Clemson’s Vic Beasley certainly put on a heck of a show Sunday at the 2015 NFL Scouting Combine. Not only did he show up in Indianapolis weighing 246 pounds, he also posted some fantastic numbers at that weight.
While these are only numbers that should reinforce what we all did or didn’t see on tape, I thought we would have some fun with them and put them into perspective by comparing them to a several other player’s numbers.
For starters, you probably remember me writing several times about the explosive rating that Pat Kirwan of SiriusXM NFL Radio likes to use. In short, that number is derived by adding the bench reps to the vertical and broad jump numbers. Kirwan always says that a player with a score of 70 or better is very explosive. As you can see in the table below, Beasley’s explosive rating is a majestic 86.83.
Houston Texans defensive end J.J. Watt registered an 81.00 explosive rating at the 2011 NFL Scouting Combine. I have included his numbers along with a few other current NFL players in the list below for comparison purposes. As far as players that worked out Sunday that have a completed explosive rating close to Beasley’s, Owamagbe Odighizuwa and Trey Flowers both are a distant second with 74.58 ratings.
You will probably notice the speed score column below as well. That score metric was introduced back in 2008 by Football Outsiders for the purpose of evaluating running back draft prospects. It was created to compare smaller running backs to larger ones and it incorporates an official time in the 40-yard dash with the player’s weight. While it was created for running backs, I like to use it for all players just for comparison purposes.
If you sort the table below you will see that Odighizuwa has the best speed score of all the players listed. Beasley is tied with Denver Broncos linebacker Von Miller for second in this group of players and Dante Fowler Jr. is not far behind both of them. Once again, these are just numbers, but they are remarkable nonetheless.
There is also a LA column below and that stands for lateral agility. That number is derived by adding a player’s short-shuttle time to his 3-cone time and the lower the number the better. When using this number as a means of comparison, however, it’s always good to consider the weight of a player as you would never expect one that weighs 280 pounds to post a score as low as one that that weighs 245 pounds. With that disclaimer out of the way, you can see that Beasely easily checked that box on Sunday as well.
So now that we have firmly established that Beasley was a combine warrior while in Indianapolis, we need to look at the knocks on him. I believe Lance Zierlein summarized them perfectly in the profile that he wrote on him on NFL.com.
Unlikely to convert speed to power against NFL tackles. Wins with athleticism on majority of his sacks. Rarely transitions from speed rush to spin as an instinctual pass-rush counter. Lacks ideal arm length. Too often content to stay blocked if pass rush stalls out. Needs to shed blocks more consistently against run.
If you’ve seen Beasley’s tape you already know that he can get after the quarterback. However, you will also see that he does generally win with speed and finesse and not so much with power as Zierlein stated. He also appears to have problems at times setting the edge against the run.
Now, Beasely’s combine measurables tell us that he should have enough power and explosiveness to win in all of those areas of his game and that’s something that NFL coaches will have to work on getting him to do at the next level, and especially if he’s going to be an every-down weakside outside linebacker in a 3-4 defense.
Beasley certainly won the combine Sunday and it won’t be long until we see whether or not those great numbers that he posted show up on Sunday in the NFL.
|Wright, Gabe||300||5.07||34||26.5||8′ 4″||7.73||4.56||90.81||68.83||12.29|
|Fowler Jr., Dante||261||4.60||19||32.5||9’4″||7.40||4.32||116.58||60.83||11.72|
|Wagenmann, Zack||247||4.82||14||37.5||9′ 1″||7.07||4.26||91.52||60.58||11.33|
|Walton, Leterrius||319||5.25||25||27||8′ 7″||7.91||4.78||83.98||60.58||12.69|