Schemed success

[gimmesix]

I don't watch much college football, so when it comes to judging players, I have to find clips of them, including the highlight videos that, of course, focus on their most successful moments.

One of the things I notice a lot in the highlight packages is that they will include plays that make the player look good that really have nothing to do with the skill of the player. For instance, I was watching some videos of defensive linemen and with one, in particular, I was watching, most of his success came because of scheme. Blitzes, for example, allowed him to go unblocked to make a play in the backfield. Or the blocking scheme didn't account for him. Or the defense stunted and the offense didn't account for it and let him go free.

This is where we don't need to get caught up in numbers/statistics. They can be misleading because just because a player has a high number of sacks, it doesn't mean that he won a lot of matchups to get those sacks. It's important to actually pay close attention to why the player had the success. Did he show good use of hands/technique to fight through one-on-ones or double-teams? Did he show power and burst to defeat blocking?

I know this isn't anything new for most of you, but I think we forget it sometimes and get caught up in measurables and statistics more than we should. Not saying those things aren't important, but give me the guy who can fight through those double-teams every time over the faster guy who gets pressure and sacks only when he's unblocked.

 

[Rockport]

I don't watch much college football, so when it comes to judging players, I have to find clips of them, including the highlight videos that, of course, focus on their most successful moments.

One of the things I notice a lot in the highlight packages is that they will include plays that make the player look good that really have nothing to do with the skill of the player. For instance, I was watching some videos of defensive linemen and with one, in particular, I was watching, most of his success came because of scheme. Blitzes, for example, allowed him to go unblocked to make a play in the backfield. Or the blocking scheme didn't account for him. Or the defense stunted and the offense didn't account for it and let him go free.

This is where we don't need to get caught up in numbers/statistics. They can be misleading because just because a player has a high number of sacks, it doesn't mean that he won a lot of matchups to get those sacks. It's important to actually pay close attention to why the player had the success. Did he show good use of hands/technique to fight through one-on-ones or double-teams? Did he show power and burst to defeat blocking?

I know this isn't anything new for most of you, but I think we forget it sometimes and get caught up in measurables and statistics more than we should. Not saying those things aren't important, but give me the guy who can fight through those double-teams every time over the faster guy who gets pressure and sacks only when he's unblocked.

Lots of get their opinions by watching highlight films of players. None of us here can even remotely evaluate these draft prospects without sitting down across the table from the guy and try and get in his head. That’s why all these mocks, this guy is the best, no this guy is the best, no that guy is the best is an effort in futility. People trying to play NFL scout when we don’t know squat.

 

[morasp]

I used to try my hand at player evaluation but it gets overwhelming in a hurry especially when you try to factor in all the variables like level of competition, injury, character, will the physical traits translate to the NFL. In the end I ended up trusting the NFL.com rankings and being more of a GM type keeping in mind traits for a position that I value. I used to get an old newsprint draft guide by someone named Joel Buchsbaum who was excellent at player evaluations and Lance reminds me of him. He caught my attention when we needed an edge rusher a few years ago and he was the only one that thought DLaw was one of the top ones in the draft. He isn't perfect but for the first three rounds he's more or as accurate as any others I've seen. I agree that stats can be misleading and shouldn't be the only factor considered but they're sill one factor that should be looked at coupled with others.

 

[AsthmaField]

I used to try my hand at player evaluation but it gets overwhelming in a hurry especially when you try to factor in all the variables like level of competition, injury, character, will the physical traits translate to the NFL. In the end I ended up trusting the NFL.com rankings and being more of a GM type keeping in mind traits for a position that I value. I used to get an old newsprint draft guide by someone named Joel Buchsbaum who was excellent at player evaluations and Lance reminds me of him. He caught my attention when we needed an edge rusher a few years ago and he was the only one that thought DLaw was one of the top ones in the draft. He isn't perfect but for the first three rounds he's more or as accurate as any others I've seen. I agree that stats can be misleading and shouldn't be the only factor considered but they're sill one factor that should be looked at coupled with others.

I used to order Joel Buchsbaum’s draft guide (PFW) every year and it was by far the best that I’ve ever seen. Many of the actual team’s would call him to get his takes on prospects. He was right way more than he was wrong too.

Much of how I look at prospects comes from years of reading his takes on players and watching how and who Jimmy Johnson would draft.

When Buchsbaum passed away, it was a great loss for draftnik’s like us everywhere.

He did his complete draft guide and all of his interviews from home and over the phone. He had pretty severe health issues that prevented him from leaving home, if I remember correctly.

When he passed away, among those at his funeral in Chicago was Bill Belichick, who said he used to call Joel’s home phone to ask him about prospects.

The Pro Football Weekly draft guide has been garbage since Joel died.

 

[CATCH17]

I’ve gave up on the team so I don’t spend near as much time on the draft as I used to.


College statistics mean nothing. You’re looking for talent and traits.


Stats are overrated anyways.. Look at Dak.. He puts up a lot of fools gold stats.

John Elway had a career 54% completion percentage.

Stats are just there for people who don’t know what they’re looking at to be able to quantify a players ability.

 

[gimmesix]

I used to order Joel Buchsbaum’s draft guide (PFW) every year and it was by far the best that I’ve ever seen. Many of the actual team’s would call him to get his takes on prospects. He was right way more than he was wrong too.

Much of how I look at prospects comes from years of reading his takes on players and watching how and who Jimmy Johnson would draft.

When Buchsbaum passed away, it was a great loss for draftnik’s like us everywhere.

He did his complete draft guide and all of his interviews from home and over the phone. He had pretty severe health issues that prevented him from leaving home, if I remember correctly.

When he passed away, among those at his funeral in Chicago was Bill Belichick, who said he used to call Joel’s home phone to ask him about prospects.

The Pro Football Weekly draft guide has been garbage since Joel died.

Yes. I couldn't wait for the PFW guide to come out. I'd pour over it and have it on hand during the draft so that I could look up Buschbaum's take on the prospects. I agree that I learned a lot from the guide.

 

[gimmesix]

I used to try my hand at player evaluation but it gets overwhelming in a hurry especially when you try to factor in all the variables like level of competition, injury, character, will the physical traits translate to the NFL. In the end I ended up trusting the NFL.com rankings and being more of a GM type keeping in mind traits for a position that I value. I used to get an old newsprint draft guide by someone named Joel Buchsbaum who was excellent at player evaluations and Lance reminds me of him. He caught my attention when we needed an edge rusher a few years ago and he was the only one that thought DLaw was one of the top ones in the draft. He isn't perfect but for the first three rounds he's more or as accurate as any others I've seen. I agree that stats can be misleading and shouldn't be the only factor considered but they're sill one factor that should be looked at coupled with others.

I agree that stats are a factor, but I think you definitely have to keep them in perspective. A cornerback, for instance, who doesn't have very many interceptions because no team ever throws his way would be better in my estimation than a corner who has multiple interceptions because he gambles a lot and teams aren't afraid to attack since he gives up big plays on some of those gambles.

 

[pancakeman]

I don't watch much college football, so when it comes to judging players, I have to find clips of them, including the highlight videos that, of course, focus on their most successful moments.

One of the things I notice a lot in the highlight packages is that they will include plays that make the player look good that really have nothing to do with the skill of the player. For instance, I was watching some videos of defensive linemen and with one, in particular, I was watching, most of his success came because of scheme. Blitzes, for example, allowed him to go unblocked to make a play in the backfield. Or the blocking scheme didn't account for him. Or the defense stunted and the offense didn't account for it and let him go free.

This is where we don't need to get caught up in numbers/statistics. They can be misleading because just because a player has a high number of sacks, it doesn't mean that he won a lot of matchups to get those sacks. It's important to actually pay close attention to why the player had the success. Did he show good use of hands/technique to fight through one-on-ones or double-teams? Did he show power and burst to defeat blocking?

I know this isn't anything new for most of you, but I think we forget it sometimes and get caught up in measurables and statistics more than we should. Not saying those things aren't important, but give me the guy who can fight through those double-teams every time over the faster guy who gets pressure and sacks only when he's unblocked.

Yep, highlight plays for one player are sometimes just lowlight plays for the responsible guy on the opposite team!

 

[kskboys]

I used to order Joel Buchsbaum’s draft guide (PFW) every year and it was by far the best that I’ve ever seen. Many of the actual team’s would call him to get his takes on prospects. He was right way more than he was wrong too.

Much of how I look at prospects comes from years of reading his takes on players and watching how and who Jimmy Johnson would draft.

When Buchsbaum passed away, it was a great loss for draftnik’s like us everywhere.

He did his complete draft guide and all of his interviews from home and over the phone. He had pretty severe health issues that prevented him from leaving home, if I remember correctly.

When he passed away, among those at his funeral in Chicago was Bill Belichick, who said he used to call Joel’s home phone to ask him about prospects.

The Pro Football Weekly draft guide has been garbage since Joel died.

I think Lindy's is the best now. I like them because they don't make stupid proclamations, mostly just analyzes skillsets and how they'll transfer.

 

[AsthmaField]

Yes. I couldn't wait for the PFW guide to come out. I'd pour over it and have it on hand during the draft so that I could look up Buschbaum's take on the prospects. I agree that I learned a lot from the guide.

Exactly. It was awesome. I’d check the mail every day, just waiting on it to arrive.

I had all the years saved together for the longest time but eventually they got lost (I guess) in a move... meaning my wife probably “cleaned” and they got tossed, lol.

 

[AsthmaField]

I think Lindy's is the best now. I like them because they don't make stupid proclamations, mostly just analyzes skillsets and how they'll transfer.

Lindy’s isn’t bad.

The truth is, there just isn’t a go-to draft bible like Buchsbaum’s anymore. Luckily, with the internet, we now have a lot of places to look. Most are crap though.

 

[DanA]

Lindy’s isn’t bad.

The truth is, there just isn’t a go-to draft bible like Buchsbaum’s anymore. Luckily, with the internet, we now have a lot of places to look. Most are crap though.

Dane Bruglars beast is pretty much the definitive draft bible and IMO the best draft resource that has ever been publicly available. You just have to subscribe to the Athletic which is a pain.

 

[AsthmaField]

Dane Bruglars beast is pretty much the definitive draft bible and IMO the best draft resource that has ever been publicly available. You just have to subscribe to the Athletic which is a pain.

True enough, I haven’t subscribed so I don’t have access. From everything I hear it is excellent though.

I probably need to go ahead and do that. Every snippet I hear from that is usually something that I strongly agree with.

 

[morasp]

I agree that stats are a factor, but I think you definitely have to keep them in perspective. A cornerback, for instance, who doesn't have very many interceptions because no team ever throws his way would be better in my estimation than a corner who has multiple interceptions because he gambles a lot and teams aren't afraid to attack since he gives up big plays on some of those gambles.

That example actually emphasizes my point of how complicated it can get. In the case of the corner you would need to know what the coverage was and if he was expecting help over the top that wasn't there. Granted if you start to see a pattern watching all 22 film over multiple games it's probably a safe bet that he's a gambler. And you would have to do that for entire multiple all 22 games for about 50 CBs to get a ranking for each of them.

Another example is a lot of people like the safety RIchie Grant becuase he's a pretty good DB but what about his football IQ in terms of getting the secondary lined up pre snap? Here's what one scout told NFL.com

"As the veteran of that secondary, he needed to do a better job of making sure everyone was on the same page. There were so many busts from game to game out of that unit. But I like his ball talent and his overall field toughness." -- Area scout for NFC team

Do you want him lining up the defensive backfield. Our DBs already have enough pre snap confusion. I remember Wade Philips bringing in the veteran safety Ken Hamlin for that purpose and the entire secondary played better until they decided to go with Alan Ball and let him walk at which point the entire secondary played much worse.

And one more, everyone hates Marvin Wilson because he was lazy last year and didn't play well. It turns out he was hampered by a meniscus tear in his knee that finally sidelined him.

 

[CowboyoWales]

Another example is a lot of people like the safety RIchie Grant

"As the veteran of that secondary, he needed to do a better job of making sure everyone was on the same page. There were so many busts from game to game out of that unit. But I like his ball talent and his overall field toughness." -- Area scout for NFC team

Do you want him lining up the defensive backfield. Our DBs already have enough pre snap confusion. I remember Wade Philips bringing in the veteran safety Ken Hamlin for that purpose and the entire secondary played better until they decided to go with Alan Ball and let him walk at which point the entire secondary played much worse.

The scout was commenting on his college play, specifically his lack of organisational skills with an inexperienced backfield. Can't criticize Grant that much without seeing the reports on the two inexperienced CB's. In any case I wouldnt expect a 3rd/4th round Safety to be a on-field organisational general, especially with us he'd possibly be playing with a 1st round draft pick and another CB that could have gone in the first round?

Any player taken after the first round is going to have weaknesses and question marks against his game, the skill is identifying those traits against the players we already have and finding what's the priority.

I dont think there are many of us willing to spend your first two picks on the secondary (so that excludes us picking Holland) so the question would be....is Grant's possible communication deficiencies be shown up in a secondary with Horn/Surtain and Diggs?

I do actually agree with the need of sprinkling of experience throughout the team, unfortunately, our prominence with offense means we are left with many rookies and JAGS on defense.

 

[morasp]

The scout was commenting on his college play, specifically his lack of organisational skills with an inexperienced backfield. Can't criticize Grant that much without seeing the reports on the two inexperienced CB's. In any case I wouldnt expect a 3rd/4th round Safety to be a on-field organisational general, especially with us he'd possibly be playing with a 1st round draft pick and another CB that could have gone in the first round?

Any player taken after the first round is going to have weaknesses and question marks against his game, the skill is identifying those traits against the players we already have and finding what's the priority.

I dont think there are many of us willing to spend your first two picks on the secondary (so that excludes us picking Holland) so the question would be....is Grant's possible communication deficiencies be shown up in a secondary with Horn/Surtain and Diggs?

I do actually agree with the need of sprinkling of experience throughout the team, unfortunately, our prominence with offense means we are left with many rookies and JAGS on defense.

3rd/4th would be fine with me, i've seen people ranking him early 2nd like ahead of pick 44.

 

[kskboys]

Dane Bruglars beast is pretty much the definitive draft bible and IMO the best draft resource that has ever been publicly available. You just have to subscribe to the Athletic which is a pain.

I'd be interested if they're really good, very interested.

 

[morasp]

Dane Bruglars beast is pretty much the definitive draft bible and IMO the best draft resource that has ever been publicly available. You just have to subscribe to the Athletic which is a pain.

Is it a monthly subscription of about $5.99/mo?

 

[Rockport]

I’ve gave up on the team so I don’t spend near as much time on the draft as I used to.


College statistics mean nothing. You’re looking for talent and traits.


Stats are overrated anyways.. Look at Dak.. He puts up a lot of fools gold stats.

John Elway had a career 54% completion percentage.

Stats are just there for people who don’t know what they’re looking at to be able to quantify a players ability.

So since you’ve given up on the team you’re only here to troll folks? Oh got it.

 

[CATCH17]

So since you’ve given up on the team you’re only here to troll folks? Oh got it.

No.. I'll always be a fan of the star laundry. Even if I hate the current state that it is in.