Mike Richardon pro day Reminder

[BelichickFan]

Yes, he looked pretty good on Friday. For some reason he wasn't considered a fast, quick athlete coming out.

Richardson pro day :

40 - 4.48
20 - 2.61
10 - 1.47
Shuttle - 4.05
3-Cone - 6.27

Compared to some of the other CB coming out (some combine, some pro day, whatever NFLDraftScout had) :

Revis :

40 - 4.38
20 - 2.49
10 - 1.46
Shuttle - 4.08
3-Cone - 6.56

Hall :

40 - 4.39
20 - 2.52
10 - 1.45
Shuttle - 4.07
3-Cone - 6.50

Houston :

40 - 4.43
20 - 2.52
10 - 1.50
Shuttle - 4.12
3-Cone - 6.94

Wright :

40 - 4.36
20 - 2.51
10 - 1.48
Shuttle - 4.23
3-Cone - 6.93

Richardson's 40 was the worst but his Shuttle and 3 Cone were the best of all as his 10 was second best.

 

[lapatsfan]

As I said in another post, I thought Richardson played really well in coverage and run support. He seemed to be around the ball alot and is a hard hitter.

 

[PonyExpress]

I like Richardson too, but his eye-popping 3-cone time was deceiving. ND used small cones instead of the normal large ones, enabling quicker pivots. This accounts for the fast cone times across the board for ND prospects.

 

[Boston Boxer]

i don't care how fast someone runs around little cones...i just want to see what they do on the field...i think BB feels the same way

 

[T-ShirtDynasty]

I like Richardson too, but his eye-popping 3-cone time was deceiving. ND used small cones instead of the normal large ones, enabling quicker pivots. This accounts for the fast cone times across the board for ND prospects.

No kidding? Damn, learn something new every day around here.

 

[signbabybrady]

i don't care how fast someone runs around little cones...i just want to see what they do on the field...i think BB feels the same way

couldnt have said it better....He seems like he has some talent...and he his in the right position for a Rook (the position he plays is one not as crowded as others). Hobbs Gay James Merriwether Richardson would not be the worst group in the league not even close and if you add Zant they would be one of the better groups.

 

[sg14]

From the "this not worth much department", I get the feeling that the veteran DB's on the Pats like Richardson because in the Patriot.com photo gallery there is a picture where he is hoisted on top of their shoulders after a practice interception.

Being a fan(actic) I get to read between the lines and extrapolate as much as I want

 

[BelichickFan]

i don't care how fast someone runs around little cones...i just want to see what they do on the field...i think BB feels the same way

No sh!t, but quickness around cones is a leading indicator to quickness covering WR :bricks:

 

[PonyExpress]

From the "this not worth much department", I get the feeling that the veteran DB's on the Pats like Richardson because in the Patriot.com photo gallery there is a picture where he is hoisted on top of their shoulders after a practice interception.

Being a fan(actic) I get to read between the lines and extrapolate as much as I want

We have a stellar group of guys, veterans who know how to boost the confidence of young players. They know how to haze and they know how to praise.

 

[FarScapeR]

No sh!t, but quickness around cones is a leading indicator to quickness covering WR :bricks:

lolz.

I think, barring injuries, Richardson is going to be a serviceable DB in the next couple of years.

 

[RayClay]

You all realize that differences that slight in "exercises" don't say a lot about actual performance in pads on a football field, right?

If you don't believe me, ask Jerry Rice or Emmet Smith.

 

[Remix 6]

Houston ran a 4.32..not a 4.43

 

[BelichickFan]

You all realize that differences that slight in "exercises" don't say a lot about actual performance in pads on a football field, right?

If you don't believe me, ask Jerry Rice or Emmet Smith.

You can also look at how players move up and down the draft board after their runs. It's WAY too simplistic to say the numbers don't matter.

 

[fgssand]

Houston ran a 4.32..not a 4.43

I have tp ask how you knew this:

A) Were you and do you as a general rule check the accuracy of all our statistical quotes??

B) Do you have a steel trap mind that captures and remembers all stats from pro days and the combine??

C) He is your brother and you just had to get it right??

Just wondering how you could know this??

 

[Boston Boxer]

No sh!t, but quickness around cones is a leading indicator to quickness covering WR :bricks:

no doubt, but i tend to look at on field/game situation play rather than combine numbers...which i think get over rated by some

 

[Boston Boxer]

You can also look at how players move up and down the draft board after their runs. It's WAY too simplistic to say the numbers don't matter.

i think they do not matter as much as what a guy does on the field. Take a guy like Tommy Z from ND. What are his numbers? not that great but look at what the guy does on the field. Always making a big play and always around the ball.

 

[patsox23]

OBVIOUSLY on-field performance is the end-all, be-all, no one's disputing that, but the drills being talked about here are especially important to BB/Pioli - they've said so, and in their drafting they've backed that up.

Discussion of cone drills, etc... is EXTREMELY relevant to seeing how prospects match-up - not the only criteria, but a key one to focus on. Thanks for the stats research.

 

[RayClay]

You can also look at how players move up and down the draft board after their runs. It's WAY too simplistic to say the numbers don't matter.

It matters in drafting. Probably too much IMO. I'm guessing better teams give it less weight than what they observe on tape.

Of course even the best teams use stats over performance sometimes[/BETHEL]

 

[RayClay]

OBVIOUSLY on-field performance is the end-all, be-all, no one's disputing that, but the drills being talked about here are especially important to BB/Pioli - they've said so, and in their drafting they've backed that up.

Discussion of cone drills, etc... is EXTREMELY relevant to seeing how prospects match-up - not the only criteria, but a key one to focus on. Thanks for the stats research.

To be fair, I agree with this.

If there are large differences. There's a threshold considered "statistically insignificant" in any statistical measure.

Considering field conditions, relative health of participant that day , relative accuracy of measurement, (stop watches operated by humans?) saying one guy is faster than another based on hundredths of a second doesn't mean much.

Just look at a single player who's been timed multiple times. He's probably been timed faster and slower than the player he's supposed to be "faster than".

 

[AzPatsFan]

The last hundreth of a second doesn't mean much. But it also establishes that a guy is not far outside the "norm" for that pro position. Thats not to say he can or can't play OTIS was as slow as cold molasses. His head and instincts more than made up. Richardson has the athletic ability to rank among those who play the game at the pro level. That is all that you need to know and can learn from the artificial athletic measures.

Richardson seesm to consistently end up in position to make INTs; that requires intincts to put yourself there.