Jump to content

Nfl Zscor: Most Athletic Rookies By Position


Recommended Posts

http://internationalsportshub.com/2015/05/05/nfl-zscor-most-athletic-rookies-by-position/

As an American sports fan, over-analyzing and obsessing over freakish athletes is far too common. I’ve taken it upon myself to seek out future gems which NFL general managers may be overlooking.

For each position category measured at the 2015 NFL Scouting Combine (with the exception of kickers and punters), I averaged each drill for position groups, and how far each athlete deviated from their counterpart. Averaging the deviations from each drill, the ZScor was created. ZScor can be used at any level, any sport with anyone.

This should go without saying, but the best athletes aren’t always the best players. My analysis should only act as a supplement to performance on the football field. With that in mind, let’s jump in.

Quarterbacks:
brett.jpg?w=639

Photo via gcobb.com

This was the most misleading position, because athleticism is only a small part of a quarterbacks’ arsenal. The two top draft prospects, Jameis Winston and Marcus Mariota, have different builds and skill set. Mariota displayed special speed and agility (had fastest 40 Yd Dash, 3 Cone Drill, and Shuttle Run). When faced against professional defenses, Mariota will use this to evade pass rushers. On the other hand, Jameis uses his strong arm and “Football IQ,” to dominate his opponents.

Highest Rated Quarterbacks – ZScor
  1. Oregon- Mariota, Marcus: (1.0689 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.52 40), Agility (6.87 3 Cone Drill), Leaping Ability (36″ Vertical)
  2. Auburn- Marshall, Nick (Will be converting to corner): (1.06884 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.54 40), Agility (6.96 3 Cone Drill), Leaping Ability (37.5″ Vertical)
  3. UCLA- Hundley, Brett: (1.01418 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.63 40), Agility (6.93 3 Cone Drill & 3.98 Shuttle Run)
Lowest Rated Quarterbacks – ZScor
  1. Duke- Boone, Anthony: (-1.64588 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (5.03 40), No Lateral Quickness (7.47 3 Cone Drill)
  2. Oregon State- Mannion, Sean: (-0.93672) Weaknesses: Slow (5.14 40), No Lateral Quickness (7.29 3 Cone Drill)
  3. Florida State- Winston, Jameis: (-0.7949) Weaknesses: Slow (4.97 40), No Lateral Quickness (4.36 Shuttle Run)
Running Backs:

In previous years, running backs have been vastly overlooked. As the NFL has shifted towards a spread, passing league, many running backs have been unable to secure a long-term home. However, in the 2015 draft class, talented runners such as Melvin Gordon, Todd Gurley, and Ameer Abdullah have all been drafted to teams where they could play big roles on their offenses..

Todd Gurley has a huge upside, but also a very dark past. With history of injuries and suspension by the NCAA, he is a very risky pick for the St. Louis Rams. At the combine, he ran a surprising 4.46. David Johnson from Univ. of Northern Iowa was unknown prior to the NFL combine. He is a gem of a running back. Running the fastest three cone drill and benching 25 reps, his size and strength caught the eye of many NFL general managers.

Highest Rated Running Backs
todd-gurley-ncaa-football-kentucky-georg

Photo via dawnofthedawg.com

  1. Nebraska- Abdullah, Ameer: (1.59 Z) Strengths: Lateral Quickness (6.79 3 Cone Drill), Strong (Bench Press: 24 Reps), Leaping Ability (42.5″ Vertical”)
  2. UNI- Johnson, David: (1.18 Z) Strengths: Lateral Quickness (6.82 3 Cone Drill), Strong (Bench Press: 25 Reps), Leaping Ability (41.5″ Vertical)
  3. South Dakota State- Zenner, Zach: (0.81 Z) Strengths: Lateral Quickness (4.1 Shuttle Run), Strong (Bench Press: 25 Reps), Leaping Ability (41″ Vertical)
  4. Wisconsin- Gordon III, Melvin: (0.65 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.52 40), Lateral Quickness (4.07 Shuttle Run)
  5. Boise State- Ajayi, Jay: (0.52 Z) Strengths: Lateral Quickness (7.1 3 Cone Drill), Leaping Ability (39″ Vertical Leap)
Lowest Rated Running Backs
  1. LSU- Hilliard, Kenny: (-1.33 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (4.83 40), No Lateral Quickness (4.4 Shuttle Run)
  2. Missouri- Murphy, Marcus: (-1.29 Z) Weaknesses: Weak (Bench Press: 11 Reps)
  3. Colorado State- Hart, Dee: (-0.85 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (4.8 40), No Lateral Quickness (4.38 Shuttle Run)
  4. Florida- Jones, Matt: (-0.53 Z) No strengths nor weaknesses
  5. Florida State- Williams, Karlos: (-0.31 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.48 40) Weaknesses: No Lateral Quickness (4.46 Shuttle Run)
Wide Receivers:

A reoccuring theme throughout this draft class is scheme. In the wide receiver category, there is an abundance of both possession receivers and physical freaks. There were a ridiculous 9 wide receivers taken in the first two rounds this year.

Highest Rated Wide Receivers
  1. Auburn- Coates, Sammie: (1.1301 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.43 40), Leaping Ability (41″), Strong (Bench Press: 23 Reps)
  2. Georgia- Conley, Chris: (1.1259 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.35 40), Leaping Ability (45″ Vertical Leap), Strong (Bench Press: 23 Reps)
  3. Arizona State- Strong, Jalen: (0.8997 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.44 40), Leaping Ability (42″ Vertical Leap)
  4. Nebraska- Bell, Kenny: (0.73835 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.42 40), Lateral Quickness (6.66 3 Cone Drill), Strength (41.5″ Vertical Leap) Weaknesses: Weak (Bench Press: 7 Reps)
  5. Miami- Dorsett, Phillip: (0.6936 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.33 40), Lateral Quickness (6.7 3 Cone Drill)
Lowest Rated Wide Receivers
amari-cooper-ncaa-football-alabama-louis

Photo via dawgpounddaily.com

  1. Fresno State- Harper, Josh: (-0.9341 Z) Weaknesses: No Lateral Quickness (7.15 3 Cone Drill), Weak (Bench Press: 13 Reps)
  2. Duke- Crowder, Jamieson: (-0.59903 Z) Weaknesses: No Lateral Quickness (7.17 3 Cone Drill), Weak (Bench Press: 10 Reps)
  3. Utah- Clay, Kaelin: (-0.5149 Z) Weaknesses: No Lateral Quickness (4.26 Shuttle Run), Weak (Bench Press: 10 Reps)
  4. Alabama- Jones, Chris: (-0.4775 Z) No strengths nor weaknesses
  5. Alabama- Cooper, Amari: (-0.39875 Z) No strengths nor weaknesses
Tight Ends:

Over the past 3-4 years, the average tight end has changed quite a bit. Primarily used for blocking in the past, they’ve become primary receiving targets for many quarterbacks. Due to this surging trend, many draft prospects are trying to fit the mold.

Highest Rated Tight Ends
  1. Ohio State- Heuerman, Jeff: (1.319 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.65 40), Strong (Bench Press: 26 Reps)
  2. Southern Alabama- Saxton, Wes: (1.077 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.65 40), Leaping Ability (36″ Vertical)
  3. Southern Illinois- Pruitt, Mycole: (0.7903) Strengths: Speed (4.58 40), Lateral Quickness (7.25 3 Cone Drill), Leaping Ability (38″ Vertical)
Lowest Rated Tight Ends
  1. Texas A&M- Clear, Cameron: (-0.9567) Weaknesses: Slow (4.98 40), No Lateral Agility (7.52 3 Cone Drill)
  2. UTEP- Tomlinson, Eric: (-0.697) Weaknesses: Slow (4.9 40), No Lateral Agility (7.46 3 Cone Drill)
  3. Arkansas- Derby, A.J: (-0.6742) Weaknesses: Slow (4.8 40), Weak (Bench Press:15 Reps)
Offensive Line:

In 2015, football’s shift to fast-pace offense has called for a new breed of blockers. Elite size must be combined with rapid feet to protect the runners and throwers.

Highest Rated Offensive Linemen
  1. Oregon- Fisher, Jake: (1.46 Z) Strengths: Speed (5.01 40), Agility (7.25 3 Cone)
  2. Hobart- Marpet, Ali: (1.2723 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.98 40), Agility (7.33 3 Cone), Strong (Bench Press: 30 Reps)
  3. Virginia Tech- Gibson, Lawrence: (0.96115 Z) Strengths: Speed (5.04 40), Agility (4.56 Shuttle Run) Leaping Ability (33.5″ Vertical)
  4. Florida State- Erving, Cameron: (0.94668 Z) Strengths: Agility (4.63 Shuttle Run), Strong (Bench Press: 30 Reps)
  5. Pittsburgh Clemmings, T.J: (0.73051 Z) Strengths: Agility (4.54 Shuttle Run), Leaping Ability (32.5″ Vertical)
Lowest Rated Offensive Linemen
  1. Florida State- Matias, Josue: (-2.18094 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (5.52 40), No Lateral Quickness (8.19 3 Cone Drill)
  2. Wisconsin- Haverstein, Rob: (-1.0416 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (5.46 40), No Lateral Quickness (8.28 3 Cone Drill), Weak (Bench Press: 16 Reps)
  3. Florida- Brown, Trenton: (-0.8481 Z) Weaknesses: No Lateral Quickness (8.23 3 Cone Drill), Weak (Bench Press: 20 Reps)
  4. Oklahoma- Williams, Daryl: (-0.81372 Z) Weaknesses: No Lateral Quickness (5.15 Shuttle Run)
  5. Alabama- Shepherd, Austin: (-0.64318 Z) Weaknesses: No Lateral Quickness (8.04 3 Cone Drill), Weak (Bench Press: 17 Reps)
Defensive Tackles

Few and far between, the defensive tackle position is highly exclusive. This draft won’t provide an All-Pro DT, but many solid role-players make up this position.

Highest Rated Defensive Tackles
  1. Washington State- Cooper, Xavier: (1.12712 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.86 40), Agility (6.71 3 Cone Drill), Leaping Ability (33″ Vertical)
  2. Iowa- Trinca-Pasat, Louis: (0.7734 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.96 40), Leaping Ability (32″ Vertical)
  3. Clemson- Jarrett, Grady: (0.5668 Z) Strengths: Agility (7.37 3 Cone Drill), Strong (Bench Press: 30 Reps)
Lowest Rated Defensive Tackles
  1. Houston- Mbu, Joey: (-1.661 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (5.54 40), No Lateral Quickness (8.2 3 Cone Drill), No Leaping Ability (22.5″ Vertical)
  2. Florida- Orr, Leon: (-0.88704 Z) Weaknesses: No Lateral Quickness (8.26 3 Cone Drill)
  3. UCLA- McCarthy, Ellis: (-0.5525 Z) Weaknesses: No Lateral Quickness (8.16 3 Cone Drill)
Defensive Ends:

This years’ draft will produce multiple future stars at the defensive end position. Headlined by Clemson’s Vic Beasley and Florida’s Dante Fowler Jr, the future is very bright for them.

Highest Rated Defensive Ends
  1. Clemson- Beasley, Vic: (1.725 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.53 40), Agility (6.91 3 Cone Drill), Leaping Ability (41″ Vertical), Strong (Bench Press: 35 Reps)
  2. UVA- Harold, Eli: (0.91686 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.6 40), Agility (7.07 3 Cone Drill, 4.16 Shuttle Run)
  3. UCLA- Odighizuwa, Owamagbe: (0.7538 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.62 40), Agility (4.19 Shuttle Run), Leaping Ability (39″ Vertical)
  4. Michigan- Clark, Frank: (0.535 Z) Strengths: Agility (7.08 3 Cone Drill, 4.05 Shuttle Run), Leaping Ability (38.5″ Vertical)
  5. NDSU- Emanuel, Kyle: (0.44891 Z) Strengths: Agility (7.1 3 Cone Drill)
Lowest Rated Defensive Ends
  1. USC- Williams, Leonard: (-1.215 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (4.97 40), No Lateral Quickness (7.59 3 Cone Drill), No Leaping Ability (29.5″ Vertical)
  2. Clemson- Crawford, Corey: (-1.1474 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (5.01 40), No Lateral Quickness (7.64 3 Cone Drill)
  3. Memphis- Idefi, Martin: (-0.8823 Z) Weaknesses: Weak (Bench Press: 16 Reps)
  4. Fresno State- Davison, Tyeler: (-0.7460 Z) Strengths: Strong (Bench Press: 32 Reps)Weaknesses: Slow (5.18 40), No Lateral Quickness (7.53 3 Cone Drill)
  5. Oregon- Armstead, Arik: (-0.63101 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (5.1 40), No Lateral Quickness (7.5 3 Cone Drill)
Linebackers

Despite having much depth, the linebacker class of 2015 features no true standouts.

Highest Rated Linebackers
  1. Kentucky- Dupree, Bud: (2.24 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.56 40), Leaping Ability (42″ Vertical, 138″ Broad Jump)
  2. Penn State- Hull, Mike: (1.2938 Z) Strengths: Agility (6.99 3 Cone Drill), Strong (Bench Press: 31 Reps)
  3. Clemson- Anthony, Stephone: (0.96135 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.56 40), Agility (7.07 3 Cone Drill), Leaping Ability (37″ Vertical)
  4. Texas- Hicks, Jordan: (0.8248 Z) Strengths: Agility (6.78 3 Cone Drill), Leaping Ability (38″ Vertical)
  5. LSU- Alexander, Kwon: (0.72628 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.55 40), Strong (Bench Press: 24 Reps)
Lowest Rated Linebackers
  1. Alabama- Dickson, Xzavier: (-1.1574 Z) Weaknesses: No Lateral Quickness (7.56 3 Cone Drill), No Leaping Ability (29.5″ Vertical)
  2. Colorado State- Davis, Aaron: (-1.1398 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (4.95 40), No Leaping Ability (29″ Vertical), Weak (16 Reps)
  3. TCU- Dawson, Paul: (-1.06306 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (4.93 40), No Leaping Ability (28″ Vertical)
  4. Oregon- Washington, Tony: (-0.76068 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (4.99 40)
  5. Louisville- Mauldin, Lorenzo: (-0.7363 Z) Weaknesses: No Lateral Quickness (7.47 3 Cone Drill)
Defensive Backs

After the 2013 Super Bowl, NFL teams scrambled to find defensive backs which fit the mold of the Seattle Seahawks. They dominated Peyton Manning’s passing and erased any doubt about what the Legion of Boom was capable of.

Highest Rated Defensive Backs
  1. Wake Forest- Johnson, Kevin: (1.4365 Z) Strengths: Agility (6.79 3 Cone Drill), Leaping Ability (41.5″ Vertical)
  2. Utah- Rowe, Eric: (1.14625 Z) Strengths: Speed (4.45 40), Agility (6.7 3 Cone Drill), Leaping Ability (39″ Vertical)
  3. Tennessee- Coleman, Justin: (1.0052 Z) Strengths: Agility (6.61 3 Cone Drill), Leaping Ability (37.5″ Vertical), Strong (Bench Press: 20 Reps)
  4. USC- Shaw, Josh: (1.0042) Strengths: Speed (4.44 40), Strong (Bench Press: 26 Reps)
  5. Memphis- McCain, Bobby: (0.9895 Z) Strengths: Lateral Quickness (3.82 Shuttle Run)
Lowest Rated Defensive Backs
  1. Miami- Gunter, LaDarius: (-1.3948 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (4.69 40), Weak (Bench Press: 12 Reps)
  2. TCU- Hackett, Chris: (-1.3845 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (4.81 40)
  3. Tulane- Doss, Lorenzo: (-0.9968 Z) Weaknesses: No Lateral Quickness (7.2 3 Cone Drill), Weak (Bench Press: 9 Reps)
  4. Syracuse- Eskridge, Durell: (-0.8963 Z) Weaknesses: Slow (4.63 40), No Leaping Ability (31″ Vertical)
  5. Alabama- Collins, Landon: (-0.74558) Weaknesses: No Lateral Quickness (7.38 3 Cone Drill, 4.33 Shuttle Run)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...