The Ultimate Positional Value 2020 NFL Draft Board

Every year, NFL Draft analysts put together their draft boards, but most of the time, they aren’t properly adjusted towards positional value. However, since positional value ultimately tends to determine where players are, and should be, drafted, I decided to alter my big board in order to properly compensate for it. Based off of several data points from Pro Football Focus, I’ve not only been able to create a draft board that completely adjusts towards positional value, but also the difficulty of finding a player at the position in the draft. Without further adieu, let’s go over the process of doing so.

Every draft prospect that I gathered information on was already assigned an overall grade based on their abilities (floor and upside), so now, I had to adjust for position value; an “85” grade for a running back and a quarterback are obviously not the same. Therefore, I multiplied each prospect’s overall grade with the product of: mean Pro Football Focus WAR for their position times the Coefficient of Variation in WAR:

QB: Mean WAR- 1.63, Coefficient of Variation- 0.70

RB: Mean WAR- 0.10, Coefficient of Variation- 0.64

WR: Mean WAR- 0.28, Coefficient of Variation- 0.84

TE: Mean WAR- 0.18, Coefficient of Variation- 0.62

OT: Mean WAR- 0.10, Coefficient of Variation- 1.09

IOL: Mean WAR- 0.1, Coefficient of Variation- 1.095

IDL: Mean WAR- 0.06, Coefficient of Variation- 1.34

EDGE: Mean WAR- 0.06, Coefficient of Variation- 15.4

LB: Mean WAR- 0.11, Coefficient of Variation- 0.83

CB: Mean WAR- 0.23, Coefficient of Variation- 0.91

S: Mean WAR- 0.23, Coefficient of Variation- 0.77

I could’ve just multiplied the overall grade by the mean WAR, but for positions such as edge rusher and offensive tackle, the mean WAR may not completely reflect the value of the position, and they have higher coefficient of variations- those positions can have players that are significantly more valuable than their mean WAR would suggest if they can establish themselves as a top-tier player at the position. However, for the most part, we can see that outside of quarterback, the farther you play from the trenches, the more valuable you’re likely to be.

Next, we take our new number from step two, and multiply it by the drop-off in percentile at the position from drafting it in round one; our formula is (Step two number) times (drop-off to Round 2 X drop-off to Round 3 X drop-off to round four). This helps put a greater value on positions where it’s harder to find quality players after the first round; edge rushers, for example, have a major drop-off in talent after round one, per Pro Football Focus, so there is more value in taking a blue-chip player at that position than a running back, for instance.

Now, for each position, we can take our new variable for each player from step three, and subtract that by the mean variable for each position. In other words, we’re subtracting each player’s adjusted overall grade by the mean adjusted overall grade by the position, in order to assess how much they stand out from other players in their draft class. For example, this wide receiver class is very rich in talent, while the edge rush class isn’t, so with many teams likely to pass on the high-end wide receivers, it was important to demonstrate if they’re actually making the right decision; we can add our step four variable by our step three variable for each position (Step 5).

How likely is it that the player you draft is going to be at least an average player? To do this, I used Pro Football Focus’ findings on the “hit rate” (60 grade, 300+ snaps) between players drafted at a certain position in the first day and second day of the draft, and then multiplied my variables from step five by (1+(rate number)). In simpler terms, greater value was placed on positions where it’s harder to find average players at the position- the bar is much higher for certain positions to return the value of draft investment than others. Now, we’ve not only adjusted the original overall grade for positional value, but also draft value- if it’s going to be difficult to address a certain position down the line, it’s better to do so now, like QB or OT. Safeties and WRs, meanwhile, are among the positions with a higher hit rate between Days 1 and 2, and thus the bar is much higher for those players to justify their return relative to other players at the position. Here were my findings at each position:

Quarterback: Obviously, quarterbacks are by far the most valuable position in football, and with how hard it is to find a franchise quarterback outside the top of the draft, they definitely received the largest increase in position with the draft board. It is worth noting, however, that for quarterbacks, their adjusted overall grade was weighted, as WAR highly dependent on the quality of the player. To do, we take the mean and standard deviation from the quarterback class’ grade s from step two to get the percentile QB prospect the player is given the strength of the class, and divide by (.4 (weight from WAR) divided by the percentile.) Joe Burrow, for example, ranks in the 63rd percentile so his grade was divided by ((.4/.63)=.65)

Running Back: Running backs have the same mean WAR as offensive linemen, but since it takes five offensive linemen to fill out an offensive line, and there is a large supply of running backs available, they were sent flying down the draft board.

Wide Receiver: This position is the second most valuable in football, but it’s easier to find a receiver in the draft that can be at least an average contributor, so they took a slight hit on the draft board in that regard. Overall, though, wide receiver prospects saw their stock rise significantly on the draft board.

Tight End: This isn’t a very strong tight end class, and given how difficult it is to draft a player at the position, it would make sense for teams to avoid drafting tight ends in round one- there is a high bust rate, and several of the top players at the position were drafted in the middle rounds.

Offensive Tackle: Offensive Tackles may not generate much WAR on average, but when you adjust for how hard it is to even find an average player at the position through the draft, it’s clear that blue-chip tackles provide a lot of value.

Interior Offensive Line: They’re simply easier to find than offensive tackles, and teams should look to the middle rounds to fill their holes here. That is, unless a Quenton Nelson type prospect is available.

Interior Defensive Line: The bar simply is very high for an interior defensive lineman to provide value, as they need to be a standout pass rusher- there are plenty of run-stuffing nose tackles available late in the draft every year.

Edge Rusher: It’s not the most valuable position, but it is so hard to find a quality edge rusher outside of day one, so although positional value caused them to slightly move down the board, the first-round caliber players at the position remained in decent shape.

Linebacker: Teams have not done a good job of drafting linebackers of the years, and given that it’s a position more predicated on coverage, which allows teams to get creative with covering safeties, I’d avoid taking one in round one; dime safeties, as we’ll see with the top defensive player in this class, are the exception.

Cornerback: Cornerbacks are super valuable, especially since it is a volatile position- it’s hard to find players who are consistently productive on a year-to-year basis. There is also a significant drop-off in the expected percentile when you don’t draft them in the first round, so overall, they received a massive bump in their draft board position.

Safety: In my opinion, safeties are undervalued in today’s game, especially with how much zone coverage teams are utilizing on defense. Unfortunately for players at the position, however, there are plenty of quality safeties; it’s easier to find solid contributors in the draft, which means that it may not be wise to select a safety in the first round- you may be able to get a similar player in terms of quality in the middle rounds of the draft.

Now, it’s time to officially dive into my draft board. Since this is not an “end all be all” type of board, I’ve ranked players in specific tiers based on percentile: 100th percentile, 99.9th percentile, 99th percentile 95th percentile, 90th percentile, 80th percentile, 70th percentile, and so on.

The “100th Percentile” (Pick Range: 1-1)

Photo Cred: The Spun

#1: QB Joe Burrow, LSU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 137.8344191)

It’s difficult to find a franchise quarterback, but Burrow is even better than that- the LSU product projects as a future top-ten quarterback, and when you have the chance to select that type of player, you don’t think twice. It would be a colossal mistake for the Bengals to do anything than draft him with first overall pick.

The “99.9th” Percentile (Pick Range: 2-2)

Photo Cred: Sun-Sentinel

#2: Tua Tagovailoa, Alabama (Adjusted Overall Grade: 99.50190392)

Even if he was fully healthy, Tagovailoa is a clear step-down from Burrow, as he has more subtle flaws. Yet, he is still a bonafide franchise quarterback, and assuming he’s healthy, he’s worth much more than any of the other non-quarterbacks who could be selected with the second overall pick. Even though the Redskins have Dwayne Haskins, Tagovailoa would be an upgrade, and if they really don’t want to select him, they should definitely look to trade down; the Dolphins and Chargers may be eager to land their quarterback of the future.

The “99th Percentile” (Pick Range: 3-5)

Photo Cred: New York Post

#3: LB/S Isaiah Simmons, Clemson (Adjusted Overall Grade: 87.58117298)

Simmons’ best trait is his versatility, as he has the size, length, and athleticism to play either linebacker or safety. However, for a team to get proper return for their investment, he shouldn’t have a distinct role- if he’s just a traditional linebacker or safety, he’s not as elite of a prospect. Still, he’s the perfect example of where defenses are heading; in order to stop explosive offenses, they need to have athletic, position less playmakers.

#4: CB Jeffrey Okudah, Ohio State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 87.55504614)

Cornerback is the most valuable defensive position, and any team that drafts Okudah should be getting as close to a lockdown corner as you can get. He can fit in any defensive scheme, but he simply is perfect for the Lions’ press-man defensive scheme; he makes a lot of sense for them with the third overall pick.

#5: QB Jake Fromm, Georgia (Adjusted Overall Grade: 86.23039265)

By no means do I expect anyone to take Fromm with the fifth overall pick, nor do I expect him to a first-round prospect. After all, quarterbacks tend to fall in the draft when there isn’t a clear fit for them, and Fromm isn’t a generational type prospect. What he figures to be, however, is a smart, accurate quarterback, and even if he’s a mid-tier quarterback, he’s very valuable. In other words, whichever team drafts him will be getting a major steal in terms of value.

The “95th Percentile” (Pick Range: 6-12)

Photo Cred: Sportsnaut

#6: WR CeeDee Lamb, Oklahoma (Adjusted Overall Grade: 85.40516859)

Lamb’s ball skills and run after catch ability are rare, and he should be a true #1 receiver. Even in such a deep draft class, he’s the perfect prospect to help develop a quarterback, and is worthy of a top-ten pick.

#7: WR Jerry Jeudy, Alabama (Adjusted Overall Grade: 84.05793827)

Jeudy very well may be the top receiver in this draft class, as his route running and run after catch ability are special. I’d be very shocked if he didn’t end up as a true #1 receiver, and considering his player comparison, Amari Cooper, just signed a $100 million contract, it’s clear why he’s an elite prospect.

#8: EDGE Chase Young, Ohio State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 82.81011316)

In terms of pure talent, there is no doubt that Young is the best player in this draft. However, it’s very hard for an edge rusher to truly make an impact, and Young would have to live up to his ceiling only to justify being a top-three pick. That’s exactly why the Redskins shouldn’t be content selecting him with the second overall pick.

#9: OT Jedrick Wills, Alabama (Adjusted Overall Grade: 82.38622183)

Offensive tackles don’t provide a lot of value on their own, as it’s more about having a collective group than anything else, but finding a day-one starter at the position is super rare. Wills has true All-Pro potential, and thus is worthy of a top-ten selection.

#10: CB Kristian Fulton, LSU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 80.78787179)

Fulton isn’t as elite of a prospect as Okudah, but he’s a refined cornerback prospect capable of playing in any defensive scheme. There’s a chance he could fall out of the first round, which would make him one of the steals of the draft- a high-end starting cornerback should never fall outside the first round.

#11: OT Andrew Thomas, Georgia (Adjusted Overall Grade: 79.90667803)

Thomas is as safe as a tackle prospect as you can be; based on how hard it is to find even an average tackle through the draft, it’d be foolish not give him serious consideration with a top-ten pick. He doesn’t have a lot of upside, but I’d rather draft a reliable tackle than a boom-or-bust type of player, and Thomas definitely is the former.

#12: CB Jeff Gladney, TCU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 79.4391919)

Gladney may not be the biggest cornerback, yet he may be the most physical player in this draft class. His ball skills are off the charts, and even if he has to play a lot of snaps as a nickel corner, that holds a ton of value when so many offenses utilize three-receiver sets.

The “90th Percentile” (Pick Range: 13-20)

Photo Cred: Bleacher Report

#13: OT Tristan Wirfs, Iowa (Adjusted Overall Grade: 78.6986951)

Simply put, Wirfs is an athletic freak and even if he’s not super lengthy, he has all the tools and skills necessary to be an above-average offensive tackle. I’d love to see him in a zone-blocking scheme, such as the Browns or 49ers.

#14: CB Trevon Diggs, Alabama (Adjusted Overall Grade: 78.37580964)

Diggs won’t be a fit with every defense, as he’s not the type of cornerback you’d want to leave on an island. However, in either a zone-heavy scheme, or a defense that uses a lot of press coverage, he’s a natural fit- his wingspan and ball skills are rare for the position.

#15: QB Jordan Love, Utah State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 78.24015634)

Love’s turnovers and lack of development in college are a concern, and until now, I didn’t see him as a first-round caliber prospect. However, the more I think about it, the more I have to recognize the potential pay-off if he reaches his ceiling; I’d rather take a chance on a quarterback who I know can produce high-end plays. He’s a perfect match for the Patriots, Saints, Colts, or any team with a knack for developing quarterbacks.

#16: CB CJ Henderson, Florida (Adjusted Overall Grade: 78.09267333)

Henderson had a down year in 2019, but he was easily a top-ten prospect heading into the year, and is super athletic. He has the upside to be a dominant man-coverage cornerback, and will likely get drafted around this range.

#17: CB AJ Terrell, Clemson (Adjusted Overall Grade: 77.91544293)

Terrell struggled in the National Championship game versus LSU, but it’d be silly to let that destroy his stock. He’s a scheme diverse cornerback with great ball skills and athleticism, and is interchangeable with Diggs and Henderson.

#18: WR Henry Ruggs III, Alabama (Adjusted Overall Grade: 77.74279604)

Ruggs is a magnificent vertical receiver with 4.27 speed, but he’s also terrific after the catch and is more polished as a route-runner than you’d expect. He truly has Tyreek Hill upside.

#19: CB Cameron Dantzler, Mississippi State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 76.96445071)

Danztler isn’t athletic nor lengthy. but how much does that matter? So many teams are mostly running zone coverage, so why wouldn’t a team value his ball skills, instincts, and polished coverage ability? He figures to be one of the major steals of the draft.

#20: WR Tee Higgins, Clemson (Adjusted Overall Grade: 75.18933291)

Higgins isn’t a straight-line burner, nor does he have much experience working over the middle of the field. However, his ability to win at the catching point is off the charts, while he’s also an underrated route runner.

The “80th Percentile” (Pick Range: 21-40)

Photo Cred: CBS Sports

#21: WR Laviska Shenault, Colorado (Adjusted Overall Grade: 73.95371069)

Sheanult isn’t a polished route runner at all, but his run after catch ability and versatility are extremely rare. Add in his shockingly strong contested catch skills, and he’s the perfect weapon for a smart offensive mind.

#22: WR Justin Jefferson, LSU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 73.86950878)

Jefferson didn’t play much outside of the slot in college, but after running a 4.44 40-yard dash, it’s easy to project him as an outside receiver. A lot of his production in college was schemed up for him, which is a concern, but he’s a tremendous route runner with the ability to adjust and catch any pass thrown to him.

#23: CB Jaylon Johnson, Utah (Adjusted Overall Grade: 73.80888554)

Johnson’s aggressiveness works both ways for him, as he’s an absolute playmaker, yet gets exposed on double moves a lot as well. He’s a very similar player in a lot of ways to Marcus Peters, who, similarly to Johnson, is a much better player when he’s allowed to play zone coverage and trust his instincts.

#24: CB Bryce Hall, Virginia (Adjusted Overall Grade: 73.49332898)

Hall will be exposed in man coverage, but luckily for him, he’s an elite zone corner that fits today’s NFL. With his physicality, he’s destined for a cover-three or press-heavy scheme, such as the 49ers, Chiefs, or Seahawks.

#25: OT Josh Jones, Houston (Adjusted Overall Grade: 73.4694007)

Jones is extremely athletic, and although he’ll need some refinement, has very productive in college. He’s not on the level of the top tackles in this class, though he’s still worthy of being selected in the first round.

#26: WR Tyler Johnson, Minnesota (Adjusted Overall Grade: 72.26967277)

I don’t know why Johnson isn’t getting more recognition leading up to the draft. Not only was he one of the top receivers in all of college of football, he’s a precise route runner; he has some drop issues, but his ability to separate more than makes up for it.

#27: OT Mekhi Becton, Louisville (Adjusted Overall Grade: 72.05478915)

Becton is likely to be a top-five selection in this draft, which would be a mistake. He doesn’t have much experience with true pass sets, and per Pro Football Focus, didn’t grade out well in those limited sets. His power and surprisingly athleticism for the position makes him worth a first-round pick, but it’s scary how high of a chance there is that he ultimately turns out to be a bust.

#28: EDGE Curtis Weaver, Boise State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 71.8564848)

Weaver’s body type concerns evaluators, but he’s a smart and well-developed pass rusher who’ll make an impact immediately. He’ll be one of the best value picks if drafted outside of the first round.

#29: IDL Derrick Brown, Auburn (Adjusted Overall Grade: 71.83074371)

Interior defensive linemen that aren’t elite pass-rushers aren’t that valuable, and although Brown is a solid pass rusher, he doesn’t stand out in that area. His run defense is great, but that’s highly replaceable, and he’ll likely be over-drafted in the top ten.

#30: IDL Javon Kinlaw, South Carolina (Adjusted Overall Grade: 71.76071449)

Honestly, I’m not sure that Kinlaw isn’t a better player than Brown. His pass-rushing upside is off the charts, to the point where he almost looks like a carbon copy of Chris Jones. He does play high and needs to improve the variety of his approach, but his upside is as enormous as it can be for any interior defensive lineman outside not named Aaron Donald.

#31: WR Denzel Mims, Baylor (Adjusted Overall Grade: 71.72236042)

Mims’ stock has soared since he dominated the Senior Bowl, but I’m still a little worried about a) how limited of a route tree he ran and b) his high amount of drops. Still, teams are always on the look out for wide receivers and he has #2 receiver upside.

#32: WR Devin Duvernay, Texas (Adjusted Overall Grade: 71.55395665)

Even if Duvernay is stuck to being a slot receiver, he’ll thrive there with his run after catch ability. He very well may be Golden Tate’s clone, and thus should be earning more early-round consideration than he’s getting.

#33: EDGE AJ Epenesa, Iowa (Adjusted Overall Grade: 71.46900956)

Before running a 40-yard dash over 5.00 seconds, this would’ve seemed absurdly low for Epenesa. Now, however, draft analysts are no longer certain he’s a blue-chip edge rusher, though perhaps that’s overblown. He was never going to win with his athleticism, but rather his technique and power. Can he develop into a strong enough pass rusher and not just a sound run defender? That’ll be the ultimate question with the Iowa product.

#34: CB Damon Arnette, Ohio State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 71.42924357)

Arnette is a limited player, yet he’s surprisingly stout as a zone defender. He’s not on the same level as some of the other top corners in this draft, but he’d be earning more first-round recognition if this wasn’t such a deep cornerback class.

#35: WR Jalen Reagor, TCU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 71.3434519)

Reagor isn’t a polished player and didn’t stand out in college, but he has plenty of upside as a vertical threat, and is super explosive. He’s great “Plan B” for teams who are unable to draft Henry Ruggs.

#36: CB Darnay Holmes, UCLA (Adjusted Overall Grade: 71.23472243)

He’ll be limited to being a slot cornerback due to his size limitations, so Darnay Holmes may not even be drafted until the third day of the draft. Regardless, he could be a terrific nickel corner with his excellent usage of his instincts and ball skills, so I’m not too worried about him being constrained to the slot.

#37: WR Van Jefferson, Florida (Adjusted Overall Grade: 71.21714906)

In any other draft, I’m certain Van Jefferson would be a more well-known prospect. He does have his injury concerns and isn’t overly physical, though he’s such a skilled route runner, and thus has a very high floor.

#38: WR Brandon Aiyuk, Arizona State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 70.83824054)

Aiyuk’s run after catch ability and explosiveness is terrific, but some teams will be pass on him due to his lack of diverse route tree and physicality. The best bet for him is to end in a favorable offensive scheme, such as the Saints or Chiefs.

#39: WR Michael Pittman Jr., USC (Adjusted Overall Grade: 70.83824054)

If a team doesn’t feel comfortable drafting Tee Higgins in the first round, Pittman Jr. is a great alternative option. He can catch any pass, is super physical at the catch point, and is a better route runner than he gets credit for.

#40: WR John Hightower, Boise State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 70.58563485)

Hightower is a relatively unknown prospect, as he just offers no sort of physicality whatsoever. His upside as a vertical receiver, however, is very similar to Will Fuller, and he’s one of my favorite “sleepers” in the draft.

The “70th Percentile” (Pick Range: 41-59)

Photo Cred:

#41: QB Josh Love, San Jose State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 69.41232118)

Even as NFL teams are becoming more accepting of smaller-statured quarterbacks, the 6’0″, 200 pound Love doesn’t have the physical tools that they’re looking for. Yet, he progressed so much this past season and does all the “little things” well, so he’s a great option for teams looking for a high-end backup/potential starter.

#42: WR James Proche, SMU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 69.406803)

Proche may have the best hands in this entire draft, but he’s an unrefined route runner who also isn’t very physical. He’s more of a slot receiver than a deep threat, though I still like him as a day-two prospect.

#43: WR Isaiah Hodgins, Oregon State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 69.406803)

Hodgins is a fantastic player at the catch point with excellent ball tracking ability; he’s not a great separator, but he’s a feisty player that could develop into a complementary option for a smaller, shiftier receiver.

#44: S Grant Delpit, LSU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 69.15408917)

Delpit plays a valuable prospect and projects very well in coverage, though he doesn’t stand out from your “traditional safety”. I’m okay with taking him in the first round, yet the drop-off between him and a day-two prospect may be minimal.

#45: CB Noah Igbinoghene, Auburn (Adjusted Overall Grade: 68.95882506)

With very poor ball skills and a very unrefined skillset, Igbinoghene will need time to develop. If he reaches his potential, though, he’ll be a terrific match-and-mirror corner with his athletic traits, so I understand why teams are very high on him.

#46: S Xavier McKinney, Alabama (Adjusted Overall Grade: 68.85330408)

He’s very versatile and may be the best coverage safety in this draft class, but McKinney projects more as a “safe player” than a playmaker, so although he projects as a above-average starting safety, I’m not sure there aren’t a lot of players with a similar skillset.

#47: WR Gabriel Davis, UCF (Adjusted Overall Grade: 68.81739502)

Davis doesn’t have any elite trait, which isn’t ideal. Still, he also is a reliable player with strong hands, so why shouldn’t a team take a shot on him on the second day of the draft?

#48: CB Essang Bassey, Wake Forest (Adjusted Overall Grade: 68.80536954)

We’ve already gone over how important slot corners are in today’s NFL, so while Bassey has severe physical limitations, his prolificness in zone coverage outweighs that. He’s a plug-and-play starter who also is super athletic.

#49: WR KJ Hamler, Penn State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 68.64899125)

Hamler is a smaller player who will strictly be a slot receiver, though he’s fantastic after the catch and also is shockingly adequate as a deep threat. If he’s used as a vertical slot receiver, such as Nelson Agholor in his best season with the Eagles in 2017, teams will be getting proper value for selecting the Penn State product.

#50: IDL Jordan Elliot, Missouri (Adjusted Overall Grade: 68.6093986)

I’m a huge fan of Elliot’s pass-rushing upside, especially since he was the highest graded interior defensive lineman in college football, per Pro Football Focus. Yet, he has too much room to grow, which is worrisome; at a non-valuable position, that prevents him from being a first-round caliber prospect based on this draft board.

#51: WR Donovan Peoples-Jones, Michigan (Adjusted Overall Grade: 68.60689026)

Peoples-Jones didn’t develop into the player he was supposed to be at Michigan, though it’s hard not to recognize his upside. He’s the 19th ranked receiver on my draft board, and is honestly higher rated than I’d like based on the importance of the wide receiver position.

#52: S Antoine Winfield Jr., Minnesota (Adjusted Overall Grade: 68.59011709)

With incredible instincts, above-average athleticism, and tons of potential in coverage, Winfield Jr. is a fantastic safety prospect. Yet, between his injury issues and lack of length, we once again have to raise the question: how high should this safety be drafted given the way teams have been able to find impact contributors at the position with relative ease?

#53: CB Amik Robertson, Louisiana Tech (Adjusted Overall Grade; 68.39039107)

You’re not going to find a more competitive player than Robertson, who is elite zone defender with rare ball production. He’ll flourish as a nickel corner.

#54: OT Lucas Niang, TCU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 68.14473926)

Niang will need some time to develop, but he should develop into a capable starting right tackle, and would do best in a power/gap scheme.

#55: LB Wille Gay Jr, Mississippi State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 68.01758899)

Were it not for the off-the-field issues, Gay Jr. would rank even higher on this list. He’s a fantastic coverage linebacker with unprecedented athleticism for the position, though he didn’t play much in college due to various suspensions.

#56: OT Jack Driscoll, Auburn (Adjusted Overall Grade: 67.87453225)

Driscoll will need to develop his play strength, but with his athleticism, as well as refinement in pass sets, I see him as a future starting tackle. He’d fit with a lot of teams, but I’d love to see him protect Kyler Murray in Arizona.

#57: TE Adam Trautman, Dayton (Adjusted Overall Grade: 67.73478895)

Ranked as the top tight end in this draft class, Trautman’s stock has declined ever since a poor showing at the combine. As a small-school prospect, it’s hard to gauge how developed of a player he is, though I like his upside as a receiver and in-line blocker. If it weren’t for the relative variance of drafting tight ends, he’d rank higher on the draft board.

#58: WR Bryan Edwards, South Carolina (Adjusted Overall Grade: 67.63856846)

Despite being a bigger-bodied target, Edwards isn’t someone who is going to come up with many contested catches. What he is, however, is a solid route-runner who is difficult to bring down after the catch. He’s the 20th ranked receiver, but yet, the value of position drives him ahead of some well-regarded players at less valuable positions.

#59: S Kyle Dugger, Lenoir-Rhyne (Adjusted Overall Grade: 67.59376637)

Coming from Lenoir-Rhyne, it’s nearly impossible to evaluate Dugger. Yet, he’s an athletic freak that is built to even play linebacker, so he could a defensive playmaker for teams that can’t select Simmons. He’ll need to develop better coverage instincts, which is concerning enough for him to probably not be a first-round caliber prospect, though he’s a terrific target in the second round.

The “60th Percentile” (Pick Range: 60-85)

Photo Cred:

#60: WR Quartney Davis, Texas A&M (Adjusted Overall Grade: 67.133571)

Davis isn’t a very exciting prospect, but he does do a good job creating separation, and tracks passes well. I’m not super excited about his prospects, but he plays a valuable position and succeeds in the most important area, which is noteworthy.

#61: CB Michael Ojemudia, Iowa (Adjusted Overall Grade: 67.07196999)

He’ll have to go to the right scheme, preferably, a zone-heavy or press-heavy scheme, but Ojemudia is your traditional physical, lengthy zone defender, and should follow in the paths of several other athletically limited NFL cornerbacks.

#62: S Ashytyn Davis, California (Adjusted Overall Grade: 66.97339699)

As a former track star, Davis is simply an elite athlete. Therefore, he’s built to be a single-high safety in the NFL, though he’s neither refined nor physical.

#63: WR Chase Claypool, Notre Dame (Adjusted Overall Grade: 66.88075142)

Even though he ran a sub-4.40 40-yard dash, I’d prefer for Claypool to move to tight end, where he has the size to play. He’s excellent in contested catch situations, but as a tight end, is lack of prescient route running and release packages would work better.

#64: CB Lamar Jackson, Nebraska (Adjusted Overall Grade: 66.87312616)

Jackson is almost the same exact player as Ojemudia, as although he’s athletically limited, he has the ball skills, physicality, and zone coverage instincts to be successful in the right defensive scheme.

#65: CB Troy Pride Jr., Notre Dame (Adjusted Overall Grade: 66.8601581)

Then, there’s Troy Pride Jr., who has zero ball skills whatsoever, and is unrefined overall. However, he’s an elite athlete, so overtime, the hope has to be that he can develop into a solid match-and-mirror cornerback.

#66: WR Collin Johnson, Texas (Adjusted Overall Grade: 66.75444858)

If he played a decade ago, Johnson would’ve been a first-round pick. His contested catch ability is fantastic, but he can’t create separation, and thus is likely a red zone threat or needs to be converted potential to tight end.

#67: OT Matthew Peart, UConn (Adjusted Overall Grade: 66.74602222)

At 6’7″ and 310 pounds, Peart has all the length you want for an offensive tackle. He’s super athletic and will be terrific in space, though he’ll need to establish better play strength and become more refined in his pass sets.

#68: CB Kindle Vildor, Georgia Southern (Adjusted Overall Grade: 66.6764437)

Vildor isn’t the greatest fit in today’s NFL given his lack of development in zone coverage, though he’s a good athlete who has upside in man coverage.

#69: Lavert Hill, Michigan (Adjusted Overall Grade: 66.49272931)

Though he’s not an exciting prospect, Hill is a capable zone defender who is even better in man coverage, and it wouldn’t shock me at all if he’s a low-end starting cornerback coming from a good program.

#70: S Terrell Burgess, Utah (Adjusted Overall Grade: 66.3718)

Burgess’ ability in man coverage is impressive for a safety, and he’ll be able to be utilized a lot as a slot corner, which enhances his value. Still, as a one-year starter, he’s another example of a good not great safety prospect; even in this draft class, there are several players who’ll be competent starters.

#71: CB Dane Jackson, Pittsburgh (Adjusted Overall Grade: 65.93726337)

I’m starting to sound like a broken record, but Jackson fits the mold as a physical zone defender; leave him on an island, however, and the outcome won’t be pretty.

#72: TE Cheyenne O’Grady, Arkansas (Adjusted Overall Grade: 65.83955384)

As a physical player who isn’t afraid to block or catch passes over the middle of the field, there is a lot to like with O’Grady’s skillset at the tight end position. However, he’s not much of a vertical threat, has off-the-field issues, and also didn’t perform well at the combine.

#73: IDL Ross Blacklock, TCU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 65.73819974)

I’m a big believer in Blacklock’s upside as an interior defender, since he’s very athletic. Yet, he’s unrefined, and unless you’re guaranteed of a high-end player at this position, drafting him within the top 40 picks is not a great usage of cost-benefit analysis.

#74: EDGE Julian Okwara, Notre Dame (Adjusted Overall Grade: 65.71649182)

Okwara will be a disastrous run defender, but with his pass-rushing upside and electric athleticism, who cares? The problem is, non blue-chip edge rushers don’t have a high success rate, and he has plenty of room to grow.

#75: WR Kalija Lipscomb, Vanderbilt (Adjusted Overall Grade: 65.61772295)

He’s not a vertical threat AT ALL, but Lipscomb offers an interest skillset with his route-running, hands, and run after catch ability. He’s yet another receiver in this class that could play a meaningful role for an offense down the road.

#76: EDGE K’Lavon Chaisson, LSU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 65.60464822)

Everything that applies to Okwara applies to Chaisson as well. I’m worried about his lack of production in college, though he’s an athletic marvel with plenty of length. It’d be a massive mistake to take him in the first round, though I’m on board with taking a chance on him on the second day of the draft.

#77: EDGE Yetur Gross-Matos, Penn State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 65.2619535)

Athletic player with a lot of upside yet no production in college? Gross-Matos also fits that bill, since he’s lengthy and has a lot of power, though is very underdeveloped as a pass rusher. If you’re going to be worth a high draft pick as an edge rusher, you better be ready to contribute right away, and although that also doesn’t apply to Chaisson or Okwara, that’s even more so the case with the Penn State pass rusher.

#78: TE Cole Kmet, Notre Dame (Adjusted Overall Grade: 65.19588911)

Kmet is a safer prospect as a solid run-blocker with the ability to be a reliable possession receiver, though without any vertical receiving ability, what’s the ultimate reward for drafting him? Since tight end is a position that is hard to make an impact right away, I’d rather draft a player with a much greater upside.

#79: S Geno Stone, Iowa (Adjusted Overall Grade: 65.18748536)

Stone is the exact reason why teams should be careful not to overdraft safeties. His coverage instincts are incredible, which means he’ll be a premier playmaking safety. Yet, he’ll likely be available on the third day of the draft; I’d much rather draft him there than one of the top safety prospects in the first round.

#80: WR Jauan Jennings, Tennessee (Adjusted Overall Grade: 65.15461251)

He didn’t test well at the combine at all, nor does he impress as a route runner, vertical receiver, or ball tracker. Still, he is so dynamic after the catch, and is another example of the high pay-off a receiver prospect can provide if he pans out.

#81: LB Patrick Queen, LSU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 65.13241967)

Linebacker has been a very difficult position for teams to draft, and Queen epitomizes that. He’s likely to be drafted in the first round, and although he is an athletic freak with upside in coverage, is more of a boom-or-bust type of player.

#82: LB Akeem Davis-Gaither, App State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 65.09494995)

Davis-Gaither will need to continue to add mass to stick at the position and will have a lot of room to grow coming from Appalachian State. I do love his upside as a pass-rusher and his overall athleticism, though he’s far from a sure thing at the position.

#83: LB/EDGE Zack Baun, Wisconsin (Adjusted Overall Grade: 65.05748021)

Linebacker/edge hybrids have been able to play a meaningful role for defenses, thanks to the growth of the Belichick tree. Yet, only four defenses figure to play that style of hybrid defense, and Zack Baun doesn’t fit as an off-ball linebacker or edge rusher- he is highly dependent on what team drafts him. Without a specific role and the likely learning curve of learning a new position, it’s probably not wise to invest too high of a pick on him. His versatility could allow him to be valuable in the right defensive scheme, however.

#84: QB Nate Stanley, Iowa (Adjusted Overall Grade: 64.5697074)

Stanley is almost certainly not going to be a starting quarterback, but he’s coming from a pro-style offense, and has the type of accuracy in the quick passing game to be an ideal backup quarterback. He thrived using play-action in college, so he’d be at his best in San Francisco, Tennessee, or with the Rams.

#85: G Netane Muti, Fresno State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 64.52457381)

It’s much easier for teams to find starting offensive guards than tackles, which is why every interior offensive lineman was pushed down the draft board. Still, Netane Muti is super powerful, athletic enough, and should be a reliable run blocker and pass protector.  If it weren’t for his injuries in college, he may have been developed enough to rank at least one percentile higher.

NOTE: For the prospects in the 50th Percentile and below, we’ll only highlight the prospects of note.

The “50th Percentile” (Pick Range: 86-111)

NCAA Football: SEC Championship-Georgia vs Louisiana State
Photo Cred: CBS Sports

#86: CB Shyheim Carter, Alabama (Adjusted Overall Grade: 64.48051613)

#87: LB Kenneth Murray, Oklahoma (Adjusted Overall Grade: 64.19567639)

Murray wasn’t asked to do much in coverage in college, and for what it’s worth, also struggled in run defense. He is a heat seeking missile who loves to play downhill, but his decision-making is very concerning when projecting his adjustment to the NFL.

#88: LB Troy Dye, Oregon (Adjusted Overall Grade: 64.15820666)

Dye is an exciting player in pass coverage, but he’s so limited in run defense, and is only an average tackler. Will he be Cory Littleton? That’s certainly possible, so I’m perhaps an even bigger fan of him than this ranking would indicate.

#89: EDGE Darrell Taylor, Tennessee (Adjusted Overall Grade: 64.03991605)

Taylor’s bull rush is fantastic, but he still is far from a blue-chip edge rusher prospect, so may be overvalued in this draft.

#90: IOL Nick Harris, Washington (Adjusted Overall Grade: 63.8463919)

He’s not the strongest of players, but Nick Harris thrives playing in space, and also has guard/center versatility. He’s a perfect fit for zone-blocking teams such as the 49ers, Rams, Browns, and Bengals.

#91: LB Logan Wilson, Wyoming (Adjusted Overall Grade: 63.82097908)

#92: EDGE Josh Uche, Michigan (Adjusted Overall Grade: 63.77911538)

Similarly to Zack Baun, Uche is a bit of a “tweener”, as he may not have the physical tools to be strictly an edge rusher. It’ll be up to the NFL to decide how to properly utilize his skillset, though ideally he’d be used as a linebacker/edge rusher hybrid- his versatility should be an asset, rather than a weakness.

#93: RB D’Andre Swift, Georgia (Adjusted Overall Grade: 63.7481227)

I’m a major fan of D’Andre Swift as a prospect. Unfortunately, he plays an invaluable and replaceable position, which hurts his value significantly. Still, with his explosiveness and receiving ability, he’s an instant playmaker for an offense.

#94: WR KJ Hill, Ohio State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 63.72318029)

#95: EDGE Jonathan Greenard, Florida (Adjusted Overall Grade: 63.70460169)

#96: RB Clyde Edwards-Helaire, LSU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 63.48738414)

Edwards-Helaire’s receiving ability is fantastic, as he shows the capability to even line up out wide. He’s also very shifty with super light feet, so he may very well be the best running back prospect in this draft class.

#97: WR Aaron Fuller, Washington (Adjusted Overall Grade: 63.30217081)

#98: LB Markus Bailey, Purdue (Adjusted Overall Grade: 63.22146338)

#99: WR Antonio Gandy-Golden, Liberty (Adjusted Overall Grade: 63.04956512)

#100: IOL Robert Hunt, Louisiana (Adjusted Overall Grade: 62.9845358)

He’ll have to move from tackle to guard, but Hunt is very powerful and has upside as both a run blocker and pass protector. Plus, it can’t hurt that he has experience at tackle, just in case a team needs a short-term fix at the position.

#101: CB Reggie Robinson, Tulsa (Adjusted Overall Grade: 62.78385953)

#102: OT Ezra Cleveland, Boise State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 62.48629304)

#103: OT Prince Tega Wanogho, Auburn (Adjusted Overall Grade: 62.31145341)

#104: OT Trey Adams, Washignton (Adjusted Overall Grade: 62.26376988)

#105: S K’Von Wallace, Clemson (Adjusted Overall Grade: 62.16083504)

Wallace fits best as a slot defender with his coverage ability, though for teams that like to blitz their defensive backs, he’ll also fit. His value may be even higher than is reflected by his ranking.

#106: TE Hunter Bryant, Washington (Adjusted Overall Grade: 62.12060195)

Bryant is more of a slot receiver than a tight end who is very similar to Evan Engram. He’s not physical and provides zero value when run-blocking, and if he’s going to be just a “big receiver”, you’d wish he’d be more of a reliable target.

#107: IOL Cesar Ruiz, Michigan (Adjusted Overall Grade: 62.10855088)

Another player with guard/center versatility, Ruiz is an athletic player who is pretty refined as a pass protector. You’d wish he played with more power on a consistent basis, however.

#108: LB David Woodward, Utah State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 62.09737144)

#109: OT Isaiah Wilson, Georgia (Adjusted Overall Grade: 62.00945769)

#110: OT Austin Jackson, USC (Adjusted Overall Grade: 61.97766867)

#111: LB Jordyn Brooks, Texas Tech (Adjusted Overall Grade: 61.94749251)

The “40th Percentile” (Pick Range: 112-134)

NCAA Football: Pac-12 Conference Championship-Oregon vs Utah
Photo Cred: Broncos Wire

#112: OT Ben Bartch, St. Johns (Adjusted Overall Grade: 61.85051258)

#113: LB Khaleke Hudson, Michigan (Adjusted Overall Grade: 61.53532547)

#114: IOL Jonah Jackson, Ohio State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 61.48688416)

Jackson epitomizes why teams shouldn’t overdraft interior offensive linemen. He likely won’t be drafted until the final day of the draft, yet he’s a super reliable pass protector who should be a day-one starter.

#115: QB Justin Herbert, Oregon (Adjusted Overall Grade: 60.9622654)

How much quarterbacks are valued greatly depends on the quality of the prospect, and in Justin Herbert’s case, I don’t understand the hype. He’s a passive player that struggles to go through progressions and doesn’t have much touch in the short term passing game; he’s the perfect example of the “toolsy” quarterback that teams fall in love with due to his size, arm strength, and athleticism, only to be looking for a new starting quarterback just a year or two later.

#116: QB Jacob Eason, Washington (Adjusted Overall Grade: 60.75960013)

#117: IDL Marlon Davidson, Auburn (Adjusted Overall Grade: 60.69609433)

Moving from edge rusher to the interior defensive line, Davidson has a lot of potential as  pass rusher. It’s a rather replaceable position, but he’s a powerful player and will be a nice asset for defensive coordinators on obvious passing downs.

#118: TE Bryce Hopkins, Purdue (Adjusted Overall Grade: 60.65447668)

#119: QB Mason Fine, North Texas (Adjusted Overall Grade: 60.55693485)

I’m a little surprised Fine isn’t getting a little more recognition leading into the draft. He’s a smaller-statured player, yet is accurate enough, has very productive in college, and makes plenty of plays out of structure.

#120: EDGE Bradlee Anae, Utah (Adjusted Overall Grade: 60.54518702)

#121: LB Francis Bernard, Utah (Adjusted Overall Grade: 60.48617299)

#122: OT Jared Hilbers, Washington (Adjusted Overall Grade: 60.48358456)

#123: LB Cam Brown, Penn State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 60.33629406)

#124: IOL Matt Hennessy, Temple (Adjusted Overall Grade: 60.21529315)

#125: OT Saahdiq Charles, LSU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 60.05443274)

#126: IOL Calvin Throckmorton, Oregon (Adjusted Overall Grade: 59.89033101)

#127: RB JK Dobbins, Ohio State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 59.64800952)

Dobbins is the perfect zone-runner with his vision, though he’s not quite as consistently impactful in the passing game as you’d like.

#128: IOL Tyler Biadasz, Wisconsin (Adjusted Overall Grade: 59.6360128)

#129: IOL Logan Stenberg, Kentucky (Adjusted Overall Grade: 59.81968706)

#130: S Julian Blackmon, Utah (Adjusted Overall Grade: 59.58536238)

#131: IDL Neville Gallimore, Oklahoma (Adjusted Overall Grade: 59.57562646)

Gallimore has some major flaws, but he offers upside as an athletic pass-rushing nose tackle, and if he can succeed in that role, a la Javon Hargrave, he’ll be a worthwhile investment. Still, as mentioned, he’s a flawed player, which isn’t ideal for an interior defensive lineman.

#132: IDL Justin Madubuike, Texas A&M (Adjusted Overall Grade: 59.57562646)

#133: IOL Ben Bredeson, Michigan (Adjusted Overall Grade: 59.45233854)

#134: OT Justin Herron, Wake Forrest (Adjusted Overall Grade: 59.37096873)

The “30th Percentile” (Pick Range: 135-164)

Photo Cred: FanDuel

#135: OT Tyre Phillips, Mississippi State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 59.24381263)

#136: TE Thaddeus Moss, LSU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 59.22411055)

The son of Randy Moss, Thaddeus Moss is an interesting prospect, as he’s the best run-blocking tight end of this class and has excellent ball skills. With subpar separation and vertical receiving ability, however, his immediate upside is limited

#137: TE Josiah Deguara, Cincinatti (Adjusted Overall Grade: 59.18835141)

#138: EDGE Trevis Gipson, Tulsa (Adjusted Overall Grade: 59.01018876)

He’ll need to develop a better array of pass-rushing moves, but Gipson wasn’t used properly in college, yet was still very productive- I prefer his upside over some of the other edge rusher he’s ranked around.

#139: EDGE Terrell Lewis, Alabama (Adjusted Overall Grade: 58.95802863)

#140: S Brandon Jones, Texas (Adjusted Overall Grade: 58.87099771)

#141: EDGE Khalid Kareem, Notre Dame (Adjusted Overall Grade: 58.60781058)

#142: RB Jonathan Taylor, Wisconsin (Adjusted Overall Grade: 58.59201853)

Taylor is a super explosive straight-line runner, but between his large amount of fumbles and lack of impact in the passing game, he’s definitely a step behind Swift and Edwards-Helaire; he’s a pretty flawless runner, but that’s ironically not the most important part of being a running back.

#143: S Myles Bryant, Washington (Adjusted Overall Grade: 58.51381537)

#144: S Kamren Curl, Arkansas (Adjusted Overall Grade: 58.47621723)

#145: EDGE Anfernee Jennings, Alabama (Adjusted Overall Grade: 58.33955846)

#146: EDGE Alton Robinson, Syracuse (Adjusted Overall Grade: 58.10856357)

#147: QB Jalen Hurts, Oklahoma (Adjusted Overall Grade: 58.04388537)

Hurts’ inability to go through progression is super alarming, even if he’s athletic and accurate. I like him as a day-three flyer, but his best role in the NFL would be backing up Lamar Jackson in Baltimore’s run-heavy offense.

#148: RB Antonio Gipson, Memphis (Adjusted Overall Grade: 58.01187533)

Gipson isn’t a traditional running back, yet he’s so explosive and offers pass-catching value as a converted receiver; he’s the perfect weapon for modern offenses. He’s the type of running back that teams should be targeting in the draft.

#149: S Levonta Taylor, Florida State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 57.98744141)

#150: S Jeremy Chinn, Southern Illinois (Adjusted Overall Grade: 57.924984326)

#151: S Tanner Muse, Clemson (Adjusted Overall Grade: 57.94984326)

#152: OT Hakeem Andeiji, Kansas (Adjusted Overall Grade: 57.92456815)

#153: TE Harrison Bryant, Florida Atlantic (Adjusted Overall Grade: 57.68646698)

#154: RB Anthony McFarland, Maryland (Adjusted Overall Grade: 57.55558293)

He wasn’t very productive in college and won’t run much between the tackles, yet McFarland’s explosiveness is incredible, so he’s the perfect change-of-pace back for a zone-blocking team.

#155: S Josh Metellus, Michigan (Adjusted Overall Grade: 57.46106744)

#156: EDGE Jabari Zuniga, Florida (Adjusted Overall Grade: 57.28890431)

#157: QB Steven Montez, Colorado (Adjusted Overall Grade: 57.19269119)

#158: QB James Morgan, FIU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 57.19269119)

#159: LB Malik Harrison, Ohio State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 57.00148798)

#160: IDL Raekwon Davis, Alabama (Adjusted Overall Grade: 56.84448605)

Davis didn’t develop into the all-around player he was supposed to be for the University of Alabama, which is very concerning. He could be a run-stuffing defensive tackle, but rather, I’d like him as a early-down “big edge” for a team that uses that type of player, such as the 49ers, Seahawks, or Jaguars- he has the length (6’7″) to play that role.

#161: IDL Davon Hamilton, Ohio State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 56.77445681)

Hamilton has some serious work to do with his pass-rushing, but he’s an elite run defender, is powerful, and is athletic for his size. With proper coaching, he could be a pass-rushing nose tackle, similarly to DJ Reader, Javon Hargrave, and prime Linval Joseph.

#162: S Alohi Gillman, Notre Dame (Adjusted Overall Grade: 56.63390835)

#163: TE Devin Asiasi, UCLA (Adjusted Overall Grade: 56.57793323)

#164: QB Jake Luton, Oregon State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 56.52389576)

The “20th Percentile” (Pick Range: 165-201)

Photo Cred:

#165: WR Austin Mack, Ohio State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 56.4818172)

#166: LB Davion Taylor, Colorado (Adjusted Overall Grade: 56.47691174)

Taylor only played one game in high school due to religious reasons, so he’s very underdeveloped. If teams use him right as a safety/linebacker hybrid, his athletic tools will be properly utilized, but he won’t be an immediate contributor whatsoever.

#167: EDGE Alex Highsmith, Charlotte (Adjusted Overall Grade: 56.46924505)

#168: S Jalen Elliot, Notre Dame (Adjusted Overall Grade: 56.44591764)

#169: TE Sean McKeon, Michigan (Adjusted Overall Grade: 56.25610085)

#170: RB Zack Moss, Utah (Adjusted Overall Grade: 56.24537189)

Moss is an intriguing running back based on his ability to create yards after contact, the most important skill when projecting running backs to the next level. Still, he’s not a standout athlete, nor is he a consistent receiver.

#171: S Jared Mayden, Alabama (Adjusted Overall Grade: 56.14513251)

#172: S Jordan Fuller, Ohio State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 56.06993623)

#173: IDL McTelvin Agim, Arkansas (Adjusted Overall Grade: 55.95325077)

#174: QB Anthony Gordon, Washington State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 55.89563339)

#175: RB Cam Akers, Florida State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 55.89337489)

#176: IDL Robert Windsor, Penn State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 55.65398894)

#177: TE Colby Parkinson, Stanford (Adjusted Overall Grade:  55.64819526)

#178: TE Albert Okwuegbunam, Missouri (Adjusted Overall Grade: 55.5409178)

#179: S JR Reed, Georgia (Adjusted Overall Grade: 55.43076784)

#180: IOL Michael Onwenu, Michigan (Adjusted Overall Grade: 55.29847695)

#181: EDGE Carter Coughlin, Minnesota (Adjusted Overall Grade: 55.26956195)

#182: OT Colton McKivitz, West Virginia (Adjusted Overall Grade: 55.04766151)

#183: EDGE Jonathan Garvin, Miami (Adjusted Overall Grade: 54.78521784)

#184: IOL Solomon Kindley, Georgia (Adjusted Overall Grade: 54.70506544)

#185: LB Michael Pinckney, Miami (Adjusted Overall Grade: 54.6408949)

#186: QB Bryce Perkins, Virginia (Adjusted Overall Grade: 54.63910865)

#187: EDGE Mike Danna, Michigan (Adjusted Overall Grade: 54.36703676)

#188: EDGE Trevon Hill, Miami (Adjusted Overall Grade: 54.33067952)

#189: OT Charlie Heck, North Carolina (Adjusted Overall Grade: 54.31651397)

#190: LB Justin Strnad, Wake Forrest (Adjusted Overall Grade: 54.30366732)

#191: RB Reggie Corbin, Illinois (Adjusted Overall Grade: 54.2767961)

You’d be hard-pressed to find a running back with as much agility/shiftiness as Reggie Corbin, who is simply a human joystick. He doesn’t have any sort of vision as a runner nor any sort of power, but he’s the perfect sixth-or-seventh round complementary running back.

#192: IOL Kevin Dotson, Louisiana (Adjusted Overall Grade: 54.21055783)

#193: IDL Bravvion Roy, Baylor (Adjusted Overall Grade: 54.11334563)

#194: IOL Damien Lewis, LSU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 54.04101236)

#195: LB Kamal Martin, Minnesota (Adjusted Overall Grade: 53.92897001)

#196: IOL Lloyd Cushenberry, LSU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 53.92798205)

#197: RB Darius Anderson, TCU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 53.90524371)

#198: WR Lynn Bowden, Kentucky (Adjusted Overall Grade; 53.74525557)

#199: TE Jacob Breeland, Oregon (Adjusted Overall Grade: 53.57416438)

#200: RB Eno Benjamin, Arizona State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 53.50109901)

#201: TE Jared Pinkney, Vanderbilt (Adjusted Overall Grade: 53.39536861)

The “10th Percentile” (Pick Range: 202-230)

Photo Cred: KSL Sports

#203: S Antoine Brooks, Maryland (Adjusted Overall Grade: 53.21247755)

#204: IDL Leki Fotu, Utah (Adjusted Overall Grade: 53.13293625)

#205: IDL Rashard Lawrence, LSU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 53.06290542)

#206: RB Ke’Shawn Vaughn, Vanderbilt (Adjusted Overall Grade: 52.97962198)

#207: RB DeeJay Dallas, Miami (Adjusted Overall Grade: 52.95354813)

#208: TE Charlie Taumopeau, Portland State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 52.53614894)

#209: IOL Jake Hanson, Oregon (Adjusted Overall Grade: 52.45848799)

#210: TE Joey Magnifico, Memphis (Adjusted Overall Grade: 52.42987148)

#211: QB Cole McDonald, Hawaii (Adjusted Overall Grade: 52.40979057)

#212: TE Mitchell Wilcox, South Florida (Adjusted Overall Grade: 52.35835318)

#213: WR Kendrick Rogers, Texas A&M (Adjusted Overall Grade: 52.35592428)

#214: IDL Josiah Coatney, Ole Miss (Adjusted Overall Grade: 52.15252687)

#215: IOL Shane Lemieux, Oregon (Adjusted Overall Grade: 52.02059553)

#216: QB Tyler Huntley, Utah (Adjusted Overall Grade: 51.98419348)

#217: RB JaMychal Hasty, Baylor (Adjusted Overall Grade: 51.92363099)

#218: LB Jacob Phillips, LSU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 51.68078613)

#219: LB Shaquille Quarterman, Miami (Adjusted Overall Grade: 51.6433164)

#220: RB Lamical Perine, Florida (Adjusted Overall Grade: 51.3239324)

#221: EDGE Kenny Willekes, Michigan State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 51.29794025)

#222: IOL John Simpson, Clemson (Adjusted Overall Grade: 50.28275448)

#223: TE Stephen Sullivan, LSU (Adjusted Overall Grade: 50.212804)

#224: RB Stephen Carr, USC (Adjusted Overall Grade: 50.12453523)

#225: IOL Tremayne Anchrum (Adjusted Overall Grade: 49.97192113)

#226: IOL Zach Shackelford (Adjusted Overall Grade: 49.60457261)

#227: IOL Darryl Williams, Mississippi State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 49.57631504)

#228: QB Sea Patterson, Michigan (Adjusted Overall Grade: 49.12661302)

#229: IDL Jason Strowbridge, North Carolina (Adjusted Overall Grade: 49.001211)

#230: LB Evan Weaver, California (Adjusted Overall Grade: 48.90802601)

The “5th Percentile and Below” (Pick Range: 231-241)

Photo Cred: Boston College Athletics

#231: IDL Osa Odighizuwa, UCLA (Adjusted Overall Grade: 48.72109403)

#232: OT Terrence Steele, Texas Tech (Adjusted Overall Grade: 48.19712691)

#233: EDGE James Smith-Williams, NC State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 47.54306995)

#234: QB Brian Lewerke, Michigan State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 47.3026255)

#235: RB AJ Dillon, Boston College (Adjusted Overall Grade: 45.97879283)

#236: IDL James Lynch, Baylor (Adjusted Overall Grade: 45.77986589)

#237: RB Josh Kelly, UCLA (Adjusted Overall Grade: 45.75716509)

#238: IDL Raequan Williams, Michigan State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 45.56977817)

#239: IOL Tommy Kraemer, Notre Dame (Adjusted Overall Grade: 45.53548138)

#240: EDGE Azur Kamara, Kansas (Adjusted Overall Grade: 45.41155497)

#241: IDL Larrell Murchison, NC State (Adjusted Overall Grade: 43.32884244)


One thought on “The Ultimate Positional Value 2020 NFL Draft Board

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s