RS12
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 32,528
- Reaction score
- 29,874
Jimmy Garoppolo’s draft stock in the media is gaining steam, but the quarterback is a player whose whole does not equal the sum of his parts.
In this week’s Futures, I wrote that scouting quarterbacks remains an untamed wilderness for the NFL. While easier for scouts to identify details like height, weight, arm strength, base accuracy, and mobility, it’s more difficult to quantify – or even qualify – that amount of sophistication that a player has when it comes to integrating these details on the field.
Reading defenses, pocket presence, touch, and placement are examples of this kind of sophistication. They aren’t easy to grade because they involve multiple variables that differ on every play.
Even so, if a team is honest and vigilant about identifying what it can – and should – spend time coaching, then it will do a better job scouting prospects. Having this kind of accurate self-assessment of its skills and priorities should help them elevate or reject prospects.
They should focus more on “knockout factors” in their scouting. Even if it’s not formalized in a scouting report or on paper, the better teams have a core identity that each player must match or he’s not on its draft board. The Ravens have it. I believe the Steelers have it. I suspect to some degree the Patriots and Seahawks do, too.
I’ve always considered having “knockout factors” in my scouting reports. Now that I’m almost 10 years into the RSP, I’m closer to incorporating them into my process. The reason I’ve waited is that a knockout factor has to be obvious.
http://mattwaldmanrsp.com/2014/03/05/qb-jimmy-garoppolo-knockout/
In this week’s Futures, I wrote that scouting quarterbacks remains an untamed wilderness for the NFL. While easier for scouts to identify details like height, weight, arm strength, base accuracy, and mobility, it’s more difficult to quantify – or even qualify – that amount of sophistication that a player has when it comes to integrating these details on the field.
Reading defenses, pocket presence, touch, and placement are examples of this kind of sophistication. They aren’t easy to grade because they involve multiple variables that differ on every play.
Even so, if a team is honest and vigilant about identifying what it can – and should – spend time coaching, then it will do a better job scouting prospects. Having this kind of accurate self-assessment of its skills and priorities should help them elevate or reject prospects.
They should focus more on “knockout factors” in their scouting. Even if it’s not formalized in a scouting report or on paper, the better teams have a core identity that each player must match or he’s not on its draft board. The Ravens have it. I believe the Steelers have it. I suspect to some degree the Patriots and Seahawks do, too.
I’ve always considered having “knockout factors” in my scouting reports. Now that I’m almost 10 years into the RSP, I’m closer to incorporating them into my process. The reason I’ve waited is that a knockout factor has to be obvious.
http://mattwaldmanrsp.com/2014/03/05/qb-jimmy-garoppolo-knockout/
