[Leftcoast]

Not so fast!  Peat (and Carter) are at least testing the NFL waters!

http://www.mercurynews.com/sports/ci_271...-early-nfl

[Leftcoast]

Not so fast!  Peat (and Carter) are at least testing the NFL waters!

http://www.mercurynews.com/sports/ci_271...-early-nfl

[stupac2]

Not so fast!  Peat (and Carter) are at least testing the NFL waters!

http://www.mercurynews.com/sports/ci_271...-early-nfl

Even if they're 90% sure they want to stay there's no harm in submitting the paperwork.

[stupac2]

Not so fast!  Peat (and Carter) are at least testing the NFL waters!

http://www.mercurynews.com/sports/ci_271...-early-nfl

Even if they're 90% sure they want to stay there's no harm in submitting the paperwork.

[gocard14]

Speaking of the Pac-12 blog, they did a piece this morning that had this to say about Peat:

I hope he does come back. He was one of my favorite prospects coming into this year. He has a chance to be a really good right tackle in the NFL for a long time. But I just haven't seen the development this year. He was a top 20 kind of guy coming into this season. The biggest concern for me is his balance: He's lunging a lot and is occasionally off-balance. Guys will take advantage of that at the next level. For me, I think it's in his best interest to work on staying back on his heels more. For a guy who's so dominant with his physical ability, I'd also like to see more aggressiveness from him.

There's also a bit in there about Cajuste, whose draft position is mostly determined by his 40 time.

Which is one of the most ridiculous things I've read.  They (scouts) have two full years of film of Cajuste as a starter running routes against high level competetion. How any timed race, out of pads, on a track contains any relevance compared to that information is completely beyond me. Some slow people play fast (e.g. Jerry Rice), and plenty of fast people play slow (e.g. any wide reciever drafted by the Oakland Raiders). Either Cajuste plays like he's fast or he doesn't.

Measurables are nice to have for high school recruits as there is often very little film of them playing against quality opponents, but it's crazy to me that any NFL team would make personnel decisions based on a 40 time when actual game film is an option.

[gocard14]

Speaking of the Pac-12 blog, they did a piece this morning that had this to say about Peat:

I hope he does come back. He was one of my favorite prospects coming into this year. He has a chance to be a really good right tackle in the NFL for a long time. But I just haven't seen the development this year. He was a top 20 kind of guy coming into this season. The biggest concern for me is his balance: He's lunging a lot and is occasionally off-balance. Guys will take advantage of that at the next level. For me, I think it's in his best interest to work on staying back on his heels more. For a guy who's so dominant with his physical ability, I'd also like to see more aggressiveness from him.

There's also a bit in there about Cajuste, whose draft position is mostly determined by his 40 time.

Which is one of the most ridiculous things I've read.  They (scouts) have two full years of film of Cajuste as a starter running routes against high level competetion. How any timed race, out of pads, on a track contains any relevance compared to that information is completely beyond me. Some slow people play fast (e.g. Jerry Rice), and plenty of fast people play slow (e.g. any wide reciever drafted by the Oakland Raiders). Either Cajuste plays like he's fast or he doesn't.

Measurables are nice to have for high school recruits as there is often very little film of them playing against quality opponents, but it's crazy to me that any NFL team would make personnel decisions based on a 40 time when actual game film is an option.

[washingtonismoney]

I don't think it's totally crazy to want to see some measurables, if you're an NFL scout. (Though I do wonder why the 40? To me quickness and explosiveness has always been more important, so I'm more interested in the 3-cone or vertical leap...).

Here's why. Let's take Stanford's schedule this year. It wasn't super-difficult, but very respectable. And let's say you're an NFL scout. You had to watch a Stanford player clown the 59ers, Washington State, Army, and Davis. How many future NFL players did, say, Henry Anderson get matched up against during that time? So right there you have a third of the schedule disqualified due to rampant suck; just totally useless for projecting for the pros.

OK, go a tier up. Was it really *that* useful to see a random Stanford prospect against, say, Oregon State or Washington? Maybe here and there.

Already you can see that the sample is rather small, in terms of game film, to see a random Stanford prospect against respectable opposition. And we know what happens when there are small sample sizes. Now, let's repeat the exercise for some of these teams out there that played absolute joke schedules.

So now you can see why NFL scouts are interested in seeing some absolute measures of athleticism.

[washingtonismoney]

I don't think it's totally crazy to want to see some measurables, if you're an NFL scout. (Though I do wonder why the 40? To me quickness and explosiveness has always been more important, so I'm more interested in the 3-cone or vertical leap...).

Here's why. Let's take Stanford's schedule this year. It wasn't super-difficult, but very respectable. And let's say you're an NFL scout. You had to watch a Stanford player clown the 59ers, Washington State, Army, and Davis. How many future NFL players did, say, Henry Anderson get matched up against during that time? So right there you have a third of the schedule disqualified due to rampant suck; just totally useless for projecting for the pros.

OK, go a tier up. Was it really *that* useful to see a random Stanford prospect against, say, Oregon State or Washington? Maybe here and there.

Already you can see that the sample is rather small, in terms of game film, to see a random Stanford prospect against respectable opposition. And we know what happens when there are small sample sizes. Now, let's repeat the exercise for some of these teams out there that played absolute joke schedules.

So now you can see why NFL scouts are interested in seeing some absolute measures of athleticism.

[OutsiderFan]

Good scouts rely on video and watching guys in person.  David DeCastro had terrible measurables in terms of quickness and speed.  It's what he put on video at Stanford that made him a first round pick.  Now DeCastro might be a pro bowler in the NFL.

Peat has great athleticism.  Scouts know this just from watching him play.  His issue has been consistency and technique. He's been dinged for lunging at pass rushers and not being a road grader in the run game.  None of that is going to change based on his combine workouts, no matter how great they might be. 

Someone will draft Peat high just because he is such a fine athlete at his size, but if he could refine his technique and be a bit more dominant in the run game, he could potentially be a top 5 pick, maybe even #1 overall.  It ain't going to be this year, with Mariota, Leonard Williams, and some others having had more impressive years.  One thing I'm willing to wager is very few Top 5 OL picks didn't use their redshirt years.

[OutsiderFan]

Good scouts rely on video and watching guys in person.  David DeCastro had terrible measurables in terms of quickness and speed.  It's what he put on video at Stanford that made him a first round pick.  Now DeCastro might be a pro bowler in the NFL.

Peat has great athleticism.  Scouts know this just from watching him play.  His issue has been consistency and technique. He's been dinged for lunging at pass rushers and not being a road grader in the run game.  None of that is going to change based on his combine workouts, no matter how great they might be. 

Someone will draft Peat high just because he is such a fine athlete at his size, but if he could refine his technique and be a bit more dominant in the run game, he could potentially be a top 5 pick, maybe even #1 overall.  It ain't going to be this year, with Mariota, Leonard Williams, and some others having had more impressive years.  One thing I'm willing to wager is very few Top 5 OL picks didn't use their redshirt years.

[rudruff]

Disagree about DeCastro. He blew up his combine, but I agree that film is probably a much better way to evaluate prospects.

[rudruff]

Disagree about DeCastro. He blew up his combine, but I agree that film is probably a much better way to evaluate prospects.

[Bruce Wang]

...He blew up his combine

I remember hearing that actually happened.  Did anybody find out what set him off during the interview?

[Bruce Wang]

...He blew up his combine

I remember hearing that actually happened.  Did anybody find out what set him off during the interview?

[djones]

Cause returns.
Peace returns.
Uncertain whether or not Carter returns

[djones]

Cause returns.
Peace returns.
Uncertain whether or not Carter returns

[stupac2]

Peace returns.

After these troubled years of war this is joyous news.

[stupac2]

Peace returns.

After these troubled years of war this is joyous news.