Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

[ericanadian]

I feel like Mike does good analysis when he does the work. His extensive review of Rojo is solid and he’s been very specific about why he thinks Rojo will fail and it’s easy to agree or disagree with that. His initial reviews are very brief and when he doesn’t go into high levels of detail it’s hard to understand why he was right or wrong about a guy. Sometimes I’m left wondering if he just has a gut feel on a guy and goes with that and then sorts out the details later.

I will say Henderson basically doing nothing his rookie season is not a positive sign. Its not like Gurley was back to his old form and shredding the league apart. I always question a guy when he doesnt see playing time when the potential opportunity presents itself. My thoughts are the same with Damien Harris. But this draft, and season, definitely have my interest even though I dont own Henderson or Harris anywhere.

I think Henderson’s real opportunity is coming this year with Gurley getting cut. Will be interesting to see how he responds. I’m not sure why there was any expectation of Harris doing much of anything given the RB depth in NE and Belichick’s history with rookie RBs. Look at James White, Vereen or Woodhead.

[FantasyFreak]

Because Mike said he sucked and to avoid. That was pretty good call considering he was going in the 1st round of most drafts.

I thought this was dynasty football?

No one knows at this point whether DH is a hit or a miss. Let's wait to see this season.

Perhaps so, but it is a fact that spending a 1st round pick on him was a miss. You could have drafted someone else and then acquired Henderson later much cheaper.

Sure, but where do you draw the line? For instance, Mike took Sanders ahead of Jacobs. He could have drafted Jacobs and flipped him for Sanders plus week 9.

[Cult of Dionysus]

My issue with Mike is that his tape scouting also has flaws in it. This is what he said of David Montgomery's tape:

I've said it before and I'll say it again; This is the most over-rated RB in the last 5 years. He isn't special. He's a power runner with great hands out of the backfield, so that's nice. He doesn't sink his hips, he runs upright, he carries the ball in the same arm no matter which side of the field he's on (so it's always in harms way, but also gives a clue that he's uncoachable). If he's draft to the Ravens and is only asked to run straight forward, yeah he's worth a 1st round pick to some people. Not me, but some people. EDIT: I have no idea why people like him. I just watched more of his film and I can't figure it out. He's slow behind the line, he can't create space, he's so upright.... ugh. When he catches the ball at full speed in open space, yeah he looks pretty good, and that's probably the part people are looking at. But that's not what a RB does. I moved him down to my "Probably Not" category. He's just so bad.

I've highlighted where Mike has basically said that DM doesn't have a juke move in his hips. He runs straight, up-right and doesn't have a lot of wiggle. I would agree with this assessment if he was talking about Jonathan Taylor. But alas it is of David Montgomery. And while DM is a powerful, fast runner who typically used his speed, power and good o-line work to his advantage, there were glimpses of DM's ability to cut and juke defenders in his College Highlights and he certainly showed some vicious cuts in the NFL.

If you wanna watch some College Tape:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndjD9mo0IB0

Much of it is power running. But there are instances of him doing really really nice lateral moves. Heck, at 1:42 he strings about 3 or 4 moves together in a 9 second run versus USC.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQ2CwD65LwE

More nice cuts at 4:50 and 5:50.

2019 NFL Season:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3JIpLQxtxI

242 for 889 yards (3.7ypc) and 6 TDS on the ground behind a bad line and terrible QB play for much of the season.

But it's not about the #s, its all about the cuts that he did show (both in college and with the Bears).

[MEuRaH]

Didn't see this coming.

I don't think some of this should be judged and others should be weighted. My focus is finding under-rated late 1st/early 2nd rounders or finding RBs that are valued as a first but shouldn't be. Why should I be judged by saying Jacobs & Sanders are the top 2 guys in 2019? Everyone said that. I'm not special.

When I was working for DLF last year I was asked to rate the top 16 RBs based on ADP, and then research undrafted RBs, so that's what I did. At the time, Mattison wasn't in the top 16, so I didn't give him any of my attention. Why is that in there?

There's others up there like that. This is what I said about Wilkins "I don't think he'll be more than a 1-2 year guy" and "he'll be more relevant than Ronald Jones this year", which was in reference to 2019 and he was indeed more relevant. Yet my Wilkins rating is a "miss"?

But much of that is tedious. I think the important rankings are the ones where I told people to avoid 1st rounders who didn't pan out (recognizing over-rated players), or people who should be 1st round value who aren't (recognizing under-rated players), and being wrong on those I thought were worth a 1st round pick (like Freeman, which might be my worst call imo).

So as far as good and bad calls, based on the above:

GOOD:
Singletary (rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder, I put him in the 1st round)
KJ (most said he was 6th or 7th best rb, I said top 3, but I also warned against injuries)
Penny
RoJo
DH (because of my 2019 prediction)

BAD:
Michel
Freeman
Dixon

I'll own up to 3 bad calls. These are terrible. None of these guys have lived up to any form of a 1st round pick during their careers and I said that they would.

As for Chubb, I said he was a Frank Gore clone, and so far his stats are almost identical to Frank Gore after 2 seasons. Say what you want but he's turning into exactly what I expected.

[MEuRaH]

My issue with Mike is that his tape scouting also has flaws in it. This is what he said of David Montgomery's tape:

I've said it before and I'll say it again; This is the most over-rated RB in the last 5 years. He isn't special. He's a power runner with great hands out of the backfield, so that's nice. He doesn't sink his hips, he runs upright, he carries the ball in the same arm no matter which side of the field he's on (so it's always in harms way, but also gives a clue that he's uncoachable). If he's draft to the Ravens and is only asked to run straight forward, yeah he's worth a 1st round pick to some people. Not me, but some people. EDIT: I have no idea why people like him. I just watched more of his film and I can't figure it out. He's slow behind the line, he can't create space, he's so upright.... ugh. When he catches the ball at full speed in open space, yeah he looks pretty good, and that's probably the part people are looking at. But that's not what a RB does. I moved him down to my "Probably Not" category. He's just so bad.

I've highlighted where Mike has basically said that DM doesn't have a juke move in his hips. He runs straight, up-right and doesn't have a lot of wiggle. I would agree with this assessment if he was talking about Jonathan Taylor. But alas it is of David Montgomery. And while DM is a powerful, fast runner who typically used his speed, power and good o-line work to his advantage, there were glimpses of DM's ability to cut and juke defenders in his College Highlights and he certainly showed some vicious cuts in the NFL.

If you wanna watch some College Tape:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndjD9mo0IB0

Much of it is power running. But there are instances of him doing really really nice lateral moves. Heck, at 1:42 he strings about 3 or 4 moves together in a 9 second run versus USC.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQ2CwD65LwE

More nice cuts at 4:50 and 5:50.

2019 NFL Season:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3JIpLQxtxI

242 for 889 yards (3.7ypc) and 6 TDS on the ground behind a bad line and terrible QB play for much of the season.

But it's not about the #s, its all about the cuts that he did show (both in college and with the Bears).

Is this from my final report?...

[Cult of Dionysus]

Didn't see this coming.

I don't think some of this should be judged and others should be weighted. My focus is finding under-rated late 1st/early 2nd rounders or finding RBs that are valued as a first but shouldn't be. Why should I be judged by saying Jacobs & Sanders are the top 2 guys in 2019? Everyone said that. I'm not special.

When I was working for DLF last year I was asked to rate the top 16 RBs based on ADP, and then research undrafted RBs, so that's what I did. At the time, Mattison wasn't in the top 16, so I didn't give him any of my attention. Why is that in there?

There's others up there like that. This is what I said about Wilkins "I don't think he'll be more than a 1-2 year guy" and "he'll be more relevant than Ronald Jones this year", which was in reference to 2019 and he was indeed more relevant. Yet my Wilkins rating is a "miss"?

But much of that is tedious. I think the important rankings are the ones where I told people to avoid 1st rounders who didn't pan out (recognizing over-rated players), or people who should be 1st round value who aren't (recognizing under-rated players), and being wrong on those I thought were worth a 1st round pick (like Freeman, which might be my worst call imo).

So as far as good and bad calls, based on the above:

GOOD:
Singletary (rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder, I put him in the 1st round)
KJ (most said he was 6th or 7th best rb, I said top 3, but I also warned against injuries)
Penny
RoJo
DH (because of my 2019 prediction)

BAD:
Michel
Freeman
Dixon

I'll own up to 3 bad calls. These are terrible. None of these guys have lived up to any form of a 1st round pick during their careers and I said that they would.

As for Chubb, I said he was a Frank Gore clone, and so far his stats are almost identical to Frank Gore after 2 seasons. Say what you want but he's turning into exactly what I expected.

I think DH is a TBD and Penny is gonna get a shot this year as well and might surprise people. I also think you could add Miles Sanders to your list of hits, cuz almost no one had him high early, and you had him high early.

[ArrylT]

Because Mike said he sucked and to avoid. That was pretty good call considering he was going in the 1st round of most drafts.

I thought this was dynasty football?

No one knows at this point whether DH is a hit or a miss. Let's wait to see this season.

Perhaps so, but it is a fact that spending a 1st round pick on him was a miss. You could have drafted someone else and then acquired Henderson later much cheaper.

Absolutely. It is definitely too early to determine if Henderson is a bust or not, however I believe most owners would concur that the first few years of an RBs career are usually expected to be their most productive/valuable. So if you spent a high pick on Henderson expecting an immediate impact, then the call to avoid him was the right call. It all depends on your dynasty perspective - but for say owners that look to buy low & sell high, at this snapshot in time, buying on Henderson at this cost at rookie drafts was not the move to make, therefore DLF_Mike along with many others have made the correct call atm.

[Cult of Dionysus]

My issue with Mike is that his tape scouting also has flaws in it. This is what he said of David Montgomery's tape:

I've said it before and I'll say it again; This is the most over-rated RB in the last 5 years. He isn't special. He's a power runner with great hands out of the backfield, so that's nice. He doesn't sink his hips, he runs upright, he carries the ball in the same arm no matter which side of the field he's on (so it's always in harms way, but also gives a clue that he's uncoachable). If he's draft to the Ravens and is only asked to run straight forward, yeah he's worth a 1st round pick to some people. Not me, but some people. EDIT: I have no idea why people like him. I just watched more of his film and I can't figure it out. He's slow behind the line, he can't create space, he's so upright.... ugh. When he catches the ball at full speed in open space, yeah he looks pretty good, and that's probably the part people are looking at. But that's not what a RB does. I moved him down to my "Probably Not" category. He's just so bad.

I've highlighted where Mike has basically said that DM doesn't have a juke move in his hips. He runs straight, up-right and doesn't have a lot of wiggle. I would agree with this assessment if he was talking about Jonathan Taylor. But alas it is of David Montgomery. And while DM is a powerful, fast runner who typically used his speed, power and good o-line work to his advantage, there were glimpses of DM's ability to cut and juke defenders in his College Highlights and he certainly showed some vicious cuts in the NFL.

If you wanna watch some College Tape:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndjD9mo0IB0

Much of it is power running. But there are instances of him doing really really nice lateral moves. Heck, at 1:42 he strings about 3 or 4 moves together in a 9 second run versus USC.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQ2CwD65LwE

More nice cuts at 4:50 and 5:50.

2019 NFL Season:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3JIpLQxtxI

242 for 889 yards (3.7ypc) and 6 TDS on the ground behind a bad line and terrible QB play for much of the season.

But it's not about the #s, its all about the cuts that he did show (both in college and with the Bears).

Is this from my final report?...

EDIT (after further review): It was the 1st one. Here's the full quote from the 1st report.

David Montgomery - I've said it before and I'll say it again; This is the most over-rated RB in the last 5 years. He isn't special. He's a power runner with great hands out of the backfield, so that's nice. He doesn't sink his hips, he runs upright, he carries the ball in the same arm no matter which side of the field he's on (so it's always in harms way, but also gives a clue that he's uncoachable). If he's draft to the Ravens and is only asked to run straight forward, yeah he's worth a 1st round pick to some people. Not me, but some people. EDIT: I have no idea why people like him. I just watched more of his film and I can't figure it out. He's slow behind the line, he can't create space, he's so upright.... ugh. When he catches the ball at full speed in open space, yeah he looks pretty good, and that's probably the part people are looking at. But that's not what a RB does. I moved him down to my "Probably Not" category. He's just so bad.

But it shouldn't matter as I was only referencing your analysis that he has no lateral, cutting, juking abilities when his college tspe showed he definitely has some. Not saying he's Barry Sanders. But he's also not Jonathan Taylor.

I just checked your 3rd and final report and it says the following:

He doesn't sink his hips and he leans into holes. I was hoping he'd go to a power attack and... I think he did? I thought the reason that the Bears shipped off Howard and signed Patterson was so that they could use more zone, so I'm confused. EDIT: Bears are running power and that suits Monty's strengths, so that's a huge plus. Monty DOES indeed sink his hips and has good vision... am I ranking him too low? This could be scary.

Again, and I'm sorry for harping on this, but you very adament that DM couldn't sink his hips or make a lateral move. In your 1st report. In your edit of your 1st report. Even in the first copy of your 3rd report. Then quite late, and I actually think it was after the 8/8/2019 pre-season game versus the Carolina Panthers that you went in and added the final edit that "he DOES sink his hips."

While I understand that you can your assessment of a player can change during the 3-report phase, I struggle to understand how an attribute that is plain to see on tape can be missed. This isn't a a question of speed (e.g. Elijah Holyfield) who then tested FAR slower than he might have looked. This is cutting, spinning, etc. Either you got those skills or you don't. Either you they are on tape or they are not. Either you see them or you don't.

[Chwf3rd]

Didn't see this coming.

I don't think some of this should be judged and others should be weighted. My focus is finding under-rated late 1st/early 2nd rounders or finding RBs that are valued as a first but shouldn't be. Why should I be judged by saying Jacobs & Sanders are the top 2 guys in 2019? Everyone said that. I'm not special.

When I was working for DLF last year I was asked to rate the top 16 RBs based on ADP, and then research undrafted RBs, so that's what I did. At the time, Mattison wasn't in the top 16, so I didn't give him any of my attention. Why is that in there?

There's others up there like that. This is what I said about Wilkins "I don't think he'll be more than a 1-2 year guy" and "he'll be more relevant than Ronald Jones this year", which was in reference to 2019 and he was indeed more relevant. Yet my Wilkins rating is a "miss"?

But much of that is tedious. I think the important rankings are the ones where I told people to avoid 1st rounders who didn't pan out (recognizing over-rated players), or people who should be 1st round value who aren't (recognizing under-rated players), and being wrong on those I thought were worth a 1st round pick (like Freeman, which might be my worst call imo).

So as far as good and bad calls, based on the above:

GOOD:
Singletary (rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder, I put him in the 1st round)
KJ (most said he was 6th or 7th best rb, I said top 3, but I also warned against injuries)
Penny
RoJo
DH (because of my 2019 prediction)

BAD:
Michel
Freeman
Dixon

I'll own up to 3 bad calls. These are terrible. None of these guys have lived up to any form of a 1st round pick during their careers and I said that they would.

As for Chubb, I said he was a Frank Gore clone, and so far his stats are almost identical to Frank Gore after 2 seasons. Say what you want but he's turning into exactly what I expected.

If someone was using your rankings in 2018 they wouldn't have any Nick Chubb.

I wouldn't call KJ a hit just yet - the consensus in May was Guice at #2 and I think KJ's value is essentially equal to Guice.

I'm not really buying the Kalen Ballage excuse either.

I posted a list of the players you really took a stance on as judged against ADP earlier:
Darrell Henderson - looks good so far
Kerryon Johnson - TBD
Nick Chubb - looks like a miss
RoJo - looks good so far
Rashad Penny - looks good so far
Kalen Ballage - miss

[MEuRaH]

Is this from my final report?...

I don't actually know. But it shouldn't matter as I was only referencing your analysis that he has no lateral, cutting, juking abilities when his college tspe showed he definitely has some. Not saying he's Barry Sanders. But he's also not Jonathan Taylor.

Riiiight.

And THIS is the reason I stopped posting my process because it's all people remember. Last year I hated... and I mean HATED.... Josh Jacobs right off the bat. He made so many mistakes that it made my head spin. But after watching tons of tape I realized that the mistakes he made were the same exact mistakes Damien Harris made. I doubt it's the coaching, I wonder if it was miscommunication with play calling. But the point is that if I didn't keep digging I may have hated Jacobs unfairly.

And that's what you're doing here. You're not grabbing from my finished product and holding it against me. I don't mind being criticized (look around lol) but at least do it fairly.

[Cult of Dionysus]

Is this from my final report?...

I don't actually know. But it shouldn't matter as I was only referencing your analysis that he has no lateral, cutting, juking abilities when his college tspe showed he definitely has some. Not saying he's Barry Sanders. But he's also not Jonathan Taylor.

Riiiight.

And THIS is the reason I stopped posting my process because it's all people remember. Last year I hated... and I mean HATED.... Josh Jacobs right off the bat. He made so many mistakes that it made my head spin. But after watching tons of tape I realized that the mistakes he made were the same exact mistakes Damien Harris made. I doubt it's the coaching, I wonder if it was miscommunication with play calling. But the point is that if I didn't keep digging I may have hated Jacobs unfairly.

And that's what you're doing here. You're not grabbing from my finished product and holding it against me. I don't mind being criticized (look around lol) but at least do it fairly.

I updated my post above to give a complete picture of your assessment of DMs lateral ability and hips.

And just on the issue at hand, there's no way you can dismiss your miss of his DMs hips as "part of the 3-step process" unless you watch like 30 second clips of players and do your whole analysis off of Combine and NFL Draft numbers. It's just absurd to say that an RB guru and coach would miss so badly on a basic trait such as cutting, spinning, juking. It's like catching ability for a WR. You don't need the Combine and the NFL Draft to say whether a WR can catch the ball or not. It's there on tape. Either he's got it or he doesn't. And someone like Ice will be able to make the right call, one way or the other.

[Kmani6]

Didn't see this coming.

I don't think some of this should be judged and others should be weighted. My focus is finding under-rated late 1st/early 2nd rounders or finding RBs that are valued as a first but shouldn't be. Why should I be judged by saying Jacobs & Sanders are the top 2 guys in 2019? Everyone said that. I'm not special.

When I was working for DLF last year I was asked to rate the top 16 RBs based on ADP, and then research undrafted RBs, so that's what I did. At the time, Mattison wasn't in the top 16, so I didn't give him any of my attention. Why is that in there?

There's others up there like that. This is what I said about Wilkins "I don't think he'll be more than a 1-2 year guy" and "he'll be more relevant than Ronald Jones this year", which was in reference to 2019 and he was indeed more relevant. Yet my Wilkins rating is a "miss"?

But much of that is tedious. I think the important rankings are the ones where I told people to avoid 1st rounders who didn't pan out (recognizing over-rated players), or people who should be 1st round value who aren't (recognizing under-rated players), and being wrong on those I thought were worth a 1st round pick (like Freeman, which might be my worst call imo).

So as far as good and bad calls, based on the above:

GOOD:
Singletary (rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder, I put him in the 1st round)
KJ (most said he was 6th or 7th best rb, I said top 3, but I also warned against injuries)
Penny
RoJo
DH (because of my 2019 prediction)

BAD:
Michel
Freeman
Dixon

I'll own up to 3 bad calls. These are terrible. None of these guys have lived up to any form of a 1st round pick during their careers and I said that they would.

As for Chubb, I said he was a Frank Gore clone, and so far his stats are almost identical to Frank Gore after 2 seasons. Say what you want but he's turning into exactly what I expected.

Barkley
Johnson
Guice
Michel
Freeman
Ballage
Chubb
Wilkins
Penny
Jones III

If these were in fact your rankings, you badly missed on Chubb. I have a good feeling your 2020 JT take will end up pretty similar to this 2018 Chubb take. Let’s be real just like you said yourself, mostly everyone had the same 2019 RB rankings...

[Blueboy]

Is this from my final report?...

I don't actually know. But it shouldn't matter as I was only referencing your analysis that he has no lateral, cutting, juking abilities when his college tspe showed he definitely has some. Not saying he's Barry Sanders. But he's also not Jonathan Taylor.

Riiiight.

And THIS is the reason I stopped posting my process because it's all people remember. Last year I hated... and I mean HATED.... Josh Jacobs right off the bat. He made so many mistakes that it made my head spin. But after watching tons of tape I realized that the mistakes he made were the same exact mistakes Damien Harris made. I doubt it's the coaching, I wonder if it was miscommunication with play calling. But the point is that if I didn't keep digging I may have hated Jacobs unfairly.

And that's what you're doing here. You're not grabbing from my finished product and holding it against me. I don't mind being criticized (look around lol) but at least do it fairly.

Just gonna throw out that I personally found seeing multiple stages of your process MUCH more informative than had it just been a final ranking. Keying into the process from start to finish, along with how you make certain decisions (based on new information or correcting mistakes), lets readers critically think much more.

If, for instance, I pick up on the fact that we disagree about part of a prospect's film early in your process, it lets me as a reader have a better understanding of what lens I should view your forthcoming analysis. I could list many other examples, but generally I just think sharing multiple stages of the process is a far superior approach to information architecture.

It's understandable that you wouldn't want to do so again, based on the response, but maybe consider linking to those parts of the process somewhere off the forum instead? I imagine that, removed from the response-heavy nature of an user-driven forum, misinterpretations wouldn't cause as much annoyance.

[MEuRaH]

Just gonna throw out that I personally found seeing multiple stages of your process MUCH more informative than had it just been a final ranking. Keying into the process from start to finish, along with how you make certain decisions (based on new information or correcting mistakes), lets readers critically think much more.

If, for instance, I pick up on the fact that we disagree about part of a prospect's film early in your process, it lets me as a reader have a better understanding of what lens I should view your forthcoming analysis. I could list many other examples, but generally I just think sharing multiple stages of the process is a far superior approach to information architecture.

It's understandable that you wouldn't want to do so again, based on the response, but maybe consider linking to those parts of the process somewhere off the forum instead? I imagine that, removed from the response-heavy nature of an user-driven forum, misinterpretations wouldn't cause as much annoyance.

Awesome, that was my intention from the beginning. Evaluating a RB over several weeks with fresh eyes each time allows you to catch things that you missed on previous evals, good and bad. Sometimes I'd find something so bad or so good that I found myself focusing on that one thing in every clip/play and I'd miss everything else. "Oh look, there he is not sinking his hips again" and I'd miss the fact that he found the cut back lane, for example.

But most people only remember the results, not the process, which was literally the entire point of parts 1 and 2. The amount of reflection from either of those two posts make me sad because the point was obviously lost. I'm glad you found it useful.

lol It's like a high school book report, and the teacher and/or classmates keeps mentioning the mistakes you made on your rough drafts, even though you got an A on the final product, the only one that should matter. Oh well.

[OhCruelestRanter]

Man, this is an awful lot of typing from somebody who doesn’t care what people think about him and his process.