Favre: Smith Should be the Number One Pick

[SF Dolphin Fan]

Devonta Smiths tape is so good. But I think it’s fair to be concerned about his small frame. I know he played in the SEC and against top talent and stayed mostly healthy but NFL is a different animal, a lot of the college targeting calls where players get ejected aren’t even flags in the NFL

Yeah, that's really my only concern with him. He is definitely physical for his size and otherwise has everything you look for.

We know he's not going #1 overall though.

 

[Swollcolb]

Yeah, that's really my only concern with him. He is definitely physical for his size and otherwise has everything you look for.

We know he's not going #1 overall though.

I actually view him very similar to Tua last year. The tape is so good it’s worth the gamble

 

[SF Dolphin Fan]

I actually view him very similar to Tua last year. The tape is so good it’s worth the gamble

Murray looks like someone who couldn't take a hit in the NFL, yet that hasn't been a problem. Just so hard to say regarding durability.

 

[rafael]

Weight and Injuries

NFL football is a violent game, and traumatic injuries are unfortunate but unavoidable. But are bigger players more likely to be hurt than their smaller peers?

www.footballoutsiders.com

This was a study that related weight and injury correlation across different positions.

"For most positions, higher weight is now associated with a higher injury rate. This provides some evidence for our hypothesis that the greater impact forces heavier players experience lead to higher injury rates.

There are two major exceptions to this trend. Heavier running backs exhibit lower injury rates than their lighter counterparts. This may be because of differences in the way heavier running backs are used. Our running back category included both halfbacks and fullbacks, so instead of an effect of weight we may simply be seeing that fullbacks or heavy halfbacks receive fewer carries and thus have fewer chances to get hurt. Supporting this hypothesis of "confounding by role" is a small negative correlation between weight and rush attempts among running backs in 2016 and 2017.

Injury rates also drop among the heaviest tight ends (271 to 290 pounds). Similar to running backs, confounding by role may be an explanation. The heaviest tight ends may be primarily blockers rather than receivers, and blocking is likely a lower-risk activity than running routes and being tackled post-reception.

The heaviest offensive linemen (more than 350 pounds) also exhibit lower injury rates than their lighter counterparts, but confounding by role is less likely to apply here. I do not have an explanation for this decline besides random chance."

They concluded:

"All else equal, if a team has a choice between a 180-pound defensive back and a 210-pounder, they may want to go for the lighter guy."

I thought this was interesting b/c it is the opposite of what I find most fans believe. Most fans seem to assume that all things being equal you should take the heavier guy. Their conclusions mirror what I have seen in every single study on this over the years. I've seen comments posted about it "being fair to be concerned" about Smith's lower weight, but it really isn't to anybody who is basing their opinion on facts.

 

[jimthefin]

I would guess that the only draft in NFL history where a WR should have gone first was 1985 where Bruce Smith went first and JERRY RICE was taken 16th.

Some of the guys taken ahead of Rice are truly shocking.

 

[Swollcolb]

Murray looks like someone who couldn't take a hit in the NFL, yet that hasn't been a problem. Just so hard to say regarding durability.

Injury’s and future durability is impossible to project and I get that. I mean shoot we have two massive WRs 6’5” 220 and 6’3” 215 and their both hurt all the time too.

Regarding Kyler I wasn’t as concerned because he’s small but compact and he’s also an elite slider from his baseball background. He’s so good at protecting himself from hits, he can get into that slide so freaking fast

 

[Hoot]

Favre saying he would take D.Smith 1st definitely perks the ears. I am still blown away by his first half in NAT CHAMP game. His ability to separate is exceptional.

 

[SF Dolphin Fan]

Favre saying he would take D.Smith 1st definitely perks the ears. I am still blown away by his first half in NAT CHAMP game. His ability to separate is exceptional.

No question. Top in the class regarding separation ability.

 

[rafael]

No question. Top in the class regarding separation ability.

IMO separation ability and hands are the top two traits that predict NFL success. Too many teams have focused on size/speed and that's just not predictive. Separation ability and hands are the elite traits you want in a top WR pick.

 

[Feverdream]

IMO separation ability and hands are the top two traits that predict NFL success. Too many teams have focused on size/speed and that's just not predictive. Separation ability and hands are the elite traits you want in a top WR pick.

Debatable... but I understand the idea.

Here's where the logic breaks down a bit for me however... nagging injuries, and all NFL players eventually have them, the game is too violent to avoid this. Players whose game is predicated on achieving separation depend on being 100% healthy to get open. By way of an example, this is NOT DVP's game, but he frequently achieves 100 yard days... while never being all that open. A smallish player nursing a hammy or a sore ankle isn't going to have the burst and change of direction to get open any longer... so there goes 90% of their game.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Cheetah]

Debatable... but I understand the idea.

Here's where the logic breaks down a bit for me however... nagging injuries, and all NFL players eventually have them, the game is too violent to avoid this. Players whose game is predicated on achieving separation depend on being 100% healthy to get open. By way of an example, this is NOT DVP's game, but he frequently achieves 100 yard days... while never being all that open. A smallish player nursing a hammy or a sore ankle isn't going to have the burst and change of direction to get open any longer... so there goes 90% of their game.

Just my 2 cents.

Good point.

 

[rafael]

Debatable... but I understand the idea.

Here's where the logic breaks down a bit for me however... nagging injuries, and all NFL players eventually have them, the game is too violent to avoid this. Players whose game is predicated on achieving separation depend on being 100% healthy to get open. By way of an example, this is NOT DVP's game, but he frequently achieves 100 yard days... while never being all that open. A smallish player nursing a hammy or a sore ankle isn't going to have the burst and change of direction to get open any longer... so there goes 90% of their game.

Just my 2 cents.

Factually and statistically, smallish players have fewer nagging injuries, particularly things like a hammy. Players who are great at separation generally take less contact which is probably why they have fewer injuries. Contrast that to guys like Devante Parker. Those guys rely on physicality and tend to have more of those nagging injuries. He misses a ton of games. In fact IIRC Parker missed half of his games his senior season in college in addition to all the games he's missed for the Dolphins. What did Smith miss due to injury? A half? All of these injury concerns break down in the face of facts. Smallish players (outside of RB and OL) factually get fewer injuries than their bigger counter-parts.

 

[Feverdream]

Factually and statistically, smallish players have fewer nagging injuries, particularly things like a hammy. Players who are great at separation generally take less contact which is probably why they have fewer injuries. Contrast that to guys like Devante Parker. Those guys rely on physicality and tend to have more of those nagging injuries. He misses a ton of games. In fact IIRC Parker missed half of his games his senior season in college in addition to all the games he's missed for the Dolphins. What did Smith miss due to injury? A half? All of these injury concerns break down in the face of facts. Smallish players (outside of RB and OL) factually get fewer injuries than their bigger counter-parts.

Could you share some of these statistics please?

 

[rafael]

Could you share some of these statistics please?

I posted one of the articles that looked at injuries correlated to weight in one of these threads. I think it looked at injuries from 2007 to 2015. I'll see if I can find it, but feel free to look if you're interested. But the conclusion was that injuries were lower across almost all positions on the lower ends of the weight ranges (the exceptions were RB, OL and TE). So, for example, that wasn't saying you would want 150# CB. It was saying that in the normal range for an NFL CB (hypothetically 175-210 or so), there were fewer injuries for the players in the lower range than the higher range. It didn't give a concrete reason, but speculated that lighter players put less stress on on tendons, joints and other soft tissues than heavier players. I also think that play style is a large factor. If you're the guy who is always looking for contact then you will be injured more often than the guy whose body is exposed to less contact.

That was just one article, but I have looked at this issue over the last two decades and literally every single study or analysis has failed to find more injuries for smaller players. And several have found more injuries among the heavier players. I always find it interesting b/c fans consistently say that bigger players are less likely to get injured and for most positions there is no factual basis for such a belief and considerable evidence against it.

Edit: here is my old post:

Weight and Injuries

NFL football is a violent game, and traumatic injuries are unfortunate but unavoidable. But are bigger players more likely to be hurt than their smaller peers?

www.footballoutsiders.com

This was a study that related weight and injury correlation across different positions.

"For most positions, higher weight is now associated with a higher injury rate. This provides some evidence for our hypothesis that the greater impact forces heavier players experience lead to higher injury rates.

There are two major exceptions to this trend. Heavier running backs exhibit lower injury rates than their lighter counterparts. This may be because of differences in the way heavier running backs are used. Our running back category included both halfbacks and fullbacks, so instead of an effect of weight we may simply be seeing that fullbacks or heavy halfbacks receive fewer carries and thus have fewer chances to get hurt. Supporting this hypothesis of "confounding by role" is a small negative correlation between weight and rush attempts among running backs in 2016 and 2017.

Injury rates also drop among the heaviest tight ends (271 to 290 pounds). Similar to running backs, confounding by role may be an explanation. The heaviest tight ends may be primarily blockers rather than receivers, and blocking is likely a lower-risk activity than running routes and being tackled post-reception.

The heaviest offensive linemen (more than 350 pounds) also exhibit lower injury rates than their lighter counterparts, but confounding by role is less likely to apply here. I do not have an explanation for this decline besides random chance."

They concluded:

"All else equal, if a team has a choice between a 180-pound defensive back and a 210-pounder, they may want to go for the lighter guy."

I thought this was interesting b/c it is the opposite of what I find most fans believe. Most fans seem to assume that all things being equal you should take the heavier guy. Their conclusions mirror what I have seen in every single study on this over the years. I've seen comments posted about it "being fair to be concerned" about Smith's lower weight, but it really isn't to anybody who is basing their opinion on facts.

 

[Feverdream]

I posted one of the articles that looked at injuries correlated to weight in one of these threads. I think it looked at injuries from 2007 to 2015. I'll see if I can find it, but feel free to look if you're interested. But the conclusion was that injuries were lower across almost all positions on the lower ends of the weight ranges (the exceptions were RB, OL and TE). So, for example, that wasn't saying you would want 150# CB. It was saying that in the normal range for an NFL CB (hypothetically 175-210 or so), there were fewer injuries for the players in the lower range than the higher range. It didn't give a concrete reason, but speculated that lighter players put less stress on on tendons, joints and other soft tissues than heavier players. I also think that play style is a large factor. If you're the guy who is always looking for contact then you will be injured more often than the guy whose body is exposed to less contact.

That was just one article, but I have looked at this issue over the last two decades and literally every single study or analysis has failed to find more injuries for smaller players. And several have found more injuries among the heavier players. I always find it interesting b/c fans consistently say that bigger players are less likely to get injured and for most positions there is no factual basis for such a belief and considerable evidence against it.

Edit: here is my old post:

Weight and Injuries

NFL football is a violent game, and traumatic injuries are unfortunate but unavoidable. But are bigger players more likely to be hurt than their smaller peers?

www.footballoutsiders.com

This was a study that related weight and injury correlation across different positions.

"For most positions, higher weight is now associated with a higher injury rate. This provides some evidence for our hypothesis that the greater impact forces heavier players experience lead to higher injury rates.

There are two major exceptions to this trend. Heavier running backs exhibit lower injury rates than their lighter counterparts. This may be because of differences in the way heavier running backs are used. Our running back category included both halfbacks and fullbacks, so instead of an effect of weight we may simply be seeing that fullbacks or heavy halfbacks receive fewer carries and thus have fewer chances to get hurt. Supporting this hypothesis of "confounding by role" is a small negative correlation between weight and rush attempts among running backs in 2016 and 2017.

Injury rates also drop among the heaviest tight ends (271 to 290 pounds). Similar to running backs, confounding by role may be an explanation. The heaviest tight ends may be primarily blockers rather than receivers, and blocking is likely a lower-risk activity than running routes and being tackled post-reception.

The heaviest offensive linemen (more than 350 pounds) also exhibit lower injury rates than their lighter counterparts, but confounding by role is less likely to apply here. I do not have an explanation for this decline besides random chance."

They concluded:

"All else equal, if a team has a choice between a 180-pound defensive back and a 210-pounder, they may want to go for the lighter guy."

I thought this was interesting b/c it is the opposite of what I find most fans believe. Most fans seem to assume that all things being equal you should take the heavier guy. Their conclusions mirror what I have seen in every single study on this over the years. I've seen comments posted about it "being fair to be concerned" about Smith's lower weight, but it really isn't to anybody who is basing their opinion on facts.

So... if this study is true... how much less likely do you expects that Devonte Smith is to be injured than say... Terrance Marshall?

10%? More? Less?