistic fingerprint. Some of these styles may or may not work in the NFL. Others may work best in a specific scheme. Then there are some that have a chance to work regardless of the offense.

Woods may not make as many players miss as Austin or Patterson, but his skill as a route runner and pass catcher should make him a fit in any NFL system. Woods’ big plays come from the catch itself more often than after it.

Austin might show us a facet of his game that wasn’t used much at West Virginia, but it’s more likely that he’ll be a short-to-intermediate threat whose big plays come after the catch. It means he’ll have to become a high-volume receiver in the NFL with the versatility to contribute as a runner is packages that include screens, draws, toss plays and jet sweeps.

Patterson has the physical dimensions, budding skills, and experience to earn a living like Woods, but his special skill for creating after the catch at a higher level could make him a Pro-Bowl player, but if his skill at making defenders miss diminishes versus the enhanced athleticism of the NFL and he doesn’t compensate by learning the techniques that Woods displays to get open, the Tennessee wunderkind could flop. For Patterson it might come down to how special his elusiveness is and this sample reveals it might be good enough.

You can follow Nick Whalen on Twitter @_NickWhalen

For analysis of skill players in this year’s draft class, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio available April 1. Prepayment is available now. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

Futures: Unknown, Unsung, and Underappreciated

There's a player in this draft who reminds me of Cruz in the sense that he's an unknown and underrated. Photo by Football Schedule.
There’s a player in this draft who reminds me of Cruz in the sense that he’s an unknown and underrated. Photo by Football Schedule.

When you’re in my line of work, the most memorable players are often the unknowns, the underappreciated, and the underdogs. One of the most memorable for me was a player I watched in September 2006, whose performance against a top-ranked Tennessee Volunteers defense was so good that it belied his 24-carry, 72-yard box-score entry.

Here’s what I wrote about him in my game notes:

This was an impressive performance for [prospect], who
demonstrated unequivocally that he is a tough, physical back than can carry the load and get the difficult yardage as well as break the play outside or beat defenders in the open field with his moves and quickness. He rarely went down on the first hit unless the defender made a perfect form tackle.

It’s very impressive how low he can run in short yardage situations to get 2-3 tough yards against stacked defenses. Players bounced off [prospect] repeatedly in this game. This was one of the more impressive efforts I saw from a back all year.

These are notes meant for my own use, otherwise I would have found an appropriate synonym for “impressive,” so I didn’t use it three times in a five-sentence span. This 5-foot-11, 192-pound runner had one of my favorite performances of the year -– a year where Adrian Peterson and Marshawn Lynch were the headliners at running back for the 2007 NFL Draft.

Like most, Lynch and Peterson were my top two backs. However this runner, who wowed me despite a sub-par yardage day, was ranked fourth in my pre-draft rankings. In 2007, 25 running backs went off the board.

Ahmad Bradshaw –- that No. 4 back on my board –- was the last runner taken in the draft; the 40th pick in the seventh round, going 250th overall. If we look at current career production, I was wrong about Bradshaw as my No. 4 back.

He has actually been the third-most productive runner from this draft class.

Players like these are memorable because let’s face it, unknown, unsung, and underappreciated usually means undrafted and unemployed. When a late-round or undrafted player makes his mark, it appeals to the part of us that roots for the underdog.

Whether it’s the small-school prospect with the big-time game, the well-known player whose skills are even better than advertised, or the overshadowed longshot with shocking moments of excellence, my favorite part of studying college prospects is watching talent that flies below the national radar.

Bradshaw’s obstacles towards reaching the NFL radar were injuries, off-field immaturity, and a B-list college program. I can think of others who fit the bill.

Victor Cruz was a small-school prospect with a big-time game. Ray Rice was a well-known college star who proved he was big enough, quick enough, and skilled enough to get the job done as a pro. Priest Holmes and Terrell Davis are great examples of talents that toiled in supporting roles behind talented teammates like Ricky Williams and Garrison Hearst after injuries cost them chances of earning more playing time.

My publication, the Rookie Scouting Portfolio, is a pre-draft analysis of offensive skill players that I publish April 1. (It also has a post-draft addendum.) What I enjoy the most about the April 1 publication is the opportunity to generate rankings where “draft stock” carries little to no weight. It’s a chance to focus more on the talent and less on the business.

This week, I’m sharing one unknown, one unsung, and one underappreciated prospect from my 2013 RSP analysis. I believe each prospect has the talent to out-perform his draft stock. These are excerpts from this year’s RSP that have been re-purposed for this column. It’s a small preview of what you’ll find in the publication.

Read the Rest at Football Outsiders