Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

    What factor is the best indicator that a productive college player will be a bust as a pro?
    38
    Level of Competition (i.e. college success against weak opponents)
    7.89%
    3
    Measurables/Physique (i.e. too short, too light for position at pro level)
    10.53%
    4
    Measurables/Performance (i.e. too slow in 40, to weak in weightroom)
    0.00%
    0
    Injury history (i.e. frequent injuries or recovered from severe injury)
    5.26%
    2
    Behavior (i.e. often in trouble with law, university or NCAA)
    7.89%
    3
    College stats (i.e. production low compared to measurables)
    5.26%
    2
    Flash in the Pan (i.e. player who had only one productive year in college)
    7.89%
    3
    System Differences (i.e. player who succeeded in a non-pro style system)
    28.95%
    11
    None of the above: They're all indicators, and ultimately its a crapshoot.
    26.32%
    10

  • #2
    Re: What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

    I really just don't believe in to many qb's that run spread offenses or option offenses. Just doesn't work in the NFL most of the time.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

      I went with behavior but I think of it a different way. It's about maturity and work ethic. I don't care what type of system you were in, how healthy you were or your size / talent level, you MUST have a high work ethic and you MUST possess a massive desire to be the best in the league at your position. I think that's the difference.

      As an example, Tony Banks had everything you'd want in a franchise QB except that work ethic and drive for success. Alex Barron is the same way. The guy didn't have to work hard in college, it was noted as his negative coming out of the draft and it's shown true through his career. The only thing keeping him from being a hall of famer is his desire to be great and the maturity to do what it takes to get there.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

        Well, it's definitely NOT behavior. That has absolutely nothing to do with predicting an NFL career.



        Sincerely,
        Lawrence Phillips
        The more things change, the more they stay the same.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

          I went with system differences but here are some of the players to provide counter-arguements:

          Level of competition: Jason Taylor played for Akron, Ben Roethlisberger for Miami (OH)
          Measurables/physique: Drew Brees measures 6 feet tall
          Measurables/performance: Jerry Rice ran a 4.7
          Injury history: Adrian Peterson, Chris Johnson only made 5 starts junior year. Steven Jackson suffered a knee injury his last year at OSU
          Behavior: Randy Moss left FSU for weed during probation
          College Stats: Eric Wright, CB for the Browns had 29 tackles and 1 int before declaring
          Flash in the Pan: Carson Palmer, USC; senior year stats overshadow otherwise above-average career
          System player: Wes Welker, Texas Tech; Kevin Kolb, Houston

          These are just some of the players that prove how hard it is to scout whether a player can make it in the NFL but for each counter-example there are probably 5-10 players who didn't pan out.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

            I'd agree with several of those:

            1. System - If a player was able to succeed by doing things they won't be able to get away with in the pros, you have to wonder how directly their success will translate. In Jason Smith's case, the change in stance is probably not as huge a difference as say a quarterback who is accustomed to running more than he throws.

            2. Behavior - Whatever happened to Maurice Clarett? Does anyone recall whether the Israeli mob ever caught up with him?

            3. College Stats/Flash in the Pan - This one varies widely depending on circumstances. The guy might have just changed positions, or might even still be learning the game if he's a converted track guy or basketball player. He might have been behind other stars on the depth chart. He might have played through injury. It might have been a system that didn't take advantage of his talents (e.g. star receiver on a team committed to power running).


            I tend to put less stock in measurables unless they're way off from what you would expect. You hear a lot of stories about guys who were said to be too short, too slow--too something--to succeed and still managed to become all-stars. Conversely, you also hear lots of stories about workout wonders who were drafted too high and busted out.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

              It would be hard to just pick one. When the Rams took Tye Hill I thought he was too small and could not play with the bigger more physical receivers. You would have to beware of players with a lot of off the field issues i.e. Lawrence Phillips.
              :ramlogo:

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

                Originally posted by Goldenfleece View Post
                I'd agree with several of those:

                1. System - If a player was able to succeed by doing things they won't be able to get away with in the pros, you have to wonder how directly their success will translate. In Jason Smith's case, the change in stance is probably not as huge a difference as say a quarterback who is accustomed to running more than he throws.

                2. Behavior - Whatever happened to Maurice Clarett? Does anyone recall whether the Israeli mob ever caught up with him?

                3. College Stats/Flash in the Pan - This one varies widely depending on circumstances. The guy might have just changed positions, or might even still be learning the game if he's a converted track guy or basketball player. He might have been behind other stars on the depth chart. He might have played through injury. It might have been a system that didn't take advantage of his talents (e.g. star receiver on a team committed to power running).


                I tend to put less stock in measurables unless they're way off from what you would expect. You hear a lot of stories about guys who were said to be too short, too slow--too something--to succeed and still managed to become all-stars. Conversely, you also hear lots of stories about workout wonders who were drafted too high and busted out.
                OH YEAH!! I remember Maurice Clarett, I remember a couple years ago he was busted for robbing an old lady and I believe he is still in jail.. Someone correct me if i'm wrong? Was he ever drafted?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

                  Originally posted by Goldenfleece View Post
                  I'd agree with several of those:

                  1. System - If a player was able to succeed by doing things they won't be able to get away with in the pros, you have to wonder how directly their success will translate. In Jason Smith's case, the change in stance is probably not as huge a difference as say a quarterback who is accustomed to running more than he throws.

                  2. Behavior - Whatever happened to Maurice Clarett? Does anyone recall whether the Israeli mob ever caught up with him?

                  3. College Stats/Flash in the Pan - This one varies widely depending on circumstances. The guy might have just changed positions, or might even still be learning the game if he's a converted track guy or basketball player. He might have been behind other stars on the depth chart. He might have played through injury. It might have been a system that didn't take advantage of his talents (e.g. star receiver on a team committed to power running).


                  I tend to put less stock in measurables unless they're way off from what you would expect. You hear a lot of stories about guys who were said to be too short, too slow--too something--to succeed and still managed to become all-stars. Conversely, you also hear lots of stories about workout wonders who were drafted too high and busted out.
                  OH YEAH!! I remember Maurice Clarett, I remember a couple years ago he was busted for robbing an old lady and I believe he is still in jail.. Someone correct me if i'm wrong? Was he ever drafted?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

                    It's a crapshoot. Nothing more than that. That's why I don't believe that you can't take a certain position high because so many say you can't. Like you can't take a Safety high in the draft. BS. I guarantee you that the S from Tennessee is going to be a difference maker.

                    I think people look waaaayyyyyy too much at 40 times, how high a guy jumps, how many squats he does, how he does in the 3 cone, 5 cone, and ice cream cone drills and not how the dude plays on the field.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

                      I'd say college stats. So many "experts" fall in love with the physique and athleticism of a player and then forge that they weren't near as productive what there atheleticism go.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

                        Originally posted by txramsfan View Post
                        It's a crapshoot. Nothing more than that. That's why I don't believe that you can't take a certain position high because so many say you can't. Like you can't take a Safety high in the draft. BS. I guarantee you that the S from Tennessee is going to be a difference maker.

                        I think people look waaaayyyyyy too much at 40 times, how high a guy jumps, how many squats he does, how he does in the 3 cone, 5 cone, and ice cream cone drills and not how the dude plays on the field.
                        You say it's a crapshoot and then guarantee a kid is a difference maker? Maybe we should take a long-snapper in the first round? Or maybe a FB. Afterall, if we can guarantee they'll be successful, it would be rediculous to not pick them right?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

                          Originally posted by txramsfan View Post
                          It's a crapshoot. Nothing more than that. That's why I don't believe that you can't take a certain position high because so many say you can't.

                          I would have to disagree its more than that, some teams are better than others because of there scouting and personnel department. I think after you get into the middle rounds the talent level, levels off.
                          :ramlogo:

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

                            Originally posted by RebelYell View Post
                            You say it's a crapshoot and then guarantee a kid is a difference maker? Maybe we should take a long-snapper in the first round? Or maybe a FB. Afterall, if we can guarantee they'll be successful, it would be rediculous to not pick them right?
                            Don't over react to my post like you are some sort of draft guru. What I am saying is that the scientific method (or lack of it) hasn't worked for the Rams this decade. They are relying too much on measurables and not how someone plays on the field.

                            I'm not saying draft a friggin long snapper or a FB in the first round, but I am saying why not draft a Safety or a WR high when normally you wouldn't?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

                              Originally posted by txramsfan View Post
                              What I am saying is that the scientific method (or lack of it) hasn't worked for the Rams this decade. They are relying too much on measurables and not how someone plays on the field.
                              According to the guys at the PD, the Rams draft woes are from too much man-love between Zygmunt and agents. (Okay, everybody catch your breath and recompose from that awful visual that just flashed through your mind)

                              I recall reading that Zygmunt's influence on draft day was based on how well he got along with the player's agent. If they had a good relationship (ie. Zyg felt he could sign the kid relatively easily), he would push for a particular player.

                              If completely true, not a good way to build a champion.
                              The more things change, the more they stay the same.

                              Comment

                              Related Topics

                              Collapse

                              • HUbison
                                What exactly is a "bust" anyway?
                                by HUbison
                                This seems to be a term that is as available yet undefined as "nutrition supplements". So how about we come to some kind of definition for "bust". There will be the Pam Anderson jokes and HOF statues, ha ha, but how do you define what makes a player a "bust"?

                                IMHO, a player can not be considered a bust until the majority of their career with their current team is finished. Maybe I'm too patient, but it seems that any determination before then would not give a clear picture of a player's worth. For example, with 28 interceptions in his first year, some would have called Manning a bust. I'd be hard-pressed to find anyone saying that now. After his first three seasons, #1 pick Drew Bledsoe had 5 more picks than TDs, another bust. Dante Culpepper never saw the field his rookie year, certain bust. Tiki Barber, Mushin Muhammad, Joe Horn, Trent Green, Bertrand Berry, Leonard Little, Warren Sapp, the list goes on and on of top-tier players that would have been considered busts IF their careers stopped after the first 2 or 3 years.

                                My point is this: some of the players that we like to call "busts" such as our 3 first round DTs or even guys who haven't seen the field like Barron, have not earned the label simply because we don't know what the rest of their time with us holds. If they were to walk away today, never to return, then yea, I could see them being called busts, but we don't know what they are going to do from here on out, so why not have a little patience.

                                But back to the original question....what is your definition of "bust"?
                                -08-10-2005, 12:58 PM
                              • Goldenfleece
                                Thoughts on Ranking Prospects
                                by Goldenfleece
                                Height, weight, 40 times, bench presses...these things don't tell you whether a man will be a good pro. What they do tell you is how well a player will be able to apply his skills at the next level. The physical attributes become sort of prerequisites to be able to do certain things on the field. With insufficient speed, a player who previously excelled at man-to-man coverage may not be able to keep up, so his skills wouldn't transfer as well to the NFL. But the higher level of competition also weeds out those who relied on athleticism instead of skill. The key to remember is that a man's physical limitations are just that; they tell you what a player cannot do, instead of what he can.

                                Play on the field should be the first and the last thing scouts look at. A workout warrior who didn't impress on the field is at best a raw prospect (if he has not been playing long enough to learn the nuances of a position). If a player has been in the game for a long time but still has not mastered the fundamentals of his position, doesn't seem to recognize how plays develop, struggles to learn a playbook, can't pick up what the coaches try to teach him, or has other major difficulties with the mental and technical aspects of the game--these aren't problems that are likely to go away. You look at what he has done on the field and only after that do you look at the workout numbers to see if it is likely he can repeat or improve on that in the pros. Again, the only exemption is for players who are still learning the position. In those cases, it is just harder all around to predict how successful they will be.

                                Senior Bowl performances largely tell you how well a player can be coached and how he stacks up when taken out of his normal scheme. A good Senior Bowl is a testament to a player's adaptability and skill against other top competitors, but the practices tend to tell more than the actual game. After all, the game is much like a Pro Bowl; the quarterbacks and receivers don't have chemistry, the linemen aren't always on the same page, etc.

                                Interviews are underrated by the average fan, probably because they are one element of the process we can't quantify or reliably gauge the effects of. However, this whole process is at its core a job application, and as with most job application processes, the interview can make or break a candidate's chances. Coaches and teams have to believe that the player's heart is in it, that he is motivated, that he works hard, that he is reliable and trustworthy. A player has to be mentally tough and driven to succeed in the NFL. Otherwise, hungrier players will beat him out. A reckless player can not only get himself suspended but tarnish the name of the franchise.

                                Other considerations include level of competition, the scheme played in, the ability of the coaching staff (are his mistakes the kind that are easily correctable?), leadership/character, and to some degree image/marketability...
                                -04-13-2008, 10:58 AM
                              • ramhard
                                Clearing up the BUST debate - Long
                                by ramhard
                                There is one comment that always sparks heated responses on this forum - calling someone a draft BUST (well, and bringing up Martz or Warner but that's for another thread). The arguments usually start with someone calling a player (this year it's Long or Smith) and then angry responses to the contrary. The arguments against usually are something along the line of:

                                1. You can't judge a player after X years (fill in the blank), you gotta have patience.
                                2. He is a productive player, have realistic expectations.
                                3. He's playing as well as Y player, why don't you call that player a bust.
                                4. For a low drafted player - he's only a (5, 6, or 7th) round choice, most don't pan out anyway.

                                Arguments in favor of a bust are usually:

                                1. He's not playing at Pro Bowl caliber.
                                2. He doesn't have the stats of Z player (someone drafted equal or lower in a similar draft).
                                3. He 2 years he only has ______(fill in the appropriate statistics) so he's a bust.

                                The problem is that the arguments are mixing issues. Here are some groundrules for judging the returns to a player:

                                1. Draft Position - where a player is drafted DOES matter. Why? Because a player drafted in the top 5 of a draft has very different cap implications than a player drafted in the 4th round. A player who eats up $5-$10 million of your cap room needs to have a higher impact than a player who eats up $400k. People have often argued that's why in the current system, no one wants to trade into the top 5 draft picks because the cap hit is so high and if you miss on a player it hamstrings you for 3-4 years with your cap.

                                So yes, a player drafted in the top 5 draft picks can be a bust with average performance; while the same player drafted in the 4th round with the same performance isn't a bust.

                                2. Playing Position - the position a player plays DOES matter. Why? Again back to cap implications, but also to when the typical player makes an impact. Position matters because certain positions have higher average salaries than other positions, so missing on a low average position kills you more than missing on a high average position. For example, if the average QB costs (across the league) is $4M, while the average offensive guard is $1M, if you draft a guy high and give him a big bonus at QB (say a $5M average) you only lose $1M on your cap because of what you have to pay to an average replacement QB; while at guard you would lose $5M.

                                Also, certain positions have quicker impact than other positions. For example, reaction positions like RB and LB (and maybe OT) the top players are good quickly. While at other positions like QB, C, and DT they often take longer. Now of course there are exceptions to every rule, and things change over time. For example, it looks like at the QB position, the development time is starting to be reduced - in part because of the control of...
                                -10-23-2009, 11:18 AM
                              • txramsfan
                                What I have noticed each year?
                                by txramsfan
                                Is one guys saint is another guys sinner. One may think Clausen is the best option since Peyton Manning and someone else will swear Clausen is a bust. I used that because I was going back and for with the Beast about it but it's true.

                                There are going to be question marks about every player in the draft....including Suh. He played mostly against spread offenses. How is he going to handle the banging inside that's going to happen in the NFL? No one knows. Not even you out there who say he's a can't miss product. Everyone is a miss in my opinion until they prove otherwise. Sure Tebow has all the style and grace of a hooligan soccer fan whose team just lost the World Cup and he's pissed (both ways) but who really knows if he's going to be bad or good? No one.

                                This is what makes this whole process a crapshoot. No one freakin knows and can say without any reasonable doubt that one of these guys is going to be great or a bust. You may get lucky once in awhile but I bet your overall prediction record is about as good as your winning lotto ticket percentages. What I do enjoy though is how most of us (including me on occasion) think we know it all and everyone else is brain dead because they don't agree with me.

                                So with that, let the bull hockey from us fly because after last night it's officially NFL Draft Season.
                                -01-08-2010, 02:35 PM
                              • berg8309
                                Quarterback Qualities
                                by berg8309
                                With the recent thread on Walterfootball's assessment of Bradford vs. Clausen, I thought it would be a good time to ask what everyone values in a QB. Obviously different people have different qualities they rate higher than others, for instance Walterfootball values arm strength, and I value accuracy. I have put together a list of what I deem important traits in a QB. Note that not all of these are things I believe you can measure from an armchair, and it is not exhaustive, just a top 8.

                                1. Decision Making - No matter what your physical tool set is, accurate, gun for an arm, speed demon, all of the above, if you make poor decisions, you will be a poor QB, end of story. This includes everything from not throwing into too much coverage, to knowing when to cut losses and throw the ball away.

                                2. Accuracy - The most important physical attribute to me. Not to take away from others which are still important, but if you can't get the ball on target, then what good is everything else? This does not mean you need elite accuracy, but enough to hit your targets. If your throws are always high or wide by too much, you'll never be a success.

                                3. Intangibles - Successful QBs don't roll in at noon and leave at 2. First in, first out, or close to. You need a guy who not only loves the game and cares about being the best (Or trying to be) but who has his head on straight outside the game as well. You will crash and burn at QB with no work ethic. I initially had this lower, but then I thought about QBs like LeaF and Russell who just don't care. They had the skill sets, but their loafer attitude made them bad QBs.

                                4. Release - I value this higher than arm strength because a quick release can make up for a certain amount of lack of arm strength on short and intermediate routes. A quick release gives D-linemen less time to put their hands up, and coverage backs less time to read and react. Angle of release is also important in terms of how well the ball travels, and how likely it is to get batted down at the line.

                                5. Arm strength - Although I believe you can get away with just adequate arm strength, I will readily admit that if you have to float balls because you can't throw hard enough, you are going to have a bad time. Floating balls are easy to pick off, or at least get a hand on. You want to be accurate, but you don't want to give too much time for the defense to get in front of it. Also helpful for stretching the field when you need a desperation play, or have a speed receiver who finds himself with a mismatch.

                                6. Footwork - I am not good at identifying good footwork, I admit that. However I will also admit that it is important. Bad footwork can lead to falling down, missed handoffs, failed play action, and an assortment of other problems with throwing a good ball and hiding it from the defense as long as possible.

                                7. Football I.Q. - Good QBs can...
                                -04-19-2010, 05:24 PM
                              Working...
                              X