Quote:I changed the position from S to CB. But the players were Taylor Mays and Earl Thomas.
Why is Thomas on the bad athlete side of this comparison? He had a somewhat subpar vertical, but we didn't get the agility drills and his 40/10 were the best in his class and this one.
Quote:Perfect example why spider charts and sparq metrics mean very very little.
Checking out the top pSparq rated CBs from 2014:
Stanley Jean Baptiste - 138.9 - Has played in 4 NFL games since being drafted in the second round waived by saints and lions - picked up by 'hawks
Torin Harris - 134.1 - undrafted - not in league
Dashaun Phillips - 134 - Has 2 career starts - 11 games played - 5 tackles - 0 passes defensed - 0 int
Keith McGill - 133.7 - converted to safety for the raiders where he is a special teamer with only 3 defensive starts and 2 passes defensed
Rishard Anderson - 131.1 - played in a handful of preseason games for the titans and got cut
Am I missing something here?
Quote:Checking out the top pSparq rated CBs from 2014:
Stanley Jean Baptiste - 138.9 - Has played in 4 NFL games since being drafted in the second round waived by saints and lions - picked up by 'hawks
Torin Harris - 134.1 - undrafted - not in league
Dashaun Phillips - 134 - Has 2 career starts - 11 games played - 5 tackles - 0 passes defensed - 0 int
Keith McGill - 133.7 - converted to safety for the raiders where he is a special teamer with only 3 defensive starts and 2 passes defensed
Rishard Anderson - 131.1 - played in a handful of preseason games for the titans and got cut
Am I missing something here?
You're not missing a thing. If you're feeling bored, keep a list of the names that KY keeps pimping and look back on them in a couple years.
The list will be similar to this one.
You guys are still on a crusade against numbers lol
Quote:You guys are still on a crusade against numbers lol
No, I think they're nailing it.
Don't let "numbers" tell you something that watching someone play football doesn't.
Quote:You guys are still on a crusade against numbers lol
It's impossible to beat into their heads that numbers AND film is an option...
Quote:It's impossible to beat into their heads that numbers AND film is an option...
are you trying to tell me scouting is a complex process that requires a vast amount of information from different avenues to come to a proper conclusion?
Quote:It's impossible to beat into their heads that numbers AND film is an option...
I thought that's what I was trying to convince
you of.
I weigh the film much greater than the numbers. Therein lies the difference. (Especially when it's some flukey metric with no actual discernible track record of success. )
Quote:I thought that's what I was trying to convince you of.
I weigh the film much greater than the numbers. Therein lies the difference. (Especially when it's some flukey metric with no actual discernible track record of success. )
I have been abundantly clear a thousand times on here that all parts are pieces of the puzzle, despite some fools trying to twist or put words in my mouth.
It's also not a scale, it's a filter. There is no 80% film 20% combine like Dave said. At least it's not for the progressive aka good teams.
Quote:There is no 80% film 20% combine like Dave said.
It's different for every individual player in that regard for me. I have no set percentage or ratio - but I very rarely have radical shifts in my perception or rating of players because of their combine performance unless it's just really horrendous.
Outside of Tabor - those CBs you claimed had bad outings were not "horrendous" at the combine and won't move much (if at all) for me.
And that "filter" is letting a lot of bad players through with high ratings while some good ones are rating low. I think it's broken.
Quote:It's different for every individual player in that regard for me. I have no set percentage or ratio - but I very rarely have radical shifts in my perception or rating of players because of their combine performance unless it's just really horrendous.
Outside of Tabor - those CBs you claimed had bad outings were not "horrendous" at the combine and won't move much (if at all) for me.
And that "filter" is letting a lot of bad players through with high ratings while some good ones are rating low. I think it's broken.
It's just playing the odds. Once they pass the filter then you see if they can play or not. Of course you'll miss some outliers, but overall you're better off.
Zach Whitman @zjwhitman Mar 6
Not all good athletes are good players
Very few poor athletes are good players
Most great players are great athletes
There's always room for someone to "fall in love" with a candidate, regardless of the film and/or the numbers (whether either are supportive or not.)
Those sting the worst.
![[Image: Geno-Smith.jpg]](https://yougabsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Geno-Smith.jpg)
Quote:There's always room for someone to "fall in love" with a candidate, regardless of the film and/or the numbers (whether either are supportive or not.)
Those sting the worst.
Their QB situation is a mess lol
Quote:are you trying to tell me scouting is a complex process that requires a vast amount of information from different avenues to come to a proper conclusion?
Yeah. If you read my previous posts you'll find plenty of evidence of me saying that the draft for me is majorly based on watching a player actually play. You'll see me say that the combine and measurements are a small percentage of your research. You'll also see me say that no matter how well prepared you are, it's still a crap shoot.
But if you want to think it's just a witch hunt against the numbers.... Take a look at the guys that KY was slamming his fists for... Geno, teddy, Vic Beasley are the only names that people really remember. Why? Because the players he falls in love with, he falls in love based on their spider charts and their sparq ratings. Most of the guys that are drafted higher based on their combines and charts go nowhere and flame out.
Beasley is honestly the best of the bunch and he's only has one good season so far. Sure there are exceptions, but for me, by rule, the game film is the most important. The combine is a small fraction.
I will say the combine helps expose things like Allen's arthritis. (Not to be confused with 2 shoulder surgeries with the rumor of a third secret surgery.) But to weigh it as highly as people are doing, talking about fournettes poor vert impacting him heavily? No. Get out of here with that. It's fantasy.
Edit: I'll also add that the combine is great for small school players that no one has heard of. Guys that you might not have film on. Guys that come over from other sports or other countries. Those are the type of guys where I would weigh the combine and pro days more heavily.