Cam Davis 40

[gcane44]

Cam is a great talent, but why do we have to bend over backwards to defend any perceived criticism. He's not a perfect RB prospect. Similar as a prospect to Mark Walton is pretty accurate IMO, which is a great thing.

 

[DapperSlapper]

Any high schooler that runs a laser 4.5 is elite. There is no way around that. Only 15 rbs ran a 4.59 or faster at the 2016 Nfl combine. However, it is very unlikely that his time drops to a 4.4 by the time he leaves Miami

Yes, but only 22 RB's ran the 40 at the 2016 NFL combine. So another way to say that is - "68% of the RB's at the 2016 NFL combine ran better than a 4.59".

At this point - If Davis ran a 4.50 at 190 lbs., that would be elite. If he ran a 4.59 at 215 lbs., that would be elite. But a 4.59 at 190 lbs. is a good time - not elite.

You can't compare FAT (laser) times to NFL combine. They are not simply not comparable. The NFL does not release the FAT times because they don't want NFL stars in the making to have the same times as high school or college kids. 4.59 laser could easily be 4.5 at the NFL combine. It could also be sub 4.5. It could possibly be 4.59, though that is doubtful. There is simply no comparison because the NFL insists on releasing only times recorded using a timing method that relies in part on human action.

 

[Papa_Cane]

LOL at using one 40 time to judge if someone has elite speed or not. Football is played with a helmet and pads. Watch the god**** tape ...nobody is catching Cam once he's gone.

"Wellll if it was clocked .8 seconds faster only then would he have ELITE speed"

Yea. A 3.79 40 yard dash would be pretty epic.

On a serious note: I echo the similar sentiments that others have already mentioned. Davis is 16-17, with muscles on top of muscles and running as fast as some NFL players. Any way you slice it 4.59 is really fast and he has room to improve (which is scary) His film looks great and paired with Lingard and the monsters we are going to have on the O-Line... will be fun to watch. . . R.I.P. ACC defenses

 

[bshaw28]

Any high schooler that runs a laser 4.5 is elite. There is no way around that. Only 15 rbs ran a 4.59 or faster at the 2016 Nfl combine. However, it is very unlikely that his time drops to a 4.4 by the time he leaves Miami

Yes, but only 22 RB's ran the 40 at the 2016 NFL combine. So another way to say that is - "68% of the RB's at the 2016 NFL combine ran better than a 4.59".

At this point - If Davis ran a 4.50 at 190 lbs., that would be elite. If he ran a 4.59 at 215 lbs., that would be elite. But a 4.59 at 190 lbs. is a good time - not elite.

So you're comparing 40 times of 21-23 year olds to a 16-17 year old and what's elite ?

This is the same guy who said Scarlett is better than Walton. So we got a troll or just a porster on our hands.

Not trolling - just responding to Kyle who used the NFL Combine as his comparison. Lu and others also made posts using RB's at the NFL combine as a comparison. It's a fair comparison to make.

My point was I thought Kyle saying "Only 15" skewed the argument vs. saying "15 out of 22" RB's at the 2016 NFL Combine ran better than a 4.59.

I think the 40 time you run coming into college is, more often than not, basically the 40 time you'll run when leaving college. Duke bulked up and lost speed. Do you think Yearby got significantly faster since he's been at Miami? I don't. Has Walton? I think Walton came in as a 4.6 guy and will leave a 4.6 guy.

But consider these 2 things:

1) Say Davis improves his 40 time from 4.59 to 4.50. That would be great! But then you could still say 10 of the 22, 45%, of the RB's at the 2016 NFL Combine ran better than a 4.50. It sounds like it moves the needle more than it does.

2) At the Orlando Event, Malcolm Davidson was a 5'9" 185 RB who ran a 4.44. Similar size, but .15 faster. So if 4.59 is "elite", what adjective do you use to describe a 4.44? Mind-blowing? Inconceivable?

In my opinion the superlatives get out of hand too often, too quickly. My slidng scale would look something like this if you're checking in at 5'10" 190:

4.50 - elite
4.55 - great
4.60 - good
4.65 - ok
4.70 - bad

If Cam's 4.59 is "elite", then is Lingard's 4.63 time a great time as well? It's only .04 slower. And what is a 4.44 40 time?

 

[ageezy]

Cam is a great talent, but why do we have to bend over backwards to defend any perceived criticism. He's not a perfect RB prospect. Similar as a prospect to Mark Walton is pretty accurate IMO, which is a great thing.

i pointed this out earlier, i don't think he breaks as many tackles as walton. . . but his top end speed is elite . . . he's running away from guys in his clips . . . but in regards to natural vision and running ability, he's average at best

 

[bshaw28]

What was Emmitt Smiths 40 or Jerome Bettis or LeVeon Bells?

Yup. The list is long of great NFL RBs who never ran 4.5s (at least legit electronically-timed).

Yes - but the problem is Smith retired 15 years ago, Bettis played at 5'11" 255, and Bell plays at 6'1" 225.

Of the Top 25 NFL rushers in 2016, 2 played below 215 lbs. - Freeman and McCoy.

If you don't have size you better have speed. If you don't have speed, you better have size. Most NFL RB's have both size and speed. McCoy has speed. Freeman has neither size or speed. That's 1 out of 25.

It's a sliding scale. That's why Robert Burns running a 4.57 at 215 is "elite", but Davis running a 4.59 at 190 is "good".

As others have mentioned, Davis looks like he's built pretty solid right now. He looks like he can go to 200 or 205 without losing speed, but after that, added bulk may cause him to lose a step. From their frames, Lingard looks a little slight still (at least his legs do) - so it looks like it'll be easier for Lingard to put on 30 lbs. without sacrificing any speed than it would be for Davis to put on 20 lbs. and not sacrifice any speed.

 

[plantcity3]

Any high schooler that runs a laser 4.5 is elite. There is no way around that. Only 15 rbs ran a 4.59 or faster at the 2016 Nfl combine. However, it is very unlikely that his time drops to a 4.4 by the time he leaves Miami

It's not unlikely. Ahmmon richards ran a 4.7 in highschool and now he's the fastest on the team running 4.3-4.43 range. Herb waters had a similar increase in his 40 too

It is not humanely possible to slash .4 off a 40 yard dash in one year fam

Lol I read that and was like I know Brock doesnt honestly believe that....

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

 

[Harry Heinous]

LOL at using one 40 time to judge if someone has elite speed or not. Football is played with a helmet and pads. Watch the god**** tape ...nobody is catching Cam once he's gone.

"Wellll if it was clocked .8 seconds faster only then would he have ELITE speed"

Yea. A 3.79 40 yard dash would be pretty epic.

On a serious note: I echo the similar sentiments that others have already mentioned. Davis is 16-17, with muscles on top of muscles and running as fast as some NFL players. Any way you slice it 4.59 is really fast and he has room to improve (which is scary) His film looks great and paired with Lingard and the monsters we are going to have on the O-Line... will be fun to watch. . . R.I.P. ACC defenses

Hah! My b .08 !

 

[brock]

Any high schooler that runs a laser 4.5 is elite. There is no way around that. Only 15 rbs ran a 4.59 or faster at the 2016 Nfl combine. However, it is very unlikely that his time drops to a 4.4 by the time he leaves Miami

It's not unlikely. Ahmmon richards ran a 4.7 in highschool and now he's the fastest on the team running 4.3-4.43 range. Herb waters had a similar increase in his 40 too

It is not humanely possible to slash .4 off a 40 yard dash in one year fam

Lol I read that and was like I know Brock doesnt honestly believe that....

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

That was his reported time from some camp that he did in highschool. I didn't say it was his senior year....

 

[The Franchise]

Any high schooler that runs a laser 4.5 is elite. There is no way around that. Only 15 rbs ran a 4.59 or faster at the 2016 Nfl combine. However, it is very unlikely that his time drops to a 4.4 by the time he leaves Miami

Yes, but only 22 RB's ran the 40 at the 2016 NFL combine. So another way to say that is - "68% of the RB's at the 2016 NFL combine ran better than a 4.59".

At this point - If Davis ran a 4.50 at 190 lbs., that would be elite. If he ran a 4.59 at 215 lbs., that would be elite. But a 4.59 at 190 lbs. is a good time - not elite.

So you're comparing 40 times of 21-23 year olds to a 16-17 year old and what's elite ?

This is the same guy who said Scarlett is better than Walton. So we got a troll or just a porster on our hands.

Not trolling - just responding to Kyle who used the NFL Combine as his comparison. Lu and others also made posts using RB's at the NFL combine as a comparison. It's a fair comparison to make.

My point was I thought Kyle saying "Only 15" skewed the argument vs. saying "15 out of 22" RB's at the 2016 NFL Combine ran better than a 4.59.

I think the 40 time you run coming into college is, more often than not, basically the 40 time you'll run when leaving college. Duke bulked up and lost speed. Do you think Yearby got significantly faster since he's been at Miami? I don't. Has Walton? I think Walton came in as a 4.6 guy and will leave a 4.6 guy.

But consider these 2 things:

1) Say Davis improves his 40 time from 4.59 to 4.50. That would be great! But then you could still say 10 of the 22, 45%, of the RB's at the 2016 NFL Combine ran better than a 4.50. It sounds like it moves the needle more than it does.

2) At the Orlando Event, Malcolm Davidson was a 5'9" 185 RB who ran a 4.44. Similar size, but .15 faster. So if 4.59 is "elite", what adjective do you use to describe a 4.44? Mind-blowing? Inconceivable?

In my opinion the superlatives get out of hand too often, too quickly. My slidng scale would look something like this if you're checking in at 5'10" 190:

4.50 - elite
4.55 - great
4.60 - good
4.65 - ok
4.70 - bad

If Cam's 4.59 is "elite", then is Lingard's 4.63 time a great time as well? It's only .04 slower. And what is a 4.44 40 time?

You're continuing to ignore the different timing methods used at the Nike events and the NFL combine that DapperSlapper has pointed out. That's a really huge factor that people continue to gloss over, as the NFL combine method accounts for a significant reduction in 40 times.

Another big factor is that guys spend a couple months training for the NFL combine. They train very specifically for the events at the combine most importantly the 40.

The only true way to compare 40 times is from the same day in the same conditions at the same event. Once you start cross-polenating different variables such as field, weather, wind and method of timing (FAT v. Hand start/stop), then the comparisons become meaningless.

 

[Harry Heinous]

^ Precisely

 

[3rd-43]

^ Pizza the Hut



Starving now.

 

[teddywestside]

What was Emmitt Smiths 40 or Jerome Bettis or LeVeon Bells?

Yup. The list is long of great NFL RBs who never ran 4.5s (at least legit electronically-timed).

Yes - but the problem is Smith retired 15 years ago, Bettis played at 5'11" 255, and Bell plays at 6'1" 225.

Of the Top 25 NFL rushers in 2016, 2 played below 215 lbs. - Freeman and McCoy.

If you don't have size you better have speed. If you don't have speed, you better have size. Most NFL RB's have both size and speed. McCoy has speed. Freeman has neither size or speed. That's 1 out of 25.

It's a sliding scale. That's why Robert Burns running a 4.57 at 215 is "elite", but Davis running a 4.59 at 190 is "good".

As others have mentioned, Davis looks like he's built pretty solid right now. He looks like he can go to 200 or 205 without losing speed, but after that, added bulk may cause him to lose a step. From their frames, Lingard looks a little slight still (at least his legs do) - so it looks like it'll be easier for Lingard to put on 30 lbs. without sacrificing any speed than it would be for Davis to put on 20 lbs. and not sacrifice any speed.

Epic trolljob. Very crafty. Except Davis and Lingard are gonna make you look like an utter ****** in a year or two. lulz.

 

[Hegemon]

I'd love to see these guys 40 times in full pads.

In fact every event should be in full pads.

 

[Harry Heinous]

^ Pizza the Hut



Starving now.

 

[bshaw28]

Laser times are, typically, .24 slower than hand times.

So, for any of y'all suggesting 4.59 and 4.63 laser times are not "elite" ... Make the adjustment, and ask yourself how you feel about a 4.35 40 for Davis and a 4.39 for Lingard.

And those kids are still in the 11th grade ...

Some of yall need to stay off of Playstation, or pay attention to the NFL combine 40 times.

4.6 on the laser is elite for a high school kid.

Where are you getting .24 from? Here's a article comparing the Hand Held times vs, the Electronic times at the NFL combine (scroll down to see the times). The difference is about .05 - .10.

2015 NFL Combine: Real-time 40s to be used for first time - CBSSports.com

As a comparison - here's The Opening numbers for Miami RB's:

Davis - 5'10" 190 4.59
Burns - 5'11" 215 4.57
Homer - 5'11" 195 4.48
Walton - 5'9" 182 4.63
Yearby - 5'9" 179 4.58
Gus - 6'2" 221 4.58


But here's some of the Elite at The Opening:

Dalvin Cook - 5'11" 196 4.46
Sony Michel - 5'11" 194 4.46
Nick Chubb - 5'11" 217 4.47
Joe Mixon - 6'1" 209 4.53


I know I sound like a hater - but saying 4.59 is "elite" just isn't fair to the kid. It's setting expectations too high. I'm excited about our 2018 RB's, but I can already see the hype train starting to get a little out of control.

I'm totally on board with saying Davis is a Walton/Yearby level/type of talent. But he's definitely not in the the Duke/Cook category. I think the Michel/Collins/Scarlett category is over-hyping him a bit too IMO.

I posted times from that same article the other day for a different purpose. You apparently don't understand that the combine times released are not "laser" times. They are laser start, hand stop. Look at the times in that article you linked - they are not comparing hand times to laser times. They are comparing hand time to what they release at the combine, which is laser start, hand stop. Some of those differ by .12 (maybe more, I didn't double check). That's with only one human reaction in the timing. Use 2 human reactions (hand timing), and the difference could easily be .24 between FAT and hand timing.

I'm with you it's not a completely fair comparison, and I understand it's different methods.

Is there something wrong with my thinking here?

The article says it's "Started by Hand, Stopped by Beam". The Average difference in the times listed in the article (HH vs. ET) is .06.

So .06 difference with 1 Human reaction (Electronic Time) vs. 2 Human reactions (Hand Held)

Would it be safe to assume it would be .06 x 2 = .12 difference on average using 2 human reactions (Hand Held vs. Laser Time)?
Would it be safe to assume it would be .06 x 1 = .06 difference using 1 human reaction (Electronic Time) vs. 0 human reactions (Laser Time)?

If so, a 4.59 LT 40 would be a 4.53 ET 40 at the combine.

MIATL said "Laser times are, typically, .24 slower than hand times". And I disagreed with that. My post said the difference would .5 - .10, but doing the math, I think the average would be .12. That's a huge difference from .24.

Some of the ET vs HH times were off by .12. To assume the HH vs. LT would be off .24 assumes the person recording the HH time would be off by both .12 (the extreme) on the start, and off by .12 (the extreme) on the finish. It's possible, but far from typical.

.24 assumes the extreme, while .12 assumes the average. I think the Average would be a better measurement IMO.

So I don't agree that a guy who runs a 4.60 40 Laser Time "typically" would time at a 4.36 Hand Held time. I just don't buy that anyone at these events would watch a guy run a 4.6, look down at their stopwatch and see a 4.36 and think "that seems legit"

 

[bshaw28]

Any high schooler that runs a laser 4.5 is elite. There is no way around that. Only 15 rbs ran a 4.59 or faster at the 2016 Nfl combine. However, it is very unlikely that his time drops to a 4.4 by the time he leaves Miami

Yes, but only 22 RB's ran the 40 at the 2016 NFL combine. So another way to say that is - "68% of the RB's at the 2016 NFL combine ran better than a 4.59".

At this point - If Davis ran a 4.50 at 190 lbs., that would be elite. If he ran a 4.59 at 215 lbs., that would be elite. But a 4.59 at 190 lbs. is a good time - not elite.

So you're comparing 40 times of 21-23 year olds to a 16-17 year old and what's elite ?

This is the same guy who said Scarlett is better than Walton. So we got a troll or just a porster on our hands.

Not trolling - just responding to Kyle who used the NFL Combine as his comparison. Lu and others also made posts using RB's at the NFL combine as a comparison. It's a fair comparison to make.

My point was I thought Kyle saying "Only 15" skewed the argument vs. saying "15 out of 22" RB's at the 2016 NFL Combine ran better than a 4.59.

I think the 40 time you run coming into college is, more often than not, basically the 40 time you'll run when leaving college. Duke bulked up and lost speed. Do you think Yearby got significantly faster since he's been at Miami? I don't. Has Walton? I think Walton came in as a 4.6 guy and will leave a 4.6 guy.

But consider these 2 things:

1) Say Davis improves his 40 time from 4.59 to 4.50. That would be great! But then you could still say 10 of the 22, 45%, of the RB's at the 2016 NFL Combine ran better than a 4.50. It sounds like it moves the needle more than it does.

2) At the Orlando Event, Malcolm Davidson was a 5'9" 185 RB who ran a 4.44. Similar size, but .15 faster. So if 4.59 is "elite", what adjective do you use to describe a 4.44? Mind-blowing? Inconceivable?

In my opinion the superlatives get out of hand too often, too quickly. My slidng scale would look something like this if you're checking in at 5'10" 190:

4.50 - elite
4.55 - great
4.60 - good
4.65 - ok
4.70 - bad

If Cam's 4.59 is "elite", then is Lingard's 4.63 time a great time as well? It's only .04 slower. And what is a 4.44 40 time?

You're continuing to ignore the different timing methods used at the Nike events and the NFL combine that DapperSlapper has pointed out. That's a really huge factor that people continue to gloss over, as the NFL combine method accounts for a significant reduction in 40 times.

Another big factor is that guys spend a couple months training for the NFL combine. They train very specifically for the events at the combine most importantly the 40.

The only true way to compare 40 times is from the same day in the same conditions at the same event. Once you start cross-polenating different variables such as field, weather, wind and method of timing (FAT v. Hand start/stop), then the comparisons become meaningless.

If this is true, then saying the 4.59 Davis is "elite" is pointless discussion, right? Because the other times haven't been posted yet. Maybe 4.59 was the fastest time for an RB and it looks great. Maybe 5 RB's ran a 4.4 and a 4.59 doesn't look so good.

And it would make comparing his 4.59 against any other 40 time anyone not at this event has ever ran meaningless?

I understand different variables - but I'm not agreeing with the amount those variables have an effect.

I think 4.4 guys generally run 4.4's under any condition - same for 4.5 guys, 4.6 guys. Maybe a guy who generally runs a 4.50 has a bad day and runs a 4.60. Or he runs a 4.50 Hand Held time, but then runs a 4.62 Laser Time. I can see all that.

But players are going to run in the same basic range no matter what the conditions or timing method. Not that it never happens, but it would be very unusual for a 4.4 guy to randomly put up 4.6, no matter what the condition.

 

[The Franchise]

Yes, but only 22 RB's ran the 40 at the 2016 NFL combine. So another way to say that is - "68% of the RB's at the 2016 NFL combine ran better than a 4.59".

At this point - If Davis ran a 4.50 at 190 lbs., that would be elite. If he ran a 4.59 at 215 lbs., that would be elite. But a 4.59 at 190 lbs. is a good time - not elite.

So you're comparing 40 times of 21-23 year olds to a 16-17 year old and what's elite ?

This is the same guy who said Scarlett is better than Walton. So we got a troll or just a porster on our hands.

Not trolling - just responding to Kyle who used the NFL Combine as his comparison. Lu and others also made posts using RB's at the NFL combine as a comparison. It's a fair comparison to make.

My point was I thought Kyle saying "Only 15" skewed the argument vs. saying "15 out of 22" RB's at the 2016 NFL Combine ran better than a 4.59.

I think the 40 time you run coming into college is, more often than not, basically the 40 time you'll run when leaving college. Duke bulked up and lost speed. Do you think Yearby got significantly faster since he's been at Miami? I don't. Has Walton? I think Walton came in as a 4.6 guy and will leave a 4.6 guy.

But consider these 2 things:

1) Say Davis improves his 40 time from 4.59 to 4.50. That would be great! But then you could still say 10 of the 22, 45%, of the RB's at the 2016 NFL Combine ran better than a 4.50. It sounds like it moves the needle more than it does.

2) At the Orlando Event, Malcolm Davidson was a 5'9" 185 RB who ran a 4.44. Similar size, but .15 faster. So if 4.59 is "elite", what adjective do you use to describe a 4.44? Mind-blowing? Inconceivable?

In my opinion the superlatives get out of hand too often, too quickly. My slidng scale would look something like this if you're checking in at 5'10" 190:

4.50 - elite
4.55 - great
4.60 - good
4.65 - ok
4.70 - bad

If Cam's 4.59 is "elite", then is Lingard's 4.63 time a great time as well? It's only .04 slower. And what is a 4.44 40 time?

You're continuing to ignore the different timing methods used at the Nike events and the NFL combine that DapperSlapper has pointed out. That's a really huge factor that people continue to gloss over, as the NFL combine method accounts for a significant reduction in 40 times.

Another big factor is that guys spend a couple months training for the NFL combine. They train very specifically for the events at the combine most importantly the 40.

The only true way to compare 40 times is from the same day in the same conditions at the same event. Once you start cross-polenating different variables such as field, weather, wind and method of timing (FAT v. Hand start/stop), then the comparisons become meaningless.

If this is true, then saying the 4.59 Davis is "elite" is pointless discussion, right? Because the other times haven't been posted yet. Maybe 4.59 was the fastest time for an RB and it looks great. Maybe 5 RB's ran a 4.4 and a 4.59 doesn't look so good.

And it would make comparing his 4.59 against any other 40 time anyone not at this event has ever ran meaningless?

I understand different variables - but I'm not agreeing with the amount those variables have an effect.

I think 4.4 guys generally run 4.4's under any condition - same for 4.5 guys, 4.6 guys. Maybe a guy who generally runs a 4.50 has a bad day and runs a 4.60. Or he runs a 4.50 Hand Held time, but then runs a 4.62 Laser Time. I can see all that.

But players are going to run in the same basic range no matter what the conditions or timing method. Not that it never happens, but it would be very unusual for a 4.4 guy to randomly put up 4.6, no matter what the condition.

True. It's goofy to call Davis's 40 elite without knowing what the other guys ran. As it turned out, Davis ran a 4.64, which clearly wasn't elite at the Miami Opening in comparison to the other times.

I stand by my other comments that it's goofy to compare 40 times from different events with different timing methods and different conditions.

 

[DapperSlapper]

Laser times are, typically, .24 slower than hand times.

So, for any of y'all suggesting 4.59 and 4.63 laser times are not "elite" ... Make the adjustment, and ask yourself how you feel about a 4.35 40 for Davis and a 4.39 for Lingard.

And those kids are still in the 11th grade ...

Some of yall need to stay off of Playstation, or pay attention to the NFL combine 40 times.

4.6 on the laser is elite for a high school kid.

Where are you getting .24 from? Here's a article comparing the Hand Held times vs, the Electronic times at the NFL combine (scroll down to see the times). The difference is about .05 - .10.

2015 NFL Combine: Real-time 40s to be used for first time - CBSSports.com

As a comparison - here's The Opening numbers for Miami RB's:

Davis - 5'10" 190 4.59
Burns - 5'11" 215 4.57
Homer - 5'11" 195 4.48
Walton - 5'9" 182 4.63
Yearby - 5'9" 179 4.58
Gus - 6'2" 221 4.58


But here's some of the Elite at The Opening:

Dalvin Cook - 5'11" 196 4.46
Sony Michel - 5'11" 194 4.46
Nick Chubb - 5'11" 217 4.47
Joe Mixon - 6'1" 209 4.53


I know I sound like a hater - but saying 4.59 is "elite" just isn't fair to the kid. It's setting expectations too high. I'm excited about our 2018 RB's, but I can already see the hype train starting to get a little out of control.

I'm totally on board with saying Davis is a Walton/Yearby level/type of talent. But he's definitely not in the the Duke/Cook category. I think the Michel/Collins/Scarlett category is over-hyping him a bit too IMO.

I posted times from that same article the other day for a different purpose. You apparently don't understand that the combine times released are not "laser" times. They are laser start, hand stop. Look at the times in that article you linked - they are not comparing hand times to laser times. They are comparing hand time to what they release at the combine, which is laser start, hand stop. Some of those differ by .12 (maybe more, I didn't double check). That's with only one human reaction in the timing. Use 2 human reactions (hand timing), and the difference could easily be .24 between FAT and hand timing.

I'm with you it's not a completely fair comparison, and I understand it's different methods.

Is there something wrong with my thinking here?

The article says it's "Started by Hand, Stopped by Beam". The Average difference in the times listed in the article (HH vs. ET) is .06.

So .06 difference with 1 Human reaction (Electronic Time) vs. 2 Human reactions (Hand Held)

Would it be safe to assume it would be .06 x 2 = .12 difference on average using 2 human reactions (Hand Held vs. Laser Time)?
Would it be safe to assume it would be .06 x 1 = .06 difference using 1 human reaction (Electronic Time) vs. 0 human reactions (Laser Time)?

If so, a 4.59 LT 40 would be a 4.53 ET 40 at the combine.

MIATL said "Laser times are, typically, .24 slower than hand times". And I disagreed with that. My post said the difference would .5 - .10, but doing the math, I think the average would be .12. That's a huge difference from .24.

Some of the ET vs HH times were off by .12. To assume the HH vs. LT would be off .24 assumes the person recording the HH time would be off by both .12 (the extreme) on the start, and off by .12 (the extreme) on the finish. It's possible, but far from typical.

.24 assumes the extreme, while .12 assumes the average. I think the Average would be a better measurement IMO.

So I don't agree that a guy who runs a 4.60 40 Laser Time "typically" would time at a 4.36 Hand Held time. I just don't buy that anyone at these events would watch a guy run a 4.6, look down at their stopwatch and see a 4.36 and think "that seems legit"

.12 would not exactly be extreme - this is why in many years the NFL took so long to release their version of a player's 40 time.

Who looked at Bo Jackson's 4.12 40 and thought "that seems legit"?

Consider this, if you are a sprinter at a meet conducted to IAAF rules with fully automatic timing, and you start before 0.1 seconds have elapsed since the sound of the gun, it's a false start. Why? Human reaction time. If you start faster than 0.1 secs after the gun, it is assumed (by rule) that you guessed when the gun was going to sound. Hand timing a 40 is similar at the start - there is no lead up to a runner's start, so one can safely assume that hand starting will begin about 0.1 after the runner starts. At the finish, there is a lead up, as the runner is approaching the end, so hand stopping may be done in advance of the runner's crossing the finish or after, but very rarely exactly as the runner crosses the line.

Going back to Bo's time, I think it's safe to assume that the stopwatch was started a wee bit late and stopped a wee bit early. Add those 2 wee bits together, and the real result may have been 4.3+ (still extremely fast). There's no way of knowing.

To correct myself earlier, the combine is hand start, laser finish. I said it backwards at least once, I think. I'm too lazy to go back and read through my earlier posts.

 

[bshaw28]

Laser times are, typically, .24 slower than hand times.

So, for any of y'all suggesting 4.59 and 4.63 laser times are not "elite" ... Make the adjustment, and ask yourself how you feel about a 4.35 40 for Davis and a 4.39 for Lingard.

And those kids are still in the 11th grade ...

Some of yall need to stay off of Playstation, or pay attention to the NFL combine 40 times.

4.6 on the laser is elite for a high school kid.

Where are you getting .24 from? Here's a article comparing the Hand Held times vs, the Electronic times at the NFL combine (scroll down to see the times). The difference is about .05 - .10.

2015 NFL Combine: Real-time 40s to be used for first time - CBSSports.com

As a comparison - here's The Opening numbers for Miami RB's:

Davis - 5'10" 190 4.59
Burns - 5'11" 215 4.57
Homer - 5'11" 195 4.48
Walton - 5'9" 182 4.63
Yearby - 5'9" 179 4.58
Gus - 6'2" 221 4.58


But here's some of the Elite at The Opening:

Dalvin Cook - 5'11" 196 4.46
Sony Michel - 5'11" 194 4.46
Nick Chubb - 5'11" 217 4.47
Joe Mixon - 6'1" 209 4.53


I know I sound like a hater - but saying 4.59 is "elite" just isn't fair to the kid. It's setting expectations too high. I'm excited about our 2018 RB's, but I can already see the hype train starting to get a little out of control.

I'm totally on board with saying Davis is a Walton/Yearby level/type of talent. But he's definitely not in the the Duke/Cook category. I think the Michel/Collins/Scarlett category is over-hyping him a bit too IMO.

I posted times from that same article the other day for a different purpose. You apparently don't understand that the combine times released are not "laser" times. They are laser start, hand stop. Look at the times in that article you linked - they are not comparing hand times to laser times. They are comparing hand time to what they release at the combine, which is laser start, hand stop. Some of those differ by .12 (maybe more, I didn't double check). That's with only one human reaction in the timing. Use 2 human reactions (hand timing), and the difference could easily be .24 between FAT and hand timing.

I'm with you it's not a completely fair comparison, and I understand it's different methods.

Is there something wrong with my thinking here?

The article says it's "Started by Hand, Stopped by Beam". The Average difference in the times listed in the article (HH vs. ET) is .06.

So .06 difference with 1 Human reaction (Electronic Time) vs. 2 Human reactions (Hand Held)

Would it be safe to assume it would be .06 x 2 = .12 difference on average using 2 human reactions (Hand Held vs. Laser Time)?
Would it be safe to assume it would be .06 x 1 = .06 difference using 1 human reaction (Electronic Time) vs. 0 human reactions (Laser Time)?

If so, a 4.59 LT 40 would be a 4.53 ET 40 at the combine.

MIATL said "Laser times are, typically, .24 slower than hand times". And I disagreed with that. My post said the difference would .5 - .10, but doing the math, I think the average would be .12. That's a huge difference from .24.

Some of the ET vs HH times were off by .12. To assume the HH vs. LT would be off .24 assumes the person recording the HH time would be off by both .12 (the extreme) on the start, and off by .12 (the extreme) on the finish. It's possible, but far from typical.

.24 assumes the extreme, while .12 assumes the average. I think the Average would be a better measurement IMO.

So I don't agree that a guy who runs a 4.60 40 Laser Time "typically" would time at a 4.36 Hand Held time. I just don't buy that anyone at these events would watch a guy run a 4.6, look down at their stopwatch and see a 4.36 and think "that seems legit"

.12 would not exactly be extreme - this is why in many years the NFL took so long to release their version of a player's 40 time.

Who looked at Bo Jackson's 4.12 40 and thought "that seems legit"?

Consider this, if you are a sprinter at a meet conducted to IAAF rules with fully automatic timing, and you start before 0.1 seconds have elapsed since the sound of the gun, it's a false start. Why? Human reaction time. If you start faster than 0.1 secs after the gun, it is assumed (by rule) that you guessed when the gun was going to sound. Hand timing a 40 is similar at the start - there is no lead up to a runner's start, so one can safely assume that hand starting will begin about 0.1 after the runner starts. At the finish, there is a lead up, as the runner is approaching the end, so hand stopping may be done in advance of the runner's crossing the finish or after, but very rarely exactly as the runner crosses the line.

Going back to Bo's time, I think it's safe to assume that the stopwatch was started a wee bit late and stopped a wee bit early. Add those 2 wee bits together, and the real result may have been 4.3+ (still extremely fast). There's no way of knowing.

To correct myself earlier, the combine is hand start, laser finish. I said it backwards at least once, I think. I'm too lazy to go back and read through my earlier posts.

We can agree to disagree, but I think being off .24 - .12 on each end is extreme. I stick with my original point - it's possible, but far from typical.

People may have believed Bo ran a 4.12 then, because it was 30 years ago. It's obviously an Urban legend. No one would believe it today. If you listen to Bo's version, he ran a 4.13 electronically, but the hand held times were 3.9.

Barry Sanders allegedly was playing basketball, come off the court and ran the 40 in high-tops, then went back to playing basketball at his Pro Day. These are all good pre-combine stories.

It's 2017. Timing in much more controlled and accurate than it was in the 80's.

Cam Davis ran a 4.64 Laser at this event. Assuming someone would have hand timed 4.40, because that's the "typical" difference, is a big stretch IMO.