NFL Draft Scouting Prototypes: Fact or Fiction?
If you follow the NFL Draft even a little then you’ve heard at least one analyst every year bring up a player’s (fill in the blank) and say “they don’t fit the prototype because of that and chances are they’ll slide.” They don’t normally deal in absolutes, but occasionally they will say a player won’t make it as a pro because of that attribute. These range from a Quarterback’s hand size, to forty times, to the length of an Offensive Tackle or Edge Rusher’s arms. I started working on my Draft Board project before the end of the 2019 season, specifically looking at a player’s college production and combine testing results. I was originally looking to see if there was anything that led to a high chance of success as a pro, but what I found was mostly a bunch of things that led to a high chance of failure as a pro. I’m going to use some of what I found to tackle the age old scouting beliefs and give an answer to whether they are fact or fiction. If there are any others you can think of that I don’t cover below send us an email or shoot us a message on Facebook, I’ll check it out and get back to you.
A Quarterback’s hand size matters.
Fact or Fiction? Fact, but not by the standard prototype you hear about
What I found: The supposed hand size that a Quarterback should have is no smaller than about 9.38”. Out of the 19 Quarterbacks drafted from 2009-2018 that I’ve assessed as being successful pros, six of them have hands that are shorter than 9.38”, but none of them have hands that are shorter than 9”. To be fair, only five players (invited to the Combine) from that time frame had hands smaller than 9”, so it’s not like measuring in under 9” is all that common.
A Quarterback’s height matters.
Fact or Fiction? Fiction
What I found: That Prototypical height that scouts looked for back in the good old days was right in that 6’3”-6’5” range, though they wouldn’t knock a guy for being taller than that. This is one of those outdated requirements some still cling to from an era where most of the Quarterbacks stood in the pocket because if they tried to leave it they would embarrass themselves. Out of the 19 Quarterbacks drafted from 2009-2018 that I’ve assessed as being successful pros, 11 of them measured in under 6’3”.
An Offensive Tackle’s arm length matters.
Fact or Fiction? Fact (sort of)
What I found: The arm length scouts would look for is right around 33.5”. From 2009-2018 there have been 39 Offensive Tackles I’ve assessed as being successful pros. 38 of those 39 have arm lengths of 33.25” or bigger. The only exception to that so far has been Braden Smith (the Colts Right Tackle). Those are pretty big numbers to make it safe to believe that if an Offensive Tackle coming out of college doesn’t have the arm length they should probably kick inside to Guard.
A Center shouldn’t be too tall.
Fact or Fiction? Fiction
What I found: The belief was that a tall Center would prevent a Quarterback from being able to properly see the middle of the field. That height was usually capped at around 6’3”, maybe 6’4”. Out of the 16 Centers drafted from 2009-2018 that I’ve assessed as being successful pros, six of them were 6’4” and another 3 of them were 6’5”. There are reasons, similar to what I mentioned for the QBs height assessment, that may have led to a height limit at the position back in the day, but thanks to the transformation of the league and the players that line up under Center nowadays, it no longer holds true anymore.
An Edge Rusher’s arm length matters.
Fact or Fiction? Mostly fiction
What I found: Trying to find the actual “requirement” that scouts are looking for on this is difficult. Every year I hear an analyst or read an article where they’re talking about how they don’t think this edge rusher or that edge rusher will pan out because they don’t have the length. I tackled this in two ways, height and arm length. I also took a player from the 2021 draft class that I heard referenced in a negative manner when it comes to this myth, Joseph Ossai. Ossai measured in at 6’3” and his arm length was 33.88”. From 2009-2018 there were no players who measured in under 6’1”, successful or not, it just didn’t happen. In that same period there were 44 players who I assessed as being successful pros. Three of them were 6’1”, six of them were 6’2” and 11 of them were 6’3”, so as far as height is concerned, sure it matters...if the player is 6’ or shorter. Of those 44 players, two players had arm lengths above 31” but below 32”, five players had arm lengths between 32 and 32.99”, and 13 players had arm lengths between 33 and 33.99”. So sure arm length matters, if a player measures in at 31” or shorter. And if we’re keeping score, only five players who attended the Combine from those years had arm lengths of 31” or shorter.
Forty Times are very important.
Fact or Fiction? Depends on the position
What I found: This one is a little tricky so I’m going to tackle each position group separately.
Quarterbacks - Yes, but only on the slow end. This is kind of a believe it or not and kind of a “that actually makes sense.” Out of those 19 successful QBs I mentioned from 2009-2018, NONE of them ran a 5.00 or slower forty, and only ONE ran in the 4.9-4.99 range. I have theories on why this one stuck, but I won’t dive into that, all I’m going to say is that Dwayne Haskins (class of 2019) ran a 5.04, knowing something like this may have helped Washington out long term.
Running Backs - Not really. Turns out a RBs broad jump and 3-cone play a bigger part in their success. There are instances where a slow forty (4.6 or slower) had a negative effect when combined with other statistical factors, but there wasn’t anything outright.
Wide Receivers - YES! Not only was it one of the biggest factors for success, there also was not one Receiver that I assessed as a successful pro from the 2009-2018 time period who ran a 4.66 or slower forty (that’s out of 38 players). On the flip side of that, there were 35 players invited to the Combine during that time frame who ran a 4.66 or slower and did not succeed. Here’s another interesting result for you, out of those 38 successful pros, only ONE ran faster than a 4.3 forty. It was Tyreek Hill and he did it at his pro day (he wasn’t invited to the Combine). In that same period six other players ran their forty in under 4.3 and none of them succeeded as a pro, or at least they haven’t yet, you never know if a career will turn itself around. A curious thought that being too fast actually hurts your chances for success. Could be that every single one of them measured in under 6’ and weighed under 190. Could be that they all dealt with similar hamstring problems which seems to grab hold of so many speedsters (pure speculation, I didn’t go through and look at their injury history). Something I’ll keep an eye on going forward.
Tight Ends - Yes, kind of. Like the Running Backs there were a few instances where a slow forty combined with another factor led to a low success rate, or no success. But the Tight Ends also had a “no slower than” factor. Out of the 22 that I assessed as successful pros, none of them ran a 4.84 or slower forty. Whereas, 51 players who went to the Combine in the aforementioned time frame who weren’t considered successful pros, ran a 4.84 or slower forty. There’s a relativity to the Tight Ends though. For my assessments I look at statistics, so I’m looking for Tight Ends who make an impact in the pass game, but there are definitely guys out there who are drafted/signed specifically because of their blocking capabilities.
Offensive Lineman - Yes, but only because I only have the Combine testing results to go off of for the O-Line. The Forty is not the most important success factor for Offensive Lineman, and neither is the Bench Press (pause for the shock to subside). Believe it or not, the biggest success factor for Offensive Tackles and Guards was the 3-cone drill, and the biggest one for Centers was the 20-yard shuttle (otherwise referred to as the short shuttle). Thanks to Orlando Brown, one of the 39 successful Offensive Tackles ran a 5.5 or slower forty. And as far as the Interior O-Lineman go, none ran a 5.6 or slower forty. But when it comes to the unsuccessful players in either of those areas there really aren’t many who fit that bill either, only 16 of the Tackles ran a 5.5 or slower forty and only seven of the Interior Lineman ran a 5.6 or slower.
Edge Rushers - No, not really. Just like the Running Backs, Edge Rushers forties only matter when they’re on the slower side and tied to another factor in a negative way. Turns out the Short Shuttle and 3-Cone Drill play a much bigger role on both the positive and negative side of things. Don’t get me wrong, a fast forty can be helpful, but not as much as the hype for the drill suggests.
Defensive Tackles - Yes, but with caveats. Since the weight of a Defensive Tackle varies so drastically I split them at the 320 pound mark. No Successful Defensive Tackle that weighed under 320 pounds (there were 26 of them) ran a 5.25 or slower forty. Meanwhile, there were 25 unsuccessful players who weighed under 320 and ran a 5.25 or slower forty. When it came to success factors, the 3-Cone Drill and college production played the biggest role.
Linebackers - Yes and No. This group excludes those Outside Linebackers in a 3-4, because they fall into the Edge Rusher category. I want to make that point so you have a reference when checking out the 2021 class. There is a slow limit: None of the 46 successful pros ran a forty in 4.86 or slower. But it also wasn’t one of the top success factors, that belonged to college production in tackles and total turnovers, as well as their jumping (Broad and Vertical). That second part was a big surprise to me.
Cornerbacks - YES! Surprise, surprise, the two positions where the forty matters the most are Receiver and Corner. None of the 53 successful Corners ran a 4.67 or slower forty, and there were 14 unsuccessful Corners that did. Plus, the forty was the biggest success factor at the position.
Safeties - Eh. The 3-Cone Drill was the biggest success factor, though there was a “no slower than” forty factor. None of the 46 successful Safeties ran a 4.75 or slower forty. But, there were also only seven unsuccessful Safeties that ran a 4.75 or slower forty.