WaterfallJumper
Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2009
- Messages
- 8,439
- Reaction score
- 18,079
Couldn't agree more. Production on the field of play is more important to me than the vast majority of these combine metrics. It's why I'm wary about the likes of Sam Hubbard as a 1st rounder, who has all the boxes ticked, but hasn't really ever put it together on the field.
While I'm mostly in agreement, even production isn't as important for me as translatable traits. Chandler Jones is my go to example. He had, what, 4.5 sacks his final year in school? But clearly he had the latent talent to succeed. The trick is determining if production is inflated/suppressed by scheme, and then figuring out if the skillsets apply to your scheme. Everyone needs technique improvement in the pros, but some players acclimate more quickly. Sometimes athletic ability can produce a player profile that is really promising down the road, but the technique/snap count hasn't resulted in stat sheet production. I believe Hubbard falls into this category, and he will continue to improve.
Also -- and this is almost impossible to determine without getting to know a player -- it's important to consider personality, work ethic, and general intelligence / learning ability. Anyone can learn something new, but aptitude depends on several limiting factors. GMs want to mitigate risk as much as possible if there's not clear production and testing results.
Last edited: