The predictive value of the NFL combine
Now that the strange excitement that grips the N.F.L. world during the scouting combine is over, it’s worth asking whether what we saw really mattered.
An analysis by the Harvard Sports Analysis Collective confirms that a track meet in February is of limited use for people trying to figure out how well people will play football in November. You can see the work on the organization’s blog, position by position, broken down by offense and defense. But here are the highlights:
Two things appear to matter when it comes to quarterbacks: height over 6 feet 2 inches and shuttle time. In other words, tall, shifty quarterbacks are the best. A quarterback’s outright speed does not seem to matter much at all. Of course, this analysis does not take into account the predictive value of Robert Griffin’s ability to charm reporters and coaches with his wit and quirky taste in socks.
Running backs tend to get better as they get shorter, heavier and faster. Any exercise involving a cone does not seem to matter much.
Cornerbacks appear to get better when they are faster and bigger, but their ability to jump is surprisingly irrelevant. (Or, at least, their ability to jump without pads on and with ample warning is irrelevant.)
The position in which the combine best predicts success appears to be defensive end. These players get better as they get heavier and faster, and those who run the cone drills better tend to do better in the N.F.L.
Wide receivers and fullbacks might as well not show up at the combine. Nothing they do in Indianapolis seems to reliably translate into success in the N.F.L.
This article was written by Joshua Brustein and appeared in the New York Times.
Posted by Necesitamos Mas Football
on 9:31 a. m..
Filed under