The model graded Ian Thomas at pick #226; he was actually picked #101 by CAR. 8 NFL seasons in, he's carved out a genuine role (grading 8.0 of 20 per season), and the market has paid him — a second deal at $5.7M a year. The 4-tier model has him as a likely role. NFL grades have been modest so far (0% recent-3, 8% peak across 7 seasons). The AAV predictor called it: model said $7M/yr, actual was $6M.
Headline grade, verdict, and the one-line scout take
The league moved faster than our board — CAR took him at No. 101, 125 picks ahead of our No. 226 grade. His career is settling that argument now.
Draftanomics had Ian Thomas at #226 on draft night — a Day 3 grade — and CAR took him at No. 101, 125 picks earlier than our grade. Bust risk projects at 21%, below the position median — the model has a tight grade. The room had him #117 pre-draft; our board sat 109 spots lower.
Written from the live model's numbers — projected to round 7, and it updates whenever the model does. See methodology for what drives the take.
The written report — drafted from the fact sheet, every number traceable, honest about what we can't see yet
Which signals drove the grade up or down — in plain English
The analyst room, accuracy-weighted, plus where Draftanomics disagrees with it
Measurables, traits, and college play quality
Bust probability, injury history, character flags, pre-mortem
How well this prospect fits each of the 32 team schemes
Probability he's still on the board at each of your picks
Historical players this prospect resembles
Clips, scout notes, voice memos, written reports
Read the two ends and skim the middle: the model has a real track record telling stars and busts apart, but “solid starter vs. rotation guy” is close to a coin flip from public data — that's why those two bars are grayed. For his odds of outright busting, the Bust-risk panel next door is the number to trust.
4 public boards track this prospect. Per-board breakdown loads with the live board.
Highlight reels indexed from YouTube. Loads only when you press play.
The grade is held down by production trajectory, power-5 production share, and his charted total career snaps.
The grade is the 0-to-1 score the board sorts by — it only means something next to the rest of this class, which is why the rank above it is the number to quote.
Outcome shares from the 4-tier model. The Bust share here is a different model than the headline bust probability — for bust risk, use that number.
Everything that could go wrong with Ian Thomas, gathered in one place — the most serious flags listed first.
Roster-based need returns once the 2017 season is played — grading this year’s teams on last year’s depth chart would be guessing. What’s knowable now: the teams holding picks around No. 226, and which of them already spent premium capital at RB / WR / TE in the 2017 draft.
Gold means no recent premium investment at RB / WR / TE — the cleaner fit on paper. Grey means they already spent one.