Long versus Clowney Pre-draft measurables

[Warner4Prez]

Agree, it doesn't mean "nothing". It means something, but it's not everything, either. The point is, Clowney is faster, Long is a bit quicker, and was heavier. But we're also talking about fractions of seconds. The main point, IMO, is that Clowney is a "once in a generation" player. Well . . . maybe. We wont' know that for a few years, but there have been better athletes than him. Kearse was faster, about same size. There have been plenty stronger.

Could he be as good as Mario Williams or Julius Peppers? Yeah, but also maybe not.

All I can say, is after seeing these numbers for many years, Clowney posted good numbers, but not so good that he can be called a once in a generation player. That, coupled with his senior performance . . . tells a story.

Yeah this whole "once in a generation" tag that gets thrown around is my least favorite form of NFL hyperbole.
How many "once in a generation" players have we seen in the last decade now? Dorsey and Suh were both 'OIAG' defensive tackles. Bradford and Luck have both been 'OIAG' quarterbacks. The funny thing is, I don't remember them saying it about guys like Calvin Johnson or Adrian Peterson.

Also, food for thought: Vernon Gholston ran a 4.58.

 

[The Rammer]

Yeah this whole "once in a generation" tag that gets thrown around is my least favorite form of NFL hyperbole.
How many "once in a generation" players have we seen in the last decade now? Dorsey and Suh were both 'OIAG' defensive tackles. Bradford and Luck have both been 'OIAG' quarterbacks. The funny thing is, I don't remember them saying it about guys like Calvin Johnson or Adrian Peterson.

Also, food for thought: Vernon Gholston ran a 4.58.

Amen to that. Clowney has bust written all over him me thinks... Don't compare that to Chris Long.

 

[Alan]

jjab360 stuck trying to get by with only one smiley:






You guys certainly know how to go overboard when making an argument lol.

Don't you wish we had a larger variety of Smileys?

Second of all, considering the lack of new things to talk about I'm ready to do three or four more posts on this same subject.

Third of all, I don't know the meaning of the word overboard. I love long wordy posts with lots of stats and pertinent minutiae. The more the better. That's how I learn things and refine my positions.

Fourth of all, I missed all the other 200 conversations about whether we should draft Clowney. I've got lots of catching up to do.

 

[jrry32]

I see nothing in Chris Long's or Clowney's resume that would merit the label of freakish athlete. Look at Cook's stats at the link and I think you'll see the difference because IMO he does fit the description.
http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=56966&draftyear=2009&genpos=TE

Don't get me wrong jrry, I'm not implying that Clowney isn't an exceptional athlete. I just don't think he's any more athletic than Chris is. My point in my original post has to do with the, IMO, extreme overhyping of Clowney's abilities. I don't see anything in his combine stats or his college career that would substantiate that claim. I do see him having the capability to become very good if he gets his head straight but that's a big if.

Aaron Curry was a freakish athlete too.

Alan, you know I love ya man but this is nuts. Clowney weighed in 20 pounds heavier than Cook and put in similar times in the 40, 3 cone drill and a similar broad jump. The only area where Cook had a decided advantage is the vertical jump.

And I'll point out again that Clowney was 20 pounds heavier. Cook is a freakish athlete. Clowney is a freakish athlete. Long is not.

Combine measurables be damned, I've seen the guy run around SEC Tackles without being touched. I've seen him throw SEC OLs around like ragdolls. I've seen him run down HBs and WRs from the other side of the field. And then he went into the combine and lit it up like many expected. And yet you're honestly telling me that a 4.53 OFFICIAL 40 is not impressive...despite it apparently being a top 5 time for DEs over the last decade(that's what they said at the combine)? Come on, Alan.

And the unofficial time...which NFLDraftScout uses but has not come in yet was somewhere around a 4.47. This is a nearly 270 pound 6'5" DE. That's freakish.

But I don't even care about the 40. I knew the guy was a freakish athlete before he ever went to the combine. It's evident on the field.

So yea, I think this entire argument is outrageous. It's like the people that tried to argue that Mike Evans isn't that good at coming down with contested balls...what?!?! There are a lot of things you can pick on Clowney for...but there's really no questioning his freakish athleticism. And Chris Long isn't on that level. Which is why he hasn't developed into a dominant DE despite his football IQ, motor and diverse set of pass rush moves. I love Chris but he's a good to very good DE. If he had Clowney's athleticism and length, he'd be on that JJ Watt level. There simply isn't a comparison here athletically.

Just like there's no comparison between Long and Quinn in terms of athleticism. The combine measurables may say differently but I've seen those two on the football field and Quinn is on another level athletically.

Alan, I respect the hell out of you but I think you're way off base here.

 

[jrry32]

Yeah this whole "once in a generation" tag that gets thrown around is my least favorite form of NFL hyperbole.
How many "once in a generation" players have we seen in the last decade now? Dorsey and Suh were both 'OIAG' defensive tackles. Bradford and Luck have both been 'OIAG' quarterbacks. The funny thing is, I don't remember them saying it about guys like Calvin Johnson or Adrian Peterson.

Also, food for thought: Vernon Gholston ran a 4.58.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1113320/index.htm

He is a postmodern prototype for his position, Randy Moss minus the misanthropy. But Calvin Johnson, Georgia Tech's once-in-a-generation wide receiver, is not perfect.

Food for thought, Stephen Hill ran a 4.28. Should we avoid 6'4" WRs with 4.2 speed?

Gholston didn't bust because he was athletic.

 

[jjab360]

I see nothing in Chris Long's or Clowney's resume that would merit the label of freakish athlete. Look at Cook's stats at the link and I think you'll see the difference because IMO he does fit the description.
http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=56966&draftyear=2009&genpos=TE

Don't get me wrong jrry, I'm not implying that Clowney isn't an exceptional athlete. I just don't think he's any more athletic than Chris is. My point in my original post has to do with the, IMO, extreme overhyping of Clowney's abilities. I don't see anything in his combine stats or his college career that would substantiate that claim. I do see him having the capability to become very good if he gets his head straight but that's a big if.

Aaron Curry was a freakish athlete too.

In retresospect, I just have one question, Alan. If a nearly 270 lb DE running a 4.4 isn't a freakish athlete in your book, then what the heck does a freakish athlete look like, lol?!? 280 lbs running a 4.3???

I respect all your posts, but you're way off base on this one.

 

[Warner4Prez]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1113320/index.htm


Food for thought, Stephen Hill ran a 4.28. Should we avoid 6'4" WRs with 4.2 speed?

Gholston didn't bust because he was athletic.

Haha, well considering the Jets are supposedly ready to give up on Hill, maybe we should.
Also, thanks for the link to Megatron. I knew there had to be one out there somewhere!

 

[Alan]

jrry32 saying I remind him of a cashew:
Alan, you know I love ya man but this is nuts. Clowney weighed in 20 pounds heavier than Cook and put in similar times in the 40, 3 cone drill and a similar broad jump. The only area where Cook had a decided advantage is the vertical jump.

And I'll point out again that Clowney was 20 pounds heavier. Cook is a freakish athlete. Clowney is a freakish athlete. Long is not.

Combine measurables be damned, I've seen the guy run around SEC Tackles without being touched. I've seen him throw SEC OLs around like ragdolls. I've seen him run down HBs and WRs from the other side of the field. And then he went into the combine and lit it up like many expected. And yet you're honestly telling me that a 4.53 OFFICIAL 40 is not impressive...despite it apparently being a top 5 time for DEs over the last decade(that's what they said at the combine)? Come on, Alan.

And the unofficial time...which NFLDraftScout uses but has not come in yet was somewhere around a 4.47. This is a nearly 270 pound 6'5" DE. That's freakish.

But I don't even care about the 40. I knew the guy was a freakish athlete before he ever went to the combine. It's evident on the field.

So yea, I think this entire argument is outrageous. It's like the people that tried to argue that Mike Evans isn't that good at coming down with contested balls...what?!?! There are a lot of things you can pick on Clowney for...but there's really no questioning his freakish athleticism. And Chris Long isn't on that level. Which is why he hasn't developed into a dominant DE despite his football IQ, motor and diverse set of pass rush moves. I love Chris but he's a good to very good DE. If he had Clowney's athleticism and length, he'd be on that JJ Watt level. There simply isn't a comparison here athletically.

Just like there's no comparison between Long and Quinn in terms of athleticism. The combine measurables may say differently but I've seen those two on the football field and Quinn is on another level athletically.

Alan, I respect the hell out of you but I think you're way off base here.

HA! I caught that use of similar when it fit your view.
It's similar when it's the 40 time and 3-cone drill but it's a HUGE difference in weight. You also failed to mention the HUGE difference in their 10 yard splits. You also didn't see anything similar in their college stats either and said that Long played an extra year when he actually only played in 6 games as a freshman. Just pulling your leg a little here jrry.

When a DE isn't even as strong as a TE then I'm sorry jrry but I just can't put him in the freak category. Exactly what stat did Cloney perform as well as or better than Cook except the weight category? 1 inch farther in the long jump?

So lets get to the part where I can give you the benefit of the doubt. I think I mentioned before that I'd only seen him play in one game (ever), so I bow to you superior knowledge about how he shows up in a game. You make a very good point about the comparison between Quinn and Long and it may be a similar situation between Clowney and Long. However, you seem to be forgetting that I merely said that I see nothing in his COMBINE STATS and COLLEGE STATS that would lead me to believe that he's a freak. That' doesn't mean that on closer inspection during games, like you've given him, that he doesn't flash in areas and skills that aren't measured by mere stats. So the corollary to that sentence is I'm not saying you're wrong about him (although that hurt a little typing that). It also doesn't mean I think I'm wrong in what I said because the "stats" alone don't support your view IMO.

All of this also doesn't take into consideration that I think he's a head case but that's a different conversation.

BTW, I love ya too even though you don't have any vowels in your name. I would never let my daughter even date, much less marry a guy without a vowel in his name. And no, I don't count the "y" as a vowel.

 

[jrry32]

HA! I caught that use of similar when it fit your view.
It's similar when it's the 40 time and 3-cone drill but it's a HUGE difference in weight. You also failed to mention the HUGE difference in their 10 yard splits. You also didn't see anything similar in their college stats either and said that Long played an extra year when he actually only played in 6 games as a freshman. Just pulling your leg a little here jrry.

I was talking about Clowney vs. Cook...not Long.

When a DE isn't even as strong as a TE then I'm sorry jrry but I just can't put him in the freak category. Exactly what stat did Cloney perform as well as or better than Cook except the weight category? 1 inch farther in the long jump?

Well, Clowney's unofficial 40 was a 4.47...Cook's was a 4.49.

And strength? The bench press doesn't measure functional strength. It measures upper body muscular endurance. It's basically a litmus test to how dedicated a guy is to the weight room and is easily the most meaningless measurable. Especially considering that functional strength in football comes mainly from the lower body.

Clowney is FAR stronger than Cook on the field.

So lets get to the part where I can give you the benefit of the doubt. I think I mentioned before that I'd only seen him play in one game (ever), so I bow to you superior knowledge about how he shows up in a game. You make a very good point about the comparison between Quinn and Long and it may be a similar situation between Clowney and Long. However, you seem to be forgetting that I merely said that I see nothing in his COMBINE STATS and COLLEGE STATS that would lead me to believe that he's a freak. That' doesn't mean that on closer inspection during games, like you've given him, that he doesn't flash in areas and skills that aren't measured by mere stats. So the corollary to that sentence is I'm not saying you're wrong about him (although that hurt a little typing that). It also doesn't mean I think I'm wrong in what I said because the "stats" alone don't support your view IMO.

All of this also doesn't take into consideration that I think he's a head case but that's a different conversation.

BTW, I love ya too even though you don't have any vowels in your name. I would never let my daughter even date, much less marry a guy without a vowel in his name. And no, I don't count the "y" as a vowel.

Fair enough but combine and college stats aren't going to give you the same sort of understanding of a guy's skill-set that games will. But I understand not everyone has the free time that I do to put in this sort of thing.

Not even ONE date?

 

[Alan]

jjab360 coming out of left field:
In retrospect, I just have one question, Alan. If a nearly 270 lb DE running a 4.4 isn't a freakish athlete in your book, then what the heck does a freakish athlete look like, lol?!?

So, you do realize that the 266 lb DE you're talking about ran a 4.53 and not a 4.4 right? That's a night and day difference in a short distance like the 40. I already answered your second question but because Cook isn't a DE you might have dismissed that as being my answer. It is my answer because they both weigh about the same (Cook weighs 254 lb) and the position you play on the field has no bearing on your athleticism. Unless you want to start making qualifications like "he's an athletic freak for a DE" which is a distinction I wasn't making.

 

[Alan]

jrry with a very moving plea:
Not even ONE date?

Nope, you'd have to change your name to something wild like Jerry.

BTW, I love your new avatar. So does my daughter.

 

[jjab360]

So, you do realize that the 266 lb DE you're talking about ran a 4.53 and not a 4.4 right? That's a night and day difference in a short distance like the 40. I already answered your second question but because Cook isn't a DE you might have dismissed that as being my answer. It is my answer because they both weigh about the same (Cook weighs 254 lb) and the position you play on the field has no bearing on your athleticism. Unless you want to start making qualifications like "he's an athletic freak for a DE" which is a distinction I wasn't making.

Actually, Cook weighed in at 246 lbs at the combine and ran an a 4.50 official 40 according to NFL.com, the 4.49 is an unofficial hand time. Clowney weighed in at 20 pounds heavier, and was measured around a 4.47 unofficial hand time, had about the same broad jump, 3-cone drill, etc., again all despite weighing 20 pounds heavier. Is a 4.35 40 yard dash nearly as impressive for a 215 pound receiver as it is for 235 lb Calvin Johnson?

Seems like you're playing the part of the contrarian on this one, Alan, there's no way you can call Cook a physical freak without giving that same distinction to Clowney.

 

[jrry32]

Nope, you'd have to change your name to something wild like Jerry.

BTW, I love your new avatar. So does my daughter.

That's too much of a compromise. Oh well, X's daughter it is.

 

[laramsoriginal]

Clowney can run a 1.0 40 and I would not even think twice about taking him with a top 10 pick... Even if the rams had a need at DE.

His college coach said Clowney's work ethic is "ok" .......yeah i'll pass on him.

I could be wrong and Clowney turns into a monster at the next level. I believe it all depends on Clowney, he hit the genetic powerball lol so anything is possible.

 

[jjab360]

Clowney can run a 1.0 40 and I would not even think twice about taking him with a top 10 pick... Even if the rams had a need at DE.

His college coach said Clowney's work ethic is "ok" .......yeah i'll pass on him.

I could be wrong and Clowney turns into a monster at the next level. I believe it all depends on Clowney, he hit the genetic powerball lol so anything is possible.

"He was OK," Spurrier said. "It wasn't like Marcus Lattimore, you know, every player is a little different. His work habits are pretty good, they're not quite like Lattimore, a Stephon Gilmore, Melvin Ingram, some of those guys, but when the ball is snapped he's got something no one else has."

Oh the horror...

 

[Thordaddy]

A lazy college player made a multi millionaire ,nah I'll pass.
If your only "OK" as far as the old ball coach sees your work ethic,let someone else try to wake him up.

 

[Alan]

jjab360 with additional info:
Actually, Cook weighed in at 246 lbs at the combine and ran an a 4.50 official 40 according to NFL.com, the 4.49 is an unofficial hand time. Clowney weighed in at 20 pounds heavier, and was measured around a 4.47 unofficial hand time, had about the same broad jump, 3-cone drill, etc., again all despite weighing 20 pounds heavier. Is a 4.35 40 yard dash nearly as impressive for a 215 pound receiver as it is for 235 lb Calvin Johnson?

Seems like you're playing the part of the contrarian on this one, Alan, there's no way you can call Cook a physical freak without giving that same distinction to Clowney.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/12537/jared-cook
Cook's playing weight is 254 lbs and I don't think that changed his "freak" status.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...ng-the-combine-pile-the-jadeveon-clowney-show
Clowney was given an official time of 4.53
Unofficial is a synonym for incorrect and thus meaningless.
As for "about the same", that's the difference between "exceptional athlete" and "freak" in my book. You look at that as contrarian and I look at it as you having different criteria for freak status than I do.

Bottom line here jjab is that the term "athletic freak" is a purely subjective definition of a players athletic ability. The good thing here is that now we both know exactly what the other's definition is. So we'll each know where the other is coming from in the future.

It's all good but it's even better when you know exactly what the other guy means when he says something.

 

[jrry32]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/12537/jared-cook
Cook's playing weight is 254 lbs and I don't think that changed his "freak" status.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...ng-the-combine-pile-the-jadeveon-clowney-show
Clowney was given an official time of 4.53
Unofficial is a synonym for incorrect and thus meaningless.

Ironically, the opposite is true. NFLDraftScout uses unofficial times(they get times from scouts and usually have them updated on their site about a month after the combine). NFL organizations use unofficial times(they have scouts time it). The only people that use the "official" times are the fans and media.

Seeing as the combine exists for the NFL organizations' benefit, the official times are more or less meaningless.

As far as playing weight is concerned, he didn't time his 40 at that weight. Which affects how fast you run. So in order to have an accurate comparison, you'd need to use the weight he ran at...which as jjab said, is 246.

And if you're using the NFLDraftScout time for Cook(unofficial time), the 40 time to use for Clowney would be the 4.47 unofficial time...in order to remain consistent. Just saying.

 

[Alan]

jrry32 floating back with:
Ironically, the opposite is true. NFLDraftScout uses unofficial times(they get times from scouts and usually have them updated on their site about a month after the combine). NFL organizations use unofficial times(they have scouts time it). The only people that use the "official" times are the fans and media.

Seeing as the combine exists for the NFL organizations' benefit, the official times are more or less meaningless.

As far as playing weight is concerned, he didn't time his 40 at that weight. Which affects how fast you run. So in order to have an accurate comparison, you'd need to use the weight he ran at...which as jjab said, is 246.

And if you're using the NFLDraftScout time for Cook(unofficial time), the 40 time to use for Clowney would be the 4.47 unofficial time...in order to remain consistent.

I think there's something wrong what you just said but it's that time of the night again and I'm not thinking clear enough. I'll check back in on this tomorrow. But as a quick preview, NFLDraftScout also has Cook running a 4.42. How would a scout time it? With a stop watch? the offical time is done by a machine and is never wrong. That's why the official time is always the one used for official purposes. Hence the name official. But like I said, i'm not thinking all that clearly right now so I'll look at this again later. Time to watch some DVR'd Elementary.

 

[jrry32]

I think there's something wrong what you just said but it's that time of the night again and I'm not thinking clear enough. I'll check back in on this tomorrow. But as a quick preview, NFLDraftScout also has Cook running a 4.42. How would a scout time it? With a stop watch? the offical time is done by a machine and is never wrong. That's why the official time is always the one used for official purposes. Hence the name official. But like I said, i'm not thinking all that clearly right now so I'll look at this again later. Time to watch some DVR'd Elementary.

Rather than trying to explain it myself and making it more confusing, I'll just post this:
http://rob-rang.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/13682485/34964121

Even before the inclusion of the secret FAT timings this year, there was confusion by the media and fans over the so-called "official" 40 times. And the reason is simple -- there really is no single, "official" 40 time.

Here is what happens to get the 40 times at the Combine that are revealed:
--Those who participate in the 40 actually run twice, and on each run they are timed by two hand-held stopwatches and one electronic timer (that is actually initiated by hand on the player's first movement).
--Combine data put together for NFL teams by National Scouting includes all six of those times for each player, but no single official time.

Team scouts and coaches have various approaches for reaching agreement on a 40 time they use from those six timings. Some use averages. Some throw out slowest and fastest and then average the rest. Some ignore the whole thing and use a time taken by their own scout.

However, the rapid ascent of the Combine as a media event has created a lot of misconceptions, especially with the addition of live coverage by NFL Network on television and NFL.com online. In recent years, in an attempt to expedite reporting of data, both NFL Network and NFL.com have published 40 times and have not cited the source of those times, except to say they are unofficial.

And this year there will be more of the same, as stated in this week's press release from NFL.com and NFL Network, which says: "For the first time ever, NFL.com provides unofficial 40-yard dash times for each participant in real time with the Combine Tracker, allowing fans to obtain results and data faster than ever before. Additionally, the new Combine Tracker lists how each athlete performed in all of the drills, providing a central location to receive statistics as they happen."

All this is great for fans viewing online or on television, as long as they understand, as the press release states, that the times are "unofficial." Most media will go with those same times until more specific data becomes available.

In deference to the players, NFLDraftScout.com uses the best verifiable -- or listed -- time from the Combine unless it is conspicuously skewed from the other times. However, the times are usually well grouped.

NFLDraftScout hasn't gotten Clowney's times in yet so they're using the media reported time until then. As I said, it's usually updated about a month after the combine. Sometimes, it takes longer. Clowney's 40 on NFLDS will probably be around the 4.47 40 he was reported to "unofficially" run.

The "official" times exist for the media and fans.

Not that it really matters because the difference between a 4.53 40 and a 4.47 40 for a DE doesn't mean much.