TPR Update

I’ve added prospect ratings from Draft Ace to the TPR system. Again, the idea is to get as many reasonable ratings as possible and derive a “consensus” rating for each prospect.  That measure then gets adjusted for positional risk and impact to give us a final prospect ranking.  I’m not too familiar with Draft Ace, but they’ve performed well over the past 5 years (according to the Huddle Report), so in they go.

I’m not going to go through the entire list again (I’ll update the TPR Tab above though), but here are the major takeaways:

– Lane Johnson improved 1 spot, moving from #9 overall to #8.  Not a meaningful change, but still.

– Matt Barkley falls from the #15 overall prospect to #34, a very big drop considering it’s due to the addition of just one ranking.  However, given where the Eagles drafted him (#98), he still qualifies as a great value pick.

– Zach Ertz falls, but just 3 spots, from #50 to #53.  This is a pick to keep a close eye one.  Seems like a bit of a reach (not a huge one), but also fits the Eagles very well (for what we think they want to do).  It’s safe to assume he was ranked much higher than #53 on the team’s board; let’s hope that ranking was accurate.

– Bennie Logan, unfortunately, does not benefit greatly from the update.  He does improve by 4 spots, but remains a definite “reach”, taken almost a full round early (29 spots).  I’m most disappointed by this pick, and nothing I’ve heard or seen since draft day has changed that.  If the team really liked him, then fine, but it’s very likely they could have slid down to draft him more in line with his value.

I understand that there might have been another team interested in him, but Logan doesn’t appear to be the type of player for whom the risk of losing outweighs the benefit of trading down and trying to take him lower.

– Jordan Poyer, picked #218 in the draft, rates as the #75 prospect overall on the TPR board.  He hasn’t practiced yet (graduations rules), but he’s the guy to watch from the late rounders.

– Ryan Nassib jumps 8 spots and becomes the top QB and the #13 overall prospect.

– Geno Smith falls 8 spots to become the #19 overall prospect.  I (along with the rest of the universe), am bearish on Geno Smith, not least because he landed in a terrible spot.  The Jets have a miserable recent history with Quarterbacks.  If Smith does fail, we won’t know if he was just overrated to begin with or if he wasn’t developed correctly.  unfortunately for him, the chances of the second possibility are relatively high.

– John Cyprien and Kenny Vaccaro both fall, to become the #32 and #33 prospects.  While Vaccaro was taken earlier, it means even if Cyprien had been available for the Eagles at #35, he would not have been as big a “value” pick as initially indicated.  That makes me feel a bit better, given that I really wanted him going into round two.

– The biggest “reaches” of the first round haven’t changed much, and our current bust watch-list is as follows:

Kyle Long, EJ Manuel, DJ Hayden, Justin Pugh, Matt Elam, Travis Frederick, Eric Reid

That’s all for now.  Check the TPR Tab for the updated list if you’re interested (I’ll update it within 10 minutes of this post).


5 thoughts on “TPR Update

  1. While I know its the Cowboys, but they had Logan as a 3rd round talent or more exact 51st on their board.

    One thing it is clear that the TPR system cant take into consideration is scheme fits. If we look at the Cowboys big board again (who was put together by competent people, they just got overruled by a moron), we can see that they didnt include several bad scheme fits (like none of the big NT types was on their board)

    • Very true, and its definitely a weakness of the system. However, the idea is to get an overall ranking from which we can making broader judgments. For instance, I wouldn’t fault the Eagles for passing on a high ranked 4-3 DE, since he obviously isn’t a fit.

      That means we need to a be a bit more discerning when it comes to judging teams against the TPR ranks, but I don’t think it detracts from the overall utility. It just means we need to be careful when looking at it.

      No doubt the Eagles weren’t the only team with a higher grade on Logan, but it certainly appears as though they were one of only a few to hold him in that regard. That makes me nervous.

      On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Eagles Rewind

      • My point was that I would not surprise me if there was 29 players taken in the first two rounds there was not on the Eagles board at all for various reason.
        I think after the first two rounds draft boards begin to diverse so much that concluding if they are a risk/reward player is hard.

  2. I know it’s a balancing act choosing which columns to show in a given table, but in light of Barkley falling based on a single new rating, I’d consider putting the standard deviation of the various rankings back into the TPR.

    It seems like that would help identify some of the potential Boom-or-Bust picks. For example, your original list shows the SD for Ryan Nassib to be 8.61 as there was wide disagreement among the ratings as to how good he really was. Contrast that with Chance Warmack’s SD of 0.88.

    I think that number (SD) is important in putting into context a prospect’s grade.

    Great work on the blog, by the way. You’re quickly becoming required reading alongside Tommy Lawlor’s blog. But you’ve got a long way to go to match the graphics of Jimmy Kempski (case in point: Glad to see you included in this year’s Eagles Almanac. Well deserved.

    • Thanks, appreciate the feedback. BTW, Ill never be able to duplicate Jimmy’s artistic talent, so I don’t even try.

      Good point on the SD, ill add it back in and repost it to the TPR tab.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s