Risk Flexibility & the Pass Rusher

Post-Combine Update (February 27, 2013)

The combine is over, and I wanted to provide a quick update on where we stand in regard to the players who make their living rushing the quarterback. First of all, the numbers are going to change once the official numbers are made public. It may be awhile until we get the official 10-Yard Split so we’ll have to make due with what we have.

After including the 2013 prospects in my pass rusher database, I currently have a total of 1,781 players in it.. It includes players from the 1999 to 2013 drafts.

In the Top Speed Rushers category, the only player to make the cut is Southern Mississippi OLB Jamie Collins. Cornelius Washington of Georgia, with an Explosive Power metric of 1.07, would have made the list, but his Production Ratio was less than 1.00. He’s not included. In order to qualify, a player has to have an Explosive Power metric over 1.05 and a Production Ratio greater than 1.00. Collins exceeded both. He is an elite prospect.

As far as the Top Power Rushers are concerned, Missouri’s Sheldon Richardson and Samford’s Nicholas Williams are the only players to qualify. I actually cheated by putting Richardson in. He didn’t run the agility drills, and I obviously don’t have his numbers. However, I wanted to include him since I think he’ll ultimately make the cut at his pro day. If he doesn’t, I’ll take him out. In case you forgot, to qualify as a Top Power Rusher, a prospect has to have an Explosive Power metric greater than 1.00, Agility rating greater than 0.50, 10-Yard Speed greater than -1.00, and a Production Ratio greater than 1.00. These metrics are explained below in the Pre-Combine section.

The High Risk Pass Rushers category is again the most interesting. It includes several high profile players that many consider to be early round options in the upcoming draft. The most high profile prospect in the list is Barkevious Mingo of LSU. Others include William Gholston, Sam Montomery, Margus Hunt, Michael Buchanan, Corey Lemonier, Armonty Bryant and Ty Powell. Again, making this list isn’t a guarantee of failure at the NFL level. However, there is a high percentage of bust potential for players that make this list. From 1999 to 2012, there are 102 that are classified as “High Risk” and only 5 made the Pro Bowl. If I were a GM, I’d consider value and the risk before I pulled the trigger on any of these guys.

All of the above mentioned players have been included in the tables listed below in the Pre-Combine Introduction. I’ve sorted the high risk players in the 2013 by their Twitch metric, the only one used in the study.

Here are the results of some other notable players from the 2013 class:

Yr	Name	School	HT	WT	40	10	SS	3 C	BJ	Vert	Speed	ExPwr	S10	Bend	PR
13	Datone Jones	UCLA	6.31	283	4.80	1.63	4.32	7.32	9.33	31.5	106.62	0.96	3.54	2.32	1.88
13	Shariff Floyd	Florida	6.21	297	4.92	1.68	4.75	7.40	8.83	30.0	101.37	0.97	2.54	2.17	1.15
13	Jared Smith	UNH	6.28	302	5.08	1.80	4.39	7.20	9.58	32.5	90.69	1.06	-4.24	2.31	0.94
13	Ziggy Ansah	BYU	6.43	271	4.63	1.56	4.26	7.11	9.83	34.5	117.94	0.97	5.97	2.21	1.34
13	Bjoern Werner	Florida St	6.28	266	4.83	1.66	4.40	7.30	9.25	31.0	97.75	0.89	0.08	2.28	2.14
13	Devin Taylor	S. Carolina	6.60	266	4.72	1.60	4.30	6.89	10.67	35.0	107.19	0.97	2.32	2.10	0.88
13	C. Washington	Georgia	6.33	265	4.55	1.60			10.67	39.0	123.66	1.07	3.37	0.00	0.54
13	Dion Jordan	Oregon	6.47	248	4.60	1.57	4.35	7.02	10.17	32.5	110.78	0.87	2.81	2.12	1.19
13	Damontre Moore	Texas A&M	6.36	250	4.95	1.69			10.17	35.5	83.28	0.93	-3.90	0.00	2.57

Pre-Combine Introduction (February 20, 2013)

There are countless methods to effectively trading the stock market. During the past 20 years, I’ve tried and failed at many of them. Until I fully understood the concept of risk and the importance of being flexible, it was a continuous struggle. When risk in the market increases, the flexible mind immediately tries to reduce the risk by reducing or eliminating the position. It’s a simple concept but an important one in measuring success of failure in the trading game.

I take the same approach to NFL prospects. It’s all about managing risk and determining levels of complexity. As I mentioned in my last article, there is nothing that will replace the traditional method of tape study. However, there is value in the numbers. The numbers aren’t subjective, they can be managed, and I feel they’re a valuable tool in the evaluation process. If you don’t think teams are using this data in a similar fashion, I’d suggest thinking otherwise because some are.

In this study, I used data from 1,739 players from the Defensive LIne and Linebacker positions that were in the 1999 to 2012 NFL Drafts. Like the previous study, I used data obtained at the NFL Combine or at individual Pro Days. I used each players Height, Weight, 40 Yard Time, 10 & 20 Yard Splits, Short Shuttle, 3-Cone, Vertical Jump, and Broad Jump.

Data

Players in Study	Positions	NFL Drafts
1,781	DT, DE, LB	1999 - 2013

The results of the study:

Top Speed Rushers

Yr	#	Name	School	HT	WT	40	10	SS	3 C	BJ	Vert	Speed	ExPwr	S10	Bend	PR
13		Jamie Collins	S. Miss	6.28	250	4.64	1.56	4.32	7.10	11.58	41.5	107.87	1.09	4.43	2.17	2.50
03	56	Osi Umenyora	Troy State	6.26	278	4.69	1.62	4.33		9.75	38.0	114.92	1.07	3.84	0.00	3.04
00	186	Adalius Thomas	S. Miss	6.19	270	4.56	1.60	4.42		10.00	38.5	124.89	1.07	4.52	0.00	2.95
01	63	Derrick Burgess	Ole Miss	6.19	264	4.92	1.73		7.85	10.50	40.0	90.11	1.09	-3.92	0.00	2.50
06	71	Chris Gocong	Cal Poly	6.18	263	4.70	1.61	4.08	7.05	10.25	38.5	107.79	1.06	3.22	2.29	2.46
02	2	Julius Peppers	N. Carolina	6.52	283	4.71	1.65			10.42	36.5	115.01	1.06	1.39	0.00	2.38
04	18	Will Smith	Ohio State	6.22	275	4.60	1.59	4.05	7.42	9.75	38.5	122.84	1.07	5.50	2.48	2.35
05	12	S. Merriman	Maryland	6.36	272	4.72	1.66	4.21		10.08	40.0	109.61	1.07	0.36	0.00	2.32
02	11	Dwight Freeney	Syracuse	6.07	266	4.48	1.57	4.40		9.75	37.5	132.07	1.05	6.44	0.00	2.25
11	70	Justin Houston	Georgia	6.22	270	4.62	1.62	4.37	6.95	10.42	36.5	118.53	1.06	3.19	2.10	2.19
11	66	Dontay Moch	Nevada	6.11	248	4.40	1.57	4.38	7.09	10.67	42.0	132.33	1.07	4.34	2.14	2.18
09	46	Connor Barwin	Cincinnati	6.29	256	4.59	1.53	4.18	6.87	10.67	41.5	115.35	1.07	6.85	2.11	1.96
12	28	Nick Perry	USC	6.23	271	4.64	1.58	4.66	7.25	10.33	38.5	116.93	1.08	5.64	2.09	1.88
06	159	Mark Anderson	Alabama	6.35	254	4.63	1.64	4.22	6.95	10.58	42.0	110.55	1.05	-0.34	2.19	1.75
05	128	Chauncey Davis	Florida St	6.14	273	4.80	1.65	4.44	7.66	9.83	37.0	102.86	1.06	2.10	2.44	1.55
05	UD	Derek Wake	Penn State	6.22	236	4.65	1.63	4.13	7.12	10.83	45.5	100.96	1.05	-1.18	2.31	1.30
07	102	Brian Robison	Texas	6.26	259	4.67	1.49	4.26	6.89	10.08	40.5	108.91	1.05	1.36	2.06	1.17
09	13	Brian Orakpo	Texas	6.25	263	4.63	1.56	4.45	7.26	10.83	39.5	114.66	1.09	2.78	2.19	1.17
04	91	Tony Hargrove	GA Tech	6.17	261	4.66	1.66	4.22	7.12	10.17	39.5	110.69	1.06	2.33	2.28	1.04
07	46	Lamarr Woodley	Michigan	6.12	265	4.74	1.65	4.42		9.75	38.5	104.99	1.05	1.48	0.00	1.01

The first group are the players I consider to be the top Speed Rushers. They are sorted from highest to lowest by their Production Ratio (PR), which is the only performance based metric in the study. The PR is determined by adding a players Sacks and Tackles for Loss and dividing by the Number of Games Played. To qualify, each player had to score 1.00 or higher.

The only other filter I used was the Explosive Power (ExPwr) metric. By using the player’s height, weight, broad jump, and vertical jump, it attempts to quantify how much power and explosion a player can generate in his game. It’s arguably the most important characteristic for a pass rusher. Each one of these players generated a score greater than 1.05.

As indicated in the Stats are for Losers, or Are They? article, I prefer to cluster the players in groups based on defined characteristics and whether or not they’ve outperformed their original draft position.

When I scan over the results, Chris Gocong is the only player I feel didn’t perform up to his draft position. As the 71st pick in the 2006 draft, he had a decent career, but he was mostly a disappointment. Chauncey Davis was far from spectacular, but I suspect he’d go higher than pick 128 if we knew then what we know now. Tony Hargrove flashed superstar ability on occasion, but character issues kept him off the field. Two others, Nick Perry and Dontay Moch, haven’t been on the field long enough to make a final determination.

The rest have more than held their on in their play, and have significantly outperformed their draft position.

Top Power Rushers

Yr	#	Name	School	HT	WT	40	10	SS	3 C	BJ	Vert	ExPwr	Agility	S10	Bend	PR
13		Shel. Richardson	Missouri	6.20	294	5.02	1.69			9.67	32.0	1.04	-	1.69	-	1.21
13		Nick Williams	Samford	6.37	309	4.94	1.63	4.65	7.55	9.25	33.0	1.06	0.92	5.86	2.27	1.36
10	175	Greg Hardy	Ole Miss	6.33	282	4.79	1.67	4.65	7.25	9.75	36.0	1.04	0.70	0.97	2.14	1.65
11	11	J.J. Watt	Wisconsin	6.44	290	4.81	1.64	4.21	6.88	10.00	37.0	1.08	1.51	3.06	2.16	2.15
09	24	Peria Jerry	Ole Miss	6.13	299	4.98	1.68	4.64	7.30	9.50	31.0	1.04	0.66	3.15	2.17	1.92
10	10	Tyson Aluala	California	6.19	295	4.87	1.67	4.43	7.15	9.67	35.5	1.10	1.02	3.01	2.20	1.46
06	1	Mario Williams	NC State	6.58	295	4.66	1.60	4.36	7.19	10.00	40.5	1.13	1.05	5.30	2.22	3.13
10	2	Ndamukong Suh	Nebraska	6.31	307	5.03	1.69	4.44	7.21	8.75	35.5	1.07	0.95	2.49	2.23	2.25
11	86	Allen Bailey	Miami	6.25	285	4.71	1.67	4.56	7.43	9.75	36.5	1.07	0.61	1.67	2.27	1.38
10	120	Geno Atkins	Georgia	6.11	293	4.78	1.68	4.43	7.33	9.75	33.0	1.07	0.84	2.62	2.29	1.04
12	49	Kendell Reyes	Connecticut	6.34	299	4.95	1.69	4.53	7.43	9.42	34.5	1.06	0.64	1.52	2.30	1.50
07	UD	Mike DeVito	Maine	6.28	295	4.87	1.62	4.53	7.50	9.00	33.0	1.01	0.57	5.48	2.30	1.59
10	56	Mike Neal	Purdue	6.25	294	4.87	1.60	4.53	7.53	9.42	33.0	1.03	0.54	6.69	2.30	1.42
07	10	Amobi Okoye	Louisville	6.17	302	5.07	1.65	4.44	7.46	9.25	30.0	1.02	0.70	4.98	2.34	1.58
05	28	Luis Castillo	Northwestern	6.23	305	4.79	1.67	4.24	7.28	9.33	34.5	1.10	1.08	3.84	2.36	1.04
02	146	Rocky Benard	Texas A&M	6.28	294	4.96	1.69	4.41	7.43	9.00	33.0	1.01	0.76	1.30	2.36	1.82
11	20	Adrian Clayborn	Iowa	6.21	281	4.78	1.61	4.13	7.30	9.42	33.0	1.00	1.17	4.98	2.39	1.13
06	14	Brodrick Bunkley	Florida State	6.22	306	5.01	1.71	4.16	7.33	9.42	32.5	1.07	1.11	1.69	2.44	2.62
04	35	Igor Olshansky	Oregon	6.43	315	4.96	1.75	4.41	7.61	9.17	33.5	1.07	0.58	-0.75	2.48	1.65
06	73	Dusty Dvoracek	Oklahoma	6.22	306	5.01	1.75	4.37	7.62	9.17	34.0	1.08	0.61	-0.61	2.50	1.46

The top Power Rushers are sorted from lowest to highest by the Bend Metric, which uses the 10 Yard Split, Short Shuttle, and 3-Cone in an attempt to measure change-of-direction and the ability to bend off the edge. However, the metric was not used as a filter in this study.

The first filter used in the sort is the Explosive Power (ExPwr) metric, and it includes players that scored 1.00 or higher. The Agility metric was also used as a sort. In order to make the cut, it required players scoring greater than 0.50. The other number based metric is Ten Yard Speed (Sp10). It’s a weighted average that includes the 10 yard split and a prospect’s height and weight. In order to qualify, it required a score greater than -1.00. The final sort is the Production Ratio, and the cut-off is anything less than 1.00.

When I look at the results, there are a couple I consider to be busts. First, Dusty Dvoracek was a complete failure as a player. As the 73rd pick in the 2006 draft, much more was expected from him. In his defense, he did have some injury issues. Three others, Peria Jerry, Mike Neal and Amobi Okoye, have yet to live up to expectations for one reason or another. Allen Bailey has flashed, but he hasn’t been in the league long enough to form a final opinion.

The other players in the list have performed well. The gems, Greg Hardy, Geno Atkins, Mike DeVito, would arguably be top 10 selections if we could go back in time.

High Risk Pass Rushers

Yr	#	Name	School	HT	WT	40	10	SS	3 C	BJ	Vert	Speed	Twitch	ExPwr	Agility
13		Armonty Bryant	East Central	6.31	263	4.86	1.66	5.00	7.32	9.83	31.5	94.28	1.74	0.92	0.28
13		Margus Hunt	SMU	6.68	277	4.62	1.62	4.51	7.07	10.08	34.5	121.60	1.29	0..96	1.02
13		S. Montgomery	LSU	6.27	262	4.81	1.64	4.51	7.18	9.50	34.5	97.89	1.27	0.94	0.91
13		Lavar Edwards	LSU	6.33	277	4.80	1.64	4.51	7.03	9.92	33.0	104.36	1.27	0.99	1.06
13		Wm. Gholston	Michigan St	6.52	281	4.96	1.73	4.59	7.20	9.17	28.5	92.86	1.26	0.87	0.81
13		Mike Buchanan	Illinois	6.44	255	4.78	1.59	4.44	6.91	9.42	33.0	97.69	1.25	0.87	1.25
13		Barkevous Mingo	LSU	6.35	241	4.58	1.55	4.39	6.84	10.67	37.0	109.54	1.24	0.94	1.37
13		Corey Lemonier	Auburn	6.28	255	4.60	1.57	4.40	7.14	9.92	33.0	113.90	1.23	0.92	1.06
13		Ty Powell	Harding	6.18	245	4.64	1.59	4.40	6.98	10.17	37.0	105.71	1.21	0.96	1.22
09	3	Tyson Jackson	LSU	6.34	296	4.94	1.68	4.80	7.64	8.50	28.5	99.41	1.52	0.91	0.16
09	4	Aaron Curry	Wake Forest	6.13	254	4.52	1.50	4.51	7.15	10.33	37.0	121.71	1.41	1.01	0.94
08	6	Vernon Gholston	Ohio State	6.36	266	4.65	1.53	4.40	7.12	10.42	35.5	113.79	1.27	1.00	1.08
11	7	Aldon Smith	Missouri	6.35	263	4.74	1.66	4.50	7.19	9.83	34.0	104.20	1.24	0.94	0.91
03	9	Kevin Williams	Oklahoma St	6.39	304	4.81	1.68	5.04	7.66	9.33	30.0	113.59	1.76	0.99	-0.10
09	11	Aaron Maybin	Penn State	6.30	249	4.78	1.57	4.38	7.52	10.33	38.0	95.39	1.21	0.98	0.70
06	13	Kam Wimbley	Florida State	6.31	248	4.61	1.60	4.48	6.97	10.75	38.5	109.82	1.28	1.00	1.15
10	15	J. Pierre-Paul	South Florida	6.38	270	4.71	1.65	4.67	7.18	9.75	31.5	109.73	1.42	0.93	0.75
03	15	J. McDougle	Miami	6.17	264	4.70	1.61	4.58	7.28	9.75	34.0	108.20	1.37	0.97	0.74
10	16	Derrick Morgan	Georgia Tech	6.30	266	4.77	1.60	4.43	7.12	9.33	34.0	102.76	1.23	0.94	1.05
12	16	Quinton Coples	N. Carolina	6.47	284	4.78	1.63	4.78	7.57	9.08	31.5	108.80	1.55	0.93	0.25
07	17	Jarvis Moss	Florida	6.53	250	4.70	1.59	4.41	7.21	10.00	30.5	102.47	1.22	0.84	0.98
03	18	Calvin Pace	Wake Forest	6.33	269	4.80	1.74	4.62	7.96	9.58	33.0	101.35	1.28	0.94	0.02
09	18	Robert Ayers	Tennessee	6.26	272	4.77	1.62	4.51	7.56	8.50	29.5	105.08	1.29	0.86	0.53
02	23	Napolean Harris	Northwestern	6.24	253	4.55	1.60	4.44	7.15	9.58	34.0	118.06	1.24	0.91	1.01
12	26	Whit Mercilus	Illinois	6.30	261	4.68	1.58	4.49	7.03	9.83	32.0	108.81	1.31	0.92	1.08
08	28	Lawr. Jackson	USC	6.35	271	4.82	1.60	4.40	7.08	9.00	31.0	100.42	1.20	0.89	1.12
09	32	Ziggy Hood	Missouri	6.23	300	4.83	1.62	4.55	7.50	9.00	33.0	110.25	1.33	1.04	0.55
12	35	C. Upshaw	Alabama	6.13	281	4.74	1.67	4.60	7.32	9.08	27.5	111.33	1.33	0.91	0.68
11	37	Jabaal Sheard	Pittsburgh	6.23	264	4.68	1.59	4.65	7.34	9.58	31.0	110.07	1.46	0.91	0.61
99	40	Tony Bryant	Florida State	6.29	273	4.85	1.71	4.57	7.57	9.25	34.5	98.68	1.26	0.97	0.46
11	41	Jarvis Jenkins	Clemson	6.33	310	5.03	1.78	4.83	7.42	8.17	26.5	96.85	1.45	0.90	0.35
00	42	Cornelius Griffin	Alabama	6.26	297	4.9	1.69	4.62	7.63	9.25	31.0	103.04	1.33	1.00	0.35
09	43	Everette Brown	Florida State	6.12	256	4.65	1.59	4.53	7.55	9.50	31.5	109.51	1.34	0.90	0.52
10	43	Sergio Kindle	Texas	6.23	250	4.65	1.65	4.53	7.26	9.83	36.5	106.94	1.28	0.95	0.81
09	45	Clint Sintim	Virginia	6.22	256	4.75	1.56	4.40	7.37	9.92	34.5	100.58	1.25	0.95	0.83
08	50	Calais Campbell	Miami (FL)	6.63	290	5.01	1.69	4.60	7.19	9.25	29.5	92.06	1.31	0.90	0.81
11	51	DaQuan Bowers	Clemson	6.28	280	4.92	1.76	4.57	6.98	9.17	34.5	95.57	1.21	0.99	1.05
09	52	David Veikune	Hawaii	6.19	257	4.79	1.58	4.46	7.20	9.17	33.0	97.64	1.28	0.90	0.94
08	52	Quintin Groves	Auburn	6.30	259	4.53	1.57	4.42	7.31	10.00	29.5	123.01	1.25	0.88	0.87
10	54	Carlos Dunlap	Florida	6.47	278	4.68	1.61	4.61	7.21	9.25	31.5	115.90	1.40	0.91	0.78
09	57	Paul Kruger	Utah	6.35	263	4.83	1.60	4.47	7.52	9.00	32.5	96.65	1.27	0.88	0.61
07	57	Victor Abiamiri	Notre Dame	6.35	267	4.80	1.56	4.39	7.54	10.33	34.0	100.59	1.23	0.98	0.67
07	58	I. Alama-Francis	Hawaii	6.42	280	4.85	1.73	4.62	7.31	9.50	35.0	101.21	1.29	0.99	0.67
03	59	Alonzo Jackson	Florida State	6.33	266	4.86	1.69	4.50	7.69	9.50	37.0	95.36	1.21	0.98	0.41
12	59	Vinny Curry	Marshall	6.26	266	4.69	1.58	4.40	6.90	9.17	35.0	109.96	1.22	0.95	1.30
07	62	Dan Bazuin	C. Michigan	6.23	266	4.77	1.59	4.75	7.09	9.08	31.0	102.76	1.56	0.89	0.76
06	63	Daryl Tapp	Virginia Tech	6.13	252	4.83	1.66	4.48	7.32	9.08	33.0	92.61	1.22	0.89	0.80
07	65	Quientin Moses	Georgia	6.44	261	4.82	1.59	4.53	7.38	9.58	32.0	96.71	1.34	0.89	0.69
08	66	K. Langford	Hampton	6.45	287	4.95	1.62	4.69	7.72	9.50	27.0	95.61	1.47	0.89	0.19
03	67	Antwan Peek	Cincinnati	6.21	246	4.67	1.54	4.35	7.07	10.42	37.0	103.44	1.21	0.97	1.18
07	68	Quincy Black	New Mexico	6.13	240	4.42	1.53	4.34	6.86	10.33	41.5	125.76	1.21	1.01	1.40
09	70	Mike Johnson	Georgia Tech	6.58	266	4.69	1.56	4.37	7.42	10.67	38.5	109.96	1.21	1.02	0.81
09	71	M. Shaughnessy	Wisconsin	6.42	266	4.86	1.69	4.88	7.68	9.33	30.5	95.36	1.59	0.87	0.04
10	72	Alex Carrington	Arkansas St.	6.43	285	4.92	1.69	4.81	7.64	10.17	33.0	97.28	1.52	1.01	0.15
08	72	Chris Ellis	Va. Tech	6.35	263	4.71	1.56	4.65	7.64	9.08	27.0	106.88	1.49	0.81	0.31
12	72	Olivier Vernon	Miami (FL)	6.18	261	4.64	1.63	4.50	7.39	10.17	34.5	112.62	1.27	0.99	0.71
08	78	Shawn Crable	Michigan	6.39	245	4.61	1.56	4.55	7.29	9.25	28.0	108.49	1.39	0.77	0.76
08	88	Bruce Davis	UCLA	6.21	252	4.78	1.62	4.47	7.34	9.08	29.0	96.54	1.25	0.82	0.79
03	89	A. Williams	Miami (FL)	6.16	263	4.70	1.64	4.47	7.53	9.42	32.0	107.79	1.23	0.92	0.60
08	92	Cliff Avril	Purdue	6.23	253	4.51	1.50	4.51	6.90	9.75	32.5	122.31	1.41	0.90	1.19
07	97	Ray McDonald	Florida	6.28	276	4.89	1.62	4.97	7.41	9.50	29.0	96.54	1.75	0.91	0.22
04	97	Reggie Torbor	Auburn	6.18	254	4.65	1.62	4.97	7.41	9.50	29.0	108.66	1.24	0.95	0.66
11	99	K.J. Wright	Mississippi St	6.28	246	4.75	1.65	4.46	7.26	10.00	32.0	96.65	1.21	0.87	0.88
12	103	Frank Alexander	Oklahoma	6.31	270	4.80	1.69	4.59	7.58	9.75	34.5	101.73	1.30	0.98	0.43
00	113	Leonard Cason	Auburn	6.12	283	5.06	1.74	4.75	7.82	8.83	28.0	86.34	1.41	0.91	0.03
10	115	Phillip Dillard	Nebraska	6.02	245	4.65	1.58	4.43	7.16	8.83	31.5	104.81	1.25	0.85	1.01
08	116	Kenny Iwebema	Iowa	6.33	274	4.91	1.59	4.75	7.62	9.08	29.0	94.29	1.56	0.88	0.23
09	117	Kyle Moore	USC	6.42	272	4.81	1.62	4.47	7.40	8.75	30.5	101.63	1.25	0.86	0.73
07	120	Baraka Atkins	Miami (FL)	6.37	271	4.69	1.56	4.67	7.02	9.33	33.0	112.02	1.51	0.93	0.91
09	120	B. Williams	Texas Tech	6.20	261	4.96	1.66	4.49	7.23	9.33	33.0	86.25	1.23	0.92	0.88
09	125	L. Sidbury	Richmond	6.19	266	4.53	1.53	4.43	7.46	10.00	35.0	126.33	1.30	1.00	0.71
01	126	Eugene Hartwell	W. Illinois	6.08	250	4.86	1.66	4.56	7.64	9.50	36.5	89.62	1.30	0.96	0.40
06	127	Ray Edwards	Purdue	6.38	273	4.81	1.65	4.59	7.71	9.50	39.0	102.00	1.34	1.03	0.30
99	132	Peppi Zellner	Ft. Valley	6.42	246	4.72	1.64	4.49	7.40	10.17	35.5	99.13	1.25	0.91	0.71
07	134	Antwan Barnes	FIU	6.04	240	4.43	1.50	4.32	7.29	9.50	34.0	124.63	1.22	0.94	0.99
01	134	Jeremy Pharms	Washington	6.04	257	4.91	1.65	4.53	7.37	8.83	32.5	88.44	1.28	0.90	0.70
10	134	Ricky Sapp	Clemson	6.31	252	4.65	1.60	4.41	7.29	9.50	34.0	107.80	1.21	0.90	0.90
04	135	Antonio Smith	Oklahoma St	6.28	274	5.03	1.75	4.75		9.00	33.0	85.61	1.40	0.94	0.00
07	138	Jay Richardson	Ohio State	6.46	279	5.00	1.65	4.54	7.50	9.33	33.0	89.28	1.29	0.95	0.56
10	142	Cam Sheffield	Troy	6.19	257	4.92	1.60	4.53	7.23	9.58	33.0	87.72	1.33	0.92	0.84
11	142	Karl Klug	Iowa	6.25	275	4.85	1.66	4.53	7.03	9.42	29.5	99.40	1.27	0.92	1.04
10	149	Hall Davis	LA Lafayette	6.30	271	4.84	1.67	4.63	7.53	9.50	34.5	98.77	1.36	0.97	0.44
10	153	Austen Lane	Murray State	6.47	276	4.84	1.69	4.60	7.38	10.42	34.5	100.59	1.31	1.01	0.62
99	153	Rod Coleman	East Carolina	6.13	262	4.94	1.75	4.57	8.00	9.25	32.5	87.99	1.22	0.92	0.03
08	154	Kroy Biermann	Montana	6.23	246	4.85	1.59	4.56	7.08	9.33	31.5	88.92	1.37	0.84	0.96
11	157	Doug Hogue	Syracuse	6.20	235	4.62	1.64	4.57	7.09	10.08	36.0	103.16	1.33	0.90	0.94
12	164	J. Massaquoi	Troy State	6.18	264	4.68	1.59	4.53	7.38	10.00	33.5	110.07	1.34	0.98	0.69
11	165	Pernell McPhee	Mississippi St	6.21	278	4.91	1.78	4.59	7.13	8.92	28.5	95.66	1.21	0.89	0.88
99	175	Robert Daniel	NW State	6.48	281	5.04	1.75	4.86	7.91	9.17	28.5	87.10	1.51	0.88	-0.17
00	181	Quinton Reese	Auburn	6.29	283	5.13	1.75	4.68	7.91	8.42	30.0	81.72	1.33	0.89	0.01
09	182	Jarius Wynn	Georgia	6.21	275	5.01	1.69	4.58	7.40	8.92	31.5	87.30	1.29	0.93	0.62
10	186	Cliff Geathers	S. Carolina	6.62	274	4.98	1.72	4.72	7.20	9.33	36.0	89.10	1.40	0.95	0.68
03	194	Aaron Hunt	Texas Tech	6.21	262	4.87	1.69	4.52	7.68	8.83	30.0	93.16	1.23	0.86	0.40
08	199	Robt. Henderson	S. Miss	6.26	278	4.81	1.63	4.53	7.28	9.50		103.87	1.30	0.00	0.79
09	199	Stryker Sulak	Missouri	6.37	251	4.63	1.56	4.58	7.31	9.42	31.0	109.24	1.42	0.84	0.72
09	205	RaShon Harris	Oregon	6.30	298	4.99	1.78	4.87	8.18	8.83	25.5	96.13	1.49	0.89	-0.45
10	212	Chris McCoy	Middle TN	6.26	261	4.70	1.65	4.51	7.13	10.25	33.0	106.97	1.26	0.96	0.96
07	213	Chase Pittman	LSU	6.38	270	5.03	1.68	4.64	7.58	8.50	27.5	84.36	1.36	0.81	0.38
06	216	James Wyche	Syracuse	6.44	262	4.63	1.67	4.51	7.76	9.67	33.0	114.03	1.24	0.91	0.33
10	213	Willie Young	NC State	6.38	251	4.88	1.70	4.56	7.24	9.83	38.0	88.52	1.26	0.95	0.80
02	224	Derrius Monroe	VA Tech	6.30	269	4.56	1.64	4.51	7.38	9.25	31.5	124.43	1.27	0.91	0.71
10	226	George Selvie	South Florida	6.36	252	4.93	1.67	4.63	7.48	9.08	30.5	85.32	1.36	0.82	0.49
10	232	Jammie Kirlew	Indiana	6.10	260	5.05	1.68	4.74	7.50	9.25	33.0	79.95	1.46	0.93	0.36
02	232	Gregg Scott	Hampton	6.29	268	4.90	1.73	4.61	7.50	9.17	32.5	92.98	1.28	0.92	0.49
06	237	S. McClover	Auburn	6.19	262	4.70	1.63	4.52	7.88	9.50	39.0	107.38	1.29	1.02	0.20
07	238	Abraham Wright	Colorado	6.18	242	4.90	1.65	4.46	7.20	9.25	31.0	83.96	1.21	0.83	0.94
07	239	CJ Ah You	Oklahoma	6.30	274	4.70	1.53	4.40	7.06	9.00	36.5	112.30	1.27	0.99	1.14
10	240	Kavell Conner	Clemson	6.03	242	4.59	1.55	4.60	7.36	9.17	33.5	109.04	1.45	0.88	0.64
06	241	Charles Bennett	Clemson	6.29	258	4.70	1.64	4.53	7.49	9.58	33.5	105.74	1.29	0.92	0.58
08	244	Angelo Craig	Cincinnati	6.33	252	5.07	1.65	4.57	7.38	9.83	30.5	76.28	1.32	0.86	0.65
04	253	Isaac Hilton	Hampton	6.29	267	4.57	1.59	4.48	7.99	10.25	36.5	122.43	1.29	1.02	0.13

Like the results of the WR study, this is my favorite part of the list. The only filter I used was the Twitch metric, which measures change-of-direction or get-off. It includes players that scored greater than 1.20. The tables are sorted by draft position from highest to lowest. Since there were so many players, I had to break it down into two tables. I didn’t include DT types in this category, but they’ll be included in the next installment.

Instead of going over the results individually, please take a moment to look over it. With the exception of a handful of players (Jason Pierre-Paul, Aldon Smith, Kevin Williams, Kamerion Wimbley, Jabaal Sheard, Calvin Pace, Carlos Dunlap, Paul Kruger, Calais Campbell, Cliff Avril, Michael Johnson), it’s littered with guys that didn’t perform to expectations. I’ve highlighted the players that have made the Pro Bowl. If I was a GM, this is a list that I would pay close attention to. There are definitely some booms, but there are far more busts. It comes down risk and recognizing value, and how much you’re willing to take.

The next installment of pass rushers will include the 2013 class. I’ll also include more categories sorted by level of risk.

Tony Wiltshire

Tony.Wiltshire@gmail.com

@TonyWiltshire