Official 2018 4th round pick: J'mon Moore WR

[Dantés]

Yea Moore was totally off my board. St. Brown, Quinn, and Cain all there for the taking. He better work out because I'm calling bust.

Moore is 6'3" 207, his agility drills and vertical jump were excellent, and he has 127 catches, 2094 yards, and 18 touchdowns against SEC competition the last two years.

What is he doing "off your board?"

 

[gatorpack]

He has that Terrell Owens stride to him once he gets going. This can be good!

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

Moore is 6'3" 207, his agility drills and vertical jump were excellent, and he has 127 catches, 2094 yards, and 18 touchdowns against SEC competition the last two years.

What is he doing "off your board?"

I didn't follow him after the combine when he ran that 4.63 40. The way I do my "scouting" the combine should make me more interested not less, so some players just automatically fall off my boards.

But since you guys posted Pro Day numbers I'm not so steamed about the pick, especially since we got 2 of the guys I wanted anyway.

 

[Dantés]

I didn't follow him after the combine when he ran that 4.63 40. The way I do my "scouting" the combine should make me more interested not less, so some players just automatically fall off my boards.

But since you guys posted Pro Day numbers I'm not so steamed about the pick, especially since we got 2 of the guys I wanted anyway.

I think you need to reasses how you look at the combine.

For one, his official time was 4.60.

For another, his 38” vertical is in the 81st%, his 4.04 short shuttle is in the 88th%, and his 6.56 three cone is in the 97th%. And that’s all with above average size and length.

His workout was one of the most impressive of the receivers at the combine, but you wouldn’t know that if you only look at forty times.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

I think you need to reasses how you look at the combine.

For one, his official time was 4.60.

For another, his 38” vertical is in the 81st%, his 4.04 short shuttle is in the 88th%, and his 6.56 three cone is in the 97th%. And that’s all with above average size and length.

His workout was one of the most impressive of the receivers at the combine, but you wouldn’t know that if you only look at forty times.

The 40 isn't everything but there are certain thresholds I want before I make my board. Moore missed on the 40 and the vertical. For his size I was hoping for a good 40.25"+. I was more unforgiving on that. But my 40 threshold is 4.56, so yea, those two measurables took him off my board. Didn't watch really any game tape as Mizzou wasn't that impressive as a team, but I did hear about the drops. Sue me, I just didn't care for him.

 

[GleefulGary]

How many WR's do you think have a vertical of 40"+? I mean...that's pretty dang selective. 38" at 6'3 is a phenomenal vert.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

I'm very critical on verticals, as a 5"9 CB/FS prospect for Divsion 1AA football I had a 37" vertical, and I'm only 5"9. For him being 6"3, yea I was harsh.

So if I was still my 21 year old self against him on a jump ball, I like my chances; especially with his drops. Might just pick it off on it's way to the ground through his arms.

 

[Dantés]

The 40 isn't everything but there are certain thresholds I want before I make my board. Moore missed on the 40 and the vertical. For his size I was hoping for a good 40.25"+. I was more unforgiving on that. But my 40 threshold is 4.56, so yea, those two measurables took him off my board. Didn't watch really any game tape as Mizzou wasn't that impressive as a team, but I did hear about the drops. Sue me, I just didn't care for him.

So you eliminate 80+% of receivers based on their vertical jump alone then?

 

[GleefulGary]

I'm very critical on verticals, as a 5"9 CB/FS prospect for Divsion 1AA football I had a 37" vertical, and I'm only 5"9. For him being 6"3, yea I was harsh.

So if I was still my 21 year old self against him on a jump ball, I like my chances; especially with his drops. Might just pick it off on it's way to the ground through his arms.

That makes no sense. You're 5'9 with a 37" vertical, he's 6" taller than you, and his vertical is 1" greater than yours...but you like your chances on a jump ball?! Dude, cmon. Btw, where'd you play? I had a lot of friends play in the Big Sky Conference. Love me some FCS football.

But anyways, usually smaller guys have better verts because of the body mass difference. But check the combine...the amount of WR's with a 40" vert is pretty minimal.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

That makes no sense. You're 5'9 with a 37" vertical, he's 6" taller than you, and his vertical is 1" greater than yours...but you like your chances on a jump ball?! Dude, cmon. Btw, where'd you play? I had a lot of friends play in the Big Sky Conference. Love me some FCS football.

But anyways, usually smaller guys have better verts because of the body mass difference. But check the combine...the amount of WR's with a 40" vert is pretty minimal.

Gotta have confidence when the avg WR is 4-6" taller than you, lol.

But most WRs don't use their hops as much as they should, especially when they know they have height advantages. I've lost more jump balls to the QB making a throw that puts me out of position than the WR making the boxed out catch.

But I walked into Liberty in the Big South but got cut. So my career was over after it barely began. I was too much of a gambler on baiting because I was used to being the faster guy in high school and I used to stare down the QB whenever I was in the slot/outside, bad habits from playing FS. And I was a below average tackler. That's my own scouting report, lol

 

[AmishMafia]

The 40 isn't everything but there are certain thresholds I want before I make my board. Moore missed on the 40 and the vertical. For his size I was hoping for a good 40.25"+. I was more unforgiving on that. But my 40 threshold is 4.56, so yea, those two measurables took him off my board. Didn't watch really any game tape as Mizzou wasn't that impressive as a team, but I did hear about the drops. Sue me, I just didn't care for him.

Zoiks! You are finicky on your WRs. Hell, Jerry Rice would not have made your board.

Moore has a real good chance to play as a rookie. I'm excited about the dimension he may bring to the offense. Nice pick Gute!

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

Zoiks! You are finicky on your WRs. Hell, Jerry Rice would not have made your board.

It's relative, I only expected that vertical relative to his height/weight/body type. I obviously wouldn't expect every WR to perform as similar. But hey that's why they don't pay me the big buck; but if they did my Drafts would be far more exciting. You'd be like, "We are killing it every year! SB or Bust!"

 

[AmishMafia]

It's relative, I only expected that vertical relative to his height/weight/body type. I obviously wouldn't expect every WR to perform as similar. But hey that's why they don't pay me the big buck; but if they did my Drafts would be far more exciting. You'd be like, "We are killing it every year! SB or Bust!"

Is the vertical easier or harder for a taller person?

 

[Dantés]

It's relative, I only expected that vertical relative to his height/weight/body type. I obviously wouldn't expect every WR to perform as similar. But hey that's why they don't pay me the big buck; but if they did my Drafts would be far more exciting. You'd be like, "We are killing it every year! SB or Bust!"

Realize that vertical jump numbers are based on a player's initial reach. A 6'3" player does not have a 5" advantage over a 5'10" in that test because they start by measuring the player's reach and then measure how high above their own reach that player can jump. So it doesn't make any sense to judge verticals different based on height. The reach measurement equalizes the metric.

 

[GleefulGary]

It's relative, I only expected that vertical relative to his height/weight/body type. I obviously wouldn't expect every WR to perform as similar. But hey that's why they don't pay me the big buck; but if they did my Drafts would be far more exciting. You'd be like, "We are killing it every year! SB or Bust!"

You know that verticals don't depend on your height, right?

So how a vertical works is you take your standing reach. So lets say at 5'9" you have 29" arms, your standing reach is probably like 92-93", when you jump you hit 129-130". That means your vertical is 37". For Moore, he was about 6'3" with about 33" arms. We'll guess his standing reach is about 102", plus a 38" vert means he's getting to around 140" total. That's how verticals work.

 

[AmishMafia]

You know that verticals don't depend on your height, right?

So how a vertical works is you take your standing reach. So lets say at 5'9" you have 29" arms, your standing reach is probably like 92-93", when you jump you hit 129-130". That means your vertical is 37". For Moore, he was about 6'3" with about 33" arms. We'll guess his standing reach is about 102", plus a 38" vert means he's getting to around 140" total. That's how verticals work.

But it does, from a biomechanics standpoint.

A taller person, with longer legs, can transfer more energy for a longer time into jumping.

On the negative side, longer legs have a elongated fulcrum which decreases angular momentum at the knee given the same torque.

Not sure how that balances out, but my thinking is taller people have an advantage. Or, more probably, a person with a greater leg to height ratio has the advantage. Just guessing though.

 

[Dantés]

But it does, from a biomechanics standpoint.

A taller person, with longer legs, can transfer more energy for a longer time into jumping.

On the negative side, longer legs have a elongated fulcrum which decreases angular momentum at the knee given the same torque.

Not sure how that balances out, but my thinking is taller people have an advantage. Or, more probably, a person with a greater leg to height ratio has the advantage. Just guessing though.

Taller people are also almost always heavier, which is a disadvantage.

 

[GleefulGary]

But it does, from a biomechanics standpoint.

A taller person, with longer legs, can transfer more energy for a longer time into jumping.

On the negative side, longer legs have a elongated fulcrum which decreases angular momentum at the knee given the same torque.

Not sure how that balances out, but my thinking is taller people have an advantage. Or, more probably, a person with a greater leg to height ratio has the advantage. Just guessing though.

Not always. Taller people typically have more mass. Just like shorter arms make it easier to bench press, shorter legs make it easier to jump higher. Same amount of strength packed into a smaller mass results in a different force level. It's why the tall guys in the NBA almost always have smaller verticals than your tiny guys.

 

[AmishMafia]

Not always. Taller people typically have more mass. Just like shorter arms make it easier to bench press, shorter legs make it easier to jump higher. Same amount of strength packed into a smaller mass results in a different force level. It's why the tall guys in the NBA almost always have smaller verticals than your tiny guys.

If you look at the highest verticals from the combine, they are typically in the upper middle heights. Eyeballing it, an inch or two over average.

Weight is definitely a factor I should have included with the other factors I listed.

Another I purposely omitted is stretch factor. I'm not sure how they measure static reach, but it seems a player could underperform by not fully reaching. Then when jumping, stretch to maximum for the greatest differential.

The point i was trying to make is there are a bunch of factors involved. The test is meant to gauge explosiveness and not how high you can reach. I know there are formulas out there that account for height, arm length, and weight to calculate power or twitch.

 

[Dantés]

If you look at the highest verticals from the combine, they are typically in the upper middle heights. Eyeballing it, an inch or two over average.

Weight is definitely a factor I should have included with the other factors I listed.

Another I purposely omitted is stretch factor. I'm not sure how they measure static reach, but it seems a player could underperform by not fully reaching. Then when jumping, stretch to maximum for the greatest differential.

The point i was trying to make is there are a bunch of factors involved. The test is meant to gauge explosiveness and not how high you can reach. I know there are formulas out there that account for height, arm length, and weight to calculate power or twitch.

Which is all well and good. But more to the point, it came up because he thought the vertical measured how high a person reaches on a universal standard and not how high they can jump off the ground.

 

[AmishMafia]

Which is all well and good. But more to the point, it came up because he thought the vertical measured how high a person reaches on a universal standard and not how high they can jump off the ground.

I'm not sure if that is what he meant. That's why I asked him what I did. If he is using one of these twitch metrics, he very well could have anticipated a better vertical.

Moore, though, was very impressive in this category, outdoing most of the successful NFL receivers.

 

[GleefulGary]

Moore had a vertical bested by only about 20% of recorded (legitimate) NFL WR's.

 

[Jerellh528]

How many WR's do you think have a vertical of 40"+? I mean...that's pretty dang selective. 38" at 6'3 is a phenomenal vert.

In the past 10 years there’s only been 32 wrs to post 40+ verticals at the combine and not a single pro bowler amongst them, in fact most of the list are no namers. In this years draft D.J Chark was the only one.

 

[Poppa San]

So again our GM F>R259 left the Packers with a colossal hole at WR.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

To answer everyone, I know I'm illogical on my vertical scenario, but I'm allowed to be eccentric, just like any real NFL GM.

So again our GM F>R259 left the Packers with a colossal hole at WR.

I still would have drafted St. Brown no later than the 4th, and Valdez-Scantling in the 6th or 7th. But the Browns jumping up to draft Callaway in the 5th? I shat a brick.