Combine versus "the tape"

[Captain Lemming]

I used to be a tape over the numbers kind of guy.
It just occurred to me That we have done quite well with pure athletes.

From Willie Parker, to Timmons, to Ike, to Wallace, to Bryant, and possibly now Coates. Raw college players with athleticism and upside.

Excellent college players who are ridiculous athletes like Dupree and Shazier look like future stars.

Contrast that to the most awarded college player on the roster, Jarvis Jones who had twice the sacks as Dupree and dominated at the college level with modest athleticism.

The talk of Henry who seems a very limited athlete, when we already have a guy who seems to have much greater upside because of his athleticism in Jesse James made this topic come to mind.

Now before you come and say "of course "both" matter, we all know that. My point is that many of us have expressed the thought that productivity especially in a power conference is more important than "measurables".

I think many undervalued the measurable, component and our team has had much success factoring that part in HEAVILY in the draft.

[SS Laser]

What is AB, Bell, and Ben considered? Neither in my mind. Bell and Ben had college production sure and are good athletes. But did not "blow" up the combine that I remember? Neither did AB and without looking he must not have had big production in college to be a 6th round pick. You are looking at possible great players (except Timmons, Parker and even Wallace) which I agree with you at this point. But I also wanted to look at it from the 3 best players on the team. Oh another I just thought of is Heyward or even Tuitt? How do you see them? Are they "tape" guys? Interesting thought. But there also has to be enough good tape to back up the "numbers"?

[Slapstick]

The answer is that it is a combination of both...the challenge is figuring out how well the player's game will translate to the NFL, which is why it isn't an exact science...

Jarvis Jones takes a lot of grief, but if he is a bust, he's not even the biggest draft bust at his position from that draft...

[feltdizz]

AB was a monster in college but it was Central Michigan. Scouts went to watch another player and AB caught his eye.

My best friends older brother coached for CMU back when AB was there and my friend said AB always put on a show.

[The Man of Steel]

This is great topic BTW.

Both Emmanual Sanders and Antonio Brown put up huge receiving numbers in college but neither one were considered anything special going into the draft. Then you have Landry Jones who statistically-speaking is still one of the greatest all-time passers in NCAA history. Someone else mentioned Jarvis Jones as being someone who dominated the college game as well. It seems like stats, awards, championships, etc on the college level may or may not be a measuring stick for future greatness so you need both the tape and the combine to weed out the posers but even then it's often just a crapshoot.

[BradshawsHairdresser]

Sometimes the stats are overblown. For instance, they'll ding an edge rusher because his 40 time is north of 4.6, but he's got a quick first step and strength at the point of attack, and knows how to put some moves on a blocker. How useful is a straight 40 time, really, in evaluating his possible professional success?

[SteelerOfDeVille]

tape first, combine to confirm what you saw. "that WR looked fast", but, then runs a 4.8 is a bad thing. the game is played on the field, not in shorts.

[SteelerOfDeVille]

This is great topic BTW.

Both Emmanual Sanders and Antonio Brown put up huge receiving numbers in college but neither one were considered anything special going into the draft. Then you have Landry Jones who statistically-speaking is still one of the greatest all-time passers in NCAA history. Someone else mentioned Jarvis Jones as being someone who dominated the college game as well. It seems like stats, awards, championships, etc on the college level may or may not be a measuring stick for future greatness so you need both the tape and the combine to weed out the posers but even then it's often just a crapshoot.

But, the tape, not the stats.

I remember calling my shot on Tim Couch, who was #1 overall for the Browns - easy call as a bust. Had the opportunity (being in KY) to see a lot of him. Statistically, he was a beast. But, if you watched their games, you realized he spent the entire game throwing quick read passes of <10 yards and occasionally, his WR would break one. He'd go 40 of 50 for 320 yards and 3 TDs. But, couldn't read a defense or throw the ball downfield.

It's the tape, but, it's how you look at the tape. Stats told a lot of you that Mendenhall was the best RB in his class. Watching games (i.e., tape) told me that Jonathan Stewart was. While you can't predict injury, you do have to know what you're looking for at each position.

[Oviedo]

The answer is that it is a combination of both...the challenge is figuring out how well the player's game will translate to the NFL, which is why it isn't an exact science...

Jarvis Jones takes a lot of grief, but if he is a bust, he's not even the biggest draft bust at his position from that draft...

He is a "bust" for us which is what matters. Trying to bring other players from that draft into this is just muddying the waters to keep from accepting the fact he is one of the poorer 1st Round picks of the Colbert era.

I'm still not sure what the team saw when they watched him in college and saw his measureables because it was clear he was not an explosive athlete who manhandled tackles in college. He got his sacks by tenacity which hasn't translated because tackles in the NFL are too good and don't give up on their blocks.

IMO Jones is an example of why drafting for need versus best player available can blow up in your face. We got Jones because we thought Harrison was done and we needed a ROLB. Harrison part time is still better than Jones.

[RuthlessBurgher]

tape first, combine to confirm what you saw. "that WR looked fast", but, then runs a 4.8 is a bad thing. the game is played on the field, not in shorts.

At the Combine, the stuff we don't see (med check and interviews) are immeasurably more important than any of the on field stuff that is broadcast.

And among the field stuff, the objective, measureable 40 times, vertical jump, bench press, etc. where we can list results numerically and rank prospects within their position group afterward aren't as important the subjective field drills (how fluid someone's hips are when he turns and runs can't exactly be quantified, but trained scouts surely know what they are looking for).

The combine outliers on either side will get a second look...if someone tests much better than you expected or tests much worse than you expected, then you re-watch the tape again to see what you might have missed the first time.

[SidSmythe]

The tape is the first thing I'd look at.
Sure I've seen JJs pedestrian speed show up on the field. His 40 time confirmed it.
However I watched his tape and was not impressed at all.
If I like his tape then I'd look at his workout.
But in the end I want to look him in the eye and be convinced he loves football and wants to win as 1/53rd of that equation.

[Oviedo]

tape first, combine to confirm what you saw. "that WR looked fast", but, then runs a 4.8 is a bad thing. the game is played on the field, not in shorts.

Confirmation is the key which is why you need a 40 time. "Looking fast" on tape playing in Conference USA is not the same as "looking fast" playing in the SEC, Big 10, etc

You need those baselines from the combine

[Slapstick]

He is a "bust" for us which is what matters. Trying to bring other players from that draft into this is just muddying the waters to keep from accepting the fact he is one of the poorer 1st Round picks of the Colbert era.

I'm still not sure what the team saw when they watched him in college and saw his measureables because it was clear he was not an explosive athlete who manhandled tackles in college. He got his sacks by tenacity which hasn't translated because tackles in the NFL are too good and don't give up on their blocks.

IMO Jones is an example of why drafting for need versus best player available can blow up in your face. We got Jones because we thought Harrison was done and we needed a ROLB. Harrison part time is still better than Jones.

Talking about other players from the exact same draft "muddies the waters"? That makes zero sense...Those are the only players that make perfect sense when determining the dreaded "bust" label...

[Shawn]

Good thread and some valid points. Let me state that I'm not in the camp that believes the combine offers much value. The combine is a dog and pony show. There are too many people who top the charts in categories who never amount to a hill of beans in the pros. Also, there are plenty of people who are extremely productive at the college level who dont amount to a hill of beans in the pros. IMO, its ALL about the tape. It's a mix of athletic prowess and refinement of technique.

Lets go with a famous recent comparative. Mosley and Shazier. ON TAPE (not even talking combine) it was obvious that Shazier was the better athlete. I went back and forth looking at their games. Shazier was faster, more explosive, and highly productive. But, Mosley was more well rounded, more technically sound, didn't make nearly as many glaring errors as Shazier...didn't get swallowed up or put on his back side nearly as much. Mosley was more technically sound and more physical. Who do you pick? Steelers leans towards athletic upside...hoping to teach the other things. While I tend to disagree with that philosophy of drafting you cant argue with recent results. The Steelers have been hitting on these guys and you really have to give the scouts and coaches a big pat on the back. I'm a bird in the hand guy...I prefer the guys with lower bust potential. But the Steelers have been taking these chances and it's paid off.

[Chadman]

When Chadman used to do his draft analysis/Steelers off-season threads, it was surprising how much Combine numbers actually came into play, on a consistant basis, for certain positions.

WR, CB were the 2 most obvious. 40 time is what everyone talks about, but it was the cone drills & jump drills where nearly ALL Steelers selected in the draft performed at the top end of their combine class.

AB, Sanders, Bryant, Wheaton, any number of the CB's, including all the later round guys that turned out to be nothing- they almost all had superior jump & cone skills.

These numbers didn't play into other positions as much, but TE, S & LB numbers were generally along these lines as well.