2010 NFL draft combine thread

[pbmax]

There are very few ways to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges for a significant number of draft picks. Watching game tape cannot give you more than just a sense of how much the events on tape are because of the player and how much was a result of the matchup or level of competition.

If a group of players are from the same big time conference, then you probably get a better feel, because of common opponents and high level of competition. But if a player has only started a year, or missed a common opponent game or plays in a non-BCS conference, then you may have very little tape of that player going up against top college competition.

The combine gives you data on how much raw athleticism was a part of that player's overall package. It cannot tell you how they will perform on the field like numerous, good and relevant tape will. But it provides a baseline of comparison that is independent of competition, scheme or matchup and give you a list of players with similar playing backgrounds and physical attributes for comparison. That may give you an idea of the potential.

In short, relying too much on the Combine might get you Mike Mamula. But ignoring the Combine numbers might get you Abdul Hodge in the 3rd.

[Smidgeon]

There are very few ways to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges for a significant number of draft picks. Watching game tape cannot give you more than just a sense of how much the events on tape are because of the player and how much was a result of the matchup or level of competition.

If a group of players are from the same big time conference, then you probably get a better feel, because of common opponents and high level of competition. But if a player has only started a year, or missed a common opponent game or plays in a non-BCS conference, then you may have very little tape of that player going up against top college competition.

The combine gives you data on how much raw athleticism was a part of that player's overall package. It cannot tell you how they will perform on the field if there is numerous good and relevant tape on the guy. But it provides a baseline of comparison that is independent of competition, scheme or matchup and give you a list of players with similar playing backgrounds and physical attributes for comparison. That may give you an idea of the potential.

In short, relying too much on the Combine might get you Mike Mamula. But ignoring the Combine numbers might get you Abdul Hodge in the 3rd.

And putting too much weight on the combine lets players like Jerry Rice drop in the 1st or Greg Jennings to the 2nd and pushes players like Gholston to the top where they don't belong.

[3irty1]

There are very few ways to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges for a significant number of draft picks. Watching game tape cannot give you more than just a sense of how much the events on tape are because of the player and how much was a result of the matchup or level of competition.

If a group of players are from the same big time conference, then you probably get a better feel, because of common opponents and high level of competition. But if a player has only started a year, or missed a common opponent game or plays in a non-BCS conference, then you may have very little tape of that player going up against top college competition.

The combine gives you data on how much raw athleticism was a part of that player's overall package. It cannot tell you how they will perform on the field if there is numerous good and relevant tape on the guy. But it provides a baseline of comparison that is independent of competition, scheme or matchup and give you a list of players with similar playing backgrounds and physical attributes for comparison. That may give you an idea of the potential.

In short, relying too much on the Combine might get you Mike Mamula. But ignoring the Combine numbers might get you Abdul Hodge in the 3rd.

And putting too much weight on the combine lets players like Jerry Rice drop in the 1st or Greg Jennings to the 2nd and pushes players like Gholston to the top where they don't belong.

It also pushes up guys like Chris Johnson or even Clay Mathews and drops slews of others out of the first round where they don't belong.

[Smidgeon]

There are very few ways to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges for a significant number of draft picks. Watching game tape cannot give you more than just a sense of how much the events on tape are because of the player and how much was a result of the matchup or level of competition.

If a group of players are from the same big time conference, then you probably get a better feel, because of common opponents and high level of competition. But if a player has only started a year, or missed a common opponent game or plays in a non-BCS conference, then you may have very little tape of that player going up against top college competition.

The combine gives you data on how much raw athleticism was a part of that player's overall package. It cannot tell you how they will perform on the field if there is numerous good and relevant tape on the guy. But it provides a baseline of comparison that is independent of competition, scheme or matchup and give you a list of players with similar playing backgrounds and physical attributes for comparison. That may give you an idea of the potential.

In short, relying too much on the Combine might get you Mike Mamula. But ignoring the Combine numbers might get you Abdul Hodge in the 3rd.

And putting too much weight on the combine lets players like Jerry Rice drop in the 1st or Greg Jennings to the 2nd and pushes players like Gholston to the top where they don't belong.

It also pushes up guys like Chris Johnson or even Clay Mathews and drops slews of others out of the first round where they don't belong.

We'll never know for certain, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if TT had Clay Matthews high on his list pre-Combine based on--oh, I don't know--scouting. I would think for the higher round picks that the Combine is mostly about reinforcing what scouts were already saying or trying to weed out red flags. The combine should be the garnish, not the main course.

[3irty1]

The combine is probably the most important event for any of these guys (save QBs, Kickers, Punters and such). The NFL draft is about potential and the combine tells us more about potential than anything else.

Disagree. Mostly because of what the source said to Peter King. If you're going into the combine without a clear idea (already) of who's better than whom, then I don't want you to be my team's GM.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...ons/index.html

Knowing whos better than whom is not the same as who's got more potential than whom. All of the mock drafts/big boards out there now take into account how people are expected to do at the combine. Meeting or exceeding expectations is the most important thing these individuals have to do once the season ends.

I agree that the combine is big for those players who will be drafted late. But I also believe the most important parts of the combine are the interviews and medical exams.

What? You think the combine is bigger for the second day guys than it is the first day guys? 6th and 7th rounders don't stand to lose millions. Yeah it might be more important from a GM or Mel Kiper standpoint where up until now you've only been able to do a 2 round mock draft at best. The combine is where the measurables are measured and that's pretty important when talking about prospects.

I'll quote the Florio line: "The only time a guy is going to use his 40 speed in a straight line is when something really good happens or really bad happens." A good GM has his board mostly set.

The reason I think the combine is more important for lower round picks is either because they came from a less competetive program and need the measurables to boost their stock or because they have to show they have the potential to do more than they did in school. The top prospects have already established their potential by performing in college.

The Combine is much more than a 40 time. Your 10 yard, bench press, jumps, cone tell just as much if not more depending on the position.

Top prospects also can have fall out of the first round based on a poor performance at the combine. Everett Brown, Dan Connor, and Dwayne Jarrett all come to mind.

[Smidgeon]

The combine is probably the most important event for any of these guys (save QBs, Kickers, Punters and such). The NFL draft is about potential and the combine tells us more about potential than anything else.

Disagree. Mostly because of what the source said to Peter King. If you're going into the combine without a clear idea (already) of who's better than whom, then I don't want you to be my team's GM.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...ons/index.html

Knowing whos better than whom is not the same as who's got more potential than whom. All of the mock drafts/big boards out there now take into account how people are expected to do at the combine. Meeting or exceeding expectations is the most important thing these individuals have to do once the season ends.

I agree that the combine is big for those players who will be drafted late. But I also believe the most important parts of the combine are the interviews and medical exams.

What? You think the combine is bigger for the second day guys than it is the first day guys? 6th and 7th rounders don't stand to lose millions. Yeah it might be more important from a GM or Mel Kiper standpoint where up until now you've only been able to do a 2 round mock draft at best. The combine is where the measurables are measured and that's pretty important when talking about prospects.

I'll quote the Florio line: "The only time a guy is going to use his 40 speed in a straight line is when something really good happens or really bad happens." A good GM has his board mostly set.

The reason I think the combine is more important for lower round picks is either because they came from a less competetive program and need the measurables to boost their stock or because they have to show they have the potential to do more than they did in school. The top prospects have already established their potential by performing in college.

The Combine is much more than a 40 time. Your 10 yard, bench press, jumps, cone tell just as much if not more depending on the position.

Top prospects also can have fall out of the first round based on a poor performance at the combine. Everett Brown, Dan Connor, and Dwayne Jarrett all come to mind.

And you think that scouts and GMs weren't aware of the limitations prior to the combine that dropped those pundits' "top picks" out of round 1? I think that as the offseason progresses and the combine and pro day and interviews progress, draft boards are being tweaked (and red flags can remove someone from a board entirely) but not overhauled. I think it'd be more accurate to say that it dropped those players from the pundits' round 1 mock drafts. My theory is that it's the armchair scouts' opinions and mock drafts that change the most and become closer to the professional scouts' opinions that already had the examples you mentioned downgraded from where Kiper was projecting.

Since none of us are professional scouts and it's all speculation anyway, both my theory and your theory fit the facts. But both viewpoints are unsubstantiated until you can study what personnel decision-makers are really thinking about prospects. The spreading of disinformation (see: Bush, Reggie vs Williams, Mario) means that we'll never know.

[Lurker64]

Well, I think the difference between professional scouts and draftniks is that at this point in the process, scouts don't have definite fixed opinions on guys and draftniks do. There's no point for a team to have a draft board filled out at this point, so they don't. However, there is a point for draftniks to have a draft board filled out, say, in October. So teams keep a very flexible outlook on players at this point and only note things that are more or less objectively true but vague from watching game tape (e.g. runs good routes, has good hands, good top speed, questionable acceleration) and the combine and pro day workouts simply serve to quantify these things. The most valuable parts of the combine by far are the interviews and the physical, but it certainly helpful to assign numbers to things you've already noticed from tape.

[Smidgeon]

Well, I think the difference between professional scouts and draftniks is that at this point in the process, scouts don't have definite fixed opinions on guys and draftniks do. There's no point for a team to have a draft board filled out at this point, so they don't. However, there is a point for draftniks to have a draft board filled out, say, in October. So teams keep a very flexible outlook on players at this point and only note things that are more or less objectively true but vague from watching game tape (e.g. runs good routes, has good hands, good top speed, questionable acceleration) and the combine and pro day workouts simply serve to quantify these things. The most valuable parts of the combine by far are the interviews and the physical, but it certainly helpful to assign numbers to things you've already noticed from tape.

This I agree with.

[3irty1]

I think everyone including NFL GMs and scouts have plenty of questions about these players (and so do you if you think the combine is powerful enough to get Gholston drafted 6th overall). The combine isn't held for draftniks. All the combine info is useful in judging the translation of players from college schemes and systems to NFL schemes and systems. Many of the things you want to know if these players can do they have never done before. Even just the environment created by the combine where every player is expected to show up in the best shape of their lives tells the story of their work ethics.

[swede]

The cone drill is big for identifying on the field quickness, and the vertical jumps and broad jumps are useful for determining leg strength. That stuff is obvious, I guess. When you're trying to set a draft board and looking at two similar players these numbers can help someone make a decision.

(Obviously, Raji's inability to turn a sub 5 40 didn't turn off TT. That's a long way to haul 300+ pounds.)

That said, ND has forgotten more about football then I'll ever know. If he thinks the combine is over-rated I'm guessing he has a pretty good reason why he thinks so.

If nothing else, I DVR the combines and go through them to learn the names and faces of the new guys to help make draft day more fun for me. Max Unger and Eric Wood were like my buddies by the time I had finished watching them go through their drills.

[packrulz]

The combine is probably the most important event for any of these guys (save QBs, Kickers, Punters and such). The NFL draft is about potential and the combine tells us more about potential than anything else.

Disagree. Mostly because of what the source said to Peter King. If you're going into the combine without a clear idea (already) of who's better than whom, then I don't want you to be my team's GM.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...ons/index.html

Knowing whos better than whom is not the same as who's got more potential than whom. All of the mock drafts/big boards out there now take into account how people are expected to do at the combine. Meeting or exceeding expectations is the most important thing these individuals have to do once the season ends.

I agree that the combine is big for those players who will be drafted late. But I also believe the most important parts of the combine are the interviews and medical exams.

What? You think the combine is bigger for the second day guys than it is the first day guys? 6th and 7th rounders don't stand to lose millions. Yeah it might be more important from a GM or Mel Kiper standpoint where up until now you've only been able to do a 2 round mock draft at best. The combine is where the measurables are measured and that's pretty important when talking about prospects.

I'll quote the Florio line: "The only time a guy is going to use his 40 speed in a straight line is when something really good happens or really bad happens." A good GM has his board mostly set.

The reason I think the combine is more important for lower round picks is either because they came from a less competetive program and need the measurables to boost their stock or because they have to show they have the potential to do more than they did in school. The top prospects have already established their potential by performing in college.

The Combine is much more than a 40 time. Your 10 yard, bench press, jumps, cone tell just as much if not more depending on the position.

Top prospects also can have fall out of the first round based on a poor performance at the combine. Everett Brown, Dan Connor, and Dwayne Jarrett all come to mind.

And you think that scouts and GMs weren't aware of the limitations prior to the combine that dropped those pundits' "top picks" out of round 1? I think that as the offseason progresses and the combine and pro day and interviews progress, draft boards are being tweaked (and red flags can remove someone from a board entirely) but not overhauled. I think it'd be more accurate to say that it dropped those players from the pundits' round 1 mock drafts. My theory is that it's the armchair scouts' opinions and mock drafts that change the most and become closer to the professional scouts' opinions that already had the examples you mentioned downgraded from where Kiper was projecting.

Since none of us are professional scouts and it's all speculation anyway, both my theory and your theory fit the facts. But both viewpoints are unsubstantiated until you can study what personnel decision-makers are really thinking about prospects. The spreading of disinformation (see: Bush, Reggie vs Williams, Mario) means that we'll never know.

A lot of college players hire personal trainers to help them test well at the combine, there's a lot of money at stake. If the combine is so overrated, how come all 32 teams spend all that time and millions of dollars to have it?

[Smidgeon]

The combine is probably the most important event for any of these guys (save QBs, Kickers, Punters and such). The NFL draft is about potential and the combine tells us more about potential than anything else.

Disagree. Mostly because of what the source said to Peter King. If you're going into the combine without a clear idea (already) of who's better than whom, then I don't want you to be my team's GM.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...ons/index.html

Knowing whos better than whom is not the same as who's got more potential than whom. All of the mock drafts/big boards out there now take into account how people are expected to do at the combine. Meeting or exceeding expectations is the most important thing these individuals have to do once the season ends.

I agree that the combine is big for those players who will be drafted late. But I also believe the most important parts of the combine are the interviews and medical exams.

What? You think the combine is bigger for the second day guys than it is the first day guys? 6th and 7th rounders don't stand to lose millions. Yeah it might be more important from a GM or Mel Kiper standpoint where up until now you've only been able to do a 2 round mock draft at best. The combine is where the measurables are measured and that's pretty important when talking about prospects.

I'll quote the Florio line: "The only time a guy is going to use his 40 speed in a straight line is when something really good happens or really bad happens." A good GM has his board mostly set.

The reason I think the combine is more important for lower round picks is either because they came from a less competetive program and need the measurables to boost their stock or because they have to show they have the potential to do more than they did in school. The top prospects have already established their potential by performing in college.

The Combine is much more than a 40 time. Your 10 yard, bench press, jumps, cone tell just as much if not more depending on the position.

Top prospects also can have fall out of the first round based on a poor performance at the combine. Everett Brown, Dan Connor, and Dwayne Jarrett all come to mind.

And you think that scouts and GMs weren't aware of the limitations prior to the combine that dropped those pundits' "top picks" out of round 1? I think that as the offseason progresses and the combine and pro day and interviews progress, draft boards are being tweaked (and red flags can remove someone from a board entirely) but not overhauled. I think it'd be more accurate to say that it dropped those players from the pundits' round 1 mock drafts. My theory is that it's the armchair scouts' opinions and mock drafts that change the most and become closer to the professional scouts' opinions that already had the examples you mentioned downgraded from where Kiper was projecting.

Since none of us are professional scouts and it's all speculation anyway, both my theory and your theory fit the facts. But both viewpoints are unsubstantiated until you can study what personnel decision-makers are really thinking about prospects. The spreading of disinformation (see: Bush, Reggie vs Williams, Mario) means that we'll never know.

A lot of college players hire personal trainers to help them test well at the combine, there's a lot of money at stake. If the combine is so overrated, how come all 32 teams spend all that time and millions of dollars to have it?

Because it sells, and the NFL is a business.

[pbmax]

Never saw this guy before, but I thought his twitter stuff looked interesting.

http://www.movethesticks.com/

http://twitter.com/movethesticks

He was recommended by Chris Mortensen, which would make him initially questionable. But he was an actual scout for the Ravens and Browns, meaning he might be right half the time.

[packrulz]

The combine is probably the most important event for any of these guys (save QBs, Kickers, Punters and such). The NFL draft is about potential and the combine tells us more about potential than anything else.

Disagree. Mostly because of what the source said to Peter King. If you're going into the combine without a clear idea (already) of who's better than whom, then I don't want you to be my team's GM.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...ons/index.html

Knowing whos better than whom is not the same as who's got more potential than whom. All of the mock drafts/big boards out there now take into account how people are expected to do at the combine. Meeting or exceeding expectations is the most important thing these individuals have to do once the season ends.

I agree that the combine is big for those players who will be drafted late. But I also believe the most important parts of the combine are the interviews and medical exams.

What? You think the combine is bigger for the second day guys than it is the first day guys? 6th and 7th rounders don't stand to lose millions. Yeah it might be more important from a GM or Mel Kiper standpoint where up until now you've only been able to do a 2 round mock draft at best. The combine is where the measurables are measured and that's pretty important when talking about prospects.

I'll quote the Florio line: "The only time a guy is going to use his 40 speed in a straight line is when something really good happens or really bad happens." A good GM has his board mostly set.

The reason I think the combine is more important for lower round picks is either because they came from a less competetive program and need the measurables to boost their stock or because they have to show they have the potential to do more than they did in school. The top prospects have already established their potential by performing in college.

The Combine is much more than a 40 time. Your 10 yard, bench press, jumps, cone tell just as much if not more depending on the position.

Top prospects also can have fall out of the first round based on a poor performance at the combine. Everett Brown, Dan Connor, and Dwayne Jarrett all come to mind.

And you think that scouts and GMs weren't aware of the limitations prior to the combine that dropped those pundits' "top picks" out of round 1? I think that as the offseason progresses and the combine and pro day and interviews progress, draft boards are being tweaked (and red flags can remove someone from a board entirely) but not overhauled. I think it'd be more accurate to say that it dropped those players from the pundits' round 1 mock drafts. My theory is that it's the armchair scouts' opinions and mock drafts that change the most and become closer to the professional scouts' opinions that already had the examples you mentioned downgraded from where Kiper was projecting.

Since none of us are professional scouts and it's all speculation anyway, both my theory and your theory fit the facts. But both viewpoints are unsubstantiated until you can study what personnel decision-makers are really thinking about prospects. The spreading of disinformation (see: Bush, Reggie vs Williams, Mario) means that we'll never know.

A lot of college players hire personal trainers to help them test well at the combine, there's a lot of money at stake. If the combine is so overrated, how come all 32 teams spend all that time and millions of dollars to have it?

Because it sells, and the NFL is a business.

How? TV ratings? No. T-shirts? No. Magazines? A few maybe.

[swede]

Mike Sherman was totally into the combines, always alert to the possibility of an elite left-footed punter, and he never missed a moment of action.