SPARQ Receivers

Most of us know that Carroll and some of his staff worked with Nike to develop the SPARQ evaluation system for athletes. You can google Seahawks and SPARQ to get more information, but data has demonstrated that the Seahawks front office tends heavily to evaluate players based first of raw athletic ability, and then confirming it via film. They also tend to value overall length of the player, which is not part of the SPARQ system.

I've combed the combine data, ranked the WR's in each of the SPARQ areas (weight, bench, shuttle, vertical and 40) and added another ranking for length (height, hand size and arm length) . . . each receiver has been averaged across those 6 criteria, and I present to you the list (average ranking in parenthesis)

1. J. Janis (8)
2. M. Bryant (10.2)
3. D. Moncrief (13)
3. J. Matthews (13)
5. A. Robinson (14.2) - No bench data
6. M. Evans (15.7)
7. M. Lucas (16.5)
8. O. Beckham (16.7)
9. B. Ellington (17)
10. B. Cooks (17.5)
11. D. Adams (18.3)
12. S. Watkins (18.3)
12. D. Street (18.3) = No bench data
13. B. Coleman (18.8)
15. M. Campanaro (19)
16. M. Hazel (19.7)
17. S. Evans (20.8)
18. K. Benjamin (21.2)
19. D. Copeland (21.5)
20. J. Huff (21.6)
21. C. Hoffman (21.8)

Other notables

24. M. Lee (23.2)
25. P. Richardson (23.3)

28. J. Abbedaris (28)
29. J. Landry (30.8)

Some names were left off due to too much incomplete data.

A couple of sleeper surprises to see what we can find out . . .

Marcus Lucas, Missouri . . . complete unknown, a part time player for the Tigers with great size, length and strength, adequate vertical, but is not fast or agile . . . but he's pretty massive and still ran a 4.6 . . . currently rated as a 7th round/UFA.

Bruce Ellington, South Carolina . . . vastly undersized but ridiculous athleticism across the board. Great vertical and shuttle, better than expected strength. Currently rated as a 3-4th rounder.

A couple of names targeted for the Seahawks that are surprisingly low on the list . . .

Brandon Coleman, Rutgers . . . great size, length and vertical, but bad numbers across the board, near the bottom in speed, agility and strength.

Kelvin Benjamin, Florida St . . . similar to Coleman except worse vertical.

Cody Hoffman, BYU . . . size and length and nothing else.

Marqise Lee, USC . . . decidedly average across the board.

Jarvis Landry, LSU . . . pooped all over himself at the combine to the point where you've got to think something was physcially wrong with him.

There's those two names again, Janis and Bryant. I bet one becomes a Hawk.

I was shocked at how Janis tested. He is head and shoulders above the field. Top ten in every category except vertical, and even there he was very good.

With the 32 overall pick, Seattle Seahawks select WR Jordan Matthews, Vanderbilt

McGruff":2c7vkdwm said:

I was shocked at how Janis tested. He is head and shoulders above the field. Top ten in every category except vertical, and even there he was very good.

Click to expand...

His only knock? Hands-9'. Otherwise-he's a cyborg. The guy blazed a unoff 4.30 40 on his first attempt and made it look effortless. Bryant Looked awesome as well, either one would be good with me.

Any history on the usage or significance of Sparq?

SeahawksFanForever":313rz7an said:

With the 32 overall pick, Seattle Seahawks select WR Jordan Matthews, Vanderbilt

Click to expand...

Yessirree. I agree.

-The Glove-":16pw6lag said:

Any history on the usage or significance of Sparq?

Click to expand...

Fieldgulls.com has a bunch of articles and data compiled from our own Seahawks.

http://www.fieldgulls.com/seahawks-anal ... s-hunt-for

Cody Hoffman's name sticks in my brain for some reason. I think I saw him in a game or two and he impressed me but I never focused on him.

SPARQ might be a fine baseline, but there is no way that this front office (or any successful front office) is weighing bench press ability with the weight as they would the 3 cone drill when looking at wide outs.

That leads to seriously overrating someone like Bryant who showed to be an incredible straight line athlete, but whose change of direction numbers are more in line with a TE. The Seahawks can have Stephen Williams or Ricardo Lockette run fly routes all day long, you need to be able to change direction quickly and fluidly to be a successful NFL receiver.

That's part of what makes the Janis numbers so remarkable, his straight line speed combined with the quickness he showed is almost unheard of for a guy 6'3 220lbs.

Except Bryant had a higher than average shuttle, and of the larger receivers, only Janis and Street ran better.

SPARQ = you are trying to come up with some revolutionary thing for the NFL when it is was meant for underdeveloped high school seniors. IMO it is a tweaked version of the basic NFL Combine test that is meant for football high school kids going into college programs.

We all know what kind of prospects the Seahawks want on their roster...Bigger, Stronger, Faster! So, concentrate on scouting players that fit that mold and concentrate on the NFL combine drills that focus on those aspects. If a big, long CB doesn't have a good 40-yard time, but that player has good ball skills, then he is still a Seahawks type prospect. Or if said player has unique qualities, but may be undersize ie., Bruce Irvin, or this year DT Aaron Donald...then they are higher on the Seahawks draft board that most other teams.

McGruff":3k2luj3b said:

Except Bryant had a higher than average shuttle, and of the larger receivers, only Janis and Street ran better.

Click to expand...

Bryant's three cone drill which is about quick changed of direction in tight spaces (kind of like route running) placed him 33rd out of the 38 timed participants.

drrew":14ros1o7 said:

McGruff":14ros1o7 said:

Except Bryant had a higher than average shuttle, and of the larger receivers, only Janis and Street ran better.

Click to expand...

Bryant's three cone drill which is about quick changed of direction in tight spaces (kind of like route running) placed him 33rd out of the 38 timed participants.

Click to expand...

Truth . . . but that's not what SPARQ measures . . . this exercise was merely done to illuminate one primary tool that the Seahawks themselves have identified as part of their evaluation process which draft reviews confirm.

cover-2":3gp2debk said:

SPARQ = you are trying to come up with some revolutionary thing for the NFL when it is was meant for underdeveloped high school seniors. IMO it is a tweaked version of the basic NFL Combine test that is meant for football high school kids going into college programs.

We all know what kind of prospects the Seahawks want on their roster...Bigger, Stronger, Faster! So, concentrate on scouting players that fit that mold and concentrate on the NFL combine drills that focus on those aspects. If a big, long CB doesn't have a good 40-yard time, but that player has good ball skills, then he is still a Seahawks type prospect. Or if said player has unique qualities, but may be undersize ie., Bruce Irvin, or this year DT Aaron Donald...then they are higher on the Seahawks draft board that most other teams.

Click to expand...

SPARQ takes all of that into account. You don't have to excell at everything to excel in SPARQ ratings.

And the team itself has mentioned SPARQ specifically and combine testing scores more generically.

Its not the only thing, and my exercise doesn't claim to know the formula, but it does I think bring to light some possible prospects, and probably eliminate some others.

Of the realistic options likely to be available from #32 and down I'm glad to see my top 3 choices are high on the SPARQ

1a.Matthews
1b.Moncrief
3.Robinson

I keep wavering between Moncrief and Matthews, would love to see some of our .net experts break them down futher. My initial instincts is that Matthews is slightly more polished but not as high of a ceiling as Moncrief. I might be biased cause I can't get the "feed moncrief" song out of my head.

Why do a lot of people automatically assume that you want the hawks to draft a player just based on athleticism whenever you bring up the SPARQ system? I had a long conversation with someone on Twitter about this.

Dri Archer is a slot WR in the NFL, I know he tested with the RB at the combine but he is in the Percy Harvin, Tavon Austin mold of slot receiver... so if you have the time could you tell me where he ranks. I know he is only 5'8" so that will hurt his score...

sliv":hz21t1tp said:

Dri Archer is a slot WR in the NFL, I know he tested with the RB at the combine but he is in the Percy Harvin, Tavon Austin mold of slot receiver... so if you have the time could you tell me where he ranks. I know he is only 5'8" so that will hurt his score...

Click to expand...

i was thinkng Randell Cobb, Harvin is much bigger than people think and nobody is really equal to him.

sliv":36wbhaxr said:

Dri Archer is a slot WR in the NFL, I know he tested with the RB at the combine but he is in the Percy Harvin, Tavon Austin mold of slot receiver... so if you have the time could you tell me where he ranks. I know he is only 5'8" so that will hurt his score...

Click to expand...

I've the spread sheet at work . . . but quick mental math tells me he'd be ranked in the mid-teens . . . major high marks for speed, leaping, and (surprisingly) strength. His shuttle was solid, but gets dinged for being very small across the board, including child sized hands.