A microcosm of a larger point: Montee Ball vs. Knile Davis

[kmbryant09]

Cy - I don't really get your argument. The only assessment you've given to Davis that doesn't include his combine is that he has "average or better vision and anything else needed for a RB".

That isn't really helpful. Do you think he breaks a lot of tackles? Do you see him setting up blocks? Is he patient? His numbers don't necessarily prove that, although I personally can't speak to his game tape.

I don't mean to pick on you, I'm just trying to prove a larger point. Just because Player A is more athletic than Player B, that doesn't make him more talented or a better NFL player or prospect. There is a major difference between being an athlete and being an NFL RB. Marshawn Lynch isn't very fast or quick, nor would I guess that he has a great vertical (measuring explosiveness), yet he's one hell of a RB because of his vision, balance, and physicality. None of those 3 things are "tangible" and none of them can be measured by combine stats.

It drives me nuts that you don't quote my posts, as you seem to miss things I have already written. Do you read my posts?

Here is one thing I wrote:

But I explained my feeling that Davis is much more explosive and has a better skillset for the NFL based on his athleticism. I have no idea about all of the other factors, and I will defer to the NFL draft to help me decide this.

To explain further-- many of the things you mentioned (in bold above) are subjective. Therefore, you and I might not agree on them for any prospect available in the NFL draft this year. (However, as someone mentioned, Lynch nailed speed and verticals at the combine)

So my way of mitigating risk is this: I find a threshold that I am comfortable with for athleticism, and I let the NFL draft dictate if the "intangibles" are there. Clearly it is not foolproof, but here is an example...

Step 1: I like RB's who are athletic, as it gives them more opportunities to start and produce. Therefore, I screen RB's at the combine based on what I consider important, such as sub 4.6 40's and other measures of speed and ability to cut.
Step 2: I also prefer RB's who are sturdy, so I might look at height/weight and see a comparison. I might screen RB's based on their current weight and what I guess they can change their weight to be. This usually only removes scat backs or lighter RB's.

This is what you are discussing about with Davis and Ball "based on the combine." Davis is the ideal RB for athleticism, but I have no idea about any other skill he possesses. Ball is at the threshold of where I wouldn't be interested. Had he run a 4.5 (or I think he is capable of a 4.5, based on game speed), I think he might be fast enough to be effective. Had he run a 4.7 or lower, I would probably ignore him completely. As it is now, I am considering him a risk due to his lack of athleticism.

Step 3: I review the NFL draft and see where the RB is drafted. This final step is me using the NFL as a surrogate for my own scouting. It isn't perfect, as Morris and Foster have shown, but it is similar to a practice I hate when misapplied.

Misapplication: Only hiring graduates of an ivy league or top 10 school, with the reasoning being that "they screened the candidates for us, if they can graduate from an ivy league school, they are good enough to work here."

Correct application: Since NFL teams review all candidates (in contrast to the example above, where many excellent candidates may not even apply to ivy league schools for several different reasons), I believe that I can substitute their judgment for my own with regard to an RB's ability. They watch a lot more tape and are paid for their analysis. They don't always get it right, but I think the draft order can be used as an assurance of ability.

Round 1: IMO, if a RB is taken in the 1st round, I don't think twice about whether he has NFL ability. If he busts, it isn't because he didn't show enough ability in college.
Round 2: I typically use this as an indicator that the RB is special enough to be considered average or above average.
Round 3: IMO, the RB has a flaw that can be overcome, such as an injury risk or lack of speed, but in a good situation they can excel
Round 4: I only take the risk on RB's with injury histories, as I assume a fully healthy RB won't be drafted in the 4th round or later unless they lack NFL ability.
Round 5-7 and UDFA: I let someone else take the risk

Example: If Ball is drafted in the 2nd round, I will overlook his lack of speed. If he drops to the 3rd, I will probably consider him more of a plodder and only draft if it is a great opportunity. If in the 4th or later, since he has no injury concern, I will ignore him until 4th+ round in rookie drafts.

If Davis is drafted in the 2nd round, I will overlook his injury history. If he drops to the 3rd or 4th, due to the injury history, I will take a risk on him, but based on where he goes and in which round, I might not use a first round pick on him. If 5th or higher, I will ignore him until 4th+ rounds in rookie drafts.

So you are right, I don't know if Ball or Davis is a good NFL RB. I haven't done the scouting. But this is my (in process) method of mitigating risk and only selecting players I really like.

Well I'll reply so that everyone has to sift through your long posts over and over again because it makes you happy.

The above quote that you specifically mention means nothing! You say he's more explosive and has a better skillset based on athleticism.

Again, explosiveness & athleticism are things that show up at the combine and can go a long way in determining who is the better ATHLETE. I'm interested in who is going to the better running back. I'm not really even saying that Ball is better than Davis, but please point to something besides athleticism when comparing who the better RB is between Davis & Ball. Didn't think that was too much to ask.

I think you had one sentence in these long posts that talk about vision, but I believe you said he has average or above average vision.

For the record - I really like your "evaluation process" and I too try and do something similar. Not trying to hate on you or your process. Just looking for a breakdown of football skills that pertain to an NFL running back BESIDES combine numbers. Vision/patience/balance/etc. I have not had a chance to check both of these guys out on film, so that's why I'm asking.

[Cy23]

So my way of mitigating risk is this: I find a threshold that I am comfortable with for athleticism, and I let the NFL draft dictate if the "intangibles" are there. Clearly it is not foolproof, but here is an example...

Step 1: I like RB's who are athletic, as it gives them more opportunities to start and produce. Therefore, I screen RB's at the combine based on what I consider important, such as sub 4.6 40's and other measures of speed and ability to cut.
Step 2: I also prefer RB's who are sturdy, so I might look at height/weight and see a comparison. I might screen RB's based on their current weight and what I guess they can change their weight to be. This usually only removes scat backs or lighter RB's.

This is what you are discussing about with Davis and Ball "based on the combine." Davis is the ideal RB for athleticism, but I have no idea about any other skill he possesses. Ball is at the threshold of where I wouldn't be interested. Had he run a 4.5 (or I think he is capable of a 4.5, based on game speed), I think he might be fast enough to be effective. Had he run a 4.7 or lower, I would probably ignore him completely. As it is now, I am considering him a risk due to his lack of athleticism.

Step 3: I review the NFL draft and see where the RB is drafted. This final step is me using the NFL as a surrogate for my own scouting. It isn't perfect, as Morris and Foster have shown, but it is similar to a practice I hate when misapplied.

Misapplication: Only hiring graduates of an ivy league or top 10 school, with the reasoning being that "they screened the candidates for us, if they can graduate from an ivy league school, they are good enough to work here."

Correct application: Since NFL teams review all candidates (in contrast to the example above, where many excellent candidates may not even apply to ivy league schools for several different reasons), I believe that I can substitute their judgment for my own with regard to an RB's ability. They watch a lot more tape and are paid for their analysis. They don't always get it right, but I think the draft order can be used as an assurance of ability.

Round 1: IMO, if a RB is taken in the 1st round, I don't think twice about whether he has NFL ability. If he busts, it isn't because he didn't show enough ability in college.
Round 2: I typically use this as an indicator that the RB is special enough to be considered average or above average.
Round 3: IMO, the RB has a flaw that can be overcome, such as an injury risk or lack of speed, but in a good situation they can excel
Round 4: I only take the risk on RB's with injury histories, as I assume a fully healthy RB won't be drafted in the 4th round or later unless they lack NFL ability.
Round 5-7 and UDFA: I let someone else take the risk

Example: If Ball is drafted in the 2nd round, I will overlook his lack of speed. If he drops to the 3rd, I will probably consider him more of a plodder and only draft if it is a great opportunity. If in the 4th or later, since he has no injury concern, I will ignore him until 4th+ round in rookie drafts.

If Davis is drafted in the 2nd round, I will overlook his injury history. If he drops to the 3rd or 4th, due to the injury history, I will take a risk on him, but based on where he goes and in which round, I might not use a first round pick on him. If 5th or higher, I will ignore him until 4th+ rounds in rookie drafts.

So you are right, I don't know if Ball or Davis is a good NFL RB. I haven't done the scouting. But this is my (in process) method of mitigating risk and only selecting players I really like.

This is an excellent articulation of what I try to do as well. I think far too many people like to style themselves amateur scouts, feeling they have some special ability to judge college talent that professional scouts do not. I am very skeptical of that. Perhaps some do. I know I do not, and I am comfortable admitting it, so I tend to rest heavily on the talent evaluations of people that I trust, NFL teams and analysts outside the NFL.

I know some people who are very good at it. I am not.

I think the biggest thing is you can watch tapes and see what someone is good at, but I don't think you can watch tapes and see what someone is not good at. For example, if you watch Ball you may come away impressed with his vision or whatever, but when you watch Davis you don't come away with that. That doesn't mean Davis doesn't possess it, he might not be given the freedom to use his vision or he might be following a blocker etc.

I do watch clips and fall in love with the skills of a particular RB, but I think you can fall in love with any players based on their highlights. I try to limit how much I use that as reasoning for my decisions.

[kmbryant09]

As for Marshawn Lynch - that is very surprising that he tested that well. But I'll counter with 2 points:

1. That speed/quickness does not translate to the field. He absolutely is not considered fast or quick by NFL RB standards. He's anything but fast & quick.

2. I believe he weighed in at combine at 215. I'm guessing he plays closer to 230-235. Hard to know for sure since websites don't really update weight once a player enters the league.

[RobertBobson]

I know some people who are very good at it. I am not.

I think the biggest thing is you can watch tapes and see what someone is good at, but I don't think you can watch tapes and see what someone is not good at. For example, if you watch Ball you may come away impressed with his vision or whatever, but when you watch Davis you don't come away with that. That doesn't mean Davis doesn't possess it, he might not be given the freedom to use his vision or he might be following a blocker etc.

I do watch clips and fall in love with the skills of a particular RB, but I think you can fall in love with any players based on their highlights. I try to limit how much I use that as reasoning for my decisions.

And I think Confirmation Bias is a big risk in evaluating tape. What you may think of a player/team/conference going into reviewing the tape, can color the way you see their performances when you're evaluating them. It's very difficult to be objective.

[RobertBobson]

That you don't think Marshawn Lynch is a fast RB, and that he ran a 4.46, should give you pause and make you think what a 4.6 runningback will look like in the NFL.

[Cy23]

Well I'll reply so that everyone has to sift through your long posts over and over again because it makes you happy.

The above quote that you specifically mention means nothing! You say he's more explosive and has a better skillset based on athleticism.

Again, explosiveness & athleticism are things that show up at the combine and can go a long way in determining who is the better ATHLETE. I'm interested in who is going to the better running back. I'm not really even saying that Ball is better than Davis, but please point to something besides athleticism when comparing who the better RB is between Davis & Ball. Didn't think that was too much to ask.

I think you had one sentence in these long posts that talk about vision, but I believe you said he has average or above average vision.

For the record - I really like your "evaluation process" and I too try and do something similar. Not trying to hate on you or your process. Just looking for a breakdown of football skills that pertain to an NFL running back BESIDES combine numbers. Vision/patience/balance/etc. I have not had a chance to check both of these guys out on film, so that's why I'm asking.

That is a poor example, as I went to the level of explicit minutia detail because you kept hammering me for not including detail. I don't like writing posts that long and don't want myself quoted for my own sake, but to show the reader what you are replying to. Kind of like turning signals, it helps traffic navigate around your posts.


I, too, am interested in who is going to be the better running back. However, as it is subjective, I do not talk about vision or patience or balance etc. I can give my perspective all I want, but you might not agree with it. That is where I substitute the NFL's apparent scouting for my own.

And it is fine to ask people to scout for you and break down the subjective football skills, but you kept questioning my statement regarding Davis being more athletic and therefore having a better skillset. I get what your point is, but I don't think criticizing people for factoring in the combine numbers is what you meant to do. However, that is how it was coming across to me.

[kmbryant09]

That you don't think Marshawn Lynch is a fast RB, and that he ran a 4.46, should give you pause and make you think what a 4.6 runningback will look like in the NFL.

And if you really think a timed 40-yard dash in gym shorts that took place 7 years ago that players spend weeks preparing specifically for is the best indication of NFL speed, that should give you pause.

How many times does a player play faster or slower than his 40-yard dash time. Especially well into a players career. How someone runs a 40-yard track meet indoors in gym shorts doesn't always show up 5 years later, in pads and against competition. Sometimes you have prospects who have questions about their speed drop 10-15 pounds before the combine just to shave .1 seconds off their 40-time - only to put the weight right back on and go back to playing slow.

Seriously,instead of using Lynch's time from 7 years ago to determine how fast he is in today's NFL, put on some tape, compare him to other RB's, and let me know if you still think he's considered fast by NFL RB standards.

[kmbryant09]

That is a poor example, as I went to the level of explicit minutia detail because you kept hammering me for not including detail. I don't like writing posts that long and don't want myself quoted for my own sake, but to show the reader what you are replying to. Kind of like turning signals, it helps traffic navigate around your posts.


I, too, am interested in who is going to be the better running back. However, as it is subjective, I do not talk about vision or patience or balance etc. I can give my perspective all I want, but you might not agree with it. That is where I substitute the NFL's apparent scouting for my own.

And it is fine to ask people to scout for you and break down the subjective football skills, but you kept questioning my statement regarding Davis being more athletic and therefore having a better skillset. I get what your point is, but I don't think criticizing people for factoring in the combine numbers is what you meant to do. However, that is how it was coming across to me.

No worries, I was not meaning to criticize you for factoring in combine numbers. I apologize for getting a little nasty.

I guess at this point I realize that Davis is a physical specimen and Ball is not. Just looking for some detailed insight on some of the more difficult things to judge (vision, balance, patience, etc) since I haven't had a chance to do so myself. :cheers:

[Cy23]

Here are two write ups from my other fantasy forum (a leaguemate in several of my leagues wrote these up)

Montee Ball
http://www.fantasysharks.com/artman2/pu ... ary_21.htm

PROS: Downhill, decisive, quick, tough runner, a nose for the end zone with the production to back it up.
CONS: Lacks ideal speed and does not have a special element about his game.

DRAFT BRIEFING: Undervalued. NFL personnel are looking for difference makers and game changers, not factoring in risk enough, and letting types like Ball slip. He returned to school because he was disappointed in his grade from the Draft Committee, reportedly third round, and unfortunately their grade likely did not change based on what happened in 2012.


Knile Davis
http://www.fantasysharks.com/artman2/pu ... y_28th.htm

PROS: He is very fast for a man of his size.
CONS: Everything else. While he is a track star in a straight line, his lateral movement is awful. He’s very stiff, almost having to come to a complete stop to change direction. It causes him to try to drive through people instead and has likely led to his laundry list of lower body injuries.

DRAFT BRIEFING: If someone falls in love with his combine and ignores the tape thinking, he could be a lead back, but it will be disastrous for him and the franchise. Not being sure if there will be ‘that guy’ or not, if he falls into Day 3 and is utilized as a 5-7 touch/game back he could be a very scary weapon, though.


Obviously it is one perspective and he doesn't go into detail about "vision," "patience" and everything else. Whole series of quick profiles like that though.

[RobertBobson]

How many times does a player play faster or slower than his 40-yard dash time.

Okay, but what about Ball makes you feel like he "plays faster" than his 40 time? Ball seems to be a plodder in the Big Ten, which does not project well imo.

Seriously,instead of using Lynch's time from 7 years ago to determine how fast he is in today's NFL, put on some tape, compare him to other RB's, and let me know if you still think he's considered fast by NFL RB standards.

That's not my point. My point is, Lynch is very physically gifted, and succeeds in large part because of his tangible physical gifts, not purely on intangibles and unmeasurables. That Lynch (to you) does not appear to be athletic should 1) tell you something about the high level of athleticism there is in the NFL 2) Make you worry about someone who is coming into the NFL from a much lower baseline athletic level.

[TheOracle]

Which is more likely-

A) That Davis can be taught to be a patient runner who uses his blockers better, improve his ball security and footwork, and learn to run more decisively instead of prolonging plays and taking negative yardage?

B) That Montee Ball can be taught to have sub-4.4 speed on a 227 lb frame?

When people use the term "talent" in this context they are talking about seemingly innate ability as opposed to learned skills. People refer to Davis being more talented because the areas in which he excels are typically attributes that one cannot develop over the course of an NFL career. This is in stark contrast to the things people tout when they support Ball; the items that have been mentioned here in Ball's favor are things that can typically be taught to a running back.

[clarion contrarion]

A better question would be, would Montee Ball lose his starting job to Dennis Johnson?

I read this entire thread and I think this post is the most valuable of all .....
skip davis - chris henry AZ 2.0
skip ball - evan royster 2.0
trade into the last pick of the rookie draft .....select dennis johnson - get the best player of the 3

[kmbryant09]

How many times does a player play faster or slower than his 40-yard dash time.

Okay, but what about Ball makes you feel like he "plays faster" than his 40 time? Ball seems to be a plodder in the Big Ten, which does not project well imo.

Seriously,instead of using Lynch's time from 7 years ago to determine how fast he is in today's NFL, put on some tape, compare him to other RB's, and let me know if you still think he's considered fast by NFL RB standards.

That's not my point. My point is, Lynch is very physically gifted, and succeeds in large part because of his tangible physical gifts, not purely on intangibles and unmeasurables. That Lynch (to you) does not appear to be athletic should 1) tell you something about the high level of athleticism there is in the NFL 2) Make you worry about someone who is coming into the NFL from a much lower baseline athletic level.

Robert - I've never once stated any opinions on Ball, let alone that he plays faster than his 40-time. I haven't watched tape on either of these guys yet.

But by now we all know that Davis is more athletic (a great athlete) and Ball is more of a plodder (not a great athlete). Let's move the discussion on to something beyond 40-times and bench press reps.

Anybody have some input on Ball/Davis' ball-carrying vision? Elusiveness? Patience? Balance? Skills that will/will not translate from college to the NFL? (Cy - thanks for posting that analysis.)

[Julio]

A better question would be, would Montee Ball lose his starting job to Dennis Johnson?

I read this entire thread and I think this post is the most valuable of all .....
skip davis - chris henry AZ 2.0
skip ball - evan royster 2.0
trade into the last pick of the rookie draft .....select dennis johnson - get the best player of the 3

That comment wasn't meant as a tout for DJ, but just an observation that Knile Davis lost his starting gig and significant PT to a presumably lesser back Johnson. I know Davis had some hammy issues mid-season, but still one would thing an all-talent like Davis would overcome and perform...which according to the stats, he didn't.