NFL Draft 2017 Scouting Report: WR Krishawn Hogan, Marion
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
2017 NFL DRAFT SCOUTING REPORT APRIL 9, 2017 NFL Draft 2017 Scouting Report: WR Krishawn Hogan, Marion *WR grades can and will change as more information comes in from Pro Day workouts, Wonderlic test results leaked, etc. We will update ratings as new info becomes available. *WR-B stands for "Big-WR," a classification we use to separate the more physical, downfield/over-the- top, heavy-red-zone-threat-type WRs. Our WR-S/"Small-WRs" are profiled by our computer more as slot and/or possession-type WRs who are less typically physical and rely more on speed/agility to operate underneath the defense and/or use big speed to get open deep...they are not used as weapons in the red zone as much. I don’t know how anyone can be 'sure' one way or the other when it comes to scouting Krishawn Hogan. Hogan's NFL Combine numbers bring you to the table – he has NFL starter measurables top to bottom…he's 6′3″/222, has big hands, runs a 4.56 40-time, a 6.74 three-cone. Slap those measurables on Clemson's Mike Williams, and he'd go in the top 10 overall. Hogan, as he should, dominated the NAIA ranks – averaging over 100+ yards and 1.0+ receiving TDs per game over his final three seasons as 'the guy' for Marian. The output is what you'd like to see. But, we all recognize…'it's the NAIA level'. If you turn to his tape…good luck figuring that out. Hogan is a starting NFL body/physique playing against the lower levels of opposition. At times, he looks like a man among boys. Other times, he's uninvolved. I'm left to 'wonder' because their offense and quarterback were not conducive to scouting Hogan or getting Hogan the opportunities he needed/deserved…or if it's on Hogan. Marian University is sitting there with an NFL wide receiver, and they deployed their run game as the main weapon in the games I watched. Partly coaching, partly poor QB play. There's so much conflicting/empty/incomplete data, but I'll take a stab at what my gut, my notes, and the data are telling me… When I watch the tape, I don’t see anything magical. I see an NFL body doing some damage at the lower levels, but I was never blown away. My biggest memory watching his tape – I watched Marian take on (a then) #2 St. Francis (IND) team. Marian came out constantly running the ball…barely passing. When they got close to the goal line, they instantly went to Hogan as a wildcat QB. More times than not, Hogan scored a short rushing TD in those situations (he had 10 of them in 2016, 15 of them in 2015). He was definitely better than the defenders as a runner and as a receiver, but he’s not a guy that just screamed College Football Metrics| 1 2017 NFL DRAFT SCOUTING REPORT APRIL 9, 2017 off the tape. When he lined up at wide receiver, the defense covered him one on one. I don’t know which side was dumber…Marian for not taking advantage of Hogan on every play, or defenses that didn't double or triple him. It was a bizarro-land watching these games – dreadful awareness of how to use and defend weapons. Hogan was already established as a star…so why did teams not double him more? Why did his own coach not give him the ball every other play…via screens, running plays, etc.? I rarely saw anything besides slants and medium passes or the goal line wildcat runs with Hogan. Hogan was a decoy much of the game. I don’t know whether to blame Hogan…or the coaching. My lean is that Hogan has NFL ability but is operating from a very inexperienced starting point. He's not so dominant that he can out-athlete the NFL. So, he's going to struggle to transition because his college offense was a joke. The fact that Hogan was great with output but not out of this world makes me wonder about his mindset, his aggression. He could have done so much more – why not politely demand the ball more? Why not transfer? In the end, I have more questions than answers trying to scout the kid. You love his story. A late bloomer. Worked as a third-shift janitor to pay for school, initially. Worked and worked, and became an NAIA star and made it to the NFL Combine. That's no small feat. You know he'll work as hard as he can. However, an NFL team is probably looking at a 2–3 year learning curve…so, is he special enough to hold a roster spot for as you develop him? Maybe. There's enough here on his measurables alone to get him drafted, late round/cheap. Who knows what he'll develop into? It's a mystery, and it won’t reveal a conclusion for a few years most likely. For me, I'm just not that excited. I remember seeing small school Tyrell Williams and instantly thinking I was seeing something special…and he wasn't used right by his coaches or QB. Hogan was underutilized as well, but of what I did see – I wasn't that moved. Krishawn Hogan, Through the Lens of Our WR Scouting Algorithm: The only game Marian lost last season was in the NAIA quarterfinals. Hogan had 8 catches for 74 yards and no TDs in that game…and one rush for 1 yard. That can't happen. The biggest game of the season and you don’t take over the game? That's what worries me about Hogan. The week before their loss, in the first round of their playoffs – 2 catches for 52 yards and a 29-yard TD. Three carries for 4 yards and a TD. How is the best WR at the NAIA level only getting 6 touches in a playoff game…and most of them at the wildcat? College Football Metrics| 2 2017 NFL DRAFT SCOUTING REPORT APRIL 9, 2017 In his two 2016 playoff games, thus the better competition he faced, Hogan averaged 5.5 catches for 63.0 yards and 0.5 TDs per game. I don’t care how bad your QB is…you have to do better than that to make me a believer that you’re a god ready to strike the NFL. NFL Combine data… 6′3.0″/222, 32.1″ arms, 9.8″ hands 4.56 40-time, 4.21 shuttle, 6.76 three-cone 13 reps bench press, 36.5″ vertical, 10′4″ broad jump Hogan's stats on his school's website: http://www.muknights.com/roster/16/5/7411.php The Historical WR Prospects to Whom Krishawn Hogan Most Compares Within Our System: I'm not sure we can bank on any of these comparisons because Hogan is such a unique animal due to his level of play. However, I wonder if Hogan had gone to LSU…would he be another Dwayne Bowe? In a different environment would Hogan make sense as a top 125 prospect? He does remind me of Dwayne Bowe, now that the computer mentions it. Most of our Hogan comparison players did not do much in the NFL. WR Draft Last First College H H W Power Speed Hands Score Yr Strngt Agility ' h Metri Metric Metric c 6.764 2017 Hogan Krishawn Marian 6 3.0 222 7.24 5.54 8.42 6.001 2014 Culbreath Ryan Furman 6 3.5 224 7.42 5.18 5.72 7.552 2007 Bowe Dwayne LSU 6 2.2 221 9.22 7.96 9.69 4.637 2010 Gettis David Rice 6 3.0 217 7.35 5.71 6.24 5.323 2009 Brown Freddie Utah 6 2.5 215 6.73 5.87 6.24 7.088 2012 Kinnie Brandon Nebraska 6 2.6 220 7.90 9.77 8.92 4.248 2012 Davis Dominque E. Carolina 6 3.0 221 8.66 3.09 5.50 8.216 2006 Baskett Hank New Mexico 6 3.0 224 9.64 8.57 10.40 College Football Metrics| 3 2017 NFL DRAFT SCOUTING REPORT APRIL 9, 2017 *A score of 7.0+ is where we start to take a Big-WR prospect more seriously. A score of 8.50+ is where we see a stronger correlation of a Big-WR going on to become NFL good/great/elite. A score of 10.00+ is more rarefied air in our system and indicates a greater probability of becoming an elite NFL Big-WR. All of the WR ratings are based on a 0–10 scale, but a player can score negative, or above a 10.0 in certain instances. Overall WR score = A combination of several on-field performance measures, including refinement for strength of opponents faced. Mixed with all the physical measurement metrics, rated historically in our database. “Power-Strength” = A combination of unique metrics surrounding physical size profiling, bench press strength, etc. High scorers here project to be more physical, better blockers, and less injury-prone. “Speed-Agility” = A combination of unique metrics surrounding speed, agility, physical size, mixed with some on-field performance metrics. High scorers here project to have a better YAC and show characteristics to be used as deep threats/to create separation. “Hands” = A combination of unique metrics surrounding on-field performance in college, considering the strength of opponents played.