The NFL Combine and college Pro Days are behind us while the NFL Draft is right around the corner. There has been no shortage of coverage for these prospects, but I wanted to bring a different spin on player comparisons. To do this, I use a technique called clustering, which allows me to bucket these players into several statistical profiles and compare one to another. In the clustering, I included a combination of production, efficiency, athleticism and usage metrics in hopes of capturing who these players are.
NFL Draft 2024 Prospect Comparisons
This article will cover the methodology with commentary on some of the standout players from the 2024 class. This year’s running back cohort is, in a word, underwhelming. No single prospect stands out as the best of the group and none rank in the top 60 of the consensus prospect big board, with just two of them in the top 75. Because of this, there’s a chance we won’t see a running back drafted in the first two rounds.
In the last 20 years, at least three running backs were drafted in the first two rounds in all but two drafts (2019, 2016), speaking to the relative strength of this class. It’s unlikely we see any of these backs enter a full workhorse role, but some potential diamond-in-the-rough prospects could work themselves into a complementary role.
Methodology
Before I get into the analysis, I want to explain the methodology and techniques I used along with delineating what this analysis is and, more importantly, what it is not. Let’s start with the latter.
This analysis is a descriptive way to compare a player’s college stats and athleticism to historical results. This is not a predictive indicator of future NFL and fantasy success or that a player with similar athletic and production stats will have the same career.
In terms of the methodology, I used a principal component analysis (PCA) using data since 2016. If you’re unfamiliar with PCA, it is a way to “squish” several variables (in this case, each of our statistical metrics), into just a couple of variables — our principal components — thus simplifying our dataset and reducing noise. Put another way, PCA helps us find fewer features that will represent our data (or prospects) in a more compressed way.
This also allows me to visualize the results on two axes using the first two principal components, which I wouldn’t be able to do easily with the several metrics we have. This is also where we can see player comparisons — players that appear further away from the center of the chart are more unique in their results and fall into a more distinct category.
For running backs, below are the weights for the metrics for each of the two principal components. To calculate a player’s principal component, you can read these as linear equations. So, for principal component one, a player’s score is calculated as (-0.17*Height) + (-0.05*Weight) + (-0.01*Forty-Yard Dash) + (0.55*Carries/Game) + (0.58*Touches Market Share) + (0.54*Dominator Rtg) + (0.09*Yards after Contact/Att) + (0.02*Missed Tackles Forced/Rush) + (0.28*Breakaway %) + (0.13*YPRR).
I also calculated similarity scores between each prospect’s metrics profile — I only used the metrics used in the PCA above. For this, I calculated the Euclidean distance of each metric between each player to get the Cosine similarity, resulting in our similarity score. Below each player, I’ll give a brief list of the players whose statistical profile is most similar to the prospect, along with the similarity score. These scores are in a range of 0 to 1, with 1 meaning a player’s statistical profile is an exact match.
With that, let’s get into some analysis.
Running Back Prospect Comparisons
Most similar players: Javonte Williams (0.800), Bijan Robinson (0.797), Tyjae Spears (0.694)
If not for tearing his ACL late in the 2023 season, I would posit Jonathon Brooks would be the clear-cut No. 1 back in this class. He’s still the top-ranked running back on the consensus big board, but it’s not unanimous. Brooks followed in Bijan Robinson’s footsteps at Texas admirably, rushing for 1,150 yards on just 190 attempts in his final season. His 0.36 missed tackles forced per carry was in the 95th percentile of running backs in 2023 while his 1.5 yards per route run was also quite solid and demonstrates his versatility. Finally, Brooks ranked 22nd out of 252 running backs in my database with a career 4.13 yards after contact per rush.
Because of the injury, Brooks did not do any athletic testing, which could further hurt his draft stock. I don’t expect him to get a huge role as a rookie coming off of injury, but I would be buying stock on him entering his second year.
Most similar players: Kendre Miller (0.757), Rashaad Penny (0.692), Bijan Robinson (0.685)
Trey Benson is the other player competing with Brooks to be the top running back taken in this year’s draft. Benson is another elusive and explosive back, made more impressive since he suffered a massive knee injury as a freshman in late 2020. Both his 3.9 yards after contact average and 11.7% breakaway rate ranked among the top 30 of the 191 qualifying running backs in my database. Benson didn’t get a ton of carries in college with just 316 total. That should help his longevity in the league with his injury history.
Benson’s athleticism is extremely solid, too, as he has a 116.3 speed score (ranks 17th) thanks to his 4.39-second 40-yard dash. His strength also shows up on the tape as he can bounce off of tacklers to get extra yardage. It feels like Benson will fit in more as an early-down bruiser as he doesn’t have much receiving experience, catching just 32 passes throughout college. Still, I’d be very happy for Benson to be drafted by my team.
Most similar players: Deuce Vaughn (0.734), Donnel Pumphrey (0.651), Trayveon Williams (0.644)
Blake Corum was a key cog in the Wolverines’ National Championship run last year and has been one of the most productive backs over the past two years. Corum totaled over 1,300 yards from scrimmage each of the past two years and scored a combined 61 touchdowns. However, how he got those touchdowns last year was lackluster:
Furthermore, his efficiency has been downright terrible for someone considered to be among the best backs in the class. Corum averaged a paltry 3.09 yards after contact per carry in his three playing years, just a 34th percentile mark, per PFF. He also struggled to make players miss with just 0.22 missed tackles forced per carry, outside the top 100 backs in my database. Age is another concern with Corum, as he’ll be turning 24 in November of this year. Corum feels like he’ll have a limited ceiling for fantasy and be relatively touchdown-reliant.
Most similar players: Javonte Williams (0.764), Tyjae Spears (0.754), Darwin Thompson (0.711)
At just 5-foot-9 and 195 pounds, Bucky Irving is among the smallest backs in this class. He isn’t very fast either, running a 4.55-second 40-yard dash at the combine, giving him a miserable 2.22 Relative Athletic Score (RAS). Still, his production speaks for itself.
Over his three-year career at Oregon, Irving’s 95.3 Pro Football Focus (PFF) rushing grade and 0.36 missed tackles per carry rank in the 98th and 99th percentile, respectively. Where Iriving may excel is as a pass-catching option out of the backfield. Irving was one of two running backs last year to record at least 1,000 rushing yards and 50 catches. His 1.4 yards per route run average leaves a little to be desired (still in the 90th percentile since 2019), but he led all running backs in PPR points from receiving production the last two years. If he can get work as a team’s third-down back with occasional runs on early downs, he’ll offer a solid floor for fantasy purposes.
Most similar players: Trey Sermon (0.805), Tyler Allgeier (0.803), Isaiah Spiller (0.767)
Audric Estime also had one of the biggest hits to his draft stock at the combine as he recorded a 4.71-second 40-yard dash, which isn’t great for a 5-foot-11 back weighing 221 pounds. He did follow that up with a 4.61-second 40-yard time at his Pro Day, which should erase some of the speed concerns. Outside of the athleticism, though, Estime has an incredibly good production and efficiency profile.
His 9.1% breakaway rate is modest and speaks to his lack of speed after he gets through the hole. However, his 4.04 yards after contact per rush is just behind Brooks in this class and Estime plays a bulldozing style of offense. Estime’s career 93.1 PFF grade on zone runs is also the best among 202 qualifying running backs, so getting into a scheme that uses this rushing style would benefit him greatly. I’m willing to fade the slow forty time and bank on his production profile speaking more to his ability.
Most similar players: Royce Freeman (0.887), A.J. Dillon (0.862), Samaje Perine (0.846)
As a fellow Wisconsin grad, Braelon Allen holds a special spot in my heart. That said, had he been able to enter the NFL following his freshman season, he may have been considered the top back in this class. While Allen didn’t necessarily get worse, he didn’t improve on what was an outstanding first year. Allen recorded 1,200 rushing yards in each of his first two seasons (and would have gotten to 1,000 last year had he not missed a couple of games), averaging at least 5.4 yards per carry each season. He also had a nose for the end zone with double-digit touchdowns all three years of his college career.
The area Allen did slightly improve in was as a pass-catcher. In his first two years, he caught just 21 passes but recorded 28 total in his final year. He wasn’t very efficient with his routes as he averaged a paltry 0.74 yards per route run, but he at least demonstrated an ability to catch the ball. Perhaps the thing that might intrigue teams the most about Allen is that he just turned 20 in January.
Most similar players: Jerome Ford (0.924), Jordan Scarlett (0.817), Miles Sanders (0.803)
In three years at Tennessee, Jaylen Wright showed steady improvement year-over-year in production and efficiency. All of Wright’s PFF rushing grade, rushing yards, yards per carry, missed tackles forced per attempt and yards after contact per attempt rose each year throughout college.
There are some criticisms of his production given the offense Wright played in. Per Josh Norris, Wright had just four carries when facing at least eight defenders in the box, an extremely advantageous situation for any running back. That said, Graham Barfield’s yards created stat has Wright with the second-highest yards created per attempt at 5.44 in the class. Not to mention, Wright’s athleticism is among the best in this group as he recorded a 114.1 speed score and is the prototypical NFL running back size at 5-foot-11 and 210 pounds. These somewhat conflicting narratives make Wright an interesting evaluation.
Most similar players: DeeJay Dallas (0.806), Kendre Miller (0.682), Bryce Love (0.661)
MarShawn Lloyd spent his first three years at South Carolina before transferring to USC, where he finally got some run (no pun intended). Lloyd matched his rushing production at South Carolina in just one season as a Trojan, but he still failed to reach 1,000 yards rushing in any season. That said, his 7.1 yards per carry last year was outstanding and is in large part due to his 97th-percentile missed tackles forced per attempt.
Lloyd also had one of the bigger discrepancies in how he performed on gap vs. zone run schemes — his gap scheme PFF grade last year was in the 99th percentile while his zone scheme PFF grade was down in the 30th percentile. Some will point to Lloyd’s eight career fumbles as a knock against him. While it certainly may impact his draft stock ever so slightly, it is one of the least-stable stats from college to the pros and shouldn’t be a concern.
2024 NFL Mock Drafts
Here are a few early predictions for the 2024 NFL Draft. We’ll continue to add our 2024 NFL Mock Drafts leading up to the start of Round 1.
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Google Play | Spotify | Stitcher | TuneIn | RSS | YouTube
