Forty times v. top end speed

[fredtoast]

I have posted about this before, but thought I'd bring it up again because of this

 

http://www.bengals.com/news/article-1/Different-times-for-Ross/33cde495-9808-4a16-8de7-2c74dac75a98

 

"But truth be told, Ross, of all people, wants to run as fast as some of the guys in his receiver room. The big, quick Cody Core for one. The sleek, gifted A.J. Green for another. After they strip away the GPS wires from practice, those two usually lead the pack with the fastest moves at about 23 miles per hour.  Even though Ross is a world-record holder of sorts, he’s still trying to reach that 23 range that measures speed of the game. Which is much more than raw speed."

 

The players with the fastest forty times are the ones who get the quickest start.  The forty time does not measure top speed.  Fans of drag racing know what I am talking about.  At the end of the quarter miles two times are posted.  One is "elapsed time", which is like a forty yard dash time, and the other is "trap speed", that is the speed the car is traveling as it crosses the finish line.  We all know that some of the taller WRs do not have the greatest forty times, but if you want a "deep threat" top speed is much more important.  Two players can run the exact same forty time but one will be running much faster at the end and will pull away from the other.  If you ever watche dUsain Bolt race you would know what I am talking about.  He is never the fastest guy out of the blocks, but when he hits his top speed (almost 28 MPH) he just blows everyone else away.

 

I have been preaching for years that the combine should report a players "top speed" as well as the "elapsed time" for the forty yard dash.  With WRs top speed is more important that elapsed time because every race with a CB begins with a "rolling start".  If a CB is playing off the line it does not matter if a WR has the quickest start on earth they don't start really "racing" until both are side by side.  And even in press coverage the real race does not begin until both are already running.

 

With RBs the opposite is true.  The quickest start is most important because the RB can hit the hole quicker.  A RB almost never gets to top speed.  The combine does measure "ten yard split" which gives the time for the first ten yards of the forty.  Again 2 RBs can have the exact same forty time but one will hit the hole quicker.  "Ten yard split" is also very important for DEs or LB edge rushers.  It is a much better indicator of how quick a player is than the forty time.

 

 

 

 

[omgdrdoom]

Having good vision to see and then hit the holes with quick cuts is one of the most important things for an RB to me, much more important than 40 times or their top speed. Gotta get into open space to begin with for that stuff to matter. Not saying you don't want a quick RB, it's just secondary to good vision IMO but you want a guy that has both ideally.

 

As far as Ross goes, he should shine on quick release passes from Andy if he can learn to handle NFL press coverage. A lot of people seem to think it's going to be a simple transition and a matter of fact that Ross is going to easily "burn" these physical DBs. If he can beat the press regularly, he could be a nightmare over the middle of the field. I don't see Ross as the potential deep threat like many fans do, he's more of the short pass, get some YAC kinda guy I'd imagine. I'm glad you posted this as it's good to have this discussion occasionally to make sure everyone realizes that there's a huge difference between running fast in the 40 yd dash and being a true NFL deep threat.

[T-Dub]

It would be interesting to see splits with & without pads.  Running with all that gear on is an entirely different thing.

[LostInDaJungle]

39 minutes ago, omgdrdoom said:

Having good vision to see and then hit the holes with quick cuts is one of the most important things for an RB to me, much more important than 40 times or their top speed. Gotta get into open space to begin with for that stuff to matter. Not saying you don't want a quick RB, it's just secondary to good vision IMO but you want a guy that has both ideally.

Holes don't stay open long though. RB's need that burst to take advantage of open holes. Defenders are also looking for gaps, so if your burst speed isn't better than the MLB, he's going to be at the hole same time as you. One of the reasons Zeke Elliot is so dangerous is it only takes him 2-3 steps to burst through the hole and be up to speed. So, there's a bit of a chicken/egg situation, although without both you're never going to make that chicken omelette.

Also, physics comes into play... A 230 pound guy going 20 MPH hits with 934 N of force. (209 pounds) That same guy going 23 MPH generates 1064 N. (239 pounds) That extra speed means you essentially have to tackle a guy who's 30 pounds heavier. 

It's like saying that the most important thing for a hitter is being able to tell a curve ball from a fastball. If you don't have the hand speed to get the bat around, or the power to hit a dinger, you're not a home run threat.

All of those aspects are important, but if I could only have one, I'd take the guy with the burst to be able to execute the play I've drawn up and the hole I want him to hit. Give me a big quick guy who can go 4 yards and a cloud of dust, and I'll rely on my O-Line to open up the holes for him. (ala Jerome Bettis) If you can't get to the edge faster than a LB, I don't give a flying how good your vision is, we're going to have to block for you to be effective.

 

[omgdrdoom]

^ all solid points. I suppose that's probably why almost every RB that's considered to be "good" happen to have that burst and also have great vision and football IQ.

 

I do have a question though, how often is a RB going to be going 20 - 23 MPH at the average time of contact for an NFL RB? Never maybe? I know the point you were trying to make (which I'm not saying is a bad one), but the gap of force differential is going to be a lot smaller when you consider more realistic numbers. What's it look like when you take a 230 pound guy using an approximate speed that he would actually be going at the time of first contact? From the time he takes the handoff and hits the OL-DL/LB battle to make cuts (where I'd assume most contact is made on average), there's no way he's going anywhere near 20+ MPH.

[LostInDaJungle]

12 minutes ago, omgdrdoom said:

but the gap of force differential is going to be a lot smaller when you consider more realistic numbers.

If anything, I would think the gap would be greater, and with slower speeds the benefit greater.

Just guesstimating.... A Jerome Bettis might be going 10-11 MPH when he hits the line. An Ezekiel Elliot might be going 15-16 MPH. A 5 MPH difference.  Overall Newtons (pound-force) would be lower, so the percentage benefit from that speed is greater. (Also, we're assuming that the RB is a sphere, no stiff-arms, etc...)

Thanks Sports Science - Elliot is going 15.3 MPH when he hits the hole. 

 

In contrast, here's Ray Lewis. Based on their "1,000" pounds calculation and him being 250lbs., he's going ~10 MPH when he hits that door. He doesn't have much of a run up... But he's also not a slow dude.
 

 

[fredtoast]

I 100% agree that "field vision" is one of the most important skills a RB can possess, but unfortunately it is almost impossible to measure other than watching film.

 

Trent Richardson is a perfect example.  He had great size, speed, work ethic, and heart, but he failed in the NFL because of poor field vision.

 

Same thing is true with QBs.  The ability to "read the field" is the most important skill they can have, but it is almost impossible to measure with any test other than watching them on film.

 

It is easy to see holes open and receivers get open when looking down on the field from the stands, but on field level it is madness with 22 guys running in different directions at different speeds.  The ability to immediately gauge how fast everyone is moving in what direction is a skill just like being able to do complex math in your head.  Some people have it and some don't.

[fredtoast]

I have also argued before that smaller RBs can be effective running between the tackles because they can hit they holes quicker before they close.

 

They can't take the pounding of running inside 20 times a game, but on limited carries a small back can run inside effectively (as long as he has an o-line opening holes and does not have to make the yards all on his own by breaking tackles or falling forward)

[omgdrdoom]

Thanks LIDJ, no one will ever confuse me for a science major so seeing some of that stuff explained is pretty cool. I assumed with slower speeds the difference would be less just by the natural assumption of greater force for faster moving objects but I guess that's why I'm not a physicist LOL

 

Like I said earlier I guess there's a big reason most of the good players at any position possess both the football IQ along with the physical traits/athleticism. You don't see many top tier players without both so I guess it shouldn't have to be between picking between the 2. If a guy doesn't have 1 or the other he's probably going to have a tough time becoming successful in the NFL.

[|Bunghole|]

8 hours ago, omgdrdoom said:

there's a huge difference between running fast in the 40 yd dash and being a true NFL deep threat.

LOL, yup. Just ask Al Davis. Wait...he's dead. Anyhoo, good points for both sides of the equation. Talent will always matter, and so does speed, but I am firmly in the camp that heart, motor and IQ matter a little more. I also think that by saying that, the position group you are addressing matters too. Take say...Urlacher in his prime. Not a fast guy but a brutally effective linebacker due to instinct, strength and football smarts. But he was a linebacker, not an RB or a WR. I think there's a minimum threshold for speed at both those positions where you can't make it at the NFL level unless you have at least SOME of it. 

 

But there are plenty of examples of track star type guys at WR (ask the Raiders...and our beloved Benny Brazell) that can run really fast but can't really play the position well (or stay healthy because they're small-ish). I fear Ross getting injured often but I hope this isn't the case. I'm banking on his elusiveness in space and his breakaway speed, which I believe he has or will soon develop. His college tape has some plays that are simply breathtaking.

 

As for RB's, I think Mixon is the complete package. Runs fast, has great cut and shake moves and can catch the ball well, even on deep routes (which I hope we try with him sometimes). And he's not small like Bernard or hesitant like Hill. 

 

At the end of the day, as usual, much of this team's offensive success will hinge on the trenches.

[T-Dub]

14 hours ago, Bunghole said:

 

 

I fear Ross getting injured often but I hope this isn't the case.

 

That's the thing - he's already injured.  He was injured when we drafted him.  

[fredtoast]

14 hours ago, Bunghole said:

 Take say...Urlacher in his prime. Not a fast guy but a brutally effective linebacker due to instinct, strength and football smarts. But he was a linebacker, not an RB or a WR. I think there's a minimum threshold for speed at both those positions where you can't make it at the NFL level unless you have at least SOME of it. 

I don't really disagree with the point you were making, but Urlacher is not a good example.  He was pretty damn fast.  His last year in college he played some WR and returned punts.

 

Here is my take on "speed v. football skills".  A player who can read what is going on and react a few tenths of a second quicker makes up for the lack of speed.  But the best players both react quickly and run fast.

[fredtoast]

14 minutes ago, T-Dub said:

 

That's the thing - he's already injured.  He was injured when we drafted him.  

There are lots of players that get injured in college but become great NFL players. I don't know why you have such a big problem with this.  Anthony Munoz had 2 knee surgeries in college.  Adrian Peterson had a serious injury his last year in college.  And I could give you a hundred other examples if you want.

[T-Dub]

4 minutes ago, fredtoast said:

And I could give you a hundred other examples if you want.

 

You name 2 HoF (or likely HoF) players that were drafted injured in the top 10 and act like that's the norm rather than dramatic outliers.

 

So yes, please do name 100 other Top 10 draft picks that were chosen despite being injured and went on to have HoF-caliber careers.

[Steve4192]

7 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

That's the thing - he's already injured.  He was injured when we drafted him.  

So was Anthony Munoz.

 

Sometimes it works out .... sometimes it doesn't.

 

Hopefully Ross is one of the guys who works out.

[T-Dub]

17 minutes ago, Steve4192 said:

So was Anthony Munoz.

 

Sometimes it works out .... sometimes it doesn't.

 

Usually it doesn't. I think it's fairly obvious that Anthony Munoz is a statistical outlier in many, many ways. 

 

IOW:  These kids found almost $100k in a duffel bag in a field.  

 

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=1025381

 

That doesn't mean we should all quit our jobs and start searching fields for duffel bags.

[fluhartz]

5 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

Usually it doesn't. I think it's fairly obvious that Anthony Munoz is a statistical outlier in many, many ways. 

 

IOW:  These kids found almost $100k in a duffel bag in a field.  

 

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=1025381

 

That doesn't mean we should all quit our jobs and start searching fields for duffel bags.

I would like to... where are the fields?

[T-Dub]

7 hours ago, fluhartz said:

I would like to... where are the fields?

 

Um.  Do you live in Manhattan or LA?  A field is kind of like a park only without the sidewalks and crackheads.  They're actually quite common in many parts of the country.  

[fredtoast]

On 8/26/2017 at 9:17 AM, T-Dub said:

 

You name 2 HoF (or likely HoF) players that were drafted injured in the top 10 and act like that's the norm rather than dramatic outliers.

 

So yes, please do name 100 other Top 10 draft picks that were chosen despite being injured and went on to have HoF-caliber careers.

So do you not watch college football?  Players get hurt in college all of the time.  Do I really have to post examples to prove this to you?

 

Looking just at the top ten picks from the 2017 draft.

 

#1 Myles Garrett missed 3 games in the '16 season with injury.

#4 Leonard Fournette missed half of the '16 season for LSU with injury.

#7 Mike Williams missed his ENTIRE JUNIOR SEASON with an injury.

#8 Christian Mccafferty misses 2 games in '16 due to injury.

 

I can't believe there are people out there who think every guy that gets injured in college is going to be a bust.

 

If you want me to do all of the research for you then lets make a bet.  Of all the players to be selected either Pro Bowl or All Pro over the last three years, how many do you claim never got injured in college? 

 

 

[T-Dub]

25 minutes ago, fredtoast said:

So do you not watch college football?  Players get hurt in college all of the time.  Do I really have to post examples to prove this to you?

 

Looking just at the top ten picks from the 2017 draft.

 

#1 Myles Garrett missed 3 games in the '16 season with injury.

#4 Leonard Fournette missed half of the '16 season for LSU with injury.

#7 Mike Williams missed his ENTIRE JUNIOR SEASON with an injury.

#8 Christian Mccafferty misses 2 games in '16 due to injury.

 

I can't believe there are people out there who think every guy that gets injured in college is going to be a bust.

 

 

 

 

I can't believe how quickly you move the goalposts and then make a strawman argument that nobody proposed but yourself.

 

How many of those guys were hurt when they were drafted?  That's what we were discussing, since you seem to have forgotten. Also, you're still short 94 players by my count. 

 

 

[fredtoast]

2 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

I can't believe how quickly you move the goalposts and then make a strawman argument that nobody proposed but yourself.

 

How many of those guys were hurt when they were drafted?  That's what we were discussing, since you seem to have forgotten. Also, you're still short 94 players by my count. 

 

 

Okay, lets stop moving the goalposts.  Tell me exactly what your problem is with drafting a player who has been injured in college?  I need you to commit to a clear position before I can prove you wrong.

 

Are you okay with drafting any player that has been injured, no matter how badly, as long as he can play at the time of the draft?  Is that the only situation where you have problems with drafting a guy?  Or are you saying you would never draft a guy who had to miss the combine or a pro-day workout because of injury?

 

I'll be glad to do the research to show how clueless you are as soon as you tell me what your exact position is.

[UncleEarl]

55 minutes ago, fredtoast said:

Okay, lets stop moving the goalposts.  Tell me exactly what your problem is with drafting a player who has been injured in college?  I need you to commit to a clear position before I can prove you wrong.

 

Are you okay with drafting any player that has been injured, no matter how badly, as long as he can play at the time of the draft?  Is that the only situation where you have problems with drafting a guy?  Or are you saying you would never draft a guy who had to miss the combine or a pro-day workout because of injury?

 

I'll be glad to do the research to show how clueless you are as soon as you tell me what your exact position is.

Hahaha.  So, no matter his position he is wrong?  I love it.

[T-Dub]

1 hour ago, fredtoast said:

Okay, lets stop moving the goalposts.  Tell me exactly what your problem is with drafting a player who has been injured in college?  I need you to commit to a clear position before I can prove you wrong.

 

Are you okay with drafting any player that has been injured, no matter how badly, as long as he can play at the time of the draft?  Is that the only situation where you have problems with drafting a guy?  Or are you saying you would never draft a guy who had to miss the combine or a pro-day workout because of injury?

 

I'll be glad to do the research to show how clueless you are as soon as you tell me what your exact position is.

 

What if my position is that you're kind of a blow-hard?  PROVE ME WRONG FREDDIE

 

Quote

Tell me exactly what your problem is with drafting a player who has been injured in college?

 

Never said that, anywhere.  I was questioning the wisdom behind drafting players that were *still* injured, as in seriously enough to impact their availability for TC or the start of the season.  All that other stuff was a complete fabrication on your part.

[fredtoast]

12 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

 

Never said that, anywhere.  I was questioning the wisdom behind drafting players that were *still* injured, as in seriously enough to impact their availability for TC or the start of the season.  All that other stuff was a complete fabrication on your part.

Why are you opposed to this.

 

Can you name a player who was not healthy at the time of the draft and then washed out of the NFL due tpo injury?  I can name a bunch of players who missed the combine or were unable to work out at the time of the draft and still became very good NFL players.  Drafting a player is about more than just one season.

 

To me this just seems like another example of you bitching about something just because the Bengals did it without looking around the league and seeing that every other team does the exact same thing.

[fredtoast]

12 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

What if my position is that you're kind of a blow-hard?  PROVE ME WRONG FREDDIE

Nothing wrong with being a blow hard when I speak the truth.  In fact I have to blow hard to be heard over all the crying and squealing from the haters around here.