Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
benjamin Solak
thedraftnetwork.com
table of contents
click to navigate
Introduction 2
Format 4
Methodology 9
2018 Contextualized Quarterbacking 17
Drew Lock 18
Tyree Jackson 23
Kyler Murray 28
Daniel Jones 33
Jarrett Stidham 38
Ryan Finley 43
Brett Rypien 48
Will Grier 53
Dwayne Haskins 58
Comparative Data 63
1
thedraftnetwork.com
Introduction
Hello! Welcome to Year 2 of Contextualized Quarterbacking.
Contextualized Quarterbacking was born of the 2018 NFL Draft and its thunderously
contentious quarterbacking class. It’s easy to forget now, after his rookie season, just
how much doubt surrounded Baker Mayfield. Easier to remember are the debates
regarding Lamar Jackson’s future position and the effect of supporting cast on Josh
Allen.
I don’t think Contextualized Quarterbacking provides those answers, hard and fast. No
methodology alone does that job. Tape study builds our foundation for understanding
a prospect; analytical models and data points such as CQ add emphasis and challenge
biased preconceptions; conversations with coaches, trainers, and players color in the
gaps.
2
thedraftnetwork.com
Introduction
1. How often things were easy for the quarterback, and how often they were hard
2. What happened when things were easy
3. What happened when things were hard
Again, I must say: the CQ does not rank quarterbacks. It does not evaluate decision-
making, pre- and post-snap processing, and risk management. It can help us draw some
conclusions about these critical aspects of quarterback play, but it only sheds a crack of
light. More work is needed in that regard.
I hope you find the data provided valuable at the most and thought-provoking at the
least. I do not hope you find it worthy of the unthinking vitriol that characterizes the
football community on Twitter, but you can find me @BenjaminSolak if you do feel so
moved. I can also be reached via email at benjamin@thedraftnetwork.com, and all of
my final quarterback evaluations can be found at The Draft Network.
I appreciate you opening up this portfolio and taking a gander. I’m excited to hear what
you think.
Sixers in 6,
Benjamin Solak
3
thedraftnetwork.com
format
There are four pages to each quarterback profile in the CQ, each with tables and charts.
I think they are spectacularly adorned, but you can feel free to disagree.
Each table is detailed on the subsequent pages, explaining what each shows and why it
matters.
4
thedraftnetwork.com Chartable Attempts shows the raw data
page 1
from all the passing attempts for the QB in
question, as well as umbrella Accuracy and
Placement numbers for all attempts
page 2
true dropbacks, as well as the frequency of the
non-passing plays included. It also details how
often the QB’s pass-catchers failed him.
6
thedraftnetwork.com These two heat maps show how Targets and
page 3
Yards are distributed across the twelve regions
of the field, so we can better understand where
and how an offense produced
page 4
tion data on critical downs and in the red
zone, as well as adjusted conversion rates
to better capture true efficacy
Methodology
There’s a lot of different measures in the CQ. I want to run through how I got to each
one, and what value I think they confer.
The word Methodology feels very snobby, doesn’t it? I should just use Methods.
So this year, I made sure I got at least 300 dropbacks, and focused on top level
competition available. I think the numbers we get will be worse across the board, but
hopefully better reflect the capacity of the quarterbacks in question.
I also charted less quarterbacks this season -- though that’s less about the “work
smarter” vibe of the passes selected, and more about this class being...bad. If a
quarterback got an undraftable grade from me off of film, I didn’t select them for the
portfolio.
Those throws that were not charted include intentional throwaways, throws on which
the QB was hit, miscommunications with the receiver, or routes on which the receiver
fell down. I also insisted on an overhand throwing motion, to eliminate the detestable
shovel pass, and trashed garbage-time throws against prevent defenses.
9
thedraftnetwork.com
Methodology
ACCURACY AND PLACEMENT
Quarterbacks need to get the ball to their receivers. We forget that sometimes. Arm
strength, mental processing, intangibles, mobility -- they’re all very exciting, aren’t they?
But the first thing a quarterback needs to do is throw a catchable football.
That’s the Accuracy metric. It measures whether or not a ball is catchable. An accuracy
score of .905, for example, would imply a catchable throw 90.5% of the time.
There are issues with the Accuracy metric, though. It rewards underthrows
tremendously, as even an egregious underthrow is catcahble, while the slightest
overthrow is technically uncatchable. The Accuracy metric is also unaware of many
small, but important details that truly illustrate an “accurate” throw.
Accurate throws maximize the opportunity for yards after catch, by hitting a receiver in
stride or leading them away from a closing defender. Accurate throws protect the ball
from being played on by defenders and protect receivers from oncoming contact.
That’s where Placement comes into play -- it’s a more nuanced measure of how
accurate a throw was. Throws could be measured as Well-Placed (1 point), Decently-
Placed (0.5 points), and Poorly-Placed (0 points).
10
thedraftnetwork.com
Methodology
And that’s a critical point to understand about throwing accurate passes: ball velocity
is built into the equation. We talk about arm strength and accuracy as if they’re two
separate ideas, but they’re linked.
Duke QB Daniel Jones is a tremendous example: he’s really an accurate passer to the
middle of the field, but when he’s asked to drive balls into the sideline, they die on him,
and what would have been an accurate pass falls short and inside.
Or take Boise State QB Brett Rypien -- any time he has to put some extra mustard on a
throw, his accuracy drops off a cliff. Missouri QB Drew Lock: puts too much velocity on
short/intermediate throws, and they often spike down low to their targets.
Accuracy and Placement are the most important measures in all of the CQ. They tell
you how good a quarterback is at getting the ball to his pass-catchers, and that’s what
matters.
I used First Read because it’s the vernacular that we’re familiar with, but it’s important
to acknowledge that reads in most offensive systems -- especially college offensive
systems -- aren’t linear or discrete. They very rarely, if ever, go from this route, to that
route, to the other route, to the checkdown.
Another way of saying this: quarterbacks don’t read routes. They read defenses.
11
thedraftnetwork.com
Methodology
Sometimes that means reading one defender, one “key”, and putting him in conflict.
Think about a smash concept, which puts the flat defender in conflict. You “throw him
wrong” by putting the ball wherever he doesn’t go.
Sometimes that means reading a whole area, like a spacing concept, which will have
three routes in the same basic region of the field, and the quarterback again makes the
defense wrong. You can express these routes in a “1-2-3” process if you like, but the
quarterback is still reading one area of the field, and making one decision.
via smartfootball.com
12
thedraftnetwork.com
Methodology
Again, here we’re often keying off of one defender (the flat defender) and making our
decision based off of his action. You should continue reading the Smart Football post
on “triangle reads” if you want a deeper understanding of how I chart my First Read/
Beyond passes.
The long and short of it is this: I’m austere in my charting of “Beyond First Read.” I want
to see quarterbacks make a second decision, go through a second thought process,
before I give them a credit for truly moving beyond their first read.
As such, scrambling quarterbacks tend to measure favorably here, which can conflate
their numbers -- we believe they’re well-developed pocket passers who can rip through
their progressions in timing with their footwork and blocking.
This is a good example of where data fails, and we should always turn back to the film
for confirmation. But it is also still a signal of the trait we’re interested in: scrambling
quarterbacks often are better processors after their first read, because of the practice
they’ve had for years improvising on the fly. So if we’re looking for QBs who can stay
cool when their first read -- their first decision -- is taken away, we should look for
scrambling QBs. The trait is still signaled in the data.
OUT OF POCKET
Charting whether or not a player was outside of the pocket was not very hard.
The only note here: in the case of full slide protection or otherwise hard play-action, in
which there wasn’t really a pocket to identify, the quarterback was considered “Out of
Pocket”
13
thedraftnetwork.com
Methodology
PLATFORM
If a player had was able to step up into his throw from a stationary base, he was
throwing from a Clean Platform.
I have no interest in rewarding players for their poor mechanics or skittish demeanor
under pressure (looking at you, Drew Lock and Will Grier). If players had the space and
the time to step into throws, but faded away, stepped into the bucket, or ducked their
shoulder, this was still measured as a Clean Platform throw.
Adjusted Platforms were only given when there was something clearly obstructing
the quarterback’s throwing hallway -- he had to adjust his throwing motion to release
the football. These platforms necessitate different arm slots and stronger, natural arm
power -- those are the traits I wanted to highly.
If a player was on the move when he released the football, he was on a Move Platform.
PRESSURE
Pressure is a bit of a bear indeed. How early, exactly, can we determine if a blitzer is
close enough to a quarterback to have pressured him? How far into the quarterback’s
throwing motion must he be, to be unaffected by a sudden flash of color in front of
him?
Generally speaking, I relied on the reaction of the quarterback to chart pressure. It’s
important to note that pocket management is not reflected in these numbers, just
as decision-making is not reflected in accuracy. Quarterbacks who appropriately took
their drop, climbed the pocket, and delivered on time were unpressured, even as the
defensive ends careened by him and beyond the peak of the pocket.
14
thedraftnetwork.com
Methodology
So a quarterback had to clearly react to the pressure -- it had to affect his process
somehow. I charted those responses into five different categories
• Stand and Deliver -- while under pressure, the quarterback threw a chartable
attempt
• Escape -- the quarterback eluded the pressure and threw from an unpressured
platform
• Scramble -- the quarterback eluded the pressure and subsequently tucked and ran
• Sack -- the quarterback was sacked
• Unchartable -- the quarterback threw the ball away; was hit on the throw; the ball
was batted; et cetera.
Pressure was also charted by its genesis, to better understand how supporting cast and
play style contributed to pressure numbers. As I said above, pocket management is not
illustrated in pressure numbers -- but we can make some assumptions about vestibular
sense, blitz recognition, and internal clock.
15
thedraftnetwork.com
Methodology
As some are fond of saying, sacks are a QB stat. That’s why QB Responsibility is an
important stat. It shows us how frequently a QB was responsible for a blitzer, or poorly
managed the pocket, and what happened when that occurred.
TIGHT WINDOW
The final of the contexts, Tight Window throws are fascinating. Generally speaking, a
throw is into/through a tight window if the ideal placement of the ball is changed by
the window.
We want to hit our receivers in the numbers, right? But on back-shoulder fades in the
end zone, we need to put the ball away from the defender first and foremost, and leave
it high so our taller receiver can elevate. On deep comebacks, we want to put the ball
low and away, so our receiver can shield the ball from the defender with their body. On
intermediate crossers, we want to lace our throws over the first level, but not so high as
to force our receivers to jump and expose them to body shots from closing safeties.
Defenders affect throwing windows, and when the ball placement is accordingly
changed, the throw is into -- or through -- a tight window.
It’s important to note that these windows are in the field of play -- all three dimensions.
A receiver can be “wide open” because nobody’s around him, but sinking first level
defenders can still tighten the window by forcing the quarterback to put air on the
football he wouldn’t otherwise.
This is why we say Tight Windows change the placement of the football. Not unlike
Beyond First Read, we want to grade strigently here, to be sure we’re circling reps in
which distinguishable processes occurred.
16
thedraftnetwork.com
2018 cq
The inaugural CQ, in a much less pretty format and without as many measures, can be
found at this link.
tl;dr
17
thedraftnetwork.com
Drew locK
I don’t like Drew Lock’s film very much.
His ball placement and accuracy are good, and he’s a plus athlete and has strong num-
bers Outside The Pocket and on the Move, but doesn’t take it there unless he’s schemed
to. His deep ball, advertised as the strength of his game, is just fine -- his short to inter-
mediate throws remain disappointingly haphazard.
Will Lock benefit much from a year off of starting? I don’t think so, so it honestly makes
sense for the player himself to be drafted early and start in Year 1, despite the fact that
I don’t think he has the talent to hold the job long. Lock reminds me of Blaine Gabbert
and even Blake Bortles at times, and that ugly limbo between starter and backup may
trap Lock early in his young career.
Check Out: His Contextual Data is pretty good, save for Tight Windows -- and look at his
Adjusted Conversion %, especially in the Red Zone. Drops killed him there.
18
thedraftnetwork.com
20
thedraftnetwork.com
21
thedraftnetwork.com
clutch performance
Drew Lock Completions
3rd Down
71
3rd & 5+
48
Red Zone
19
Missouri Attempts
Yards
112
818
77
614
42
204
Senior Completion % 63.4% 62.3% 45.2%
Accuracy 0.866 0.844 0.833
Born: 11/10/96 Placement 0.571 0.565 0.548
Conversions 50 31 12
Conversion % 44.6% 40.3% 28.6%
Adjusted Conversion % 52.1% 50.0% 51.1%
INTable 5 5 3
INTable % 4.5% 6.5% 7.1%
BLOCKING
PRESSURE
Pressure: Response
QB
PRESSURE
OUT OF
POCKET
22
thedraftnetwork.com
TYREE Jackson
Tyree Jackson is king of the project players. He’s the biggest, fastest, strongest, and don’t
miss it just because he needs work: his deep ball is naturally good. Better than most in
this class.
The question is: how many players in this class are actual projects? I’d argue Drew Lock
is, and that’s why I have Jackson ranked higher. Same goes for Daniel Jones. All three of
these quarterbacks need development -- whether sitting on the bench, or getting reps
as a low-stress starter on a losing team -- before they can turn in NFL-caliber play.
For Jckson, the goal is teaching him how to chill out. Jackson’s Tight Window numbers
are awful because he jams the ball where it doesn’t belong -- same goes for his throws
Beyond First Read. There’s a lot of panic to his game right now that can be erased with
better coaching, as well as the inching march of maturity we too easily forget about.
Jackson’s worth the gamble, in my book -- I’d take him late on Day 2, plan to start him
in 2020, and raise my building’s doorframes four inches.
Check Out: How rarely Jackson scrambles and how often he throws deep
23
thedraftnetwork.com
Buffalo Sacks
16
15
3.6%
3.4%
RS Junior Batted 8 1.8%
Throwaway 10 2.2%
Born: 11/7/1997 Drops 30
Drop Rate 7.6%
Adjusted completion % 65.0%
25
thedraftnetwork.com
26
thedraftnetwork.com
clutch performance
tyree Jackson Completions
Attempts
3rd Down
67
119
3rd & 5+
49
88
Red Zone
24
59
Buffalo Yards 1090 894 175
RS Junior Completion %
Accuracy
56.3%
0.899
55.7%
0.875
40.7%
0.814
Born: 11/7/1997 Placement 0.542 0.551 0.559
Conversions 50 36 14
Conversion % 42.0% 40.9% 23.7%
Adjusted Conversion % 51.1% 49.0% 43.1%
INTable 10 6 6
INTable % 8.4% 6.8% 10.2%
BLOCKING
PRESSURE
Pressure: Response
QB
PRESSURE
OUT OF
POCKET
27
thedraftnetwork.com
KYLER MURRAY
Young man can sling the pill!
Murray is as fun of a QB watch as you’ll find in the NFL Draft. Folks thirst after the Ma-
homes comparisons, and while I see the similarities in some areas (comfortable di-
recting traffic on extended plays; baseball-inspired arm slots on some quicker throws),
what’s most reminiscent of Mahomes is how much fun I had watching Murray’s film.
Not unlike Baker before him, Murray’s evaluation has some gaps in it that you can’t
divorce from the Oklahoma offense. Murray attacked a ton of tight windows, largely as
a product of his ability to extend plays, but still struggles to keep the ball safe on such
throws; he also struggled to navigate the pocket at times, and accordingly created a lot
of his own pressures.
But hear me when I say: you can’t teach that deep ball, and you can’t teach that athlet-
icism, either. Murray grades out in a similar tier as Sam Darnold did for me last season:
bit raw, bit rough, but oh so exciting. Worthy of an early pick for sure.
Check Out: Heat maps, pressure wheels, and the adjusted conversion rates.
28
thedraftnetwork.com
oklahoma Sacks
33
16
8.0%
3.9%
RS Junior Batted 5 1.2%
Throwaway 14 3.4%
Born: 8/7/1997 Drops 17
Drop Rate 5.0%
Adjusted completion % 75.2%
30
thedraftnetwork.com
31
thedraftnetwork.com
clutch performance
kyler murray Completions
Attempts
3rd Down
57
83
3rd & 5+
38
59
Red Zone
23
42
oklahoma Yards 993 707 245
RS Junior Completion %
Accuracy
68.7%
0.904
64.4%
0.864
54.8%
0.857
Born: 8/7/1997 Placement 0.602 0.534 0.631
Conversions 48 31 15
Conversion % 57.8% 52.5% 35.7%
Adjusted Conversion % 57.7% 50.7% 36.5%
INTable 4 4 2
INTable % 4.8% 6.8% 4.8%
BLOCKING
PRESSURE
Pressure: Response
QB
PRESSURE
OUT OF
POCKET
32
thedraftnetwork.com
Daniel Jones
Daniel Jones’ draft process is more reminiscent of Josh Allen’s than we’d like to admit.
A likable fella who just want to play a little ball, Jones checks boxes in size and athlet-
icism, and has the benefit of a strong coach-QB tree with Duke HC David Cutcliffe, just
as Allen enjoyed with Craig Bohl. The same supporting cast excuses that were made for
Allen are made for Jones, and rightfully so: his offensive line couldn’t block a Twitter
troll.
That said, Jones lacks the wild arm talent of Allen, and I’m not sure what you hang your
hat on here. Jones is at his best facilitating the quick game and is fearless in the pocket.
It’s inspiring when its not leading to haphazard, turnover-worthy throws. I appreciate
his ability to manipulate arm angles, throw with zip, and extend plays.
If Jones can continue to build on a improving deep ball, he has a nice upside profile, but
should not be seriously considered a Year 1 starter or a Round 1 selection. Ideally, Jones
becomes Nick Foles -- and that’s a problematic ideal.
Check Out: Beyond First Read and Into Tight Window stats -- those numbers are low! --
as well as the heat maps to see how Jones benefitted from the RPO game
33
thedraftnetwork.com
Duke Sacks
17
26
4.9%
7.5%
RS Junior Batted 11 3.2%
Throwaway 7 2.0%
Born: 5/27/1997 Drops 32
Drop Rate 11.1%
Adjusted completion % 74.1%
35
thedraftnetwork.com
36
thedraftnetwork.com
clutch performance
DANIEL JONES Completions
Attempts
3rd Down
43
76
3rd & 5+
27
54
Red Zone
14
22
Duke Yards 599 354 95
RS Junior Completion %
Accuracy
56.6%
0.868
50.0%
0.870
63.6%
0.818
Born: 5/27/1997 Placement 0.513 0.454 0.614
Conversions 32 18 7
Conversion % 42.1% 33.3% 31.8%
Adjusted Conversion % 42.4% 34.7% 28.0%
INTable 5 5 1
INTable % 6.6% 9.3% 4.5%
BLOCKING
PRESSURE
Pressure: Response
QB
PRESSURE
OUT OF
POCKET
37
thedraftnetwork.com
Jarrett Stidham
I struggle to get excited about Jarrett Stidham, who was objectively inaccurate in a
scheme built on easy throws. While he has good distance to his arm, Stidham struggles
to place the ball deep with any consistency, so this strength still exists in the hypothet-
ical. Again, when he adds extra mustard on his tight window throws, Stidham loses the
ability to place the football, and accordingly puts the ball at risk.
Stidham brings some good mobility to the position, though he struggles with pocket
feel, and has the arm talent worthy of drafting and developing as a Day 3 option. To
expect anything more out of Stidham than a potential backup is to have admirably lofty
expectations.
Check Out: The Accuracy and Placement numbers, and then stop there. If you want to
keep going, check out what Pressure does to him.
38
thedraftnetwork.com
auburn Sacks
23
19
6.5%
5.4%
RS Junior Batted 5 1.4%
Throwaway 23 6.5%
Born: 8/8/1996 Drops 16
Drop Rate 5.6%
Adjusted completion % 70.2%
40
thedraftnetwork.com
41
thedraftnetwork.com
clutch performance
Jarrett Stidham Completions
Attempts
3rd Down
47
88
3rd & 5+
31
60
Red Zone
16
35
auburn Yards 691 440 131
RS Junior Completion %
Accuracy
53.4%
0.807
51.7%
0.783
45.7%
0.743
Born: 8/8/1996 Placement 0.409 0.408 0.586
Conversions 32 18 6
Conversion % 36.4% 30.0% 17.1%
Adjusted Conversion % 32.1% 26.9% 20.0%
INTable 6 5 0
INTable % 6.8% 8.3% 0.0%
BLOCKING
PRESSURE
Pressure: Response
QB
PRESSURE
OUT OF
POCKET
42
thedraftnetwork.com
RYAN FINley
I’m fine with Ryan Finley -- the person himself, the idea of him existing, what he sym-
bolizes in the world. It’s all okay by me.
A valiant, but not overbearing champion of the milquetoast, Finley has likable traits
when dealing with pressure, attacking tight throwing windows, and working deep into
his progression. All of his Contextual Data is competitive with top quarterbacks of re-
cent years.
But the numbers don’t reflect what even a cursory filmwatch does: Finley’s arm limits
his game. He pulls out routes back downfield and forces crossers to tread water in the
dangerous middle of the field. Even with solid mechanics, Finley’s lack of ball velocity
hurts his accuracy and limits his offense to a harrowing degree.
Check Out: All the Contextual Data I mentioned, but also: how the entire offense runs
to the right under Finley
43
thedraftnetwork.com
NC State Sacks
7
10
1.8%
2.6%
RS Senior Batted 1 0.3%
Throwaway 7 2.6%
Born: 12/26/1994 Drops 17
Drop Rate 4.8%
Adjusted completion % 71.9%
45
thedraftnetwork.com
46
thedraftnetwork.com
clutch performance
ryan finley Completions
Attempts
3rd Down
58
107
3rd & 5+
38
70
Red Zone
26
48
NC State Yards 715 498 226
RS Senior Completion %
Accuracy
54.2%
0.925
54.3%
0.943
54.2%
0.917
Born: 12/26/1994 Placement 0.500 0.521 0.615
Conversions 42 23 14
Conversion % 39.3% 32.9% 29.2%
Adjusted Conversion % 44.6% 38.7% 40.8%
INTable 9 7 2
INTable % 8.4% 10.0% 4.2%
BLOCKING
PRESSURE
Pressure: Response
QB
PRESSURE
OUT OF
POCKET
47
thedraftnetwork.com
Brett Rypien
I gotta say, I ended up disappointed in Rypien’s final numbers here. While he isn’t the
noodle-armed milksop clutching a one-way ticket to Clipboard Purgatory that many
styled him, his placements numbers do little to inspire faith in the dubious. Rypien was
supposed to trade on elite accuracy to mask his average arm and size -- that doesn’t
seem to be a tenable route any longer.
The simple reality is that Rypien is a rhythm player -- when he’s on his first read, in
cadence with his drops, and clear to hitch and drive into his throw, he’s golden. But he
too often bird-dogs his first read and forces the ball into perplexing, turnover-prone
situations. When asked to generate velocity without a clear runway and platform, his
accuracy is entirely scattershot.
Rypien is likely a backup at the next level, though timing systems (read: New England)
will get the most out of his ability. Cut down on his baffling decisions to Hail Mary in
the middle of the game, and we’ve got something here. Otherwise, it’s a modest out-
look.
Check Out: Where Rypien does (and doesn’t) throw INTs is fascinating to me. So are his
unintelligilbe heat maps.
48
thedraftnetwork.com
50
thedraftnetwork.com
51
thedraftnetwork.com
clutch performance
Brett RYpien Completions
Attempts
3rd Down
48
85
3rd & 5+
34
69
Red Zone
11
19
Boise State Yards 646 545 127
Senior Completion %
Accuracy
56.5%
0.835
49.3%
0.826
57.9%
0.789
Born: 7/9/1996 Placement 0.529 0.522 0.579
Conversions 39 26 7
Conversion % 45.9% 37.7% 36.8%
Adjusted Conversion % 47.4% 42.1% 40.0%
INTable 4 4 1
INTable % 4.7% 5.8% 5.3%
BLOCKING
PRESSURE
Pressure: Response
QB
PRESSURE
OUT OF
POCKET
52
thedraftnetwork.com
will grier
Grier’s my mid-round guy in this year’s class, which I suppose means something.
It’s a good class for mid-round QBs, but don’t be fooled: that’s only because all of the
QBs are bad. Typically, there’s not such thing as a mid-round QB -- you’re either good
enough to be a Round 1 guy, or you’re a spectulative add whenever a team feels like it.
In this class, because of the derth of talent, we expect more action on Day 2.
Grier’s footwork is a travesty and he would improve upon already strong accuracy and
placement numbers by normalizing his throwing process and limiting his fades away
from penetration. Grier’s a mixed bag when it comes to responding to pressure, but he’s
an excellent creator on the hoof, has a great knack for the deep ball (especially from
odd platforms), and is decisive with the football. You could do far worse than ol’ Thrill
Grier as a backup/spot starter.
53
thedraftnetwork.com
55
thedraftnetwork.com
56
thedraftnetwork.com
clutch performance
will grier Completions
Attempts
3rd Down
58
107
3rd & 5+
38
70
Red Zone
26
48
west virginia Yards 715 498 226
rs SENIOR Completion %
Accuracy
54.2%
0.925
54.3%
0.943
54.2%
0.917
Born: 4/3/1995 Placement 0.500 0.521 0.615
Conversions 42 23 14
Conversion % 39.3% 32.9% 29.2%
Adjusted Conversion % 44.6% 38.7% 40.8%
INTable 9 7 2
INTable % 8.4% 10.0% 4.2%
BLOCKING
PRESSURE
Pressure: Response
QB
PRESSURE
OUT OF
POCKET
57
thedraftnetwork.com
Dwayne Haskins
Boy can Dwayne Haskins throw mesh.
I’m not sure why there was ever -- and still is -- hype around Haskins. As a one-year
starter, it is impressive to see how comfortable he is working through progressions, and
he has some strong pocket navigation ability. But Haskins is a statue when pressure
arrives and it will obliterate his accuracy.
Haskins’ arm talent, advertised as strong, is only good -- its the zip to the intermedi-
ate levels that impresses, while the deep ball is regularly underthrow. Any throw that
requires touch, Haskins typically shorts and leaves hanging for defenders to play on.
Generally a safe quarterback, those are his only “eek!” throws.
Haskins might be a starter in a couple of years, but he for sure needs that time -- and
I’m not sure the team he ends up with will see top-shelf returns on their investment.
Check Out: Pressure wheels show the lack of mobility, as does the Contextual Data.
58
thedraftnetwork.com
60
thedraftnetwork.com
61
thedraftnetwork.com
clutch performance
dwayne haskins Completions
Attempts
3rd Down
56
98
3rd & 5+
48
80
Red Zone
14
38
ohio state Yards 662 584 98
rs sophomore Completion %
Accuracy
57.1%
0.878
60.0%
0.900
36.8%
0.895
Born: 5/3/1997 Placement 0.592 0.563 0.553
Conversions 36 30 6
Conversion % 36.7% 37.5% 15.7%
Adjusted Conversion % 40.3% 41.8% 18.2%
INTable 0 0 2
INTable % 0.0% 0.0% 5.3%
BLOCKING
PRESSURE
Pressure: Response
QB
PRESSURE
OUT OF
POCKET
62
thedraftnetwork.com
comparative data
63
thedraftnetwork.com
64
thedraftnetwork.com
65
thedraftnetwork.com
66
thedraftnetwork.com
67
thedraftnetwork.com
68
thedraftnetwork.com
69
thedraftnetwork.com
70
thedraftnetwork.com
71
thedraftnetwork.com
72
thedraftnetwork.com
73
thedraftnetwork.com
74
thedraftnetwork.com
75
thedraftnetwork.com
76
thedraftnetwork.com
77
thedraftnetwork.com
78
thedraftnetwork.com
79
thedraftnetwork.com
80
thedraftnetwork.com
81
thedraftnetwork.com
82