Big Turk Posted June 25, 2017 Share Posted June 25, 2017 (edited) Think being an "athletic freak" correlates to being drafted in the first round in the NFL?? Think again...This is based on 19 years of combine data with almost 7,000 players. I took all players who were in the top 5% of their combine numbers for their position for 4 of the 7 key combine tests and broke it down by round drafted. DE's and RB's are highly correlated with "athletic freaks" being drafted in the 1st round. SS's and DT's to a lesser extent. CB, WR, OLB and TE are highly correlated with "Raw Athletic Freaks" being drafted as a "flyer" in round 7 as that had the most "freaks" at those positions. While the highest percentage of "athletic freaks" were drafted in the 1st round(20.95%), the next highest percentage was for them to be drafted in the 7th round(18.10%), followed by being undrafted "free agents"(17.62%). Just remember next time you see great combine numbers and think this guy is gonna be a superstar...chances are this dude is not very good at football and will be a late round pick or a UDFA. Link to the study: http://imgur.com/a/A0ufd #NextGenAnalytics Edited June 25, 2017 by matter2003 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted June 25, 2017 Share Posted June 25, 2017 I believe what you are talking about are known as "intangibles" or "football smarts". Player A is faster, stronger and more physically gifted than player B but player B has better reads, blocks, angles, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted June 25, 2017 Author Share Posted June 25, 2017 (edited) I believe what you are talking about are known as "intangibles" or "football smarts". Player A is faster, stronger and more physically gifted than player B but player B has better reads, blocks, angles, etc. Yes, and it shows that highly athletic players that also have those are chosen very highly, while teams take flyers on 7th round picks who are super athletic but not very good at football... mid round picks show low "freak" potential but are solid football players. http://imgur.com/a/vTmLR(freaks by position by round) Here are some suprising finds: DE "freaks" are mostly taken in the 1st round---12% of all DE's drafted in the 1st round qualified as "freaks", but only 2 of the 214 DE's taken in rounds 2-5 did(none of them in round 2). The numbers ticked up to 4% of DE's n rounds 6 and 7. SS "freaks" are drafted earlier than their FS counterparts---22% of SS taken in round 1 were "freaks" compared to 7% of FS...this trend continued through the first 3 rounds but reversed in all rounds after starting in round 4 CB and WR freaks are near non-existent in Rounds 3 and 4---there were 0 CB "freaks" out of 172 taken in rounds 3 and 4, and only 2 WR "freaks" out of 177 taken in rounds 3 and 4... 0 OLB "freaks" went in round 1 out of 46 OLB's taken(and before you ask, yes both Von Miller and Khalil Mack are listed as OLB's in the data) QB "freaks" were either drafted in the 1st round or drafted in the 6th round with almost nothing in between(except 1 taken in round 2 out of 142 QB's drafted in round 2,3,4,5 or 7) 7th round is still 2nd in percentage of freaks even when accounting for the extra players that are selected---rounds break down as follows: Round 1: 7% Round 2: 3% Round 3: 3% Round 4: 2% Round 5: 3% Round 6: 3% Round 7: 5% UDFA: 2% Edited June 25, 2017 by matter2003 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted June 25, 2017 Share Posted June 25, 2017 If I'm reading this right.... Basically you've found that football players are chosen first and that you rank those by physical talent. Then at the very end you just grab a rare specimen even if a long shot to teach them the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted June 25, 2017 Author Share Posted June 25, 2017 (edited) If I'm reading this right.... Basically you've found that football players are chosen first and that you rank those by physical talent. Then at the very end you just grab a rare specimen even if a long shot to teach them the game. More or less but there are some very interesting variations on a position by position basis...this type of stuff helps me model how players are created for the draft Edited June 25, 2017 by matter2003 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jr1 Posted June 25, 2017 Share Posted June 25, 2017 Sean just drafts seniors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted June 25, 2017 Author Share Posted June 25, 2017 (edited) Sean just drafts seniors Something very interesting that I just thought of when you said that...how many of these "freaks" are underclassmen... The data shows that underclassmen who come out VASTLY overestimate how much their "freakish" athleticism is worth: Round by Round: R1---148 Underclassmen drafted, 8 were "freaks"(5%) R2---103 UC drafted, 3 freaks(3%) R3---105 UC drafted, 19 freaks(18%) R4---99 UC drafted, 12 freaks(12%) R5---111 UC drafted, 22 freaks(20%) R6---131 UC drafted, 23 freaks(18%) R7---185 UC drafted, 38 freaks(21%) it's obvious the GM's place a higher value on football ability over freakish athleticism, but the college kids think their freakish athleticism will result in them getting drafted earlier and come out their junior year, which conclusively is shown doesn't happen except for the ones who are also damn good football players Edited June 25, 2017 by matter2003 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted June 25, 2017 Share Posted June 25, 2017 (edited) Yes, and it shows that highly athletic players that also have those are chosen very highly, while teams take flyers on 7th round picks who are super athletic but not very good at football... mid round picks show low "freak" potential but are solid football players. http://imgur.com/a/vTmLR(freaks by position by round) Here are some suprising finds: DE "freaks" are mostly taken in the 1st round---12% of all DE's drafted in the 1st round qualified as "freaks", but only 2 of the 214 DE's taken in rounds 2-5 did(none of them in round 2). The numbers ticked up to 4% of DE's n rounds 6 and 7. SS "freaks" are drafted earlier than their FS counterparts---22% of SS taken in round 1 were "freaks" compared to 7% of FS...this trend continued through the first 3 rounds but reversed in all rounds after starting in round 4 CB and WR freaks are near non-existent in Rounds 3 and 4---there were 0 CB "freaks" out of 172 taken in rounds 3 and 4, and only 2 WR "freaks" out of 177 taken in rounds 3 and 4... 0 OLB "freaks" went in round 1 out of 46 OLB's taken(and before you ask, yes both Von Miller and Khalil Mack are listed as OLB's in the data) QB "freaks" were either drafted in the 1st round or drafted in the 6th round with almost nothing in between(except 1 taken in round 2 out of 142 QB's drafted in round 2,3,4,5 or 7) 7th round is still 2nd in percentage of freaks even when accounting for the extra players that are selected---rounds break down as follows: Round 1: 7% Round 2: 3% Round 3: 3% Round 4: 2% Round 5: 3% Round 6: 3% Round 7: 5% UDFA: 2% ....yes sir....and it invalidates depending on stats ALONE when discussing a player.....highly manipulative and widely open to interpretation for proving a dichotomy of points........helluva lot more to a player than stats IMO....some WR slug named Rice ran a 4.73 forty at the combine..... Edited June 25, 2017 by OldTimeAFLGuy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm Spartacus Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 Leif Larson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 (edited) Leif Larson ....Tony Mandarich......Brylcream Mel's "a behemoth....a man among boyz".....honorable mention to Boyz...........all time Mel-ism was 1994 draft when Colts' Tobin took LB Trev Alberts vs Trent Dilfer at 5...yup the prolific Dilfer (OK)....Mel tweaked and ranted on air....Tobin was interviewed about Mel and he said, "who's he"...LMAO............ Edited June 26, 2017 by OldTimeAFLGuy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abc Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 Mike Mamula Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm Spartacus Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 Coy Wire - he can jump out of an empty built in pool. (freak!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted June 27, 2017 Author Share Posted June 27, 2017 Coy Wire - he can jump out of an empty built in pool. (freak!) Not necessarily...he'd also have to be in the top 5% of at least 3 other categories as well to qualify Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 Imo... First round = good players that are also athletic freaks 2-6 = good players with athletic limitations 7- UDFA= Combine studs with limited film but worth a flyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmur66 Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 Thats just freakin great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 If I'm reading this right.... Basically you've found that football players are chosen first and that you rank those by physical talent. Then at the very end you just grab a rare specimen even if a long shot to teach them the game. Pretty much. At the very top of the draft you want players who have both produced at a high level and are very physically gifted. They are your elite playmakers. Next up are more moderately physically gifted players who have produced. Those are your solid starters. Then you have players who have big flaws or deficiencies in some areas, but are gifted in one or more. They are your role players. Lastly we have our developmental players. They're either highly physically gifted, but underdeveloped players or ones that have hit their physical limits already. No sense chasing many of the latter, so this is where I like to see gifted small school prospects who may not have gotten very good coaching taken. Sometimes you can find players from larger schools that have had their development delayed too. Poor coaching, coaching turnover, injuries, legal problems, etc. The bottom line on late round picks is that you might as well swing for the fences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyBoy Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 You have an interdependence going on I think. QBs are often drafted in the first round, especially underclassmen qbs, and qb is the least important position when it comes to athleticism. I would check the correlation of combine performance on draft position for qbs compared to other positions and I bet it's significantly weaker, if not negatively correlated, since athletic freaks likely get pushed to different positions early on (that could be interesting to explore, amd might explain why freak o-linemen are so rare/valuable). What happens to your data when you exclude qbs, or at least nonfreak qbs (going on the logic that say tebow could have played TE for example)? This is really awesome though, real cool concept! What did you use to do the analysis? I've been learning/using R and it's crazy cool, and I do a lot of stuff in excel too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Where were you when Aaron Maybin and Brian Orakpo were available to us at pick #11 in 2009? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts