A 10 Year History of First Round CB's: How Safe is Trae Waynes? | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

A 10 Year History of First Round CB's: How Safe is Trae Waynes?

j-off-her-doll

Super Donator
Club Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2009
Messages
22,490
Reaction score
22,471
Location
Dream Songs
Looking at the drafts from 2005-2014, 40 CB’s were selected in Round One. Of these 40 CB’s, only 8 had 3-Cone times worse than 6.99 (20%). Starting with the most recent:

1. Darqueze Dennard – 7.07 (24[SUP]th[/SUP] pick)
2. Xavier Rhodes – 7.29 (25[SUP]th[/SUP] pick)
3. Morris Claiborne – 7.01 (6[SUP]th[/SUP] pick)
4. Dre Kirkpatrick – 7.20 (17[SUP]th[/SUP] pick)
5. Leodis McKelvin – 7.06 (11[SUP]th[/SUP] pick)
6. Mike Jenkins – 7.21 (25[SUP]th[/SUP] pick)
7. Antoine Cason – 7.07 (27[SUP]th[/SUP] pick)
8. Antonio Cromartie – 7.02 (19[SUP]th[/SUP] pick)

Note – DJ Hayden and Fabian Washington did not participate in the 3-Cone.

Most people have Revis, Sherman, and Peterson as the top 3 CB’s in the NFL. Revis posted a 3-Cone of 6.56; Sherman posted a 6.72; and Peterson timed at 6.58. Sherman obviously wasn’t a First Round pick, but I mention him for reference.

Prior to his injury, the best rookie CB from the 2014 class was Jason Verrett. Of the top CB’s from the class, his 6.69 3-Cone was the best. Dennard is the only CB from this class on our list of 8, and after Verrett, Bradley Roby posted the best time at 6.74.

From the 2013 group of CB’s, Trufant has looked the best, and in the 3-Cone, he was also the top CB of the Round One CB’s from his class – with a 6.67. Rhodes posted the worst time, and he was pretty good in 2014. It should be noted that he’s 6’1, 210, with 33 3/4” arms (very long).

Two of the three CB’s drafted in First Round of the 2012 Draft posted 7+ 3-Cones (Claiborne and Kirkpatrick), and neither has lived up to expectations, though both have battled through some injuries. Stephon Gilmore has played well in Buffalo, and he posted a 6.61 3-Cone.

To continue the pattern, Patrick Peterson’s 6.58 was the best of his group. Amukamara posted a 6.97, and Jimmy Smith posted 6.93. Amukamara has been somewhat of a disappointment, but Smith has developed into a very good CB. At 6’2, 211, with 32 1/4” arms, he’s another guy whose length has helped.

In 2010, the top time for the top CB prospects belonged to Devin McCourty at 6.70; of course, he moved to FS, but he’s arguably the best player from that group. Joe Haden is the best CB from the class, but his respectable, if average, 6.94 was the worst among the First Round picks.

In 2009, only 2 CB’s were drafted in Round One, but both posted excellent 3-Cones, and both developed into excellent players: Malcom Jenkins – 6.59, Vontae Davis – 6.75. Jenkins, like McCourty, moved to FS.

2008 saw 5 CB’s go in the First, and 3 of the 5 are on the 7+ list (McKelvin, Jenkins, Cason). The two CB’s who were not? Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie and Aqib Talib. They posted times of 6.74 and 6.82 respectively. Note – the other 3 have not lived up to their draft slots.

2007 was outstanding at the top. Darrelle Revis’ 6.56 was only good for 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] best. Leon Hall topped him with a 6.50. Hall isn’t on Revis’ level, obviously, but he’s been a very good CB throughout his career, and he made the All Pro team once. Aaron Ross was also drafted in Round One, and he timed in at 6.67.

Tye Hill posted the best time of the 2006 group at 6.64, and the two worst times were posted by Antonio Cromartie and Jonathan Joseph – 7.02 and 6.92. Joseph’s 3-Cone puts him in the safe range, and at his peak, he was the best CB from this group. Cromartie’s lack of quickness shows up. When he’s not able to use his length to redirect WR’s, he struggles to change direction. He and Rhodes share some similarities here.

Finally, Antrel Rolle and Carlos Rogers had the best 3-Cones from 2005 group. Rolle recorded a 6.68, but, like McCourty and Jenkins, he moved to FS. Rogers posted a ridiculous 6.48. Had he not wasted away in Washington for six seasons, his career would likely be seen in a different light. He was outstanding in San Francisco, where he made an All Pro team in 2011.

*
So what does this all mean for Waynes? Well, you can point to Cromartie and Rhodes, and say, ‘Maybe Waynes is an exception.’ He doesn’t have the frame of Cromartie or Rhodes, but maybe his 4.31 40 makes up for that. But, at 6’0, 186 lbs, with 31” arms and 8 ¼” hands, he’s not going to win a lot of physical battles against NFL WR’s. Cromartie and Rhodes hold their own very well in this area. They’re also much more physical on the LOS than is Waynes.

Further, you have to consider that, at 6’0, 191 lbs, Atoine Cason ran a 4.45 40, Mike Jenkins (5’10, 190lbs) ran a 4.38 40, and Mike Jenkins, at 5’10 197 lbs, ran a 4.38. Very fast CB’s – not great players. More similar in size to Waynes than Waynes is to Cromartie or Rhodes.

We should also remember that only 1 in 5 First Round CB’s posted 7+ 3-Cones. That teams generally avoid CB’s with 7+ 3-Cones is a red flag in of itself.

It’s likely that Waynes is the next member of the 7+ 3-Cone, so where does his legacy fall within this group? He’s certainly more similar in stature to the smaller fast guys who are still in the NFL but also guys who never justified their draft positions. Maybe his speed bumps him into that group with Cromartie and Rhodes. Cromartie has justified his draft position (despite his inconsistent play), and Rhodes looks like he might. We should mention, though, that Cromartie is very clearly not on the level of guys like Revis, Peterson, Talib, Joe Haden, or even Vontae Davis. So if you have a First Round grade on Waynes, and you think that his speed gives him a chance to have a similar career to Cromartie, I can buy that. If you have a Top 10 grade on him, though, you’re asking him to be the best CB in the last 10 drafts to post a 3-Cone worse than 7.0.

His feet hurt him the worst against Baylor.

[video=youtube;RPx3c76slcg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPx3c76slcg[/video]

At 0:10 (marking the video time), he loses his man deep, then loses the ball. Should have been PI.
At 0:37, he’s correct in taking his first step inside to cut off any inside routes, but the WR still crosses his face. Poor throw, or it could have been a TD.
At 0:47, he’s playing off and outside like he has help to the middle, but there was no help. Not even close to the WR, who drops a TD.
At 1:08, the WR creates nice separation on the back shoulder and catches the ball at the Goal Line.
2:08, he’s not paying attention, and Goodley cleans his clock. Knocks him out of the game for a bit.
At 2:45, he gets beat deep down the sideline.
At 2:59, the WR creates space on a comeback for an 8-yard gain. Waynes makes a solid tackle on the play.
At 3:28, he drops a gift INt (8 ¼” hands?).

I have Waynes in the Second Round. He’s not a safe pick. His upside rests somewhere between Leodis McKelvin and Antonio Cromartie, and his build suggests the upside may be closer to McKelvin.
 
When will you learn that foot quickness and change of direction (agility) are not the same thing?
 
Quality post, and also the reason why I put Kevin Johnson ahead of Trae all day.

Trae being labeled as the best "press corner" is the only reason he's so hyped over the other top corners. I've said it over and over, he will be a decent corner, but you ever let him cover a player like Jarvis Landry and Jarvis would toy with him.
 
I just hate the numbers. They mean nothing. I'm in 100% agreement with you that his movement skills aren't on par with recent prospects such as PP, or Trufant. But you don't need numbers to see that. It's clear as day on tape. Like most high cut guys, Waynes doesn't change direction as fluid as someone shorter than him. There is a little hip tightness there. The problem is in his hips, not his feet. And I'm in agreement with you that is his biggest weakness. But he's so good in every other area he's able to compensate. Zero doubt in my mind he'll be a better pro than Xavier Rhodes.
 
I just hate the numbers. They mean nothing. I'm in 100% agreement with you that his movement skills aren't on par with recent prospects such as PP, or Trufant. But you don't need numbers to see that. It's clear as day on tape. Like most high cut guys, Waynes doesn't change direction as fluid as someone shorter than him. There is a little hip tightness there. The problem is in his hips, not his feet. And I'm in agreement with you that is his biggest weakness. But he's so good in every other area he's able to compensate. Zero doubt in my mind he'll be a better pro than Xavier Rhodes.

When there's lineman with better cone drill #s than you, and your a cb, the numbers mean something.

J-off just broke the numbers down for you clear as day, and yet you still are going to sit here and say fhe numbers don't mean anything? Smh
 
When there's lineman with better cone drill #s than you, and your a cb, the numbers mean something.

J-off just broke the numbers down for you clear as day, and yet you still are going to sit here and say fhe numbers don't mean anything? Smh

No, they don't. Numbers are for lazy people. The eye in the sky doesn't lie.
 
Waynes has a great ability to make plays on the ball in contested situations
 
Peters and PJ Williams are 7+ guys too.

After looking at the list I've come to one conclusion.

Byron Jones is just an animal and will be drafted way higher than anyone thinks right now. Every year there is a player that absolutely skyrockets due to numbers, and they just dont get much better than Jones.
 
All I have to say is that Patrick Peterson should be considered by no one to be a top 3 corner. Dudes so overrated it's funny
 
I just hate the numbers. They mean nothing. I'm in 100% agreement with you that his movement skills aren't on par with recent prospects such as PP, or Trufant. But you don't need numbers to see that. It's clear as day on tape. Like most high cut guys, Waynes doesn't change direction as fluid as someone shorter than him. There is a little hip tightness there. The problem is in his hips, not his feet. And I'm in agreement with you that is his biggest weakness. But he's so good in every other area he's able to compensate. Zero doubt in my mind he'll be a better pro than Xavier Rhodes.

I agree that the numbers translate to tape. I think they help contextualize what we're watching. You can say a player does this or that well, but what does it mean to his projected success? In this case, I went with isolating 3-Cone times. It highlights how guys with similar traits have struggled. In this case, and in most cases, we're viewing the numbers as thresholds. Where does this deficiency really start impacting a player's chance at success in the NFL?

I leave it as a possibility that he may be good enough in other areas to compensate and become a great player, but, again, you're asking him to be the best CB in 10+ years to perform the 3-Cone in 7+ seconds. I don't like those odds.

---------- Post added at 06:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:22 AM ----------

Quality post, and also the reason why I put Kevin Johnson ahead of Trae all day.

Trae being labeled as the best "press corner" is the only reason he's so hyped over the other top corners. I've said it over and over, he will be a decent corner, but you ever let him cover a player like Jarvis Landry and Jarvis would toy with him.

Thanks, and I agree. I have Kevin Johnson in the top-20 range.
 
All I have to say is that Patrick Peterson should be considered by no one to be a top 3 corner. Dudes so overrated it's funny

Arizona asks Peterson to play on an island against elite WR's. Outside of Revis, no CB is asked to do that on a consistent basis. You'd like to see some more consistency from Peterson, but if there were an open draft on NFL CB's, Peterson would be one of the top 2 or 3 picks.
 
I understand that some want to check the box and confirm with data what they see on tape, that's just never been my style. But at the end of the day, whatever works best for the evaluator.
 
Arizona asks Peterson to play on an island against elite WR's. Outside of Revis, no CB is asked to do that on a consistent basis. You'd like to see some more consistency from Peterson, but if there were an open draft on NFL CB's, Peterson would be one of the top 2 or 3 picks.

Absolutely. Todd Bowles blitzes off the bus. Peterson shadows the opposition's #1 WR. And with how much they blitz they play a lot of 0 coverage. If you were to rank schemes for a CB, the hardest would be what Arizona asks you to do, and the simplest would be what Seattle asks you to do. That's why the PP vs Sherman argument pisses me off. They play man free and cover 3 almost exclusively, against trips they will play quarter-quarter-half (cover 6), but other than that they pretty much line up in single high. Sherman is only responsible for his deep 1/3 and having the safety with the most range in the league (Earl) behind him allows him to be more aggressive and jump routes. He also has a bunch of really athletic LB's dropping underneath the #1 WR to his side as well. I'm glad you noticed that, because most people will just check PFF or see that Julio Jones has X amount of yards against Patrick Peterson. What they don't point out or bother to ask themselves is "what is the player asked to do" which is one of the biggest mistakes to make when evaluating a player, whether college, NFL, or even high school.

I rank the Elite Corners as
#1. Revis
#2. Peterson
#3. Sherman
#4. Vontae
 
I understand that some want to check the box and confirm with data what they see on tape, that's just never been my style. But at the end of the day, whatever works best for the evaluator.

I want to make it clear that I'm not advocating for measurements over film, but you're right that I do use these drills to check boxes. You can find posts, though, where I questioned Waynes' COD before the Combine. It was confirmation rather than revelation.

But I agree, you have to do what works for you.
 
Absolutely. Todd Bowles blitzes off the bus. Peterson shadows the opposition's #1 WR. And with how much they blitz they play a lot of 0 coverage. If you were to rank schemes for a CB, the hardest would be what Arizona asks you to do, and the simplest would be what Seattle asks you to do. That's why the PP vs Sherman argument pisses me off. They play man free and cover 3 almost exclusively, against trips they will play quarter-quarter-half (cover 6), but other than that they pretty much line up in single high. Sherman is only responsible for his deep 1/3 and having the safety with the most range in the league (Earl) behind him allows him to be more aggressive and jump routes. He also has a bunch of really athletic LB's dropping underneath the #1 WR to his side as well. I'm glad you noticed that, because most people will just check PFF or see that Julio Jones has X amount of yards against Patrick Peterson. What they don't point out or bother to ask themselves is "what is the player asked to do" which is one of the biggest mistakes to make when evaluating a player, whether college, NFL, or even high school.

I rank the Elite Corners as
#1. Revis
#2. Peterson
#3. Sherman
#4. Vontae

Absolutely, Peterson's job is much more difficult than Sherman's. I can't knock Sherman too much, though, because he does his job about as well as possible. I could rank the top 3 guys in any order. If Vontae can put together another year like last season, I think he's right where you rank him. For now, I'll put him behind Talib, but Davis is right there.
 
Back
Top Bottom