Year One: An Escapade In Blathering

Well, it was one year ago today, when Reilly and I started this rambling blog.  If it has been an excruciatingly dull journey for you, just imagine how it feels for Reilly.  That's the equivalent of seven years of his life, that he can never get back.  Sure, the fame, the money, and the women might seem like ample compensation for our efforts, but a Jedi craves not these things.  We do this for nobler reasons.  We do it for the lulz.

To celebrate our one year blather-versary, I thought I would post up the most interesting search queries that have led people to our dark and musty corner of the internet.

1. drunken giraffe
2. kangaroo au pair
3. dog vs. kangaroo
4. lumberjack college
5. Why are running backs short?
6. dead prostitutes
7. dead hookers
8. Buffalo hookers (the murderers are getting a bit more specific)
9. average speed of a kangaroo
10. kangaroo squirrel
11. How much could a kangaroo bench?
12. Paul Worrilow is the most interesting man in the world
13. fat guys in spandex
14. Ron Jeremy length

To say that our small readership is probably made up of deviants and weirdos, would probably be an understatement.  I mean, let's ignore the dead prostitute theme here, and just focus on the person searching for a "kangaroo au pair".  Am I supposed to believe that there are individuals out there that want to employ a kangaroo as a nanny for their children?  Yes, it sounds awesome in theory, but the practical application of a kangaroo babysitter just doesn't strike me as terribly sensible.  Then again, judging such a concept without testing its real world feasibility, might be a product of my biases concerning gargantuan marsupials as care givers.  Maybe it would work?  The only way to know for sure is to test this concept in the laboratory.  So, if anybody could send me a kangaroo, or if you don't have that, if you happen to have a spare child lying around the house, we can begin testing this bold concept.  Maybe it will be the next billion dollar industry.

Either way, I don't want it to sound like Reilly and I are judging any of you sickos kind people.  I just really wanted to express my gratitude to the small group of people who have passed through these parts, and particularly the ones who have become regular visitors.  It's been rather nice, having strange people (kangaroo owning prostitute murderers?) to bounce these ideas off of, as my family seems to have the ability to block out most of my nonsense.  Those of you who I have been able to interact with, either through the comments section or through emails, have been very kind and supportive of our lunatic efforts.  The word 'idiot' hasn't been thrown at me nearly as much as I would have expected, or probably deserved.  Hopefully, as time goes on, we can remain on the right side of the ledger, in that sense.

Jordan Matthews: Stealth Midget

I've really struggled a fair bit with how I feel about Jordan Matthews.  As a prospect, he is simply beyond weird.  Still, for the most part, I have had generally positive things to say about him.  I've tried to temper my tendency to speak negatively about every single prospect that crosses my path.  He easily met the computer's criteria when it came to statistical production.  When it came to his athletic ability, he also managed to meet the computer's standards for a 'Big' wide receiver, though he wasn't exactly off the charts in this area.

Despite all of that, there are some things which make me very nervous about Matthews.  Part of the problem, I can't deny, is that I figure there is a good chance of looking like an idiot if I bet too strongly against somebody who dominated the SEC the way Matthews did.  This is why I let the computer do most of the thinking for me.  If I am wrong about a prospect, I can blame a wonky hard drive.  In this case, as I said, the computer thinks Matthews falls within the acceptable range of what it would expect to see in a successful wide receiver prospect.  It's not an insignificant accomplishment for a receiver to get the computer's blessing, and I don't treat the computer's recommendations lightly.  Still, I do get the feeling that Matthews might be a bit of an optical illusion.

When you hear that Matthews is just a tad over 6'3"tall, and weighs in at 212 pounds, you naturally think "Hey, that's a pretty big guy!"  Because of the wight-class he falls into, the computer judges him against other 'Big' wide receivers, who are over 200 pounds.  No, he's not quite as big as Andre Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, or Julio Jones, but he does have nice physical proportions, which leads you to look at him as a potentially intimidating #1 wide receiver.  This creates a somewhat odd problem, because even though the computer says he meets all of the criteria of a 'Big' receiver, he doesn't really move the needle too far when it comes to his athletic ability, at least in comparison to some of his bulky brethren. 

When I was discussing Jordan Matthews, I suggested that he might be more like a 'Small' receiver in a 'Big' receivers body.  So, let's think about this for a second.  Is it just the physical dimensions of a receiver that should get us excited about their potential?  Or, is it the power that generally resides in these larger frames, which really makes a difference?

There are all sorts of physical traits that you can look at with a receiver.  First of all, you want him to actually be able to catch the ball.  That seems pretty obvious, though teams do ignore this quite frequently (Stephen Hill!).  Some measure of speed and quickness is also nice.  We can look at the player's 10-yard split and 40-time to get some sense of that, and Matthews appears to do quite well in this area.  There's also the issue of agility, and the ability of a receiver to contort his body in seemingly unnatural ways, or have the elusiveness to get open.  With larger prospects, we also start to dream of something even more unusual.  We imagine a kind of physical dominance, and the ability to simply overwhelm an opposing cornerback.  For this, I think we want plain and simple old-fashioned power.

As I've said before, when the computer is weighing the 'Big' receivers, it puts more of an emphasis on the player's Kangaroo Score than it does for the 'Small' prospects.  The Kangaroo Score is my measure of lower body power, based on the player's vertical jump and broad jump, in relation to the player's weight.  Some people shift more of their attention to a player's bench press results, but I just suspect that lower body power is the more important factor.  I'm not suggesting that this is the be-all-end-all of physical traits, but I do think it has some significant bearing on a player's ability to plow through an opponent, and probably increases the difficulty with which a player is going to be tackled or pushed around.

When the computer comes up with the Kangaroo Score for a player, it basically averages the results from the vertical jump and broad jump, while factoring in a player's weight.  Normally this isn't a huge problem.  The two scores generally mirror each other, to some degree.  If you take a player's vertical jump, and multiply it by 3.5, you'll probably wind up pretty damn close to what their broad jump is.  This isn't always the case, however.

When I previously discussed Jordan Matthews, I expressed some concern about his rather mediocre Kangaroo Score 0.232.  This result is given in the form of how many standard deviations he was above the average result for a wide receiver, and while his result is technically above average, it is still really quite pedestrian.  Regardless, I suggested that players such as A.J. Green, Jordy Nelson and Sidney Rice had also produced rather pedestrian Kangaroo Scores, yet managed to go on to have a significant degree of success.  This is true, but it is also a bit misleading, as these 3 players had rather peculiar results that might require deeper examination.  So, let's look at their Kangaroo Scores, and break things down  a bit more thoroughly.

NAME	Vert Kangaroo	Broad Kangaroo	Total Kangaroo
Jordan Matthews	0.160	0.340	0.232
Sammy Watkins	-0.270	0.821	0.166
AJ Green	-0.141	0.821	0.243
Jordy Nelson	-0.816	0.865	-0.143
Sidney Rice	0.617	-0.346	0.231

There's something I should mention here, before we go any further.  The 'average' of the Vertical Kangaroo Score and the Broad Jump Kangaroo Score, obviously isn't weighted in a 50/50 manner.  The Total Kangaroo Score gives a slight advantage to the Vertical Kangaroo Score, with more of a 60/40 split.  There are reasons for this, which I'll try to get into as we go along.

Either way, all 5 of these players have Total Kangaroo Scores that would basically fall in the somewhat 'average' range.  When we look a bit deeper, however, we see that 4 out of these 5 players did manage to rise at least 0.500 standard deviations above the average, in one of the two jumps.  Watkins, Green and Nelson, are rising above the 0.500 mark somewhat significantly, in at least one of the two jumps, so there is at least some suggestion that power is lurking within them.  Matthews, on the other hand, seemed to demonstrate merely average power, regardless of the jump.

Now, what could all of this actually mean?  There was an article I linked to, at one time, that discussed some of the potential differences between a vertical jump and a broad jump, in relation to speed and quickness.  I'll post it again, here, though I don't want anyone to think that I swear by any of the theories expressed in this article.  Basically, the writer suggests that this is all about muscle development, and says that players with an above average vertical jump might have better quickness, while players with a better broad jump might have better deep speed.  I wouldn't say that my own conclusions on this subject are entirely set in stone, but based on a number of players that I have gone back to examine, there might be some merit to this idea.  Still, I wouldn't overreact to any of this, as the results only seem to gain some debatable value when there are fairly extreme variations in the two results.

The potentially more important issue that I want to address is a bit different.  Instead of discussing how these things relate to speed or quickness, let's just focus on the value of having some sort of demonstrable power, that is above the average expected result.  We're talking about power for the purpose of violence and intimidation.  While the majority of the players in the above mentioned group had wildly varying results between their vertical jump and their broad jump, at one time or another, they did demonstrate significant power of some sort.  This isn't necessarily a knockout blow to Matthews, it just raises the question of whether we should have certain expectations of him performing like a conventional 'Big' wide receiver.

Now, this has all been comparing Matthews to 4 particular/peculiar players, who produced results that might have needed a deeper examination.  Perhaps, some of these players would have produced less divergent results in their two jumps, if given another chance.  It is impossible to say, though many players do correct these inconsistencies/irregularities when they perform at their pro days.  Either way, we will never know the answers to some of these questions.

Instead, let's ask a question about a broader selection of wide receivers.  While contemplating this year's wide receiver prospects, I reexamined some of the prospects from the last 15 years.  Among the 'Big' receivers, I set aside 40 players who I felt had managed to become statistically significant in their NFL careers.  'Statistically significant' is obviously rather vague, and my opinions on this are probably a bit biased.  Nonetheless, I suspect we would all agree on most of the players I included in this examination.  They tended to be the obvious sorts of players, that have become well known to us all.

Among these 40 'Big' receivers, there were only five for whom no data/insufficient date related to the vertical jump or broad jump was available.  These five players were Hakeem Nicks, Michael Crabtree, Eric Decker, Roy Williams, and Demaryius Thomas.  There's no conclusion we can come to about these players, but I'll leave them in the calculations anyway.  They represent 12.5% of the 40 players I will be mentioning, and will count as players without exceptional Kanagroo Scores, though I have to suspect that some of them would have actually done quite well in this area.

21 of the 40 (52.5%) players managed to produce both vertical jumps as well as broad jumps that were approximately 0.500 standard deviations above average, or better   The players in this group included the majority of the Calvin Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, Andre Johnson, Roddy White, Julio Jones, Marques Colston, Vincent Jackson variety of receiver, and most were producing results well above a mere 0.500.  The median Total Kangaroo Score among these 21 players was a fairly stunning 1.095

29 out of these 40 (72.5%) 'Big' receivers managed to rise above the 0.500 standard deviation threshold in at least one of the two jumps.  This somewhat broader group might include more enigmatic players, but at one time or another they did display some power.  This group obviously includes the 3 players that I used in the comparison to Jordan Matthews, as well as others such as, Dwayne Bowe, Pierre Garcon, David Boston, Jerricho Cothcery, James Jones as well as a few others.  It's still a rather respectable group.

Now, we get to the 6 players out of the 40 (15%) I examined, who failed to produce a result over 0.500 in either of their 2 jumps.  These six players were Justin Blackmon, Cecil Shorts, Brandon LaFell, Anquan Boldin, Austin Collie, and Steve Johnson.  There are some good players in this group, but with the exception of Anquan Boldin, who is a well established outlier, it is very difficult to say that many of the others would be mistaken for 1st tier wide receivers.  Some, like Shorts and Collie (one of the more peculiar inclusions in this list, and someone I should have probably excluded), clearly are more comparable to what we think of as small receivers, and only make this list because their weight, being over 200#, makes them technically eligible, while being obvious misfits for 'Big' receiver comparisons.

Like I said though, there are still those 5 rather significant receivers for whom we have either insignificant results, or no data at all.  You can use your own judgement as to whether they should bolster the results of one of these groups, or another.

At least to some extent, I think you can probably see why I have some concerns about Jordan Matthews, and his fit as a conventional 'Big' receiver.  None of this is meant to imply that he can't do well, or that I don't think he will do well.  I'm just saying that if you think he is somebody who will perform like many of the larger receivers who have come before him, I would tend to hedge my bets on that.  The possibility that he could perform well in a role similar to what you see smaller receivers doing, on the other hand, is quite possible, and probably a better fit for his particular skills, namely his above average speed.  His statistical production, also, can't easily be ignored.  Still, when I have watched him play, it was this speed that caught my eye, and not any sort of abundance of power or physicality.  Like I said, I think Jordan Matthews is kind of an optical illusion.

Kangaroo Court: The 2014 Wide Receivers

This year's list of wide receiver prospects probably isn't going to be very interesting to most people.  Last year, the list of receivers that the computer thought were interesting differed rather greatly from the players that were actually taken highly.  This time, the computer is largely in agreement with the general consensus, at least for the most part.  Perhaps the only interesting thing about this years' list, is the fact that the computer seems to have largely identified most of the prospects who are projected to be taken in the first few rounds, without ever actually seeing them play.

Among the receivers who were taken in the first 2 rounds last year, only DeAndre Hopkins actually met the computer's standards for being a probable success.  Even here, I think the computer would have had some minor issues with taking Hopkins in the first round, but that is just quibbling over value at this point.  Still, except for Keenan Allen, for whom we didn't have the necessary data to make an evaluation, Hopkins has so far been the most productive receiver of the 2013 class.  The accomplishments of Tavon Austin and Cordarelle Patterson are still lagging a bit behind, and largely hanging on their production as punt/kick returners, which is outside of the scope of what we are really looking for here.

As for some of the other players that the computer liked, we are still waiting to see what will happen.  Since they tended to be later draft picks, it could take some time, and maybe their opportunity will never come.  Getting an opportunity obviously matters a lot.  Ryan Spadola, who was the definition of an oddball prospect (and one of the computer's highest ranked small receivers), is a perfect example.  In the 2013 preseason, he appears to have had the 2nd most receiving yards among all receivers (213 yards on 13 receptions), even including veterans.  The next closest rookie was 43 yards behind him.  Not bad for an undrafted kid from Lehigh University, though evidently not good enough for the Jets.  They cut him, after throwing one regular season pass to him in a rain storm (which he dropped), because they felt they were all set at the receiver position with Stephen Hill.  Don't ask me to explain what they were thinking, because I have no idea.  All I'm trying to say is that opportunities don't always come to the players that might deserve them.

Since I only got around to mentioning receivers after the draft had already happened last year, I didn't really discuss the prospects very much.  The time for that sort of thing had already passed.  This year will be different in some ways.

I should also mention that, since this is an ongoing process that I am trying to gradually improve, I have contemplated making some changes to how the computer looks at wide receiver prospects.  Most of the changes I want to eventually make will relate to the "Big' receivers, where I am contemplating making the Agility Score a stronger factor.  I've also been thinking about altering the way that the computer looks at the issue of speed, with more attention paid to the the 10-yard splits.  Still, these issues are still in the pipeline, and there's a bit of fiddling left to do.  For this year, the game will superficially remain the same as before, as will the scores for the players.

As we did last year, I will list every wide receiver prospect who managed to produce both a Stat Score and an Athletic Score, that was no worse than -0.100 standard deviations below average.  The receivers will be divided into two groups, one for players that are over 200# (the 'Big' receivers), and those who are under 210# (the 'Small' receivers).  For players who fit in both groups (players who are between 200 and 210 pounds), I'll test them in both groups to see where they might fit best.  For 'Small' receivers, the computer puts more of an emphasis on speed and agility when forming their Athletic Score, and their Stat Scores is more demanding of multiple seasons of solid statistical production.  For the 'Big' receivers, the computer places more of an emphasis on power (the dreaded Kangaroo Score), and their Stat Score is somewhat less demanding.  I'll also filter out any 'Big' receivers with 40-times below 4.60 seconds, as well as filtering out 'Small' receivers with 40-times below 4.50 seconds.

Big Receivers

NAME	Stat Score	Athletic Score
Mike Evans	0.470	1.143
Donte Moncrief	0.019	1.532
Jeff Janis	1.897	1.014
Davante Adams	1.086	0.860
Jordan Matthews	1.444	0.239
Sammy Watkins	0.313	0.527
Allen Robinson	0.941	0.689
Cody Latimer	0.097	0.895

Small Receivers

NAME	Stat Score	Athletic Score
Michael Campanaro	0.548	0.225
Brandin Cooks	1.165	0.323
Erik Lora	1.310	0.220
Albert Wilson	1.270	0.502
Odell Beckham	0.120	0.432
Marqise Lee	0.838	-0.005

Of course, these are just the players that the computer thinks have the best chance of becoming 'average' NFL receivers.  My definition of average is a player that can produce 35 receiving yards per game played over the course of their career (a modest 560 receiving yards over 16 games), so my standards are fairly low.  I wouldn't take the scores listed above too seriously, as they are really scores that are built upon many smaller scores, which frequently matter even more.  This is just how I start the 'weeding out' process, to determine which players I want to focus my attention on.  In reality, I always end up having to veto some of the computer's recommendations for various reasons, which I will try to describe as we go along.  Unfortunately, my own worthless and subjective opinion does come into play a bit more on these vetoes.


Because of the way that data slowly becomes available, I will continue to modify and adjust some of these results as new information becomes available.

Sammy Watkins, WR, Clemson  Ht: 6' 0.75"  Wt: 211
40 Time: 4.34  Kangaroo Score: 0.166  Agility Score: -0.515
I have to admit that I have paid almost zero attention to Sammy Watkins.  It's fairly obvious that he will be taken before Team Kangaroo is on the clock at pick #17, so it really isn't worth my time to dig into him as a prospect.  From what I can tell he seems to have reliable hands, and while his physical traits outside of his 40 time aren't mind blowing, they still manage to get him a passing grade.  While his results may not look stunning, I will say that there are some weird inconsistencies in his combine data that would allow for a slightly more positive view of him, as well as the possibility that he might fit better among the 'Small' receiver group, where his stats would be weighed a bit differently.  For instance, his time in the 3-cone drill was a fairly average -0.143 standard deviations below average.  His short shuttle, on the other hand, was a rather poor -0.886 standard deviations below average.  It's somewhat less common to see this kind of difference between the two results, and I suspect Watkins could have cleared up this discrepancy, one way or the other, at his pro day.  Unfortunately, he chose to stand on his combine numbers, leaving me to wonder if there is an actual reason for concern, or not.  There was also a similar issue with the results from his vertical jump and broad jump, where his vertical came out significantly lower than I normally would have expected based on his broad jump results.  Basically, his results are just all over the map.  Like I said though, I've paid very little attention to Watkins.  While I'm willing to accept that Watkins can be a good receiver, I can't confidently bet on him being the best receiver in this draft class.

Mike Evans, WR, Texas A&M  Ht: 6' 4.75"  Wt: 231
40 Time: 4.47  Kangaroo Score: 1.408*  Agility Score: -0.550
I can understand why people are interested in Evans, and the power he brings to the table.  I'm just not convinced that this is enough on its own to guarantee success.  While people seem to keep trying to compare Evans to Vincent Jackson, the computer thinks he bears more of a similarity to Marques Colston and Reggie Williams.  While Colston, Williams, and Evans all had good Kangaroo Scores (in Evans case we only have his vertical jump to base this on), their overall athletic profiles are more like a moderately stiff and somewhat smaller tight end.  Even though I place less of an emphasis on agility for 'Big' receivers, when a player's results fall below -0.500, I do start to get a bit nervous.  While I like Colston, and the computer projected him as an interesting 2007 prospect, he is still a bit of an oddball.  I think Colston deserved to be selected higher than he was taken (7th round), but without the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, I think there were good reasons why he really didn't belong in the first 2 rounds of the draft.  I think the chances that Evans can perform at Colston's level are rather slim, though I would still say that Evans should become at least an average receiver (faint praise).  Personally, Evans didn't make much of an impression on me, when I watched him play.  With Texas A&M's offense spreading people out, and having a scrambling QB to distract people, I think this probably did Evans some significant favors.  That their offensive line also appeared to be giving Manziel extra time to scan the field, and for Evans to eventually get open, also adds to my concerns.  His resume seems to consist of the occasional dominating performance, like at Alabama or Arkansas, and then long stretches of almost complete irrelevance.  Personally, I probably wouldn't take Evans before the 3rd round, as I'm just not convinced he will end up being the sort of terror that some people expect him to become.

Marqise Lee, WR, USC  Ht: 5' 11.75"  Wt: 192
40 Time: 4.44  Kangaroo Score: -0.113  Agility Score: 0.651
Athletically, there isn't necessarily anything wrong with Lee.  The problem is that he sort of skates along the line of mediocrity in several areas, more than I would like to see in a supposed 1st round prospect.  His 10-yard split of 1.56 seconds, in particular, is right where I would begin to fret (at least for a small receiver), if it was any lower.  I have to admit that my opinion of Lee has continued to tumble the more and more I have seen him play.  I'm just not sure that his hands are really worthy of 1st round pick.  While his statistical production is pretty good overall, his reputation still seems to revolve around his 2012 season, and whether you believe that this represented his actual normal level of play, or whether that season was the aberration.  Injuries might explain his drop in production in 2013, but they don't really explain the rate at which he was dropping passes.  I wouldn't want to have that question lingering in my head, if I were selecting him in the 1st round, so I would probably pass on him, unless he fell quite a bit in the draft.

Brandin Cooks, WR, Oregon  Ht: 5' 9.75"  Wt: 189
40 Time: 4.30  Kangaroo Score: -0.759  Agility Score: 1.864
Imagine throwing a feather as hard as you could at Dan Snyder's head.  How much damage would it do?  That's sort of the situation we have with Brandin Cooks.  There just isn't enough power to really be intimidating.  Fortunately, he has the speed and agility to still provide a viable threat, though whether that is threatening enough to merit a 1st round pick is debatable.  Despite his somewhat more impressive bulk, the computer would still lump Cooks in with midget-class receivers such as T.Y. Hilton and DeSean Jackson, who also lack any real power.  I think there is a place for receivers like this, but drafting them in the 1st round would make me nervous, even though I think the odds of Cooks becoming a failure are somewhat slim.  It's just a question of whether his ceiling is high enough to justify such an investment.   His 2nd Gear Score of 0.20 also suggests that his deep speed is probably even more stunning than his already impressive 40-time might appear.  The computer does like Cooks a fair bit more than last year's Tavon Austin, though I would still probably view Cooks as just a luxury acquisition, for a team that already has other pieces in place.

Odell Beckham, WR, LSU  Ht: 5' 11.75"  Wt: 198
40 Time: 4.31  Kangaroo Score: 0.088  Agility Score: 1.565
I'm still not a fan of drafting smallish receivers in the 1st round, but I really can't find much about Beckham that is objectionable.  There was a bit of an issue with his 40-time at the combine, where his official result was a 4.43.  On his first run, he appears to have had a rather bad start with a 10-yard split of 1.59 seconds, and finished with a time of 4.40.  This result produces a 2nd Gear Score of 0.19, which does suggest that his deep speed is still quite impressive.  On his second run, he had an excellent 10-yard split of 1.50 seconds, and finished with a time of 4.31.  Again, his 2nd Gear score was 0.19.  However you look at these numbers, I think it is fair to say that Beckham isn't lacking deep speed.  While I would prefer to have seen stronger statistical production, he did manage to meet the computer's goofy standards, and I didn't see anything in his stats that would suggest a problem.  Personally, I thought he looked pretty good, and had above average hands.  I would say that the odds are pretty good that he will become an above average wide receiver, and he might be my favorite 'Small' receiver in this draft class..

Allen Robinson, WR, Penn State  Ht: 6' 2.5"  Wt: 207
40 Time: 4.48  Kangaroo Score: 1.370  Agility Score: 0.566
Getting an accurate account of Robinson's 40 time has been a bit ridiculous.  At the combine, where he weighed 220#, he had one run of 4.60 seconds, and another of 4.56 seconds.  That was moderately troubling, though his 10-yard splits were quite good.  Then, at his pro day, by which point he had dropped 13 pounds, he seems to have run a 4.48.  The problem is in how the computer looks at speed in relation to weight.  Regardless of any improvement in his 40 time, it is somewhat offset by his loss of mass.  Still, I like Robinson quite a lot.  He has power, agility and was highly productive.  His Agility Score would be even higher (1.695), if I used his pro day results, but for the time being, I am leaving that out.  His statistical production is even more impressive due to the degree to which his team heavily leaned on him as the primary force in their offense.  From what I can tell, he also seems to have rather excellent and reliable hands.  The fact that he is one of the younger WR prospects that will go near the top of the draft also carries some significant weight.  I do, however, think there is a fairly high likelihood that his ceiling might be capped a bit, and that he will become more of a possession receiver because of his lack of speed.  Despite this potential limitation, I'd be very interested in acquiring him.  The upside for Robinson might be similar to that of Mike "Not The Fat One" Williams, or Hakeem Nicks.  The downside might be something along the lines of Brandon Lafell.  While I'd probably be quite willing to pay a 2nd round pick for him, I'm not sure if the potential risks merit a 1st rounder, though it could be very tempting.  Either way, players who fit Robinson's athletic/statistical mold rarely fail, so he should be a relatively safe pick.

Jordan Matthews, WR, Vanderbilt  Ht: 6' 3"  Wt: 212
40 Time: 4.40  Kangaroo Score: 0.232  Agility Score: 0.051
Every single time I watch Matthews play, my opinion gets flipped around.  There's clearly no problem with his statistical production, where his results are stunning.  It's more of an issue with his physical traits.  The computer has generally had a hard time with these sorts of physically large receivers with just moderate lower body power (based on their Kangaroo Score).  Physically, the best comparisons I can give for someone like Matthews might be A.J. Green, Jordy Nelson, or Sidney Rice, who were also 'Big' receivers with mediocre Kangaroo Scores.  Of course, there are numerous others who haven't been quite as successful as those three, though most of them were unlikely to have Matthews production as a counterbalance.  Like Sidney Rice, I suspect there might be a somewhat higher risk of injury for Matthews, because of his somewhat lower score on the body mass index.  The computer actually sees Matthews as a 'Small' receiver in a 'Big' receivers body, if that makes any sense.  He seems to get by on speed and agility (his Agility Score may not look exceptional, but by 'Big' receiver standards it is pretty good), more so than by physically dominating his opponents the way most big receivers do.  Based on what I have seen of him, the computer's view of Matthews likely style of play seems to be a pretty good fit.  Some people have expressed minor doubts about his hands, though from what I could tell this wasn't a huge issue, and generally only became a concern on more tightly contested passes.  He wasn't pulling any Heyward-Bey types of drops.  It's when the computer looks at his speed relative to his weight, that Matthews seems to rise above the more common possession receivers and have some real down-the-field potential.  While I would generally prefer a more physically overpowering type of receiver, I have to admit that Matthews will probably become an above average receiver, and even has a good shot at ending up one of the best receivers in this draft class.

Cody Latimer, WR, Indiana  Ht: 6' 2.5"  Wt: 215
40 Time: 4.43  Kangaroo Score: 1.175  Agility Score:  ?
Latimer might be one of the biggest wildcards in 2014 draft.  When it comes to size, speed and power, everything checks out just fine.  Unfortunately, because of a foot injury, he never ran the short shuttle or 3-cone drill, so we'll never know his Agility Score.  Generally, I am suspicious of players who duck out on certain drills, while participating in others, since the player probably knows what their strengths and weaknesses are, and might be hiding something from us.  Though I put less emphasis on the Agility Score for 'Big' receivers, I do think results above, or below -0.500, would have a significant impact on projecting what Latimer may end up becoming, and have used that imaginary result to 'fill in the blanks' for Latimer, as I have a hard time imagining that he is any stiffer than Mike Evans.  This speculation brings me back to the Colston comparison that I brought up when discussing Mike Evans.  Personally, I found Latimer to be much more impressive than Evans, and probably a better heir to the Colston throne.  Latimer appeared to have better hands than Evans, be more physical, and have better speed.  Latimer also might be the best run blocking receiver that I have seen in this entire class.  His mediocre statistical production does cause me some concern, though his team appeared to lean on him just as much as Texas A&M leaned on Evans, in terms of the percentage of the teams total offense that they were each responsible for.  Indiana also didn't appear to be doing Latimer any favors, with the constant changing of the starting QBs.  He particularly seemed to struggle with Chase Coffman in 2012, who appeared to be a more conservative/incompetent QB.  When Sudfeld and Roberson came in, and were making more aggressive down-the-field passes, Latimer clearly did much better.  I suspect his struggles with Coffman might also point towards Latimer perhaps not having the sort of exceptional quickness and agility to dominate as a short range receiver, where these potentially missing traits might come into play more often.  It's just a hunch, and there isn't much I can do to confirm this.  On the other hand, as an intermediate-to-deep receiver, he might be one of the best prospects in this class.  If he is used as a go-up-and-get-it type of frisbee dog receiver, I think he would probably be excellent.  Unfortunately, the hype on Latimer is reaching the point where the risks might be starting to outweigh the rewards, and some people are even projecting that he could slip into the 1st round.  If he was available in the 3rd round, I would definitely take him.  In the 2nd round, I would have to seriously consider it.  In the 1st, I would find it a bit hard to justify...though I have been known to take a stupid gamble from time to time.  I probably like Latimer much more than some of the data would suggest was wise.

Davante Adams, WR, Fresno State  Ht: 6' 1"  Wt: 212
40 Time: 4.50  Kangaroo Score: 0.960  Agility Score: -0.054
I like Davante Adams, but I have to admit that I view him as just a backup plan if I were to miss out on Allen Robinson.  Basically, all of the concerns I have about Robinson extend to Adams, but are somewhat magnified.  Everywhere that Adams did well athletically, Robinson was just a bit better.  While Adams had stunning statistical production, Robinson produced to a greater degree with less surrounding talent (for the most part).  Since I think Robinson might be limited to more of a possession receiver role it's not surprising that my thoughts on Adams are running in a similar direction.  If there is one area where I think Adams comes out ahead of Robinson, it might be related to his hands.  They both seem to be reliable, but Adams hands appear to be just a bit more impressive.  I like Adams, though I doubt I would give him serious consideration before the 3rd round.

Donte Moncrief, WR, Mississippi   Ht: 6' 2"  Wt: 221
40 Time: 4.35  Kangaroo Score: 1.740  Agility Score: -0.545
Jeff Janis, WR, Saginaw Valley St.   Ht: 6' 2.75"  Wt: 219
40 Time: 4.30  Kangaroo Score: 0.986  Agility Score: 1.520
I would probably cut Donte Moncrief from this list altogether.  His combination of mediocre production and poor hands (most likely related issues), makes him too risky for where many people seem to be projecting that he will be taken, in the 2nd to 3rd round.  Considering the possibility that you can probably get a similarly athletic freak with similarly sketchy hands a couple of rounds later by selecting Jeff Janis, the value in looking at Moncrief seems unjustified.  There's just a little too much Robert Meachem to these guys for me to feel comfortable with using a high draft pick.  Still, I doubt they can be any worse than Stephen Hill.

Mike Campanaro, WR, Wake Forest  Ht: 5' 9.5"  Wt: 192
40 Time: 4.44  Kangaroo Score: 0.113  Agility Score: 1.116
As a mid-to-late round prospect, I think Campanaro is fairly interesting.  His Stat Score actually somewhat underrates his performance, as he missed numerous games with injuries.  At the same time...he missed numerous game with injuries, which is obviously a concern.  Athletically, he's perfectly reasonable, with the sort of quickness, speed, and agility I look for in a small receiver, though I wouldn't describe his speed as blazing.  He seems to have reliable hands, and I wouldn't be surprised if he turns out to be decent, if he can avoid injuries.

Albert Wilson, WR, Georgia St.  Ht: 5' 9"  Wt: 202
40 Time: 4.35  Kangaroo Score: 0.168  Agility Score: -0.169
I should probably cut Wilson from the list too.  His statistical production, while quite good, obviously came against a lower level of competition.  I also really didn't find him to be terribly interesting when I watched him play, but he appeared to be adequate.  The thing that really makes me want to scratch Wilson from consideration is his 10-yard split of 1.59 seconds.  Do you know what the history is of 'Small' receivers who can't crack 1.56 seconds in their 10-yard split?  It's not very good.  Not very good at all. 

Erik Lora, WR, Eastern Illinois   Ht: 5' 10.3"  Wt: 203
40 Time: 4.48  Kangaroo Score: -0.142  Agility Score: 0.526
I won't say much here.  He's obviously a long shot, from a lower level of competition, and has no shockingly exceptional physical traits.  When it comes to athletic ability, he's basically a thicker framed Marqise Lee, at a significantly lower price.  While Lee will obviously be given a prime opportunity to compete, Lora will be lucky to get drafted at all.  Still, I think he could find a niche on some teams.  He seems to be dependable, and that's not a bad thing.

Now, I'd like to take a moment to rant about some people who really scare me.

Whatever team ends up selecting Kelvin Benjamin, should probably check their GM for symptoms of dementia.  While Benjamin's 1,101 receiving yards in his final season at Florida State might seem impressive, it only represented 15.15% of the team's total offense, which is lower than what I am looking for.  Prior to the 2013 season, he was even less of a presence, and from what I could tell seemed quite unreliable at catching the ball.  The idea of drafting him simply because he is huge, doesn't really make a lot of sense either, as there was little evidence that he possessed any sort of superior athletic ability, since he did poorly in pretty much all of the combine drills.  While I don't make a big deal about Agility Score for 'Big' receivers, his result of -1.624 is still astoundingly bad.  I tried to give him the benefit of the doubt, and also weighed his numbers as if he was a tight end, but he still came out as a bit of a mediocrity.  I expect things to go rather badly for whichever team ends up making this pick.

Martavis Bryant is clearly am impressive athlete (4.34 40-time, 0.869 Kangaroo Score and a -0.406 Agility Score) , but I would have serious concerns about drafting him as highly as some people seem to be projecting he will be taken.  Among NFL players who have averaged 45 yards/game played (a higher tier than I have generally been discussing), almost none have had a stat score as low as Bryant's -0.409.  Among those who did, there was almost always an obvious explanation for their poor statistical production, such as Percy Harvin splitting time at RB, Josh Gordon getting suspended, or Stevie Johnson not getting significant playing time until his final college season.  Most of these factors are things I can adjust for, but in Bryant's case, there doesn't seem to be a great reason to overlook how little he actually accomplished.  He may become a useful player of some sort, but I have to doubt that he will produce to a level that would merit a pick in the first 3 rounds.

I feel somewhat bad for criticizing Paul Richardson.  Athletically, he has some worrisome issues (4.35 40-time, -1.037 Kangaroo Score and a -0.461 Agility Score).  His statistical production was pretty good...when he was able to play.  That right there is the issue.  His low score on the body mass index crushes his Athletic Score (his BMI result is -2.690 standard deviations below average), as the computer feels he is way too much of an injury risk because of his thin frame.  It's a similar situation to why the computer has never been a big fan of Sidney Rice, and I think we have all seen how that turned out.  That he has already missed significant time in his college football career due to injury, somewhat verifies that there is a reason for concern, and also knocks down his stat score due to lack of participation.  If he's healthy, he might still surprise me, but as a long term investment, he is very sketchy, especially for someone that people project might be selected in the 2nd round.

Kangaroo Court: The 2014 Running Backs

You could be looking at tentacle porn right this very second.  If you so wished.  Instead of that, you came here.  The simple fact that you've selectively wandered into this little corner of the internet practically guarantees that you are a classy and sophisticated individual (relatively speaking).  Perhaps you are a connoisseur of the arts.  Most likely, you drink with your pinky pointed outwards.  Your spouse is probably the sort who would decline membership in the Daughters of the American Revolution, as she is still a royalist.  I suspect that there's also a good chance that you spend your weekends engaging in dressage and falconry.  That's just how we do things around here, isn't it?

Being such a swell individual, you have probably been exposed to the 'great works' such as the 1973 masterpiece Soylent Green.  Perhaps the most fascinating aspect of the post-apocalyptic utopia that is portrayed in this film, other than its brilliant solution as to how we should deal with the rabble, was the oft overlooked real estate system it proposed.  In the future, it was suggested, every apartment came...fully furnished.  The film shows a time when men were men, and women were sofas.  It was a glorious time (for males in the economic top one-percent)!  The objectification of our fellow human beings was achieved to perfection, and probably not terribly different from what I imagine life is like inside Dan Snyder's underground volcano fortress.

In a similar fashion, I suspect we could view disposable meatsacks running backs as a form of Soylent.  They are increasingly becoming less and less valuable, and a commodity that should probably be used up and then quietly disposed of on the side of the road (hopefully before they start beating their fiancee).  Of course, as Charlton Heston might say,"It's people!  Running backs are made out of people!"  This little ethical dilemma is something we probably can, and should, overlook.  We really don't want to have our sleep disturbed by such unpleasant thoughts.  Beat them like a rented mule, and then send them to the glue factory.

When I have looked at the other position groups for the upcoming draft, I have tended to be extremely pessimistic.  I expect most of the draft prospects to do rather poorly, or at least not be exciting enough to aggressively pursue.  With running backs, I strangely lean slightly in the opposite direction...sort of.  I figure most of them are generally perfectly adequate, though still probably somewhat unexceptional.  While people are gradually embracing the idea that teams shouldn't invest 1st round picks in running backs, I'd probably go a step further.  I wouldn't take one before the 3rd round.  Hell, with the way the free agent market has been going in recent years, I would almost say that they aren't worth drafting at all, since they can be picked up on short term deals that pay almost nothing nowadays.  For the most part, I really don't think it matters who your team's running back is, as long as the offensive line is passably competent, and the running back's skills are used correctly.

If a player only has raw power, run him up the middle.  If he only has speed and agility, run him outside the tackles.  Let's not over-think this.  I hate to see teams that appear to be confused about this simple concept, and then whine about how the player isn't meeting their expectations the way the Dolphins have been doing with poor Lamar Miller.  Complaining that Lamar Miller isn't 'more physical' is just offensively stupid.  Lamar Miller has excellent speed (4.34 40-yard dash, with a 0.19 2nd Gear Score), very good agility (0.857 Agility Score), and showed that he can also catch the ball when he was in college.  What he doesn't have is remarkable power (0.071 Kangaroo Score), so wishing that he would behave like a human battering ram is unrealistic.  I like Lamar Miller a lot, but I think I appreciate him for what he is, not what I might wish that he could be.  Asking a player to be something other than what he actually is, strikes me as a bit insane.

I've already mentioned my peculiar views on running backs and their athletic abilities, so I'll just skip ahead a bit here.  The player's Kangaroo Score (our measure of lower body power) and Agility Score (based on their short shuttle and 3-cone times) will be given in the form of how many standard deviations above, or below average, that the player happens to be compared to his peers at the same position.  I'll also include the player's 2nd Gear Score, and Speed Score.  Personally, I have some issues with using the Speed Score, but a fair number of people are familiar with it, so I figured I would toss it in there.  I should also mention that I use the unofficial 40 times, rather than the magically altered official times of the NFL, since I prefer to look at the results in relation to a player's 10-yard split.

This list will continue to be updated, as new data and prospects come to my attention.  I won't list everyone here, but instead will just mention the players that I feel are interesting for one reason or another.

Tre Mason, RB, Auburn  Ht: 5' 8.4"  Wt: 207
40 Time: 4.45   2nd Gear: 0.08   Speed Score: 105.5   Kangaroo Score: 0.520  Agility Score: 0.854?
I don't have any serious complaints about Mason.  His Kangaroo Score suggests that he has at least moderate lower body power, even if he isn't exceptional here.  For his Agility Score, though, we have to solely rely on his short shuttle result, which is above average, since we are missing his 3-Cone time.  While his 40-time isn't stunning for a small running back, his 10-yard split of 1.53 seconds, does suggest a high degree of quickness.  When you combine all of this with his high level of productivity the last two years, Mason seems to have a perfectly reasonable resume.  While he's been highly productive, he hasn't caught many passes, though I thought he looked rather good when given an opportunity to do so.  Would I take him in the 2nd round, where he is generally projected to be selected?  No, because running backs are about as valuable as a moldy ham sandwich.  Still, I suspect he should do okay, and his high draft status will likely give him many opportunities to get on the field.

Carlos Hyde, RB, Ohio State  Ht: 5' 11.7" Wt: 230
40 Time: 4.61   2nd Gear: 0.08   Speed Score: 101.8   Kangaroo Score: 0.533  Agility Score: ?
I'm going to ignore his off-the-field issues, since they aren't my primary concern.  While Hyde has been rather productive, it was really only in his senior year where his stats suddenly went through the roof.  Unfortunately, I kind of feel that the teams he played against as a senior, just weren't terribly good.  He seemed to beat up a lot of mediocre programs like Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, etc.  That's not his fault, of course.  The schedule is the schedule, and he did what he should have done.  Still, when I see his measurable traits, it makes me worry about whether he has the athletic ability to perform against a higher level of competition.  I could forgive his poor speed (though his 10-yard split of 1.69 seconds really makes me worry about his quickness), if I he seemed to have exceptional power, but his Kangaroo Score is a bit pedestrian for someone who is promoted as being a power back.  As for his agility, it is hard to say since he didn't do the 3-Cone or short shuttle drills (though I will say that he didn't look terribly stiff to me).  In the end, I kind of suspect that his offensive line did him a lot of favors.  I can't say that he is incapable of succeeding, but I wouldn't want to bet on him.

Bishop Sankey, RB, Washington  Ht: 5' 9.4" Wt:  209
40 Time: 4.49   2nd Gear: 0.04   Speed Score: 102.8   Kangaroo Score: 0.231  Agility Score: 1.582
As his numbers would suggest, he seems to basically be an outside the tackles runner, with at least a  respectable ability to also catch the ball.  He was very productive, and I appreciate the added dimension he brings as a receiver, but I think whether he has great success will hinge somewhat on who selects him.  Players with his sort of average Kangaroo Scores aren't terribly likely to break many tackles, or run over anyone, so I generally think they require a competent offensive line more than some of their more powerful peers.  You generally expect to see smaller running backs exhibiting a higher degree of quickness, and his time of 1.53 seconds fits that expectation.  He struck me as a respectable running back, with the sort of nimbleness his measurables would lead you to expect, but I can't see taking him as highly as he is generally projected to go.

KaDeem Carey, RB, Arizona  Ht: 5' 9.3" Wt: 207
40 Time: 4.69   2nd Gear: -0.11   Speed Score: 85.5   Kangaroo Score: -0.526  Agility Score: -0.491
Carey was undeniably a very productive player.  Unfortunately, his results make it a bit of a mystery as to how he managed to do so well.  According to his measurable traits, he lacks speed, power, and agility, and I don't like to bet against the numbers.  While I can't say that Carey is doomed, I also can't see how anybody could confidently bet on Carey with a high draft pick, when there will be safer prospects out there.  He strikes me as a ridiculously unnecessary gamble, and I don't like to bet on a player being an outlier.  Honestly, I don't think he looks as bad as his number might suggest, but if you consistently make picks based on gut reactions or your lying eyes, you will most likely end up getting burned in the long run.

Jeremy Hill, RB, LSU   Ht: 6' 0.5"  Wt:: 233
40 Time: 4.59   2nd Gear: 0.01   Speed Score: 104.9   Kangaroo Score: -0.195  Agility Score: ?
Yes, Hill was very productive in his final year in college, but I don't trust him at all.  When you consider his weak measurables, along with the fact that he was running behind a fairly talented 271# fullback (J.C. Copeland), I begin to suspect that Hill might be product of his environment.  His game-to-game stats also seem to show a trend of beating up on the weak, and struggling against the better teams.

Devonta Freeman, RB, Florida State  Ht: 5' 8"  Wt: 208
40 Time: 4.51   2nd Gear: 0.06   Speed Score: 99.5   Kangaroo Score: -0.817  Agility Score: -0.157
Nope.  Nope.  Nope.  Not interested.  I really don't get the appeal of Freeman at all.

Charles Sims, RB, West Virginia   Ht: 6'   Wt: 214
40 Time: 4.46   2nd Gear: 0.07   Speed Score: 108.16   Kangaroo Score: 0.781  Agility Score: -0.412
For someone with a relatively low Agility Score, I'm surprised at how productive Sims has been as a receiving option.  Because of his above average Kangaroo Score, I think he could stand up reasonably well as a main carry running back.  He really strikes me as a very weird prospect.  That he excelled as a receiver, while being only moderately productive as a runner, is sort of the opposite of what the computer would have expected, given his athletic profile.  I wouldn't necessarily predict stardom for Sims, but I wouldn't be surprised if he became an adequate and versatile running back.  I see people projecting him to be taken in the 3rd round, and that is a little bit higher than I would consider selecting him, since there are other prospects I prefer over him.  He really strikes me as one of the more confusing running back prospects.

Lache "Loch Ness" Seastrunk, RB, Baylor   Ht: 5' 9"  Wt: 201
40 Time: 4.46   2nd Gear: 0.10   Speed Score: 101.59   Kangaroo Score: 0.976  Agility Score: 0.220
More than anything else, I am really impressed by his name.  That is going to be a tough selling point for his rivals to match.  I should probably note that Seastrunk improved his 40 time to a 4.37 at his pro day.  This would change his Speed Score to 110.23, and his 2nd Gear Score to 0.18.  Obviously, these improved results should be treated with some wariness, though I wouldn't completely dismiss them in this case.  Overall, Seastrunk has been a reasonably productive player, for a guy who has never had more than a paltry 158 carries in a season, though he's never been much of a receiving threat.  For a small running back, he also seems to have surprisingly respectable power.  I thought he was actually one of the more interesting running backs to watch, but without any demonstrated ability as a receiver (I'm not saying that he can't catch the ball, just that he hasn't so far), I probably wouldn't consider him before the 4th round.  Compared to a lot of the other running back prospects, I though he showed more suddenness/explosiveness, which also probably relates to his Kangaroo Score.  I wouldn't be surprised if he turns turns out to be one of the better RB prospects in this draft.

Andre Williams, RB, Boston College  Ht: 5' 11.3" Wt: 230
40 Time: 4.50   2nd Gear: 0.08   Speed Score: 112.17   Kangaroo Score: 1.931  Agility Score: 0.137
Based on his very high Kangaroo Score, but just moderate results relating to his speed and agility, he would appear to primarily be an inside the tackles battering ram.  He didn't strike me as terribly flashy, but every team should have at least one guy like this, who can consistently pound the ball for a short gain.  I suspect he should do okay on almost any team, since I think these sorts of power backs tend to be less dependent on their offensive line, though a good line would obviously still help.  For what he is, I like him a fair bit, and would love to see him paired up with someone like Zac Stacy.  Still, I probably wouldn't take him unless he fell to the 4th round, which is tiny bit later than some people seem to be projecting that he will go.

Jerick McKinnon, RB, Georgia Southern  Ht: 5' 9"  Wt: 209
40 Time: 4.37   2nd Gear: 0.15   Speed Score: 113.57   Kangaroo Score: 1.222  Agility Score: 0.985
Do you remember last year's hype over converting QB Denard Robinson to the running back position?  Well, as an all around athlete, McKinnon crushes Robinson.  While Robinson had blazing speed, he didn't have the sort of power or agility to be a serious running back threat, but McKinnon does.  Perhaps my favorite measurable trait of McKinnon's is his excellent 10-yard split of just 1.52 seconds, which suggests rather extreme quickness.  It doesn't do a player much good, being able to run forty yards quickly, if people are going to catch you in the first ten yards.  I'm sure people will fret about the level of competition McKinnon faced, but if he ends up being available in the middle-to-late rounds of the draft, I wouldn't worry about this too much.  I don't see a problem with rolling the dice on athletic freaks in the latter half of the draft.  If he was available in the 4th or 5th round, I would definitely be interested in selecting him, though I am somewhat concerned with the rumors that teams are considering converting him into a defensive back.

Tyler Gaffney, RB, Stanford  Ht: 5' 11"  Wt: 220
40 Time: 4.49   2nd Gear: 0.02   Speed Score:  114.24   Kangaroo Score: 0.415  Agility Score: 0.901
There's not much to criticize about Gaffney, when it comes to his athletic ability.  He seems to have respectable speed for a guy his size, reasonable power, and significantly above average agility.  He was also quite productive in his time at Stanford, though he didn't do much as a receiver.  Overall, he seems like an acceptable prospect for someone who is generally projected to go in the 4th or 5th round.  Still, I can't say that he blew me away, when I watched him play, but I guess he had his moments.  Something about Gaffney just never clicked with me, though I can't quite put my finger on it.  The main drawback to Gaffney seems to be his age.  I'm not sure how thrilled I would be about drafting a 24 year old running back.  Still, he seems like a reasonable player to abuse for a couple years, and then discard.

Rajion Neal, RB, Tennessee  Ht: 5' 11"  Wt: 220
40 Time: 4.57   2nd Gear: 0.06   Speed Score:  100.87   Kangaroo Score: 0.796  Agility Score: -0.642
I'm still waiting to see official pro day results for Neal, but this is where things stand now, based on the rumors.  I'll get around to exploring him at some later time.

Stephen Houston. RB, Indiana  Ht: 6' 0.75"  Wt: 225
40 Time: 4.52   2nd Gear: 0.06   Speed Score:  109.73   Kangaroo Score: 2.105  Agility Score: 0.135
CBS is currently projecting that Houston will go undrafted, which is frustrating, but somewhat understandable.  In terms of pure athletic ability, Houston is pretty impressive.  Unfortunately, there is a catch.  He has never rushed for more than 802 yards in a season, though a fair bit of this has to do with not getting a lot of carries.  Some games, he seems to just take over, and perform like a monster.  Other games, he seems to get tackled a little too easily for someone that the numbers would suggest should have excellent power.  He did show some ability catching the ball, so, he also has some versatility.  Overall, I rather like Houston as a late round or UDFA prospect, though I do wonder if there is some hidden reason for his lack of high level productivity.

Lorenzo Taliaferro, RB, Coastal Carolina  Ht: 6'  Wt: 229
40 Time: 4.54   2nd Gear: 0.03   Speed Score:  107.8   Kangaroo Score: 0.495  Agility Score: 0.527
While Taliaferro was extremely productive at Coastal Carolina, he was obviously playing against a fairly low level of competition.  While his measurable traits are reasonably respectable, there is nothing truly shocking about them.  I would say that this sort of mirrors what I saw of Taliaferro when I watched him play.  For a player of his size, his Kangaroo Score only suggests moderate potential as a power back.  My own worthless and subjective opinion of Taliaferro, is that he looked fairly wretched.  I would ignore Taliaferro as a draft prospect.

Damien Williams, RB, Oklahoma  Ht: 5' 11" Wt: 222
40 Time: 4.43   2nd Gear: 0.11   Speed Score: 115.28   Kangaroo Score: 0.662  Agility Score: -0.744
Well, he seems to have some speed, and at least a reasonable amount of power.  It's his Agility Score that is weighing him down in the eyes of the computer.  The problem here is that there is a significant difference between how he performed in the short shuttle, where he did fine (a result of 0.177), and his results from the 3-cone drill (-1.666 standard deviations below average).  Normally there is enough of a correlation between how a player does in these drills, that such extremely divergent results don't occur very often.  Based on what I have seen of him, I would tend to want to throw out his poor 3-cone time, as just a flukish anomaly.  If he was likely to be a high draft pick, throwing out data would bother me, but he isn't.  He struck me as a moderately talented player, who is probably worth a look as an UDFA, though I would probably never draft him.  He was supposedly kicked off the Oklahoma team for failing multiple drug tests, but if you're not doing drugs while you are in college you are probably missing the point of the entire experience.

Kangaroo Court: The 2014 Linebackers

What do you fear the most?  What makes you wake up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat?  Is it the Peruvian ridge-backed chupacabra that haunts your dreams?  Maybe, the Nicaraguan sabre-toothed chupacabra?  Perhaps it is the ring-tailed chupacabra of the Oaxaca region of Mexico?  Many an intrepid cryptozoologist has fallen prey to all of these creatures (exact statistics on chupacabra related deaths are unavailable due to the Lizard People covering up their existence), and I'm sure each and every one of these fallen heroes was convinced that there was nothing more terrifying than the particular beast which took them down.

Maybe your answer is simply,"My primary fear in life is the chupacabra, regardless of their regional variety".  This would be a very wise answer, as no chupacabra should be underestimated (particularly if they are protecting their nest).  Debating minor differences in how quickly you would be killed, by one chupacabra versus another, are pointless.  In much the same way, I feel that the desire to classify linebackers as inside linebackers, outside linebackers, linebackers for a 4-3 defense, or those for a 3-4 defense, can become a bit ridiculous.  I prefer to keep an open mind about most prospects, though I will acknowledge that some players do have traits that might limit their versatility.  I just wouldn't recommend making rash judgements based on minor differences in weight, which often seems to be the way these things are done.  It's the size of the fight in the chupacabra linebacker that matters most.

"80% of life is showing up"-Woody Allen

This quote sums up my views on tackle statistics (as well as TFLs, PBUs, INTs, and forced fumbles).  People often want to downplay a player's number of tackles, but particularly for linebackers, I don't think they should.  Even if this sometimes means accepting the fact that not all tackles are equal, I prefer to see a linebacker who at least shows up to where the ball is, even if it is just for an assisted tackle.  I still have a preference for solo tackles, but arriving on the scene to help a teammate probably shouldn't be so casually dismissed.  For middle linebackers, in particular, I expect to see very high tackle counts, if I am going to take them seriously.  People have occasionally questioned the value of tackle stats for defensive players, arguing that pile jumpers accumulate cheap stats just by showing up late in the play.  There might be some minor truth to this, but do you know what is worse than a cheaply acquired stat?  Not acquiring any stats at all, that's what.

"I only have one rule. Everyone fights. No one quits. You don't do your job, I'll shoot you myself."-Jean Rasczak (from the Academy Award winning movie Starship Troopers)

While I most likely wouldn't support threatening to shoot a teammate just to motivate them (there may be exceptions), I think this line pretty well captures the relentless lunacy I expect to see in a linebacker.  I sadly have to admit that there is some subjective analysis that goes into all of this.  While I generally only support players who have high statistical production, along with great athleticism, at some point I have to prioritize the few remaining players who managed to survive the weeding-out process.  At that point, it pretty much comes down to who I think was the most entertaining to watch, which also tends to be the person who I would least like to have chasing me down a dark alley.  I want my linebackers to play with a murderous rage and violence, even if this frequently seems to trickle into their off the field behavior.  I'm not married to these lunatics, so I'm not really terribly concerned if they are borderline insane.  I want them to be fueled by methamphetamine and 'roid rage...unless my annual income suddenly increases to the point where I might end up being neighbors with them...but until then, unleash the berserkers!

There is one additional factor that can cause me to rate a player higher than the conventional wisdom would dictate was sensible.  If the player, either legally or just as a nickname, is referred to as either Gator, Tank, or Peanut, this has some special appeal to me.  Yes, I am keeping a watchful eye on Gator Hoskins.  I can't say that these names have a strong correlation to a player having a successful career, but it can't hurt.

Since the athletic traits of players in this category are measured against all defensive prospects who are under 275#, this skews their results when it comes to the Kangaroo Score, because they don't have the same mass as some of the larger outside pass rushers in this weight class.  Since the goal is to see how many standard deviations away from an average result that a player is, we have to make some mental adjustments here.  For these (generally) lighter prospects, a Kangaroo Score of -0.800, would be the approximate point at which we would find the 'average' player in this group.  Among these lighter prospects, you typically start to see Pro Bowl and All Pro players reaching a score of -0.400, or better.  Just like the Kangaroo Score, the Agility Score (which comes from the short shuttle and 3-cone drill), will also be given in the form of how many standard deviations away from the  average result that a player is.  Normally, I would expect a player with a higher Kangaroo Score to be a stronger hitter, and more productive on blitzes, while a player with a high Agility Score will probably be better in coverage.  Still, nothing is set in stone, and individuals do vary in how they perform.

This list will continue to be modified and updated, as new data and prospects come to my attention.  The list won't include every player. but instead, just the ones that I find interesting for one reason or another.  Updated 5/4/2014


Anthony Barr, OLB, UCLA
40 Time: 4.66    Kangaroo Score: 0.563   Agility Score:  1.255
As I said earlier in the post on DEs & 3-4 OLBs, I think Barr might be more interesting as an OLB in a 4-3, rather than in a 3-4.  While he's a physically gifted guy, and has been quite productive, I think he does much better when operating in space, and struggles a bit more when directly tied up with OTs.  That's just my opinion, and I'm not inclined to make much of a fuss about it if others disagree.

C.J. Mosley, ILB, Alabama
40 Time: 4.62   Kangaroo Score: -0.748   Agility Score:  -0.251
Well, he appears to have extremely average lower body power, slightly below average agility, and speed of the okay-to-"meh" variety.  This sort of mediocre athleticism might actually be excusable, if the player had exceptional statistical production, but he doesn't.  Don't get me wrong, he was reasonably productive, just not enough to make me perk up and pay attention.  It also probably doesn't help that whenever I watched him play, I felt myself slipping into a coma out of sheer boredom.  I really don't see anything to suggest that he deserves to be taken before the 4th or 5th round.  Still, he will probably be taken fairly early, and many opportunities to start will be given to him.  People will see what they want to see, and be eager to say that he is performing brilliantly.  If he does end up as a disappointment, I think it will probably take time for people to come to that conclusion, as people will mainly want to see the positive aspects of a high draft pick.  I really don't see what makes him any different from his predecessor, the mediocre Rolando McClain.  Of course, there are still people who insist that McClain was a real talent, even to this day, and I've largely given up on trying to debate this issue.

Ryan Shazier, OLB, Ohio State
40 Time: 4.38   Kangaroo Score:  0.964   Agility Score:  1.026
Shazier is going to put me into an awkward position.   Yes, he is an amazing athlete.  Yes, his statistical production in college was very impressive.  Still, despite all of that, I'm just not terribly excited about him.  Every time I watch him play, I just see a guy that makes weak or ineffectual tackles, which is not something I want to see in a linebacker.  Then I look at his stat sheet, and I am confronted with somebody who doesn't appear to have any problem racking up tackles.  Cognitive dissonance is rattling my mind.  I had a similar issue with Bobby Wagner a couple of years ago.  The computer loved him, but watching him play just didn't set my panties on fire.  So, you're probably best served by ignoring my deranged concerns on Shazier, because the computer thinks he could be a star.

Kyle Van Noy, OLB, BYU
40 Time: 4.71   Kangaroo Score:  -1.002   Agility Score:  0.456
This was already covered in the post about DEs and 3-4 OLBs, but since Van Noy could be suitable for a 4-3 defense, I am forced to repeat some things.  While I do think Van Noy would do better in a 4-3, I still would feel a bit nervous about him..  There are aspects of his statistical production that are very encouraging, like his high number of TFLs.  Then, there are aspects of his physical profile that I find very worrisome, such as his below average Kangaroo Score.  Taking him in the first few rounds, where he is projected to go, strikes me as very risky, so I would avoid him.

Trevor Reilly, OLB, Utah
40 Time: 4.66   Kangaroo Score:  -0.907   Agility Score:  ?
I really don't care what his measurables are, or how productive he was in college.  He's 26 years old, and that freaks me out.  By the time he adjusts to the higher level of competition in the NFL, he will probably be entering his inevitable physical decline.  I just don't get how people are projecting him as a 2nd to 3rd round draft pick.

Yawin Smallwood, ILB, Connecticut
40 Time: 5.01   Kangaroo Score:  -0.548   Agility Score:  ?
It's starting to look like we will never get a full set of results for Smallwood.  His Kangaroo Score is acceptable, if not particularly exciting.  I suspect he is avoiding doing the short shuttle and 3-Cone drills, because he knows he will do poorly in them.  From what I have seen nimbly-toed gracefulness is not his strong suit, so I'm not surprised that he might duck out of doing these drills.  His statistical production was above average, but I can't say I was too impressed by him.  He didn't seem to be an amazing tackler, despite his stats, or terribly aggressive.  He also seemed to be just about as slow as his wretched 40 time would suggest.  I think he's overrated, for a player that people are projecting will go in the 3rd round. 

Chris Borland, ILB, Wisconsin
40 Time: 4.83   Kangaroo Score:  -0.257   Agility Score:  0.340
He actually strikes me as an okay little prospect.  Nothing about him really blows me away, but I could see him being a solid role player, that might even thrive in the right situation.  His college production was a fair bit above average, and he showed some ability as a blitzer as well as a handful of tipped passes.  He strikes me as a somewhat athletically limited guy, who might do better as an ILB in a 3-4, where he wouldn't have to cover as much ground.  When I watched him play, he seemed to run in the wrong direction a little bit more than I would hope for.  I don't expect him to become a star, but wouldn't be surprised if he is a useful/serviceable type of player, and probably wouldn't take him before the 4th round.

Shayne Skov, ILB, Stanford
40 Time: ?   Kangaroo Score:  ?   Agility Score:  ?
I can't say too much about Skov until we get some sort of Pro Day results.  I thought he looked pretty good against the run, but rather poor in coverage.  Injuries seem to be an issue for him.  Without some sort of confirmed measurables, I would be forced to pass on him.

Telvin Smith, OLB, Florida State
40 Time: 4.52   Kangaroo Score:  -1.867   Agility Score:  -0.442
Let's see if we can save some time here, by being succinct.  I think he is going to struggle to have much of an impact.  Too succinct?  Okay.  I think he is going to get annihilated if someone insists on playing him at linebacker.  Of course, some people would suggest that he might play strong safety, since he is only 6'3", and 218 pounds.  That sounds reasonable until you look at his Agility Score, which would be even lower if he was being compared to the average results for defensive backs.   I'm not sure that there really is an appropriate position for him.

Jordan Tripp, OLB, Montana
40 Time: 4.67   Kangaroo Score:  -0.316   Agility Score:  1.757
As an overall athlete, Tripp is rather impressive, and his statistical production was quite good, even if it came against a relatively low level of competition.  Still, from the little I have been able to see of him, he didn't really blow my mind.  He struck me as relatively soft, and someone who mainly excelled in coverage, which probably isn't surprising when you consider his excellent Agility Score.  I think he has some potential, but I'm not sure if I would be willing to pursue him as high as the 3rd round, where people seem to be projecting that he will be taken.  Still, he is somebody who I would keep my eye on.

Christian Kirksey, OLB, Iowa
40 Time: 4.50   Kangaroo Score:  -0.452   Agility Score:  0.059
I wouldn't make fun of anyone for selecting Kirksey.  He has fairly good athletic ability.  He was pretty productive, even if he didn't make as many plays behind the line of scrimmage as I would like to see.  In the little I have seen of him, he looked pretty good on the field.  So, I wouldn't be surprised if he turns out to be an okay player, though I'm not sure if he is special enough to warrant a 3rd round pick, which is where I see people projecting him to go.  It should also be mentioned that Iowa had a surprising number of reasonably talented players on their defense, such as James Morris and Anthony Hitchens, who will also be selected in this draft, which somewhat makes me wonder how much Kirksey benefited from all of this. 

Kevin Pierre-Louis, OLB, Boston College
40 Time: 4.51   Kangaroo Score:  0.205   Agility Score:  1.533
Hello?  Is it Pierre-Louis you're looking for?  I really like Pierre-Louis.  He's quick (1.53 10-yard split), fast, powerful, and agile.  When I watched him play, he more than met the expectations I had based on his measurable traits.  He looked good in coverage.  He was impressive on blitzes.  He seemed more than capable of running people down, and made good tackles.  People seem to be projecting that he will be taken in the 5th or 6th round, but I suspect he will go higher than that.  I have to imagine that the relatively low projections people have for him are being influenced by his weight (232#), and the fact that he has missed 3 games in 2012 and 2011 with injuries, but this doesn't really bother me too much.  While I can understand how people might not be thrilled with his weight, that seems like something that can be cured with a high-cheeseburger diet.  I suspect he could become a rather special player, and be more positionally versatile than some might expect.  He's a rather high priority target for Team Kangaroo, and I would go so far as to say that I greatly prefer him over the more highly touted Ryan Shazier.  I would probably start to consider Pierre-Louis in the 3rd round.

Lamin Barrow, ILB, LSU
40 Time: 4.64   Kangaroo Score:  -0.338   Agility Score:  0.002
On paper, he's a fairly mediocre athlete, with fairly good statistical production.  He didn't make much of an impression on me.  In fact, he kind of put me to sleep.  I suspect playing at LSU is the main reason he is getting mentioned as a prospect.  People are projecting that he will go in the 4th to 5th round, but I would ignore him.

Morgan Breslin, OLB, USC
40 Time: 4.60   Kangaroo Score:  -0.662   Agility Score:  ?
It's really unfortunate that we may never get to know Breslin's Agility Score, as I think he is a really interesting prospect.  As a pass rusher, he was about as productive as anyone who will be available in this year's draft, though he was derailed by injuries this last year.  His Kangaroo Score isn't quite what I would have hoped to see, but is still within the tolerable/average range for a linebacker.  His speed is perfectly acceptable, though his 10-yard split of 1.59 seconds is even more promising.  So, we are left wondering if he might have some sort of extreme agility that would make him a worthwhile target, and explain whether he can continue to do well.  I loved watching him play, but without sufficient data to make an assessment, I would have to pass on him, which annoys me a bit.

Preston Brown, ILB, Louisville
40 Time: 4.86   Kangaroo Score:  -0.143   Agility Score:  0.753
I don't want it to sound as if I am terribly excited about Brown, because I'm not.  Still, if he were used as a 3-4 ILB, he might be somewhat useful, and I think this might minimize his shortcomings in terms of speed.  He's a fairly nimble, hefty player (251#), who just doesn't appear to have much range.  His college production was reasonably good, though nothing amazing.  I probably wouldn't pursue him, but if he was there in the 6th round, I could see him producing acceptable results for the right team.

Carlos Fields, OLB, Winston-Salem State
40 Time: 4.50   Kangaroo Score:  0.378   Agility Score:  0.748
This is probably only going to cause me heartache, but I have to do it.  If you're looking for a Paul Worrilow or Vincent Rey type of linebacker prospect, someone extremely cheap who might emerge as something special, this might be your guy.  Yes, he played at a goofy school, but he seems to have been reasonably dominant while he was there, which is all you can ask from him.  He showed production in almost every aspect of the game, making tackles for a loss, interceptions, and forced fumbles.  From the little I have been able to see of him, he looks like he could be a terror.  Athletically, he has the speed, power, and agility to be quite special.  For some reason, that I can't explain, people seem to think that C.J. Mosley is a 1st round talent, and that Fields is a nobody who might not even get drafted.  If I had to choose, I would go with Fields over Mosley every single time, and the fact that one will be much cheaper than the other just makes it an even simpler decision.  Am I saying that I would take Fields in the 1st round?  Hell no!  I'm just dumpster diving here, and looking for value.  There are no guarantees that Fields will turn out to be a good player, but if he is given an opportunity I think the odds are better than some might suspect.  Unfortunately, I do have to worry about whether a team will give him much of a chance, and that his talent will be squandered.  I would probably start to target Fields in the 5th or 6th round, though many are projecting that he will go even later, if he is even selected at all.  I have to admit that I have a serious weakness for strange prospects like Fields.

Brock Coyle, ILB, Montana
40 Time: 4.60   Kangaroo Score:  -0.601   Agility Score:  1.160
While his measruables aren't quite as impressive as his Montana teammate Jordan Tripp, they are still rather good.  Just like I said with Tripp, I would be concerned about the level of competition that Coyle faced, though there isn't much we can do about that.  It is what it is.  I can't claim to have watched very much of him, since Montana games are difficult to come across, but from the little I have witnessed, I think I preferred him to Tripp.  He just struck me as the more intimidating, and aggressive player, who might also be a better tackler.  Since Coyle is only projected to be a 7th-round-to-undrafted type of prospect, the price of admission is also lower.  As a 'lottery ticket' pick at the very end of the draft, I think he could be rather interesting.

James Morris, ILB, Iowa
40 Time: 4.78   Kangaroo Score:  -0.179   Agility Score:  0.553
He appears to be a good athlete with good statistical production.  Like his teammate Christian Kirksey, I have to wonder how much he benefited from the talent that surrounded him at Iowa, but for a player that is projected to go in the 7th round, or go undrafted, this is less of a concern.  While I wouldn't bet on him becoming a star, I wouldn't be surprised if he outperforms a number of the more overrated prospects who will be taken ahead of him, if he is given a chance.

Howard Jones, OLB, Shepherd
40 Time: 4.60   Kangaroo Score:  0.339   Agility Score:  -0.009
Jones is obviously an odd duck, coming from Shepherd College.  Still, for someone who is only projected to be a late round pick, he has some upside.  His 10-yard split (1.58 seconds) suggests that he has good quickness, and he has decent speed, but it is his above average Kangaroo Score (for someone his size, at least) that is probably his best attribute.  It would suggest that he could be a decent pas rusher, as a 4-3 OLB, which was sort of his area of strength in college, where he accumulated a lot of TFLs.  Outside of that, I think he would probably just be fairly average.  He's not someone I would freak out about, but he might have some upside.

Kangaroo Court: The 2014 Defensive Backs

I suspect that whatever I say about defensive backs will leave me wide open for bloody and contentious arguments.  I'm almost tempted to avoid this subject altogether, but that would be a bit cowardly.  Depending on how things play out, I might end up claiming that I was drunk when I wrote this, just to have an excuse.

The problem, as I see it, is the incredible volatility in the way we perceive the quality of defensive backs.  Perhaps more than any other position group, one day's hero is the next day's goat.  A good middle linebacker or defensive tackle can be selected year after year to Pro Bowl or All Pro teams (not that these honors should be taken too seriously), but outside of a very select group of players, there seems to be a constant changing of the guard in the defensive backfield.

I don't really think that the quality of most players probably changes very much from year to year, or at least not as much as our attitudes about them do.  Sure, a player might improve with experience, and decline with age and injuries, but their essential qualities are probably fairly set.  Part of our change of perception is probably due to Interception Hysteria, where a player suddenly grabs people's attention with a handful of eye-popping plays, but the second his numbers dwindle, so does the mania.  When the dynamic and explosive results shrink into the background, you are often left with a player that has exploitable flaws.  Those flaws start to stand out a bit more, and we begin to judge them more harshly.  I suspect this is just as big of a problem for teams, as it is for fans, as they frequently over-invest in flash-in-the-pan players, only to later wonder why the well seems to have run dry.  I tend to believe that what a player is, he most likely will largely remain, but his circumstances and surrounding talent can be constantly evolving.

When people debate which position influences the success of the other more, defensive backs aiding the pass rush or vice versa, I tend to come down pretty strongly in favor of the pass rushers.  I think a team can probably do pretty well with mediocre defensive backs, if their pass rush is strong.  I'm not so sure about how reliable or consistent the results are with the opposite approach.  Of course, defining what a "mediocre defensive back" is, is its own problem.  I suspect that most defensive backs are pretty mediocre (well, statistically speaking, they have to be), though our hysteria can often elevate these players, for a time, to some lofty and highly paid pedestals.  Was Pro Bowler Mike Jenkins actually talented (yes, he surprisingly made a Pro Bowl in 2009), or was he a player with limited ability who benefited from the seemingly eternal luster of being a former 1st round pick, as well as playing behind DeMarcus Ware?  It's a tricky question to answer (no, it really isn't), though I personally suspect that Jenkins likely sucks.  Why do I think this?  Well, I think despite people's optimistic hopes for him, he probably lacked the athletic ability to really reach the greatest heights of success.

While some players might only thrive in a certain environment, there are certain players who seem so exceptional that it is hard to imagine a situation where they wouldn't perform well.  I like to picture the great defensive backs as if they were Marcel Marceau, capable of mimicking their opponents movements to perfection.  There aren't enough discussions about football that end up mentioning dead French mimes, and I am trying to rectify that problem.  While people get excited about a great 40 time, I think it's really exceptional agility that separates the great from the merely good.  For this we have the Agility Score (based equally upon a player's short shuttle drill and 3-Cone drill), to show how many standard deviations above, or below average, that a player is relative to other players in his position group.  While I can never definitively say who the "great" players are, we can make a simple comparison here.

	40 yard	2nd Gear	Agility
Champ Bailey	4.28	0.20	2.575*
Darrelle Revis	4.38	0.08	1.176
Patrick Peterson	4.31	0.18	1.160
Mike Jenkins	4.38	0.09	-1.552

While they are all quite fast, it is pretty easy to see which one of these players is not like the others.  In Champ Bailey's case, we only have the data from his short shuttle to go on, but there tends to be enough of a correlation between short shuttle results, and 3-Cone results, to safely expect that the missing information probably wouldn't have been capable of hurting him very much.  In fact, I might argue that the short shuttle drill might be slightly more valuable than the 3-Cone drill, when it comes to predicting success, though I don't want to get into that right now.

When you consider the huge physical advantages that players like Bailey, Revis, and Peterson have, it's not hard to imagine why they have found success.  You can almost picture them whistling Anything You Can Do, as they run about the field, perfectly capable of matching almost any movement their opponents makes.  Yes, I started out making references to mimes, and felt I should add more hyper-masculine references from the musical Annie Get Your Gun.  Life is simply easier for the supremely gifted athlete.  This doesn't mean that I think a high agility score guarantees success, or that a player with a poor result will fail.  I would, however, probably suggest that players who fall on either of the two extreme ends of this scale, will have wildly different probabilities of finding success.

But it's all so much more wonderfully complicated than just a player's agility.  There are probably a dozen different athletic or statistical areas of concern for us to fret about, all with varying degrees of potential importance.  Quickness, speed, size, power, and proven college production are all worth putting on the scale.  While individual players can find varying degrees of success, and defy our expectations, gambling on players who have a paucity of evidence to support the views you have based on your lying eyes, is a difficult gamble to justify.  This is particularly true, if you are thinking about using a high draft pick.  Of course, as you get deeper into the draft, it is reasonable to lower your standards a bit.

So, to the best of my limited ability, I will try to narrow down the field of prospects, looking for the players that I feel have the odds most strongly tilted in their favor.  The degree to which I value one piece of data over another, will shift somewhat, as we move from cornerbacks, to free safeties, to strong safeties, but the goal is always the same.  That goal is to minimize the risk of doing something that is potentially stupid.  Perhaps, even more importantly than seeking to identify gems, we are really seeking to avoid busts.  Mediocrity is tolerable.  Selecting someone who becomes an outright failure isn't.

Besides the player's Agility Score, I will also list their 2nd Gear score, and their average number of passes defended in their last two years in college.  Like Charles Nelson Reilly in a bathhouse, I think a high quality DB should probably be grabbing balls with some frequency.  For safety prospects, my expectations for the Agility Score will go down a bit, but I hope to see an increase in their Kangaroo Score (our measure of lower body power), which is also given in the form of how many standard deviations that a player is away from the average result for someone in their position group.

Let the guessing begin....

This list will continue to be modified and updated as new data, and additional prospects, come to my attention.  Not every prospect will be included here, but instead, just the ones that I find interesting for one reason or another.  Updated: 5/6/2014


Darqueze Dennard, CB, Michigan State  Ht: 5'10.75"  Wt.: 199
40 time: 4.41  2nd Gear:  0.16   Agility Score:  -1.235   Avg. PD:  12
Well, what do you do with a guy who has poor agility, average speed, and relatively mediocre quickness (1.57 10-yard split), as well as just slightly better than middle-of-the-road statistical production?  I certainly don't see any of this as a reason to believe that he should really go in the 1st round, and I suspect that people are being blinded by his moderately impressive number of interceptions (10 in the last three years). Personally, I think he would do better as a free safety, though I would still would have some concerns even there.  As a cornerback, I think he is probably a moderate fraud, though that doesn't mean he can't be serviceable to some degree.  I just doubt he will ever be able to deliver the level of high quality play that you would expect for such a potentially high draft pick.

Justin Gilbert, CB, Oklahoma St.  Ht: 6'  Wt.: 202
40 time: 4.31  2nd Gear:  0.23   Agility Score:  -0.790   Avg. PD:  11.5
I have somewhat mixed feelings about Gilbert.  On the one hand, his Agility Score is rather troubling, though this this is largely because of the poor short shuttle time at his pro day.  So, I think he could struggle against quick, agile receivers who run sharp routes.  On the other hand, he probably has the size, speed and power to adequately match up with some of the bigger receivers, who generally aren't terribly nimble.  I think he could do an okay to good job, but most likely will never truly be great.  For someone his size, he doesn't strike me as much of a force against the run, though he should be capable of doing so (0.506 Kangaroo Score).  I have a hard time getting excited about Gilbert, though I wouldn't necessarily bet against him.

Ha'Sean 'Ha Ha' Clinton-Dix, FS, Alabama   Ht: 6' 1.3"  Wt.: 208
40 time: 4.58  2nd Gear:  0.02   Agility Score:  -0.603   Avg. PD:  7.5
I really don't get the appeal of Clinton-Dix as a draft prospect, and fully expect him to become a disappointment like most of the recent players who came out of Alabama.  His Agility Score is too low for me to take him seriously as a free safety, and is more in line with what I expect to see from a strong safety.  At the same time, he seems to lack the power to be a strong safety (0.079 Kangaroo Score), where I would hope to see something closer to a 1.000.  His college production was also very much of the "meh" variety,  in my opinion.  I would avoid him altogether, let alone in the 1st round, though he does get points for having a name that is fun to say.  Ha Ha, indeed, the joke will be on somebody.

Calvin Pryor, FS, Louisville    Ht: 5' 11"  Wt.: 207
40 time: 4.58  2nd Gear:  0.00   Agility Score:  -0.595   Avg. PD:  7
Athletically, he is very similar to Clinton-Dix, and raises a lot of the same concerns.  The main difference is that Pryor was much more productive (though their Avg. PD is similar), and more entertaining to watch, which at least allows me to raise the argument that perhaps his measurable traits don't adequately capture what he brings to the table.  While he is listed as a free safety, he seems to play more like a strong safety, and his Agility Score would be perfectly acceptable for that role.  My only real concern with him as a strong safety prospect would be his Kangaroo Score, which is just  0.072, though he seems to be a pretty good hitter despite this average result.  While I wouldn't be able to select him, because Reilly and I need to unanimously agree about a prospect in order to choose him (Reilly doesn't like him), he does strike me as a fairly entertaining prospect who could exceed our expectations. 

Bradley Roby, CB, Ohio St   Ht:  5' 11"  Wt.: 194
40 time: 4.34  2nd Gear:  0.17   Agility Score:  0.862   Avg. PD:  17.5
Well, he is very physically gifted, and unlike some corners he actually seems to be willing to hit people.  Perhaps even more than his impressive speed, I am drawn in by his exceptional quickness (1.51 10-yard split).  His statistical production was well above average, and he made plays in multiple aspects of the game, which is good to see.  He's actually slightly younger than some of the other corners (born 5/1/1992), which I like, and this could give him some advantages in terms of further development.  I'm not sure if I really see any significant problems here.  While I don't think he is necessarily overly dominant in any one area, I think he might be the one of the safer overall compromises in terms of size, athleticism, production.

Jason Verrett, CB, TCU   Ht:  5' 9.5"  Wt.: 189
40 time: 4.36  2nd Gear:  0.14   Agility Score:  1.175   Avg. PD:  19 
He's quick, fast, agile, and productive.  So, obviously, I like him quite a lot.  With that said, I think there are still limitations to what you can expect from such a relatively small corner.  From what I can see, he does appear to be quite capable in coverage, though there are times where he gets pushed around a little bit.  He's kind of like a relentless little chihuahua, that keeps nipping at your ankles, and slowly driving you insane.  If it weren't for the size concerns, I would say he is the probably the most appealing corner prospect that I have seen in this draft.  An obvious person to compare him to might be someone like Lardarius Webb, though Verrett is actually slightly heavier and much more physically gifted than Webb was (at least on paper), though Verrett's 40-yard dash is just a tiny bit less impressive.  As long as you don't expect him to shutdown larger receivers of the Andre Johnson or Calvin Johnson variety (not that any corner really does this), I don't see any reason to think he shouldn't do quite well.

Kyle Fuller, CB, Virginia Tech   Ht: 5' 11.5"  Wt.: 190
40 time: 4.40  2nd Gear:  0.12   Agility Score:  -0.053   Avg. PD:  9.5
I don't necessarily have a huge problem with Fuller's average agility, or the mediocre rate at which he got his hands on the ball.  To some extent, his strengths seemed to lie in his above average physical play, and that's fine.  His Kangaroo Score of  0.288 is tiptoeing into the realm of the safeties, when it comes to potential hitting power, and his above average number of tackles for a loss lines up nicely with this strength.   Still, I probably wouldn't draft someone with his physical traits as highly as he is projected to go, since I think the first couple of rounds should be reserved for defensive backs with truly exceptional coverage skills.  As with Bradley Roby, I would give him some extra consideration just for being a bit younger than some of the other prospects (born 2/16/1992).  While he may end up being a good corner, I would probably bet against him becoming a great one.  I wouldn't give him serious consideration until the 3rd or 4th round, though that isn't the insult it may sound like to some people. 

Marcus Roberson, CB, Florida  Ht: 6'  Wt: 191
40 time: 4.61  2nd Gear:  -0.04   Agility Score:  0.474   Avg. PD:  8.5
For some reason I seem to run across a lot of people projecting Roberson as a 2nd round pick.  I don't quite get what they are thinking on this one, but I wish them luck.

Lamarcus Joyner, CB, Florida St.  Ht: 5'8"  Wt: 184
40 time: 4.47  2nd Gear:  0.12   Agility Score:  -1.677   Avg. PD:  6
I can only assume that the people who are promoting Joyner as a high draft pick, are doing so as a joke. 

Jaylen Watkins, CB, Florida   Ht: 5' 11"   Wt: 194
40 time: 4.41  2nd Gear:  0.09   Agility Score:  -1.694   Avg. PD:  9
I wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole, though people seem to be projecting that he will go in the 2nd or 3rd round.

Jimmie Ward, FS, Northern Illinois   Ht: 5' 10.75"  Wt.: 197
40 time: 4.47  2nd Gear:  0.09   Agility Score:  -0.200   Avg. PD:  15.5
I like Jimmie Ward a lot.  I'm just not sure what position he should play.  Athletically he falls into a somewhat gray area between free safeties and cornerbacks.  While I normally place almost no value in a player's results from the bench press, his 9 repetitions does set off some alarms for me.  The bench press tends to be a terrible thing to put much stock in, except for weeding out players with abnormally low results.  Ward's result was about half of what I would normally expect to see for a safety prospect, and there does seems to be some correlation between this and a player's ability to become an exceptional tackler.  Despite this concern, he actually appears to be pretty good when making tackles, though they tend to be of the go-for-the-ankles variety, and this leaves me feeling somewhat concerned about what will happen when he faces bigger and more powerful running backs and tight ends, who might just plow through him.  His 0.502 Kangaroo Score, is also only a moderately good/acceptable result for a safety (though quite good for a corner).  All of this combined with his relatively small size for a safety (5' 10.75", and 197#) makes me worry about how he will stand up to the punishment.  I really have to wonder if he would be better off being used in a cornerback/nickelback role.  Still, he has proven to be a surprisingly capable tackler, and has been extremely productive.  Part of me would be very tempted to take him in the 2nd round, though it would make me nervous, and probably be a bit of a violation of some of my rules.  Either way, he is a very exciting player to watch, and I think he is vastly more interesting than Ha'Sean Clinton-Dix.

Deone Bucannon, SS, Washington St.   Ht: 6' 1"  Wt.: 211
40 time: 4.48  2nd Gear:  0.06   Agility Score:  -0.444   Avg. PD:  7.5
My feelings about Bucannon sort of waver, going one way and then the other.  But they're just feelings, nothing more than feelings.  While his Agility Score is nothing to write home about, it is in an acceptable range for a strong safety.  While strong safeties tend to lag behind other defensive backs when it comes to agility, they generally compensate for this with power.  Bucannon's 1.162 Kangaroo Score suggests to me that the power is in fact present.  When it comes to athletic ability, he is basically the prototypical strong safety.  His statistical production was excellent, and diverse, with 15 career interceptions, 7 forced fumbles, and 13.5 tackles for a loss.  He didn't really set my panties on fire when I watched him play, but I still suspect he should eventually become a good safety, since I don't place a lot of value in what my lying eyes tell me.  With that said, I'd definitely take him if he fell to the 3rd round, and might even go as high as the 2nd round, as I figure he is a relatively low risk prospect, who should turn out to be an at least adequate player, even if he doesn't become a star.

Stanley Jean-Baptiste, CB/S, Nebraska  Ht: 6'2.5"   Wt:  218
40 time: 4.55  2nd Gear:  0.03   Agility Score:  -0.007   Avg. PD:  13.5
Is it wrong for me to downgrade a prospect simply because I think he might be a moron?  That's sort of the vibe I get when I see this player interviewed, and the fact that he will also be a 24 year old rookie doesn't help to dispel these intelligence/maturity concerns.  Nevertheless, I do find Monsieur Jean-Baptiste to be extremely interesting, and if we eliminated all of the idiots from the NFL, there might not be many guys left standing.  The problem here is determining what position he will play.  If he ends up playing cornerback, I think he could struggle, though the Seahawks have gotten good mileage out of similar over-sized prospects recently.  Still, I think his Agility Score, and short shuttle time of 4.33 seconds would probably make this a questionable idea.  As a safety, on the other hand, these concerns are greatly diminished, and he does possess excellent size for that position.  Perhaps more importantly, he has the power to play that position.  As I said before, I want a strong safety to have a Kangaroo Score of about 1.000 standard deviations above average.  Jean-Baptiste's score was 2.594, which is simply stunning.  That's some very impressive lower body power, but despite what his size and power might suggest, I like him more as a free safety than as a strong safety.  It's his ability to get his hands on the ball, rather than his hitting/tackling ability, that really impresses me, which probably isn't surprising considering that he is a converted wide receiver.  Now, his official 40 time of 4.55 seconds is somewhat worrisome, though that too would be borderline tolerable for a safety.  Fortunately, he improved upon this time at his pro day, running a reported 4.45.  Pro day results can be a bit questionable at times, but I would probably be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt here, and say that he probably runs in the mid-to-low 4.5s.  If he is still there in the 3rd round he could be a fairly interesting target for Team Kangaroo.

Rashaad Reynolds, CB, Oregon St.  Ht: 5' 10"  Wt.: 189
40 time: 4.49  2nd Gear:  0.02   Agility Score:  1.049   Avg. PD:  13
Well, he's not that big and he's not that fast.  He is, however, quite quick (1.51 second 10-yard split), and very nimble.  If a team can accept his physical limitations, and provide some safety help against much faster opponents, I think he could provide at least adequate depth.  He didn't make much of a positive impression on me when I watched him play, but if he slid to the 4th or 5th round, I might be interested.  In the end, I'm really not much of a fan, despite some of his measurable traits.

Phillip Gaines, CB, Rice   Ht: 6' 0.3"  Wt.: 193
40 time: 4.31  2nd Gear:  0.18   Agility Score:  1.163   Avg. PD:  15.5
For someone who is generally listed as a mid-round pick, I think the calculation of risk vs reward would be rather favorable here.  Athletically, he is clearly quite gifted, and comparable perhaps to the smaller Jason Verrett, though Verrett seems to be a scrappier player.  From the little I have been able to see, he appears to cover his opponent quite tightly, and he has managed to get his hands on the ball fairly frequently even if he hasn't turned a lot of those opportunities into interceptions.  It's a bit harder to judge him as a tackler, since I didn't see him get many opportunities to do this, but when the opportunity arose he appeared quite willing to at least make an effort here.  He has missed playing time in the past due to injuries, though none of them appeared to be too serious.  While I often see him listed as a 4th to 5th round prospect, I doubt he will last that long in the draft, and I would probably start to target him in the 3rd round.  At this point, he is probably one of my three favorite corners in this year's draft, and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he ends up outperforming more highly touted players like Gilbert and Dennard, though he might not get as many opportunities early on.

Dontae Johnson, CB/S, NC State   Ht: 6' 2"  Wt.: 200
40 time: 4.41  2nd Gear:  0.16   Agility Score:  -0.024   Avg. PD:  6.5
As a cornerback, I don't find Johnson to be terribly impressive.  He does appear to be a fairly good tackler though, and with his size and athletic traits, I could see him as a moderately interesting safety (which he has played in the past).  Since I value the Kangaroo Score a bit more for safeties, I will say that his result of  0.710 is a good, but not necessarily shocking result for a safety.  If someone insists on using him as a corner, I suspect he will struggle with more nimble wide receivers, against whom he probably doesn't have the agility to keep up with.  I generally see people projecting him to be selected in the 5th to 6th round, which seems like a reasonable place to take someone like him, depending on who is available at other positions that might be more interesting.

Ross Cockrell, CB, Duke    Ht: 6'   Wt: 191
40 time: 4.47  2nd Gear:  0.17   Agility Score:  -1.453   Avg. PD:  16.5
Once again, we have to decide how we feel about pro day results.  I wouldn't normally even raise this issue, but Cockrell was so productive, that I am wary of being too dismissive of his abilities.   While his 40 time was fairly average, he did manage to improve this at his pro day to a 4.44.  More importantly, perhaps, he improved his 10-yard split from a wretched 1.64 to an excellent 1.50.  Similarly, while I wouldn't normally pay much attention to a corner with an Agility Score of -1.453, but he likewise improved this to a more average -0.278 at his pro day.  These still aren't exciting results, but they are at least acceptable, especially for someone who is only projected to be taken in the 5th or 6th round.  Maybe he was drunk at the combine, I really don't know.  Personally, he struck me as a pretty good player, which makes me want to trust his pro day results, but truthfully, I would probably pass on him in favor of a more athletically superior prospect.  That's how we roll.

Bennett Jackson, CB, Notre Dame  Ht: 5'11.75"  Wt: 195
40 time: 4.46  2nd Gear:  0.11   Agility Score:  0.974   Avg. PD:  6.5
I should probably mention that he did improve his 40 time to a 4.40, at his pro day, though you can take that with a grain of salt.  He didn't get his hands on the ball as much as I would hope to see, but when he did, it seemed to frequently result in an interception (6 in the last two years).  As far as his tackling ability is concerned, I really haven't come to any strong conclusions yet.  At this point I would strongly lean towards Jackson, over someone like Rashaad Reynolds.  People seem to project that Jackson will be taken in the 5th or 6th round, which seems fairly reasonable to me.  Probably not a bad corner, for someone who can be picked up rather cheaply, even if he will possibly only become a #3 or #4 corner on a lot of teams.

Travis Carrie, CB, Ohio  Ht: 5'11.5"  Wt: 206
40 time: 4.43  2nd Gear:  0.12   Agility Score:  -0.298   Avg. PD:  14.5
Yes, I know this is becoming a bit of a theme, but I want to see someone use him as a safety.  Could he do okay as a corner?  Maybe.  He probably wouldn't do any worse at corner than some of the overrated prospects that people have been hyping.  I'm just not sure if he would thrive there.  At safety, I think he has a shot at really excelling, and his 1.415 Kangaroo Score suggests he has the power to make this switch.  That he has generally managed to get his hands on a lot of balls, and appears to be a decent tackler doesn't hurt either.  Will I get my way here, and see a position switch?  Probably not.  CBS is listing him as a player who will go undrafted, but I think he's probably worth picking up, and would start considering him around the 5th round.

Dashaun Phillips, CB, Tarleton St.  Ht: 5'11" Wt: 182
40 time: 4.48  2nd Gear:  0.09   Agility Score:  1.328   Avg. PD:  8.5
I can't really say too much about Phillips, because I have never gotten to see him play.  I suppose ESPN got too much criticism about all of their Tarleton State coverage, and decided to shift the spotlight to an underdog program like Alabama.  Since he comes from a low level program, is a bit of a lightweight, and only had moderate production, it is fairly obvious why he is generally projected to go undrafted.  On the other hand, he appears to be very agile, acceptably fast, and can be had for less than a ham sandwich.  Considering the poor state of most teams' #3 or #4 cornerback, I think he might be well worth bringing in as an UDFA, just to see if he might have something.

Brandon Watts, LB/S, Georgia Tech  Ht: 6' 1.75"  Wt: 225
40 time: 4.41  2nd Gear:  0.10   Agility Score:  -0.097   Avg. PD:  1.5
This is another peculiar player that I have been unable to watch, but I thought he was worth mentioning.  Yes, he was actually a linebacker, not a defensive back, but at his pro day he only weighed 225# (though the team's site, and other sources, sometimes claim he weighs 235#, which is probably fiction), which would give him an excellent frame for a strong safety.  In terms of his measured agility, he would actually be above average for a strong safety, and more in line with what I expect to see in a free safety.  His lower body power, however, is way beyond what I would hope for in a free safety, and even exceeds the results of most strong safeties, with a 2.014 Kangaroo Score.  His college production was just okay, but maybe this was due to being a bit undersized for the position he was playing.  I really don't know since, as I said, I haven't been able to watch him play.  Physically, he is almost a clone of Stanley Jean-Baptiste, though slightly bigger and faster.  Since he is projected to go undrafted, I think he is well worth picking up as a UDFA.