Roger Lewis goes undrafted

[Flipper]

Travis is small and fairly slow...that's the killer. You can't be both. He's got great feet though. I could see him being a slot in the NFL while getting some third down action at RB. He's going to be limited in the NFL: as a running back because he's too slow to make the edge

[mscarn]

The NFL collectively doesn't know how to evaluate talent? I'm at a loss....

Yet somehow they found and turned a tiny QB like Julian Edelman into a stud WR.

I just don't get it either...

But that's the whole point. Their evaluations were so off that they didn't pick him until the 7th round after he was never invited to the combine.

For every player that was evaluated properly and played to the potential of their draft position there's 2 that did not. That's a bad system in my book. Calling it an inexact science is like calling Rosie O'Donnell an inexact supermodel.

[Flipper]

Did you wipe those numbers off after you pulled them out of your ass? The issue isn't the methodology (which is constantly evolving)...they spend millions of dollars and thousands of hours on this s**t and have going back to the days when BLESTO was first formed. The issue is that it's really hard to correctly peg who's going to make it and who isn't. It's that way in basketball, baseball and hockey as well.

Let's put it another way...the goal is to win. You win with players. If there really was a benefit to discarding the entire known scouting methodology to find some mysterious new way of procuring talent...don't you think someone would have said "Eureka" and chucked the whole thing awhile ago. If there really are all these great players out there (at a two to one ratio) that no one is finding. Why hasn't someone struck out on their own to get them. Ar e you really the ONLY ONE who gets this?

[2006Grad]

I have to disagree, the first time a GM says to the owner or a coach says to the GM "hey lets completely draft players differently" they will be out of a job. Statistics say to go for it on 4th and short more often, so why don't teams? Fear, if you do anything that can get to second guessed you're out of a job. This might be a good system, but it doesn't mean it's he best system. It's simply the system that everyone is using.

[Flipper]

Interesting....but the issue I have with your analogy is that there's empirical data to support the notion that going for it on fourth down is the way to go You can't really point to any data top suggest that there's a better alternative...you can only say the current approach is flawed and even then you'd have a difficult time truly assessing how flawed.

I will agree wholeheartedly that the culture in the NFL discourages innovation on a grand scale...although the acceptance of what were thought to be "gimmick" offensive concepts like the spread and the wildcat is an encouraging sign that the culture may be changing.

[hammb]

Interesting....but the issue I have with your analogy is that there's empirical data to support the notion that going for it on fourth down is the way to go You can't really point to any data top suggest that there's a better alternative...you can only say the current approach is flawed and even then you'd have a difficult time truly assessing how flawed.

I will agree wholeheartedly that the culture in the NFL discourages innovation on a grand scale...although the acceptance of what were thought to be "gimmick" offensive concepts like the spread and the wildcat is an encouraging sign that the culture may be changing.

To that end the Browns DID draft completely differently from the establishment. They hired a GMish guy that is a harvard grad with no experience in scouting. They hired a strategy guy that is a baseball genius with no experience at the NFL level. Their picks throughout the draft were clearly based more on modern metrics and analysis than they were on traditional scouting methods. (Look no further than post-draft grades; all traditional guys have ripped their draft completely, the PFF and metrics based sites have lauded them for grabbing talent that shouldn't have dropped so far).

But here's the rub. Those metric based analyses have been around for several years. The Patriots have adopted it as a major part of their org for years. I fully support this sort of drafting, because I think (if done judiciously) it better allows for the removal of emotion and knee-jerk reactions on draft day in the warroom; moreso than merely building a purely scout-based draft board. But in the end, with the data we have from the numbers sites in the past few years it really isn't any more reliable of predicting quality NFL players than the more scout based method that teams have relied on forever. Sure it has it's hits and it identifies many players as potential steals that the traditional methods don't. And it dislikes a lot of players that traditional people fall in love with. But in the end, neither system is close to 100% accurate, because you're trying to predict the future. On the top talent, both are about 50/50, dropping to about 30/70 in the 2nd/3rd rounds, and a lot closer to 5% of finding quality starters beyond the top 100 picks.

The NFL guys, be it traditional scouts or more numbers based, gather as much data as anybody can possibly imagine about these draft prospects. But no matter how much data you gather, how many times you meet with these prospects, which data you lean on or ignore, it doesn't matter. At the end of the day you're trying to predict the future. The future of what a 21-23 year old is going to be like in 5 years after you hand them millions of dollars and instant fame. If you think there is a better system out there, by all means market it. You'll be rich beyond imagination.

And I'm not disagreeing the NFL is resistant to change. It very much is. Largely because the guys are all risk adverse...they know they'll have far more job security by attempting their version of the status quo than they would be if they try to implement something completely different. That's why I am so encouraged about what the Browns are attempting...but I also know that it's trying to play a numbers game by stacking long term odds in their favor...like playing perfect blackjack to gain a 52% advantage over the house. Even if it works perfectly it might take 5+ years to show up on the field, so I'm hopeful the impatient owner will step back and give it time; it's not a strategy that has much of a chance of an instant turnaround...Much like going on 4th down. Long term, the numbers say you're dumb to punt as much as guys do, but it only takes one or two failed opportunities costing you a game before the higher ups might start questioning the validity of the long term strategy...you have to be "all in" from top to bottom to make these sorts of things work.

Interestingly, as well, this conversation started by saying Greene & Lewis were victims of a failed system...a system that misses out on so much talent. Well the new wave of scouting/drafting typically leans far AWAY from non Power5 players. Personally, I feel you have to evaluate all prospects on their own merits and ignore competition level on draft day, but the numbers seem to disagree with me. You're largely far better off taking players from power5 teams than you are from the MAC, etc. Even if you're looking for a mid-late round gem, you're more likely to find an NFL starter by taking a guy overlooked on a power5 team that was either battling for playing time, victim of scheme/circumstance, etc than you are taking the star WR from a MAC school. Sure there are plenty of anecdotal examples like Antonio Brown, Greg Jennings, etc, but on the whole? The more modern takes would seem to lean you away from MAC type talent in the draft. Look at Cincy, widely lauded as being one of the best drafting teams in the NFL in recent years...on quick look they've only drafted 2 non-power5 players in the top 5 rounds of the draft in the last 7 years.

[mscarn]

Did you wipe those numbers off after you pulled them out of your ass? The issue isn't the methodology (which is constantly evolving)...they spend millions of dollars and thousands of hours on this s**t and have going back to the days when BLESTO was first formed. The issue is that it's really hard to correctly peg who's going to make it and who isn't. It's that way in basketball, baseball and hockey as well.

Let's put it another way...the goal is to win. You win with players. If there really was a benefit to discarding the entire known scouting methodology to find some mysterious new way of procuring talent...don't you think someone would have said "Eureka" and chucked the whole thing awhile ago. If there really are all these great players out there (at a two to one ratio) that no one is finding. Why hasn't someone struck out on their own to get them. Ar e you really the ONLY ONE who gets this?

Calm down there my man.

Here's the point. There was just a draft. How many of those players in Rounds 1-7 will play to the talent and potential of their draft position over the course of their career? No better or no worse, simply where the best and brightest of the NFL deemed them to be. Jared Goff was the number one overall pick. What are the odds he'll make a Pro Bowl? Less than 50/50? For all those millions invested in perfecting the great methodology that includes having offensive linemen run 40 yard dashes and that's the best they could do? The Browns (like hammb mentioned) have gone to an entirely new system but I'm not arguing for the rest of the teams to do the same. I'm simply saying they're really bad at what they're doing and the evidence is there to be seen every year with every team with picks getting cut and UFA's making rosters. GM's themselves readily acknowledge it. They don't want to be bad; they just undeniably are. It's like hitting; you fail 7 out of 10 times and it's considered successful due to the standard it's measured against. The act of hitting a baseball is inherently challenging and no methodologies to yield consistent .400 or .500 averages exist. NFL scouting is the same thing and Lewis and Greene are merely the latest of its casualties.

[Flipper]

None of those guys got drafted because they're not good enough athletes to get drafted. They weren't overlooked or discriminated against. In the NFL Roger Lewis isn't fast enough to get separation on most of the corners and he didn't do anything else in college to suggest that there are skills that will overcome that lack of speed, average size and below average strength. Greene is small and slow. He was elusive in the open field, but a depth slot WR who can only play slot WR doesn't have much value in the NFL. Matt Johnson is short...so is Wilson and so in Brees...but he isn't one of those guys. He doesn't have the overall athleticism of Wilson and he doesn't have the brain that Brees does. MJ looked awful the last few games this year because defenses were onto us and he didn't react to that. He kept trying to make plays that worked in week 3 but were covered in week 11. NFL Qb's don't do that...not if they want to remain NFL Qb's any way.

[gspointer]

Sub 4.5 is fast enough. Combine times were messed up. There were problems with the times.

[Flipper]

No...they weren't. You had some slow WR's say they were...but there were plenty of guys who ran really fast who would have had to be descendants of Mercury himself to run as fast as a corrected "messed up" time wold suggest.

[hammb]

No...they weren't. You had some slow WR's say they were...but there were plenty of guys who ran really fast who would have had to be descendants of Mercury himself to run as fast as a corrected "messed up" time wold suggest.

No s**t. Players always run faster at their pro days. Faster tracks has a lot to do with it, but much less accurate hand timings has more to do with it. The other factor is the fact that there "official" time at pro days. Every coach/scout/whatever will hand time themselves and the reports we end up hearing are usually whoever timed it the fastest. There's a ridiculous amount of human error in hand timed 40s when you're talking about tenths and hundredths of a second making a difference.

As for sub 4.5 being fast enough? It is plenty fast. It's not fast enough when it's actually 4.57 when timed properly and the ONLY thing you've shown on film is an ability to run the 9 route or the hitch to set up the 9 route. In the NFL one trick pony deep threats need to be at least a tenth of a second faster than the fastest time I've seen Roger reported. Or they need to have great size/leaping ability to win 50/50 balls.

Roger Lewis is a good enough athlete to make it in the NFL if he has great technique, route running , etc. The problem has always been the fact that he's not a good enough athlete for teams to take him in the draft and overlook the fact that his film is basically worthless. The downside of the Dino scheme (and Baylor and every other team running it) is the film & production are worthless...what Lewis did at BG will NOT translate for him at the NFL. It hasn't hurt Baylor's guys being drafted, because Briles recruits elite world class athletes. Believe me, I have a lot of the same film questions about Corey Coleman as I do Lewis. The difference is Coleman clocked a sub 4.4 at his pro day, flashed a 40.5" vertical leap, and elite change of direction skills as well.

While we're talking about old out dated lousy scouting techniques, I'll bring up SPARQ, because it's new, it's hot, and every NFL team looks at it VERY closely. And I think it has more bearing on the WR position than any other. Coleman had a133.9 SPARQ to put him in the 94th percentile of NFL WRs, and tied for 3rd in the class. Lewis checked in at 103.8 putting him in the 15th percentile of NFL WRs and #125 in this WR class.


Bottom line, he's a below average NFL athlete who was insanely productive in a small conference in a gimmicky offense. He's a good enough athlete that if he shows ability to run routes he can be a 4th-5th WR in the NFL, but he's going to need to show stuff that he was never given an opportunity to show in BG's offense. He landed in a good spot for him, so I hope for the best. I really think ODB is the only returner there that is 100% guaranteed in his role, so that bodes well for the young guys.

[gspointer]

No...they weren't. You had some slow WR's say they were...but there were plenty of guys who ran really fast who would have had to be descendants of Mercury himself to run as fast as a corrected "messed up" time wold suggest.

I so hate it when the so called experts here talk out of their asses. This was well documented. This is one of many links/discussions on the issue.

http://www.baltimorebeatdown.com/2016/3 ... ne-was-off" target="_blank

[hammb]

No...they weren't. You had some slow WR's say they were...but there were plenty of guys who ran really fast who would have had to be descendants of Mercury himself to run as fast as a corrected "messed up" time wold suggest.

I so hate it when the so called experts here talk out of their asses. This was well documented. This is one of many links/discussions on the issue.

http://www.baltimorebeatdown.com/2016/3 ... ne-was-off" target="_blank

A speculative article comparing the completely worthless on screen time makes it well documented? I did a couple of quick googles looking for anything credible that the 2016 NFL Combine 40 times were incorrect and didn't find much else. I saw a couple other mentions of this very same Jalen Ramsey timing issue, but I think most were going back to this exact same thing. Admittedly I didn't spend hours digging, but I didn't find anything showing a similar issue for any other single player. Not saying it doesn't exist, but I sure as hell wouldn't call it well documented, and I DEFINITELY have seen nothing close to enough evidence to make a declaration that "Combine times were messed up...there were problems..." And while I didn't spend hours researching your claim, I do spend hours (way too many, actually) watching/reading draft stuff leading up to it, and this was the FIRST time I've ever heard this claim of mistimings running rampant.

At most I see evidence of ONE problem, and the way these things are measured pardon me if I trust the lasers and pressure pad technology a bit more than I trust a video with an unofficial overlaid clock. Especially considering when I watch the video it looks to me like Ramsey moved his head forward before moving his legs/hand and that could have very well triggered the laser to begin timing. Ramsey didn't run at his pro day so we don't have a second time to compare to.

Sorry for being a so called expert. I'll just continue believing there is a giant NFL conspiracy to make sure BG players don't make it to the pros.

[Flipper]

Yeah well if baltimorebeatdown.com say it... that's like the fricking NY Times...

OK..let's look at this another way...

Here's the profile of Taj Sharpe..they guy I said should be the first MAC WR off the board before the draft (before Lewis or Braverman. I was right...go me)

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2016/profiles/ ... id=2555317" target="_blank


Here's Roger Lewis' scouting profile

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2016/profiles/ ... id=2555472" target="_blank

Similar physically...Sharpe is taller. Sharpe is also more polished. He did more than sprint past MAC DB's on go routes so he got drafted. He showed skills that overcame his equally pedestrian measurables and he was rewarded with hearing his name on day 3.

[gspointer]

Google? In am also talking about scouts who decided to forget the timer and hand time. And said it publicly. Look just stop making comments you do not vet yourself before making them. Lewis is sub 4.5 no question about it and that is fast enough. Like I said earlier drops were a concern on him. Oh yeah the sun video is messed up to. Just own your mistake. One reason I do not post often is because of the hot wind here. Just wastes my time. Flip said no problem with times. NOT TRUE! Even Braxton Miller commented on this as well.