Patmos wrote:While I have not done anything nearly as extensive, I have researched the influence of metrics in an attempt to build a "player profile" for the top WR. I found that the broad jump and vertical are great indicators, along with size/weight/speed. For example, the only top 10 WR with a vertical less than 36" last year was AJ Green at 34.5." All of the top 10 had a broad jump greater than 10' (120"). With the exception of DeSean Jackson, Dez was the only WR shorter than 6'3" (he's 6'2"). Nobody was slower than a 4.55 forty.
As a result, my player profile is:
1- 6'2"+ / 210+ (ideal is 6'3" / 220+)
2- 4.55 forty or better
3- 10' broad jump / 36" vertical
If I look at a WR in the 6'-6'1" range, he needs to be 4.45 forty or better (but I factor less production due to less touchdowns).
I personally believe that combining the metrics into a single metric diminishes the accuracy, I prefer to see if the player meets all the profile requirements individually. If he does, I like him. I will adjust for vertical or height, but I eliminate anyone who doesn't hit the other metrics.
I would certainly be curious on your findings regarding the vertical and broad jump.
This is very interesting, and I think you're spot on. I think the metric I've come up with may be a better substitute for Points 1 and 2 you mentioned because it takes into account how fast a player is for their size, which to me is much more applicable than just arbitrarily deciding where the line is for speed/height.
From what I see on my metric, anything over 190 is good, and anything over 200 is elite. Using your third factor (broad/vertical jump), I think you get a pretty damn good idea of a player's explosiveness and physical ability.
Thoughts?
