RAS?

[Stewy]

(04-01-2023, 02:43 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: What I do (or more appropriately, what I would do if I were a scout) is sort the players into tiers based on their play on the field, interviews, intangibles etc (the non workout stuff), and then within those tiers, sort them by RAS.

So if you have two WRs that were similarly productive on the field, good leaders, good interviews etc, but one has a 9.3 RAS and the other has a 7.5 RAS, I'd rate the 9.3 RAS player higher.

I think if a player is productive on the field but puts out an absolutely putrid RAS, it's worth re-considering which tier you're willing to draft that player. Similar for a player that is productive on the field and has a high RAS, maybe you push them a tier higher on your board.

I don't, however, believe having a good RAS score should make you draftable all on its own or move you up the draft board if you do not have the production to make that pick make sense. There are plenty of people who could score a high RAS who don't know the first thing about playing football. You don't want to draft those people.

In short, I would use it to check boxes. "Yep. The fast guy on the field is fast on the track. That makes sense." Or "Yea, that player that looked like he had no lateral agility didn't do well in the agility drills. That makes sense."

If a player looks fast on the field and then runs a 4.6, I'd move WRs who looked fast and tested fast above that player (But I would not move a WR who didn't look fast on the field but looked fast on the track above them, if that makes sense).

You're approach is logical but I think missing a piece.  A good scout simply wouldn't use it as a separator and a check box, but the first prompt to ask "WHY? and WHAT?" are the discrepancies between two players with the same production but vastly different scores / OR two with similar scores but vastly different production.  A scout who can answer those questions is earning their paycheck.

Fans can use it as a check box.....scout need to look deeper.