Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

BlueShoe

Bradley Chubb 3-Cones at 7.37

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, ColtsBlitz said:

No, nor do I want to. 

 

Im 18, so I’m a youngster no doubt on this forum. 

 

A boy amonst men (and women) if you will

Don’t make me feel old 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

So does responsibility 

And the list goes on and on. Reliability, provider, protector... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

Hands and technique with NFL strength will help him with several counters including the bull rush when he has the OL on his toes. I'd still want the Colts to develop depth for that 4-3 DE position to help Chubb come along with limited reps to begin with. 

 

Are we keeping Robert Mathis still? Chubb could use to learn the spin move, that is why I am asking.

 

 

In case it wasn't answered, yes, Mathis remains on the staff....  no change...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On March 4, 2018 at 3:39 PM, PrincetonTiger said:

The Combine is a joke

It does seem like the Combine is just an excuse to grab some coffee, a sweet roll, & drown yourself in mindless stats for GMs doesn't it? 

On March 4, 2018 at 3:42 PM, PrincetonTiger said:

Coaches and Scouts rely much more on Fïlm and personal interviews

Yep, the eye in the sky never lies. 

On March 4, 2018 at 3:51 PM, OffensivelyPC said:

No, it is where truths are over exaggerated. The film is where the truth comes out. These guys arent even running in pads.

Exactly right OPC. Not real football yet. 

On March 4, 2018 at 4:21 PM, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

I'm not as into all of this as some of you are so I'll defer to you when it comes to the importance of the drills and how they translate to being an NFL player. To me, it seems to be forgotten that he is going to have a pro day at NC State sometime in the very near future and I'm sure if he tests well he could very well still be in the mix at # 3. I could be wrong, but I just don't see how one drill on one day of the year erases a heck of a collegiate career. I'm not saying it does or doesn't, I'm just saying it doesn't make sense to me. 

That's why I like Pro days. Athletes are relaxed & comfortable & usually do their best work. Some guys don't do well under the microscope. They prefer controlled environments where they can shine. 

21 hours ago, krunk said:

No one whose opinion means anything has showed even a fleas worth of concern over this. Why? Because if you're being reasonable you understand the stuff in the film has the greatest weight. I would not let something like this effect anything unless the tape was mediocre to poor. There's a gazillion stats quoted in the NFL for everything and coaches and GMs overlook them when they are certain a guy can play. You got to know when to fall in line with what is traditionally accepted and when to overlook or ignore it. Teams do this all the time. I ain't buying it! As Ballard has stated before "You gotta scout with your eyes and your gut" The film dont lie on Chubb

You're always a guy I rely on to set me straight & separate fact from fiction Krunk. When you talk, I listen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of things I said about Chubb in another thread.....

 

Chubb's somewhat disappointing 3 cone relative to his straight line performances (such as 40 time, broad and vertical jumps) is due to him looking, IMO, somewhat top heavy, high wasted, with thin legs.  Spells poor lateral agility and high knee injury risk.  I like dlineman to be built with a lower center of gravity.

 

Its the the laws of physics  They engineer Indy cars to be low to the ground for better cornering.  Same thing applies to humans.  Except genetics tends to dictate that.

 

Read the writeups about how they describe players.  Dwight Freeney had a "thick bubble" and thick legs.  Others have narrow hips or a narrow base.  Freeney had a heck of a spin move for 12 years but no knee injuries.

 

Superman described Henry Anderson as being on the ground a lot in college.  Good player, just on the ground a lot.  He has a high center of gravity.  Knee injury his first year.  Steve Emtman was built the same way.  Two knee injuries in two years.  

 

I don't know about Chubb for sure , but just glancing at him and noticing a somewhat high waisted body type and his natural weight distribution explained perfectly to me why he excelled at the straight-line and power tests but only average in the cornering tests.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

It does seem like the Combine is just an excuse to grab some coffee, a sweet roll, & drown yourself in mindless stats for GMs doesn't it? 

Yep, the eye in the sky never lies. 

Exactly right OPC. Not real football yet. 

That's why I like Pro days. Athletes are relaxed & comfortable & usually do their best work. Some guys don't do well under the microscope. They prefer controlled environments where they can shine. 

You're always a guy I rely on to set me straight & separate fact from fiction Krunk. When you talk, I listen. 

Thanks S Dubb! My whole thing is if I see you on tape beating the best of the best and putting up stats very similar to players who just recently as the last two years went in the top 5. And in some cases like TFL even more superior why am I going to let running around 3 cones be the end all be all? I dont see good reasoning in that. Does that all of a sudden mean you can't play anymore? Grigson made a point to get people with good 3 cone times but did we ever have anybody on this team that could actually play? No we did not! I'm not going to say the data is completely useless, but I do know you can never completely take common sense out of the equation. If I see you on tape bending the corner, tossing tight ends around like rag dolls, living in the backfield, tossing aside a guard who people are considering drafting as high as #2. Consistently beating NFL level players then that is going to carry over.Gomer Pyle can figure that out!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On March 4, 2018 at 3:25 PM, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

I think Ballard dresses cooler than polian.

This reply made me laugh. One of my professors, Dr. Louise Robbins, always told us as a class: Dress for the position who aspire to become in life. 

 

All that really means is one guy's wife does a better job at selecting his daily threads than the other one does. 

 

174481-179461.jpg?itok=D6t1qHK2

 

 

bill-polian-e1380104567584.jpg

 

It's the no tie/shades look that people find stylish & cool right like a secret service agent? Just goofing around. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Demarcus Lawrence hasn't really been a great pass rusher. He was excellent in 2017, but average at best before that. He was hurt, and suspended, and all that, but he wasn't on my radar as a great pass rusher before this season, just a disappointing second round pick.

 

Still, he did blow up last year, which serves as evidence that a bad 3 cone doesn't mean you can't be a good pass rusher.

Both years he did play a full season he had 8 and 14.5 sacks, he was disappointing because of the injuries and suspension not his play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, DougDew said:

A couple of things I said about Chubb in another thread.....

 

Chubb's somewhat disappointing 3 cone relative to his straight line performances (such as 40 time, broad and vertical jumps) is due to him looking, IMO, somewhat top heavy, high wasted, with thin legs.  Spells poor lateral agility and high knee injury risk.  I like dlineman to be built with a lower center of gravity.

 

Its the the laws of physics  They engineer Indy cars to be low to the ground for better cornering.  Same thing applies to humans.  Except genetics tends to dictate that.

 

Read the writeups about how they describe players.  Dwight Freeney had a "thick bubble" and thick legs.  Others have narrow hips or a narrow base.  Freeney had a heck of a spin move for 12 years but no knee injuries.

 

Superman described Henry Anderson as being on the ground a lot in college.  Good player, just on the ground a lot.  He has a high center of gravity.  Knee injury his first year.  Steve Emtman was built the same way.  Two knee injuries in two years.  

 

I don't know about Chubb for sure , but just glancing at him and noticing a somewhat high waisted body type and his natural weight distribution explained perfectly to me why he excelled at the straight-line and power tests but only average in the cornering tests.

 

I think it was more of a technique thing that had to due with his poor 3 cone from looking at him on film he looks thickly built and has a low center of gravity IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, krunk said:

Thanks S Dubb! My whole thing is if I see you on tape beating the best of the best and putting up stats very similar and in some cases like TFL even more superior why am I going to let running around 3 cones be the end all be all? I dont see good reasoning in that. Does that all of a sudden mean you can't play anymore?

Yeah, I get the value in full medical workups on athletes as well as say your vertical jump which indicates a guy's initial burst off the line of scrimmage, but any person can have a bad drill. It doesn't mean they forgot how to play.  Uh huh. Tackes For A Loss are essential in any game cause it means Chubb can shed blocks & make his presence known down in down out. 

 

I read  you man. Game tape tells ya all any GM needs to know. Not stop watches & cones. Besides, when a lot of guys bark orders at you on drill after drill, eventually it all becomes a blur anyway. Being a mouse trapped in a maze of commands doesn't always span learning. It's just an excuse to compile more data that doesn't really change anything anyway. 

 

All that matters is medical, game tape, how college janitors view this kid. A good guy who won't embarrass your franchise or a train wreck that burns the party candle at both ends. Well said Krunk as always. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ty4atd said:

I think it was more of a technique thing that had to due with his poor 3 cone from looking at him on film he looks thickly built and has a low center of gravity IMO.

OK.  As I said it was just a quick look compared to most of the others.  Its something I'll watch for in writeups and other highlights.  He may be fine, but its the #3 pick and I like the player to be perfect.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

OK.  As I said it was just a quick look compared to most of the others.  Its something I'll watch for in writeups and other highlights.  He may be fine, but its the #3 pick and I like the player to be perfect.....

No player will be perfect, I was just saying I think his 3 cone time had more to do with taking too many steps than his actual burst/bend. I trained for the 3 cone in HS and was able to shave .3 seconds off my time and I'm far from an athlete haha. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote from Louis Riddick who a lot of people respect:

 


‘You would be foolish to pass on Bradley Chubb. Foolish. I like Bradley Chubb more than [2017 No. 1 overall pick] Myles Garrett, personally’ —@LRiddickESPN es.pn/2FUIN5P

4:23 PM - 5 Mar 2018

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, krunk said:

Quote from Louis Riddick who a lot of people respect:

 


‘You would be foolish to pass on Bradley Chubb. Foolish. I like Bradley Chubb more than [2017 No. 1 overall pick] Myles Garrett, personally’ —@LRiddickESPN es.pn/2FUIN5P

4:23 PM - 5 Mar 2018

Maybe that's why he keeps interviewing for GM openings and he can't get hired.  He doesn't know what he's talking about.   PFF has Landry rated the No.1 ER followed by Davenport, Key, and Chubb at no. 4.  Landry's the real deal.  If we pick an ER I hope it's Landry.  He killed the combine including the 3 cone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, richard pallo said:

Maybe that's why he keeps interviewing for GM openings and he can't get hired.  He doesn't know what he's talking about.   PFF has Landry rated the No.1 ER followed by Davenport, Key, and Chubb at no. 4.  Landry's the real deal.  If we pick an ER I hope it's Landry.  He killed the combine including the 3 cone. 

Ok mr data cruncher! There's nobody anywhere selling Harold Landry as a top 3 pick. There's a reason for that. Landry is inconsistent and doesnt want to play the run. Hes usually around 3.5 to 5 sacks more than he is 16 sacks. When those bodies get put on him you dont get the same guy. And I like Landry. However you're looking for consistency with a top 3 pick. That's not Landry, he had one good year. Key has character and consistency concerns so that's what's keeping him out of the picture. Davenport I would not select with a top 3 pick because to me he was never able to dominate the small school level at any point. Now you expect him to come to the NFL and do that? Chubb has all these dudes beat because hes well rounded and consistent at Everything where it matters! On the field and off the field. Riddick knows what hes talking about here and so does anybody else who matters who has made similar comments. Hey but if you want to toss all that aside because of a 3 cone go right ahead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, krunk said:

Ok mr data cruncher! There's nobody anywhere selling Harold Landry as a top 3 pick. There's a reason for that. Landry is inconsistent and doesnt want to play the run. Hes usually around 3.5 to 5 sacks more than he is 16 sacks. When those bodies get put on him you dont get the same guy. And I like Landry. However you're looking for consistency with a top 3 pick. That's not Landry, he had one good year. Key has character and consistency concerns so that's what's keeping him out of the picture. Davenport I would not select with a top 3 pick because to me he was never able to dominate the small school level at any point. Now you expect him to come to the NFL and do that? Chubb has all these dudes beat because hes well rounded and consistent at Everything where it matters! On the field and off the field. Riddick knows what hes talking about here and so does anybody else who matters who has made similar comments. Hey but if you want to toss all that aside because of a 3 cone go right ahead.

If we pick an ER I would still take Landry over Chubb.  His injury this year cost him or he would have been the top ER.  He's going to go high IMO and I would rather trade back if we can't get Barkley so there is a good chance we won't pick at three anyway.  I'll be curious to see Mayocks top 5 ER after the combine.  But I trust PFF more than a failed GM. who can't find work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, southwest1 said:

This reply made me laugh. One of my professors, Dr. Louise Robbins, always told us as a class: Dress for the position who aspire to become in life. 

 

All that really means is one guy's wife does a better job at selecting his daily threads than the other one does. 

 

174481-179461.jpg?itok=D6t1qHK2

 

 

bill-polian-e1380104567584.jpg

 

It's the no tie/shades look that people find stylish & cool right like a secret service agent? Just goofing around. 

He's all about DAT SWAG LYFE!:rock:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is this from NFL.com

Quote

The easiest pick in the draft? North Carolina State defensive end Bradley Chubb arrived in Indy as a likely top-five pick and did nothing to change that. He received raves for his character and handled interviews well, according to several evaluators.

How's this for an appraisal of Chubb from a head coach? "He's really good. As good as Myles Garrett. He's talented. He's the one guy who's really talented at a position of need and a position of value. And he's a great kid by all accounts."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PFF has been throwing out a list of player who tested worse than 7.2 in the combine and were first round picks as evidence as to why Chubb should be under their favorite(Landry and Davenport?). Here's the list:

 

  • Jadeveon Clowney
  • Derrick Harvey
  • Aaron Maybin
  • Larry English
  • Quinton Coples
  • Robert Ayers
  • Adrian Clayborn
  • Charles Harris
  • Björn Werner
  • Datone Jones
  • Marcus Smith
  • Takk McKinley
  • Nick Perry
  • Dante Fowler

 

IMO this is incredibly lazy and disingenuous use of a single testing number to prove an agenda and I will try to explain why in the following paragraphs:

 

I won't lie I was surprised and a bit disappointed that Chubb ran 7.37 3 cone, but lets not lose sight of just how good of a combine he actually had and how much different most of those players listed are.

 

I completely disagree with people here pushing the narrative that Chubb shows great bend on tape. He doesn't. I never watched him and though... damn, that's awesome bend. That's not to say that he cannot bend at all or win on the outside at all, but IMO he wins much more with his use of hands and technique which shows in his swipe and rip moves on the outside as well as his inside moves crossing the face of the tackle with variety of different moves(push and pull, swim, bullrush, etc) and exploding to the QB. You cannot watch Chubb and Landry for example and tell me Chubb has anywhere close to Landry's bend on the outside.

 

With all this I'm trying to say - this is OK, he didn't rely on insane bend to win and he still won a ton in variety of other ways that are projectable to the league and that were confirmed with his testing. He wins with quickness off the snap, hand usage, explosiveness and technique. And now on to the harder task - showing how Chubb is different and similar with the list PFF pulled up, because a single variable(3cone test) no matter how important hardly ever explains success or failure without taking into account other ways the players win in the NFL.

 

I made the effort to pull all of those players' testing numbers and you can see them here:

  Speed Agility Explosiveness    
  Long-area Short-area Bend Start-stop        
  40yard dash 10 yard split 3cone short shuttle Broad jump Vertical jump WEIGHT HEIGHT
Jadeveon Clowney 4.53 1.59 7.27 4.43 123 37.5 266 6’4”
Derrick Harvey 4.89   7.27 4.36 113 28.5 271 6’5”
Aaron Maybin 4.89   7.52 4.38 124 38 249 6’4”
Larry English 4.88   7.26 4.38 107 36 274 6’2”
Quinton Coples 4.78   7.57 4.78 109 31.5 284 6’6”
Robert Ayers 4.9   7.56 4.51 102 29.5 272 6’3”
Adrian Clayborn 4.83   7.3 4.13 113 33 281 6’3”
Charles Harris 4.82 1.66 7.47 4.42 109 32 253 6’3”
Björn Werner 4.83 1.69 7.3 4.4 111 31 266 6’3”
Datone Jones 4.8   7.32 4.32 112 31.5 283 6’4”
Marcus Smith 4.68 1.57 7.48 4.47 121 35 251 6’3”
Takk McKinley 4.59 1.61 7.48 4.62 122 33 250 6’2”
Nick Perry 4.64 1.62 7.25 4.66 124 38.5 271 6’3”
Dante Fowler 4.6 1.59 7.4 4.32 112 32.5 255 6’3”
Bradley Chubb 4.65 1.63 7.37 4.41 121 36 269 6’4”

 

Half of them showed nowhere near the speed Chubb showed(Harvey, Maybin, English, Coples, Ayers, Clayborn, Harris, Werner, Jones), and more than half of them showed nowhere near the explosiveness that Chubb showed(Harvey, English, Coples, Ayers, Clayborn, Harris, Werner, Jones and Fowler). All of the ones in the second category(except for Fowler) also didn't show good speed, so I think it's safe to say the comparison to Chubb based on that single 3cone test doesn't hold simply because none of them exhibit the main strengths through which Chubb usually wins and I would eliminate them from the discussion when considering whether Chubb can be a successful pass-rusher based on how this set of players tested and later performed in the league.

 

So who is left here:

Aaron Maybin (good explosiveness, bad speed)

Jadeveon Clowney

Marcus Smith

Takk McKinley

Nick Perry

Dante Fowler (good speed, bad explosiveness)

 

Aaron Maybin played linebacker in the league and played at 237lbs playing weight while not testing great for speed at the combine(at 249lbs). IMO you can safely eliminate his name from the comparison too. Just Chubb is a completely different position player who is going to play at 30-40 lbs heavier and has already tested better for speed and 3cone at 20 pounds heavier than Maybin did.

 

Now this becomes a much more reasonable list of names.

 

Jadeveon Clowney is a freak of nature and was faster than Chubb, but has similar explosiveness at a similar height and weight. Chubb also is a much more refined technician and has much better hands than Clowney entering the league. Still Clowney has been getting better and better in the league after the knee injury he suffered early and I would project him to be a great pass-rusher going forward.

 

Marcus Smith - similar speed and similar explosiveness. What's different - he did it at 20 pounds lighter than Chubb.

Nick Perry - similar quickness, similar explosiveness(maybe even a bit more explosive), at a similar size.

Dante Fowler - similar quickness, but much worse explosiveness than Chubb at 15 pounds lighter.

Takk McKinley - similar quickness, similar explosiveness... at 20 pounds lighter than Chubb!

 

As you can see not many of those are good comparisons and not many of them were working with similar physical attributes and athletic profiles and thus IMO you cannot make any inferences about how Chubb will perform in the league based on how a list based on a single test not taking into account Chubb's main strengths suggest he will do. And the ones that are similar with Chubb have actually had good careers so far.

 

tl;dr Bradley Chubb is VERY different prospect and wins in very different ways than most of the players on the list do and his athletic tests show it. If you had to narrow down the list to the players that actually resemble his physical and athletic profile you get a much more optimistic outlook for Chubb.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For Stitches....   just FYI...

 

On your big list....   at Michael Smith, you transposed two numbers on the remaining players...

 

You mixed up the very jump with the broad jump...    just wanted to give you a heads up to fix...

 

Thanks for all that hard work...    very much appreciated...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@NewColtsFan Thanks for the correction. 

 

Here's a video of someone adjusting the scores for mass density:

 

 

It's interesting to see how every player fares... I don't know if this is concerning but the guy also says that there has never been an all-pro pass-rusher with 3cone over 7.11 and short shuttle over 4.34. This is a bit concerning about the higher end projection of Chubb. He can still be a pro-bowler, but it seems like the likelyhood of him beeing a multiple time all-pro is not great. 

 

(edit) I just checked last two years of all-pro edge rushers: Demarcus Lawrence just made all-pro team with 7.46 3cone test. Everson Griffen made all-pro team with 7.25 3cone and 4.36 SS. Jadeveon Clowney made all-pro team in 2016 with 7.27 3cone and 4.43 SS. Olivier Vernon made all-pro team with 7.39 3cone and 4.5 SS. Those are just in the last 2 seasons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stitches said:

@NewColtsFan Thanks for the correction. 

 

Here's a video of someone adjusting the scores for mass density:

 

 

It's interesting to see how every player fares... I don't know if this is concerning but the guy also says that there has never been an all-pro pass-rusher with 3cone over 7.11 and short shuttle over 4.34. This is a bit concerning about the higher end projection of Chubb. He can still be a pro-bowler, but it seems like the likelyhood of him beeing a multiple time all-pro is not great. 

 

(edit) I just checked last two years of all-pro edge rushers: Demarcus Lawrence just made all-pro team with 7.46 3cone test. Everson Griffen made all-pro team with 7.25 3cone and 4.36 SS. Jadeveon Clowney made all-pro team in 2016 with 7.27 3cone and 4.43 SS. Olivier Vernon made all-pro team with 7.39 3cone and 4.5 SS. Those are just in the last 2 seasons. 

Personally I don't care how many pro bowls a player makes. That is not what determines what a player is. The pro bowl does not measure the heart of a player. I also don't care how many sacks Chubb may or may not get. If his motor runs good enough to put non stop pressure on the opposing QB and either force fumbles or turnovers is fine by me.

That is something we haven't had around here in a long time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Personally I don't care how many pro bowls a player makes. That is not what determines what a player is. The pro bowl does not measure the heart of a player. I also don't care how many sacks Chubb may or may not get. If his motor runs good enough to put non stop pressure on the opposing QB and either force fumbles or turnovers is fine by me.

That is something we haven't had around here in a long time. 

I agree and disagree.  Sacks do matter but so does his motor and constant pressure.  Sheard did just this last year.  Has a good motor or was getting pressure but not sacks.  Before him we had Mathis still (minus his achilles year).  We have had this but what we have not had since Mathis and 19.5 sacks, is a guy consistently getting sacks, not just pressure.  Also what we need is a few guys getting pressure and not just the hopes of one guy.  Sheard getting 7 sacks and Chubb getting hopefully 8-10 sacks.  Then you get the middle to contribute for another 10-15 sacks.  These are what you always hope for anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, stitches said:

Lo

PFF has been throwing out a list of player who tested worse than 7.2 in the combine and were first round picks as evidence as to why Chubb should be under their favorite(Landry and Davenport?). Here's the list:

 

  • Jadeveon Clowney
  • Derrick Harvey
  • Aaron Maybin
  • Larry English
  • Quinton Coples
  • Robert Ayers
  • Adrian Clayborn
  • Charles Harris
  • Björn Werner
  • Datone Jones
  • Marcus Smith
  • Takk McKinley
  • Nick Perry
  • Dante Fowler

 

IMO this is incredibly lazy and disingenuous use of a single testing number to prove an agenda and I will try to explain why in the following paragraphs:

 

I won't lie I was surprised and a bit disappointed that Chubb ran 7.37 3 cone, but lets not lose sight of just how good of a combine he actually had and how much different most of those players listed are.

 

I completely disagree with people here pushing the narrative that Chubb shows great bend on tape. He doesn't. I never watched him and though... damn, that's awesome bend. That's not to say that he cannot bend at all or win on the outside at all, but IMO he wins much more with his use of hands and technique which shows in his swipe and rip moves on the outside as well as his inside moves crossing the face of the tackle with variety of different moves(push and pull, swim, bullrush, etc) and exploding to the QB. You cannot watch Chubb and Landry for example and tell me Chubb has anywhere close to Landry's bend on the outside.

 

With all this I'm trying to say - this is OK, he didn't rely on insane bend to win and he still won a ton in variety of other ways that are projectable to the league and that were confirmed with his testing. He wins with quickness off the snap, hand usage, explosiveness and technique. And now on to the harder task - showing how Chubb is different and similar with the list PFF pulled up, because a single variable(3cone test) no matter how important hardly ever explains success or failure without taking into account other ways the players win in the NFL.

 

I made the effort to pull all of those players' testing numbers and you can see them here:

  Speed Agility Explosiveness    
  Long-area Short-area Bend Start-stop        
  40yard dash 10 yard split 3cone short shuttle Broad jump Vertical jump WEIGHT HEIGHT
Jadeveon Clowney 4.53 1.59 7.27 4.43 123 37.5 266 6’4”
Derrick Harvey 4.89   7.27 4.36 113 28.5 271 6’5”
Aaron Maybin 4.89   7.52 4.38 124 38 249 6’4”
Larry English 4.88   7.26 4.38 107 36 274 6’2”
Quinton Coples 4.78   7.57 4.78 109 31.5 284 6’6”
Robert Ayers 4.9   7.56 4.51 102 29.5 272 6’3”
Adrian Clayborn 4.83   7.3 4.13 113 33 281 6’3”
Charles Harris 4.82 1.66 7.47 4.42 109 32 253 6’3”
Björn Werner 4.83 1.69 7.3 4.4 111 31 266 6’3”
Datone Jones 4.8   7.32 4.32 112 31.5 283 6’4”
Marcus Smith 4.68 1.57 7.48 4.47 121 35 251 6’3”
Takk McKinley 4.59 1.61 7.48 4.62 122 33 250 6’2”
Nick Perry 4.64 1.62 7.25 4.66 124 38.5 271 6’3”
Dante Fowler 4.6 1.59 7.4 4.32 112 32.5 255 6’3”
Bradley Chubb 4.65 1.63 7.37 4.41 121 36 269 6’4”

 

Half of them showed nowhere near the speed Chubb showed(Harvey, Maybin, English, Coples, Ayers, Clayborn, Harris, Werner, Jones), and more than half of them showed nowhere near the explosiveness that Chubb showed(Harvey, English, Coples, Ayers, Clayborn, Harris, Werner, Jones and Fowler). All of the ones in the second category(except for Fowler) also didn't show good speed, so I think it's safe to say the comparison to Chubb based on that single 3cone test doesn't hold simply because none of them exhibit the main strengths through which Chubb usually wins and I would eliminate them from the discussion when considering whether Chubb can be a successful pass-rusher based on how this set of players tested and later performed in the league.

 

So who is left here:

Aaron Maybin (good explosiveness, bad speed)

Jadeveon Clowney

Marcus Smith

Takk McKinley

Nick Perry

Dante Fowler (good speed, bad explosiveness)

 

Aaron Maybin played linebacker in the league and played at 237lbs playing weight while not testing great for speed at the combine(at 249lbs). IMO you can safely eliminate his name from the comparison too. Just Chubb is a completely different position player who is going to play at 30-40 lbs heavier and has already tested better for speed and 3cone at 20 pounds heavier than Maybin did.

 

Now this becomes a much more reasonable list of names.

 

Jadeveon Clowney is a freak of nature and was faster than Chubb, but has similar explosiveness at a similar height and weight. Chubb also is a much more refined technician and has much better hands than Clowney entering the league. Still Clowney has been getting better and better in the league after the knee injury he suffered early and I would project him to be a great pass-rusher going forward.

 

Marcus Smith - similar speed and similar explosiveness. What's different - he did it at 20 pounds lighter than Chubb.

Nick Perry - similar quickness, similar explosiveness(maybe even a bit more explosive), at a similar size.

Dante Fowler - similar quickness, but much worse explosiveness than Chubb at 15 pounds lighter.

Takk McKinley - similar quickness, similar explosiveness... at 20 pounds lighter than Chubb!

 

As you can see not many of those are good comparisons and not many of them were working with similar physical attributes and athletic profiles and thus IMO you cannot make any inferences about how Chubb will perform in the league based on how a list based on a single test not taking into account Chubb's main strengths suggest he will do. And the ones that are similar with Chubb have actually had good careers so far.

 

tl;dr Bradley Chubb is VERY different prospect and wins in very different ways than most of the players on the list do and his athletic tests show it. If you had to narrow down the list to the players that actually resemble his physical and athletic profile you get a much more optimistic outlook for Chubb.

 

 

I dont think you even have to get into all that. The great majority of players on that list outside of Clowney and Fowler are not were not good football players in the first place. None of them were ever considered to be a top 5 pick outside of Clowney and maybe Fowler coming out of college. Fowler was never really a strong sack production guy to begin with. Clowney was put in an entirely different scheme than what he was used to, plus battled through a bunch of injuries. A bad or mediocre football player is just what he is. And I'm certain there were clues in the film that indicated the player was a bad to mediocre football player before the draft. You could have given them all faster 3 cones and the results wouldn't have been any different. Who really thinks if Aaron Maybin, Larry English, Quinton Coples, or Marcus Smith had faster 3 cones they'd be any better? There's much more to the pass rushing craft than a 3 cone time. I can find you a list of players just as long of failed players with fast 3 cone times. The bottom line is can you play football or not? Its extremely obvious Chubb is very good ball player. You have to know when a player falls outside of what is traditionally expected and accepted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who wants to tell me they wouldn't have drafted Clowney or Miles Garrett with a top 3 pick coming out of College if they had Chubbs exact same 3 cone time? I will be waiting. You know why you wouldn't dare say that? Because the overwhelming evidence says Damn Good Ball Player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, krunk said:

Who wants to tell me they wouldn't have drafted Clowney or Miles Garrett with a top 3 pick coming out of College if they had Chubbs exact same 3 cone time? I will be waiting. You know why you wouldn't dare say that? Because the overwhelming evidence says Damn Good Ball Player.

It's a new designation!

 

DGBP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DaColts85 said:

I agree and disagree.  Sacks do matter but so does his motor and constant pressure.  Sheard did just this last year.  Has a good motor or was getting pressure but not sacks.  Before him we had Mathis still (minus his achilles year).  We have had this but what we have not had since Mathis and 19.5 sacks, is a guy consistently getting sacks, not just pressure.  Also what we need is a few guys getting pressure and not just the hopes of one guy.  Sheard getting 7 sacks and Chubb getting hopefully 8-10 sacks.  Then you get the middle to contribute for another 10-15 sacks.  These are what you always hope for anyways.

I agree with you 100%. Most of the time whenever Chubb's name is brought up it's always about sacks. It is not necessary for him to have a high number of sacks especially his first year. Like I said he needs the motor to put pressure on the QB and maybe flush him into one of our other guys sacks. If he can force the QB just to make a bad pass that is not complete of hopefully gets picked. Sacks would be great but just feeling his presence would be more than we have seen.

The thing is if he don't get a bunch of sacks how many will jump up and call him a bust?

Like you said he just needs to be one piece of a defensive effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I agree with you 100%. Most of the time whenever Chubb's name is brought up it's always about sacks. It is not necessary for him to have a high number of sacks especially his first year. Like I said he needs the motor to put pressure on the QB and maybe flush him into one of our other guys sacks. If he can force the QB just to make a bad pass that is not complete of hopefully gets picked. Sacks would be great but just feeling his presence would be more than we have seen.

The thing is if he don't get a bunch of sacks how many will jump up and call him a bust?

Like you said he just needs to be one piece of a defensive effort.

If he comes in and can put up say 8 sacks, but as a team we are getting at least to high 30's or 40's in sacks, I would happy.  Middle of the pack last year was still like 12 more than we had.  I think a few better athletes and a better overall scheme will work in our favor.  Heck if just Sheard/Chubb can get a combined 16-20 sacks that would be a massive upgrade.  We only had 25 as a team last year......good lord that is bad!

 

Draft Chubb.  Draft Chubb!  Draft Chubb!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, stitches said:

@NewColtsFan Thanks for the correction. 

 

Here's a video of someone adjusting the scores for mass density:

 

 

It's interesting to see how every player fares... I don't know if this is concerning but the guy also says that there has never been an all-pro pass-rusher with 3cone over 7.11 and short shuttle over 4.34. This is a bit concerning about the higher end projection of Chubb. He can still be a pro-bowler, but it seems like the likelyhood of him beeing a multiple time all-pro is not great. 

 

(edit) I just checked last two years of all-pro edge rushers: Demarcus Lawrence just made all-pro team with 7.46 3cone test. Everson Griffen made all-pro team with 7.25 3cone and 4.36 SS. Jadeveon Clowney made all-pro team in 2016 with 7.27 3cone and 4.43 SS. Olivier Vernon made all-pro team with 7.39 3cone and 4.5 SS. Those are just in the last 2 seasons. 

 

@stitches - keep it coming, you are on a roll!!! Loving reading your work you have put together. :thmup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barkevious Mingo 3 cone time 6.84 seconds. Wondering why this guy can't bend the corner and cause havoc anymore than the other players you guys keep listing with slow 3 cone times? You know why? Because there's more to it than that. Learn to look at the whole picture and when to make adjustments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 10:51 PM, richard pallo said:

Maybe that's why he keeps interviewing for GM openings and he can't get hired.  He doesn't know what he's talking about.   PFF has Landry rated the No.1 ER followed by Davenport, Key, and Chubb at no. 4.  Landry's the real deal.  If we pick an ER I hope it's Landry.  He killed the combine including the 3 cone. 

Can't believe Landry would even be considered in the same breath with Chubb. He is way too small for a 4-3 ER. if Landry has a chance in this league it will be as a 3-4 LB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, stitches said:

PFF has been throwing out a list of player who tested worse than 7.2 in the combine and were first round picks as evidence as to why Chubb should be under their favorite(Landry and Davenport?). Here's the list:

 

  • Jadeveon Clowney
  • Derrick Harvey
  • Aaron Maybin
  • Larry English
  • Quinton Coples
  • Robert Ayers
  • Adrian Clayborn
  • Charles Harris
  • Björn Werner
  • Datone Jones
  • Marcus Smith
  • Takk McKinley
  • Nick Perry
  • Dante Fowler

 

IMO this is incredibly lazy and disingenuous use of a single testing number to prove an agenda and I will try to explain why in the following paragraphs:

 

I won't lie I was surprised and a bit disappointed that Chubb ran 7.37 3 cone, but lets not lose sight of just how good of a combine he actually had and how much different most of those players listed are.

 

I completely disagree with people here pushing the narrative that Chubb shows great bend on tape. He doesn't. I never watched him and though... damn, that's awesome bend. That's not to say that he cannot bend at all or win on the outside at all, but IMO he wins much more with his use of hands and technique which shows in his swipe and rip moves on the outside as well as his inside moves crossing the face of the tackle with variety of different moves(push and pull, swim, bullrush, etc) and exploding to the QB. You cannot watch Chubb and Landry for example and tell me Chubb has anywhere close to Landry's bend on the outside.

 

With all this I'm trying to say - this is OK, he didn't rely on insane bend to win and he still won a ton in variety of other ways that are projectable to the league and that were confirmed with his testing. He wins with quickness off the snap, hand usage, explosiveness and technique. And now on to the harder task - showing how Chubb is different and similar with the list PFF pulled up, because a single variable(3cone test) no matter how important hardly ever explains success or failure without taking into account other ways the players win in the NFL.

 

I made the effort to pull all of those players' testing numbers and you can see them here:

  Speed Agility Explosiveness    
  Long-area Short-area Bend Start-stop        
  40yard dash 10 yard split 3cone short shuttle Broad jump Vertical jump WEIGHT HEIGHT
Jadeveon Clowney 4.53 1.59 7.27 4.43 123 37.5 266 6’4”
Derrick Harvey 4.89   7.27 4.36 113 28.5 271 6’5”
Aaron Maybin 4.89   7.52 4.38 124 38 249 6’4”
Larry English 4.88   7.26 4.38 107 36 274 6’2”
Quinton Coples 4.78   7.57 4.78 109 31.5 284 6’6”
Robert Ayers 4.9   7.56 4.51 102 29.5 272 6’3”
Adrian Clayborn 4.83   7.3 4.13 113 33 281 6’3”
Charles Harris 4.82 1.66 7.47 4.42 109 32 253 6’3”
Björn Werner 4.83 1.69 7.3 4.4 111 31 266 6’3”
Datone Jones 4.8   7.32 4.32 112 31.5 283 6’4”
Marcus Smith 4.68 1.57 7.48 4.47 121 35 251 6’3”
Takk McKinley 4.59 1.61 7.48 4.62 122 33 250 6’2”
Nick Perry 4.64 1.62 7.25 4.66 124 38.5 271 6’3”
Dante Fowler 4.6 1.59 7.4 4.32 112 32.5 255 6’3”
Bradley Chubb 4.65 1.63 7.37 4.41 121 36 269 6’4”

 

Half of them showed nowhere near the speed Chubb showed(Harvey, Maybin, English, Coples, Ayers, Clayborn, Harris, Werner, Jones), and more than half of them showed nowhere near the explosiveness that Chubb showed(Harvey, English, Coples, Ayers, Clayborn, Harris, Werner, Jones and Fowler). All of the ones in the second category(except for Fowler) also didn't show good speed, so I think it's safe to say the comparison to Chubb based on that single 3cone test doesn't hold simply because none of them exhibit the main strengths through which Chubb usually wins and I would eliminate them from the discussion when considering whether Chubb can be a successful pass-rusher based on how this set of players tested and later performed in the league.

 

So who is left here:

Aaron Maybin (good explosiveness, bad speed)

Jadeveon Clowney

Marcus Smith

Takk McKinley

Nick Perry

Dante Fowler (good speed, bad explosiveness)

 

Aaron Maybin played linebacker in the league and played at 237lbs playing weight while not testing great for speed at the combine(at 249lbs). IMO you can safely eliminate his name from the comparison too. Just Chubb is a completely different position player who is going to play at 30-40 lbs heavier and has already tested better for speed and 3cone at 20 pounds heavier than Maybin did.

 

Now this becomes a much more reasonable list of names.

 

Jadeveon Clowney is a freak of nature and was faster than Chubb, but has similar explosiveness at a similar height and weight. Chubb also is a much more refined technician and has much better hands than Clowney entering the league. Still Clowney has been getting better and better in the league after the knee injury he suffered early and I would project him to be a great pass-rusher going forward.

 

Marcus Smith - similar speed and similar explosiveness. What's different - he did it at 20 pounds lighter than Chubb.

Nick Perry - similar quickness, similar explosiveness(maybe even a bit more explosive), at a similar size.

Dante Fowler - similar quickness, but much worse explosiveness than Chubb at 15 pounds lighter.

Takk McKinley - similar quickness, similar explosiveness... at 20 pounds lighter than Chubb!

 

As you can see not many of those are good comparisons and not many of them were working with similar physical attributes and athletic profiles and thus IMO you cannot make any inferences about how Chubb will perform in the league based on how a list based on a single test not taking into account Chubb's main strengths suggest he will do. And the ones that are similar with Chubb have actually had good careers so far.

 

tl;dr Bradley Chubb is VERY different prospect and wins in very different ways than most of the players on the list do and his athletic tests show it. If you had to narrow down the list to the players that actually resemble his physical and athletic profile you get a much more optimistic outlook for Chubb.

 

 

 

AAEAAQAAAAAAAAO5AAAAJDFlZGM2MzE4LWUxMzEt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth... Daniel Jeremiah addressed this on his podcast and said that pro Scouts do place some value on the 3 cone time. Rule of thumb was anything over 7 wasn't going to be a guy whose likely to be an elite pass rusher. He did however still mock us taking him at 3 as he feels he's still the best edge rusher available in the draft. Kind of a mixed message really. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post and work by the O.P.

When someone does that amount of work/effort, I don't tl:dr it.  I read and absorb it, try to decipher if i am on board or not.

 

Still taking it all in, but I cannot fully endorse 'explosiveness' until I also have the participants Bench Press reps along with Vertical jump and Broad jump.  Those 3 added together being at or greater than 70 gets an explosive tag in my book (actually Pat Kirwan's).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...