Draft Countdown Forums

Draft Countdown Forums (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/index.php)
-   2014 NFL Draft Forum (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=47)
-   -   Speed Scores for 2012. (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51313)

asdf1223 02-29-2012 12:48 PM

Speed Scores for 2012.
 
Football Outsiders published its speed score metric for 2012. It hasn't been as accurate as before but its still a nice metric for mid-round backs.
The formula is Speed Score: (weight * 200)/40 time^4.

Top 5 Speed scores
Lamar Miller 113.1
Robert Turbin 108.3
Bernard Pierce 107.3
Doug Martin 104.1
Cyrus Gray 103.2

The rest of it is on ESPN Insider, but you could calculate it yourself though.

Average speed score is around 100 and average score for a first round back is 112. Only 7 backs managed a score above 100.

Jimmy 02-29-2012 12:57 PM

Freak of nature. Why he'd last past the mid 3rd is beyond me.

Th30ry 02-29-2012 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asdf1223 (Post 2880282)
Football Outsiders published its speed score metric for 2012. It hasn't been as accurate as before but its still a nice metric for mid-round backs.
The formula is Speed Score: (weight * 200)/40 time^4.

Top 5 Speed scores
Lamar Miller 113.1
Robert Turbin 108.3
Bernard Pierce 107.3
Doug Martin 104.1
Cyrus Gray 103.2

The rest of it is on ESPN Insider, but you could calculate it yourself though.

Average speed score is around 100 and average score for a first round back is 112. Only 7 backs managed a score above 100.

Would be interesting to see this metric applied to the backs currently in the league and see if it mattered even a little bit vs success in the NFL. My guess is it wouldn't.

whatadai 02-29-2012 01:16 PM

speed score is useless. everyone already knows there's a correlation between being big and running fast = better chance of succeeding in the NFL. speed score is as useless as the 40 time in gauging a player's chance to succeed.

descendency 02-29-2012 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Th30ry (Post 2880342)
Would be interesting to see this metric applied to the backs currently in the league and see if it mattered even a little bit vs success in the NFL. My guess is it wouldn't.

I'd agree with this, because the bulk of a good running attack is a good run blocking system.

whatadai 02-29-2012 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Th30ry (Post 2880342)
Would be interesting to see this metric applied to the backs currently in the league and see if it mattered even a little bit vs success in the NFL. My guess is it wouldn't.

Honestly...it doesn't...

Year Player School Picked Weight 40 Time Speed Score
2005 Brandon Jacobs Southern Illinois 110 267 4.56 123.5
2004 Kevin Jones Virginia Tech 30 227 4.38 123.4
2006 A.J. Harris Northern Illinois 231 4.40 123.3
2007 Jackie Battle Houston 235 4.42 123.1
2007 Chris Henry Arizona 50 230 4.40 122.7
2003 Justin Fargas USC 96 219 4.35 122.3
2008 Chris Johnson East Carolina 24 197 4.24 121.9
2005 Fred Staton Tusculum 249 4.50 121.4
2005 Ronnie Brown Auburn 2 233 4.43 121.0
2008 Darren McFadden Arkansas 4 211 4.33 120.0

http://www.dontboothebirds.com/footb...cores-2009.php

brat316 02-29-2012 01:46 PM

Yeah TEMPLE BP

steelersrock151 02-29-2012 02:06 PM

Dontari Poe- 123.024
Jay Howard- 118.104
Whitney Mercilous- 113.590

steelersrock151 02-29-2012 02:14 PM

Stephon Hill- 118.993
Josh Robinson- 117.505

draftguru151 02-29-2012 02:42 PM

I think when they first started doing this is was to show who had bad scores, which usually points to guys who won't succeed. It's fairly obvious it's better to be big and fast than slow and small though.

Damix 02-29-2012 02:44 PM

Who comes in at the bottom?

PossibleCabbage 02-29-2012 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damix (Post 2880636)
Who comes in at the bottom?

Bottom 5 are:
Chris Rainey 91.8
Dan Heron 90.3
Lennon Creer 89.0
Mike Ball 88.1
Marc Tyler 85.3

brat316 02-29-2012 03:13 PM

2008 was pretty good year


2009 not so much

PossibleCabbage 02-29-2012 03:32 PM

That 2009 chart is kind of misleading ,since the only really good backs to come out that year were McCoy and Foster and they didn't run the 40 at the combine. Foster was coming off a knee injury (and thus was slower 2009 than at any point since), and McCoy ran a 4.50 at his pro day making his speed score 99.497 which is okay.

The telling thing about 2009 is that none of those backs ended up being any good except McCoy and Foster.

Caulibflower 02-29-2012 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Th30ry (Post 2880342)
Would be interesting to see this metric applied to the backs currently in the league and see if it mattered even a little bit vs success in the NFL. My guess is it wouldn't.

Just for fun, instead of listing the top backs and seeing who failed, here's the scores of the best backs in the NFL. Even if a high score isn't a reliable predictor of success, it may still be that most NFL backs have to be above a certain threshold to succeed at a high level. These scores are going to be as accurate as I can get them, but weights and speeds change, and of course these aren't hard and fast scores. And just for fun, I'm going to modify the score to reflect backs' builds, dividing by their height in inches and then multiplying again by 71 (5'11", average height of an NFL running back) to see if a backs' relative stoutness makes the metric seem more accurate.

Best backs in the NFL (No particular order)

Arian Foster: 94.26 (had a pulled hamstring at the combine, ran 4.71 at his pro day) Adjusted for height - 91.68
MJD: 113.08, Adjusted for height - 121.65
LeSean McCoy: 99.49, Adjusted for height - 100.91
Fred Jackson: 104.86 (couldn't find a combine or pro day, saw 4.5 for him somewhere... just used it.) Adjusted for height - 101.99
Ray Rice: 108.12, Adjusted for height - 112.89
Peyton Hillis (Getting a mulligan for last year. Don't like it, ignore the score.): 110.05, Adjusted for height - 105.59
Rashard Mendenhall: 124.53 (unofficial 40) 114.76 (official time). No adjustment.
Chris Johnson: 118.2, no adjustment.
Jamaal Charles: 112.76, no adjustment.
Darren McFadden: 120.05, Adjusted for height - 115.18
Michael Bush: 116.66, Adjusted for height - 113.43
Ryan Matthews: 111.19, Adjusted for height - 109.65
DeMarco Murray: 112.63, Adjusted for height - 111.07
Matt Forte: 110.2, no adjustment.
Adrian Peterson: 114.75, Adjusted for height - 111.61
Michael Turner: 116.63, Adjusted for height - 118.3
DeAngelo Williams: 115.8, Adjusted for height - 119.16
Jonathan Stewart: 123.84, Adjusted for height - 125.61
LeGarrett Blount: 108.59, Adjusted for height - 107.08
Beanie Wells: 104.48, Adjusted for height - 100.24
Steven Jackson: 117.82, Adjusted for height - 113.04
Marshawn Lynch: 108.67, no adjustment.
Reggie Bush: 114.36, Adjusted for height - 112.77

Now, obviously, this basically gives a bonus for being below average height (presumably more compact, denser, lower center of gravity) and penalizes for height. The differences are typically small, but seems to make some sense; MJD and Beanie Wells were only 9 apart in the original scoring, but the adjustment spaces their scores dramatically - MJD now scores 20 points higher than Beanie Wells, and their production and reputation are more accurately reflected. Given that the original score is essentially a mass/speed metric, it makes sense to consider the shape and density of a player when producing a number which ought to categorize the nature of their ability.

RWills 02-29-2012 08:31 PM

This is all crap, you're leaving out other variables like the 3-cone and s.s. for quickness(dont care about straight line speed) their broad jump and 10 yard split for explosion

PossibleCabbage 02-29-2012 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RWills (Post 2881184)
This is all crap, you're leaving out other variables like the 3-cone and s.s. for quickness(dont care about straight line speed) their broad jump and 10 yard split for explosion

This actually shouldn't be a controversial idea. All they're really saying is "it's better to be big than small if you're fast, and it's better to be fast than slow if you're big." The whole idea is just to try to figure out how relatively important those two things are for being a good RB.

Wrathman 02-29-2012 10:47 PM

I like to add the 40, three-cone and short shuttle times together to get a measurement that combines speed and quickness. I also take the 40 time and subtract out the 20 split to get a picture of what each player's long speed might look like. I use this on all the RBs, WRs and TEs. I am not incorporating weight into the equations but I think maybe that time has come.

I'm positive that working numbers like this will never identify studs from duds with total accuracy, but it might be nice to use to set an order of selection among players considered to be within the same tier of talent.

Caulibflower 03-01-2012 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wrathman (Post 2881298)
I like to add the 40, three-cone and short shuttle times together to get a measurement that combines speed and quickness. I also take the 40 time and subtract out the 20 split to get a picture of what each player's long speed might look like. I use this on all the RBs, WRs and TEs. I am not incorporating weight into the equations but I think maybe that time has come.

I'm positive that working numbers like this will never identify studs from duds with total accuracy, but it might be nice to use to set an order of selection among players considered to be within the same tier of talent.

Because I'm crazy, I'm going to incorporate the three-cone drill and short shuttle times into the already-adjusted metrics. To produce... a SuperMetric. Weight has already been an accounted-for adjustment, so now these initial variables will allow other running backs to distinguish themselves. Their scores will be divided by their three-cone time, then multiplied by 7. Then divided by the 20-yard shuttle, then multiplied by 4.5. (7 and 4.5 used as "average" times to observe *differences* in the players. Since it's not an exact average, the distance from 100 is less significant, but the higher scores will raise a player and lower will drop him, so the sorting effectively continues.)

In order now:

DeAngelo Williams:139.4
Darren McFadden: 129.69
Ray Rice: 127.3
Steven Jackson: 123.87
Jamaal Charles: 123.78
MJD:122.7
Matt Forte: 119.97
Michael Turner: 117.39
Ryan Matthews: 116.65
DeMarco Murray: 114.97
Adrian Peterson:112.7
LeSean McCoy: 111.5
Peyton Hillis: 109.7
LeGarrett Blount: 109.42
Marshawn Lynch: 105.42
Arian Foster: 89.92

Given that all the backs here have had NFL success, It looks to me that when you add quickness into it, combined with build/speed it becomes more like a spectrum of running style. You have, basically, power-runners being lower numbers, balanced runners being in the middle, and the players towards the top the hardest to get a hand on. Also, DeAngelo Williams is a freak.

Wrathman 03-01-2012 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caulibflower (Post 2881367)
Because I'm crazy, I'm going to incorporate the three-cone drill and short shuttle times into the already-adjusted metrics. To produce... a SuperMetric. Weight has already been an accounted-for adjustment, so now these initial variables will allow other running backs to distinguish themselves. Their scores will be divided by their three-cone time, then multiplied by 7. Then divided by the 20-yard shuttle, then multiplied by 4.5. (7 and 4.5 used as "average" times to observe *differences* in the players. Since it's not an exact average, the distance from 100 is less significant, but the higher scores will raise a player and lower will drop him, so the sorting effectively continues.)

In order now:

DeAngelo Williams:139.4
Darren McFadden: 129.69
Ray Rice: 127.3
Steven Jackson: 123.87
Jamaal Charles: 123.78
MJD:122.7
Matt Forte: 119.97
Michael Turner: 117.39
Ryan Matthews: 116.65
DeMarco Murray: 114.97
Adrian Peterson:112.7
LeSean McCoy: 111.5
Peyton Hillis: 109.7
LeGarrett Blount: 109.42
Marshawn Lynch: 105.42
Arian Foster: 89.92

Given that all the backs here have had NFL success, It looks to me that when you add quickness into it, combined with build/speed it becomes more like a spectrum of running style. You have, basically, power-runners being lower numbers, balanced runners being in the middle, and the players towards the top the hardest to get a hand on. Also, DeAngelo Williams is a freak.

Nice work!


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:37 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.