NFL scouts have varying opinions on different players, but a real analyst looks for repetition (in fact mathematicly factors it) in order to find a consensus.
Scouts, unlike pundits or fans, are originals. They don't copy eachother in order to hide their cluelessness, so this is as reliable as it gets.
Here are a few consensus opinions about certain NFL quarterbacks before they were drafted:
1: Too small, average arm, system quarterback. Previous quarterbacks drafted from that system failed in the NFL. Too mechanical, unable to adjust arm angle. Decent but not great athleticism. A good second round prospect, but nothing special here.
2: Highly mobile and accurate. Great command of offense. Experienced, football smart. Height is a big problem for him, and it remains to be seen if he can throw from the pocket at the NFL level. Some team will take a late round flier on him to see if they can develop him into something.
3: Big, muscular, strong armed, dual threat. Poor anticipation, raw, little experience under center, poor pocket awareness, inconsistent accuracy intermediate and deep. Project with nice upside, but needs a lot of work and is a risk.
4: Ideal size, frame, arm. Moves well. Inheritted effective dynasty at lowest level of competition. Inconsistent anticipation, needs work on ball placement. Slow release, does not read coverage well or quickly. Relies on arm too much, makes questionable throws. Nice upside, could possibly start early, but ideally needs to refine skills first.
5: Tom Brady. Nuff said.
I'll tell you who the first four are later (don't you dare!)
The most reliable opinions about quarterbacks come from current and former players at three positions:
Defensive backs study cornerbacks automaticly. They will find every weakness, at least as far as reading, placement, range, eyes, and timing. Obviously.
Receivers are less clinical, but can simply see the guys they'd want throwing the ball to them, and those they don't.
Quarterbacks are like Gruden, and like all fellow quarterbacks. But they still say "he needs to work on", and "I'd like to see more---", so you get clear, if diplomatic, critiques all the same. They can tell you lots more about mechanics and vision (the other guys don't care).
This is why former defensive back Mike Mayock is especially good at figuring quarterbacks out, and why I listen to former OSU star and pro quarterback Todd Blackledge if he opines on a specific quarterback.
Most of the rest of us, including many pundits, are pretty clueless. I am the rare one who admits it. However, I am also the rare one who uses real, objective analysis to find out what I can't see, and don't know, from those who do know.
I am an expert on sources. I know who is usually right, and who is usually wrong. I prioritize the best experts, downgrade the worst, and come up with composites.
An asterisk here is that I have been unable not to learn some stuff along the way, so I'm now only semi-clueless, which puts me around the 66th percentile if I have tapes to study.
I see things, such as: a tall wide receiver and a cornerback are running verticly step-for-step. The cornerback has outside leverage (he is to the receiver's right in this case, blocking the receiver from the sideline. This means he is supposed to have a safety waiting inside, in case the receiver cuts inside and away from him).
The pass is high and inside, so the wide receiver has to turn and reach for the ball, right?
Well, some analysts say that this pass was "thrown behind" the receiver, and call it poor placement. Actually, it was perfect placement. Only the receiver had a shot to make the catch. His whole body blocked the defender, and his arms were extended away from him.
This is also an example of a good read. The quarterback saw that the receiver couldn't go inside because the safety was lurking there like a spider, and kept the ball away from both him and the cornerback. (Of course the receiver was smart too. If he'd have cut inside anyway, the cornerback probably picks off and runs back the ball).
Unlike my humble highly trained brilliant self, very few of us ever overcome prejudice. We see what we expect to see. This is how perfect passes are "thrown behind" receivers.
We hear something said about a player, and our subconscious accepts this as fact. When we hear something contradictory, our subconscious rejects it, because accepting it would mean that WE are wrong. This then colors everything we observe with our own eyes.
I'm not sure about Mitch Trubisky yet, but I believe Deshaun Watson has been misjudged. The pass I described was his, vs Alabama in the championship.
I saw another "overthrow". The shorter reciever was racing down the sideline with a trailing cornerback all over him. Watson was about to get crushed. He threw the ball where the diving or leaping receiver had a slight chance to make a highlight reel catch, but his real intent was to get rid of the ball. Had he thrown it "on target", the cornerback had a better chance of catching it than his receiver did.
Two passes don't make a scouting report, of course, but these two do demonstrate how a scouting report can be all screwed up by prejudice: "Inconsistent deep accuracy, ball tends to float, poor anticipation..."
As I've posted, Todd Blackledge, who had watched Watson utterly destroy his Buckeyes the week prior, contradicted the scouting reports I had read.
Todd was impressed by his vision, and ability to see the "whole field", find his target quickly, and throw with superb accuracy.
That's still contrary to the consensus. The other guys don't want to be wrong. I myself all but dismissed Deshaun Watson as a Browns draft pick based on these reports. It's right there, in writing. I don't want to be wrong. Too bad. I was.
Then there's this shockingly lazy, superficial tendancy to rely on season-long statistics. Earlier in this most recent season, Watson was playing poorly (for him). His last few games, and his playoff performances, are all that matter.
Deshaun Watson is a big-time, franchise quarterback, period. He is worthy of a first overall draft pick. He's not a better player than Myles Garrett, no...but he is a Q U A R T E R B A C K.
I'm also still very interested in Mitch Trubisky. That Sun Bowl performance was really impressive. He screwed up, badly, but rallied back big time. Believe it or not, he will screw up less as he gains experience (Honest! It's true!)
One analyst believes that Trubisky may have more upside than Carson Wentz. If it's even close, should the Browns pass again? I mean, people repeating that Trubisky and Watson are inferior to Goff and Wentz sounds crazier each tjme I hear it. Just stand by. That alarm clock will ring eventually.
Here are the quarterbacks from the list I opened this post with:
1: Aaron Rodgers
2: Russell Wilson
3: Dak Prescott
4: Carson Wentz
Don't believe everything you read.
Except here, of course.
No comments:
Post a Comment