 |
| Trotwood (OH) Trotwood-Madison linebacker Mike McCray |
McCray is a 6'4", 230-pounder who claims a 4.61 forty. As a junior in 2011, he made 132 tackles, 5 interceptions (3 of which he returned for touchdowns), 2 forced fumbles, and 1 fumble recovery. As a sophomore he made 65 tackles, 3 interceptions, and 3 forced fumbles.
Ratings:
ESPN: 4-star LB
Rivals: 4-star LB, #44 overall
Scout: Unranked
247 Sports: 4-star ATH, 92 grade, #10 ATH, #168 overall
McCray's father, as you all probably know by now, played linebacker at Ohio State in the 1980s. Ohio State has yet to offer the Buckeye legacy, which is reportedly a thorn in the McCrays' side and perhaps a reason why Mike the Younger has decided to choose the Wolverines. It might not be wise to close the door on Ohio State making a run at him, but at this point, he seems solidly committed to Michigan and convinced that Ann Arbor is the place for him to be. There were rumblings recently that Tennessee was his leader, but he canceled a scheduled trip to Rocky Top and instead visited the Michigan campus, where he pledged to the coaching staff.
McCray is a very good athlete with excellent straight line speed for a guy his size. As a receiver and interceptor, he shows soft hands, makes good breaks on thrown footballs, and is hard to catch in the open field. However, I tend to disagree with a lot of the scuttlebutt out there that he's destined for the MIKE linebacker. He does say that he's being recruited as an inside linebacker, but he doesn't have the requisite skill set for the position, in my opinion. He needs to play downhill more and read run plays quicker. There are times when he takes poor angles in run pursuit, and he's also not as aggressive of a hitter as I would expect from a kid his size. I don't think his highlight clips are that impressive for a linebacker who's supposedly the 44th-best player in the country (to Rivals), aside from the interception returns. Defensive touchdowns are great, but a middle linebacker needs to make his biggest impact as a run stopper.
I also don't think he should play defensive end. Do you really want to take a guy who had eight interceptions in his sophomore and junior seasons (at least three of which were returned for touchdowns?) and make him a defensive end, where he'll only drop into coverage on a rare zone blitz? That doesn't make much sense, either.
The way I see it, McCray looks like a future SAM linebacker. He could still be used in coverage at times, and since he's not the most instinctive run stopper, rushing him off the edge would force him to play downhill and take some of that indecision out of the process. I see some similarities at this point between McCray and outgoing senior J.B. Fitzgerald.
For people who didn't like my Logan Tuley-Tillman scouting report, stop reading here. There is a monster at the end of this book.
I don't see McCray as a truly instinctive linebacker, at least not to the same level as James Ross and Joe Bolden. He doesn't seem to be a real "finisher" when it comes to tackling. He leaps at a bunch of guys and drags them to the ground with his weight, rather than wrapping up and driving his feet; on the numerous highlights I've seen, I think I've seen one impressive tackle. There are times where he almost gets a guy to the ground and needs somebody else to come and clean up. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I don't like it when dudes jog into the end zone, and he does it multiple times. This is a kid with all kinds of athletic potential but he's not college ready from the perspective of technique and football maturity.
Cue the nasty e-mails.
Trotwood-Madison High School is the alma mater of current Wolverines Roy Roundtree and Brandon Moore. McCray, commitment #14 for Michigan in 2013, is also teammates with former Michigan target Cam Burrows, a cornerback who is committed to Ohio State.
TTB Rating: 74
This is a high school kid - not even in his senior year. Save your criticisms about technique until he gets on campus and has come collegiate coaching. Your take on his potential is right on – and it’s all that matters.
ReplyDeleteIf you don't want criticisms of players, you're on the wrong website.
DeletePoint well taken.
DeleteGoodbye
Here's Thunder's scale.
Delete100 = Best prospect in the country at his position; high likelihood of 1st round NFL potential (Ex: Charles Woodson)
90-99 = Outstanding starter in Big Ten; likely All-Big Ten and All-American; high likelihood of NFL draft potential (Ex: Brandon Graham)
80-89 = Very good starter in Big Ten; good chance of All-Big Ten; some NFL draft potential (Ex: Jonas Mouton)
70-79 = Solid starter in Big Ten; some NFL draft potential (Ex: Brandon Minor)
60-69 = Average starter in Big Ten; little NFL draft potential (Ex: Mark Ortmann)
50-59 = Below average starter or good backup (Ex: John Ferrara)
40-49 = Average backup or solid special teams contributor (Ex: Darnell Hood)
1-39 = Below average backup or special teams contributor (Ex: Brandon Logan)
NOTE: Examples are based on a player's completed college career, and NOT his potential as a recruit.
A problem for some with some of Thunder's rating is that for example in the case of Kaleb Ringer who got a big time reduction, part of the criteria has to do with who's coming in with you and who's ahead of you and then Thunder's opinion on where, when and how you get on the field in view of who you will be competing against in practice..
If indeed my understanding on the thought process is even close to correct, that's all way beyond subjective analysis and very unique. In other words, Thunder is rating you against/within the world in which you are going to compete.
So, 74 is a solid starter with draft potential. Is that so bad? I'd personally put the kid into the high 70s maybe low 80s under this criteria, but a lack of big hits at his size/speed is something to wonder about. Every recruit ain't gonna be Charles Woodson, as much as we all would really like it to be.
Finally, let me close by saying that with regards to Kaleb Ringer, I still think he must have asked Thunder's wife for a date.
He sure knows how to read where the ball is going and it looks like it's pretty hard to block a big enough piece to keep him out of the play.
ReplyDeleteHe gets there.
Tackling you can teach, hitting maybe not so much, but I like him, I'm glad he's with us.
RABBLERABBLERABBLE!
ReplyDeleteHATER!!!!
ReplyDeleteSigned,
Mike McCray Sr.
Thunder,as you said he doesn't seem be a good fit at WDE or Mike. But wouldn't you want at least a some pass rush from your Sam? So that got me to think about why the coaching staff offered this kid in the first place. I know a lot of considerations go into offering, but I'd like hear your thoughts about it. Do you think it might have something to do with possibly moving to TE if he doesn't pan out at LB?
ReplyDeleteI don't think the coaches would offer a linebacker if what they really want is a tight end. I think the versatility might help in the long run, but I'm sure the coaches think he can help at linebacker.
Delete"There is a monster at the end of this book."
ReplyDeleteExcellent use of a "Grover" quote. (That was Grover, right?)
Potential (which seems great) aside, how do you 'spose he got the #44 overall ranking?
Yes, that was Grover.
DeleteI think he got the #44 overall ranking by being big and fast. I mean, if he does run a 4.61 forty at 6'4" and 230-240 lbs., that's pretty damn impressive. And he's not a bad football player by any stretch of the imagination. I would just expect the #44 overall player to be better at some things.
McCray a 74 on your scale? I'm going to have to disagree. His pass coverage skills are pretty darn good for his size. His run coverage instincts seem great too, I have no idea what you're talking about. He shoots up gaps and attacks. There seems to be little hesitation from the snap to his diagnosis of a play and picking which gap he's hitting.
ReplyDeleteThe only bad thing I have to say about his play is he doesn't seem like the best tackler. He doesn't get low enough and seems to depend on his strength or body weight to drag down a defender, but that can be fixed.
JC's TTB ranking, 86
I agree that his pass coverage skills are pretty darn good, but as I mentioned, the #1 thing for a linebacker (especially a MIKE/SAM) should be stopping the run. And I don't see the run stopping ability that you do.
DeleteAbility and instincts are two different things to me. His instincts look pretty good (to me.) However, his ability to stop the run could be improved with better tackling technique, and a little more aggression. I am confident hell be an above average talent based on athleticism alone. It is nice to have you keep us grounded though. JC
DeleteI posted above at 6:17 and looking at my post now I'm afraid it might come off as questioning the ability of McCray the player. I really love his potential and high ceiling and I'm thrilled that he's joining Maize and Blue. My question was more being curious how the coaches envision using him in the grand scheme since he has such great hands.
ReplyDeleteWow a 74...you cold.
ReplyDeleteI don't know how you get 132 tackles if you don't have good run stopping instincts. He is constantly around the ball and making plays. Agree, some technique improvements will be needed, but I think you're being too harsh.
ReplyDeleteYou can be around the ball without being extremely instinctive or a great tackler.
DeleteI am really starting to think that you just take random criticisms and throw them in your evaluations to sound like an expert. Things like, "bad instincts" or "needs to work on his footwork." You think that if you take a contrarian view, it makes you sound smart. This review is mostly hot air.
ReplyDeleteYou're entitled to your opinion.
DeleteThankfully, Thunder is an honest voice. Most recruiting sites are focused on fluffing everyone up into a future NFL all-pro.
DeleteI like the "contrarian" opinions offered. Honest criticism is great. If you can't take it, don't play high level D1/BCS ball. I think the coaches love his potential and will stash him behind the 2012 kids until his red-shirt sophomore or junior year. Having a great 2012 LB class allows us to take kids that may not be as polished as others.
ReplyDeleteThat said I am also surprised that rivals has him at 44, if you seem to see holes in his game. you said he is like JB. But if he reaches his potential, who does he remind you of from past teams?
I see a little bit of Prescott Burgess in McCray. Burgess was a slow developer, though, so we might see McCray get to his potential a little quicker.
DeleteIt's really hard to project this kind of thing IMO. No one thought Frank Clark would make an impact right away. And Ramon Taylor was considered raw too. Seems like the unexpected happens more often than not in regard to timelines of player development.
DeleteFor all we know McCray could be playing ahead of an older guy like RJS by '13 or '14.
I might argue that Taylor could still be considered a raw prospect. Outside of EMU (if I remember correctly), he really didn't play that much. And even Clark wasn't used too often, although he played pretty well when he was used.
DeleteI'd take Prescott Burgess in a heartbeat.
DeleteHe was a pretty solid upperclassman.
True, but Taylor and Clark seem to have passed some older players on the depth chart already - when most considered them to be developmental-type recruits. There are some recruits who appear ready to contribute right away (e.g., Forcier, Countess, Kalis) and do, but others who don't (e.g., Justin Turner, Jeremy Gallon). Then you have guys like Martavious Odoms, Vincent Smith, and Desmond Morgan, who you think will take a few years, but emerge as players right away.
DeleteProjecting how good someone will be is hard. Adding how quickly he'll develop into a contributing player is even harder, especially since the situation (position changes, attrition, etc.) plays a significant role.
I think you're spot on concerning his tackling ability. He doesn't miss the tackle, but he drags down these much smaller H.S. kids after they gain a few more yards. While I agree his run diagnosis is not great, like a James Ross, I think it's still decent. The part I disagree with is the JB Fitzgerald comparison. McCray has much more upside, the kid is a talented athlete, he just needs a couple years in the program.
ReplyDeleteI agree he has more upside than what we saw from Fitzgerald, but with the slow run diagnosis, that's what he looks like right now.
DeleteFitzgerald was a very highly rated recruit. He's contributed consistently to the team. It just turned out he didn't have the 'it' factor, athletically or mentally or both, to be a quality starter.
DeleteIt strikes me that these reviews have a lot of insight into what guys are like now, but less on their ceiling and the probability the coaching staff turns them into something resembling their ceiling. I'm reminded of your Frank Clark writeup, in which I think you gave him a 59. You also included a quote from Ed Orgeron about how coaches have to believe they can clean up technique. I have no doubt that Clark's game needed a ton of work. But I wonder if Mattison/Hoke are being more forward-looking in their evaluations?
ReplyDeleteAnd that's not to say that high school juniors can't have red flags. I'm more of a bball guy than football. A high school pg who can't shoot is less likely to shoot well at the next level than someone who already has a killer J. I have every confidence in your statement that McCray's run instincts stink *now.* But as someone who knows little about football, I have difficulty projecting whether that's correctable or not. And I'm more interested in what current deficiencies you think are unfixable or hard to fix, as opposed to the magnitude of all his current deficiencies, were they never addressed.
As an absurd example: suppose LeBron James were to begin a college footbal career tomorrow. I'm less interested in how bad his route-running is today and more interested in what you think about the probability distribution of his ability 2 years from now, when you combine 6'9, strength, and speed with coaching from Hecklinski. But I'm suspicious your ranking system would give him a 65 because his routes suck today.
You are correct that these reviews point out current deficiencies. It's really difficult to say which problems are fixable and which aren't. For kids who are hard-headed and refuse to change, lots of things might be unfixable. I would say that any great athlete has at least a chance to be successful at the Big Ten level if he puts in the time and the mental work. Unfortunately, that type of thing is very difficult to gauge.
DeleteSerious, potentially unfixable red flags to me are: lack of aggression, slowness, laziness, poor balance, and pad level (for linemen and linebackers). Kids who have those qualities are going to have a hard time succeeding because they're innate.
Play recognition, footwork, and various other qualities can be taught and coached up.
I always try to point out when kids have a lot of potential (both Tuley-Tillman and McCray have lots of potential). And if a kid is a poor athlete, then I will try to pass along that notion, too...because poor athletes are the ones who are bound to sit on the bench. Fortunately for Michigan, Hoke seems to be bringing in good athletes who are well coached or good athletes who need good coaching. This is not the case for Rich Rodriguez, who brought in some subpar athletes, period.
You might take a little less heat if you did a floor/ceiling projection. It's fairly common in the world of baseball scouting. Outside of the blog being criticized, I'd say it's a more informative approach.
ReplyDelete