SPARQ is now fully updated for 2015. These are now available in a Google Doc embed on the rankings page.

The advantage of the new format is that it’s possible to use the find function (CTRL-F on PC, Command-F on a Mac) to locate a given player. These documents will be updated during the draft as players are selected.

The rankings are also now available in PDF form for those who prefer a hard copy, listed below as well as on the rankings page.

All Players, All Positions

Top 300 Overall

Combine Invitees Only

Offense: Quarterback, Running Back, Fullback, Wide Receiver, Tight End, Offensive Line

Defense: Defensive Line, EDGE, Linebacker, Cornerback, Safety

-ZW

I covered the 2015 corners on Monday, and now we’re back for a quick look at the 2015 offensive line group. Note that there are no significant comparisons available in the 2015 class for J.R. Sweezy or Russell Okung.

While Seattle’s been wildly successful at converting late-round defensive backs into stars, the offensive line hasn’t been quite as successful. I’ll stage a quick defense of their recent OL draft strategy:

Their late-round OL picks have worked out relative to expectation. J.R. Sweezy is a tremendous seventh-round pick, Michael Bowie contributed as a rookie (and is now with another team), and Ryan Seymour is going into his third NFL season (albeit with another team as well). Those are successful picks. Garrett Scott’s medical retirement ended his career before he had a chance to prove himself. Jared Smith struggled with knee issues and never lasted in Seattle. Bottom-line: the Seahawks are 3-1-1 on 7^th round OL picks. That’s good.

James Carpenter was never the star that the first-round selection warranted, but he was good enough to get a second NFL contract. The third-round selection of John Moffitt is the franchise’s biggest draft error at OL under the current regime.

That leaves only Justin Britt and Russell Okung, the latter of whom is a good player. Britt’s a popular target of criticism, but I’m reserving judgment until we see his second season.

The point is that Seattle’s missed a few times, but they also haven’t invested a ton of draft capital in the line, particularly over the last 3 years. It doesn’t help that they tend to pursue linemen who specialize in the run game, and it’s probably easier to point out errors in pass protection.

Roster Mirroring

There are five offensive linemen with confirmed visits to the VMAC this month: Tennessee State’s Robert Myers, Florida’s Chaz Green, West Virginia’s Mark Glowinski, Virginia Tech’s Laurence Gibson, and Colorado State’s Ty Sambrailo. These names will come up again.

Justin Britt, 2^nd round, 2014

Comps: Duke’s Laken Tomlinson, Texas A&M’s Jarvis Harrison

Guys like Idaho’s Jesse Davis, Penn State’s Donovan Smith, and Buffalo’s Andre Davis are also in Britt’s general zip code, but Tomlinson and Harrison are better comparisons. I’ve noted a few times that Britt profiles more as a guard, and this kind of analysis is why. Note that Britt was an 89 simScore comp to Paul McQuistan last year, a near-identical match. This is a profile Seattle’s acquired a few times now.

Tomlinson is interesting. He’s projected to go in the second round, and Seattle doesn’t pick until 63. Taking a guard probably isn’t my first choice, but Tomlinson is probably the best at that position in this range. I’d talk myself into the selection in about 20 minutes, give or take.

Jarvis Harrison has a ton of potential and is a great athlete, but showed up late to his pro day and there are questions about his “want-to”. It’s difficult to see that being attractive to Peter Clay Carroll and I’d guess Harrison may be left off the Seattle draft board entirely.

James Carpenter, 1^st round, 2011

Comps: Florida’s Chaz Green, Duke’s Takoby Cofield

Chaz Green visited the VMAC last week, so the athletic comp to Carpenter becomes a little more interesting. He’s nearly identical to Carp except for the 8 second 3-cone, which definitely makes a future at tackle seem dubious. I could see Green as a late-round option at left guard.

I have no idea what a Takoby Cofield is.

Jared “Fat Rabbit” Smith, 7^th round, 2013

Comps: Hobart’s Ali Marpet, Illinois State’s Michael Liedtke, Connecticut’s B.J. McBryde

Drafted as a center, Fat Rabbit never got off the ground in Seattle, spending more time on the IR list than on the practice field. Still, that kind of athletic interior lineman is a profile that Seattle’s consistently sought after, and center is a position that the team will need to address with the departure of Max Unger.

Ali Marpet is awesome and would likely be an awesome value proposition… if he hadn’t been invited to the NFL Combine in February. Even coming from D-III Hobart, Marpet is projected to go in the 2^nd-3^rd range. He’s SPARQ-y and could probably play center, but it ain’t coming cheap.

B.J. McBryde might factor into Seahawk DL-to-OL shenanigans. Freak athlete with 35″+ arms, little draft buzz at his college position, and the exact profile Seattle’s hit before. The Eagles will probably draft him a few picks ahead of where the Seahawks have him slotted, just like we saw with Beau Allen last year.

Michael Liedtke has a wrestling background, which Tom Cable’s been known to like in the past. I know nothing about him on the field, but he’s presumably a UDFA candidate.

Michael Bowie, 7^th round, 2013

Comps: Tennessee State’s Robert Myers

Michael Bowie represents one of the lesser athletes drafted by Seattle under Carroll and Schneider. He was claimed off waivers by Cleveland last offseason after a shoulder injury, leading to a release with injury designation. It’s interesting that Carroll then fueled speculation by noting his dissatisfaction with Bowie’s weight, and it may be that those issues are part of the reason for his poor pre-draft testing.

Whatever the reason for his Seattle departure, he wasn’t terrible as a rookie, and that’s a good result from a 7^th-round draft pick. I noted last preseason that Bowie profiled better as a guard, and Robert Myers is pretty much Michael Bowie as a guard. Combine that with his recent visit to the VMAC and I could see him in rookie camp, whether as a late-round pick or an undrafted free agent. Most Seattle offensive linemen have been very athletic, but the LG position has tended to be more about mass than explosiveness.

Ryan Seymour, 7^th round, 2014

Comps: West Virginia’s Mark Glowinski, Cincinnati’s Tyreek Burwell, Hobart’s Ali Marpet

Seymour wasn’t anything special as a Seahawk, but he ended last season on the Cleveland active roster and is heading into his third NFL season. He even drew a little praise among Browns fans late last year, and that’s a positive result for the 7^th-round 2013 pick.

VMAC visitor Glowinski is a very close comp to Seymour, and he just feels like a Day 3 Seahawk pick. Burwell is the athletic OL option in UDFA, much like Garry Gilliam in 2014.

Garry Gilliam, UDFA, 2014

Comps: Virginia Tech’s Laurence Gibson

Garry Gilliam and Laurence Gibson aren’t much different. Gibson’s projected in the 6^th, which is just about right. The biggest knock on him is that he’s already 24.

With Gibson also having visited the Seahawks this April, 4 of their 5 visits are the top 2015 comparisons to former Seattle draft picks. Roster mirroring is real.

Other Fits

There are a ton of OL in the draft, but there are a few that stand out to me a little bit.

A.J. Cann, Hroniss Grasu, T.J. Clemmings

Projected Round: 2^nd

Clemmings is probably not available at 63, but they did discover a stress fracture in his foot on a recent team visit. If he freefalls on draft day, look out. Cann and Grasu are both SPARQ’d-up interior OL choice that will command a pretty high price, much like Tomlinson. Again, if Seattle does go interior OL early, this group seems the most likely.

I added a number of centers onto the list, but I’ve only watched Shaq Mason. He’s my first choice among mid-round centers. Hamilton, Easton, and Reiter round out the SPARQ-y group.

Boston College DL Brian Mihalik is 6’9″ and extremely athletic. It seems like there might end up being some buzz about him at OT, just going from the raw profile.

Buffalo’s Kristjan Sokoli is a freak of nature and would be the most Seahawks OL-to-DL convert of them all. It seems almost too obvious to actually happen in real life. He’d also be the 6^th 3 Sigma Athlete in the NFL if converted to OL.

–ZW

Chip Kelly recently pulled off somewhat of a coup in Philadelphia, taking control of the front office shortly after the 2014 regular season ended. With former GM Howie Roseman re-assigned to deal more with contracts and cap, Kelly promoted the 31-year-old Ed Marynowitz to VP of player personnel. The excellent Sheil Kapadia profiled Marynowitz today, and much of what he said echoed the philosophy that Seattle’s built under Pete Carroll and John Schneider. I recommend reading Kapadia’s excellent article before continuing as I’m only going to highlight a few passages here.

“This is a size/speed league. [Nick Saban and his staff at Alabama] believed the SEC was a size/speed league. There’s enough statistical data that will support that in terms of players that are playing at a high level. There’s a certain prototype.”

A large portion of the best players in the league are also great athletes. As I detailed a few weeks ago, the 4 current 3 sigma athletes in the NFL are all excellent players. This is anecdotal evidence, but the idea holds up under more rigorous scrutiny. There are not many elite non-QBs who test poorly.

Marynowitz worked for Saban at Alabama before coming to Philadelphia in 2011, and he details their philosophy below.

“So there’s a certain prototype at each position. We try to build the same thing here, whether it’s at inside linebacker, outside linebacker, corner, safety. There’s a prototype, and there’s a model that fits what we do.”

I’ve written before about the Seahawks and prototypes, an application that I refer to as “roster mirroring.” If the backups on a team fit into the same athletic class and build as the starters, then the scheme used to maximize the strengths of the starters should also serve the players waiting on the bench. Next Man Up works much better when the incoming player resembles the starter they’re replacing.

Marynowitz also spoke on a general height/weight/speed model and trimming the draft pool of potential Eagles, summing it up with the following quote:

“If you have seven draft picks, do you really want to waste one, especially in the top three rounds, on a guy that history is telling you… typically these guys with these types of measurables don’t produce at this level?”

As Chris Brown tweeted, this is an application of Bayesian reasoning, which you can read about here.

The application of athletic comparisons is frequently debated, but this quote does a good job of relating how they should be used. There are between 2000 and 3000 players who test at either the NFL Combine or pro days during the pre-draft season. The idea is to take the best possible bet, and if a certain prospect has athletic comparisons that show significant issues at the NFL level, I’d prefer to move on to the next player.

We don’t have to be right about every player. Missing on a prospect who ends up overcoming the odds is frustrating, but it happens. I’m more concerned about not being wrong, and that means thinning the pool of possible selections. As Maryonowtiz notes, the Eagles only have around 150 players on their final draft board.

The specific approach can shrink the pool of potential prospects, but Kelly, Marynowitz and others find more danger in trying to gamble on exceptions.

Pete Carroll has spoken before along the lines of “if you keep making exceptions, your whole team ends up being made of exceptions.” Notably, Seattle and Philadelphia had 2014’s two highest-ranked SPARQ rosters by my pSPARQ calculations.

This is less about individual evaluations and more about macro-level team roster strategy. As I wrote in my first post on this blog, a large group of superior athletes will ultimately perform better than a large group of averages athletes. Analytics matter most when used over a large number of decisions, the small percentages adding up to meaningful and significant added value. By generally selecting players from an athletic pool and taking fewer shots on the exceptions, it’s possible to obtain more value in the long run.

Marynowitz did note that exceptions aren’t necessarily discarded from the board, but that they “better be exceptional in a lot of other areas” to be considered.

Kapadia goes on to interview Marynowitz about how the team views scheme fit and culture in prospect evaluation. It’s excellent and well worth taking the time to read if you ignored my advice at the start of this article. I’ll link it again so that you don’t even have to scroll up: http://www.phillymag.com/birds247/2015/04/23/marynowitz-eagles-taking-three-pronged-approach/.

The article makes clear that analytics don’t make every decision in the Philadelpha front office; still, the Eagles do subscribe to an analytical ideology which plays a significant role in shaping their draft board and roster composition.

I’ll be back next week with the final SPARQ update and a few articles searching out roster mirroring candidates for Seattle in the upcoming draft.

Hey all — I appeared on the Seahawkers podcast this week. We talked for 30 or 40 minutes about SPARQ, how it relates to the current Seattle roster, and a few of the “Seahawk-y” players in the draft this year.

You can find the interview at the Seahawkers podcast site.

–ZW

UPDATE 4/20: The SPARQ table now includes most players with pro days occurring prior to March 20th. The image is a much higher-resolution than was used previously. Note that the “Comb.” column refers to those who were invited to the NFL Combine in February. Any numbers that are underlined and italicized comes from junior day data via Tony Wiltshire

Note that the “Percentile” and “z-score” columns refer to the NFL positional averages and not to the draft positional averages. This means that a 0.0 z-score and 50.0 percentile would represent a player who rates as a league-average NFL athlete at the position. The average NFL player is pretty athletic, so this designation is not at all a poor result.

Disclaimer: pSPARQ is not perfect and will not yield a perfect representation of any player’s athletic profile. It is meant to give us an idea of where a given player stands athletically relative to his peers. If you have any questions about the particulars, I posted an FAQ: https://3sigmaathlete.com/faq/.

Click on the images to make them readable.

All above the 50th percentile (i.e., above-average):

All below the 50th percentile:

–ZW

UPDATE 4/20: The SPARQ table now includes most players with pro days occurring prior to March 20th. The image is a much higher-resolution than was used previously. Note that the “Comb.” column refers to those who were invited to the NFL Combine in February. Any numbers that are underlined and italicized comes from junior day data via Tony Wiltshire.

Note that the “Percentile” and “z-score” columns refer to the NFL positional averages and not to the draft positional averages. This means that a 0.0 z-score and 50.0 percentile would represent a player who rates as a league-average NFL athlete at the position. The average NFL player is pretty athletic, so this designation is not at all a poor result.

Disclaimer: pSPARQ is not perfect and will not yield a perfect representation of any player’s athletic profile. It is meant to give us an idea of where a given player stands athletically relative to his peers. If you have any questions about the particulars, I posted an FAQ: https://3sigmaathlete.com/faq/.

Click on the images to make them readable.

All above the 50th percentile (i.e., above-average):

UPDATE 4/20: The SPARQ table now includes most players with pro days occurring prior to March 20th. The image is a much higher resolution than was used previously. Note that the “Comb.” column refers to those who were invited to the NFL Combine in February. Any numbers that are underlined and italicized comes from junior day data via Tony Wiltshire.

Note that the “Percentile” and “z-score” columns refer to the NFL positional averages and not to the draft positional averages. This means that a 0.0 z-score and 50.0 percentile would represent a player who rates as a league-average NFL athlete at the position. The average NFL player is pretty athletic, so this designation is not at all a poor result.

Disclaimer: pSPARQ is not perfect and will not yield a perfect representation of any player’s athletic profile. It is meant to give us an idea of where a given player stands athletically relative to his peers. If you have any questions about the particulars, I posted an FAQ: https://3sigmaathlete.com/faq/.

Click on the images to make them readable.

All above the 50th percentile (i.e., above-average):

All below the 50th percentile:

UPDATE 4/20: The SPARQ table now includes most players with pro days occurring prior to March 20th. The image is a much higher resolution than was used previously. Note that the “Comb.” column refers to those who were invited to the NFL Combine in February. Any numbers that are underlined and italicized comes from junior day data via https://www.bookmakers.eu/sports/american-football/.

Note that the “Percentile” and “z-score” columns refer to the NFL positional averages and not to the draft positional averages. This means that a 0.0 z-score and 50.0 percentile would represent a player who rates as a league-average NFL athlete at the position. The average NFL player is pretty athletic, so this designation is not at all a poor result.

Disclaimer: pSPARQ is not perfect and will not yield a perfect representation of any player’s athletic profile. It is meant to give us an idea of where a given player stands athletically relative to his peers. If you have any questions about the particulars, I posted an FAQ: https://3sigmaathlete.com/faq/.

Click on the images to make them readable.

All above the 50th percentile (i.e., above-average):

UPDATE 4/20: The SPARQ table now includes most players with pro days occurring prior to March 20th. The image is a much higher-resolution than was used previously. Note that the “Comb.” column refers to those who were invited to the NFL Combine in February. Any numbers that are underlined and italicized comes from junior day data via Tony Wiltshire.

Disclaimer: pSPARQ is not perfect and will not yield a perfect representation of any player’s athletic profile. It is meant to give us an idea of where a given player stands athletically relative to his peers. If you have any questions about the particulars, I posted an FAQ: https://3sigmaathlete.com/faq/.

Click on the images to make them readable.

All above the 50th percentile (i.e., above-average):

All below the 50th percentile: