How much should a board change after the Combine?

[Superman]

http://www.si.com/vault/2015/04/20/106753868/the-prospector

 

I posted an SI article about Grigson in the Colts section. In it, he says this: 

 

"I don't mess with the board at all postcombine," Grigson says. "I've worked places where it's completely rearranged after the combine. Completely. I've seen a lot of things where I said, That's what I won't do. It's what pisses you off as a scout. We all agreed that this guy was a first-round talent—and now we're moving him to the bottom of the third based on what he did in one drill?"

 

 

The bolded is probably hyperbole. If a guy doesn't check out medically, for instance, I'm sure the board will change. And Grigson said before the Combine that he thinks 40 times are important for figuring out where a player will be drafted, so I think they restack their board somewhat.

 

But I think his point is that they don't scout a guy and feel great on him, then say 'ehhh, he didn't test well, let's think about this some more.' Right before the quote above, the writer talks about how LeSean McCoy was dinged for his underwhelming vertical jump at his pro day, but no one cares about that now. Still, the Colts send guys to the Combine and pro days and private workouts and stuff, so they obviously care about drills and timed tests to a certain extent.

 

So my question is, how much should the Combine influence a team's draft board, in your mind? Setting aside medical stuff and failed drug tests, what's the right way to view it? Should Paul Dawson fall out of the top 50 because he doesn't run drills well? Should Ereck Flowers drop because he kick-steps like a mountain goat?

[12isthenew18]

Smokescreens

[chad72]

Things like medical exams and if a guy tests for drugs at the combine can impact where he goes. Other than that, the combine is an underwear Olympics to me. Put those guys in pads and do the drills, that is how football is played.

 

The guys that it helps on the most is the ones in smaller or weaker (supposedly) conferences, and by letting those guys move in pads, it can help them stand out.

[Valpo2004]

http://www.si.com/vault/2015/04/20/106753868/the-prospector

 

I posted an SI article about Grigson in the Colts section. In it, he says this: 

 

 

The bolded is probably hyperbole. If a guy doesn't check out medically, for instance, I'm sure the board will change. And Grigson said before the Combine that he thinks 40 times are important for figuring out where a player will be drafted, so I think they restack their board somewhat.

 

But I think his point is that they don't scout a guy and feel great on him, then say 'ehhh, he didn't test well, let's think about this some more.' Right before the quote above, the writer talks about how LeSean McCoy was dinged for his underwhelming vertical jump at his pro day, but no one cares about that now. Still, the Colts send guys to the Combine and pro days and private workouts and stuff, so they obviously care about drills and timed tests to a certain extent.

 

So my question is, how much should the Combine influence a team's draft board, in your mind? Setting aside medical stuff and failed drug tests, what's the right way to view it? Should Paul Dawson fall out of the top 50 because he doesn't run drills well? Should Ereck Flowers drop because he kick-steps like a mountain goat?

 

Not a great deal, although I would probably shy away from someone who under-performs in nearly every drill at the combine.  

 

I think if you have a guy who's under performing in everything then you have to question as to how seriously he took the process.  But if he's under performing in 1 or 2 drills.  Probably don't want to make a big deal out of it, the tape means a lot more.  

[Derakynn]

I don't really think much should change (we've had a discussion with this included before). Unless of course they have seven fractured vertebrae in their back, or they show up exceedingly overweight and then engage in a 40-yard roll or something. If the numbers are just exceedingly disturbing, that should probably be taken into account. But I don't really think players should really move around much based on a good combine. We've seen many times where athletes fail due to lack of actual football skills. (DHB)

[pacolts56]

One area where I think a substantial move...or a complete scratch off the team's board....can also happen is if a prospect's Combine interview either goes REALLY well or REALLY bad.

 

Or not at all.

 

The gold standard comparison for this would of course be the Peyton Manning vs. Ryan Leaf interview process....where Peyton actually showed up with plenty of questions of his own, versus Leaf who at the behest of Leigh Steinberg stood up the Colts.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10327498/peyton-manning-no-1-draft-pick-ryan-leaf-spurned-jim-mora

 

But Manning and Leaf aside....if a player has deficiencies in head knowledge/recognition for the position he plays, and has been able to get by with athletic talent at the college level....it could be something that surfaces in Combine interviews, or more probably if he's brought in for a team workout.

 

The latter may be a reason for Grigson's comment....and a bit of hairsplitting (or lying ) on his part.

 

Either way I think this could move the needle on a prospect.

[Superman]

I don't really think much should change (we've had a discussion with this included before). Unless of course they have seven fractured vertebrae in their back, or they show up exceedingly overweight and then engage in a 40-yard roll or something. If the numbers are just exceedingly disturbing, that should probably be taken into account. But I don't really think players should really move around much based on a good combine. We've seen many times where athletes fail due to lack of actual football skills. (DHB)

 

I think Vick Ballard is an example. He didn't come off the Colts board, obviously, despite his terrible 40 performance (how are you gonna play RB if you can't get four steps into your 40 without falling over?), but they didn't take him until the 5th round. 

 

So did Grigson say "okay, we like him but he probably won't go until later rounds because he had a bad workout, so let's earmark him for the 5th round," or did Grigson actually move him down his board because of the bad 40, like "we like him, but that's not a good 40, so let's not look at him until later on."

[Dustin]

Any edge rusher who doesn't perform well in drills should come off your board as a first round pick. Particularly if they underperformed in jumps and they have a slow 10-yard split.

Combine drills have the highest correlation to succees in edge rushers than any other position.

[Gavin]

None, Not much logic in allowing what a player does in shorts affect an opinion about what he does in pads and cleats, The combine is fun to watch but that's about it, Its been proven combine numbers don't amount to much. Film don't lie

[NewColtsFan]

A modest amount.

 

Up or down a few spots...   roughly +/-  10-15 spots, I'd guess.    Somewhere between a 1/4 and a 1/2 of a round.

 

As I've often read,  the combine and pro day should help your either verify or refute your film study. 

 

But, for example,  when Byron Jones of UConn jumped through the roof, EVERYONE went back and watched a ton more tape on him.   His combine/pro day workouts are the best in the roughly 30 years of testing.      Seriously.

 

So,  you go back and double-check.   Not only what he did,  but what you think he can become now that you've seen his incredible testing....

[NewColtsFan]

None, Not much logic in allowing what a player does in shorts affect an opinion about what he does in pads and cleats, The combine is fun to watch but that's about it, Its been proven combine numbers don't amount to much. Film don't lie

 

 

If you really think this is true,  then the NFL wastes millions and millions of dollars every year, if all they need is film.

 

I don't think it's been "proven" at all......

[Gavin]

If you really think this is true,  then the NFL wastes millions and millions of dollars every year, if all they need is film.

 

I don't think it's been "proven" at all......

Well according to Grigson himself he don't put much stock into Combine performance unless a player really pops out to him, Yes it has been proven guys that have had awful combine numbers have went on to have great careers in the NFL and vice versa, If you don't believe that then I don't know what to tell you, So who to believe? you....or a current GM? Seems an easy choice

[NewColtsFan]

Well according to Grigson himself he don't put much stock into Combine performance unless a player really pops out to him, Yes it has been proven guys that have had awful combine numbers have went on to have great careers in the NFL and vice versa, If you don't believe that then I don't know what to tell you

 

Dustin....

 

The combine invites 300+ players every year.

 

Of course,  there are going to be exceptions to every rule.

 

But the combine is a helpful tool to everyone in the business.   If it wasn't,  the NFL wouldn't do it.

 

Why you dismiss it is beyond me.....

[Gavin]

Dustin....

 

The combine invites 300+ players every year.

 

Of course,  there are going to be exceptions to every rule.

 

But the combine is a helpful tool to everyone in the business.   If it wasn't,  the NFL wouldn't do it.

 

Why you dismiss it is beyond me.....

Im not Dustin, And I never dismissed the entire process of the combine, It serves a valuable purpose, I dismissed numbers in shorts

[Dustin]

Well according to Grigson himself he don't put much stock into Combine performance unless a player really pops out to him, Yes it has been proven guys that have had awful combine numbers have went on to have great careers in the NFL and vice versa, If you don't believe that then I don't know what to tell you, So who to believe? you....or a current GM? Seems an easy choice

 

Grigson said he'd basically disregard all of the tape he saw of a safety is he ran a 4.9. He definitely puts stock into it now, IMO, since he got burned on Werner.  

[Superman]

Grigson said he'd basically disregard all of the tape he saw of a safety is he ran a 4.9. He definitely puts stock into it now, IMO, since he got burned on Werner.  

 

Pretty much. That's why I said I think what he said is an exaggeration. The numbers matter in certain situations.

 

But I think they try not to take a guy off the board if his film is great and he's super productive, but he doesn't run a great 40. Kelvin Benjamin, for instance. You've scouted him, you like him, and now because of one timed drill, you sour on him? Nope.

 

And on the other end, you don't scout a guy like Byron Jones, for instance, give him a third round grade, and then go bananas over his Combine and take him in the first.

[NewColtsFan]

Im not Dustin, And I never dismissed the entire process of the combine, It serves a valuable purpose, I dismissed numbers in shorts

 

Sorry about the name confusion.........

 

But the larger point remains,  if NFL GM's, scouts and coaches didn't put some stock into this,  then they wouldn't be doing it.

[Gavin]

Grigson said he'd basically disregard all of the tape he saw of a safety is he ran a 4.9. He definitely puts stock into it now, IMO, since he got burned on Werner.  

I think he puts stock in 40's and 10 yard splits at certain positions (Namely WR, CB, S)...But he also said a while back the 40 helps a bit in him organizing his big board but Im talking about just about all the other drills with the exception of bench press, But still guys have had awful combine performances and went on to have good or even great careers

[NewColtsFan]

Pretty much. That's why I said I think what he said is an exaggeration. The numbers matter in certain situations.

 

But I think they try not to take a guy off the board if his film is great and he's super productive, but he doesn't run a great 40. Kelvin Benjamin, for instance. You've scouted him, you like him, and now because of one timed drill, you sour on him? Nope.

 

And on the other end, you don't scout a guy like Byron Jones, for instance, give him a third round grade, and then go bananas over his Combine and take him in the first.

 

You might not jump a player two rounds,   but you might jump him one....

 

Having the best combine/pro day test results in history will do that to a player.

 

But he's the exception to the rule.......

[NewColtsFan]

I think he puts stock in 40's and 10 yard splits at certain positions (Namely WR, CB, S)...But he also said a while back the 40 helps a bit in him organizing his big board but Im talking about just about all the other drills with the exception of bench press, But still guys have had awful combine performances and went on to have good or even great careers

 

When Grigson says he puts stock in the 40 and the 10......    I don't take that to mean only those two times.

 

I think he puts plenty of stock in all the timed/measured events.   They translate to a level of athleticism.

 

There's a school of thought that puts more stock into the Vertical jump and the broad jump than the timed events.

 

Those two jumps show explosiveness.    And some put more stock in the shuttles that show change of direction rather than the 40 which is straight line speed.

 

I think Grigson speaks broadly in an effort not to reveal his own priorities....

 

Just my opinion.....

[Gavin]

Sorry about the name confusion.........

 

But the larger point remains,  if NFL GM's, scouts and coaches didn't put some stock into this,  then they wouldn't be doing it.

None was to literal I agree...But I don't think the good GM's out there get all bent out of shape over combine numbers when the film is good or even great

[Superman]

You might not jump a player two rounds,   but you might jump him one....

 

Having the best combine/pro day test results in history will do that to a player.

 

But he's the exception to the rule.......

 

I'd like to be involved in a team's draft process, and see exactly how they go about it. Because without that, we can't really know.

 

But I could see a staff liking Byron Jones, thinking they know something no one else does, and figuring they could get him at great value in the third or fourth round. Then he blows up at the Combine, and the secret's out. They don't think he'll last to the third, so they take him in the second. 

[Gavin]

When Grigson says he puts stock in the 40 and the 10......    I don't take that to mean only those two times.

 

I think he puts plenty of stock in all the timed/measured events.   They translate to a level of athleticism.

 

There's a school of thought that puts more stock into the Vertical jump and the broad jump than the timed events.

 

Those two jumps show explosiveness.    And some put more stock in the shuttles that show change of direction rather than the 40 which is straight line speed.

 

I think Grigson speaks broadly in an effort not to reveal his own priorities....

 

Just my opinion.....

I think he was being straightforward

[Superman]

I think he was being straightforward

 

Yeah, I don't think Grigson puts a lot of effort into intentional misdirection. Sure, he doesn't publish his draft rankings for everyone to see, and he's guarded with information, but I don't think he goes out there and says one thing when he really means something else. Especially not pertaining to the draft. 

[Track Guy]

I look at the combine as dangerous for a "don't count it twicer". If a guy simply sucks as an athlete, then he should take a hit in the rankings. But if athleticism is the main part of a players appeal, a good combine should just be taken for granted. I only see it useful for those guys who are regarded as pretty good players but have questions about their athleticism, I think those are the guys who should move up a bit after a good combine. 

[esmort]

A modest amount.

 

Up or down a few spots...   roughly +/-  10-15 spots, I'd guess.    Somewhere between a 1/4 and a 1/2 of a round.

 

As I've often read,  the combine and pro day should help your either verify or refute your film study. 

 

But, for example,  when Byron Jones of UConn jumped through the roof, EVERYONE went back and watched a ton more tape on him.   His combine/pro day workouts are the best in the roughly 30 years of testing.      Seriously.

 

So,  you go back and double-check.   Not only what he did,  but what you think he can become now that you've seen his incredible testing....

 

^^^ This ... I have heard in some interviews the opposite applies as well.  Someone a team is higher on puts up some bad numbers at combine so they go back to the tape and look more closely and see things in a new light ... suddenly things like those "bad angles" he took a few times that were not a big deal because maybe he just made a mental mistake (fixable) become "bad angles" that with the new combine info they realize were a result of the player realizing he didn't have the speed/ability to get there with the correct angle (not fixable). 

 

I don't believe the teams just automatically drop or raise someone purely based on the combine numbers, but I believe the combine number could be what causes the GM go back and look at the player again (and have others re-watch as well) and re-evaluate the tape under a "new light", and then drop or raise a player based on the tape now having "more context".

[Gavin]

Yeah, I don't think Grigson puts a lot of effort into intentional misdirection. Sure, he doesn't publish his draft rankings for everyone to see, and he's guarded with information, but I don't think he goes out there and says one thing when he really means something else. Especially not pertaining to the draft. 

I mean I think he would potentially if the Colts were sitting higher in the draft and he had a much better shot of getting into the top 10 picks. I certainly see the merits of it but as it is he is kinda at the mercy of 28 other teams ahead of him hoping one (or really a couple) get antsy and blow their board and take a need who is not the BPA

[Superman]

I mean I think he would potentially if the Colts were sitting higher in the draft and he had a much better shot of getting into the top 10 picks. I certainly see the merits of it but as it is he is kinda at the mercy of 28 other teams ahead of him hoping one (or really a couple) get antsy and blow their board and take a need who is not the BPA

 

If you want to move up, you move up. I don't think he'd come out and say "we want to move up," but if that's what's on his mind, then it's not like another team could stop him from doing it. 

 

Where he is now, like you said, he's at the mercy of the teams ahead of him to leave someone he likes. So he's not going to say "we really like X." But I also don't think he goes out there and says stuff like "we don't change our board after the Combine" in an effort to mislead people. I don't think that's his game. I think he'd be more likely to make meaningless general comments without committing one way or the other.

[Superman]

I look at the combine as dangerous for a "don't count it twicer". If a guy simply sucks as an athlete, then he should take a hit in the rankings. But if athleticism is the main part of a players appeal, a good combine should just be taken for granted. I only see it useful for those guys who are regarded as pretty good players but have questions about their athleticism, I think those are the guys who should move up a bit after a good combine. 

 

That's a good point. You have a small school guy that looks good on tape against bad competition, but he comes to the Combine and runs like a sea lion. You recheck the tape to see if he's just the fastest slow guy.

 

But really, good scouting should take that into consideration to begin with. You don't really need the Combine to know whether the guy at Ham Sandwich State has pro speed. But it should prompt you to take a second look at film when something just doesn't make sense, based on what you've watched on film. An edge rusher might look like he has a great first step, but his drills are terrible. You look at the film and realize he has great snap anticipation; not a bad thing, but it's not the same as having great burst. Again, good scouting should realize this already, but if you missed it, using the Combine to properly calibrate your grades makes sense.