Rate The Rookies

[rich7sena]

Quote: Originally Posted by moylan

I think you made him a little too fast the 40 time I've seen for him is 4.97. Also, what throw motion would you give him? I read an article that claims his was styled after Brady by his personal coach, but I've seen some other opinions too

He always seemed relatively athletic to me when he played (ran the Baylor's read option), though he certainly isn't a runner.

I don't think he has a Brady's release. Garoppolo has a really quick 3/4 release, unlike Brady's over-the-top launch. Looks wise, I think his release mimics Aaron Rodgers, but he doesn't have the same arm strength or consistent accuracy.

[brettmickey]

Quote: Originally Posted by XXstormmXX

I believe in high ratings across the board so here's my QB ratings. Blake Bortles, 85 OVR Manziel, 81 OVR Carr, 80 OVR Savage, 75 OVR Murray, 73 OVR Bridgewater, 63 OVR

This is insane to me. Bridgewater 63? Bortles 85? I personally watched all of these players in multiple games. Teddy has the best tape of any quarterback in the draft followed by Manziel and Bortles with Carr just behind Blake. Blake shouldn't be an 85 when he is more potential than skill at this point in his development. Let him prove your 85 rating before handing it to him. No quarterback in this draft is pro-ready enough for an 85 off the bat. That's Andrew Luck territory. Sorry but this rankings list looks like it's straight from ESPN.
As far as the top 4, I would go with:
Bridgewater 80
Manziel 80
Bortles 78
Carr 77
There is a pretty obvious drop-off after these four

[XXstormmXX]

Quote: Originally Posted by brettmickey

This is insane to me. Bridgewater 63? Bortles 85? I personally watched all of these players in multiple games. Teddy has the best tape of any quarterback in the draft followed by Manziel and Bortles with Carr just behind Blake. Blake shouldn't be an 85 when he is more potential than skill at this point in his development. Let him prove your 85 rating before handing it to him. No quarterback in this draft is pro-ready enough for an 85 off the bat. That's Andrew Luck territory. Sorry but this rankings list looks like it's straight from ESPN. As far as the top 4, I would go with: Bridgewater 80 Manziel 80 Bortles 78 Carr 77 There is a pretty obvious drop-off after these four

I'm mainly going by combine stats and pro days, that's why. Game tape is inaccurate for rating players because then players who played against bad competition will be ranked the same as players who played against top competition.

[brettmickey]

Quote: Originally Posted by XXstormmXX

I'm mainly going by combine stats and pro days, that's why. Game tape is inaccurate for rating players because then players who played against bad competition will be ranked the same as players who played against top competition.

What? When has combine stats and pro day performances ever translated well to the NFL?? The eye in the sky does not lie. It's not hard to take into account the level of competition a quarterback is going against. You still look at the throws where he is pressured or the windows he can fit the ball in.

The combine/pro day does NOT say anything about a quarterback's ability to throw an 18 yard comeback route with a 320 pound DT closing in on him. The combine/pro day does NOT show if a quarterback goes through a full-field progression, half-field progression, or 3-step read progression. The tape does show all that which is critical. No NFL scout will tell you the combine or pro day is as important as the game tape. It simply is not logical to base anything football related on a guy running around in shorts without a defense/offense to go against and dissect.

[XXstormmXX]

Quote: Originally Posted by brettmickey

What? When has combine stats and pro day performances ever translated well to the NFL?? The eye in the sky does not lie. It's not hard to take into account the level of competition a quarterback is going against. You still look at the throws where he is pressured or the windows he can fit the ball in. The combine/pro day does NOT say anything about a quarterback's ability to throw an 18 yard comeback route with a 320 pound DT closing in on him. The combine/pro day does NOT show if a quarterback goes through a full-field progression, half-field progression, or 3-step read progression. The tape does show all that which is critical. No NFL scout will tell you the combine or pro day is as important as the game tape. It simply is not logical to base anything football related on a guy running around in shorts without a defense/offense to go against and dissect.

No, game tape is the most important for NFL scouts but if we only use game tape, basically any QB who plays in a cupcake conference will have amazing ratings. For example, if we only go by game tape, Jimmy Goroppolo would be the highest rated player in the game because he completely destroyed the weak competition of the FCS.

[brettmickey]

Quote: Originally Posted by XXstormmXX

No, game tape is the most important for NFL scouts but if we only use game tape, basically any QB who plays in a cupcake conference will have amazing ratings. For example, if we only go by game tape, Jimmy Goroppolo would be the highest rated player in the game because he completely destroyed the weak competition of the FCS.

I almost exclusively stuck to game tape when evaluating these quarterbacks myself and I had no problem putting Garoppolo as the 6th best quarterback. You confuse game tape evaluation with comparing statistics. Numbers never lie, but they never tell the whole story.

For example, say Tajh Boyd had 300 yards passing in a game with 3 touchdowns and a pick. Sounds good right? Well it isn't quite as impressive if he had a 65 yard touchdown to a wide open Sammy Watkins because the corner fell down in coverage and another 50 yard touchdown to Martavis Bryant because there was blown coverage and the safety dropped in the box instead of covering deep.

Also, the process in which the quarterback finds his targets is important. I've seen Teddy make full-field reads. You can literally see his head go from the primary receiver, to the secondary receiver, to the backside receiver or tight end, and finally check it down to the back if all else fails. I saw Jimmy making simple 3 step reads (primary receiver, check down, run/throw the ball away). Because of this, his mental progression is behind Teddy currently. Can he improve and catch up mentally? That remains to be seen, but he could. All I know is that Teddy is already capable of that.

Because of this, we would not rate Jimmy the highest quarterback in the class. It isn't about how many touchdowns and yards you get, it's the process in which you get them. Any NFL quarterback can hit open receivers, the ones who can dissect a defense and have full control over their offense and game plan can become great. It is simply asinine to think a combine or pro day stacks up to a players actual resume which is his tape. It also doesn't take a genius to realize that at EIU Jimmy wasn't playing against top competition, everyone who evaluates takes that into account.

[DCEBB2001]

I think you all need to take a holistic approach to rating players. Use all of the data you can to evaluate a player. That is what REAL scouts do. They do not simply throw some stuff out and keep some of it in. Everything is regarded, albeit weighted unequally.

I urge you to take my word for it. I was a Big10 scout for NFLDS for 5 years while in college.

Most of the physical stuff can be quantified via the combine/pro day data, but most of the technical stuff is derived from game tape. The various drills that the prospects are put through are simply to attempt to verify what you see on film. Believe it or not, numbers don't always tell the whole story, but in reality, neither does the film.

You must incorporate both into your approach to rating players.

[brettmickey]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

I think you all need to take a holistic approach to rating players. Use all of the data you can to evaluate a player. That is what REAL scouts do. They do not simply throw some stuff out and keep some of it in. Everything is regarded, albeit weighted unequally. I urge you to take my word for it. I was a Big10 scout for NFLDS for 5 years while in college. Most of the physical stuff can be quantified via the combine/pro day data, but most of the technical stuff is derived from game tape. The various drills that the prospects are put through are simply to attempt to verify what you see on film. Believe it or not, numbers don't always tell the whole story, but in reality, neither does the film. You must incorporate both into your approach to rating players.

I completely agree. And that's what the combine and to a lesser effect the pro days are for. See the player's time on the 40 and it will confirm/question the players game speed. If it matches your evaluation then your belief on his game speed is confirmed. If it's surprisingly high/low you go back to the film and see if you missed something or if his athleticism doesn't completely translate when he wears pads.

But that's the thing, all these workouts simply supplement the tape. The tape outweighs everything. You want to know how good of a football player someone is? You watch him play. Of course, when two prospects are nearly equal, comparing the workout numbers can steer you to one or the other. But at the end of the day, evaluators get themselves into trouble when they fall in love with the numbers and push aside bad game tape.