Kangaroo Court: The 2016 Offensive Linemen

Reilly and I have seen some strange things over the years.  Whether we give off some sort of pheromone that attracts lunatics, we can't say for sure.  All we know is that we seem to keep finding ourselves in peculiar and difficult to explain situations, that frequently make us marvel at the insanity of the world.

For instance, in high school, the older brother of one of our closest friends used to insist that the state of Wyoming didn't exist.  He was absolutely adamant about this.  His defense of this theory was also surprisingly difficult to refute.  Had we ever been to Wyoming?  Had we ever met someone from Wyoming?  The answer to both questions was no.  Our friend's brother suggested that this was ample evidence that this supposed land south of Montana was entirely made up, and perhaps part of a grander conspiracy.  We eventually came to the conclusion that it was simpler just to accept his views on this subject, rather than to pack up a camera and make an 1,800 mile road trip.

We also had the opportunity to meet someone who sincerely believed that the government was watching us through the light bulbs in our homes (when any sane person knows that they watch us through our electrical outlets).  We'll call this guy George.  George happened to live in one of the wealthiest neighborhoods in Baltimore, which made it all the more entertaining that he covered his windows with aluminum foil.  He also had AR-15 assault rifles positioned by every window in his house.  You know, just in case.  Years later, we would learn that George died under mysterious circumstances while running a brothel in Mexico.  True story.

Reilly and I have also been exposed to the philosophical teachings of Drukpa Kunley, and eventually decided to place our spiritual well-being in his capable hands.  Not only did he introduce phallus paintings to Bhutan, but his dong was referred to as "The Thunderbolt of Flaming Wisdom".  That is what we call a role model.  It is even claimed that he defeated a demon by beating it into submission with his "thunderbolt".  It may all seem a bit demented, but I don't think most guys would be opposed to leaving behind such an impressive legacy.

When it comes to bat-shit craziness, Reilly and I would also have to include the current 2016 presidential campaign.  It's not that we want to pick on any particular candidate, because we think they are all probably a bit loopy.  The bigger issue for us has been the way that this has convinced us that the average American might be much crazier than we ever thought was possible.  We didn't think we would need to lower the bar, for our expectations of most people, but it now seems to be necessary.  When Ra's al Ghul's plan to destroy Gotham, in order to start over from scratch, starts to seem like a sane alternative, you might have a problem with your elected officials.

So, yes, we've seen some crazy shit in our time.  What we haven't seen is any clear evidence that the experts who work for NFL teams actually have an eye for offensive line talent.  At best, they appear to be guessing, just like the rest of us.  Because of this, Reilly and I have decided that this is the one position where we actually won't bother to watch any of the prospects.  Based on a little game we played, which we refer to as the Lobotomy Line, we tend to think that you're probably just as well off picking your offensive linemen based on the more objective facts that come from the combine.  The fact that this also allows us to be a bit lazy is purely a coincidence.

As always, we'll be judging the players based on a few very idiotic basic criteria.  We will measure their Kangaroo Score (our measurement of lower body power), and their Agility Score (based on their short shuttle and 3-Cone drills).  These scores are given in the form of how many standard deviations that the prospect is away from the average result for an offensive linemen.  If you are curious, you can take a look at Athleticism and the Offensive Line part I and part II, to get some sense as to how this relates to offensive tackles and guards.  For centers, we place more importance on their short shuttle times, as you can read about here.  There are, of course, other factors such as injuries, inability to elude the law, playing time, comically unnecessary punctuation in a player's name, and positional versatility that also somewhat weigh into our views on a prospect, as well as a few other minor measurable athletic traits.

This list is still under construction, as we await the complete sets of data for individual draft prospects.  The list will continue to grow, and be updated with additional players.  Individual Agility Scores are unlikely to be changed, but based on the results from college pro-days, Kangaroo Scores may be adjusted.  The order the players are listed in will also periodically be adjusted to roughly coincide with the CBS' rankings.  Last Updated: 4/5/2016


Laremy Tunsil, OT, Mississippi
Arm Length: 34.25"   Kangaroo Score: 0.612  Agility Score: ?
Wait a second, is he from Wyoming?  Oh never mind, he spells it Laremy, not Laramie.  I guess this doesn't solve our long-standing mystery about government conspiracies in the 44th state.  Since we only have his pro day results for the vertical jump and the broad jump, we are still a bit more limited in our ability to examine him than we would really like to be.  We can say that his Kangaroo Score does suggest that he has the sort of lower body power and explosiveness we look for in an offensive tackle, and that this might still be underrating him a bit.  The results from his broad jump would have actually been an even more impressive 1.237.  Based on this limited information, we see good reasons to be optimistic.  Still, we would feel slightly annoyed about having to make this sort of selection in the top 5, without a full set of data.

Ronnie Stanley, OT, Notre Dame
Arm Length: 35.625"   Kangaroo Score: -0.067  Agility Score: -0.823
If a team we were rooting for selected Stanley in the 1st round, we would feel just a little bit terrified.  The measurable results that have come in so far, that relate to Stanley's athletic ability, are well below what we are normally looking for in successful NFL offensive tackles.  Average lower body power, below average explosiveness, below average agility, below average speed and quickness, these are not the sorts of things that make us quiver with delight.  Even if we accepted Stanley's improved agility results from his pro day, he would still only get a score of -0.185, which is still a hair below average.  About the only positive we can see is Stanley's rather exceptional arm length, but that isn't something we like to bet on without other supporting factors.  People might point towards someone like Cordy Glenn, as a below average athlete (at least according to his measurable data) who has supposedly done well.  Personally, we've never had much confidence in Glenn, and still think his performance has been fairly erratic.  You can judge that for yourself.  The role that having a high draft status plays in boosting peoples' opinions of players like that is a peculiar but interesting subject.. While Notre Dame has had a reasonable amount of success protecting their quarterbacks the last few seasons, we would say that was also a situation that preceded Stanley's arrival.  In fact, the team's sack rate has gradually declined over the last three years.  What is Stanley's role in all of this?  We really can't say.  We would let some other team find out whether he can outperform his measurable traits.

Jack Conklin, OT, Michigan State
Arm Length: 35"   Kangaroo Score:  0.020  Agility Score: 0.692
We normally wouldn't be very supportive of a player with these kinds of scores.  These results would put him in the dangerous Luke Joeckel zone.  It's possible that Conklin's 2015 leg injury is still a nagging issue, so perhaps we should give him the benefit of the doubt here.  We also would give him a slight boost for his fairly exceptional arm length.  While some quarterbacks can improve our perception of an offensive line's perception, we also suspect that Connor Cook does not fall into this category.  Still, he was the quarterback throughout Conklin's career at Michigan State, which is sort of nice because it eliminates one potential variable.  The main thing that worried us about Conklin related to his 2014 season.  As his team's offensive line seemed to have its most success as a pass blocking unit (2.67% sack rate) during Conklin's time at Michigan State, and as Cook started to achieve higher YPA results as a passer (8.6 YPA), Conklin started to give up a higher than expected share of his team's sacks.  In his two other seasons as a starter, there appeared to be a potentially similar pattern that might suggest he was either benefiting from an offense that was less aggressive, or possibly looking better simply by comparison to fellow offensive linemen who were under-performing, and thus were more appealing targets for opposing defenses to attack.  We're not going to bet against Conklin, because he does have some rather positive attributes buried within his assorted results, but there are some strange issues that surround him which cause us a bit of concern.  We wouldn't be surprised if Conklin turns out to be a good player, but we would tend to bet against him becoming a great one.  In the 1t round, where he is projected to be taken, we think you should have a higher expectation of greatness than what we are seeing here.

Taylor Decker, OT, Ohio State
Arm Length: 33.75"   Kangaroo Score: -0.198  Agility Score: -0.103
I guess it's time to continue this year's rant against the current crop of Ohio State prospects  Our concern with Decker is that he reminds us just a little too much of Adam Terry.  They have similarly average explosiveness and lower body power.  They also have similarly average agility.  Being average might not be a bad thing at some positions, but for an offensive tackle, it is unusual to have a great deal of success with these traits.  The only thing we can figure that might explain why people are interested in Decker, is that he is ridiculously tall.  At a hair over 6'7" tall, he probably looks like someone who should be a good player.  It's sort of like the way you would expect a DeLorean to be fast, even though it is a bit of a slug.  Unfortunately, we think Decker's height is possibly working against him here, much like it did with Adam Terry (who was 6'8").  The problem, as we've discussed in the past, is the way that arm length relates to a player's height.  When you are as tall as Decker is, while having somewhat shorter arms, you can actually wind up in a position where your effective reach is even shorter that what your arms measure.  Suddenly, Decker's somewhat below average arm length, becomes ever so slightly worse worse.  There are just a few too many areas of concern with Decker.  While people have suggested that he will be selected in the first two rounds of the draft, we wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole, though a much sorter pole is all that is probably required to keep your distance from him.

Ryan Kelly, C, Alabama
Arm Length: 33.625"   Kangaroo Score:  0.136  Agility Score: 0.732
Just for a change of pace, we're going to talk about an Alabama player, and not say something terrible.  While Kelly doesn't precisely fit our ideal mold for a center, he isn't that far off of the mark.  The first thing we always geek out about with centers is their short shuttle time.  We generally want a result of about 4.50 seconds or better.  In Kelly's case he had a 4.59, which isn't stunning, but is close enough for us to not eliminate him from consideration.  The more peculiar issue with Kelly is his Kangaroo Score.  Centers tend to post up rather poor results here, that frequently go into the negative range.  So, while Kelly's result is just average, relative to all offensive linemen, this is actually a fair bit better than you normally see for someone at his position.  This sort of lower body power certainly can't hurt.  Among all of his other measurable traits, everything checks out as either good or at least within the average range.  Finally, we look at the fact that he has been a 3 year starter, who has yet to give up a single sack, despite playing in the SEC.  All things considered, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he turns out to be a pretty respectable player.  The only potential concern we have is that people are expecting him to be selected somewhere around the late 1st to early 2nd round range.  Maybe that's fair, but as we've said in the past, teams have routinely shown that you are just as likely to find a quality center in the 5th round or later.  While Kelly might turn out to be a good player, we think you could probably also find someone to fill this role at a significantly cheaper price.

Cody Whitehair, G, Kansas State
Arm Length: 33.625"   Kangaroo Score: -0.416  Agility Score: 1.216
Whitehair actually comes pretty close to fitting the prototype of what we expect to see in successful offensive guards.  While his Kangaroo Score is a little bit below average for an offensive lineman, suggesting somewhat below average power, it is actually well within the range of what we would feel comfortable with at the guard position.  Most quality guards tend to produce results that lean much more towards agility, rather than raw power.  In fact, this score is possibly being unfairly weighed down by his results from the vertical jump, as his broad jump results would have produced a result of 0.419.  So, he might actually be a bit more explosive than your typical guard prospect.  While we don't tend to care about bench press results, unless they are extremely abnormal, the fact that Whitehair only benched 225 pounds 16 times is a bit curious.  That is a rather peculiar result, and something we would like to see him improve on at his pro day.  It's also somewhat annoying that he will already be turning 24 this upcoming July, making him one of the older prospects in this draft.  We think Whitehair is an interesting prospect, who could possibly turn out to be pretty good, but we're just not sure if we would spend anything more than a 2nd or 3rd round pick on him at this point.

Shon Coleman, OT, Auburn
Arm Length: 35.125"   Kangaroo Score: ?*  Agility Score: ?
We're still waiting for data.  All we can say at this point, is that drafting him in the first few rounds might be pretty risky considering his medical history.  We can applaud him for coming back from cancer, but we still have to view that as a bit terrifying.  He is also currently dealing with an injury to his MCL.  For now, we'll just keep waiting for his pro day.

Jason Spriggs, OT, Indiana
Arm Length: 34.125"   Kangaroo Score: 1.328  Agility Score: 1.471
It looks like interest in Jason Spriggs has picked up a fair bit since the combine.  People seem to be projecting that he will be taken in the 2nd round, or perhaps even the late 1st, and based upon his athletic ability we think he could be a very interesting pick.  Spriggs seems to have the explosiveness (2.188 standard deviations above average), agility and quickness to become a solid pass protector.  He also appears to have the lower body power (Kangaroo Score) to hold his ground or perform well as a run blocker.  While we have adjusted his scores a bit, because of his recent pro day, this largely just evened out some of the unevenness from his combine numbers.  It's nice to know that even if things didn't work out at left tackle, he should have the ability to move to the right tackle position, which should somewhat minimize the risks of selecting Spriggs.  While Spriggs did occasionally surrender some sacks, we don't think the rate at which he did so was out of line with what we would have expected from his team's offense, and the instability at his team's QB position over the past few years.  We're leaning towards the idea that Spriggs may eventually be viewed as one of the better offensive tackles in this draft, and probably well worth a 2nd round pick, and possibly even a 1st round pick.

Vadal Alexander, G, LSU
Arm Length: 35.25"   Kangaroo Score: -0.880  Agility Score: -0.841
Outside of his exceptional arm length, we're having a difficult time seeing anything we find encouraging about Alexander.  Having results that suggest a player lacks speed, quickness, power, agility or explosiveness, would make us extremely nervous about spending the 2nd round pick people claim he will cost.  Nope, we don't like this situation at all.

Germain Ifedi, OT, Texas A&M
Arm Length: 36"   Kangaroo Score: 1.491  Agility Score: -0.017*
We still don't have all the data we would like to have for Ifedi, but so far his results are looking pretty good.  While his scores might suggest that he doesn't have the quickness or agility to play left tackle, his overall numbers look like a rather good fit for the right tackle position.  When you look at his extremely long arms, significantly above average lower body power and explosiveness, he probably has a pretty good chance of succeeding against the players he would face on the right side of the offensive line.  He might not become a top level pass blocker, we suspect he should be capable of becoming a pretty good run blocker.  He strikes us as a fairly exciting prospect, and if he was available in the 2nd round we would probably give some serious consideration towards selecting him.

Le'Raven Clark, OT, Texas Tech
Arm Length: 36.125"   Kangaroo Score: 0.534*  Agility Score: ?
It looks like we're never going to get a full set of data for Clark, since he didn't do all of the drills at his pro day.  Normally, when players duck out of doing the agility drills, we suspect they made this choice because they knew that their results were going to suck.  Outside of this issue, Clark seemed to have okay, but not really exceptional, lower body power and explosiveness.  We might also give him a slight boost for going through with the surgery to have gorilla arms transplanted onto his body.  Our picture of him so far is incomplete, but reasonably promising.  Still, if he is really going to be selected in the first few rounds, as people are suggesting, we wouldn't feel thrilled about making that pick without more data.

Nick Martin, C, Notre Dame
Arm Length: 32"   Kangaroo Score: -1.041  Agility Score: 0.431
We could possibly overlook his poor Kangaroo Score, since we generally expect centers to do poorly in that area.  Really though, even for a center his results here were rather terrible.  While his agility results aren't quite as bad, and we have seen interior linemen who have gotten by with less, this score also fails to excite us very much.  Perhaps the most worrisome issue we have is with his short shuttle time of 4.72 seconds, which is a fair bit below what we prefer to see in centers.  We're gradually coming to the conclusion that there was something fishy going on at Notre Dame, that might have inflated peoples' opinions of some of their offensive linemen.  While we had mixed feelings about his brother, Zach Martin, Nick's measurable traits are nowhere near what his brother produced.  Maybe Mrs,. Martin should have stopped having children after her first son?  While we certainly can't say that Martin is sure to fail in the NFL, we will say that his chances of success would probably be slightly improved by becoming a guard, rather than a center.  As things currently stand, there is no way we would feel comfortable selecting him in the 2nd round, and we would probably avoid him altogether.

Landon Turner, G, North Carolina
Arm Length: 32.875"   Kangaroo Score: -2.055  Agility Score: -1.247
As far as we can tell, Turner is so lacking in lower body power, that a gentle breeze might knock him over.  Fortunately, he seems to make up for this with horrible agility.  His 40 yard dash time of 5.56 seconds is also so far outside of the normal range for successful guards, that we almost wonder if the folks who are projecting him as a 2nd or 3rd round pick were watching tape of him without knowing that the fast forward button was still being held down..

Joshua Garnett, G, Stanford
Arm Length: 32.875"   Kangaroo Score: -0.269  Agility Score: 0.538
For someone who is supposedly viewed as a potential 2nd round pick, we're having a hard time finding any sort of objective numbers to justify that position.  If he turns out to be good, well, congratulations to Mr. Garnett.  It still wouldn't strike us a a sensible investment to make at that point in the draft.  Players with results like this can really go in any direction, so we try to avoid placing bets on these situations.

Jerald Hawkins, OT, LSU
Arm Length: 34.25"   Kangaroo Score: -1.276  Agility Score: -1.082
The only explanation we have for Hawkins' terrible scores is that he wanted to make his teammate Vadal Alexander feel better about also putting up a disastrous performance at the combine.  CBS claims that Hawkins will be selected somewhere in the 2nd or 3rd round, but we suspect that is unlikely, unless all of the GMs are extremely drunk.

Connor McGovern, G, Missouri
Arm Length: 32.875"   Kangaroo Score: 0.820  Agility Score: 0.726
Hey, it's the new  -- .. - -.-. .... / -- --- .-. ... .!  So far, we're finding the superficial similarities between McGovern and Mitch Morse to be kind of eerie.  The main difference is that while both of them are rather gifted athletes, and have played numerous positions on the offensive line, we suspect Morse is the only one that was likely to potentially thrive as an NFL center.  McGovern's short shuttle time of 4.65 is just a tad slower than we would like to see for that position.  Outside of that minor complaint, we think McGovern is a very interesting prospect, much like we felt with Morse.  He has above average agility, which fits the mold we like to see in a guard, but his results also suggest he has significantly better lower body power and explosiveness than you commonly find at this position.  The numbers would suggest that he is possibly one of the most interesting mid-round offensive linemen in this draft, and we're not just saying that because he recognizes that Top Gun is a cinematic masterpiece.  Like his former teammate, we wouldn't be surprised if he is taken a bit higher than the 3rd to 4th round range that some are currently predicting.  If he is still available in the middle rounds, Reilly and I would be quite willing to take a shot at him.

Joe Haeg, T, North Dakota State
Arm Length: 33.75"   Kangaroo Score: 0.476  Agility Score: 1.221
It's a bit harder to find all of the information we would want for a prospect that come from lower levels of competition, but Haeg is somewhat interesting, if also a bit peculiar.  For a tackle, his arm length is perhaps a bit on the fringe of what we would like to see, particularly for a slightly taller tackle (6'6").  His Kangaroo Score might not look very impressive, though his results from the broad jump would produce a result of 0.768, which is at least respectable.  Then we get down to his agility results which are really quite good.  For someone who is generally projected to be a mid-round pick, he might not be a terrible gamble.  If we were going to guess, we would say that his best chance of success might come as a guard.  His measurable traits are a much better match for that position.  We probably wouldn't pursue him ourselves, unless he fell to the 5th or 6th round, but we could see how some teams might find him interesting. 

Willie Beavers, T, Western Michigan
Arm Length: 33.5"   Kangaroo Score: -0.069  Agility Score: -0.234
We don't really have anything interesting to say about Willie Beavers.  We just enjoy saying his name.

Isaac Seumalo, C, Oregon State
Arm Length: 33"   Kangaroo Score: -0.621  Agility Score: 1.222
For the most part, Seumalo's results line up pretty close to what we look for in NFL centers.  His Kangaroo Score suggests that he has the sort of mediocre lower body power that we could probably accept in a center.  His above average agility is fairly ideal for the position, especially his 4.52 second short shuttle time.  One of the few things we might quibble over is his explosiveness, when mass isn't factored into the results of his vertical and broad jumps.  His results there are a tad bit lower than what we would really like to see, though they are merely average and not outright wretched results.  Still, he is one of the more experienced centers in this draft, and if he is still available in the 5th round or later, he's probably not an entirely unreasonable gamble.

Brandon Shell, T, South Carolina
Arm Length: 34.75"   Kangaroo Score: 1.403  Agility Score: 0.587
We're still trying to find more data related to Shell's time at South Carolina, but at least we now have his pro day results.  His Kangaroo Score suggests that he does have the sort of lower body power and explosiveness that we like to see in an offensive tackle.  His agility results, while not quite as exceptional, are still somewhat above average.  Overall, he appears to be a rather good athlete.  One of our concerns with Shell is that he is already 24 years old, which might somewhat limit his upside and continued development. CBS is currently projecting that he will only be a 5th or 6th round selection, and at that point in the draft we think selecting someone like Shell makes quite a bit of sense.  There's minimal risk, because of the low cost of investment, but significant physical potential that compares favorably to players who have historically been successful at his position.

Joe Thuney, G/C, North Carolina State
Arm Length: 32.25"   Kangaroo Score: 0.142  Agility Score: 1.049
We haven't come across a ton of information on Thuney, but we like what we have seen so far.  He seems to be another one of those oddballs that has played pretty much every position along the offensive line, which shows some versatility.  Still, with that average arm length, we'd guess that his days of playing tackle are over, though his reach should be perfectly fine for an interior lineman.  Fortunately, he has the sort of above average agility, that we tend to find among successful guards and centers.  His short shuttle time of 4.52 seconds also meets our criteria for a center.  While his lower body power is merely average compared to the entire pool of linemen, it is actually a fair bit above what you see with your normal guards or centers.  When we also eliminate mass as a factor in his vertical and broad jump result, the numbers would suggest that he might also be more explosive than he is powerful.  All things considered, we think he probably deserves a bit more attention than he has currently received, as CBS is still just listing him as a 6th or 7th round prospect.  We wouldn't be surprised if he is selected a bit higher than his current projections.  We'd probably start to give him some consideration in the 4th or 5th round.  If we had any significant concerns about Thuney, it would probably stem from the fact that he is a ginger.  They are the spawn of Satan, after all.

Jake Brendel, C, UCLA
Arm Length: 31.5"   Kangaroo Score: -0.113  Agility Score: 1.894
When we saw Brendel's short shuttle time of 4.27 seconds, we instantly thought "This guy had to have been a center in college".  Sure enough, that did turn out to be his position at UCLA, where he was a four year starter.  While we would normally salivate over that sort of short shuttle time, and what it could mean for his potential as an NFL center, there are a few minor issues that worry us about Brendel.  First of all, his arm length is potentially a bit of a problem.  It is somewhat less common to see interior lineman have a high degree of success with such a limited reach, though it can happen.  Secondly, he will already be turning 24 this September, which makes him a bit older than we would really like him to be.  Still, people seem to be suggesting that he is someone who would only be selected at the very end of the draft, and if that is true, we think he could be a interesting lottery ticket sort of pick.

Halapoulivaati Vaitai, T, TCU
Arm Length: 34.25"   Kangaroo Score: 1.547  Agility Score: -1.476
We really don't want to try to pronounce that name.  Regardless, what we have here appears to be a specimen that is pure power and explosiveness, with absolutely no grace.  It's true, that his pro day numbers did produce an improved agility result of 0.593, but we find this to be highly suspicious.  If it is accurate, he would appear to be a fairly interesting prospect.  The really interesting thing is that his Kangaroo score is probably underestimating his lower body power, due to some significant differences between his vertical jump and his broad jump.  If we just looked at his broad jump results, his score would be 1.850, which is a bit unusual.  With these sorts of results, we would suspect that he could be a real liability in pass protection (depending on how we view his agility score), but he might be useful as a run blocker.  We almost certainly wouldn't pursue him, but as a prospect who is only projected to be a 7th round to UDFA type of acquisition, we think some team will try to find a use for him.  He could be somewhat interesting.

PFFt...

In general, Reilly and I don't have any great expectation that the subjects which interest us will be seen as particularly fascinating to other people.  For this reason, we tend to be cautious about what topics we bring up, even if it frustrates us a bit.  No, we probably shouldn't discus our collection of ear wax.  Likewise, our fears about the Nazis who live on the dark side of the moon, is something we tend to keep to ourselves.  We could also discuss our belief that slugs are at the top of the food chain (go ahead, name one person who has survived a slug attack), but we don't mention this very often.  Sometimes, we just suspect that the issues we want to explore might cross certain lines, and we'd prefer to avoid stirring up a kerfuffle.  Today, perhaps foolishly, we decided to pursue one of those unfortunate subjects that draws our interest.

The topic we want to examine this time is PFF (Pro Football Focus).  Now, to be perfectly clear, we generally like PFF (sort of), and appreciate the statistical data they provide to the football geeks of the world.  Being critical of what they do makes us feel a bit uncomfortable, particularly since they are a well established site ($$$), while we rely on the prognostications of a dog (-$$$).  Even if we don't always agree with PFF, at least they're trying to apply clearly stated and measurable standards to their analysis of football, and this matters to us.  Geek on geek crime is not something we want to engage in, particularly since analysis of the NFL still hasn't really emerged as something that the football world has strongly embraced yet.  Still, despite some wariness, there are some concerns we have with PFF, that we felt we should discuss.

For those amongst you who aren't familiar with PFF, they run a site that accumulates data from NFL games, and attempt to analyze what all this raw information supposedly means.  It is an attempt to give us a better understanding of the game, something we feel is rather important, or at least interesting.  Reilly and I frequently agree with their assessments of particular players, and often make references to them.  Admittedly, we are more likely to quote PFF when they agree with us, and ignore them when they don't.  That's just the sort of unreliable assholes we are.  Regardless, the information they compile is greatly appreciated by many of the NFL numbers geeks of the world, as it is a challenging task to assemble such quantities of data, and is beyond the means of individuals such as ourselves.

Where we sometimes run into problems with PFF, is in their analysis of these mountains of data.  Different positions require different sorts of examinations, since productivity for a defensive lineman is obviously different than it would be for a wide receiver.  So, based on these different sets of criteria, PFF assigns "grades" in the areas they feel are relevant to the position in question.  The grades themselves are fairly meaningless on their own, and merely a tool for directly comparing players within a given position group.  These numerical grades, either positive or negative, are also highlighted in either green (good!), or red (FIRE BAD!), to give the casual observer a sense as to whether a particular player is performing at an above average level (or not).  This leads to an incredibly simple way of appraising players, though we suspect it is probably a bit too simple...and frequently a bit idiotic.

These grades, and this sort of analysis, is extremely results oriented.  Getting a sack, is better than not getting a sack.  Catching the ball, is better than not catching the ball.  This is all fairly obvious.  While Reilly and I certainly don't want to downplay the importance of actual results, sometimes things get lost in these sorts of examinations.  Sometimes the results fail to convey why a player was able to perform well.  Sometimes we miss out on the context, which might better explain what is really happening. 

I suppose our primary question/criticism is very simple, though its validity depends on what you believe should be the main goal of people who analyze the NFL.  Do we want to know who produced the best numbers?  Or, do we want to know who the best player is, even if their environment isn't exactly helping them out?  PFF might be able to answer the first question, at least to some degree.  The second question is vastly more complicated, and is the topic we want to take a look at today.


Flip a coin: Mediocrity or Star

Let's consider the subject of offensive lineman.  We ramble a lot about offensive linemen around here, and I think that our fascination stems from how boring a subject this probably is to most people.  Plus, fat guys in tight outfits are kind of funny.

When examining the performance of offensive lineman, PFF's criteria is fairly simple and easy to understand.  The method for grading these players comes mainly from two separate areas, their run blocking grade and their pass blocking grade.  For now, to keep things simple, we're just going to discuss how the pass blocking grade works...or doesn't.

Essentially, PFF simply tallies up the number of total pass attempts that a lineman was on the field for, and calculates what percentage of the time this lineman managed to keep their quarterback from being sacked.  This percentage is referred to as the player's Pass Blocking Efficiency, and superficially it seems to make some sort of sense.  Dead quarterback = bad.  Living quarterback = good.  Refer to PFF's handy red or green color code if you still need further clarification.

Now, let's talk about truth with a capital "T".  While Reilly and I are inclined to believe in the merits of examining NFL players based on their measured athletic ability, and statistical production, there are limitations to how much you want to trust such things.  Very simple statistics can suggest that there is an argument to be made that a player might be pretty good.  They don't necessarily always reveal the complete truth though, and sometimes you need to dig a bit deeper.  Do I really believe that the player who allowed the fewest sacks, is in fact the best pass blocker?  Or, do I think these outcomes can be influenced by numerous complicated factors?

Let's use two players, Ryan Clady and Orlando Franklin, to provide an example of how the value of this sort of data can become a bit murky.

In 2011, Ryan Clady was rated as PFF's 40th ranked offensive tackle (among tackles who played for 50% of their team's total snaps), when it came to pass blocking.  Since there are 32 teams, each with 2 starting tackles per team (for a total of 64...yes, we know you could do the math), that would mean Clady was viewed by PFF as being a somewhat below average tackle in 2011.  Then, in 2012, Ryan Clady was strangely ranked as the league's 4th best tackle (again, when compared to tackles who played for 50% of their team's total snaps), when it came to pass blocking.  That's a fairly remarkable rise in the rankings, going from the 40th slot, to the 4th, in just a year's time.  What exactly happened here?

Now, let's look at Orlando Franklin, who played at the opposite tackle position from Clady, for the Denver Broncos.  In 2011, Franklin's pass blocking had him ranked as PFF's 41st rated offensive tackle, just one slot shy of where we found his teammate Ryan Clady in that year.  Just like with Ryan Clady, this rating would seem to suggest that Franklin performed like a somewhat below average tackle in 2011.  Then, in the following year, 2012, Franklin's pass blocking performance had him ranked as PFF's 8th rated offensive tackle.  Again, Franklin's rating for this year was just a tad behind where we found Ryan Clady had surged to, and near the top of the league.  That all seems a bit peculiar, doesn't it? 

Though some people may disagree, Reilly and I tend to think that a player is what he is.  The "talent" of a player should be somewhat fixed.  Though experience may lead to improvement, and injury can make one decline, it seems unlikely that what a player is doing from year to year would radically change, even if the outcome from his efforts might vary significantly.  Yet, PFF seems to be suggesting that both of these tackles, playing on the same team at the same time, went from performing at a below average level to suddenly being among the top players at their position, at the same time, over the course of just one year.

What exactly is PFF telling us about these players, and is there any way to figure out why there opinion changed so radically?  Is PFF telling us anything about the quality of these players, or merely pointing towards the circumstances they might have struggled with? 


The sleeper must awaken!

Of course, there is a pretty obvious answer as to why PFF's opinion of these players shifted so dramatically in just one year.  Something very significant happened in 2012 for the Denver Broncos, which likely benefited every player on the team's offense.  This was the arrival of that scrappy, unknown quarterback Peyton Manning, who came to replace the heaven-sent Tim Tebow.  Ryan Clady and Orlando Franklin probably didn't change what they were doing at all, from 2011 to 2012.  It seems more likely that it was the perception of their performance that changed, now that they were protecting a competent different quarterback.

Let's consider what the sack rate has been for quarterbacks in Denver, both before and after Manning's arrival.  Below, we will list these sack rates (the percentage of passing plays by the team that resulted in a sack), along with the name of the team's primary quarterback in each year.  We're also including the rate at which the team's quarterback was hurried, even though we personally place much less value on this, and think it is a statistic of questionable worth.

Broncos
Year	Sack %	Hurry %	Primary QB
2007	5.15	21.74	J.Cutler
2008	2.05	21.77	J.Cutler
2009	5.58	23.11	K.Orton
2010	5.69	25.68	K.Orton
2011	7.14	34.96	T. Tebow
2012	3.13	11.39	P. Manning
2013	2.31	17.18	P. Manning
2014	2.09	14.82	P. Manning

So, in the years from 2007 to 2011, Broncos' quarterbacks were getting sacked on average about 5.12% of the time.  Those would arguably be fairly average results for an NFL team.  Only Jay Cutler's 2008 season was a significant improvement in this area (2.05%), and this fluky season probably contributed a great deal towards people's inflated opinion of him, and fed into to the Bears' eagerness to trade for Cutler.  Tebow's 2011 season, was clearly fairly horrible, with a 7.14% sack rate.  From 2012 through the 2014 season, the Manning led Broncos had a sack rate that averaged 2.51%, or about half the average rate of sacks prior to his arrival, or 2.84 times better than it was in Tebow's 2011 season.

That sort of shift could clearly influence people's opinion of how the Broncos offensive line was performing, but how likely is it that a quarterback can really have that sort of effect on a team's sack rate?  Well, let's take a look at what happened to the Indianapolis Colts, both before and after Manning's departure.

Colts
Year	Sack %	Hurry %	Primary QB
2007	2.99	29.76	P. Manning
2008	2.33	25.29	P. Manning
2009	1.79	19.46	P. Manning
2010	2.16	22.09	P. Manning
2011	5.82	21.16	Painter/Orlovsky
2012	5.13	29.93	A. Luck
2013	5.05	25.25	A. Luck
2014	3.36	22.69	A. Luck

In the years from 2007 to 2010, the chart above shows that the Manning led Colts averaged a sack on 2.31% of their passing plays.  That's roughly the same sack rate that we saw for Manning in Denver, and a fairly ridiculous result.  In the years from 2011 through 2014, after Manning's departure, the Colts have averaged a sack on 4.84% of their passing plays, which again is about twice the rate of the Manning led years.  That's not a terrible result, but it is also quite similar to how the pre-Manning era in Broncos performed.  While Andrew Luck may be improving in this area, based on his 2014 sack rate of 3.36%, it is difficult to say whether his results will ever reach Manning's level in this area.

Admittedly, having Manning change teams gave us a somewhat rare opportunity to examine the degree to which these sorts of peculiar and positive effects are transferable, from one team to another.  Great players often spend the majority of their career in one city, which makes dissecting their real impact complicated.  Dropping them into a different environment, is often the closest we can really get to having a control group.  The only other way we get to test these sorts of things is when someone is injured.

That brings us to Tom Brady, and the time he missed the 2008 season due to a leg injury, and we witnessed the emergence of Matt Cassel.  We'll leave out the 'hurry' statistics this time.

Patriots
Year	Sack %	Primary QB
2007	2.81	T. Brady
2008	7.93	M. Cassel
2009	2.95	T. Brady

Now, I suspect everyone will recall the 2008 Patriots season, and I suspect everyone will also recall the degree to which people scrutinized the way Matt Cassel filled in for the injured Tom Brady.  For the most part, people seemed to feel that Cassel filled in somewhat admirably for Brady, and in this atmosphere of deranged optimism the Chiefs traded Mike Vrabel and a high 2nd round draft pick to acquire Cassel.  They would also quickly give Cassel a $62 million contract extension.  What was overlooked in all of this lunacy was the precipitous drop in sack rate that occurred during Cassel's time under center for the Patriots.  The Patriots were getting their QB sacked 2.82 times as often in 2008, while Cassel was under center, as they were in 2007.  When Brady would return in 2009, the sack rate would magically go back to very much the same place it was prior to his injury.  There was clearly something missing with Cassel, that Brady seemed to possess.

The real question here is, do you think the Patriots offensive line was performing exceptionally in 2007, suddenly decided to tank in 2008, and then miraculously got their shit together in 2009?

Now, admittedly, using Peyton Manning and Tom Brady as an example of how a quarterback can influence a team's sack rate, can cause people to jump to some weird conclusions.  These guys are clearly rather peculiar players, and their influence over this aspect of the game is a bit unusual.  We're obviously not trying to suggest that all 'elite' (uggh, the "e" word) quarterbacks have this sort of effect on the results of their offensive line.  They don't.  From quarterback to quarterback, the ability to influence a team's sack rate can be wildly different.  For instance, we suspect that Alex Smith kind of makes offensive linemen look terrible, whether in San Francisco or in Kansas City, though that might be a subject for another day..  Without putting each player into a different environment, or having a method of establishing a control group, it's difficult to really pin down the precise degree to which one player influences the outcome of another.

Still, we do know that that this sort of influence from the QB position happens, even if we can't always perfectly measure it.

So, does it seem as if the person playing quarterback might have a fairly stunning influence on the public's perception of how the offensive line is performing?  Does it seem likely that transitioning from Tim Tebow to Peyton Manning, was probably the key factor in how the performance of these Ryan Clady and Orlando Franklin was perceived by PFF?  It certainly seems that way to us.  It really makes us wonder to what extent we should take PFF's grades for many of these things seriously, when their evaluation of a player seems like it could shift with the wind.  


Context is a bitch.

In this particular case, we were only discussing how an offensive lineman's pass blocking efficiency can be influenced by the person he is protecting.  The context of the situation does appear to matter, and this is something PFF frequently glosses over, or outright ignores.  Unfortunately, this lack of context is an issue that arises at nearly every position one can discuss.

When examining pass rushers, PFF brings out their Pass Rushing Efficiency grades, which are effectively the same thing as the Pass Blocking Efficiency grades, only turned on their head.  It becomes a simple calculation of how often a player was sent after the QB, and what percentage of the time this resulted in a sack (or a hurry).  Now, should a lone pass rusher be evaluated solely on the rate at which he gets to the quarterback, with no consideration given to how his teammates might affect his results?  Maybe a defensive end who gets 8 sacks, on a team that only produced 30 sacks in total, is more impressive than a similar player who produced twelve on a team that had 39 total sacks?  Maybe these two players are effectively the same?  Maybe it's not simply the rate at which sacks are produced by a player, but the degree to which a team's pass rush can come from multiple players, versus one isolated and therefore easily blocked individual? 

Is a wide receiver going to perform better when playing with one of the league's top quarterbacks?  Could having a viable receiving threat on the other side of the field influence a receivers' ability to perform?

Context...context...context.  It always matters, and yet frequently gets ignored by PFF, because it is probably the most difficult part of examining the NFL, and also perhaps the most meaningful question that needs to be solved.  Identifying how and why a player produces results, should get us closer to understanding who is actually contributing the most, rather than who is merely producing numbers.

If Player X performs to the PFF standard one day, they will be graded well.  If Player X perform poorly in the next game out, they will get a poor grade.   If Player X has a bunch of lovely green grades, with positive numbers, will that trend continue when he is placed on another team?  PFF can't/won't say, because their goal clearly isn't to predict the future.  PFF are basically like weathermen, who can only tell you if it rained yesterday.  Of course this approach doesn't really answer our real question, what is the true nature of Player X?  Is he essentially good, or a bum?  

Interestingly, we think PFF has placed themselves in a position where they will never have to admit that they are wrong.  The complex soup of the NFL, and the way teams assemble their rosters, can make pursuing the answers to particular questions very difficult.  That may be where the true genius of PFF really lies.  Rarely, if ever, do I see them say "according the this statistic, we feel that this player is the best at their position".  Instead, they frequently just list players in order, according to their grades in a particular area, and let you come to the conclusion "Hey, this guy must be the best!".  PFF's pretty numbers may nudge you in a particular direction, but you wind up at this conclusion all on your own.

Maybe PFF is misleading.  I don't know, and I'm not sure I would really want to say anything about that.  All I can say is that the degree to which PFF's statistics are being taken for gospel (at least by some people), might be a bit premature, and it makes me a bit uncomfortable.  It's particularly worrisome when I see some fans, reporters and game day announcers, discussing PFF grades without really digging into the subject itself, or questioning what the numbers are based upon.  Don't get me wrong.  PFF does have valuable information buried in their numbers, but people need to really analyze them, and question what the data means, rather than blindly trusting PFF's interpretation of the facts.

There's also a certain utility in these statistics, which can be destructive.  Even when the numbers are possibly flawed, or being applied incorrectly, they can be used to intimidate others, and end debates.  The analysis of what is really going on in football is still so clearly in its infancy, that silencing discussion would seem to be unfortunate, and counterproductive to our real goals. 

I suppose Reilly and I were also motivated to broach this subject because of a recent announcement made by PFF, about how they will be conducting their business in the future. Going forward, it appears PFF will no longer provide access to their raw data (a useful tool to many of us geeks), and instead only deliver their processed and pasteurized grades for players (pretty much worthless).  So, they will continue to provide their analysis of the data, while removing access to the data upon which their judgment is based from the eyes of the public.  As a friend pointed out upon hearing this announcement, they will effectively be charging people for the sort of "Overall Grades" that you find in the Madden video games.  Added context, or second guessing their interpretation of the data, clearly aren't something PFF is interested in.

As they also mention in this announcement, this new (inferior) form of data they will be providing, will be the same as the data that they provide to 19 NFL teams.  If it doesn't worry you that NFL teams could potentially be making decisions based on the grades that PFF has been providing, well, welcome to the new NFL.  Personally, I'm a bit annoyed about where this is all leading.

Kangaroo Court: The 2015 Offensive Linemen

When we did this last year, I really figured we would catch more grief over our admission that we rarely bother watching the offensive line prospects...ummm...actually play.  While I realize that there are some people who enjoy watching fat men jostle each other around (whatever floats your boat, man), the cruel calculations of our Banana 6000 Data Thresher are all I really care about here.  This may seem a bit unwise, but we just don't trust our lying eyes to make these sorts of judgments.  In the end, I figure if purchasing courting our Russian mail order bride could be done through simple data analysis, then I why not apply it to something more whimsical, like offensive linemen?

Of course, this process was a bit trickier with our darling Ludmilla.  All I really had to go on in that case were the numbers 38-44-38, and the many heartfelt poems she composed about peeling potatoes.  While her prose was moving, I do think it's possible that I might have misunderstood the meaning of those numbers.  I would have thought that at least one of them would have related to her vertical jump.  Good, hearty breeding stock is quite important to me, if I ever want my offspring to have a shot at NFL riches.  Maybe there was a mix up in converting the data from metric to standard.  I'm really not sure. Still, she is a rather sturdily constructed babushka, so perhaps we can still spawn some future nose tackles.  I swear though, if a single one of them turns out to be a long-snapper, I'm going to burn her green card.

While I've tried to encourage the company that brought Ludmilla and myself together to start some sort of combine-type program, to eliminate future misunderstandings, so far I have received little feedback.  As a televised event, I think watching Russian women running 3-cone drills in spandex could be quite compelling television viewing.  Maybe it's an idea that is just too far ahead of it's time.  Either way, history does seem to suggest that this can be done rather effectively with prospective NFL players, so I guess we'll stick with that for the time being.

As always, we'll be judging the players based on a few very basic criteria.  We will measure their Kangaroo Score (our measure of lower body power and explosiveness), and their Agility Score (based on their short shuttle and 3-Cone drills).  These scores are given in the form of how many standard deviations that the prospect is away from the average result for an offensive linemen.  If you are curious, you can take a look at Athleticism and the Offensive Line part I and part II, to get some sense as to how this relates to offensive tackles and guards.  For centers, we place more importance on their short shuttle times, as you can read about here.  We also played a little game with what we call the Lobotomy Line, to see what sort of results these limited bits of information could have theoretically produced in comparison to an actual NFL team.  There are, of course, other factors such as injuries, inability to elude the law, playing time, comically unnecessary punctuation in a player's name, and positional versatility that also somewhat weigh into our views on a prospect, as well as a few other more minor measurable athletic traits.

Speculating about a player's potential, based on their athletic traits, can obviously be a bit controversial.  People will often point to someone like Bruce Campbell as an individual with allegedly great athletic ability, who has amounted to very little, as a way of dismissing this approach.  So, let's take a look at Bruce Campbell.

	40 yard	Kangaroo	Agility
Bruce Campbell	4.75	0.411	0.487

While there are numerous positive things we could say about Campbell, and we could pick apart his numbers more thoroughly to reveal some other interesting and positive bits of data, his overall results weren't nearly as freakish as many claimed them to be.  He was a nice, moderately interesting prospect, and the computer would have given him some consideration as a mid-round pick, which is where he ended up being selected.  Still, he really didn't compare too favorably to Trent Williams, who went in the the 1st round of the same draft, and was the true physical freak.

	40 yard	Kangaroo	Agility
Trent Williams	4.81	1.644	0.528

Now, we're not trying to say that the more physically gifted player will always wind up performing better.  That would be ridiculous.  Instead, we're just suggesting that particular measurable traits do make us feel more comfortable with selecting players, at certain points in the draft.  The degree to which we place value on some of these traits can vary quite a bit, as we move along the different positions of the offensive line.  In the end, however, we're not really trying to suggest that a player is doomed to failure because of these scores.  Players who measured up poorly occasionally do rather well.  It's just that the outcomes for the truly exceptional prospects tend to turn out positively much more often than people seem to realize.

So, rather than attempting to foolishly say "this guys will succeed" and "this guy will fail", we really want to just narrow our focus to a very small handful of players, who perhaps have the balance of risk and reward more strongly tilted in their favor.  Inevitably, this will lead to passing over certain players who do quite well, but all we care about is identifying a very select few.  Last year, the computer suggested that Joel Bitonio and Corey Linsley were probably the best/safest players to pick at their respective positions, and so far things seem to be going well for them.  Hopefully, as things go on, a few other interesting nuggets will surface.

This list is still under construction, as we await the complete sets of data for individual draft prospects.  The list will continue to grow, and be updated with additional players.  Individual Agility Scores are unlikely to be changed, but based on the results from college pro-days, Kangaroo Scores may be adjusted.  The order the players are listed in will also periodically be adjusted to roughly coincide with the CBS' rankings.  Last Updated: 4/24/15

Brandon Scherff, OT/OG, Iowa
Arm Length: 33.375"   Kangaroo Score: 1.134  Agility Score: 1.489
Ah, the results from Scherff's pro day are finally in, and they look rather promising.  Based on his excellent Kangaroo Score and Agility Score, we would have to say that Scherff probably does have a significantly above average chance of meeting the expectations that people will have of a 1st round pick.  The only area of concern might be his arm length, which might force him to move inside to the guard position.  Still, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that he could do quite well as a tackle as well, since his overall athletic traits are still a rather good fit for that position as well.  I have to give him some added respect for majoring in Leisure Studies, which sounds like something that would involve an X-Box and some Doritos.  I'm just not sure how you tell your parents that you are devoting your college education to the study of 'flip cup', but it probably requires balls of steel.  Maybe that courage carries over to the football field, I really can't say for sure.  I anxiously await the results from his drug test.

Andrus Peat, OT, Stanford
Arm Length: 34.375"   Kangaroo Score: 1.615*  Agility Score: -0.102
There have been some wildly varying reports coming from Peat's pro day, but we still feel like have to radically boost his Kangaroo Score.  We still have some minor concerns about his Agility Score, but overall we now actually have to take him somewhat seriously as a 1st round draft pick.  Based on his results, we might still lean towards projecting him as more of a right tackle, because we still wonder if he has the sort of quickness that we prefer for the left side of the line.  Then again, Andrew Whitworth has appeared to do fine on the left side despite some similar concerns.  While our opinion of his athleticism has improved, we aren't sure whether we wouldn't feel more comfortable with Jake Fisher's more balanced athletic traits.  In the end, it probably doesn't matter too much, since it appears that Peat will be selected before Team Kangaroo would ever really need to give this much real consideration.

La'El Collins, OG, LSU
Arm Length: 33.25"   Kangaroo Score: -0.183  Agility Score: 0.421
I don't really see anything wrong with Collins results, but I also don't see anything that would make me feel comfortable with selecting him as highly as many people feel he is going to be taken.  In many ways, he is in a similar situation to the one Zach Martin was in last year, with very similar measurables.  I didn't have a problem with Martin either, but felt that Joel Bitonio's superior athleticism gave us more reasons to feel confident.  Still, you have to like a guy whose name seems to be 'the the'.  Maybe his parents were fans of the 1980's British rock group.

T.J. Clemmings, OT/OG, Pittsburgh
Arm Length: 35.125"   Kangaroo Score: 1.015  Agility Score: 0.677
Now, here we have a prospect that I find fairly interesting.  Athletically, he is quite impressive, and somebody I might have some interest in.  Beyond just his above average lower body power, and moderately nimbly-toed agility, Clemmings also has advantages when it comes to his arm length, which is exceptional, especially for someone of his height.  One of the big questions here is whether NFL teams will be able to see past his merely average height (a tad under 6'5"), or whether they will move him inside to the guard position.  Personally, I think height is a rather overrated trait for tackles, but many teams seem to be incredibly stubborn about this subject.  The bigger concern with Clemmings might be that he has only really played on the offensive line for 2 years, after switching over from the defense.  Considering that he will be turning 24 in November, and he might still need some time to adjust to life on the offensive line, I could see some reasons to be slightly concerned about teaching a slightly older dog new tricks.  So, I probably wouldn't take Clemmings in the 1st round, but if he is still there in the 2nd, I could be tempted to take a shot at him.

Ereck Flowers, OT, Miami
Arm Length: 34.5"   Kangaroo Score: -0.021  Agility Score: ?
So far, we only have the data related to Flower's vertical jump and broad jump at his pro day, which is significantly less information than we would really like to have.  Despite those limitations, we're still somewhat concerned with what this first piece of information might be telling us.  No, his results don't mean he is doomed, it was simply a bit more pedestrian and unexceptional than we would like to see.

Cameron Erving, OT/OG/C, Florida State
Arm Length: 34.125"   Kangaroo Score: 0.951  Agility Score: 0.811
The possibilities with Erving can be a bit ridiculous.  He started off in college as a defensive tackle, before becoming the team's left tackle in 2012, where he largely seemed to remain.  In 2014, he even spent 5 games at center.  While his relative lack of experience on the offensive line is similar to what we see with T.J. Clemmings, I think that Erving being almost 2 years younger gives him a bit of an edge to continue to improve with time.  Now, I have no real issue with him remaining at tackle, as his athletic ability appears to be perfectly suited to this, but there does appear to be a lot of flexibility to how he can be used.  When it comes to playing center, I am somewhat torn when it comes to Erving.  Since centers rarely exceed 6'5", and there are several sound possibilities as to why they rarely exceed this mark, Erving's height of just a hair under 6'5.5" might make him an unusual fit at this position.  There is also nothing that excites me more than a freakishly quick short shuttle time, when considering a center prospect.  In Erving's case, his time of 4.63 seconds is really nothing shocking, and merely 0.571 standard deviations above average for an offensive lineman.  That's not a bad result at all, but compared to some of the league's best centers, it is rather pedestrian.  In Erving's case, I might be willing to make a huge exception to this rule though.  You see, normally, centers have the absolute worst Kangaroo Scores, often posting results that go into the negative range.  Cameron's result of 0.951, is absolutely shocking for a center, and quite similar to another historical oddball, Nick Hardwick.  What this says about Erving's lower body power, really excites me.  At the same time, his overall Agility Score was still quite good, so he doesn't appear to simply be a powerful stiff.  I suspect Erving could probably play any position along the offensive line, and probably do reasonably well, though I suspect his best chance of success will come somewhere along the interior of the offensive line, most likely at the guard position.  Either way, I think his positional flexibility is a huge bonus.  I am very interested in seeing what happens with him, and suspect he is probably worth a late 1st round pick.

Jake Fisher, Oregon, OT
Arm Length: 33.75"   Kangaroo Score: 0.957*  Agility Score: 1.953
Except for his slightly below average arm length, he really seems to be a nearly perfect physical specimen.  Now, I normally try not to fuss too much about arm length, but I do have some minor concerns about it when it comes to taller players.  So, in Fisher's case, his height of 6'6", might slightly decrease his already average reach.  In the end though, I'm not sure I really care.  So far, unless someone else emerges, he appears to be  one of the most physically superior offensive linemen in the entire draft.  That he is also one of the younger prospects, at just 21 years old, also weighs into our view of his significant upside.  While it would be nice to have data related to how often Fisher gave up a sack, this doesn't seem to be available.  Still, his QB Marcus Mariota, appeared to be kept relatively clean during the past 3 years.  While you might credit this to Mariota's athleticism, I kind of doubt that is the case.  Scrambling QBs, in general, actually tend to take a higher number of sacks than pocket passers, so Fisher's job was probably more challenging than you might expect.  The one thing we can say, is that in the 13 games Fisher played this year, Mariota was only sacked on 4.19% of his pass attempts, a rather excellent result.  In the 2 games that Fisher missed with a leg injury, Mariota was sacked on 17.3% of his pass attempts.  Admittedly, this is a ridiculously small sample size, but that is all we have to work with, and you can make of it whatever you wish.  Fisher's combined athletic traits put him on a tier where failure becomes relatively rare, probably occurring no more than 25-30% of the time (Winston Justice would be an example of where this didn't work out).  With those sorts of odds, I'd say he is worth a first round pick, though some people seem to suggest that he could still be available into the 2nd round.  I would be surprised if he lasted that long, since I expect at least one team will become as enamored of Fisher's measurables as I am.

A.J. Cann, OG, South Carolina
Arm Length: 32.625"   Kangaroo Score: 0.911  Agility Score: ?
It's looking like we are never going to be able to say much about his agility, which is unfortunate.  Still, he does appear to have some power to him.  Without a full set of data, I really wouldn't want to speculate about what his chances of success are, but I have to admit that his 5.46 second forty time is a bit worrisome.  You generally don't have a lot of amazing successes coming from people who put up that sort of result.  Oh well, at least he has power.

Laken Tomlinson, OG, Duke
Arm Length: 33.675"   Kangaroo Score: 0.837  Agility Score: -0.998
Based on his tubby physique (323#), and the above measurables, he would appear to be a basic road grader type, though not necessarily an exceptional one.  He might do okay in that role, depending on which team selects him, but I have to admit that his rather poor agility largely negates the benefits of his somewhat above average power, at least in my eyes.  Based on his pro day results (where he had dropped his weight down to 316 pounds), we could boost his Agility Score to a respectably average 0.002.  If we decided to trust these newer results, we might start to consider him a fairly interesting prospect.  Still, it often pays to be wary of these sorts of radical improvements.

D.J. Humphries, OT, Floida
Arm Length: 33.625"   Kangaroo Score: 0.202  Agility Score: -0.393
To quote Jay Cutler,"Don't caaaaarrreeeee....".  I seem to see projections for where Humphries will be taken that range from the 1st round to the 3rd round.  If he does fall somewhere in that area, it would strike me as quite a daring gamble.  While none of Humphries' results are necessarily bad, they also wouldn't do anything to ease my concerns with selecting him this high.

Reese Dismukes, C, Auburn
Arm Length: 32.4"   Kangaroo Score: -0.527  Agility Score: -0.528
I'm only including Dismukes on this list because a number of  people seem to think that he will be selected in the first few rounds of the draft, and generally rate him as one of the better center prospects.  Honestly, I see nothing here that gets me the least bit excited.  One interesting fact about Dismukes, is that the only area in which he tested slightly above average at the combine was in the short shuttle drill.  As I've said before this is the one drill that centers really tend to dominate, though in Dismukes case, his time of 4.7 seconds was only 0.227 standard deviations above average for an offensive lineman, and nothing that would make me take him the least bit seriously.  While his Kangaroo Score might appear rather poor, it's actually relatively close to an an average result for a center, where power tends to be in somewhat short supply.

Ty Sambrailo, OT, Colorado St.
Arm Length: 33"   Kangaroo Score: -0.452  Agility Score: 0.827
While Sambrailo's results aren't terrible, they aren't what I want to see in a player who supposedly is going to cost a 2nd or 3rd round pick.  In the 5th round?  Hmmm...maybe.  By the third day of the draft we'll probably be quite hungover, and willing to lower our standards a bit.  While his Agility Score is respectable, I would really need to see more evidence of explosive lower body power to pick him this high in the draft.  As things stand, he has traits that I associate more with guards, and not a tackle.  Of course, I've probably just secured his hall of fame induction by expressing these doubts.

Tre Jackson, OG, Florida State
Arm Length: 32.625"   Kangaroo Score:-0.472  Agility Score: -2.566*
Tre Jackson might be a lovely human being, but his mother should smack him in the head for producing these results.  You could probably do a better job of protecting your quarterback by lining up a bunch of bean-bag chairs in front of him.

Daryl Williams, OT, Oklahoma
Arm Length: 35"   Kangaroo Score: -0.340  Agility Score: -1.978
I still seem to see a number of people projecting that Williams could be taken somewhere around the 3rd round, and this really makes no sense to me.  He doesn't seem to have the explosiveness or power to play tackle, and so far, he appears to have the agility of a rock...a very tired rock.  I wouldn't select him at all, let alone in the first half of the draft.

Tyrus Thompson, OT, Oklahoma
Arm Length: 34.875"   Kangaroo Score: 0.026  Agility Score: -0.850*
I wasn't going to include Thompson on this list, but someone mentioned that the Draft Advisory Board had given him a 2nd round grade.  In other places, I see him being projected to go around the 4th round.  Personally, I have no more interest in him than I did in his teammate Daryl Williams.  While his Kangaroo Score falls in the tolerable/average sort of range, it isn't the sort of result I really want to see.  We can't really fully weigh his Agility Score, since we only have his short shuttle time at this point, but the initial results are less than promising.  The only thing we can really say for Thompson, is that he is a rather large guy (324#), with long arms.  That doesn't really cut it in my book.

Hroniss Grasu, C, Oregon
Arm Length: 31.125"   Kangaroo Score:?  Agility Score: -0.113
The initial reports from Grasu's pro day were claiming that he had a 4.20 short shuttle time.  I think by now we've clearly established that we have a deranged affection for centers with excellent short shuttle times.  Now, the somewhat more official numbers are suggesting that he ran the short shuttle in 4.74 seconds, which is vastly less interesting to us, and more in line with what we would expect based on his 7.85 second 3-Cone drill.  While it would be nice to have the data to calculate his Kangaroo Score, that doesn't seem like it will ever become available.  So, what was once an interesting prospect, now becomes someone we won't be giving much thought to.

Ali Marpet, OG, Hobart
Arm Length: 33.375"   Kangaroo Score: 0.416  Agility Score: 1.468
At some point, I suspect we're all going to get tired of the way that players from Hobart dominate the league.  Athletically, Marpet is pretty much the ideal model for what I expect from a guard.  While guards tend to have a bit less explosive power than tackles, Marpet's Kangaroo Score is actually surprisingly good, relative to his peers.  Perhaps more importantly, his agility score is exceptional, and precisely the sort of result I'm used to seeing among the league's more successful guards.  While his 40 time of 4.98 seconds was good, I was particularly pleased with his 10-yard split of 1.74 seconds.  I suppose the main concern here is the level of competition he faced in college, but there's isn't much we can do about that.  If he continues to be available as the 3rd round approaches, I could be quite tempted to take him, though I wouldn't be surprised if he goes a bit higher than many people expect.  At this point, we see him as one of the most intriguing offensive linemen in the entire draft.

Arie Kuandijo, G, Alabama
Arm Length: 34.125"   Kangaroo Score: -1.122  Agility Score: -2.655 
I'm really not seeing anything to be optimistic about with this guy  The only thing he appears to have going for him are some unusually long arms for a guard.  Oh, the mystique of Alabama must be alive and well, if Kuandijo is being viewed as a serious prospect.

John Miller, OG, Louisville
Arm Length: 33.25"   Kangaroo Score: -0.545  Agility Score: -0.757
Hey, I know that name from somewhere.  Oh well, I must be thinking of someone else.  I really do appreciate it when a player's obvious shortcomings give me a chance to be brief.. Hmm, maybe this is the John Miller I know?  Based on his pro day results, he seems to have lifted his Kangaroo Score to 0.014, as well as improving his Agility Score to -0.049.  These are still just very average results, and it generally pays to be cautious about pro days.

Cedric Ogbuehi, OT, Texas A&M
Arm Length: 35.875"   Kangaroo Score:?  Agility Score: ?
Still waiting for data.  Considering that he tore his ACL in the West Virginia game on December 29th, it is unlikely that we'll ever get any data here, or that we could put much stock in it.  It is really unfortunate that I can't find stats related to sacks allowed by college offensive linemen.  Still, I did find numerous people making an interesting note about Ogbuehi, and the horrific 3 game stretch in which he allowed 6 sacks this past year.  That is definitely way beyond just bad, and not something I ever expect to see from a supposed star player at the college level.  Without something to counterbalance this, I'd probably avoid him altogether.

Donovan Smith, OT, Penn State
Arm Length: 34.375"   Kangaroo Score: 1.988  Agility Score: -0.412
Am I concerned about a tackle with somewhat below average agility?  Yes.  Am I also incredibly curious what will happen when a player with this sort of Kangaroo Score is used as a run blocker?  Definitely.  Personally, I'd have a hard time selecting Smith in the vicinity of the 3rd round, which is where he seems to be projected to be taken, but I am still quite curious what he might become.  I definitely wouldn't want him to play left tackle, but on the right side, eh, he might be interesting.


Mitch Morse, OG, Missouri
Arm Length: 32.25"   Kangaroo Score: 0.696  Agility Score: 0.917
.. .----. .-.. .-.. / ... . -. -.. / .- -. / ... --- ... / - --- / - .... . / .-- --- .-. .-.. -.. .-.-.- / .. / .... --- .--. . / - .... .- - / ... --- -- . --- -. . / --. . - ... / -- -.-- / -- . ... ... .- --. . / .. -. / .- / -... --- - - .-.. . .-.-.-   If he continues to be seen as just a mid-round pick, I could see some potential value here.  While he played tackle the past 2 seasons, we'd really like to see him used as a guard or center.  When we factor in his somewhat short arms, along with his above average short shuttle time of 4.50 seconds, the center position is really calling his name, and a place we think he might do quite well.  Fortunately, he seems to have already played this role, at least for a short time back in 2012.  As a guard, we have slightly less interest, and as a tackle we might not want him at all.  Without knowing what position teams will have him play, I 'd be hesitant to place any bets here, but I do think he is an interesting mid-round prospect.  If I had confidence as to how he would be utilized, I might start to target him in the 4th or 5th round.  I look forward to seeing -- --- .-. ... . written on the back of a jersey.

Terry Poole, OG, San Diego State
Arm Length: 33.25"   Kangaroo Score: 0.851  Agility Score: -0.005
While he is generally listed as a tackle, I kind of doubt that teams will use him at that position.  His somewhat shorter arm length, and merely average height (a whisker over 6'4.5"), just don't seem likely to get him an opportunity there.  As a guard, I think he would be a more interesting prospect, and perhaps a reasonable gamble to take in the mid-to-late portion of the draft.  Based on his measurable traits, I would expect him to be more at home as a run blocker than a pass protector.  I wouldn't bet on him becoming a star, but he's got to be better than someone like the dreaded Oniell Cousins.  I probably wouldn't pursue him, but I'd be interested in following his progress.

Mark "Glo Worm" Glowinski, OG, West Virginia
Arm Length: 33.125"   Kangaroo Score: 0.851  Agility Score: 0.792
There is nothing terribly amazing about either of Glowinski's scores that are listed above.  In combination, however, I do think they could make him a fairly interesting prospect.  He generally seems to be projected to be a late round pick or undrafted free agent, but if given the opportunity, he does seem to possess some interesting upside potential.  With a 4.58 short shuttle time, I wouldn't even rule out moving to the center position.  Based on players who were similar to him, I'd say he has a slightly better than a 50/50 shot of turning out to at least be a respectable player, if he is given an opportunity, which is more than you can say for many of the players who are likely to be selected at a similar point in the draft.  He's quickly becoming one of our favorite players to target in the middle of the draft.  I'd probably aim to pick him up somewhere around the 4th round.

Jarvis Harrison, OG, Texas A&M
Arm Length: 33.5"   Kangaroo Score: 0.715  Agility Score: 0.782
I would find it incredibly amusing if Harrison ended up being seen as a better player than his former teammate Cedric Ogbuehi, despite (probably) being drafted much later.  He appears to have been a fairly successful 3 year starter at Texas A&M, though he missed some time in 2014 due to injuries.  Either way, Harrison is athletically somewhat similar to the previously mentioned Mark Glowinski (actually, Glowinski measured up better, but had some inconsistencies in his combine results), and seems to be garnering a similar lack of attention.  A fair bit of the criticism of Harrison seems to relate to his roly-poly physique (330#), which strikes me as a bit odd, since the NFL tends to be a group of chubby chasers.  Just like we said with Glowinski, if he is still floating around in the 5th round, I think he'd make an interesting target.

Laurence Gibson, OT, Virginia Tech
Arm Length: 35.125"   Kangaroo Score:1.139  Agility Score: 0.558
Overall, Gibson has the sort of athletic traits that I would find rather appealing for an offensive tackle.  While his Agility Score isn't amazing, it is still good enough to not give me much concern, particularly if he is started out as a right tackle, where his physical abilities might be better suited.  Of course, there is a reason why Gibson is typically ranked as a prospect who might not go until near the end of the draft.  He only started 18 games in his college career, and will already be turning 24 this upcoming March.  Is there something terribly wrong with him, that prevented him from getting significant playing time?  Or, were his coaches just idiots?  Who can really say?  I suspect some team will gamble on his athletic ability a bit sooner than many might expect, but if he is still sitting around in the 6th or 7th round, I really see no reason not to give him a shot. 

Austin Reiter, C, USF
Arm Length: ?   Kangaroo Score: 0.617  Agility Score: 0.755
We're still looking for more information on Reiter, so take some of this with a grain of salt.  Our main concerns are that we still don't know his arm length, and he might be a slightly older prospect, though we've had a hard time figuring out when he was born.  Despite that, among the prospects who actually played the center position in college, Reiter might be one of the more interesting prospects.  If we eliminated center prospects from consideration who were conversion projects, or who will be taken in the 3rd round or higher, Reiter might end up being our top choice for the position.  While the results we have listed above might not seem exceptional, they actually line up very nicely with what we want to see in a center.  We tend to have a much lower expectation of even just average lower body power with centers, so Reiter's results here are actually surprisingly good.  While his Agility Score might look fairly uninteresting, his short shuttle results were 1.061 standard deviations above average.  We view that as a rather key attribute for successful centers, so that interests us a great deal.  Reiter was also a tree year starter at center for USF, and was twice listed on the Rimington Trophy watch list for the nation's best college centers.  Despite all of that, he is generally projected to go undrafted.  We would probably start to consider Reiter somewhere around the 5th round.