How much stock do you put into 40 times?

[Ziggy]

Just curious about how much stock people put into 40 times. This seems to be the era of the combine. Watching players fly up the draftboards when they rip off a fast 40 time makes me laugh. There is football speed, and then there is straightline, running in shorts and a tshirt, 40 yard time.

Off the top of my head, I can think of a few players that didn't burn up the stopwatches prior to the draft, but did ok on the field. Terrell Davis (4.7) Frank Gore (4.65) and Ray Lewis (4.8) I haven't researched it yet, but I'm sure we can find more examples of "slower" players excelling in the NFL.

[Devilspawn]

I plead the fif on this one. :tsk:

[Requiem / The Dagda]

You have to evaluate timed speed in comparison to how they play on the field. Some kids play faster in pads. I think that 40 times are important for several positions and should be looked at; but I believe there is a little over assessment that takes place in regards to those times.

Sometimes it's more apt to look at the shuttles and cone drills in regards to seeing how well a particular player at a certain position.

Forty times are important, but they're not the be all end all.

Let's put it this way. Lavelle Hawkins is a solid prospect at wide receiver; and he didn't run better than a 4.51 -- he still has game speed, that's evident to see. Same goes for Harry Douglas, he's a lot faster than the timed 4.54 speed he ran. (Numerous other examples.)

On the other hand, Jordy Nelson ran a 4.51 and it's very evident from the Senior Bowl game and other Kansas State games and clips that he does not run that fast and doesn't play fast on the field.

There's a whole part of the evaluation process that we as outsiders really don't take a look at, but most scouts and GM's can.

So in conclusion: Important for some positions (RB, WR, DB) but not the be all end all.

[mclark]

I don't put much stock in the 40 time. If you have two players ranked equally, then the 40 time might be a difference maker.

Spend 95% of your time evaluating game film. Evaluate football, not track and field. Sometimes the best athletes are NOT the best players. This has been true at every level in every sport I ever played.

[BOSSHOGG30]

40 times help some what, but if you can't tell from watching game tape if a player is fast or not then you shouldn't be a scout.

[Retired_Member_001]

Next to none. As said before, track speed and football speed are different things. I could give you countless amount of names that were good athletes but not good football players.

[lex]

Its become even less reliable over the years due to the fact that a lot of prospects go to these speed camps to help them run a fast 40 time. The problem potentially is that they dont do the same thing once the season starts...they revert back to what they did before they had a 40 time that was enhanced by training speed coaches that were helping them run at the combine. Still though, it does matter but its not paramount for the most part. But if a guy is a good player AND has a fast 40 time, it means more. If a guy is only fast but is unpolished as a player, he's not worthy of wasting a first on.

[Lonestar]

I think 40's perse are totally overrated except perhaps @ CB, yet many on here think that is the only way to rate a player.. or the top reason..

It is a nice thing to know, but I'm hoping the coaching staff are not like some on here only rating a player on 4.2-4.9 speed..

That said I'm not going to draft a 5.3 WR unless he is 6'8" 285 a 44" vertical and has the hands of Eddie Mac.

[mclark]

I think 40's perse are totally overrated except perhaps @ CB, yet many on here think that is the only way to rate a player.. or the top reason..

It is a nice thing to know, but I'm hoping the coaching staff are not like some on here only rating a player on 4.2-4.9 speed..

That said I'm not going to draft a 5.3 WR unless he is 6'8" 285 a 44" vertical and has the hands of Eddie Mac.

I remember how Paymah wasn't supposed to be drafted until he ran a very good 40 at the Combine. Then he shot up the draft boards. Which makes me wonder how a good 40 eliminated all the questions scouts had a bout him after watching him on tape.

How has Paymah turned out? So far not much to shout about. He was our third CB drafted three years ago (3 or 4). When DWilliams was killed, neither Foxworth nor Paymah was felt up to the job, so we traded for a starting cornerback.

I hope Paymah blossoms. I'm just not sure his 40 time really justified his being drafted where he was.

Remember Matt Jones? Ran a big time 40 and leaped in to the first round. How's he done? Ok. But he hasn't really performed like a first round pick I don't think. I think he was projected in the third or fourth round before the Combine. That's probably where he belonged.

[TXBRONC]

I don't put to much stock in 40 times. Because some wide receivers and running backs have great 40 times but play slower than there clocked speed. While some receivers and backs are play faster than their 40 times.

Also great 40 time doesn't mean much if a receiver can't good separation and for a corner if he can't stay with a receiver.

[tubby]

If Todd Blythe ran a 4.4 I would take him in the 2nd round. :coffee:

[Ziggy]

If Todd Blythe ran a 4.4 I would take him in the 2nd round. :coffee:

If Todd Blythe ran a 4.4 he might go in the second round!

[BOSSHOGG30]

If Todd Blythe ran a 4.4 I would take him in the 2nd round. :coffee:

If Todd Blythe had a good QB during his college career, he might go in the 2nd round......forget the forty time.

[haroldthebarrel]

If you want to find a correlation between speed and player success I look more at the 10 yard numbers.

But how fast he plays on the football field has a whole lot more to do with it. Terrell Davis had such excellent football speed. Rod Smith in his late career wasnt a burner but he still managed to score a td on a punt return.

The forty gives you an idea to the potential of the guy, but now with special coaches training these guys I think one should look even more at gametape.
Heck, a lot of football guys beat Gatlin in the forty. And I can guarantee that nobody would beat him in a race no matter how long it is since he trained sprint.
If the overall workout are freakish, then the forty time has some merit.

[tubby]

If Todd Blythe had a good QB during his college career, he might go in the 2nd round......forget the forty time.

Word. Meyer is terrible.

[str8jacket]

If Todd Blythe ran a 4.4 I would take him in the 2nd round. :coffee:

I would take Blythe in the second based off of watching him kill CU the past couple years

[Npba900]

Just curious about how much stock people put into 40 times. This seems to be the era of the combine. Watching players fly up the draftboards when they rip off a fast 40 time makes me laugh. There is football speed, and then there is straightline, running in shorts and a tshirt, 40 yard time.

Off the top of my head, I can think of a few players that didn't burn up the stopwatches prior to the draft, but did ok on the field. Terrell Davis (4.7) Frank Gore (4.65) and Ray Lewis (4.8) I haven't researched it yet, but I'm sure we can find more examples of "slower" players excelling in the NFL.

To some degree, 40 times should not be the only barometer of a players ability and success, especially if you look at the 40 times of players who made the pro bowl and which round they were drafted; in conjunction with the same players with better 40 times who never make it to the pro bowl.

One could also look at the 40 times of the number of players elected to the HOF over the last 10-15 years and the round they were drafted; and compare those 40 times of players who never made it to the HOF.

What better way to judge the relevance of the importance of a players 40 times position by position b/c both the pro bowl selections and induction to HOF proves those players played at the highest degree of excellence and are considered the greatest by their peers.

[sneakers]

Are you trying out for kick coverage team? Then I think it may be a little bit important, but otherwise...