1

The 2016 Rookie Scouting

Portfolio &

2015 RSP Post-Draft

(Footballguys Insider Sample)

Complete Version at www.mattwaldman.com

Game Film Analysis

Player Profiles Scouting Reports

Rankings ADP Value Analysis

A Prospectus of Fantasy Rookies at The Offensive Skill Positions

By

Matt Waldman

2

The 2016 Rookie Scouting Portfolio

Copyright 2016, 2015 by Matt Waldman

Published by Matt Waldman

Matt Waldman, Freelance Writer

mattwaldmanrsp@gmail.com

Printed in the United States of America.

All rights reserved under International Copyright Law.

No part of this file or online publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means

without the prior written consent of Matt Waldman.

3

Important Note: The table of contents is a series of bookmarks in the Adobe document. Click the bookmark icon on the Adobe menu to access. At the end of the book is the Abbreviated Draft Guide designed for quick use in a fantasy draft or as a handy print-and-carry guide. To access the Abbreviated Draft Guide, click on the bookmarks and scroll to the bottom.

Introduction The 2016 Rookie Scouting Portfolio is designed to give fantasy GMs and draftniks a convenient and extensive analysis of draft-eligible prospects at the offensive skill positions (quarterback, running back, wide receiver, and tight end). Supported with exhaustive detail, the reports are in cheat sheet format to give the reader a quick and convenient overview for fantasy GMs to reference on draft day.

What makes the RSP unique is its dedication to presenting a transparent evalaution process to the reader. It is a three-pronged, evaluation approach that begins with a grading report in a checklist format. Each checklist question is given a weighted value and is clearly defined for the reader in the glossary of the publication. This method provides a more uniform and objective grading format. It insures that one or two particular talents don’t cover up a collection of deficiencies. The information is presented to help readers understand the

value of criteria I used to evaluate players. Accompanying each checklist is a play-by-play analysis profile that

notes what was observed to merit the scores on the evaluation tool. The RSP also provides subjective analysis that provides a way for noting information essential to proejcting a player’s potential growth. This fills in the gaps that a uniform approach on the present performance may miss. When used in concert, the reader should gain a clearer picture of what the player offers now and his future potential.

The purpose of the RSP is to share my research of the rookie class, educate others about the nuances of player evalaution, and provide a methodolgy that others can conduct on their own.

Why Film Study is The Best Evaluator of Talent

The emphasis of game film to evaluate a player is based on the philosophy shared by some of the NFL’s best

personnel men in the history of the game: Joe Thomas and Ron Wolf. Commissioner Pete Rozelle recommended Thomas to the Minnesota Vikings in the 1960’s as its first personnel manager. Thomas went against the grain and built a team around scrambling QB Fran Tarkenton, a player that didn’t have ideal measurements, but possessed far greater qualities that were easy to spot on the field.

By the early 70’s, Thomas was doing the same thing in Miami. He drafted lesser regarded, Bob Griese over Heisman winner Steve Spurrier, traded for Paul Warfield, and picked Larry Csonka—a back most thought was too slow to be a productive NFL runner. When the Dolphins met the Vikings in the Super Bowl, Thomas had drafted or acquired nearly all the starters on both teams!

Former Packer’s GM, Ron Wolf credits Thomas for teaching him valuable lessons about the art of personnel

decisions. Wolf was the driving force behind the Packers acquiring Brett Favre. Wolf was convinced Favre was

4

a special player and not because of what he saw from Favre at the combine, but from film study of the future Hall of Famer’s junior season at Southern Mississippi.

This is the Rookie Scouting Portfolio’s 11th year in print and I continue to learn more with each season of work. If this is the first year you have purchased the RSP, I believe you will be equally pleased with the depth and scope of the RSP’s analysis as the readers who discovered it between 2006-2015. Rather than only seeing a short summary based on a grading scale that is vaguely explained, The 2015Rookie Scouting Portfolio is

compiled to not only give you scores, rankings, and summaries, but also a play-by-play breakdown of what was observed during the game to arrive at these conclusions.

The driving force of this concept is the method and format in which the film is broken down and delivered. Each player’s game performance is scored on a position-specific checklist containing all of the necessary fundamentals that answer the key questions about a prospect’s potential to develop into an NFL starter or fantasy asset:

Does the player demonstrate consistently sound techniques and decisions in game-day situations? Hundreds of prospects fighting for NFL roster spots have the physical talent. Dozens of these players impress on the practice field, but when the lights come on, the stands are packed, and the adrenaline is flowing, even first round draft picks can fall apart. The problem has less to do with nerves and more to do with lack of preparation—long-term, daily preparation that adds value over

years leading to this point and is rarely duplicated with short-term focus/cramming. The ability to react, decide, and execute with precision comes from techniques ingrained through hard work. These processes become second nature on the field and that ultimately leads to success. What happens on the field is almost always a product of the preparation. Bill Walsh drilled the 49ers relentlessly on the play known as “the catch.” His players thought the play would never work. Yet it was so ingrained in them when Walsh called this little-used, but highly practiced play, the team executed it to perfection when it was most needed.

Does the film provide examples that support or differ from the combine results? The

evaluation process is really nothing more than a recruiting process for a lucrative and demanding job. The resume consists of things like a player’s stats, media guide-driven measurements, and recommendations from coaches. The NFL Combine is an extensive job interview. The NFL runs the candidate through his paces to determine if his resume holds up and how he handles pressure. A series of exercises designed to test the player’s physical skills, intellect, and maturity are administered in a neutral environment with the intent to provide all players an equal starting point.

The combine is an important evaluation tool. Still, we all know some people perform a lot better on the interview than they do on the job. This is why the game film has such importance. To continue with the recruiting process analogy, the film is like a portfolio of work—a clear indication of the player’s talents when put to practical use in real game situations. In many cases, this leads to the next question…

Does the player transfer his physical skills to the football field? If a WR runs a 4.6-40 at the combine, the foregone conclusion to the general public is the player is too slow for the NFL. But this combine result won’t alarm those that have seen the same WR on film outrun a defensive back with a good angle and 4.3-speed, or separate from a corner in man coverage that has timed well in workouts. It was even discussed this year that scouts prefer to hand-time players at the combine

despite the presence of an automated timing device. This means there will always be variation in the reported times, which diminishes its value. Jerry Rice had functional speed and he was a more impressive runner in pads than in shorts. Larry Fitzgerald ran closer to 4.6 than prospects with far less skill and I vividly remember experienced football people in the media, who have a public following, questioning if he had the physical skills to be a complete NFL receiver.

5

What is the player’s comfort level with physical contact? Although it is a given football is a

contact sport, the level of physical contact a player chooses to deliver or receive can very greatly—even among pros. Wide receivers Todd Pinkston and Hines Ward are an excellent study in contrasts. Pinkston was a highly regarded receiver among many scouts because of his speed, hands, and routes.

Ward was a three-position player in college who lacked both polish as a route runner and an attractive 40-time. Pinkston failed to develop into a productive starter because he lacked a necessary comfort level with physical contact. Pinkston had trouble releasing from press coverage, fighting for separation in tight coverage, or going for the ball in traffic. On the other hand, Super Bowl XL’s MVP thrives on physical contact as a receiver, runner, and most impressively a blocker. This is a clear example why hitting is the great equalizer in football and where the film room takes precedence to the combine. Most players can perform a task with great execution in an atmosphere with minimal, or

no contact, the ones that can execute under heavy physical contact, often illegal contact, are far fewer in number.

In-game commentary accompanies each checklist and is provided to illustrate the reasons behind the player score. Instead of generically describing a player’s skill set, The 2014 Rookie Scouting Portfolio

aspires to describe how the player failed or succeeded in performing each skill set, often in specific detail. The intent is to provide you a frame of reference behind the information and a clearer understanding of the overall assessment.

The Concept Behind The Checklist Format

The concept of delivering a grade can be a highly subjective process. Take 4-5 people with a high level of expertise in a subject to evaluate an individual’s performance on a specific task. Tell the evaluators to use

a numerical or letter grading scale to score them and the odds are slim you’ll even come close to a unanimous agreement. Unless they established more specific guidelines they all agreed upon first, there will be few instances where there isn’t wide variation on the score.

The initial problem is the grading scale. Rarely do people have a clearly defined grading scale in use. For example, there are the typical corporate grading scales of 1-5 or 1-7 (1 = the lowest score and 5 = the highest score) where the joke is no one ever receives the best or worst scores. People also have vastly different ideas about the type of performance deserving of each grade. The differences in opinion increase with the range of the grading scale. Double the range from 1-5 to 1-10 and the ability to come to an

agreement becomes exponentially more difficult and further detracts from the apparent objectivity of the evaluation.

When you examine a scouting evaluation that tells you Reggie Bush received a 9 on a scale of 10 as a

receiver, how do you know what the grade is really telling you? Did the evaluator watch Bush catch the ball 9 times out of 10 opportunities? Was it 90 out of 100? Or was it just one highlight and the way a coach lauded the player’s skills as a pass catcher? How is the category of receiving defined? Does it include components like route running, the ability to gain yards after the catch, or gaining separation off the line of scrimmage with a defender in tight coverage?

All of these areas deserve evaluation otherwise the assessment is incomplete and unfair. Yet, lumping together specific skills can cloud the issue. Some talent evaluators fail to communicate how they separate these skills, if they do so at all. Their audience doesn’t understand why a receiver he evaluated with a high grade as a route runner can’t get open in the NFL. The evaluator just gave a number but didn’t

explain how he arrived at that number. If asked after the fact, the evaluator might explain his system in more detail, which can appear more as a rather convenient justification.

6

While evaluation of human performance will always be subjective, there is a way to limit the amount of

variation in the scoring process and build-in more objectivity. The best way to accomplish this feat is the two-pronged approach used as the basis for the RSP’s game film analysis:

1. Clearly define the criteria in writing. When the performance criteria has a definition, both the evaluator and the audience gain a more accurate understanding of what is expected from the evaluation process. The checklist criteria for each position in these scouting profiles are defined for

your reference. 2. Score the criteria with a grade of “Yes,” or “No.” Once there is written criteria, the evaluator

only has to grade whether the individual performed the criteria as defined. The answer is either positive, negative, or the individual didn’t have an opportunity to perform the criteria.

Of course, not all graded points have equal value when evaluating a player’s performance. One cannot assign the same importance to a receiver’s ability to run with the ball as one does to his ability to catch it. All evaluation processes prioritize the value of each criteria point in comparison to the whole, but not all evaluation tools adequately communicate the priority.

Scoring The Checklists

The criteria in these checklists are defined and assigned a numerical value. The more essential the

defined criteria point to the player’s projected NFL performance at their position, the higher the assigned point value for that particular skill. The player earns all the points for a score of “Yes,” or none of the points for a “No.”

A score of “N/A,” is more complicated. In traditional evaluation realms for employee performance “N/A” means the question is not applicable to the situation being evaluated—for instance, a running back that doesn’t have an opportunity to show great balance in rough field conditions on a sunny day in perfect stadium conditions cannot fail this area.

How the Checklist is Used

A checklist is generally used to score one game. The RSP strives for 2-4 games (and checklists) per player. While scoring one full game to a checklist is the ideal methodology, there are players whose game tape is difficult to find.

The source of the difficulty is often a small sample size of plays per game from the prospect. In these cases, of which there are only a few each year, the RSP will combine several games into one checklist or use a highlight package. The report will mention if the sample size is a highlight or compilation of multiple games.

One full game provides a better context for scoring than a compilation because each game is its own intellectual, physical, and emotional time capsule. There’s valuable information to glean from a game where a prospect has to respond to the unique obstacles presented in each contest.

Still, a compilation of games with smaller sample sizes of plays per contest offers enough value to determine a player’s baseline skills and there is little to no dropoff in value for this type of checklist analysis. Highlight-driven analysis is less reliable. These samples are edited to show the player at his best.

Successful plays don’t always reveal a complete picture of a player because he’s often performing in situations with fewer obstacles. A mix of successful and unsuccessful plays reveals a broader range of skills and behaviors from a player. Failed efforts often reveal more about how a player thinks and reacts. It’s why highlights are samples of last resort in my process.

In most cases, I watch far more than 2-4 games per player. I will use these supplemental viewings to add notes to existing checklists—often making references to games where I saw traits and skills that add to what I didn’t see performed in the full game checklist.

7

I generally pick games with a strong sample size of targets, attempts, and reps while trying to choose a quality opponent. I try to grade at least one “bad” game for each player, in which their production didn’t match their usage.

With well-defined evaluation criteria, a difficult game often reveals a lot about the player’s technique, his conceptual understanding of his position, how well he responds to adversity, and his overall understanding and feel for the game. Some of my best and most accurate analysis comes from these games.

I generally do one checklist at time, although there are games where I will score quarterbacks, receivers, and tight ends in the same sitting. Still, I prefer to focus on one player at a time and I do not leave one checklist incomplete to begin another.

How the Checklist and Stack Rankings Fit Into the RSP Analysis and Rankings

A football position is a job and every job has a minimum set of requirements. There are specific physical, mental, and technical skills for every role on a football field. The Breadth of Talent Score gauges how many things a player can do within the scope of the job requirements; the Depth of Talent Score evaluates how good the player can be at the job. Both measurements have its own weighted scoring system which prioritizes the importance of the task.

NFL schemes don’t always demand players perform the full range of skills associated with a position. A requirement for one team will be different from another. Breadth of Talent reveals which players will have the widest possible appeal to NFL teams. It doesn’t mean that player will be high on a team’s draftboard, but barring character and reputation issues, it does mean that player should be on more teams’ lists —regardless of his overall grade. Players with a strong Breadth of Talent Score are versatile.

The Depth of Talent Score quantifies the difference between on-field performances that exhibit basic skills and on-field performances that reveal exceptional ability. This is done through stack-ranking the players according to tiers of talent within each skill set.

The skill sets in the stack-rankings have slight differences with how they’re categorized compared to the checklist criteria. Each skill set has a defined tier and those tiers have point values. The Depth of Talent Score is also measured on a 100-point scale.

The higher the depth of talent score, the greater the player’s potential to star—even if the player has a small role in the offense.,

A player can have a lower breadth of talent, but great depth of talent in specific areas and become a star if placed with the right offense. Wide receiver Mike Wallace’s skills shined in a vertical passing game when paired with a quarterback skilled at deep routes, but he isn’t as talented at running a wide variety of patterns required in other offensive schemes.

The Depth of Talent Score also allows room for projecting a player’s future skill development based on realistic scenarios to improve his performance with additional training. If a player’s flaws appear correctable due to a lack of a teachable technique, conceptual understanding of the game that comes with film study and experience, or athletic skills that can improve with training, then the RSP process has the option of awarding bonus points to each stack ranking tier.

The value of the bonuses are conservative sums, because it’s the philosophy of the RSP that it’s better to err on the side of what a player is versus what a player can become. At the same time, the key to excellent scouting is the ability to project what a player can become. Projecting future development is mostly about the player’s work ethic, baseline physical skills, and his ambition and maturity with selecting the right opportunities to continue his development.

There’s a myth that players get “coached up” once they reach the NFL. Based on conversations with dozens of players, the vast majority of that coaching covers strategy and gameplan execution rather than addressing deficiencies in technique.

Development of technique and athletic potential is mostly the responsibility of the individual player. The best NFL players seek out instruction from veterans or consultants, and develop their own continuing education methods.

The NFL may have the best football players in the world, but the “best of the best” remains an exclusive category. Maturity, organization, discipline, and consistent practice above and beyond “office hours,” is often the difference

8

between a talented athlete with a great college career and a good professional football player. Note that many of these traits are as much about working smart as they are about working long and hard.

Some of these qualities can be ascertained through game study, but these personality traits are often the missing components that foil NFL player-personnel departments despite attempts to discover them with character investigations, standardized tests, and face-to-face interviews. The NFL deals with similar challenges of hiring quality employees as the rest of the real world.

Although I may award multiple bonuses for player’s depth of talent, the weight of the bonuses I award for “potential development” at most, may bump a player’s skill up a full tier from where he’s assigned. I tend to award them based on my assessment of what is easiest to learn rather than what is possible but less likely for a player to learn.

How the Stack Ranking is Done

I stack-rank players by depth of talent after completing the breadth of talent checklist. The categories are based on my definition of what constitutes depth of talent at the pro level for each skill area.

Here are the stack rankings within each category:

Star Caliber Starter Caliber Committee Caliber Reserve Caliber Free Agent Caliber Deficient

Play-by-play notes in the checklists help me determine where the player will be stack ranked within each category. Once I make that placement, I determine if his traits and behaviors exhibit potential for improvement and the difficulty level of that skill development process.

If I believe the player should improve then I will add a bonus to his stack ranking. If I think that player’s improvement will unlock additional upside to his value in this area or other areas, I will provide an additional small bonus.

If a quarterback has excellent anticipation, accuracy, and strength, but his stance and throwing motion are major barriers with his vertical passing game that can be fixed easily, I’ll add an upside bonus to certain accuracy categories because the range of his accuracy should increase once he develops better mechanics. In contrast, if a quarterback has elite athletic ability and pinpoint accuracy in a clean pocket, but his accuracy and decision-making suffers dramatically under moderate pressure, it’s far less likely that I’ll award upside bonuses to his stack ranking.

Although the Depth of Talent Score has these adjustments embedded in the final number, I also provide a ranking in the publication sorted by this score without the projection bonuses. This provides a more conservative estimate for those who believe players don’t change.

Criteria Glossary

A glossary for the information on the checklist and the stack rankings is in the back of the publication. Criteria points are the skills that make up the checklist. Each criteria point in the glossary is defined, assigned a point value, and contains an example of a player adept at the skill.

9

The sum of these points equals 100 so readers will have an intuitive grading scale. Related criteria are also grouped into broader, defined categories. There are summed grades for these categories, but these are not used for any analysis in the publication.

The checklist is designed to grade the consistency of a player’s position-based skills and baseline physical talent for the position as the RSP defines them. The higher the score, the more likely the player possesses the fundamental tools to transition to the NFL and contribute on the field.

NFL players possess a complete toolbox of skills and athletic talents less often than you would think. Productive players—even some Pro Bowl-caliber players—thrive without a full complement of position-based skills and athleticism

ideal for the position. Some top producers have a limited range of skills, but the they perform as well or better than anyone in the game with the skills they have.

When teams match these players with schemes that keep the tasks within a range of what the player can do, they thrive. But even players with a limited, but excellent skill set must have at least a certain amount of basic skills or else their talent may only translate to one task on the field.

The RSP’s evaluation process uses two measurements of player potential: Breadth of Talent (the checklist) and Depth of Talent (stack rankings). These two methods of assessing talent provide a more comprehensive understanding of a player’s range of potential.

Get the Complete Version of the 2016 RSP at

www.mattwaldman.com

10

Overview and Fantasy Impact of the TE Position For the second year in a row, the tight end class lacks well-developed talent. It’s written off as a weak class. Wait til 2017, they say. They may be right about 2017, but there is talent in this class. I said the same about the 2015 class. While it had the least amount of developed talent compared to the four years of previous groups, I recommended that there are talented players to take later and stash with patience. I also warned that there was one tight end in this class, Maxx Williams, whose talent warranted a mid-round draft pick in most fantasy leagues, but he’ll probably get picked by overzealous fantasy owners a round or two earlier than this valuation. This year, there’s one tight end I think most are sleeping on as a mid-round draft pick when his talent warrants a higher price. That player is Stanford’s Austin Hooper and fortunately, you can get him as a mid-round pick and see the dividends within the next two years. Hooper is a better player at this stage than Williams was last year and he a realistic shot of getting a lot better. So much so, that I believe Hooper, despite projecting an extra year for his development timeline, is one of the best prospects at the position during the past five years. Unless you play in a 1.5 PPR league that hords tight ends, my recommended selection strategy for the position is to pick late or play the waiver wire. The running back and receiver talent may not be as rich as last year, but these two positions develop along a faster timeline starter turnover his high. If you hit on enough players, they’ll provide currency to acquire proven needs elsewhere. One of the reasons this class has fewer proven talents is the rise of the hybrid tight end. There are two extremes of athletes funneled into the position at the college level: Fullbacks that lack the size to handle NFL-caliber edge defenders alone and wide receivers that lack the speed to stretch the seam. A related issue has to do with spread concepts that move tight ends around the formation. Many inventive concepts originate from building a structure that maximizes the best of a unique individual with special talents. Human nature, especially those coveting whatever ultimate prize they’re seeking, views the winning design and devalues

the individual. It’s the concept that’s special. We can replicate the employee. Sometimes they’re right. More often than not, they’re short-sighted. Applying this thought to football, and there are players with higher potential ceilings as traditional, in-line tight ends, but they are asked to play three different positions—in-line tight end, a fullback on the wing, and a slot receiver—and few have that unique combination of talents to match the original design that got the decision-maker excited about the concept in the first place. College programs can run these schemes and win because the tight ends in these systems succeed more on athletic ability good enough to win on Saturday—but not on its own on Sunday—than possessing a cross-section of refined skill. When they arrive in the NFL, they lack the depth of developed skill as in-line tight ends or they’ll never have the athletic ability of Aaron Hernandez and Rob Gronkowski to dominate at a variety of positions. Another reason for this class earning the “weak” tag is the amount of talent from lower profile programs: Florida International, South Carolina State, University of Texas-San Antonio, Western Kentucky, and Harvard. Even if these players have the potential to grow into Sunday regulars, lacking a program with an elite reputation next to their name deflates their draft value to NFL decision-makers. They see more risk to small school names, just like a loan underwriter views a successful small business owner and his 1098 form as a higher credit risk than a welder with a W-2. If the shine dulls on the 2017 tight end class by this point next year, there’s another theory to consider: Because the role of the tight end has morphed, the developmental timeline has increased. If the 2017 class winds up having more holes than draft analysts think and the 2014-2016 classes begin to yield players who are growning up nicely, this idea could have legs. Although there will always be exceptional talents that come along, the tight end was always a slow-developing position. Whether it’s actually common sense, it seems logical that the idea of asking a young player to do more in the same limited development environment will likely slow his growth. If we look back 3-5 years from now and conclude this theory is correct, there will have been 3-5 tight ends—maybe more—who were smart to stash late and wait.

11

Tight Ends Drafted - Total and By Round (2006-2015)

Two years ago, I predicted 18 tight ends would be drafted based on talent and recent offensive trends. That number dropped to 10. Last year, I tempered expectations to 12, at most and the league drafted 19. Based on the talent concentration of the position, and the fact that only 8 of the top 20 fantasy tight ends have more than 6 years of experience, I wouldn’t be surprised if we see between 8-12 tight ends selected in May with at least two-thirds of those players having the physical dimensions at or above the 255-pound threshold for every-down tight ends. I think organizations realize that finding an Aaron Hernandez-Rob Gronkowski combination is a pipedream. About 2016’s Tight End Rankings

The RSP now has two grading scales: Depth of Talent and Breadth of Talent. The traditional checklist that has been around since the RSP began remains in place. What it measures is the number of things that a player can do at his position. The RSP’s Skill Breakdowns have evoled into a measure of how well a player can perform those skills according to defined tiers of performance expectations. Weights have been assigned to to the tiers and like the checklist, there is a total score. The checklist score is the Breadth of Talent Score, while the Skill Breakdowns generate the Depth of Talent Score. The RSP will be using the Depth of Talent Score to build its player rankings Because the Depth of Talent Score awards small bonuses to players who show potential for development in specific areas, the RSP will also provide a table that ranks players without the projection bonuses. This third table will provide readers additional context about where I see these players now and what I foresee from them in the future. This analysis is performed with a grading system with defined criteria (see the Glossary), play-by-play observation, a

19

10

16 16

12 13

20 20

16

0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 1 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 1 0 2 2 4 3 4 2 3 5 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 2 5 0 3 3 1 2 4 4 2 4 2 4 4 3 3 3 5 2 0

5

10

15

20

25

2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007

Total

Round 1

Round 2

Round 3

Round 4

Round 5

Round 6

Round 7

12

player’s realistic development potential, and measurement of his physical skills.

Get the Complete Version of the 2016 RSP at www.mattwaldman.com

Skill Breakdowns The Rookie Scouting Portfolio checklists assess the player’s baseline physical and technical aptitude to become a

professional. These skills and attributes are defined in the publication’s glossary. However, the checklist isn’t designed to differentiate gradations of each skill. The Skill Breakdown reports are an avenue to compare how skilled these players are in each catgeory. The subheadings under each skill should be reasonably self-explanatory, but here’s a quick break down. Star Caliber: A level of skill that rivals the best in the game at his position. Starter Caliber: A level of skill commensurate with a full-time starter at his position. Committee Caliber: A baseline level of skill for a player to contribute productively in an offense. Reserve Caliber: These players lack some amount of technique or athleticism to consistently be productive, but the skill is good enough to contribute to a team. Free Agent: These players lack the minimum skill in a given area to make a team if evaluated strictly by this single component. Deficient: The player’s skill set is so lacking that they aren’t likely to receive interest from a team until it improves to at least a free agent level.

Improvement Spectrum or “Ease of Fix” for Running Back Skill Sets I include my thoughts on a player’s potential to improve his skills within each category. It’s important to remember that athletes often enter their prime in their mid-to-late twenties, which is a attributable to a combination of increased physical, technical, and conceptual skill.

Po

wer a

nd

Bala

nce

Category Easy Fixes Medium Hard Fixes

Arm Tackles x

Stiff Arm x

Initiates Contact x

Pad Level x

2nd Effort x

Cuts x

Head-on x

Indirect x

Ball

Category Easy Fixes Medium Hard Fixes

Correct Arm x

Security x

After Hit x

Sp

eed

an

d

Ag

ility

Category Easy Fixes Medium Hard Fixes

Burst x

1st & 2nd Level x

DBs x

Turns corner x

Lower Body Jukes x

Upper Body Jukes x

13

Avoids Direct Shots x

Layers Moves x

Lateral Cuts x

Vis

ion

Category Easy Fixes Medium Hard Fixes

Decisions X

Patience x

Reads/Anticipates x

Open Field x

Blo

ckin

g

Category Easy Fixes Medium Hard Fixes

Diagnosis x

Cut Blocks x

Hands x

Punch x

Feet x

Catc

hin

g

Category Easy Fixes Medium Hard Fixes

Hands Technique x

Difficult Catches x

Back to QB x

Int/Deep Game x

Consistent Target x

Catchable Targets x

“Ease of Fix” The style of type that I used for each name in these categories indicates a prospect’s potential to improve within these skill sets:

Normal Type: Little to no change projected as this player transitions to the NFL. Easy Fix: These skills can improve with ease to moderate ease if the player makes the effort. Hard Fix: These skills typically take great effort to address, if possible to address at all. Bad Habits: These players have bad habits they need to unlearn – a difficult transition, at best. High Ceiling: Aspect of player’s game with high-end potential with room to improve.

Power

Simply put, Power is a football player’s ability to move forward when a defender is blocking his progress. The variety of methods a player can use to address the defender and his effectiveness at gaining yards after contact determines the

player’s overall score within this category. Walter Payton’s style of play epitomized the techniques of a power runner. Payton was not a big back but power often stems as much from aggression, leverage, and determination as it does size and momentum. Stars can break multiple tackles, break arm tackles, push a pile, and earn yards after a collision; starters can perform 3 of the 4; committee backs 2 of the 4; reserves 1 of the 4; and free agents don’t consistently demonstrate a single one of these factors.

Star Caliber Starter Caliber Committee Caliber Reserve Caliber Free Agent Deficient

Derrick Henry Alex Collins Brandon Ross D.J. Foster Aaron Green

Dwayne Washington Brandon Wilds C.J. Prosise Josh Ferguson

Ezekiel Elliott Chase Price Christian Powell

Peyton Barber Daniel Lasco DeAndre Washington

Devontae Booker Devon Johnson

Jalen Richard Jared Baker

Jasen Oden, Jr. Johnathan Gray

Jhurrell Pressley Kenyan Drake

14

Jonathan Williams Marshaun Coprich

Jordan Howard Remound Wright

Keith Marshall Storm Barrs-Woods

Kelvin Taylor Tyler Ervin

Kenneth Dixon Vad Lee

Paul Perkins Wendell Smallwood

Tra Carson

17 13.6 10.2 6.8 3.4 0 The Best: The joke that Derrick Henry can gain four yards falling down has a kernel of truth to it. His size, strength, body lean, and force typically generated at the point of attack will yield better gains more often than smaller, weaker runners who can’t find or create a crease. Whether it’s excellent pad level, strength to push piles and break tackles, and technique to bounce off hits, Ezekiel Elliott and Peyton Barber use a variety of tools to extract every yard they can get. Dwayne Washington has little to no technical prowess, but he has the raw strength and balance to bounce off hits from linemen and linebackers, break multiple tackles in the same play, and push the pile. He needs to learn the details of the position, but he has great power. Needs Improvement: C.J. Prosise is a former safety and slot receiver, and although he weighs 220 pounds he is often dragged to the ground by safeties on reaching attempts that should not get the job done. Prosise doesn’t know how to run with the kind of leverage that is ingrained in a veteran back. He’s working with a consultant to develop better fundamentals, which should help him learn how to run with better pad level and bend to always be driving forward. Difficult Fix: Aaron Green avoids contact at all costs. Even when he has no choice but to work down hill and attack a

defender at the opposite end of a crease, he’ll turn his back into contact rather than drop his pads head-on. A player must have the will to finish strong. Although Green handles physical play well as a receiver and is willing to trade punches with much larger defenders as a pass protector, he does not exhibit the same willingness as a runner and it’s a major obstacle to his development.

Balance

Balance is a core factor in effective ball carrying, denoting the combination of good foot and body placement, agility, and awareness of one’s physical space. A player with good balance can adjust to the force of a hard blow and not fall over. Football players are trained to maintain their balance when facing most head-on collisions with a defender, but special

players have the rare ability to keep their balance when the direction of the blow or placement of the blow to the body is unexpected, coming from an angle or particularly forceful. Although an extreme example, Barry Sanders frequently demonstrated throughout his career that a low pad level, uncanny anticipation of defensive angles, and great balance could defeat the backfield penetration of a player with a significant height-weight advantage. As a receiver, Herman Moore possessed great balance in and out of routes adjusting to the ball, and as a ball carrier after the catch.

Direct Balance: The RSP defines this subcategory of balance as a player’s ability to stay upright against head-on contact. It also includes the stride of the player and how balanced he remains while running. Free agents can create a stalemate in a head-on collision with a defensive back; reserves can win collisions with defensive backs and earn stalemates with linebackers; committee backs can win collisions with defensive backs and linebackers; starters can beat defensive backs and linebackers and force stalemates with linemen; stars can win collisions head-on with all three levels of the defense.

Star Caliber Starter Caliber Committee Caliber Reserve Caliber Free Agent Deficient

Derrick Henry Alex Collins C.J. Prosise Chase Price Aaron Green

Brandon Wilds Christian Powell D.J. Foster Brandon Ross

Devon Johnson Daniel Lasco DeAndre Washington Marshaun Coprich

Dwayne Washington Jalen Richard Devontae Booker Tyler Ervin

Ezekiel Elliott Paul Perkins Jared Baker Vad Lee

Jasen Oden, Jr. Storm Barrs-Woods Jhurrell Pressley

Jonathan Williams Johnathan Gray

Jordan Howard Josh Ferguson

Keith Marshall Kenyan Drake

15

Kelvin Taylor Remound Wright

Kenenth Dixon Wendell Smallwood

Peyton Barber

Tra Carson

5 4 3 2 1 0 The Best: Derrick Henry wins collisions with lineman the way good starters can beat linebackers. It’s like watching a sledgehammer pound a railroad stake into the earth. Needs Improvement: Kenyan Drake has all the athletic tools to become a good ballcarrier, but none of the form or technique to accomplish it. If he can learn to run with a more controlled gait, including his stride and pad level, he could transform his game. If a defender hits Devontae Booker above the waist, the Utah runner looks like an elite back. If Booker gets hit below the waist, he looks like a reserve. I’d like to seem him get better at handling both types of contact. If he figures this out, he could become a special runner.

Indirect Balance: The RSP defines this subcategory of balance as a player’s ability to stay upright against contact

delivered to a player’s side. It also includes changes of direction the player executes. Free agents can create a stalemate in a head-on collision with a defensive back; reserves can win collisions with defensive backs and earn stalemates with linebackers; committee backs can win collisions with defensive backs and linebackers; starters can beat defensive backs and linebackers and force stalemates with linemen; stars can win collisions head-on with all three levels of the defense.

Star Caliber Starter Caliber Committee Caliber Reserve Caliber Free Agent Deficient

Brandon Wilds Alex Collins Aaron Green Johnathan Gray

Derrick Henry Brandon Ross Chase Price Kenyan Drake

Devontae Booker C.J. Prosise Christian Powell Vad Lee

Dwayne Washington Jalen Richard D.J. Foster

Ezekiel Elliott Kareem Hunt Daniel Lasco

Jared Baker Remound Wright DeAndre Washington

Jasen Oden, Jr. Storm Barrs-Woods Devon Johnson

Jonathan Williams Wendell Smallwood Jhurrell Pressley

Jordan Howard Josh Ferguson

Keith Marshall Marshaun Coprich

Kelvin Taylor Tyler Ervin

Kenneth Dixon

Paul Perkins

Peyton Barber

Tra Carson

3 2.4 1.8 1.2 0.6 0

The Best: Jonathan Williams has flexible hips to go with his feature back size. He has a knack for taking contact at indirect angles and staying upright as well as bending at odd angles to recover from contact at the same time he’s pushing opponents off their spot. Dwayne Washington looks like Brandon Marshall in build, but he bounces off hits from large defenders like Adrian Peterson’s unsophisticated cousin. Needs Improvement: See the entry for Kenyan Drake for direct balance, because the issues he has with his gait also apply here. C.J. Prosise, like Drake, is more athlete running the ball than running back. Prosise will get a lot more from his cuts if he can execute changes of direction from a better base.

Ball Handling

The category of Ball Handling incorporates a number of skills ranging from the most fundamental to the highly advanced. A superb offensive skill player not only demonstrates the ability to protect the ball while the target of 11 defenders, but can also use the ball to trick the defense with misdirection plays and allow his teammates more room to execute plays.

16

Star Caliber Starter Caliber Committee Caliber Reserve Caliber Free Agent Deficient

Aaron Green Alex Collins C.J. Prosise

Brandon Ross Daniel Lasco Devontae Booker

Brandon Wilds Devon Johnson Dwayne Washington

Chase Price Jasen Oden, Jr.

Christian Powell Jhurrell Pressley

D.J. Foster Josh Ferguson

DeAndre Washington Kelvin Taylor

Derrick Henry Kenneth Dixon

Ezekiel Elliott Kenyan Drake

Jalen Richard Remound Wright

Jared Baker Storm Barrs-Woods

Johnathan Gray Tra Carson

Jonathan Williams Vad Lee

Jordan Howard

Kareem Hunt

Keith Marshall

Marshaun Coprich

Paul Perkins

Peyton Barber

Tyler Ervin

Wendell Smallwood

11 8.8 6.6 4.4 2.2 0

The Best: Kelvin Taylor hasn’t fumbled during his college career. It’s the only thing he does better than his dad—who is??—at the position and if there is one way not to be just like his dad on the field, ball security would be it. Derrick Henry and Ezekiel Elliott carry the load for great teams, and they don’t cough up the ball. Needs Improvement: Kenneth Dixon fumbled every 63.5 touches at Lousiana Tech. His ball security is sound, but he’s a never-quit runner who gives second, third, and fourth efforts on plays, putting his body in awkward positions where the ball can be ripped free. He often gets his pads too high, allowing defenders to deliver hits to the ball. Alex Collins has the same problem as Dixon and lost a fumble every 43.3 touches. C.J. Prosise carries the ball too loose from his frame when he’s not in traffic, but backs don’t always know when traffic—otherwise known as pursuit—is catching up to them. Prosise also lets the ball drift low and wide from his frame when he changes direction, regardless of the density of traffic around him. He lost a fumble every 45.6 touches. Kenyan Drake, like Prosise, has to learn to run under control. Part of that control is ball security. He lost a fumble every 39.9 touches.

Speed

A player can be fast in different contexts. Speed can be measured over a variety of distances and directions. 40 yards in a straight line is the most recognizable format that people use to measure a football player’s speed. While intermediate to long-range sprinting speed has its benefits, there are other components of being “fast” as a football player. This includes short area burst—or acceleration—and non-linear speed. It is also a lot different for a player to run fast in conditions when he isn’t in several pounds of pads, hasn’t been hit dozens of times for 45-50 minutes, and his stamina level is less than optimal. The player running at the combine also isn’t being asked to think and react to outside stimuli such as defenders trying to take his head off, and there’s a good reason to wonder whether functional speed is overlooked in the evaluation process. A football player that can’t make good decisions instinctively is not as fast as a player that can react rather than think. This is why players such as Mike Anderson, Michael Irvin, and Priest Holmes have made several big plays throughout their careers but lacked impressive stopwatch speed at their respective positions.

17

Star Caliber Starter Caliber Committee Caliber Reserve Caliber Free Agent Deficient

Dwayne Washington Aaron Green Alex Collins Chase Price

Jhurrell Pressley Barry Sanders, Jr. Brandon Ross Christian Powell

Keith Marshall Brandon Wilds Devon Johnson Jasen Oden, Jr.

Marshaun Coprich C.J. Prosise Jalen Richard Jordan Howard

Tyler Ervin D.J. Foster Kelvin Taylor Peyton Barber

Daniel Lasco Kenneth Dixon Storm Barrs-Woods

DeAndre Washington Remound Wright Tra Carson

Derrick Henry

Devontae Booker

Ezekiel Elliott

Jared Baker

Johnathan Gray

Jonathan Williams

Josh Ferguson

Kenyan Drake

Paul Perkins

Vad Lee

Wendell Smallwood

3 2.4 1.8 1.2 0.6 0 The Best: I don’t know exactly how fast Dwayne Washington runs, but the 226-pound track star-turned running back had a personal best 100 meters of 11.09 seconds in high school back in 2010. What I see is a ball carrier who outruns cornerbacks with good angles. Keith Marshall ran a 4.31-second 40 at the NFL Combine. Although he didn’t have a breakaway run as a junior, his freshman tape is filled with touchdowns where he pulled past SEC defensive backs like it wasn’t even hard work. Monitor: Kenneth Dixon’s 4.59-second 40 is acceptable for a pro running back. His game is built on quickness, balance,

and versatility, but if he gets faster, he could develop into the most dangerous back in this class. Peyton Barber’s game is also one of agility and vision. If he can add a little more long speed to his game, he could become a feature back. The Worst: Tra Carson and Jordan Howard don’t need long speed as much as they need to maintain acceleration so that they hit creases with enough force to win collisions. If either one cultivates more long speed, he can become a viable candidates for a starting lineup. Chase Price is one of the more technically sound backs in this draft, but he lacks breakaway speed. If he somehow acquires it, his overall skills could make him a feature back, but don’t count on it.

Acceleration A component of speed, acceleration is how fast a player can get to full speed from a stop, a change of direction, or from a slower speed. Acceleration is arguably one of the greatest assets a runner has. How much of it he has and how he uses it in the context of a play can tip the scales in favor of a smaller runner lacking top-end speed (Emmitt Smith) and a bigger runner that can pull away in the open field, but has difficulty getting past the line of scrimmage (Bishop Sankey).

Star Caliber Starter Caliber Committee Caliber Reserve Caliber Free Agent Deficient

D.J. Foster Aaron Green Brandon Ross Christian Powell Devon Johnson

Dwayne Washington Alex Collins Daniel Lasco Jasen Oden, Jr.

Jhurrell Pressley Brandon Wilds Jalen Richard Remound Wright

Keith Marshall C.J. Prosise Jonathan Williams Storm Barrs-Woods

Kenneth Dixon Chase Price Jordan Howard Tra Carson

Marshaun Coprich DeAndre Washington Kelvin Taylor

Tyler Ervin Derrick Henry Wendell Smallwood

18

Devontae Booker

Ezekiel Elliott

Jared Baker

Johnathan Gray

Josh Ferguson

Kenyan Drake

Paul Perkins

Peyton Barber

Vad Lee

10 8 6 4 2 0

The Best: Only Jhurrell Pressley’s burst is similar to what we saw from the very best of last year’s class, but several still have star-caliber get-off. Tyler Ervin and Keith Marshall are more linear, straight-line runners compared to Marshaun Coprich and Jhurell Pressley who are likely to cut across the width of the field as they are to cleave a path north-south. Dixon’s suddenness is why his all-around game is at another level. Monitor: If Jalen Richard makes noise in a training camp, it’s because the 5-8, 210-pound runner has proven he has the burst to hang with the big boys. Richard has the vision, the balance, and the feet to compete for an opportunity. If the burst is there, he’ll be competing for a shot to contribute. Jordan Howard has to show more burst, or the one-speed runner talk will be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Needs Improvement: Storm Barrs-Woods has a smart game, but he lacks that something extra to elevate it to NFL-caliber skill. The one trait that could tie it all together is better acceleration. I’m not expecting him to acquire it.

Get the Complete Version of the 2016 RSP at www.mattwaldman.com

19

The Top 50 Receiver Prospects for Dynasty Leagues

My rankings are based on my Depth of Talent Score with ties sorted by the highest Breadth of Talent Score. These two scores represent the combination of collected data in this analysis, my view of their potential fit within any offensive system, and their potential for growth.

Additional rankings tables are sorted by Breadth of Talent, Big Receivers, and Slot Receivers . The main rankings are the Combined Board; a list of every player regardless of size and role. This is my truest, unfiltered ranking of players based on talent. Many of the players on the Combined Board are true slot receivers. Although New England, Denver, San Francisco, New Orleans, the New York Giants, and Miami are recent examples of teams that have heightened the role of the slot receiver in their offenses, the majority of teams place greater emphasis on height and weight for a primary receiver. Many of the smaller talents ranked on my Combined Board won’t even earn a shot at a starting role, but I don’t want to generate rankings where I downgrade players based on height and weight. The Big Board and the Slot Board is my solution to this dilemma. If you lean towards the conservative side of what works in football, then the Big Board is a ranking of receivers that are at least 6-0, 210 lbs. The Slot Board is a list of players of any height/weight dimension that I believe are well-suited to a slot role. While many of them are smaller players, Michael Crabtree and Marques Colston are “big slot” receivers and I have included prospects whose skills and athleticism fit into this category. The detailed profile summaries below are based on my Combined Board of the top-50 receivers I have studied. I will continue studying prospects from April through the NFL Draft, so there’s a good chance that there will be additional receivers in the RSP Post-Draft publication. The tables for the Combined Board, Big Board, and Slot Board are in the pages after the profiles.

In any dynasty league setting, I would be comfortable drafting the top 15 receivers from the Combined Board. In larger leagues with practice squad allocations and large rosters, there are 32-48 prospects I’d consider from this list below.

Note: Links to player highlights and/or interviews may break over time because I did not create them. I am only providing them as a reference for as long as they are available on the Internet. The music in these videos are often not safe for work.

20

1. Laquon Treadwell, Ole Miss (6-2, 221) Speed. Josh Doctson has enough of it. Corey Coleman has a ton of it. Even Jordan Payton has more of it than many people thought. It’s one of the bigger questions people have about Laquon Treadwell. It’s enough of a question that Treadwell is no longer the consensus No.1 receiver among draft analysts. I don’t care what Treadwell’s timed speed is; he could run a 4.7-second 40 and he’d still be the top receiver on my board. The reasons have to do with how Treadwell integrates every ounce of his balance, strength, hand-eye coordination, technique, and unwavering aggression. Treadwell is not just big, he’s limber and graceful. He can lay out for a target at any angle. The way he extends for back-shoulder fades displays an ease often seen in Randy Moss. Treadwell’s flexibility is also on display in the face of

contact. He extends through collisions for extra yards, and he has the bend to maintain his feet and regain his balance in situations not expected of a 221-pound receiver, especially a receiver as aggressive as Treadwell. His steps off the line of scrimmage are sudden, precise, and focused on attacking defenders against press coverage. Treadwell consistently wins the battle at the line of scrimmage with a repertoire of moves where he uses his feet and hands in concert to get behind a defender: shoulder dips, rips, arm-overs, two-hand pushes paired with a swat, and all choreographed with footwork that makes these moves effective. His variation of footwork is better than most receivers entering the NFL and the best I have seen from a big man in recent memory. Treadwell uses stop-start moves, jab steps, and various one-, two-, and three-step movements to set up his opponent. He even varies the pace of his actions to throw off the defenders. It’s hard to watch Treadwell release from the line of scrimmage and deny that he looks like a quick-twitch athlete. If there are any timed workouts that counter this observation, which I doubt will happen, then the most viable conclusion one can make about Treadwell is that his refined preparation makes him a lot quicker at performing actions on the field than running around ropes, cones, and yard markers. His collection of refined moves at the line, his strength, and his understanding of how to defeat cornerbacks against the jam are the best I’ve seen from a college receiver. He’ll still have a learning curve to face against NFL defenders, but he’s more equipped to make a quick transition than most. And it’s Treadwell’s skill to release at the line that should make him an impact player early on, because it’s the most important part of playing receiver. Once Treadwell gets into his stem, he does a lot of positive things to set up his breaks. He’ll often maintain a strong pad level as he takes a direct path into the defender’s alignment, which forces the opponent to turn and run. At the top of his stem, Treadwell can stack a

defender and control his pace, rendering top-speed a moot point on vertical routes. On short routes, he makes discriminating use of jab steps, head fakes, and shoulder fakes to force defensive backs into bad decisions.

Entering his breaks, Treadwell has already shown skill to come to a stop with one step. This is rare for young receivers—even more so for a receiver of Treadwell’s size who runs his routes with intensity. Keep in mind that all of this has been on display after Treadwell recovered from a nasty broken leg. The next step for the receiver is learning to drop his hips into his breaks with every type of route where this technique applies. Right now, he’s adept at dropping his hips on shorter routes. Once he can execute this technique on intermediate routes, he’ll become the type of possession threat who can move the chains at will in the middle of the field, in the flats, or at the boundaries—even against bracketed coverage. This is especially true for Treadwell because he routinely breaks back to the quarterback and attacks the ball at the earliest possible point. One area where Treadwell must get better is honoring the length of the stem so he doesn’t have to fade backwards into the desired depth of the route. When he doesn’t run stems the correct length, this fading into a

break as compensation has the unintended effect of allowing an opponent to earn a backside opening to attack the ball. This issue happens most often on back–shoulder fades. He plays bigger than his height. He has the timing to jump over the backs of defenders and snatch the ball. And he wins the ball in a collision. Although not a traditional deep threat, neither is Larry Fitzgerald, Brandon Marshall nor Michael Irvin. Like these receivers, Treadwell is a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t player: play physical against him, and he’ll bully you into separation. Lay off him, and Treadwell will quickly and fluidly dictate his agenda. It means Treadwell wins almost everywhere on the field despite lacking great stopwatch speed. He also fits every style of offense. Does the team need a rebounder because the quarterback lacks great anticipation with the deep game or the offensive line forces rushed throws? Does the offense run a precision offense that requires receivers to be exactly at their spot by the time the quarterback finishes the last step of his drop? Or does the offense employ a heavy wide receiver screen game as an extension of the ground game? Treadwell does it all. Two of Treadwell’s most outstanding traits are assets to the ground game. He’s excellent at transitioning from receiver to ballcarrier, making the first defender miss with a sudden fake or a series of shifty moves to get the opponent moving the wrong way. He also runs through wraps, pushes piles, stiff-arms defenders, and bounces off contact from DBs and some smaller LBs. The way he moves to set up his running after the catch is more advanced than most college receivers. What’s also going to endear Treadwell to coaches and teammates is his effort as a run blocker. He’s by far the best blocker in this class. He can square, slide, punch with violence, roll his hips into the contact to create leverage, and sustain his hands until the whistle.

Treadwell loves to peel off one block as the runner passes him and deliver a second shot on a pursuing defender. If Treadwell doesn’t wind up in at least a few fights during training camp, I’ll be shocked.

21

I also be shocked if he doesn’t draw some personal fouls during the season, because he’ll play through the whistle and instigate conflicts. Another way he can get too aggressive is by dropping his head into his blocks on quick-hitting passes. When he overextends like this, he lacks a set base and gives the opponent an easy opportutunity to shed the block. He’ll have the occasional concentration drop where he looks downfield to run before he secures the ball and he’ll also carry the ball too loose from his body in the open field. These are minor issues. The major takeaways should be that Treadwell dominates at the line of scrimmage, makes excellent plays at the catch point in phyiscal coverage, and has he best blend of power, agility, and balance in the open field of the receivers in this class and recent classes. He may not be the next Calvin Johnson or A.J. Green, but if that’s your only template for a special receiver worthy of sitting atop a class, you need to expand your horizons.

Treadwell has 1000-yard, double-digit touchdown potential this year and every year that he can stay healthy and play with a QB possessing at least a good football IQ. Laquon Treadwell RSP Boiler Room-Part I Laquon Treadwell RSP Boiler Room-Part II Laquon Treadwell highlights Pre-NFL Draft Fantasy Advice: While closer to his upside than the likes of Dorial Green-Beckham, Kevin White, and DeVante Parker, Treadwell is more NFL-ready than they were this time last year. He has the highest grade of any skill player in this class and I expect him to start Week 1 and deliver no worse than WR3 production. 2. Josh Doctson, TCU (6-2, 202) There’s a healthy contingent of analysts who favor Doctson as the No.1 overall receiver on the board. Gorgeous feats of acrobatics headline the TCU receiver’s game. At the same time, some of Doctson’s best work comes from coverage that Treadwell is more adept at beating earlier in the route. Even so, there’s more to Doctson than high-pointing deep targets at the boundary in tight coverage. While Treadwell has greater depth of skill, Doctson has a slightly broader range of appreciable traits. It might be why some analysts—and possibly teams—find Doctson the most appealing receiver on the board. Doctson is a smooth prospect who plays a big man’s game at the catch point. His skills remind me a lot of the Lions’ new receiver, Marvin Jones, except Jones made more impressive catches, ran better routes, and did more in the open field at Cal than Doctson did at TCU. And Jones was a fifth-round pick. I mentioned Jones’ draft spot to elicit a reaction from you and make a point: Despite the statistical evidence that claims to indicate otherwise, there is not as strong of a

correlation between draft spot and talent as writers like to indicate. In order for this to be valid, all NFL teams would have to give every player equal reps in practice and have open competitions for every spot—not to

mention have a process for making decisions on each player free of major bias. The real correlation between the player and his draft spot is about the team’s willingness to give those players opportunities to see the field. A low-round pick or free agent usually sees far fewer opportunities in practice or in meaningful parts of scrimmages and games. Each rep has far more meaning—if even paid attention to—than the reps of an early-round pick who is expected to start or contribute immediately. If an early-round pick doesn’t shine in practice, he’s on the bench. If a late-round pick or undrafted free agent doesn’t shine, he’s far more likely to be cut. Unless there’s a major injury or a coach notices and touts one of these players, late-round picks and undrafted free agents have a steeper learning curve and much tighter window of evaluation to earn the right to compete on the field. And most teams don’t immediately elevate the status of these picks after seeing them consistently out-perform the more heralded prospects.

So when I say that Jones at Cal was a better player than Doctson at TCU, it’s not a slight to Doctson. There are writers I know at major media websites who scout and write about rookies who pegged Jones as a late-round possession receiver because they hadn’t seen tape of his junior year, when he was a force as a deep threat. The fact that Jones was dominating a good cornerback class during Senior Bowl practices was only they thought. Now Jones is replacing Calvin Johnson in Detroit as Matt Stafford’s primary receiver. Jones’ exploits on the field—not necessarily the box score—are first-round value. And it took a year for Jones to earn an opportunity to impress on the field with the Bengals. Doctson is far more likely to go in the second-round than fifth. The long-term expectations will be higher, which will afford him more practice time and the opportunity to work at a slower pace while still with the team. I think he’ll have moments where he shines as a rookie and, if he learns fast, he could start and thrive. But if I’m betting on instant impact, Doctson will be third to Treadwell and Corey Coleman and the reason is their work at the line of scrimmage. Treadwell is like LeBron James going to the hole: quick, powerful, with multiple ways to win. Coleman’s lightning quicks gives him an edge even when his technique lapses. While skilled, Doctson’s work from the line lacks a special, defining characteristic that will give him a consistent leg up right away. He reduces the shoulder to avoid contact at the line of scrimmage, and he also employs a shake or chop in combination with three- and four-step release footwork. He must add to his repertoire of techniques because unlike Treadwell and Coleman, who can do rare things at the beginning of a route, Doctson’s uncommon physical skill manifests at the latter stages of a route. None of this makes Doctson a bad route runner. One of the things I enjoy the most about Doctson is the subtle ways he manipulates single coverage. He uses his eyes to sell downfield routees during his stem and he’ll pull the

string on an opponent with a slight lean, turn of the head, or slight change of pace that baits the defender into second-guessing the break point. Once the defender pauses, Docston takes the lead and rarely gives it up.

22

Doctson is also a skilled underneath receiver. He’s adept at snapping his head around on the break and locating the ball on quick-hitting routes. He understands his assignments and is often on the same page with his quarterback when it comes to adjusting the route to a change in the coverage. This season, Doctson improved the depth he got on routes, selling the stem longer and showing more competence with his speed breaks. He executes flat breaks with quicker turns than previous seasons and he’s in greater sync with the arrival of the target. Doctson still has some lapses where he doesn’t run a long enough route stem and the angle of the ball requires a greater adjustment from him than necessary and limits the open lanes after the catch, but it’s getting better. So are the turns of his hard breaks. He still has to learn to take that one hard step and drop his hips. Like Treadwell, Doctson thrives at the catch-point, but he has a larger portfolio of these plays. He makes successful

adjustments to the ball in the air against tight coverage and he can maintain possession of the ball despite getting hit while airborne. He has a knack for snatching the ball away from the reach of a defender, showing excellent body control in the air. . His timing with leaps is good enough that he has the quality of a basketball player who seems to have more hangtime that his peers when he penetrates the lane. Doctson’s lean and limber frame, his sideline awareness, his tracking of the ball, and his skill for adjusting his body in midair all create the perception he is floating, like Jordan above the rim. It isn’t magic. It’s the product of a 41-inch vertical on a 6’2” frame. His skill for adjusting to the ball also includes catching targets delivered to awkward positions, opposite his momentum on a given route. The one notable aspect of Doctson’s receiving skills that could get better is his attack on the ball. He doesn’t always get his hands up to meet the ball at its earliest point of arrival and it can make his targets more difficult. Not the physical force that Treadwell is as a runner, Doctson can pull away from pursuit. He’s also patient behind blockers and he knows when to drop the pads, split the defense, and push for extra yards. Doctson is a willing blocker who will square, extend his arms, and sustain contact with a defender long enough to turn his opponent. He’ll also run off a defender with a believable route instead of trying to engage. He is inconsistent with moving his feet after contact with the defender. His legs stop moving when he looks back for the ballcarrier, creating an opportunity for the defender to shed him and get into the play. While I prefer Treadwell because he’s a more technically sound route runner and one of the most physical receivers in several draft classes—with or without the ball—Doctson offers a little more speed and proven creativity at the catch point. Josh Doctson RSP Boiler Room

Josh Doctson highlights Pre-NFL Draft Fantasy Advice: Doctson’s skills are broad enough that, compared to Treadwell and Corey

Coleman, he’s the receiver most likely to land in a situation that demands more patience to see him make an impact. Though the idea seems counterintuitive, Treadwell and Coleman will be featured as extensions of the ground game with more success than what Doctson can offer. And as pretty as Doctson’s plays are on 50/50 balls, projecting an immediate connection with a quarterback and a rookie receiver on these routes is unwise. Doctson isn’t the route runner that Amari Cooper was, either. I wouldn’t have Doctson No.2 on my board if I didn’t see him as player capable of succeeding early, but his value is a little better long-term than short. Rankings Note: I won’t say that Coleman is a distant third to Treadwell and Doctson in my rankings, but it’s enough of a separation to put the Baylor receiver as the headliner of a second tier, because the distance between Coleman and the 13th-ranked receiver is about the same as the distance between Coleman and these top-two

talents. In fact, the next three players on my board are practically even in talent, but different enough in how that talent is expressed that team fit will be most important in determining the order that they should be drafted. Absent of that information before the draft, this is how it shakes out based solely on depth of talent. 3. Corey Coleman, Baylor (5-11, 194)

Get the Complete Version

of the 2016 RSP at www.mattwaldman.com

23

WR Rankings Tables: Combined Board, Big Board, and Slot Board Combined Board (Top 50) Times and measurements are from the NFL Combine or Pro Day workouts. “Potential” is my assessment of the player’s development curve based on his potential to improve his strength and athleticism with additional training or learn the techniques and concepts of his position. Players labeled “Upside” have additional opportunities to become better athletes and/or technicians at their position. Players earning the “Boom-Bust” label generally have a high level of athleticism but lack the knowledge of a skill or concept that could be difficult to learn. In some cases, these “Boom-Bust” players have excellent skills and knowledge of concepts, but the base athleticism to perform the job might be questionable and the chance of them improving those physical skills are not likely. A player with a “Maxed” label has likely reached his athletic (or conceptual) potential and this will limit his ability to grow beyond his current assessment. I have also labeled the roles where I believe each receiver can succeed immediately in the NFL:

Man – Tight single coverage or off man coverage that includes timing routes, vertical routes, and Red zone

targets. This is the most difficult adjustment for most young receiver, because of the element of playing a man and executing a route.

Timing – Slants, outs, digs, comebacks, and curls against off coverage or zone coverage where technique is necessary to execute with precision.

Zone – Zone coverage is more difficult than many realize. It involves anticipating where the defense is dropping

and running a fluid route to an open spot. This often requires settng up multiple defenders. There are players that are strong players against man coverage, but falter against zone.

Slot – Slot receivers generally have to be adept at zone coverage, but they also have to make more adjustments at the line of scrimmage. They face press coverage less often than perimeter receivers.

Vertical – Some players may lack great route skills to beat single coverage in the short and intermediate zones of a defense, but they have the speed, strength, leaping ability, and body control to win the ball in the vertical game regardless of the coverage type.

Red zone – The skills requried for a good vertical receiver are also fitting for the area inside the opponents’ 20 yard-line.

Based on my conversations with scouts, wide receiver rankings tend to have the greatest variance for organization to organization. Team fit, physical preferences, and special teams skill are three primary factors for this variation. The RSP Post-Draft will feature rankings that take the draft into account. Remember that injuries, off-field, issues, and other unexpected developments will make what seemed improbable today become likely tomorrow. Having sets of rankings that account for the politics/business of the NFL Draft (RSP Post-Draft rankings) and account solely for talent (this publication) will come in handy years from now.

Rank Name Ht Wt School Depth Breadth 40 20 3C V B Comments Role

1 Laquon Treadwell 6'2" 221 Ole Miss 89.95 88.5 4.65 33.00 12.00

Treadwell plays with

strength, burst, technique, and relentless physicality.

When did possession

receiver become a bad

label and why can't one be the top player in the class?

Man, Timing,

Zone, Slot, Vertical, Red

Zone

2 Josh Doctson 6'2" 202 TCU 86.95 90 4.50 4.08 6.84 41.00 14.00

Doctson is more of a

finesse player compared to

Treadwell, but he too is a

little more of a plus possession receiver than

people realize. I love his

feel for the game.

Man, Timing,

Zone, Slot,

Vertical, Red

Zone

3 Corey Coleman 5'11" 194 Baylor 83.15 85.5 40.50 17.00

Coleman could easily have

the best career of the receivers in this class. Give

him a year to gauge the

physicality of the league

and watch out.

Man, Timing,

Zone, Slot,

Vertical, Red

Zone, Return Specialist

Get the Complete Version of the 2016 RSP at www.mattwaldman.com

24

2015 Rookie Scouting Portfolio Post-Draft Analysis (Sample)

By Matt Waldman

25

2015 Rookie Scouting Portfolio Post-Draft Analysis

Copyright ©2015 by Matt Waldman mattwaldmanrsp@gmail.com

Printed in the United States of America. Al Rights reserved under International

Copyright Law.

No part of this file or online publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means without the prior written consent of Matt Waldman.

26

Introduction: How the Pre-Draft/Post-Draft Work Together

The rankings and analysis of this May update is based on a player’s draft status, his potential fit with the team, and his competition for playing time on the depth chart. The

rankings from April are based on my perception of a player’s talent.

Keep this in mind when comparing pre-draft and post-draft rankings. Lesser talents in better situations can out-perform greater talents in more difficult surroundings.

This analysis is targeted for my fantasy football audience, which has requested it for a

few years. Therefore, players I may have rated much higher on a basis of talent evaluation may be much lower in the post-draft analysis.

If you have a strong belief in drafting talent over situation, lean more on the pre-draft

RSP rankings. If you believe in factoring talent and situation, then this is the analysis to

consider for now. Remember, situations change (trades, cuts, injuries, etc.), so the pre-draft analysis still has a longer shelf life for future reference such as the waiver wire and

trades.

Dynasty/Re-draft League Philosophy

The spectrum of dynasty league strategy ranges from building a team year-to-year with a lot of player turnover to the aim of growing a dynasty that wins with players that

spend the bulk of their careers on the fantasy owners’ roster. I believe in looking at players in windows of 2-3 years. This post-draft analysis is seen from this perspective.

Re-draft league owners will also benefit from this information despite the window of

perspective being 2-3 years. The reason is the value this information provides as a guide for late-round picks and free agency during the season. Good drafts build good teams;

good in-season management builds winners.

My Thought Process behind the Rankings

Some of my rankings criteria are spelled out more within the analysis than others. For the sake of time, not everything is as transparent as I make it for the pre-draft analysis.

Here are some of the concepts that were in my mental checklist as I performed my analysis.

Scoring System

There are a great variety of scoring systems in fantasy football. These rankings were

developed, but not specifically, with this system in mind: • 1 point per reception

• 4 points per passing touchdown

• 6 points per rushing/receiving touchdown • 1 point per 10 yards rushing and receiving

• 0.5 points per 10 years passing

27

These rankings are not based on statistical projection.

Projected Years of Starter Productivity

The rankings are seen through the lens of 2-3 years. Some players I ranked higher in the pre-draft analysis may have a significantly lower ranking here. This is because it

may take 2-3 years for the player to develop into a productive fantasy starter.

Likewise, players with lower pre-draft rankings may get a bump because they will see opportunities to play earlier in their careers and the surrounding talent and coaching are

good enough to facilitate production. I believe these situations will either help the player improve at a faster rate or the offense will be able to maximize the player’s skills while

hiding his weaknesses.

In some cases, there will be players with a lower post-draft ranking despite a good

opportunity to play. In these cases, I believe the player landed in a situation where the surrounding talent and coaching will not do enough to help this player succeed early in

his career. I believe the match of player and coaching staff/surrounding talent could have a long-term detriment to his career.

While I’m doubtful that a player in this situation will have early success and I’ll express

that in my rankings, I am aware of the possibility that he may have some statistical success – perhaps significant productivity. Most fantasy readers view multiple sources

for information and I feel it makes the most sense for me to stand my ground and give the reader a guidepost that’s easier for them to form a view. Whether this view is closer

to mine or farther away, if the reader leaves these rankings with a firmer idea of what to do in a draft then I have done my job.

A Breakdown of the Analysis within the Post-Draft Add-On

This is my third year doing post-draft analysis for the Rookie Scouting Portfolio. If I continue to provide this service with the RSP, there will be a lot of room for

improvement. I value feedback so please share your thoughts.

I cannot promise I will either have the time, resources, or inclination to make all of these suggestions a reality. However, readers make the RSP better every year with their

input and I don’t expect anything different when it comes to this post-draft analysis.

The post-draft analysis contains the following: • Overrated/Underrated from a fantasy draft perspective

• Good/Bad fits with projected NFL system • Long-Term Projects

UDFA’s to Watch

• Post-draft rankings and commentary Overall

By position

28

Average pick analysis

Average pick based on dynasty drafts

A shorthand value system based on this data and my rankings

Depth chart information

Tiered cheat sheet

The aim for each of these sections is to provide the reader a well-rounded perspective about players in the 2014 rookie class, their new teams and their value on draft day for

dynasty leagues.

Additional Takes

The NFL Draft is much shorter than it used to be, but there is still arguably the same

level of talent available. I believe NFL scouting methods have mixed success with its process and there are some glaring holes in its methods that lead to good—occasionally

great—players slipping between the cracks.

The issues of organizational development strategies and character are another minefield. I comment little about character in the Rookie Scouting Portfolio publications because I

do not interview players or perform background investigations. I also believe the general public has a different idea of acceptable character than the average NFL team and the

public applies these standards (right or wrong) to these players.

Here are three essays taken from the Rookie Scouting Portfolio Blog about this subject. Evaluating the Evaluator discusses the flaws of the current evaluation process common

to the NFL. Character, Media, and the NFL: A Sour Cocktail discusses why I don’t spend

a lot of time on Character. Ruining QBs: A Recipe for Disaster broaches the flaws in NFL leadership that impacts player development.

It’s important to note that I may lack the experience and expertise of a top NFL scout,

but I believe there are aspects of my job experience and methods that improve upon the current outdated processes.

For those of you with analytics on your mind, I agree that there is a benefit to data

analysis. However, I have also interviewed consultants for NFL teams with strong backgrounds in data analysis and experience at the highest levels of playing the game.

Two articles I also highly recommend are The Hidden Advantage of Being a High NFL Draft Pick and Why Scouting Gets a Bum Rap: A Front Office Overhaul.

Get the Complete Version of the 2016 RSP at www.mattwaldman.com

29

Overrated/Underrated Players The players I’m profiling below are over or undervalued based on a projected playing

time window of 2-3 years, talent, and situation. I have a shorthand value method that is introduced later in this analysis that will help the reader gauge a potential sweet spot to

draft the player (or avoid reaching too high) if the reader agrees with my take. The information in this section will provide a more detailed explanation of players where the

valuation and my thoughts about that player’s potential match.

Falcons RB Tevin Coleman: Atlanta’s new running back is an exciting player. If you examine his stats, you’ll be awe-inspired by his average length of touchdown runs and

his yards gained in an Indiana offense that wasn’t known for its offensive line play.

These stats and Coleman’s speed will mislead you.

Coleman is not as comparable to DeMarco Murray as he is to Darren McFadden. The

biomechanics of their gaits appear similar, but Murray isn’t as stiff-hipped as McFadden and Coleman. A stiff-hipped gait inhibits balance, especially when a running back fails to

bend those hips and drive through contact when he drops his pads.

A habit that Coleman has to compound this problem is his tendency to drop his head into contact. When a running back drops his head, he loses all of his leverage and he’s

easily brought to the ground. These biomechanical habits aren’t easy to break. It’s part of how they “play their instrument” and it has been ingrained since they began

competing in athletics.

Coleman’s stiff-hipped gait also promotes a narrow stride width between each foot. It makes Coleman easier to knock off balance when he’s not running at full speed.

Coleman’s running style isn’t as problematic when he’s operating gap plays because the

design of these runs is to hit one specific crease decisively.

That single target crease of a gap play encourages runners to build momentum and hit that hole hard. This is why McFadden and Coleman appear to have good power if you

see them reach the second level and you hear them collide with a defender or watch them run through an arm tackle like a hot knife through butter.

However, it’s a deceptive look at these players. Watch both in tight spaces where they

don’t have a clear-cut hole or a zone play where they are asked to consider 2-3 reads and must run at a slower rate on their approach to the line of scrimmage. Their gaits

don’t leverage power without momentum and their narrow strides don’t have a lot of balance. It’s why they often seem like all-or-nothing runners in terms of yardage gained

during a contest.

The Falcons run a zone scheme, which requires a more patient and deliberate approach

to the line of scrimmage. When Oakland switched to more zone-blocking a few years ago, Darren McFadden disappointed. McFadden was a star in Arkansas’ gap-based

30

scheme and showed much of his promise with the Raiders when the team ran more gap

plays. Coleman’s success at Indiana came from gap style runs or sweeps and tosses with

pulling linemen where he had the speed advantage to reach the perimeter. He’ll have this success in the NFL, but the speed and savvy of pro defenders will limit the amount

of big plays Coleman can generate on these plays. NFL offenses cannot build a ground game around as few plays as college offenses, and it means that Coleman must become

more adept at executing the zone scheme.

Although I believe Coleman has better vision on these types of tight-crease plays than McFadden has displayed during his career, I’m still concerned that the Falcons’ new

runner lacks the short-area agility and balance to perform nearly as well in zone blocking as he does in a gap scheme. Don’t be surprised if Devonta Freeman, who is a

perfect fit for Kyle Shanahan’s system, outperforms Coleman. I don’t want to say that Coleman was a wasted pick, but it is the largest mismatch with system that I have seen

among the early picks in this draft.

Get the Complete Version of the 2016 RSP at www.mattwaldman.com

Good Fit-Bad Fit: Where Landing Spot Mattered in 2015

Good Fits

Regardless of talent or my view of their potential, these players match well with the

current scheme and have a clear path to contribute to the offense.

Packers QB Brett Hundley: It’s easy to say that the Packers have the luxury to take a

quarterback with talent and let him sit for 3-4 years when they have Aaron Rodgers and

Brett Favre as their past two starters and the team is performing well. It’s also a cop-out

to consider it a luxury rather than an important strategy when the backdrop for the NFL

is its collective failure to develop quarterbacks while complaining about the dearth of

talent at the position in the league.

Hundley, like Rodgers, will have the opportunity to learn behind the scenes for at least

the next 3-4 years. Hundley offers franchise physical talent with franchise-caliber

moments in the pocket as well as flashes of skill in the pocket and reading the field. I’ve

long-argued that Hundley would have been as effective, if not more so than Marcus

Mariota if he was in Oregon.

At UCLA, Hundley played in an offense that, by design and due to surrounding talent,

didn’t give the quarterback the opportunity to alter the offensive scheme to adjust to the defense before the snap. Hundley will have the time to get adept at these skills as well

31

as dropping more often from center and learning to read more complex defensive

schemes

Washington RBs Matt Jones and Trey Williams: This is a team that wants to

upgrade its offensive line and enhance its ground game so that its quarterbacks don’t have to deal with constant pressure. Alfred Morris isn’t going anywhere immediately, but

Jones has the power and enough burst to do a yeoman’s job if called upon to replace Morris. Williams is the scatback with receiving skills that Washington hoped it would get

from Chris Thompson two years ago. I love Thompson’s talent and potential, but Williams may offer more between the tackles. I believe Jay Gruden is seeking a scatback

who can offer more as receiver, and Williams could be that option sooner than later.

Get the Complete Version of the 2016 RSP at www.mattwaldman.com

UDFAs to Watch These players landed with teams where they can grow and eventually contribute. They

are talented prospects who didn’t’ get drafted due to playing for a small program, early character issues, injury, or they were late-bloomers.

Many of these players are what I would classify as long-term waiver wire priorities. These are players to follow in the news over the course of 2-3 seasons:

Do they change teams?

What is happening to the players ahead of them on the depth chart?

What are coaches and teammates saying about them?

Lions running back Joique Bell is a good example of a player who had fantasy impact in

2012 and bounced from the Eagles and Saints to Detroit within the span of two years. He would have been a UDFA to watch in the RSP if I had created a post-draft that year.

Lions RB Zach Zenner: Joique Bell had “clean-up” surgeries on his knee and Achilles’ and he’s turning 29 this season. Bell is a fine player, but Zenner offers the Lions a

younger option with power, balance, vision, and burst. Zenner can stand-up block and cut-block as a pass protector and he catches the ball well. Will he overtake Bell this

year? It’s unlikely if Bell is healthy. However, Zenner should earn a final spot on the active roster. If he doesn’t, there’s a good chance another team in need snatches him up

in August. He’s a good back to monitor on the waiver wire or be patient with for a year or two at the end of your roster.

Cowboys RBs Thomas Rawls and Synjyn Days: A short runner with a good low

center of gravity, Rawls has the vision and agility to exploit creases that are difficult for

many good backs to access. He has enough functional power to work between the

tackles as an every-down back. Dallas needs to healthy, athletic back who can execute

the zone scheme and Rawls might surprise. Days was the B-Back for Georgia Tech’s

option-based offense, which means he ran a lot of dive plays. However, Days has the

32

burst, balance, and agility to become an effective tailback. If he has a strong camp, he

could be in the mix for playing time.

Get the Complete Version of the 2016 RSP at www.mattwaldman.com

33

Strategic Overview There are so many variations of dynasty leagues and an equal number of winning

strategies. I think the best way to approach drafts is to know what you do best and find ways to maximize that strength.

If you have a good feel for talent when you see it, then worry less about average draft

position and pick players you want. Of course, it’s good to know how these players are valued so you don’t take a player you could have gotten three rounds later. However

being willing to have fantasy owners question the value of a pick and believing in your investments can pay dividends. This is generally my strength.

If you’re a good negotiator then you shouldn’t be afraid to play the market. Trade up or

down to acquire players who have a high popularity factor and time when to sell them for more desirable options. I play in a lot of leagues with Footballguys writer Sigmund

Bloom and this is one of his strengths.

Another way to build a competitive team is to study drafts and learn to minimize

mistakes. This means adhering tight to average draft position value, picking players with few question marks, and adhering to conservative, sound judgment. I think Footballguys

writer Jene Bramel and Aaron Rudnicki are good examples of writers who do this in fantasy drafts.

This year’s rookies provides specific challenges that fantasy owners will need to maintain

some level of perspective to have long-term success with this draft class:

Running back offers immediate returns at the top, a 2-3 year investment

in the middle, and some late-round/UDFAs to display patience.

Get the Complete Version of the 2016 RSP at www.mattwaldman.com

34

Overall Tiered Cheat Sheet Explained

Color Coded Tiers and Players in Bold

This cheat sheet is separated into color coded tiers. Blue highlight are Tier A picks. I

expect them to make an instant fantasy impact as no worse than bye‐week options.

Within 2‐3 years I expect them develop into quality starters capable of QB1, RB1-RB2,

WR1-WR3, or TE1 production. Green highlight are my Tier B players that have similar upside as the top tier, but on average will need more time or work to see the field as a

starter or regular contributor.

Red highlighted players are my Tier C of eventual starters or contributors, but may need 2‐3 years to attain that status. On average, this group’s upside is not as great as the

preceding tiers. Tier D in white has the potential to develop into talented situational

players or depth within 2‐3 years. Some may exceed this projection and even become

stars, but fewer in this tier have that potential than the tiers preceding them. Tier E

highlighted in yellow are projected backups and free agents. Just like the positional

rankings, players in bold are prospects that I believe are undervalued and have the upside to develop into starters regardless of their starting point.

Tier

The cheat sheet is color coded into tiers with this order. If you’re color blind, I will also

label the beginning and end of each tier. best visual way I know to display the information in a concise manner. Here’s the order of the tiers with a numerical beginning

ending point to help my friends with a diminished visual palette.

Tier A (1-14) See field early and develop into productive players Tier B (15-34)

Short-term depth obstacle, starter talent; contributor talent, immediate fit.

Tier C (41-54) Contributor potential, crowded depth chart; Situational talent, good immediate fit.

Tier D (55-92) Stash - long-term developmental talent or reserve Tier E (93-120) Large leagues only/waiver wire

Typically, most rookie drafts will cover Tiers A, B, and C of my rankings, but there are players I value differently. For example, Jawan Jamison was a Tier E player in my

analysis last year, but he was going off boards as if he’s a Tier C guy.

In contrast, Spencer Ware – a top-five running back talent in my pre-draft analysis – was a Tier C player in my rankings, but went undrafted in most leagues. This made him

a priority free agent to monitor.

35

Type

These symbols are shorthand for the risk assessment I have on the player.

Type

U Underrated - Better than draft stock ↕ High Risk Reward

Z Sleeper - Lesser known talent w/skills if

earns opportunity. ↔ Specific talent/Limited upside ↑ High ceiling, but needs work I Injury concerns

I’m generally conservative about placing an injury label on a player because I do not

receive injury reports from the NFL.

Value Designation

Next to each player is a value that I generated based on my analysis of 19 dynasty leagues. Note that it is so early in the dynasty drafting season that these values may

change by training camp. Proceed with caution with this designation and only consider it as a guidepost. I calculated the average pick number for each player and I developed a

shorthand designation for the difference between how I value a player and his average spot selected:

• Par

• Over X

• Under X

“Par” means I valued the player within +/‐5 picks of his average draft value (ADP).

Over “X” means I value the player at least five spots lower than his ADP. The X

represents the number I would add to the players’ ADP to match his value to my rankings. Stephen Hill was an “Over 11,” which means I thought the Jets receiver was

getting drafted 11 spots higher—almost a full round—than I thought he should.

Hill’s ADP was 12.8. With an Over 11 value based on my rankings, Hill would have been a less risky pick if he was available with the 23rd pick in the draft. It means, you’re

unlikely to get Hill if you follow my rankings and you should question if you’re that sold

on him.

This value designation should help readers reconcile how to approach my rankings and ADP.

36

Under “X” This year, Paul Richardson is Under 20—fantasy owners are giving you a 20-

pick discount. You can wait nearly two rounds to pull the trigger on him in many drafts.

If you use the Par, Over, and Under values wisely, you can take more value risks with your picks than what the ADP dictates because you know where the values lie

afterwards. Or, if you think I’m completely wrong about Bishop Sankey and you believe he’ll be a fantasy RB1 for the next 3-5 years, you can take him a head of a receiver like

Brandin Cooks or Odell Beckham and know that you’re getting potential value with the likes of Cody Lattimore, Martavis Bryant, and/or Paul Richardson later.

Get the Complete Version of the 2016 RSP at www.mattwaldman.com

2015 RSP Post-Draft Tiered Value Chart Sample (Cheat Sheet)

Key

Tier A See field early and develop into productive players

Tier B Short-term depth obstacle, starter talent; contributor talent, immediate fit.

Tier C Contributor potential, crowded depth chart; Situational talent, good immediate fit.

Tier D Stash - long-term developmental talent or reserve

Tier E Large leagues only/waiver wire

U Underrated - Better than draft stock

↕ High Risk Reward

Z Sleeper - Lesser known talent w/skills if earns opportunity.

↔ Specific talent/Limited upside

↑ High ceiling, but needs work

I Injury concerns

P Position Change (New position)

Quarterback

Running Back

Wide Receiver

Tight End

# Player Value

Tm

# Player Value

Tm

# Player Value

Tm

# Player Value

Tm

10 Jameis Wiston Par TB

1 Todd Gurley Par STL

2 Kevin White Par

CHI

13 Maxx Williams

Under 11.8

BAL

23 Brett Hundley

Under 23

GB

4 Melvin Gordon Par SD

3 Amari Cooper Par

OAK

56 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW13 ↑

xx

25 xxxxxxxxxx Over 7.8

↕ xx

5 Ameer Abdullah

Under 10.5 U

DET

6 D. Green-Beckham Par

TEN

57 xxxxxxxxxxxx Over 21.4

xx

52 xxxxxxxxxx

Over 11.9

xx

7 T.J. Yeldon Par

JAX

8 Nelson Agholor Par PHI

58 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW14 Z

xx

53 xxxxxxxxxx WW11 Z xx

11 Duke Johnson Par CLE

9 DeVante Parker Par ↑ MIA

64 xxxxxxxxxxxx Over 18 ↑ xx

79 xxxxxxxxxx Over 34

xxx

14 xxxxxxxxx Par xx

12 xxxxxxxxxxx Par ↑ xx

65 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW17 xx

80 xxxxxxxxxx WW25 xx

15 xxxxxxxxxxxxx Over 2.3 I xx

16 xxxxxxxxxxxx Par ↕ xx

66 xxxxxxxxxxxx Over 21.4 xx

81 xxxxxxxxxx WW26

↕ xx

17 xxxxxxxxxxx

Under 14.6

xx

18 xxxxxxxxxxxx Under 10.9

xx

67 xxxxxxxxxxxx Over 25

xx

85 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW29 P xxx

26 xxxxxxxxx Par xx

19 xxxxxxxxxxx Under 21 U xx

68 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW18 xx

86 xxxxxxxxxxxxx WW30 xxx

27 xxxxxxxxxx Par xxx

20 xxxxxxxxxxx Over 7.4 xx

69 xxxxxxxxxxxx Over 19 xx

87 xxxxxxxxxxx WW31 xxxx

28 xxxxxx Over 6.5 ↑ xxx

21 Sammie Coates Par ↕ xx

70 xxxxxxxxxxxx Over 20 xx

88 xxxxxxxxxx WW32 xx

29 xxxxxxxxxx Par ↔ xx

22 xxxxxxxxxxx Par xx

83 xxxxxxxxxx WW27 ↕ xx

89 xxxxxxxxxx WW33

xxx

30 xxxxxxxxxx Over 15.3

↕ xx

24 xxxxxxxxxxx

Under 16.8

xx

103 xxxxxxxxxx WW47 ↔

xx

92 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW36 xxx

33 xxxxxxxxxxx Par U xx

31 xxxxxxxxxxx Par U xx

104 xxxxxxxxxx WW48 ↑ xx

93 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW37 xxx

34 xxxxxxxxxxx WW1 U xx

32 xxxxxxxxxxx Par Z xx

105 xxxxxxxxxx WW49 Z xx

95 xxxxxxxxxxxxxx WW39 xx

39 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW2 xx

35 xxxxxxxxxxx Par xx

106 xxxxxxxxxx WW50 ↔ xx

124 xxxxxxxxx WW68 xx

40 xxxxxxxxxx Par ↑ xx

36 xxxxxxxxxxx Par xx

107 xxxxxxxxxx WW51 xx

125 xxxxxxxxxxx WW69 xx

41 xxxxxxxx Over 2.4 xx

37 xxxxxxxxxxx Over 14.1 xx

110 xxxxxxxxxx WW54 ↔ xx

128 xxxxxxxxxxxxx WW71 xxx

49 xxxxxxxxxx WW8 xx

38 xxxxxxxxxxx Par xx

127 xxxxxxxxxx WW70 ↔ xx

50 xxxxxxxxx WW9 xx

42 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW3 Z xx 140 xxxxxxxxxx WW80 xx

51 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW10 Z xx

43 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW4 Z xx 151 xxxxxxxxxx WW91 xx

54 xxxxxxxxxxxx Over 2 xx

44 xxxxxxxxxxxx Over 14.1 ↑ xx 152 xxxxxxxxxx WW92 ↔ xx

60 xxxxxxxxxxxx Over 26.8 xx

45 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW5 Z xx 153 xxxxxxxxxx WW93 ↔ xx

61 xxxxxxxxxxx WW15 xx

46 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW6 xx 154 xxxxxxxxxx WW94 ↔ xx

82 xxxxxxxxxxxxx WW27 ↕ xx

47 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW7 ↑ xx 155 xxxxxxxxxx WW95 ↔ xx

90 xxxxxxxxxxxxx WW34 xx

48 xxxxxxxxxxxx Over 5.7 ↑ xx

91 xxxxxxxxxxxxxx WW35 xx

55 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW12 U xx

94 xxxxxxxxxxx WW38 xx

59 xxxxxxxxxxxx Over 13 xx

96 xxxxxxxxxx WW40 ↔ xx

62 xxxxxxxxxxxx Over 24.5 xx

97 xxxxxxxxxx WW41 ↕ xx

63 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW16 xx

120 xxxxxxxxxx WW64 xx

71 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW19 xx

133 xxxxxxxxxx WW75 ↔ xx

72 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW20 xx

134 xxxxxxxxxx Over 90 xx

73 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW21 Z xx

135 xxxxxxxxxx WW76 xx

74 xxxxxxxxxxxx Over 29 ↔ xx

136 xxxxxxxxxx WW77 xx

75 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW22 U xx

137 xxxxxxxxxx Over 97 xx

76 xxxxxxxxxxxx Over 33 xx

138 xxxxxxxxxx WW78 xx

77 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW23 xx

Notable UDFAs

78 xxxxxxxxxxxx WW24 xx

xxxxxxxxxx ↕

84 xxxxxxxxxx WW28 P xx

xxxxxxxxxx I

98 xxxxxxxxxx WW42 xx

xxxxxxxxxx

99 xxxxxxxxxx Over 55 xx

100 xxxxxxxxxx WW43 ↔ xx

101 xxxxxxxxxx WW44 xx

102 xxxxxxxxxx WW45 xx

103 xxxxxxxxxx WW46 xx

108 xxxxxxxxxx WW52 xx

109 xxxxxxxxxx WW53 xx

37

Average Draft Spot Data Some of the 19 drafts I’m using for this analysis wouldn’t be finished in time for

publication so I’m providing links to these drafts to fill in the data if you wish. You’ll find these tables at the end of the book and I’ll label them as “Raw ADP” and “Raw RSP

Rank”. The first table is sorted by ADP and the second sorted by my post-draft RSP ranking.

The ADP data spans leagues from a variety of league types and at least four of them are leagues from fantasy football writers. Some of these leagues have 1.5 PPR scoring for

tight ends so the tight end ADP will be slightly inflated. If you wish factor these out, you can do so by creating your own spreadsheet and accessing the sites.

The table provides the number of leagues the ADP calculation comes from, the highest place the player is selected, and the lowest place.

Get the Complete Version of the 2016 RSP at www.mattwaldman.com

“Raw” Average Draft Position Data Worksheet Sorted By ADP Ranking (Sample)

Key

Value – How close my rankings match ADP data.

o “Par” – My RSP ranking is within +/- 5 picks of his ADP.

o “Over X” – My RSP ranking is at least 5 picks lower than his ADP. “X” is the number of picks I’d wait past his ADP spot to find him a worthwhile pick.

o “Under X” – My RSP ranking is at least 5 picks higher than his ADP. “X” is the maximum number of picks you can wait to take him. I recommend you

pick these underrated players earlier than the “Under” number if you really want them, or you study the “High” and “Low” pick range in this data to

arrive at the right place to pick the player.

o “Adj.” – This is the adjusted difference between the Average Pick for the player and 5 draft spots. This adjustment is not applied to players whose

average pick is within +/- 5 spots of my ranking.

Letters at the top columns - Links to specific drafts or ADP information from dynasty sites. The drafts shaded in gray are not complete. You can complete them

on your own if you wish to get more complete data.

RSP Player A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S

Avg Pick Sum High Low

Raw Val Adj. Value

1 Todd Gurley 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 2 3 3 1 1.6 19 1 3 -0.6 Par

3 Amari Cooper 3 1 3 3 2 3 2 6 2 4 3 2 3 1 1 3 1 1 2 2.4 19 1 6 0.6 Par

4 Melvin Gordon 1 2 2 2 4 2 4 2 3 2 2 3 2 4 3 1 5 2 3 2.6 19 1 5 1.4 Par

2 Kevin White 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 5 6 3 4 4 4 6 4 4 4 4 4 4.1 19 3 6 -2.1 Par

9 Devante Parker 5 5 5 5 5 6 5 10 7 5 5 5 6 7 5 5 8 5 5 5.7 19 5 10 3.3 Par

7 T.J. Yeldon 6 8 8 9 6 8 8 3 10 10 8 8 7 5 7 6 7 8 7 7.3 19 3 10 -0.3 Par

6 Dorial Green-Beckham 12 7 7 10 9 5 7 13 11 8 9 7 8 13 8 13 7 6 8.9 18 6 13 -2.9 Par

12 Breshad Perriman 10 6 6 7 8 10 9 15 9 7 10 10 10 20 10 10 9 6 8 9.5 19 6 20 2.5 Par

30 Tevin Coleman 11 10 10 6 10 7 10 7 12 11 11 9 12 11 9 7 11 10 11 9.7 19 6 12 20.3 15.3 Over 15.3

8 Nelson Agholor 7 9 11 11 11 6 14 8 9 7 6 13 19 6 11 10 9 9 9.8 18 6 14 -1.8 Par

5 Ameer Abdullah

8 11 9 8 12 9 11 9 13 12 12 11 11 9 11 12 11 10 10.5 18 8 13 -5.5 -

10.5 Under 10.5

25 Marcus Mariota 19 20 17 7 24 13 4 5 6 6 18 9 2 13 6 20 18 12.2 17 2 24 12.8 7.8 Over 7.8

10 Jameis Winston 14 17 13 12 16 17 12 11 4 13 17 15 5 21 12 8 2 17 20 12.9 19 2 21 -2.9 Par

11 Duke Johnson 9 15 12 13 19 14 20 8 19 16 13 12 15 8 14 9 15 19 13.9 18 8 19 -2.9 Par

Sample Rankings Tables

The information below is shaded by tier color. It includes the following information about the player:

“Pre” – Pre-draft positional ranking.

“Overall” – Post-draft overall ranking (the entire table is sorted by this criteria).

“S/L” – Short-term/Long-term outlook.

“Ceiling” – Projected Fantasy Ceiling.

Depth chart information, including:

o 2016 free agents (noted with one asterisk)

o 2017 free agents (noted with two asterisks)

o Players entering their career twilight due to age (players are underlined)

o Notes about the competition on the depth chart

Commentary about the player’s post draft ranking

Overall Pre Name Team Comments Competition S/L Ceiling Notes on Competition

1 RB1 Todd Gurley Rams

The best running back in this draft, Gurley joins a mediocre offense that has enough talent

along the offensive line for Gurley to thrive. Jeff Fisher and company saw another

opportunity to get a back like Eddie George in his prime. It's unlikely Gurley will be ready for the season and the plan is to be conservative

with his healing process. They expect him to be the franchise back and you should expect a 20-

touch per game star.

Todd Gurley, Tre Mason, Malcolm

Brown, Benny Cunningham*, Isaiah

Pead*, Chase Reynolds, Trey

Watts**

Reserve/Top-12 RB

Top-5 RB

Even with Zac Stacy's departure to the Jets, this is a crowded depth chart with talent. Mason was one of the top rookie backs from 2014 and he has the burst

and low center of gravity to fill in ably if Gurley's recovery from ACL surgery bleeds into the 2015

season. If Gurley's selection deflates Mason's competitive fire, Cunningham is the type of

overachiever to push Mason down the depth chart despite lacking top-end speed. He's a team favorite. Barring a complete turnaround, Pead is dead weight

and coming of an ACL and the Rams will save nearly a $1 million if they release him. Reynolds and Watts are limited talents. Brown is one of my top 10 RB talents

this year and I wouldn't be shocked if he pushes Cunningham and Mason for playing time. Brown is a

bigger, stronger, more versatile back with similar agility and burst.

2 WR1 Kevin White Bears

Amari Cooper is the more talented player now, but White is a stronger player with similar

speed and burst and the new Chicago receiver has a savvier quarterback and star receiver opposite him. It's possible Cooper has the

better career and out-produces White because he'll be the focal point of the Raiders offense

immediately. However, there's also more opportunity for Cooper to draw bracket

coverage and Derek Carr is promising, but still has a lot to prove. White should earn more

high-leverage situations in Chicago and build on them. Cooper is the safer pick, but White's upside arguably makes the pick worth the risk.

Alshon Jeffery*, Kevin White,

Marquess Wilson**, Eddie Royal, Marc

Mariani*, Josh Bellamy, John Chiles,

Rashad Lawrence, Levi Norwood

Team WR3/Top-12

WR

Top-5 WR

Jeffery should be the lead receiver this year, but White has the talent to develop fast into a quality

starter with Jeffery-like comparisons on 50/50 balls and additional speed on short passes. Wilson is not a

player to forget about. He's only 22 and Jeffery's contract expires after 2015. Jeffery should get re-

signed, but Wilson has the talent to become a quality starter. If both White and Wilson develop, Jeffery

could be expendable. Royal and Mariani are quality role players. Norwood is a potential special teamer.

3 WR3 Amari Cooper Raiders

Alshon Jeffery is nearing his prime years. In contrast, Michael Crabtree has a one-year "prove-it" deal that he can be a competent

starter after losing some athleicism from his Achilles' injuy. Unless another receiver on the depth chart has an excellent year, Cooper will

have to be the primary option in Oakland's passing game. Sammy Watkins was more

talented than Mike Evans and Kelvin Benjamin, but Watkins didn't have the quarterback play

and and surrounding talent to match the production of Evans and Benjamin. It's a close call and could easily take Cooper No.2, but the thought process I'm embracing gives White a

slight edge over the next 2-3 seasons, because I'm not sold on Derek Carr.

Amari Cooper, Michael Crabtree*,

Kenbrell Thompkins*, Jeremy

Gallon, Rod Streater*, Andre Holmes*, Brice Butler**, Andre

Debose, Josh Harper, Seth Roberts

Team WR1/Top-15

WR

Top-10 WR

Cooper's projected role is the primary option. Crabtree is on a one-year "prove-it" deal to determine if he still as the athleticism and

professionalism to play the game at this level. Thompkins flashes starter skill and could contribute in packages this year. Gallon has some Steve Smith

(Ravens) to his game and was recovering from injury last year. Watch how he performs in camp. He could

develop into a dynamic player. Streater has the athleticism, but lacks the consistency with routes and hands. Holmes, Butler and Debose are fine physical talents who have to become better technicians and more consistent. They've had chances to do so, but haven't converted them yet. They're on the outside

looking in.

11 RB3 Duke Johnson Browns

Look for a three-way split to begin the season, but Johnson has the talent to run inside. The

question is if the Browns will buy into Johnson as a primary runner capable of three-down work. Johnson will have to prove he won't

wear down. The Browns will want to run a lot so it's likely that Johnson's opportunity show

he can give Cleveland that three-down feature talent without ceding significant carries to

Crowell and/or West will likely happen in 2016.

Isaiah Crowell**, Duke Johnson, Terrance West,

Glenn Winston**, Shaun Draughn*

Scatback/Top-24 RB

Top-12 RB

If you look around, the media is split on whom will be the lead back in this offense before the Browns

picked Johnson. Crowell is the better talent, but some made more of his fumbling than what was really

there. West wants to lose 15 pounds, hoping that he can get quicker because his change of direction

choices don't work as well in the NFL as they did at Towson. Winston is a big back who got a lot of

diehard fan buzz, but he's a reserve. Draughn is a steady player who gets what the line blocks for him.

12 WR10 Breshad Perriman Ravens

Perriman has deficiencies as a route runner that prevents him from capitilizing on his

speed. Until he stops taking false steps off the line, learns to own the flat/sideline, and stop

fading out of his breaks, his 4.2-ish 40-time will not show on the field consistently enough for him to reprise Torrey Smith's role. If he works hard at his craft, he has the tools to match or exceed Smith's production in Baltimore, but

there's more "if" than "when" to be comfortable with him in the top tier of this

draft class.

Steve Smith, Breshad Perriman, Marlon Brown*, Michael

Campanaro, Kamar Aiken*, Darren Waller, Aldrick

Robinson, Jeremy Butler

Team WR3-WR4/Top-36

WR

Top-15 WR

Perriman will at least earn time as a rotational starter in three-receiver sets. It depends a lot on Marlon Brown's performance this summer. Brown didn't build on his rookie year as a red zone option. If he

rebounds, Perriman might see a reduced role. Smith remains the top option until he decides to hang it up

or his skills actually diminish at the rate many misjudged at this time last year. Campanaro is a

promising slot receiver and an excellent technician in zone coverage. Robinson was teammates with

Emmanuel Sanders at SMU and offers similar physical traits, but didn't build on his potential in Washington. Waller will be in line to supplant Brown or considered

a developmental move tight end.

13 TE1 Maxx Williams Ravens

Williams has the receiving skills become a double-digit touchdown producer as a red

zone threat in Baltimore. The greater quesiton is how reliable he can become as a run blocker and underneath receiver breaking back to the ball. The sooner he can do this, the less reliant

the Ravens will be on Crockett Gillmore. It makes Williams' upside somewhat dependent

on how imaginative the Ravens will be on offense. I envision Williams having a role that is a combo of Anquan Boldin and Dennis PItta,

but that might not happen right away.

Maxx Williams, Crockett Gillmore,

Allen Reisner, Konrad Reuland, Dennis Pitta, Nick

Boyle

Situational starter/Mid-

range TE1 Top-7 TE

Williams is the odds-on favorite to start, but don't be surprised if Gillmore, a better blocker and decent

receiver, earns a committee split with Williams early in the season. Allen Reisner is a journeyman lacking starter athleticism. Reuland offers more as a blocker than a receiver. Boyle is quick, but slow. If Pitta can

return from a second hip surgery and stay healthy, he could get the nod over Williams, but the odds are

stacked against him.

111 xxxxxxxxxx WW55 ↔ xx

112 xxxxxxxxxx WW56 ↔ xx

113 xxxxxxxxxx WW57 xx

114 xxxxxxxxxx WW58 xx

115 xxxxxxxxxx WW59 P xx

116 xxxxxxxxxx WW60 xx

117 xxxxxxxxxx WW61 ↔ xx

118 xxxxxxxxxx WW62 xx

119 xxxxxxxxxx WW63 xx

121 xxxxxxxxxx WW65 xx

122 xxxxxxxxxx WW66 xx

123 xxxxxxxxxx WW67 xx

129 xxxxxxxxxx WW72 xx

130 xxxxxxxxxx Over 83 xx

131 xxxxxxxxxx WW73 xx

132 xxxxxxxxxx WW74 xx

139 xxxxxxxxxx WW79 xx

141 xxxxxxxxxx WW81 xx

142 xxxxxxxxxx WW82 xx

143 xxxxxxxxxx WW83 xx

144 xxxxxxxxxx WW84 xx

145 xxxxxxxxxx WW85 xx

146 xxxxxxxxxx WW86 xx

147 xxxxxxxxxx WW87 xx

148 xxxxxxxxxx WW88 xx

149 xxxxxxxxxx WW89 xx

150 xxxxxxxxxx WW90 xx