Futures: Unknown, Unsung, and Underappreciated

Futures: Unknown, Unsung, and Underappreciated
Futures: Unknown, Unsung, and Underappreciated
Photo: USA Today Sports Images

by Matt Waldman

When you’re in my line of work, the most memorable players are often the unknowns, the underappreciated, and the underdogs. One of the most memorable for me was a player I watched in September 2006, whose performance against a top-ranked Tennessee Volunteers defense was so good that it belied his 24-carry, 72-yard box-score entry.

Here’s what I wrote about him in my game notes:

This was an impressive performance for [prospect], who
demonstrated unequivocally that he is a tough, physical back than can carry the load and get the difficult yardage as well as break the play outside or beat defenders in the open field with his moves and quickness. He rarely went down on the first hit unless the defender made a perfect form tackle.

It’s very impressive how low he can run in short yardage situations to get 2-3 tough yards against stacked defenses. Players bounced off [prospect] repeatedly in this game. This was one of the more impressive efforts I saw from a back all year.

These are notes meant for my own use, otherwise I would have found an appropriate synonym for "impressive," so I didn’t use it three times in a five-sentence span. This 5-foot-11, 192-pound runner had one of my favorite performances of the year -– a year where Adrian Peterson and Marshawn Lynch were the headliners at running back for the 2007 NFL Draft.

Like most, Lynch and Peterson were my top two backs. However this runner, who wowed me despite a sub-par yardage day, was ranked fourth in my pre-draft rankings. In 2007, 25 running backs went off the board.

Ahmad Bradshaw –- that No. 4 back on my board –- was the last runner taken in the draft; the 40th pick in the seventh round, going 250th overall. If we look at current career production, I was wrong about Bradshaw as my No. 4 back.

He has actually been the third-most productive runner from this draft class.

Players like these are memorable because let's face it, unknown, unsung, and underappreciated usually means undrafted and unemployed. When a late-round or undrafted player makes his mark, it appeals to the part of us that roots for the underdog.

Whether it’s the small-school prospect with the big-time game, the well-known player whose skills are even better than advertised, or the overshadowed longshot with shocking moments of excellence, my favorite part of studying college prospects is watching talent that flies below the national radar.

Bradshaw’s obstacles towards reaching the NFL radar were injuries, off-field immaturity, and a B-list college program. I can think of others who fit the bill.

Victor Cruz was a small-school prospect with a big-time game. Ray Rice was a well-known college star who proved he was big enough, quick enough, and skilled enough to get the job done as a pro. Priest Holmes and Terrell Davis are great examples of talents that toiled in supporting roles behind talented teammates like Ricky Williams and Garrison Hearst after injuries cost them chances of earning more playing time.

My publication, the Rookie Scouting Portfolio, is a pre-draft analysis of offensive skill players that I publish April 1. (It also has a post-draft addendum.) What I enjoy the most about the April 1 publication is the opportunity to generate rankings where "draft stock" carries little to no weight. It’s a chance to focus more on the talent and less on the business.

This week, I'm sharing one unknown, one unsung, and one underappreciated prospect from my 2013 RSP analysis. I believe each prospect has the talent to out-perform his draft stock. These are excerpts from this year’s RSP that have been re-purposed for this column. It's a small preview of what you’ll find in the publication.

Unknown: WR Perez Ashford

Northern Illinois’ player page on Ashford says the wideout "admires Steve Smith and Marvin Harrison." When I first watched Ashford, what stood out was a reliable pass catcher who always seemed to find a way to stay inbounds or reach the first-down marker, and he seeemed to often play beyond his 5-foot-11, 182-pound frame.

I remember giving him a good score, but I came away far more impressed with Martel Moore. What I didn’t know at the time was that Ashford, a second-team All-MAC (insert pithy Tanier comment here) performer in 2011, was battling through an ankle injury that limited him for much of the season.

Then I saw a play that got my attention and showed that Ashford had more big-play ability than I thought:

I continued to see plays that topped this one. Field-stretching back-shoulder fades. Circus acts of sideline contortion between multiple opponents. Receptions and yards after good hits. Flying acts of aggression across the faces of defenders 40 yards downfield.

See for yourself (Warning: Soundtrack not safe for work).

When the pass is thrown, Ashford adjusts to the ball and makes nice plays over his shoulder. He’ll attack the ball over the top or ahead of a defender on intermediate and deep routes with an aggressiveness seen from top-tier NFL talents.

What he does as well as any receiver in this draft is make acrobatic plays in challenging situations. He’s fearless with the ball in the air and will make difficult catches against contact where he has to win the ball. His hand strength is excellent.

Ashford could be an example of a player who scouts don’t have enough bullet-point data on to give a grade that won’t put them at risk of looking foolish:

  • Smaller profile school.
  • Smaller than physical prototype.
  • Inconsistent production due to injury and scheme.

According to Rob Rang, Ashford ran an average of 4.48 in the 40-yard dash on three attempts on his pro day. Even if Gil Brandt’s report, which listed the times as 4.50 and 4.58 are correct, there’s enough to see that Ashford has baseline NFL speed.

I doubt he’s drafted, but his skills are more promising than half the receivers who will get picked. This highlight tape demonstrates a lot about Ashford’s game:

  • Good footwork off the line.
  • Fast breaks on his routes.
  • Works back to the ball while maintaining route depth.
  • Ability to give that little extra to say inside the boundary and gain extra yards.

He’s a decent return specialist, but it’s his skill as a receiver that is eye-opening.

At one point I thought it was a good idea to think of Ashford as a player with a style like Stedman Bailey, but one who would have to prove his worth on special teams. But after additional looks, I’m thinking he has enough upside that he might not have to do that. If Ashford can stay healthy, perhaps he can get to test his act in front of a tougher crowd.

Unsung: RB Miguel Maysonet

[ad placeholder 4]

I think one of the more underrated workouts that the NFL uses for measuring prospects is the 20-yard shuttle, or "short shuttle." It’s a test of lateral speed and coordination. While not a predictor of football skill. I think this exercise as well as the three-cone drill offer the best test of speed and quickness over a range of distance where 80-to-90 percent of football happens.

I have been tracking Combine and Pro Day times since 2006. I don’t have a complete list, so I can’t guarantee the statement I’m about to make is 100 percent accurate.

That said, when I looked up the three best running back short-shuttle times on record since 2006, the top time was from former Pittsburgh Steelers return specialist/Percy Harvin wannabe Chris Rainey at 3.93 seconds. The next two are from this year’s class: Texas A&M’s Christine Michael (4.02), a back whose athleticism and running style is the spitting image of Ahman Green, and Stony Brook runner Miguel Maysonet (4.01).

Michael also had a 6.69-second, three-cone drill, which is good for sixth-best -- one-hundredth of a second faster than Ahmad Bradshaw’s time. If the Texas A&M runner can figure out how to stay out of his own way, his athleticism, vision, and skill as a pass protector are good enough for him to prove that he is the most talented runner in this draft.

Maysonet does not have a style that incorporates dynamic change of direction. The 5-foot-9, 209-pound back is a strong, aggressive, and patient runner with excellent burst. He does much of his work between the tackles but can also get to the edge.

Maysonet attacks defenders downfield and runs with the pad level and leg drive to push the pile or carry defenders after eliminating good angles with his agility. He does a good job pressing and cutting from I-formation power sets as well as zone schemes.

I think Maysonet runs both styles well, but he’s a little better with gap plays right now because he has a targeted place to run and doesn’t try to bounce outside quite as much. Either way, he’ll be effective.

The question mark is Maysonet’s third-down game. I didn’t see him as a pass protector or receiver because Stony Brook is a run-heavy offense.

If he displays strong skills or is a fast learner, I think he has the fundamental skills as a runner to become a contributor, if not a starter.

Underappreciated: WR Ryan Swope

I think Ryan Swope could easily have a better career than Tavon Austin. Don’t get me wrong, if I had a chance to take Tavon Austin first and the team fit is right, I’m going with the West Virginia star and not looking back. However, Swope might be one of the most underrated receivers in the draft despite the fact he’s considered one of the 15 best players at his position by many of my peers.

Swope is considered a slot receiver, but at 6-feet-0, and 205 pounds, he’s nearly identical in dimension to Louisiana Tech’s Quinton Patton –- Mike Mayock’s No. 4 receiver on his board -– and is as good or better an athlete in several measurable areas.

I think it also shows on the field.

Swope often makes the first man miss and demonstrates an array of moves after the catch that get him into open lanes downfield. Once he gets an opening, his 4.34 speed helps him defeat angles that defensive backs have on him.

The A&M receiver also has a little running back in him, the way Hines Ward did. He knows when to prioritize situations that call for elusiveness and those that require more economy.

What I value from Swope is his skill at catching the ball in traffic. This showed up a lot as a junior when he was paired with Ryan Tannehill, who demonstrated great skill at finding Swope in the seams of the defense on sprints and scrambles.

Swope is an excellent receiver with his back to the football and it makes him a versatile option as a flanker, slot man, or even backfield option in the ways we’ve seen NFL teams use Danny Woodhead, Randall Cobb, and Percy Harvin. A&M used Swope in the backfield as a starting point for the receiver; don’t be surprised if an NFL team does the same.

Swope may not be versatile in the sense that Austin is –- and he lacks the excitement factor and consistent breakaway upside of the West Virginia hybrid –- but he can approach Austin’s production inside more than Austin will approach Swope’s skill on the perimeter.

What that could mean in the NFL is that Austin will be a rich man’s Dexter McCluster (pre-Andy Reid) while Swope could be an upper-middle class Randall Cobb. Somewhere, Mike Tanier’s ears are burning from the class warfare commentary on prospect comparison.

In case you’re wondering, the 5-foot-10, 191-pound Cobb had these numbers from his pre-draft workouts:

  • 5’10”, 191 pounds
  • 4.46 40-yard dash
  • 4.34 20-yard shuttle
  • 7.08 3-cone drill
  • 33.5 vertical
  • 16 reps with 225 pounds

Swope’s data:

  • 6’0”, 205 pounds
  • 4.34 40-yard dash
  • 4.25 20-yard shuttle
  • 6.76 3-cone drill
  • 37 vertical
  • 16 reps with 225 pounds

Bigger, faster, quicker, more explosive, and just as strong as Green Bay's young superstar in the making, I think Ryan Tannehill has to be thinking he wouldn’t be at all disappointed with Ryan Swope in the second or third round if the Dolphins don’t take Austin.

Matt Waldman authors the Rookie Scouting Portfolio, an online publication devoted to play-by-play analysis of offensive skill position prospects. Now in its eighth year of publication, the RSP provides pre- and post-draft rankings, analysis, and stylistic comparisons. Waldman also includes all of his play-by-play notes, grading reports, and a glossary that defines and explains his grading criteria. The RSP is available for download now and 10 percent of each sale is donated to Darkness to Light, a non-profit devoted to preventing sexual abuse in communities across the country.


12 comments, Last at 10 Apr 2013, 8:32pm

#1 by usctrojan11 (not verified) // Apr 03, 2013 - 1:29pm

TD was nothing more than a cog in a system that made mike anderson, clintin portis, and olandis gary et. al look much much better than they really were. Thats why he should never be in the HOF.

Points: 0

#4 by Aaron Brooks G… // Apr 03, 2013 - 2:20pm

TD's production was far beyond that of Portis, who was far beyond the Anderson/Gary threshold.

I think on a normal team, he was a 1500-yard guy instead of a 2000-yard guy; but he was still a 1500-yard guy.

Points: 0

#5 by Aaron Schatz // Apr 03, 2013 - 4:36pm

Correct. Terrell Davis wasn't a cog in the machine. He was a well-polished, solid gold cog that made the machine run far better than all the other cogs which were made of ordinary metals.

Points: 0

#6 by usctrojan11 (not verified) // Apr 03, 2013 - 4:49pm

Portis was only there two years. TD was the only one of the group that got to be there four years and had consistently strong qb play in all four of them and a hall of fame lt in three of them. If Portis had been there from 1995-1998 he wouldve had the same or better production.

Points: 0

#9 by usctrojan11 (not verified) // Apr 04, 2013 - 6:35am

both their regular stats and FO-advanced stats(dyar and dvoa) are close enough to support my assertions, check them out for yourself if you dont believe me

Points: 0

#11 by cjfarls- (not verified) // Apr 05, 2013 - 1:37pm

I don't think this is necessarily too far off... Portis was a great player in the DEN system, and may have had comparable production. Portis was seemingly a bit faster, but didn't seem to have the same knack for sneaking out that extra yard or 2 that TD had... so Portis would make up production in big plays in the open field with slightly less consistent production in the trenches. I'd take TD everytime if given the choice, but Portis woulda put up HOF caliber career stats had he stayed in the system.

However, comparing either of them to Gary/Anderson is simply blind idiocy. To claim TD was merely a "cog" simply ignores that the entire offense was built around TDs productivity, and he took that scheme to basically unstoppable heights. Yes, the scheme was great... but TD was who made that scheme go.

Points: 0

#3 by Karl Cuba // Apr 03, 2013 - 2:18pm

Watching Ashford going up for the ball and repeatedly getting blasted by converging defenders while he's defenseless I do wonder if his career prospects will be helped by the new emphasis on player safety and not hitting defenseless receivers.

Points: 0

#2 by dryheat // Apr 03, 2013 - 2:16pm

1. A wide receiver.
2. A running back.
3. Because he's a white wide receiver.

Points: 0

#12 by NIU Fan (not verified) // Apr 10, 2013 - 8:32pm

Good analysis on Perez. I think athletic wise, Martel Moore as you mentioned grades higher, and is the flashier player of the two. But Perez is down right consistent. I have a good buddy on the team who says over their 4 years at NIU, he witnessed Perez drop 2 passes, EVER, practice, games, etc. EVER. He has the best hands I've seen in the MAC over a long time, may not be the flashiest but he will be a solid pro. He's a Wes Welker type of guy. Not gonna say he's better than Wes or pans out anywhere close, but he's that type of player. He was hurt this year and Martel was the number 1 guy so his numbers are low. I expect good things from both NIU wide receivers.

Points: 0

Save 10%
& Support Matt
Support Football Outsiders' independent media and Matt Waldman. Use promo code WRITERS to save 10% on any FO+ membership and give half the cost of your membership to tip Matt.