Last season in an effort to outsource my mock draft PT to the Wisdom of the Crowds^TM, I created a consensus mock draft by compiling every mock draft posted in the PT thread. This season, although I know much more about the draftees given that I am part of the S25 class, I thought I would reprise the idea again for this year. Rather than simply write my own mock draft to share my specific opinions, this method consolidates several opinions about the draft into one place so that we can understand what agreement and disagreement exists about where specific prospects will go.
To gather this data, I used two sources. The first is the point task thread for S25 ISFL draft predictions. I recorded every unique mock draft posted. The reason for using only the unique drafts was that there is rampant copy-pasting for predictions because it saves a bunch of time that would be needed to learn about all of prospects in the class, figure out team positional needs, and other stuff that is needed to make a good mock draft. If you trust that the person you're copying from has done that work and produced a decent quality mock draft, copy-pasting is a solid way to earn some TPE. Unfortunately for the purposes of making a consensus evaluation of the draft class, it doesn't necessarily reflect any new information about how people evaluate the S25 prospects.
Last year, this was the only source of data I used. This data has the major limitation that the only information given is on the top 14 prospects in that person's rankings. Anyone not included in the PT mock draft could be ranked anywhere between 15 and the end of the draft, and we have no way of knowing exactly where. While I came up with several ways to deal with this limitation last season, this season I additionally include a new source of information: media article mock drafts. These drafts generally include more rounds and therefore more information about the precise valuation of more prospects, making them a very rich data source for this project. As of the time of writing there are only 5 media article mock drafts I considered. I ignored two of them for being written before the end of the season, and the writers of both of those made PT mock drafts which differed from their articles substantially. This leaves only @katarn22 's complete mock draft (which I obtained a sneak preview of, giving me the ranking numbers), @Troen 's 4 round mock draft, both written post expansion draft, and @charlit 's 3 round mock draft (posted just as I was about to publish this, but I can't complain because it's more good data).
Methods
Once again I did not consider positional needs, meaning that players' exact rankings may not match with the team most likely to take them. I continue to think this is a "good enough" approach because it is impossible to know exactly who is willing to position switch, and trades may happen anyway if a highly valued player falls to a specific position. It can be thought of as a "user over player" method, though of course it is some amalgamation of the specific philosophies that each person comes in with when making their own unique mock draft.
To generate rankings, I first took every player that was placed in the first round by at least one mock draft considered. I then calculated the "win rates" between each pair of players, counting the number of times that a player was ranked higher than another player. For two players within the top 14, this is fairly obvious. When one of the players was placed in the top 14 and the other was not, I give a win to the player in the top 14 as it is clear that they were ranked more highly. When neither player is in the top 14 in a point task mock draft, I do not assign a win to either player as we can't tell who would have been higher had the rankings extended further. This is where the media post mock drafts are extremely useful, as we can assign wins to players outside of the top 14 due to the more complete rankings.
Because of this extra information contained in media post mock drafts, as well as the fact that there are much fewer of them and they are more reliably thorough and well considered than the point task mock drafts, I assign a higher weighting to the media post mocks. For the rankings below I consider them as 5x more informative than point task mock drafts, but this is a parameter that can be adjusted in the spreadsheet I will link below.
I then rank each prospect by their aggregate win rate - how often they win a matchup chosen at random from among all other prospects. These give the primary ranking that I use. I also calculate several other metrics, including:
• How many mocks incude that prospect as a first rounder
• A raw average draft position, where that prospect gets ranked within the top 14 among mocks that include them in the top 14.
• An adjusted average draft position, where all prospects ranked outside the top 14 are given an inferred ranking based on their win % and all of these rankings are then averaged
• The standard deviation of each prospect's ranking across all drafts
• The frequency that each prospect is ranked within the top 14 / inferred at a specific rank outside of the top 14 across all mock drafts (included on the "Pick Frequency" sheet).
Spreadsheet Link
Mock Draft
Below I will include the full first round mock draft generated by user consensus, with tidbits for each prospect.
Pick 1
- Guy Fields, LB
Win Rate: 93.8%
Included in 98.4% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 3.1
Adj. Average: 3.3
Standard Deviation 3.77
Here is the part where I should say that I heavily biased my own sample by posting the first mock draft in the point task thread. In that mock draft I ranked Guy Fields (user @r0tzbua ) 1oa to the newly created Berlin Fire Salamanders. While I think he's a top prospect in the draft and would definitley make sense as the first overall pick, I also suspect that there is an anchoring effect where many users copied my 1oa assessment. As more mock drafts have rolled in, more disagreement over the 1oa ranking definitely appeared, but Fields was rarely ranked outside of the top 4, keeping him solidly at the top of the consensus mock. The one mock that doesn't include Fields in the top 14 is user @beefstu409's, generated by his automated tool that mostly considers TPE.
Pick 2
- Goat Tank, DT
Win Rate: 93.3%
Included in 100.0% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 3.6
Adj. Average: 3.6
Standard Deviation: 1.67
GOAT TANK. The only unanimous first round pick in the data I collected, and the lowest variance ranking of any prospect. Nearly 80% of mock drafts place Goat Tank in the top 4 picks, and those that don't have him close behind. Interestingly, user @Eldorian is most commonly ranked as the 3rd prospect, with 27 mocks placing him there compared to 3 at 1oa, 10 at 2oa, and another 10 at 4oa. Outside of the top 4, his most common landing spot is pick #7 with the Hahalua.
Pick 3
- Peter Patterson, CB
Win Rate: 92.0%
Included in 95.1% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 3.8
Adj. Average: 4.3
Standard Deviation: 4.14
This is me. While I included myself as the 2oa prospect in my original mock draft and there was a time when I had the lowest standard deviation of any prospect, as more mock drafts rolled in there were several that put me towards the bottom of the first round and some that excluded me entirely. Even I moved myself down to pick 4 as I continued to revise my mock draft. Still, 33 mock drafts rank me as the 2nd overall prospect, the most by far of anyone. That's enough to keep me in this top tier of prospects alongside Fields and Goat Tank.
Pick 4
- Tex Wrecks, DE
Win Rate: 85.3%
Included in 91.8% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 5.9
Adj. Average: 6.6
Standard Deviation: 3.59
User @209tacos starts off the next tier of players, mostly solid first rounders but those that people expect to go somewhere in the middle of the first round. Wrecks is set apart by the rest of this tier by 4 mocks placing them at 1oa, so there's a definite shot this consensus rank is underestimating him.
Pick 5
- Albert Ruschmann, DE
Win Rate: 82.6%
Included in 96.7% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 6.7
Adj. Average: 7.1
Standard Deviation: 3.56
Rushcmann (user @katarn22 ) has been included in the 3rd most mock drafts of any prospect, only missing out on two so far. While he's most commonly mocked at either the 5th pick or the 8th pick, he can be found going at almost any spot in the first round if you look hard enough. Should be very interesting to see where he ultimately ends up.
Pick 6
- Swantavius Jones, CB
Win Rate: 81.4%
Included in 75.4% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 5.6
Adj. Average: 8.0
Standard Deviation: 5.59
Jones has the second highest standard deviation of any player in the consensus top 14, which I think is absolutely stupid. This is in large part due to being left off entirely of one quarter of mock drafts submitted to this point, while being mocked 1oa in another 17. I would be shocked if user @Swanty did not go in the first round tonight, he is an incredible user (voted Most Dedicated Member in the DSFL S24 awards) and would be a great contribution to the war room of whatever team drafts him. Still, he was a 4th round pick in the DSFL draft so I understand if some people missed out on him when creating their mocks.
Pick 7
- Hank Winchester, LB
Win Rate: 80.7%
Included in 91.8% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 6.7
Adj. Average: 7.5
Standard Deviation: 3.76
(I wrote the below when Winchester was the #5 consensus prospect, before accounting for a mock draft submitted while writing that omitted Winchester from the first round entirely. I feel like that proves my point.)
This is another pick where I believe there is a strong anchoring effect from my first mock draft. I initially ranked Winchester at 5oa to the New York Silverbacks, who originally held this pick, due to my thoughts that long time user @timeconsumer would be a great addition to a nascent locker room to bring some additional veteran experience on board. 21 other mocks agreed with me, making Winchester the most common 5oa pick in mocks, but since the Yeti traded up for this pick there has not been a strong consensus on where he might end up.
Pick 8
- Tayshawn Crunk, S
Win Rate: 78.2%
Included in 88.5% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 7.8
Adj. Average: 8.7
Standard Deviation: 3.32
Crunk (user... uh... @Crunk ) is another player who I wouldn't be surprised if these consensus rankings undervalued. A 2nd round pick to the London Royals last year, Crunk is solidly placed around the middle of the 1st round this time around. 42 of the 54 mocks that include him place him somewhere between picks 6 and 9.
Pick 9
- Felix Archstone, OL
Win Rate: 78.2%
Included in 93.4% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 8.9
Adj. Average: 9.5
Standard Deviation: 3.29
Archstone is almost entirely mocked to either the Baltimore Hawks at pick 6 or the Orange County Otters at pick 11, and these two modes of the distribution lead his consensus rank to be somewhere in the middle. User @GlimsTC is the only S25 rookie to have a GM role at this point (I'm pretty sure) so he should definitely be expected to go in the first round tonight, and it will be interesting to see whether one of these 2 team/player connections holds true.
Pick 10
- Dan Foster, CB
Win Rate: 75.0%
Included in 82.0% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 6.5
Adj. Average: 8.5
Standard Deviation: 6.03
Foster is apparently the most controversial prospect in the S25 ISFL draft, which is surprising as I think user @Arkz is one of the least controversial people around as almost everyone I know respects his solid and levelheaded contributions to the league. Still, he has the highest ranking variance of any player in the consensus top 14 by a large margin, with 25 top 4 rankings (including a 1oa) alongside 11 mock drafts leaving him out of the top 14 entirely. I will say that this is one of the players that I personally have the hardest time with in my mock drafts, so I am definitely curious to see where he will end up.
Pick 11
- Medicinal Toblerone, OL
Win Rate: 74.9%
Included in 95.1% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 10.1
Adj. Average: 10.4
Standard Deviation: 2.42
At this point I think everyone has caught onto Toblerone and user @JuOSu 's link to the New Orleans Second Line, with fully half of the mocks including him placing him to this team. The former New Orleans general manager is almost a sure thing to be taken by his former team, and he has the second lowerst standard deviation of any player in the consensus top 14. Still I have to wonder whether he's going to be their first round pick or whether they'll wait until later to get the player they know wants to join their team.
Pick 12
- Raylan Crowder, DE
Win Rate: 71.6%
Included in 82.0% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 10.4
Adj. Average: 11.4
Standard Deviation: 3.49
The Dallas Birddogs' first round pick last year looks to have fairly strong agreement as a mid to late first round pick this year. Most commonly mocked at either pick #7, #12, or #13, user @Asked Madden is one of the lower standard deviation prospects at the tail end of the consensus top 14.
Pick 13
- Jimi DeSoto, LB
Win Rate: 51.8%
Included in 49.2% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 10.3
Adj. Average: 14.0
Standard Deviation: 4.31
DeSoto is the top of an extremely large group of prospects that there's no clear agreement on whether or not they will go in the first round tonight. I mocked user @Jimi to the Second Line in my first pass of the mock draft, and I suspect some anchoring has taken place as that is by far his most common destination in mock drafts that include him. He does have some decent upside, as 5 mocks included him in the top 9.
Pick 14 - James Gath, CB
Win Rate: 49.4%
Included in 23.0% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 5.5
Adj. Average: 14.0
Standard Deviation: 5.03
The fact that Gath is only included in 23% of mock drafts is something I take the blame for, as I totally blanked on him when doing my quick first pass on the mock draft. Since that blunder, he has been included in just under a quarter of mock drafts, but has an average ranking in the top 6 in mocks he is included in, including 2 mocks placing him at 1oa and 3 other top 4 rankings. While this is a huge draft class and I could absolutely see some people sliding out of the first round, I'd be surprised if user @Beefstu409 is one of those people given his great work on various tools that bring great analytics to the team that drafts him.
Conclusion
All in all, 39 players were included in at least one mock draft this year, which is a great testament to the depth and quality of users in this draft class. While I don't expect this consensus mock draft to get close to everything right, I think it can be a good tool to understand what the general opinion on players' rank can be. Happy mock drafting, and good luck to all my fellow S25 prospects in tonight's draft!
Extras
While I think continuing the mock draft format doesn't make much sense, here are the other 25 prospects included in at least one mock draft, in order of descending win rate. More info is in the spreadsheet linked above.
15. Killian Chambers, WR
16. Rich Triplet, CB
17. Harley Fank, WR
18. Donald McBobby, LB
19. Jameson Vermillion, RB
20. Djibutee McJimmerson, TE
21. Vance Slattery, DT
22. Richard Leaking, LB
23. Dukburg Quakstak, CB *Cannot be a first round pick, please stop including him in the first round
24. Mike Rotchburns, RB
25. Chuck Roth, OL
26. Dave Batista, TE *See Quakstak
27. L'Gazzy Burfict, LB
28. Davriel Lavigne, S *See Quakstak, Batista
29. Darren Pama, RB
30. NationalSimulation FootballLeague, S
31. Honky-Tonk Haywood, DT
32. Rusty Rucker, LB
33. Wasrabi Gleel, LB
34. Xmus Flaxon Jaxon-Waxon, S
35. Clay Stallworth, OL
36. Lionel Rumper, S
37. Ananda Adyan, OL
38. Buster Bawlls, RB
39. Ben Alexander-Arnold, CB
To gather this data, I used two sources. The first is the point task thread for S25 ISFL draft predictions. I recorded every unique mock draft posted. The reason for using only the unique drafts was that there is rampant copy-pasting for predictions because it saves a bunch of time that would be needed to learn about all of prospects in the class, figure out team positional needs, and other stuff that is needed to make a good mock draft. If you trust that the person you're copying from has done that work and produced a decent quality mock draft, copy-pasting is a solid way to earn some TPE. Unfortunately for the purposes of making a consensus evaluation of the draft class, it doesn't necessarily reflect any new information about how people evaluate the S25 prospects.
Last year, this was the only source of data I used. This data has the major limitation that the only information given is on the top 14 prospects in that person's rankings. Anyone not included in the PT mock draft could be ranked anywhere between 15 and the end of the draft, and we have no way of knowing exactly where. While I came up with several ways to deal with this limitation last season, this season I additionally include a new source of information: media article mock drafts. These drafts generally include more rounds and therefore more information about the precise valuation of more prospects, making them a very rich data source for this project. As of the time of writing there are only 5 media article mock drafts I considered. I ignored two of them for being written before the end of the season, and the writers of both of those made PT mock drafts which differed from their articles substantially. This leaves only @katarn22 's complete mock draft (which I obtained a sneak preview of, giving me the ranking numbers), @Troen 's 4 round mock draft, both written post expansion draft, and @charlit 's 3 round mock draft (posted just as I was about to publish this, but I can't complain because it's more good data).
Methods
Once again I did not consider positional needs, meaning that players' exact rankings may not match with the team most likely to take them. I continue to think this is a "good enough" approach because it is impossible to know exactly who is willing to position switch, and trades may happen anyway if a highly valued player falls to a specific position. It can be thought of as a "user over player" method, though of course it is some amalgamation of the specific philosophies that each person comes in with when making their own unique mock draft.
To generate rankings, I first took every player that was placed in the first round by at least one mock draft considered. I then calculated the "win rates" between each pair of players, counting the number of times that a player was ranked higher than another player. For two players within the top 14, this is fairly obvious. When one of the players was placed in the top 14 and the other was not, I give a win to the player in the top 14 as it is clear that they were ranked more highly. When neither player is in the top 14 in a point task mock draft, I do not assign a win to either player as we can't tell who would have been higher had the rankings extended further. This is where the media post mock drafts are extremely useful, as we can assign wins to players outside of the top 14 due to the more complete rankings.
Because of this extra information contained in media post mock drafts, as well as the fact that there are much fewer of them and they are more reliably thorough and well considered than the point task mock drafts, I assign a higher weighting to the media post mocks. For the rankings below I consider them as 5x more informative than point task mock drafts, but this is a parameter that can be adjusted in the spreadsheet I will link below.
I then rank each prospect by their aggregate win rate - how often they win a matchup chosen at random from among all other prospects. These give the primary ranking that I use. I also calculate several other metrics, including:
• How many mocks incude that prospect as a first rounder
• A raw average draft position, where that prospect gets ranked within the top 14 among mocks that include them in the top 14.
• An adjusted average draft position, where all prospects ranked outside the top 14 are given an inferred ranking based on their win % and all of these rankings are then averaged
• The standard deviation of each prospect's ranking across all drafts
• The frequency that each prospect is ranked within the top 14 / inferred at a specific rank outside of the top 14 across all mock drafts (included on the "Pick Frequency" sheet).
Spreadsheet Link
Mock Draft
Below I will include the full first round mock draft generated by user consensus, with tidbits for each prospect.
Pick 1
- Guy Fields, LBWin Rate: 93.8%
Included in 98.4% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 3.1
Adj. Average: 3.3
Standard Deviation 3.77
Here is the part where I should say that I heavily biased my own sample by posting the first mock draft in the point task thread. In that mock draft I ranked Guy Fields (user @r0tzbua ) 1oa to the newly created Berlin Fire Salamanders. While I think he's a top prospect in the draft and would definitley make sense as the first overall pick, I also suspect that there is an anchoring effect where many users copied my 1oa assessment. As more mock drafts have rolled in, more disagreement over the 1oa ranking definitely appeared, but Fields was rarely ranked outside of the top 4, keeping him solidly at the top of the consensus mock. The one mock that doesn't include Fields in the top 14 is user @beefstu409's, generated by his automated tool that mostly considers TPE.
Pick 2
- Goat Tank, DTWin Rate: 93.3%
Included in 100.0% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 3.6
Adj. Average: 3.6
Standard Deviation: 1.67
GOAT TANK. The only unanimous first round pick in the data I collected, and the lowest variance ranking of any prospect. Nearly 80% of mock drafts place Goat Tank in the top 4 picks, and those that don't have him close behind. Interestingly, user @Eldorian is most commonly ranked as the 3rd prospect, with 27 mocks placing him there compared to 3 at 1oa, 10 at 2oa, and another 10 at 4oa. Outside of the top 4, his most common landing spot is pick #7 with the Hahalua.
Pick 3
- Peter Patterson, CBWin Rate: 92.0%
Included in 95.1% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 3.8
Adj. Average: 4.3
Standard Deviation: 4.14
This is me. While I included myself as the 2oa prospect in my original mock draft and there was a time when I had the lowest standard deviation of any prospect, as more mock drafts rolled in there were several that put me towards the bottom of the first round and some that excluded me entirely. Even I moved myself down to pick 4 as I continued to revise my mock draft. Still, 33 mock drafts rank me as the 2nd overall prospect, the most by far of anyone. That's enough to keep me in this top tier of prospects alongside Fields and Goat Tank.
Pick 4
- Tex Wrecks, DEWin Rate: 85.3%
Included in 91.8% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 5.9
Adj. Average: 6.6
Standard Deviation: 3.59
User @209tacos starts off the next tier of players, mostly solid first rounders but those that people expect to go somewhere in the middle of the first round. Wrecks is set apart by the rest of this tier by 4 mocks placing them at 1oa, so there's a definite shot this consensus rank is underestimating him.
Pick 5
- Albert Ruschmann, DEWin Rate: 82.6%
Included in 96.7% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 6.7
Adj. Average: 7.1
Standard Deviation: 3.56
Rushcmann (user @katarn22 ) has been included in the 3rd most mock drafts of any prospect, only missing out on two so far. While he's most commonly mocked at either the 5th pick or the 8th pick, he can be found going at almost any spot in the first round if you look hard enough. Should be very interesting to see where he ultimately ends up.
Pick 6
- Swantavius Jones, CBWin Rate: 81.4%
Included in 75.4% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 5.6
Adj. Average: 8.0
Standard Deviation: 5.59
Jones has the second highest standard deviation of any player in the consensus top 14, which I think is absolutely stupid. This is in large part due to being left off entirely of one quarter of mock drafts submitted to this point, while being mocked 1oa in another 17. I would be shocked if user @Swanty did not go in the first round tonight, he is an incredible user (voted Most Dedicated Member in the DSFL S24 awards) and would be a great contribution to the war room of whatever team drafts him. Still, he was a 4th round pick in the DSFL draft so I understand if some people missed out on him when creating their mocks.
Pick 7
- Hank Winchester, LBWin Rate: 80.7%
Included in 91.8% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 6.7
Adj. Average: 7.5
Standard Deviation: 3.76
(I wrote the below when Winchester was the #5 consensus prospect, before accounting for a mock draft submitted while writing that omitted Winchester from the first round entirely. I feel like that proves my point.)
This is another pick where I believe there is a strong anchoring effect from my first mock draft. I initially ranked Winchester at 5oa to the New York Silverbacks, who originally held this pick, due to my thoughts that long time user @timeconsumer would be a great addition to a nascent locker room to bring some additional veteran experience on board. 21 other mocks agreed with me, making Winchester the most common 5oa pick in mocks, but since the Yeti traded up for this pick there has not been a strong consensus on where he might end up.
Pick 8
- Tayshawn Crunk, SWin Rate: 78.2%
Included in 88.5% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 7.8
Adj. Average: 8.7
Standard Deviation: 3.32
Crunk (user... uh... @Crunk ) is another player who I wouldn't be surprised if these consensus rankings undervalued. A 2nd round pick to the London Royals last year, Crunk is solidly placed around the middle of the 1st round this time around. 42 of the 54 mocks that include him place him somewhere between picks 6 and 9.
Pick 9
- Felix Archstone, OLWin Rate: 78.2%
Included in 93.4% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 8.9
Adj. Average: 9.5
Standard Deviation: 3.29
Archstone is almost entirely mocked to either the Baltimore Hawks at pick 6 or the Orange County Otters at pick 11, and these two modes of the distribution lead his consensus rank to be somewhere in the middle. User @GlimsTC is the only S25 rookie to have a GM role at this point (I'm pretty sure) so he should definitely be expected to go in the first round tonight, and it will be interesting to see whether one of these 2 team/player connections holds true.
Pick 10
- Dan Foster, CBWin Rate: 75.0%
Included in 82.0% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 6.5
Adj. Average: 8.5
Standard Deviation: 6.03
Foster is apparently the most controversial prospect in the S25 ISFL draft, which is surprising as I think user @Arkz is one of the least controversial people around as almost everyone I know respects his solid and levelheaded contributions to the league. Still, he has the highest ranking variance of any player in the consensus top 14 by a large margin, with 25 top 4 rankings (including a 1oa) alongside 11 mock drafts leaving him out of the top 14 entirely. I will say that this is one of the players that I personally have the hardest time with in my mock drafts, so I am definitely curious to see where he will end up.
Pick 11
- Medicinal Toblerone, OLWin Rate: 74.9%
Included in 95.1% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 10.1
Adj. Average: 10.4
Standard Deviation: 2.42
At this point I think everyone has caught onto Toblerone and user @JuOSu 's link to the New Orleans Second Line, with fully half of the mocks including him placing him to this team. The former New Orleans general manager is almost a sure thing to be taken by his former team, and he has the second lowerst standard deviation of any player in the consensus top 14. Still I have to wonder whether he's going to be their first round pick or whether they'll wait until later to get the player they know wants to join their team.
Pick 12
- Raylan Crowder, DEWin Rate: 71.6%
Included in 82.0% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 10.4
Adj. Average: 11.4
Standard Deviation: 3.49
The Dallas Birddogs' first round pick last year looks to have fairly strong agreement as a mid to late first round pick this year. Most commonly mocked at either pick #7, #12, or #13, user @Asked Madden is one of the lower standard deviation prospects at the tail end of the consensus top 14.
Pick 13
- Jimi DeSoto, LBWin Rate: 51.8%
Included in 49.2% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 10.3
Adj. Average: 14.0
Standard Deviation: 4.31
DeSoto is the top of an extremely large group of prospects that there's no clear agreement on whether or not they will go in the first round tonight. I mocked user @Jimi to the Second Line in my first pass of the mock draft, and I suspect some anchoring has taken place as that is by far his most common destination in mock drafts that include him. He does have some decent upside, as 5 mocks included him in the top 9.
Pick 14
- James Gath, CBWin Rate: 49.4%
Included in 23.0% of mock drafts
Raw Average: 5.5
Adj. Average: 14.0
Standard Deviation: 5.03
The fact that Gath is only included in 23% of mock drafts is something I take the blame for, as I totally blanked on him when doing my quick first pass on the mock draft. Since that blunder, he has been included in just under a quarter of mock drafts, but has an average ranking in the top 6 in mocks he is included in, including 2 mocks placing him at 1oa and 3 other top 4 rankings. While this is a huge draft class and I could absolutely see some people sliding out of the first round, I'd be surprised if user @Beefstu409 is one of those people given his great work on various tools that bring great analytics to the team that drafts him.
Conclusion
All in all, 39 players were included in at least one mock draft this year, which is a great testament to the depth and quality of users in this draft class. While I don't expect this consensus mock draft to get close to everything right, I think it can be a good tool to understand what the general opinion on players' rank can be. Happy mock drafting, and good luck to all my fellow S25 prospects in tonight's draft!
Extras
While I think continuing the mock draft format doesn't make much sense, here are the other 25 prospects included in at least one mock draft, in order of descending win rate. More info is in the spreadsheet linked above.
15. Killian Chambers, WR
16. Rich Triplet, CB
17. Harley Fank, WR
18. Donald McBobby, LB
19. Jameson Vermillion, RB
20. Djibutee McJimmerson, TE
21. Vance Slattery, DT
22. Richard Leaking, LB
23. Dukburg Quakstak, CB *Cannot be a first round pick, please stop including him in the first round
24. Mike Rotchburns, RB
25. Chuck Roth, OL
26. Dave Batista, TE *See Quakstak
27. L'Gazzy Burfict, LB
28. Davriel Lavigne, S *See Quakstak, Batista
29. Darren Pama, RB
30. NationalSimulation FootballLeague, S
31. Honky-Tonk Haywood, DT
32. Rusty Rucker, LB
33. Wasrabi Gleel, LB
34. Xmus Flaxon Jaxon-Waxon, S
35. Clay Stallworth, OL
36. Lionel Rumper, S
37. Ananda Adyan, OL
38. Buster Bawlls, RB
39. Ben Alexander-Arnold, CB
Code:
2,848 words![[Image: 67893_s.png]](http://signavatar.com/67893_s.png)
![[Image: 002p.png]](https://i.postimg.cc/YqxHKpBC/002p.png)
![[Image: GlimsTC.gif]](https://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/GlimsTC.gif)
![[Image: image0.png]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/372602034198806530/707467132568338462/image0.png)
![[Image: Ahf3LtW.png]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/379532993070628864/703443515136278608/Ahf3LtW.png)
![[Image: 7F47ZQG.gif]](https://i.imgur.com/7F47ZQG.gif)
![[Image: 67366_s.gif]](https://signavatar.com/67366_s.gif)
![[Image: lip-chap.jpg?width=383&height=468]](https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/461498035348701185/777250920941223966/lip-chap.jpg?width=383&height=468)
![[Image: k4AYgU9.gif]](https://i.imgur.com/k4AYgU9.gif)
![[Image: TSKa9dQ.png]](https://i.imgur.com/TSKa9dQ.png)
