SPARQ scores for DEs in 2017 draft

[waldoputty]

It is all @LocimusPrime 's fault that affected my sleep. After he posted comps for Taco as Ryan Russell, had to feel better by digging up the SPARQ results from an article in BTB by one.cool.customer

Taco is an A-quadrant player in the SPARQ/production ratio plot. Of course, drafting Willis and Rivers would have felt even better given their location in the A-quadrant and both were available at 60. However Taco is in the A-quadrant. His speed probably hurt Taco's SPARQ score a bit, so lets hope his lingering ankle injury may have contributed to that...

One.cool.customer also posted historical SPARQ data for other well known players. Losers like Ryan Russell are not in the A-quadrant because of poor production.

For those not familiar with this, this plots SPARQ scores against production ratio. The x axis and y axis denote average scores. Cowboys are supposed to believe in SPARQ scores and lots of players drafted last year had high SPARQ scores.

Feel better now and going back to sleep...

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2017...athlete-impact-defensive-ends-in-the-2017-nfl

 

[Zekeats]

Try counting sheep next time

 

[waldoputty]

Try counting sheep next time

 

[gmoney112]

Even more important than SPARQ is actually being able to play.

It's really only useful when it's an outlier on either extreme, or you're using it in comparison of two similarly graded prospects.

It shouldn't be any surprise that All-Pro players are largely more physically talented than their peers, it's a physical game, but more importantly they can all play at a high level. The inverse is not true that SPARQ is going to mean that they can play at that level.

It really wasn't Russell's production or SPARQ ratio that dropped him to almost the 6th round, it was because he wasn't very good and his tape reflected that.

Taco is a fine athlete, and the fact his score was weighted with a 40 time, one of the most useless drills for lineman, makes it more impressive.

The difference between a 1st and 5th round DE is miles. Taco was universally regarded as a 1st rounder (as far as being drafted, not necessarily grades) because he's actually pretty good. He's a good athlete and has great measurables, whether he succeeds will be purely up to him. I'm guessing our Michigan connection helped them to evaluate that a bit.

I think Tapper had the highest SPARQ score in his draft. He ran faster than Myles Garrett at the same weight. If you want a SPARQ guy to root for, he's your man. Though, you'll have to sit in the back, the van's getting pretty full.

 

[waldoputty]

Even more important than SPARQ is actually being able to play.

It's really only useful when it's an outlier on either extreme, or you're using it in comparison of two similarly graded prospects.

It shouldn't be any surprise that All-Pro players are largely more physically talented than their peers, it's a physical game, but more importantly they can all play at a high level. The inverse is not true that SPARQ is going to mean that they can play at that level.

It really wasn't Russell's production or SPARQ ratio that dropped him to almost the 6th round, it was because he wasn't very good and his tape reflected that.

Taco is a fine athlete, and the fact his score was weighted with a 40 time, one of the most useless drills for lineman, makes it more impressive.

The difference between a 1st and 5th round DE is miles. Taco was universally regarded as a 1st rounder (as far as being drafted, not necessarily grades) because he's actually pretty good. He's a good athlete and has great measurables, whether he succeeds will be purely up to him. I'm guessing our Michigan connection helped them to evaluate that a bit.

I think Tapper had the highest SPARQ score in his draft. He ran faster than Myles Garrett at the same weight. If you want a SPARQ guy to root for, he's your man. Though, you'll have to sit in the back, the van's getting pretty full.

Tapper had great SPARQ but his back condition needs management. His production ratio was probably limited, but that could be attributed to playing in the wrong scheme in college.

 

[morasp]

Looks like a mixture of OLBs and DEs.

 

[DogFace]

Thanks for posting @waldoputty. I guess that's why I didn't sleep well either.

I love these comparisons. Especially the historical ones. I'm guessing there are some terrible players who scored high. Like Margus Hunt.

For the most part it seems high sparq relates to high production. I'm sure someone will dispute this and I don't know it to be true.

 

[Deep_Freeze]

I actually like SPARQ, but as with any numbers you have to know what your looking at.

The most glaring weakness is it doesn't account for height or arm length measurables. Taco's number should be better cause of his length, but he gets nothing for that obvious advantage. So if you got short arms you can bench press more reps and it also doesn't matter with the number.

I would rather compare guys of equal size when using this number.

 

[Alexander]

The immortal Kenneth Boatright was an A quadrant player. Tells you how useful this is.

 

[pugilist]

regardless of your opinion of it ( I, too, believe it is an incomplete metric) the front office laps it up as the gold standard. So really the SPARQ is a highly effective tool to use to predict players the Cowboys love and, will ultimately, draft / sign.

 

[big dog cowboy]

His production ratio was probably limited, but that could be attributed to playing in the wrong scheme in college.

Probably?

 

[Deep_Freeze]

regardless of your opinion of it ( I, too, believe it is an incomplete metric) the front office laps it up as the gold standard. So really the SPARQ is a highly effective tool to use to predict players the Cowboys love and, will ultimately, draft / sign.

True, but I figure they are smart enough to know the weaknesses of it.

If not, at least they could come to CZ and find out lol

Heck right about now, it seems like they would explain how to use the numbers to the entire league....I mean we gotta help everyone else get better, right....

 

[waldoputty]

Thanks for posting @waldoputty. I guess that's why I didn't sleep well either.

I love these comparisons. Especially the historical ones. I'm guessing there are some terrible players who scored high. Like Margus Hunt.

For the most part it seems high sparq relates to high production. I'm sure someone will dispute this and I don't know it to be true.

ugg too much energy to fall asleep...

the b quadrant would be players with high sparq and low production.
it seems cowboys have been targeting this by looking for players with an excuse for being in quadrant B because they were in the wrong system - e.g. Tapper

beyond boatright, i am sure there are other bad players in quad A. that is why it would have been better to draft willis in addition to taco.

 

[waldoputty]

I actually like SPARQ, but as with any numbers you have to know what your looking at.

The most glaring weakness is it doesn't account for height or arm length measurables. Taco's number should be better cause of his length, but he gets nothing for that obvious advantage. So if you got short arms you can bench press more reps and it also doesn't matter with the number.

I would rather compare guys of equal size when using this number.

i got to think the FO has their own version of SPARQ.
for example, may be replace the 40 time with the 10 yard split for dl
height and arm length could be incorporated.
i think Tom Landry may have installed an early version of this since he was known to be an innovator that brought computing to football scouting...

 

[waldoputty]

The immortal Kenneth Boatright was an A quadrant player. Tells you how useful this is.

sure but he was near the edge.
as is taco, but lets hope his score was weighed down by the 40 which is not really relevant for DEs.
the FO probably has its own version of SPARQ for each position.

 

[waldoputty]

regardless of your opinion of it ( I, too, believe it is an incomplete metric) the front office laps it up as the gold standard. So really the SPARQ is a highly effective tool to use to predict players the Cowboys love and, will ultimately, draft / sign.

right, i suspect the FO has a customized version of SPARQ for each position.

 

[ThreeandOut]

ugg too much energy to fall asleep...

the b quadrant would be players with high sparq and low production.
it seems cowboys have been targeting this by looking for players with an excuse for being in quadrant B because they were in the wrong system - e.g. Tapper

beyond boatright, i am sure there are other bad players in quad A. that is why it would have been better to draft willis in addition to taco.

The Cowboys have drafted several DL's in recent years (Charleton, Collins, Tapper, and Russell) that played at least part of their college career's in systems that didn't suit their talents. This has certainly hurt these players draft stock, and I would think the Cowboys believe they are getting good value at where they are able to select these players. This approach didn't pan out for Russell but the early returns on Collins are promising. We'll have to see for Taco and Tapper.

 

[John813]

Maybe it's due to Hendrickson being from a small school, but I was surprised there was no interest in him.

 

[xwalker]

ugg too much energy to fall asleep...

the b quadrant would be players with high sparq and low production.
it seems cowboys have been targeting this by looking for players with an excuse for being in quadrant B because they were in the wrong system - e.g. Tapper

beyond boatright, i am sure there are other bad players in quad A. that is why it would have been better to draft willis in addition to taco.

Do you ever just watch the game footage? Willis was just not that that impressive.

 

[waldoputty]

Do you ever just watch the game footage? Willis was just not that that impressive.

only highlights.
i recall reading that willis had an excuse for that and that he was playing a lot better at the senior bowl.
i only watch cowboys games.