Check out our YouTube page
We’ve got scouting videos up on
With comprehensive analysis from prospect expert, Nathan Cooper. Check it out!
Check out our YouTube page
We’ve got scouting videos up on
With comprehensive analysis from prospect expert, Nathan Cooper. Check it out!
By LOGAN KING
Sports Info Solutions (SIS) brings you the second annual edition of The SIS Football Rookie Handbook, with scouting reports and statistical breakdowns on over 280 college football players who are likely to be drafted or signed as rookie free agents in 2020 (a glossary for the below stats can be found here). New features for this year include unique and informative NFL team pages, research deep-dives by the SIS R&D team, and—for the first time ever—the NCAA version of their flagship football statistic, Total Points.
With the 2020 NFL Draft right around the corner, this article follows last week’s offensive line draft recommendations, focusing on potential draft targets for the 2019 league leaders in percentage of coverages from zone and man concepts.
Each team is examined in terms of their coverage tendencies last season, projected coverage tendencies for this season (based on coaching changes), and potential draft picks (based on scheme fit, roster needs, and draft position). More information on these prospects can be found in the SIS Football Rookie Handbook.
The table below displays the league leaders in percentage of coverage schemes from both zone and man.
| 2019 Coverage Tendency Leaderboards | |||||
| Man Coverage | Zone Coverage | ||||
| Rank | Team | Percent of Plays | Rank | Team | Percent of Plays |
| 1 | Patriots | 54% | 1 | Chargers | 75% |
| 1 | Lions | 54% | 2 | Panthers | 68% |
| 3 | Dolphins | 44% | 3 | Seahawks | 66% |
Man
New England Patriots
It should come as no surprise that the Patriots lead the league in percentage of defensive plays run from man coverage, as this is the third year in which the team has led the league in this statistic. Additionally, the rest of the top three teams in man coverage usage are all led by coaches from the defensive side of the Bill Belichick coaching tree. Belichick will lead the defense once more in 2020 after a near historic first half of the season in 2019 and a very strong defensive season overall.
New England returns its core group of corners from 2019, which includes four players all ranking in the top 15 at the position in Total Points per snap. While the team will likely look to address more pressing needs at other positions early in the draft, some depth options for the Patriots’ man-heavy defense in the later rounds include:
Detroit Lions
The Lions tied for the league lead in percentage of plays run from man coverage in 2019, but finished 29th in EPA against per play when playing man. Detroit moved on from defensive coordinator and primary defensive play caller Paul Pasqualoni this offseason in favor of former Eagles DB’s coach Cory Undlin.
Matt Patricia began to take over some of the defensive play calling responsibilities for the Lions towards the latter part of last season, so it remains to be seen as to who will call the defensive shots for the team in 2020. However, given Philadelphia’s strong performance against the pass when in man coverage during Undlin’s tenure (top 5 in EPA against per play in three of the last four seasons), Detroit appears to be sticking to its heavy man-coverage strategy, moving forward.
With the departure of their two primary outside corners from 2019, Darius Slay and Rashaan Melvin, the Lions are among the teams who have lost the most in terms of Total Points at the cornerback position this offseason. While the addition of Desmond Trufant partially addresses this issue, outside corner is a primary concern that should be addressed in this draft. With the third overall pick and nine picks total, potential prospects for the Lions defensive system include:
Miami Dolphins
The Dolphins come in at third in percentage of plays in which man coverage was used in 2019, but next-to-last in EPA against per play on those plays. Despite a new face at defensive coordinator in Josh Boyer, the defensive approach isn’t expected to change drastically as Boyer has worked with head coach Brian Flores ever since starting with the Patriots in 2006.
Miami made a big splash in free agency with the signing of Byron Jones, who ranked 30th in Total Points among corners last season and will step into an outside corner role for the team. The secondary has strong depth with the versatile Nik Needham (50% of snaps from outside and 45% of snaps from the slot) and slot corner Erik Rowe both ranking in the top 45 in Total Points at the position, which will come in handy with Xavien Howard facing league discipline for off-the-field issues. While likely looking to address other needs early in the draft, Miami has 14 total picks in the draft and can certainly add depth, should Howard be gone long-term. Potential players who fit in the Dolphins’ man-heavy scheme include:
Zone
Los Angeles Chargers
Much like the Patriots and man coverage percentage, the Chargers led the league in percentage of plays run from zone coverage for the third straight year. With Gus Bradley remaining at the helm, not much is expected to change by way of defensive philosophy in 2020.
Following a top 10 finish at the corner position in Total Points last season, LA adds Chris Harris Jr. to an already stout group. Harris was lined up outside on 70% of his snaps last season and finished 83rd in Total Points among corners. However, he finished 21st in Total Points at the position in 2018 as he lined up in the slot on 73% of his plays. Ideally, Harris will aid Desmond King II in the slot, after King’s regression last season.
On the outside, LA boasts two players who finished in the top 20 in Total Points at the position in Casey Hayward Jr. and Michael Davis. With the sixth overall pick, the team will look to improve at other positions early on in the draft. Here are potential options to add depth to the Chargers’ zone-heavy scheme in the later rounds:
Carolina Panthers
In the first season under head coach Matt Rhule and defensive coordinator Phil Snow, it is unclear what the defensive philosophy will be for Carolina. With the majority of the defensive back position still intact from the previous season and the coaching staff’s recent experience against Big 12 offenses, the Panthers may stick to a zone-heavy approach in pass coverage.
Through the offseason, the Panthers lost the 20th ranked cornerback in terms of Total Points when James Bradberry left. Bradberry’s departure leaves a large hole on the outside, where he played 76% of his snaps. Ross Cockrell ranked 25th in Total Points among corners while playing 55% of his snaps in the slot and 37% on the outside, but the team’s remaining options at corner, Donte Jackson and Javien Elliot, ranked 66th and 112th in Total Points, respectively, among the position. With the seventh pick in the draft, Carolina could address their need for an outside corner. Possible prospects include:
Seattle Seahawks
In his second season as the Seahawks defensive play caller, Ken Norton increased his team’s frequency of zone coverage, rising to third place in percentage of plays run with zone coverage. With few changes to the coaching staff, Seattle’s defensive approach should remain zone-focused in 2020.
The signing of Quinton Dunbar, who ranked 31st in Total Points per snap among the position, brings an improvement to a Seahawks CB group that ranked 28th in Total Points in 2019. Tre Flowers and Shaquill Griffin led the team in both snaps from the outside and snaps from the slot last season. Ranking first in percentage of snaps from base defense (four defensive backs) in 2019, Seattle is looking for corners who can play both inside and outside, rather than specialize in one area. With four picks in the top three rounds, Seattle has the potential to address this need early. Potential fits for their system include:
by NATE WELLER
On Monday, the Panthers announced a four-year $64-million extension for star running back Christian McCaffrey. The $16M average annual value clears the bar set by Ezekiel Elliott last offseason and makes McCaffrey the highest-paid running back in the league’s history.
As is customary with all things related to running back value, the move has sparked debate. Todd Gurley was supposedly the exception to the rule about paying running backs, and he was already released this offseason to try and get the Rams out of cap jail. Elliott was still one of the best backs in the league in 2019, but his contract undeniably loomed large in the decision to cut ties with Bryon Jones and the ongoing negotiations with Dak Prescott.
Stop me if you’ve heard this before, but McCaffrey’s situation is unique. The argument in McCaffrey’s favor doesn’t revolve around his rushing performance at all, but rather his ability in the passing game. McCaffrey is coming off of a season where he caught 116 passes for 1,005 yards. His 40 Receiving Points Earned were 14 points clear of the next best running back, Austin Ekeler, and are the most by a running back since Total Points’ inaugural season in 2016, outpacing his own 2018 campaign by nine points.
If the argument is that McCaffrey deserves to be paid like a wide receiver, though, it makes the most sense to compare his receiving numbers to other receivers. His 40 Receiving Points Earned in 2019 would have ranked him 18th among all pass-catchers.
It’s also fair to wonder how much McCaffrey’s usage has impacted his overall numbers. In 2019, more than half of McCaffrey’s catches occurred at or behind the line of scrimmage, and his 16 Points Earned on these plays was more than double the next closest player.
McCaffrey was far less dangerous when utilized in more traditional wide receiver alignments. On 27 targets from slot or wide alignments McCaffrey managed only 6.9 Yards per Target (Y/T). Put into context, among 86 players with at least 50 targets lined up in the slot or wide last season, only 12 posted a Y/T lower than McCaffrey’s.
None of this is to say that McCaffrey is a bad player. The Panthers are undoubtedly a better team with him than without him. All of his value as a receiver comes in addition to him being a top-ten rusher. He has led all running backs in Total Points two seasons running, and has produced despite playing alongside Kyle Allen and the shell of Cam Newton. The current state of the NFL, though, makes paying running backs top dollar a dangerous proposition, and the argument that McCaffrey should be valued like one of the league’s best receivers falls flat.
It’s good to look back after three seasons to assess a team’s draft class to see if their players are helping the team or if they were busts. We attempted to redo the first round of the 2017 NFL Draft to re-select players with three years of additional knowledge.
In most cases, we tried to take into account the position of the player they actually took and what their team needs were, but most importantly who the best players in the Draft were. Here’s what we came up with:
Selections
#1 – Cleveland Browns: QB Patrick Mahomes, Texas Tech
Actual Selection: DE Myles Garrett, Texas A&M
Mahomes was actually picked #10
Patrick Mahomes is a no-brainer. The Super Bowl LIV Champion has already won a Super Bowl MVP, NFL MVP, and been named First-Team All-Pro in his short career. In 2019, he ranked in the top six among qualifying quarterbacks in EPA, Total Points, Positive % and IQR. That all comes off a 2018 season in which he ranked either No. 1 or 2 in each of those metrics. -Nathan
#2 – Chicago Bears: QB Deshaun Watson, Clemson
Actual Selection: QB Mitchell Trubisky, North Carolina
Watson was actually picked #12
The Bears have been much maligned for not only taking Mitchell Trubisky over Mahomes and DeShaun Watson, but trading up one pick to do so. Trubisky has ranked 30th, 28th and 28th in Passing Total Points over his three seasons in Chicago, and his one playoff appearance in 2018 came on the backs of the NFL’s No. 1 ranked defense in EPA.
Watson was great before tearing his ACL halfway through his rookie campaign, but two healthy seasons later with two playoff appearances and a shootout 2019 Divisional Round loss to the No. 1 pick in this re-draft under his belt, the Texans and Chiefs are set up for success while the Bears find themselves back in the QB market. In this exercise, they don’t make the same mistake. -John
#3 – San Francisco 49ers: DE Myles Garrett, Texas A&M
Actual Selection: DE Solomon Thomas, Stanford
Garrett was actually picked # 1
Though not the No. 1 pick, Myles Garrett still finds himself in the top 3. He’s accumulated over 30 sacks in three seasons and ranked 2nd in Sack % and 22nd in Pressure % during the 2019 season. The Niners clearly wanted help off the edge to generate pressure on the quarterback. A Garrett-Bosa pairing coming off the edges in Super Bowl LIV may have changed the outcome with the Lombardi Trophy headed back to San Francisco instead of Kansas City. -Nathan
#4 – Jacksonville Jaguars: LB T.J. Watt, Wisconsin
Actual Selection: RB Leonard Fournette, LSU
Watt was actually picked #30
The Jaguars were looking to bolster their offense in 2017 with the selection of Leonard Fournette, a dominant college running back. While his addition helped lead the Jaguars on a strong playoff run his rookie year, he hasn’t lived up to his top-five pick value. T.J. Watt finished third in Defensive Player of the Year voting in 2019 and was the No. 1 ranked edge defender in Total Points, 1st against the pass and 5th against the run.
Adding Watt to the Jaguars dominant defense of 2017 (NFL-best in EPA and Positive%) would be the definition of strengthening a strength, but he could also have been the lone cog to remain after its recent purge of stars. -John
#5 – Tennessee Titans: WR JuJu Smith-Schuster, USC
Actual Selection: WR Corey Davis, Western Michigan
Smith-Schuster was actually picked #62
The Titans were hungry for receiver help in 2017, but instead of taking Western Michigan’s Corey Davis, they instead go with JuJu Smith-Schuster in our redraft. Though his production was way down in 2019 due to an injured Ben Roethlisberger and a carousel of quarterbacks, he had very productive seasons his first 2 years in the league. In 2018, a season in which he ranked 5th in receiving yards, 6th in Total Points, and 16th in EPA among all pass catchers. -Nathan
#6 – New York Jets: S Jamal Adams, LSU
Actual Selection: S Jamal Adams, LSU
The first of these re-draft selections to remain the same, Jamal Adams has been everything the Jets had hoped when they drafted him sixth overall in 2017. He was named to the All-Rookie team that year, then was a 2nd Team All-Pro in 2018 and a 1st Team All-Pro last year. He’s finished 3rd and 5th in Total Points among all safeties the past two seasons, with elite marks against both the run and pass. -John
#7 – Los Angeles Chargers: CB Tre’Davious White, LSU
Actual Selection: WR Mike Williams, Clemson
White was actually picked #27
With it seeming to be too early for a receiver and Smith-Schuster already off the board, the Chargers could dip into the defensive side of the ball to select Tre’Davious White. Among CBs seeing at least 50 passes thrown their way in 2019, White led the league in Total Points with 45. He also ranked 3rd in QBR Against (31.8) and 6th in yards per attempt (5.9). White is proving to be one of the league’s top shutdown corners, and a Chargers secondary that included White with Casey Hayward, Derwin James, and Nasir Adderley would look pretty daunting to opposing quarterbacks. -Nathan
#8 – Carolina Panthers: RB Christian McCaffrey, Stanford
Actual Selection: RB Christian McCaffrey, Stanford
Another pick that the selecting team would happily do over again. While the running back position has been devalued in the modern NFL and spending a premium draft pick on one is often met with criticism, Christian McCaffrey has become the prototype of what the league is looking for in the backfield. He put up only the third 1,000/1,000-yard rushing and receiving season in NFL history in 2019, despite having his total Air Yards be less than 0. In other words, he manufactured all of his receiving yards (and then some) after the catch. He is a three-down back in its truest form and has also proven to be supremely durable, compiling over 1,000 touches without missing a game so far in his career. -John
#9 – Cincinnati Bengals: RB Alvin Kamara, Tennessee
Actual Selection: WR John Ross, Washington
Kamara was actually picked #67
John Ross has been a bust. The Bengals instead choose Alvin Kamara, who’s been one of the best dual-threat backs in the NFL over the past couple of years. Among running backs with over 100 attempts, in 2019, Kamara ranked 3rd in Positive % and 5th in Broken Tackle % as a rusher, and was 3rd in receptions, 3rd in First Downs, 4th in Broken Tackles among RBs as a receiver. Since coming into the league in 2017, he ranks 11th in the NFL with 243 receptions. Kamara instantly makes the Bengals offense more dynamic in both the run and pass game. -Nathan
#10 – Kansas City Chiefs: CB Marshon Lattimore, Ohio State
Actual Selection: QB Patrick Mahomes, Texas Tech
Lattimore was actually picked #11
With Patrick Mahomes not available for the Chiefs this time around, they take a player who was taken one pick later in 2017 and keep rolling with Alex Smith at quarterback. Marshon Lattimore was the Defensive Rookie of the Year for the Saints after collecting five interceptions, and has proven to be one of the top corners in this class on a perennial contender. He was targeted the 10th-most times in the NFL last year while allowing a completion percentage below 50%. -John
#11 – New Orleans Saints: TE George Kittle, Iowa
Actual Selection: CB Marshon Lattimore, Ohio State
Kittle was actually picked #146
George Kittle is a steal at this point. He fills the void left by Jimmy Graham a few years prior giving Drew Brees another offensive weapon. In 2018-19 combined, he recorded 173 receptions, 2,430 yards, and 10 touchdowns. In 2019, he led all tight ends in receiving Total Points with 47. Not only has he made a large impact as a receiver, but also as a blocker, as he tied for the least amount of blown blocks in 2019. -Nathan
#12 – Houston Texans: T Ryan Ramczyk, Wisconsin
Actual Selection: QB Deshaun Watson, Clemson
Ramczyk was actually picked #32
Sensing a trend? Three of the first 12 picks in this re-draft were originally taken by the New Orleans Saints. Ryan Ramczyk was the second of their two first-round picks (Lattimore) and they clearly hit on both. Ramczyk has been a dominant presence on the Total Points leaderboards in his career, ranking 2nd, 9th, and 4th at his position in his three seasons. He’s allowed three or fewer sacks on nearly 500-plus pass protection snaps each of those years, as well. -John
#13 – Arizona Cardinals: S Eddie Jackson, Alabama
Actual Selection: LB Haason Reddick, Temple
Jackson was actually picked #112
The Cardinals were looking for back-end help throughout this draft and instead of going linebacker with their first pick, they instead select Eddie Jackson in the first round. He’s already recorded 10 interceptions as a safety, in his first three years in the league and has been named to the Pro Bowl each of the past two seasons. His 2018 campaign was one in which he racked up over 50 tackles and 6 interceptions, helping him to be named as a First Team All-Pro. -Nathan
#14 – Philadelphia Eagles: WR Chris Godwin, Penn State
Actual Selection: DE Derek Barnett, Tennessee
Godwin was actually picked #84
The Eagles have brought in some decent weapons in recent years to supplement Zach Ertz at tight end, such as Alshon Jeffrey, Desean Jackson, and others, but injuries to the receiving corps and Carson Wentz have hindered the passing game. This culminated in a 2019 season in which Wentz became the first QB to ever throw for 4,000 yards without a 500-yard receiver. Coincidentally, this was also the year Chris Godwin broke out into a superstar, ranking 3rd in total receiving yards and No. 1 in yards after catch among receivers. -John
#15 – Indianapolis Colts: CB Marlon Humphrey, Alabama
Actual Selection: S Malik Hooker, Ohio State
Humphrey was actually picked #16
The Colts original pick of Malik Hooker has been good since he finally recovered from early injuries, but with Marlon Humphrey still on the board, they go that route this time. In 2019, Humphrey ranked 5th in Yards Per Attempt among CB’s with at least 30 targets. He also possessed a Completion %, Deserved Catch %, and QBR Against that all ranked in the top 25. Those numbers helped earn him a Pro Bowl spot and be named 1st Team All-Pro in 2019. -Nathan
#16 – Baltimore Ravens: WR Kenny Golladay, Northern Illinois
Actual Selection: CB Marlon Humphrey, Alabama
Golladay was actually picked #96
Humphrey, the Ravens actual pick, goes one spot ahead of here, so Baltimore pivots to the offensive side of the ball. The Ravens have been looking for a big play receiver for a number of years, and in this re-draft they get one in Kenny Golladay. Golladay led the NFL in receiving touchdowns in 2019 and put up the 5th-most Air Yards of all players. He fits well in reality with the big arm of Matthew Stafford, and would have done so with Joe Flacco and Lamar Jackson, a role that 2019 draft pick Marquise Brown has now filled. -John
#17 – Washington Redskins: DE Jonathan Allen, Alabama
Actual Selection: DE Jonathan Allen, Alabama
Another spot in the first round where the team drafting is satisfied with the pick they made three years ago. Jonathan Allen has been a solid contributor on the defensive line for the Redskins. In 2019, among DL with at least 25 solo tackles, he ranked 4th in total tackles with 69 while also having the 5th-lowest Missed Tackle Rate. He’s also amassed 15 sacks in his first three seasons in Washington. They’re happy with their selection. -Nathan
#18 – Tennessee Titans: CB Desmond King, Iowa
Actual Selection: CB Adoree’ Jackson, USC
King was actually picked #151
Adoree’ Jackson hasn’t been a bad pick for the Titans, but in this re-draft Tennessee again stays with the same position and finds a possible slight upgrade in the Chargers’ Desmond King. He was a 1st Team All-Pro DB in 2018 and a 2nd Team punt returner, another role Jackson currently fills for the Titans. He took a bit of a step back last season, but with the prevalence of 11 personnel in today’s game, slot cornerbacks are as important as any defensive position, having to defend two-way go’s and operate through traffic. King has played nearly 94% of his snaps in the slot the past two seasons. -John
#19 – Tampa Bay Buccaneers: T Dion Dawkins, Temple
Actual Selection: TE O.J. Howard, Alabama
Dawkins was actually picked #63
Dion Dawkins has been one of the few offensive linemen that have made some sort of positive impact from this draft class. The Buccaneers have desperately been looking for offensive line help over the past few years, and decide to go with Dawkins in the first round. Dawkins has surely been a little streaky at times, but has solidified himself as a starter on the Bills offensive line. He would replace current Buccaneers LT Donovan Smith who has consistently possessed one of the top blown block rates since coming into the league in 2015, most notably with 42 blown blocks in 2017. -Nathan
#20 – Denver Broncos: RB Dalvin Cook, Florida State
Actual Selection: T Garett Bolles, Utah
Cook was actually picked #41
To say Garett Bolles hasn’t lived up to his draft slot is putting it mildly. The Broncos have taken and missed shots on multiple different running backs the past few years. It wasn’t until they hit on Phillip Lindsay after the 2018 draft ended that they found a consistent contributor. In Dalvin Cook, Denver gets a dynamic ball carrier who has dealt with some injuries and may be best served leading a committee to stay fresh. His Rushing Total Points/1,000 rates through his first two injury-shortened seasons were each top-3 in the NFL. -John
#21 – Detroit Lions: LB Zach Cunningham, Vanderbilt
Actual Selection: LB Jarrad Davis, Florida
Cunningham was actually picked #57
I liked Zach Cunningham coming into the 2017 Draft and thought that’s who the Lions should’ve taken instead of Jarrad Davis. In this re-draft, the Lions make it happen. Cunningham is an athletic sideline-to-sideline presence that can play all three downs against both the run and pass game. He’s racked up over 330 tackles so far in his career, with at least 100 tackles each of the last two seasons, including 143 in 2019. He also led linebackers and ranked 3rd among all defensive players in Run Defense Points Saved last season.
#22 – Miami Dolphins: S Malik Hooker, Ohio State
Actual Selection: DE Charles Harris, Missouri
Hooker was actually picked #15
Original No. 22 overall pick Charles Harris has amassed 3.5 sacks so far in his career. Malik Hooker goes a few spots after his initial draft slot, but after a slowed start due to injury, he’s made an impact each season of his career. As he was projected to, Hooker roams the deep middle of Indianapolis’ defense and has come up with multiple interceptions as an over-the-top defender every year. He would have fit nicely behind Reshad Jones, Xavien Howard and Minkah Fitzpatrick, if only for a short time. -John
#23 – New York Giants: WR Mike Williams, Clemson
Actual Selection: TE Evan Engram, Ole Miss
Williams was actually picked #7
The Giants have had a tough time finding playmakers on the outside. Though original pick Evan Engram has shown flashes, Mike Williams seems to be a better candidate to give the Giants what they are looking for at receiver to stretch the field now that he fell to this spot in the re-draft. After an injury-filled rookie season in which he only played 10 games and caught 11 passes, Williams has burst onto the scene in 2018 and 2019. His 2018 season included 43 catches and 10 touchdowns, while he grabbed 49 passes for over 1,000 yards in 2019. -Nathan
#24 – Oakland Raiders: S Budda Baker, Washington
Actual Selection: CB Gareon Conley, Ohio State
Baker was actually picked #36
Despite knocks for his size coming out in 2017, Budda Baker has outplayed his draft position and proven to be an impact safety at multiple levels of the defense. He was named a 1st Team All-Pro performer for his work on special teams his rookie season, and has worn numerous hats throughout his career.
Over the past two seasons, he has taken 48% of his snaps from a slot corner position, 35% from a safety alignment, and 15% in the box. He finished 4th in the NFL in total tackles in 2019, the only non-linebacker in the top 10. Not bad for a sub 5’10” DB. -John
#25 – Cleveland Browns: DE Takkarist McKinley, UCLA
Actual Selection: S Jabrill Peppers, Michigan
McKinley was actually picked #26
In this re-draft, Takk McKinley goes one spot ahead of where he was originally drafted. He’s been a solid player for the Falcons, proving to be a specialist rushing the passer. He played all 16 games his rookie season, and while he didn’t start any, he’s progressed into a starting role having started 13 of 14 games played in 2019. He followed up seasons of 6 and 7 sacks, with a 3.5 sack campaign in 2019, but was a top 25 player in pressure rate among all defensive linemen. -Nathan
#26 – Atlanta Falcons: CB Shaquill Griffin, UCF
Actual Selection: DE Takkarist McKinley, UCLA
Griffin was actually picked #90
McKinley has been a decent player for the Falcons, but he goes just ahead of this spot in our re-draft. Shaquill Griffin has fit in perfectly in the Seahawks’ Cover 3 scheme as their left cornerback. Seattle initially traded out of this spot for the Falcons to move up and take McKinley, so if they had the chance again, they may have stayed put and just taken Griffin here themselves. The Falcons have had multiple injuries to their secondary in recent years, though, and he could help with Atlanta’s recent loss of Desmond Trufant. Griffin’s 13 passes defensed in 2019 were good for 4th in the NFL. -John
#27 – Buffalo Bills: LB Haason Reddick, Temple
Actual Selection: CB Tre’Davious White, LSU
Reddick was actually picked #13
While Hasson Reddick hasn’t played up to his original draft position, having been selected 13th overall, he’s been a decent contributor for the Cardinals. At No. 27, the Bills, who have desperately been looking for off-ball linebacker help, take Reddick to fill that void. Reddick has played in all 48 games for the Cardinals, and after his rookie season in which he had to make the switch from edge rusher, which he played in college, to off-ball linebacker, he’s amassed over 150 tackles the past two seasons and now seems to be more comfortable in his role. -Nathan
#28 – Dallas Cowboys: WR Cooper Kupp, Eastern Washington
Actual Selection: DE Taco Charlton, Michigan
Kupp was actually picked #69
Dallas has been searching for more weapons for Dak Prescott since he took over the position, and Cooper Kupp would have been a great fit at this spot. The 2017 draft was nearing the tail end of Dez Bryant’s tenure and a year before the team traded a first round pick for Amari Cooper.
Somewhat understatedly, Kupp has proven to be at the very least an elite No. 2 option in the NFL. But in his return from a late season torn ACL, his 2019 catches, yards and touchdowns were all higher than his Rams teammate Robert Woods, and Amari Cooper only bested him in yards by 28, maybe suggesting he’d be more of the 1A to their 1Bs. A “Cooper-Kupp” pairing would make for a top tier receiving tandem. -John
#29 – Cleveland Browns: RB Aaron Jones, UTEP
Actual Selection: TE David Njoku, Miami FL
Jones was actually picked #182
The Browns were looking for playmakers at every position in 2017. With the last of their three picks in the first round, they turn to UTEP RB Aaron Jones. Jones has clearly outplayed his draft position and it’s easy to see why. After putting up a pedestrian 448 yards and 4 touchdowns on 81 carries as a depth player his rookie season, he’s since seen his playing time and numbers increase and vault him into the clear-cut starter.
In 2018, he rushed for 728 yards and 8 touchdowns before totaling over 1,000 yards and tied for a league-leading 16 rushing touchdowns this past season. He also added 49 receptions for nearly 500 yards through the air. In 2019, Jones ranked 4th in Total Points among RBs and was a top 10 performer in Positive Play rate as a rusher among backs with at least 150 carries. -Nathan
#30 – Pittsburgh Steelers: QB/ATH Taysom Hill, BYU
Actual Selection: LB T.J. Watt, Wisconsin
Hill was undrafted
The Steelers took a Defensive Player of the Year candidate in this spot in 2017, but Watt is long gone in this exercise. So too is Juju Smith-Schuster. Pittsburgh was coming off a Conference Championship loss, and the “Killer B’s” of Ben Roethlisberger, Le’Veon Bell and Antonio Brown were thriving. However, their work loads were astronomical, and an injury to any of the three would have been detrimental. Why not add the most versatile offensive threat in the game today?
The Steelers would use Bell in some Wildcat packages, which Taysom Hill could fulfill at the very least. He could spell Big Ben at quarterback on occasion, and potentially provide a long term replacement option like he may have for Drew Brees, a similarly aging QB. And he had 6 receiving touchdowns in 2019 as a surprisingly proficient downfield weapon for New Orleans.
In his career, Hill has played 22% of his snaps at QB, 36% as a TE, and 33% at WR, while also logging over 800 special teams reps. Mike Tomlin would find a way to get him on the field, just as Sean Payton has. -John
#31 – San Francisco 49ers: CB Adoree’ Jackson, USC
Actual Selection: LB Rueben Foster, Alabama
Jackson was actually picked #18
Adoree’ Jackson has definitely not lived up to his original draft destination at No. 18, but the back end of the first round at No. 31 makes it a little easier to swallow. Obviously he’s an incredible athlete, but he’s struggled transitioning from the college ranks to the pro-level.
However, there is a bright side. After being targeted 100 or more times his first two years in the league with solid success, he was only targeted 41 times in 2019. Additionally, his QBR Against has dropped each season from 91.1 in 2017 to 79.1 in 2019. He’s also a dynamic return man, having piled up over 1,000 yards in his career as a punt and kick returner. -Nathan
#32 – New Orleans Saints: RB Austin Ekeler, Western State
Actual Selection: T Ryan Ramczyk, Wisconsin
Ekeler was actually undrafted
With Alvin Kamara gone, the Saints would be looking for a player to fill a similar role in their offense. Austin Ekeler put up All-Pro-type numbers in 2019, as he compiled 92 receptions for almost 1000 yards (nearly all of which were after the catch) and 8 receiving touchdowns, on top of having the 3rd highest Broken Tackle% among RBs with at least 50 carries. With numerous other notable running backs still on this re-draft board (Mixon, Fournette, Hunt, Conner, and Breida to name a few), the undrafted Ekeler may be growing into the best of that group and would be a perfect fit in the Saints’ Reggie Bush/Darren Sproles/Alvin Kamara role. -John
But what about …
The original selections at picks 2 through 5 fall out of the first round in this re-draft, and it’s not hard to see why.
Mitchell Trubisky has been incredibly unstable at the Quarterback position for the Bears, and while he likely goes in the 2nd round to a quarterback-needy team in a redo, his 48-29 TD-INT ratio and 3.9% turnover-worthy throw rate are a cause for concern.
Solomon Thomas has yet to find his rhythm with only 6 career sacks. Although Fournette ran wild in the 2017 playoffs and had a decent 2019 with over 1,150 yards, he’s been injury prone and has barely averaged 4 yards per carry.
Finally, Corey Davis has been inconsistent for the Titans and while much of that blame can be placed on new Las Vegas Raiders Quarterback Marcus Mariota for most of his career, he still needs to show more to prove he’s a first-round worthy receiver.
Three years is about the general timeline in which you can begin to see if your draft picks will work out or are busts. While half of the original first rounders fell out of the first round in this re-draft, we see many players that were selected outside of Day 1 that have proven to be valuable commodities for their respective teams.
As we approach the 2020 NFL Draft, it’s a given that a handful of first round picks won’t live up to their draft position, while other late-round selections will outplay theirs. Looking back three years is a good way to see how teams have drafted: if they are hitting on those early round selections and finding some gems in the later rounds or if they are missing early and failing to find key role players late.
The New Orleans Saints, for example, found themselves with four of the players taken in this re-draft in 2017, and the Pittsburgh Steelers originally selected two of our first five overall picks. Find the teams that consistently hit early and find gems late and you’ll likely be looking at the teams that are playing in January and February.
By JOHN SHIRLEY
The Colts and Steelers were in unfamiliar territory last season. They were both attempting to rally behind an unproven quarterback, after losing their projected starters unexpectedly. After having matching circumstances and similar results in 2019, the two teams find themselves paralleling each other again heading into the 2020 Draft.
Both teams have traded away their first round pick for defensive help and both need a boost at receiver to help an aging quarterback from the legendary 2004 draft class. Based on SIS’s Total Points metric, only the Eagles currently have a worse receiving corps than the Colts and Steelers.
Current WR Corps Rankings by 2019 Total Points
| Rank | Team | WR Total Points |
| 32 | Eagles | 21 |
| 31 | Colts | 25 |
| 30 | Steelers | 26 |
The good news for the Colts and Steelers is that the upcoming NFL Draft is loaded with premier talent at the wide receiver position. While they won’t be in play for the class’s headliners, they will still have high-level players to choose from when they select at 34 and 49, respectively.
Colts
Colts Projected Top 3 WR’s 2019 Stats
| Player | Tgts | Catch% | ADoT | YAC/Rec | Slot% | Total Points |
| Zach Pascal | 73 | 56% | 11.7 | 5.8 | 53% | 17 |
| T.Y. Hilton | 69 | 65% | 9.9 | 4.9 | 37.5% | 9 |
| Parris Campbell | 25 | 72% | 8.0 | 6.0 | 57% | 0 |
The Colts returning receivers should be better this season if they can stay healthy, as they lost significant time from both T.Y. Hilton and Parris Campbell last season. But, they could still use some help at the position. A deep threat with a large catch radius would be a welcome addition, as Zach Pascal’s team leading ADoT of 11.7 only ranked 55th among receivers with at least 20 targets. New quarterback Philip Rivers is used to getting a lot of help from his receivers.
Potential Targets:
Tee Higgins, Clemson (SIS Football Rookie Handbook Grade: 6.7)
Jalen Reagor, TCU (SIS Football Rookie Handbook Grade: 6.8)
Denzel Mims, Baylor (SIS Football Rookie Handbook Grade: 6.4)
Steelers
Steelers Projected Top 3 WR’s 2019 Stats
| Player | Tgts | Catch% | ADoT | YAC/Rec | Slot% | Total Points |
| Diontae Johnson | 91 | 65% | 9.1 | 5.2 | 24% | 15 |
| James Washington | 78 | 56% | 15.2 | 4.6 | 40% | 13 |
| JuJu Smith-Schuster | 72 | 58% | 9.2 | 5.8 | 71% | -1 |
The Steelers receiving corp took a major step back last season due to multiple reasons. The absence of a starting caliber quarterback, after Ben Roethlisberger’s injury, definitely lowered the group’s potential, as did JuJu Smith-Schuster being miscast as a No. 1 receiver.
The good news for the Steelers is that with Smith-Schuster in the slot, James Washington emerging as a legitimate deep threat, and Diontae Johnson surprising as a third-round pick, they should have some solid pieces this year. Though, they could use some added size on the outside to complement the returning weapons.
Potential Targets:
Laviska Shenault Jr., Colorado (SIS Football Rookie Handbook Grade: 6.8)
Grabriel Davis, UCF (SIS Football Rookie Handbook Grade: 6.7)
Michael Pittman Jr, USC (SIS Football Rookie Handbook Grade: 6.4)
The 2020 Football Rookie Handbook is available for $15 from ACTASports.com. If you liked this article and like studying the NFL Draft, you’ll surely enjoy the book.
The following is an excerpt from the 2020 SIS Football Rookie Handbook, your guide to this year’s NFL Draft prospects. In the book, we took the Total Points player valuation system we used to evaluate NFL players and put it to use to evaluate college football players, with an emphasis on this year’s draft class. The book is on sale for $15 at ACTASports.com.
By ALEX VIGDERMAN
Initially released at the start of the 2018 NFL season, the Total Points system is Sports Info Solutions’ answer to the conundrum of evaluating players at any position using a single framework. Total Points starts by apportioning the Expected Points Added of a play to the different players involved, but also uses the wealth of charting data collected by SIS to adjust as the events of the play dictate.
For example, take two incomplete passes, which for all intents and purposes are considered equal by most metrics, but would give very different Total Points values (for the quarterback in particular, but to some extent for many players).
Play 1: On 3rd-and-8, the quarterback drops back to pass and is forced out of the pocket because the left guard blows a block. He throws it to his tight end right at the sticks, but he drops the pass.
On this play, the left guard is penalized for having blown a block, and the quarterback and intended receiver recoup that value because their job is made more difficult. The throw is on-target and in the hands of the receiver, so the quarterback is credited as though it were completed. The receiver loses a whole bunch of value, especially because the play would have resulted in a third down conversion.
Play 2: On 1st-and-10, the quarterback drops back to pass and throws a slant eight yards downfield to the tight end, but the throw sails way over the head of the intended receiver.
Here not only does the down-and-distance affect the value available to the players (the incompletion isn’t as damaging in this case), but the effective blocking by the offensive line and the off-target throw cause the quarterback to take most of the blame for the play’s failure. The offensive line and intended receiver don’t lose any value because (as far as the charting data on the play is concerned) they did their jobs effectively.
All 22 players on the field are evaluated in this way using a breadth of charting data, and the set of data being used is expanding each year as SIS adds new data points.
The result of this calculation is a raw Points Above Average value that centers around zero for each season. From there, that value is transformed into Total Points by re-scaling it to center each team’s game-level total around the average points per game instead of around zero.
FBS Total Points Leaders
Following are the leaders in Total Points from the 2019 college football season. Unsurprisingly, quarterbacks dominate the list of the most valuable players. As a result, there are three leaderboards: the top quarterbacks, the top non-quarterback offensive players, and the top defensive players.
Top FBS Players by Total Points, 2019
|
Quarterbacks |
||
| Player | School | Total Points |
| Joe Burrow | LSU | 252 |
| Anthony Gordon | Washington State | 180 |
| Justin Fields | Ohio State | 170 |
| Jalen Hurts | Oklahoma | 162 |
| Sam Howell | North Carolina | 153 |
| Non-Quarterback Offense | |||
| Player | Pos | School | Total Points |
| Travis Etienne | RB | Clemson | 84 |
| Clyde Edwards-Helaire | RB | LSU | 83 |
| Zack Moss | RB | Utah | 80 |
| Jonathan Taylor | RB | Wisconsin | 72 |
| J.K. Dobbins | RB | Ohio State | 71 |
| Kennedy Brooks | RB | Oklahoma | 65 |
| Ja’Marr Chase | WR | LSU | 62 |
| Javian Hawkins | RB | Louisville | 60 |
| Najee Harris | RB | Alabama | 60 |
| Jaret Patterson | RB | Buffalo | 58 |
| Defense | |||
| Player | Pos | School | Total Points |
| Isaiah Simmons | LB | Clemson | 76 |
| Chris Orr | LB | Wisconsin | 74 |
| Antoine Winfield Jr. | S | Minnesota | 74 |
| Nick Bolton | LB | Missouri | 68 |
| James Lynch | DT | Baylor | 67 |
| Xavier McKinney | S | Alabama | 67 |
| Derek Stingley Jr. | CB | LSU | 66 |
| Alijah Halliburton | S | Wyoming | 65 |
| Kyahya Tezino | LB | San Diego State | 65 |
| Joseph Ossai | LB | Texas | 65 |
| Akileis Leroy | LB | Florida Atlantic | 65 |
Adjusting for Strength of Opponent
Much more than is the case in the NFL, the spread of talent across teams in college matters a lot in how we must evaluate a player’s performance. To address this concern within Total Points, a team quality estimate is calculated for both sides of the ball, and then each play is modified using a multiplier that is based on the quality of the unit on the other side of the field.
This adjustment (done the same way for offense or defense) is calculated over a rolling twelve-week window for each team by combining multiple calculations, all based on Expected Points Added per game (EPA/G):
Each team’s (offensive and defensive) quality rating is based on its EPA per game compared to average, adjusted for strength of schedule. It is calculated by comparing each team’s opponents’ performance (EPAo) to their opponents’ allowances in other games (EPAoo), and then using that to modify the team’s EPA per game (EPAt). Finally, the average EPA per game across all teams (EPAavg) is subtracted out.
Put mathematically,
Team Rating = EPAt – (EPAo – EPAoo) – EPAavg.
From there, the team rating is turned into a multiplier by converting the EPA difference calculated above into a percentage of the average EPA available in a game (i.e. the absolute value of all EPA accumulated in a game on average). The adjustment will range from about a 25% downgrade (e.g. a defensive player facing the Akron or UMass offense) to about a 25% upgrade (e.g. a defensive player facing the Ohio State offense).
Example Use Cases for Total Points at the College Level
Total Points is incredibly useful as a quick way to measure players against each other because it distills player value into a single number. This is especially true for defensive players, because it’s not clear how one should compare a tackle in the run game to a sack or a pass defensed, for example. Total Points allows us to discuss players with different roles and statistical profiles apples-to-apples.
With the strength-of-schedule adjustment added on top of the existing Total Points methodology we can quickly evaluate a player compared to the full swath of college football players, which can help point scouting staffs in the direction of players whose raw statistics don’t tell the full story (for better or for worse).
One such comparison could be drawn between running backs Zack Moss of Utah and Chuba Hubbard of Oklahoma State. Moss nearly leads the position in Total Points despite only ranking 11th in yards from scrimmage, buoyed by strong performances against above-average defenses. Hubbard, the leader in yards from scrimmage, doesn’t even crack the leaderboard above in part because of a weak set of opposing defenses and in part due to a handful of fumbles and pedestrian output after contact.
Exploring Total Points Further
This edition of The SIS Football Rookie Handbook represents the initial release of these Total Points numbers. You can find them in the Deep Dive section of the player pages as well as the leaderboards for each position.
The Football Rookie Handbook is on sale for $15 at ACTASports.com
By Steve Schwarz
It’s April and there is no baseball. There are no NBA playoffs. There are no NHL playoffs. And the NFL doesn’t start its regular season until September. But because the NFL has stuck to their pre-Coronavirus schedule, we will have an NFL Draft at the end of April.
OK, it won’t be in front of the usual wild crowds of fans that were expected to swarm over Las Vegas. We won’t get to hear the cheering and jeering of picks, because it will be a “Virtual Draft.” Instead we will see computer hookups between the GMs of the 32 teams and NFL headquarters (I’d like to have the “over” on technical issues, but that’s another story). At least we will have something interesting to watch for three days starting on April 23.
And thanks to legalized betting in various places around the country, we can bet on the selections. Sure, it’s not like betting on LeBron James and the Lakers against the crosstown Clippers in a playoff series, but it can still be fun … and profitable.
At the end of the piece you can find a few of the more interesting prop bets from William Hill odds. Let’s see if we can find some profit in those odds. Here are two options supported by SIS data:
Jordan Love, Utah State, pick 15.5, over -110.
While Joe Burrow, Tua Tagovailoa and Justin Hebert figure to go to quarterback-needy teams right out of the box, there is no way, based on last season’s statistics, that Love should be anywhere near the top-15 picks.
Using SIS data in the chart below, Love’s performance last season wasn’t anywhere near elite. In fact, his IQR rating was well below the top-100 quarterbacks for the 2019 season. Anyone selecting Love is doing it based on perceived potential and that usually gets coaches/GMs fired.
Even assuming a team takes him as a project, No. 15 is far too early. You will only have to sweat out the first Jacksonville pick (currently Gardner Minshew is their starter), but the Jaguars have two first-round selections (9, 20) and if they reach for a quarterback it would likely be with the second pick (the one they got from the Los Angeles Rams for Jalen Ramsey). The Patriots might also be interested, but they are No. 23 and Bill Belichick usually trades down, not up.
| Player | College | IQR | Yards | TDs | INT |
| Tua Tagovailoa | Alabama | 146.6 | 2,840 | 33 | 3 |
| Joe Burrow | LSU | 144.5 | 5,671 | 60 | 6 |
| Justin Herbert | Oregon | 117.4 | 3,471 | 32 | 6 |
| Jordan Love | Utah State | 81.3 | 3,405 | 20 | 17 |
Justin Jefferson, LSU, pick 23.5, under -110.
Based on most expert mock drafts, three mid-draft teams are expected to go for wide receivers; San Francisco, Oakland and Denver. So by the No. 15 pick, the top-three options will be off the board. And the team who most needs a wideout is Philadelphia (No. 21). Jefferson is a perfect fit for the Eagles. Jefferson ranked No. 1 among all Power-5 receivers from a statistical perspective. Add in his 4.43 40-yard dash, 37.5 inch vertical at the combine, and Jefferson’s work in a pro-style offense and the LSU wideout has everything a team could want.
| Player | College | WR Rating | Catchable Targets | Catches | Yards | TDs |
| Justin Jefferson | LSU | 147.9 | 121 | 111 | 1,540 | 18 |
| Henry Ruggs III | Alabama | 146.8 | 44 | 40 | 746 | 7 |
| CeeDee Lamb | Oklahoma | 144.8 | 73 | 62 | 1,327 | 14 |
| Tee Higgins | Clemson | 138.6 | 75 | 59 | 1,167 | 13 |
| Jerry Jeudy | Alabama | 127.2 | 86 | 77 | 1,163 | 10 |
Sports Info Solutions has been an innovator in the collection and analysis of sports data for almost two decades. SIS specializes in baseball and football data, using professional scouting practices to collect the most detailed and accurate information in both sports. Their data can be found in the majority of team front offices, and on websites such as Fangraphs and Football Outsiders.
Various 2020 NFL Draft Prop Bet Odds
| Player (WR) | College | Draft Spot | Over | Under | |
| Jerry Jeudy | Alabama | 12.5 | 125 | -145 | |
| CeeDee Lamb | Oklahoma | 12.5 | -110 | -110 | |
| Henry Ruggs III | Alabama | 14.5 | even | -120 | |
| Justin Jefferson | LSU | 23.5 | -110 | -110 | |
| Tee Higgins | Clemson | 32.5 | -110 | -110 | |
| Player (OL) | College | Draft Spot | Over | Under | |
| Mekhi Becton | Louisville | 7.5 | -130 | 110 | |
| Tristan Wirfs | Iowa | 8.5 | 120 | -140 | |
| Jedrick Wills | Alabama | 9.5 | -145 | 125 | |
| Anthony Thomas | Georgia | 12.5 | -120 | even | |
| Player (QB) | College | Draft Spot | Over | Under | |
| Tua Tagovailoa | Alabama | 3.5 | -110 | -110 | |
| Justin Herbert | Oregon | 6.0 | 120 | -140 | |
| Jordan Love | Utah State | 15.5 | -110 | -110 | |
| Player (RB) | College | Draft Spot | Over | Under | |
| D’Andre Swift | Georgia | 31.5 | -110 | -110 | |
| Jonathan Taylor | Wisconsin | 36.5 | -110 | -110 | |
| Player (LB) | College | Draft Spot | Over | Under | |
| Isaiah Simmons | Clemson | 6.5 | 105 | -125 | |
| Kenneth Murray | Oklahoma | 24.5 | -110 | -110 | |
| Patrick Queen | LSU | 24.5 | -110 | -110 |
By LOGAN KING
Sports Info Solutions (SIS) brings you the second annual edition of The SIS Football Rookie Handbook, with scouting reports and statistical breakdowns on over 280 college football players who are likely to be drafted or signed as rookie free agents in 2020 (a glossary for the below stats can be found here). New features for this year include unique and informative NFL team pages, research deep-dives by the SIS R&D team, and—for the first time ever—the NCAA version of their flagship football statistic, Total Points.
With the 2020 NFL Draft right around the corner, this article focuses on potential draft targets for the 2019 league leaders in percentage of run plays from zone and man blocking schemes.
Each team is examined in terms of its rushing scheme last season, projected rushing scheme for this season (based on coaching changes), and potential draft picks (based on scheme fit, roster needs, and draft position). More information on these prospects can be found in the SIS Football Rookie Handbook.
The table below displays the league leaders in percentage of run plays from both zone and gap schemes.
| 2019 Rushing Scheme Leaderboards | |||||
| Gap Run | Zone Run | ||||
| Rank | Team | Percent of Runs | Rank | Team | Percent of Runs |
| 1 | Texans | 62% | 1 | Bengals | 76% |
| 2 | Dolphins | 59% | 2 | Vikings | 73% |
| 3 | Bills | 57% | 3 | Titans | 71% |
Houston Texans
The Texans lead the league in percentage of gap scheme runs in 2019, finishing just inside the top half of the league in EPA per gap scheme run. The trade of DeAndre Hophins for David Johnson is indicative of Houston’s commitment to establishing the run game, moving forward. Though offensive play-calling responsibilities will be in OC Tim Kelly’s hands this upcoming season, the scheme isn’t expected to drastically change, as Kelly has worked with head coach Bill O’Brien since 2012 at Penn State.
Given the return of each of the team’s offensive line starters from 2019, Houston is not hard-pressed to find an immediate starter on the offensive front in this year’s draft. Rather, the Texans can address their need at wide receiver in the early rounds. There are several prospects who project to fit into Houston’s gap blocking scheme which may be available in the later rounds:
Miami Dolphins
While the Dolphins called the second most run gap scheme run plays in 2019, next season will likely be a different story, as Chan Gailey is now the offensive coordinator. Gailey’s history with the New York Jets points to a zone running scheme, as his 2015 and 2016 Jets squads ranked 9th and 1st in percentage of zone run plays called. Though only one player in next season’s OL position group finished above 60th in total points per snap at their position in 2019 (Ereck Flowers, 7th), Miami has 12 picks in the 2020 Draft, meaning plenty of opportunities to improve along the line.
With three picks in the first round and a total of six in top 70 picks, Miami has the ability to add several top talents to fit into Gailey’s zone scheme, such as the following:
Buffalo Bills
The Bills called the third highest percentage of runs from gap schemes in 2019. Buffalo retains their offensive play caller in Brian Daboll and also returns all five starting O-Linemen from last season. Only one of those starters finished outside of the top 26 in total points at their position (T-Cody Ford, 41st). With the ability to focus on other needs in the early rounds of the draft, potential options for Buffalo’s zone scheme include:
Cincinnati Bengals
In Zac Taylor’s first season leading the team, Cincinnati led the league in percentage of zone runs called. This offseason, the Bengals released guard, John Miller who was second on the team’s OL in terms of total points. Miller was replaced with Xavier Su’a-Filo who played only 307 offensive snaps for the Cowboys at guard, last season. The most dire need for this position group comes at left tackle, where snaps were split between John Jerry, Cordy Glenn, and Fred Johnson.
With the first overall pick in hand, the Bengals hold immense leverage; potential options for their zone-heavy scheme include:
Minnesota Vikings
Of the Viking’s run plays in 2019, 73% were zone scheme runs. Despite former OC Kevin Stefanski’s departure to Cleveland, the team should retain scheme consistency with Gary Kubiak taking the reins. Minnesota returns four starters from last season’s OL, after moving on from RG Josh Kline.
After big losses to the defensive back and wide receiver position groups this offseason, the team will likely not address the offensive front early on in the draft. Potential options in for the Viking’s zone scheme include:
Tennessee Titans
The Titans ranked third in percentage of zone scheme run plays and ranked 5th in EPA per play on those runs. Tennessee enters the 2020 season with the same offensive play caller and four (three of which finished in the top 14 at their position in total points in 2019) out of five primary starters on the OL from last year, losing Jack Conklin to Cleveland. Dennis Kelly, who earned 10 total points in limited snaps last season, is expected to fill in for Conklin.
The Titans are limited to six picks in the draft, with their first one coming at number 29. With limited opportunities to add depth, some players which could fit into the Titans’ zone scheme include:

By NATE WELLER
After a hectic start to the NFL offseason, things have slowed considerably as GMs do their final draft prep and learn how to use Zoom. At some point, though, the market will pick back up, and the biggest non-QB domino left to fall is Jadeveon Clowney.
It’s a weird time to be an NFL free agent, and Clowney is undoubtedly feeling the effects, probably more than any other player. Given his checkered injury history and team’s inability to perform a physical with their own doctors, Clowney has been unable to generate as much of a market as one might expect for a talented 27-year old pass rusher. Beyond that, teams are no doubt hesitant to throw top edge rusher money at a guy coming off of a three-sack campaign, even if that’s not really a fair reflection of Clowney’s performance.
Clowney generated 48 pressures in 2019, which still ranked him tied for 29th in the league despite missing time. The problem was that Clowney only turned those pressures into sacks a little less than six percent of the time, which ranked him 50th of 51 players with at least 40 pressures. Turning pressures into sacks is an inherently noisy metric, and there’s plenty of reason to believe Clowney will bounce back. Between 2016 and 2018 Clowney ranked 13th in the NFL in pressures with 163, and he turned 16 percent of those into sacks.

Arguably the best part of Clowney’s game, though, is his ability against the run. Clowney was solid as a run defender 2019. His 13 Run Defense Points Saved in 2019 (a stat explained here) ranked him 12th among defensive ends. But even after a (relatively) down year against the run, Clowney still leads all defensive ends by this metric since 2016, edging out Calais Campbell.
It’s impossible to say precisely how much of Clowney’s limited market can be attributed to his medical history and how much is a reaction to his stats in 2019. Regardless, Clowney is likely to have a strong market once things return to relative normalcy. And whatever team does pay Clowney will likely be getting production that is much closer to his performance between 2016 and 2018 than what we saw last season
By JOHN SHIRLEY
Quarterbacks are often labeled by their propensity for taking risks down the field. Throw it deep often and you get labeled a “Gunslinger.” Throw it short and rely on your receivers to make plays and you get labeled a “Game Manager.”
These designations are usually only provided by anecdotal evidence and fans’ feelings towards different players. But, the underlying principle of analyzing quarterback aggression by using throw depth can be a useful tool when predicting certain quarterback metrics and playing styles.
Throw depth has been shown to be a major driver in quarterback accuracy metrics and to be relatively stable year to year. Intuitively this makes perfect sense due to the fact that shorter throws are generally easier than throws down the field. This is why throw depth is a key factor in our metrics such as pComp and why average depth of target (ADoT) has been used to compare similarity between college quarterbacks.
Factoring throw depth into these types of analysis is extremely important, but using raw ADoT to evaluate a quarterback’s downfield aggression ignores the fact that all offensive schemes are not the same. Some offenses are predicated on a quick passing game, while others incorporate more field stretching concepts. This can skew ADoT in either direction and our view of certain quarterback’s downfield aggression.
In the NFL
By using ADoT +/- we can see which NFL quarterbacks were the most aggressive (the first five QBs listed on this leaderboard) and which were most conservative (the last five QBs) this past season.
2019 NFL Quarterbacks by ADoT +/- (Minimum 250 Attempts)
| Rank | Player | Team | ADoT | ADoT +/- |
| 1 | Ryan Tannehill | Titans | 9.5 | 1.6 |
| 2 | Matthew Stafford | Lions | 10.8 | 1.6 |
| 3 | Jameis Winston | Buccaneers | 10.4 | 1.4 |
| 4 | Dak Prescott | Cowboys | 9.4 | 0.9 |
| 5 | Baker Mayfield | Browns | 8.4 | 0.8 |
| … | ||||
| 26 | Jimmy Garoppolo | 49ers | 6.5 | -0.6 |
| 27 | Tom Brady | Patriots | 7.5 | -0.6 |
| 28 | Lamar Jackson | Ravens | 8.6 | -0.7 |
| 29 | Derek Carr | Raiders | 6.6 | -1.2 |
| 30 | Drew Brees | Saints | 6.5 | -1.4 |
This provides an interesting look at the new quarterback situation in Tampa Bay, as the Buccaneers’ previous starter, Jameis Winston, has consistently been among the league’s most aggressive passers and their new starter, Tom Brady, has consistently been among the league’s most conservative.
It also provides nice examples of why ADoT can be misleading in AFC North quarterbacks Baker Mayfield and Lamar Jackson. These are two players who have very similar ADoT’s, with Mayfield averaging 8.4 yards and Jackson averaging 8.6. However, based on their downfield opportunities, Mayfield is the more aggressive passer, as his ADoT +/- is 1.5 yards higher.
The 2020 Draft Class
The same analysis done in the NFL can also be done for college quarterback prospects. Shown here are the ADoT +/- numbers for the Top 10 quarterbacks in this year’s SIS Football Rookie Handbook.
Top 10 SIS Football Rookie Handbook Quarterbacks by ADoT +/-
| Player | School | ADoT | ADoT +/- |
| Jordan Love | Utah State | 9.6 | 1.5 |
| Jalen Hurts | Oklahoma | 10.6 | 1.3 |
| Tua Tagovailoa | Alabama | 8.3 | 1.0 |
| Justin Herbert | Oregon | 8.4 | 1.0 |
| Jake Fromm | Georgia | 9.7 | 0.9 |
| Jacob Eason | Washington | 8.7 | 0.5 |
| Tyler Huntley | Utah | 8.4 | 0.3 |
| Steven Montez | Colorado | 8.0 | -0.1 |
| Joe Burrow | LSU | 9.1 | -0.2 |
| Anthony Gordon | Washington State | 6.7 | -1.2 |
This is one of the few times you will see LSU’s Joe Burrow near the bottom of a leader board. Although he had a relatively high ADoT, his almost even ADoT +/- suggests he was not airing it out or taking risks more than you would expect. The offense he was playing in simply called deeper routes on average. Not surprising considering LSU coaches could put their trust into one of the best offensive lines in the country, high-level NFL prospects at all skill positions, and a historically-accurate quarterback.
On opposite ends of the spectrum we have Utah State’s Jordan Love and Washington State’s Anthony Gordon. Love aired the ball out more than any other prospect. Though, this aggressive style for Love resulted in the worst On-Target% of the 17 quarterback prospects within the Rookie Handbook at 68%. Gordon was ultra-conservative within the Air Raid offense, which led to the fourth highest On-Target% in the Rookie Handbook at 80%.