Draftanomics
  • 2027 board
  • Consensus board
  • 2028 way-too-early
  • Draft news
  • Simulator
  • The house mock
  • Draft order
  • Trade calculator
  • The Scouting Slate
  • Sleepers & reaches
  • Movers & fallers
  • Player comps
  • Dynasty rookie board
  • Track record
  • Past drafts, re-graded
  • Analyst leaderboard
My rankingsAccount
Get the weekly →
Draftanomics

Honest NFL Draft analytics. The model's receipts against actual NFL teams live on the track record.

Boards
  • 2027 board
  • Consensus board
  • Sleepers
Tools
  • Mock draft simulator
  • Plays Like
  • Dynasty rookie board
Track Record
  • Year-by-year results
  • Accountability Index
  • Our board, on the record
  • Past drafts, re-graded
  • Methodology
  • Developers · free API
  • About
Account
  • My board
  • Weekly email
Data + sources
RAS by Kent Lee Platte·Consensus Big Board (Arif Hasan)·nflverse·PFR·CFBD·All sources & credits·Methodology
Career-value model, live
Privacy·Terms·Press ⌘K to search·Draftanomics2026
  1. Draftanomics/
  2. 2019 board/
  3. Andrew Van Ginkel
Refreshed just now
Andrew Van Ginkel
2019 NFL Draft prospect

Andrew Van Ginkel

LB·Wisconsin
age 23.8 · 6'3" · 241 lb

On the live board, bust risk sits at 17% and the realistic range is No. 104 to No. 238.

187CompVince Biegel
→ MIA's 2019 class
Print sheet
⚠Limited public-board coverage (0 boards) — grade leans on stats + athleticism alone
Backtest: model vs. reality

The model graded Andrew Van Ginkel at pick #187; he was actually picked #151 by MIA. 7 NFL seasons in, he's hung on the fringe of the rotation (grading 5.1 of 20 per season), and the market has paid him — a second deal at $2.6M a year. The 4-tier model gives him a 44% chance at an elite career. His NFL play has graded as a solid starter (11% recent-3, 33% peak across 6 seasons). Model predicted $18M/yr; actual $3M (over by $16M).

Andrew Van GinkelLBDraftanomics #187
Print
Dossier
OverviewScouting reportWhy this gradeConsensusProduction6Risk3Team fit5Will he be there?Comps5Film & notes

Overview

Headline grade, verdict, and the one-line scout take

Draftanomics Rank
Medium conviction
#187LB·Wisconsin

The league moved faster than our board — MIA took him at No. 151, 36 picks ahead of our No. 187 grade. His career is settling that argument now.

Scouting report

The written report — drafted from the fact sheet, every number traceable, honest about what we can't see yet

Why this grade

Which signals drove the grade up or down — in plain English

Consensus

The analyst room, accuracy-weighted, plus where Draftanomics disagrees with it

Production6

Measurables, traits, and college play quality

Risk3

Bust probability, injury history, character flags, pre-mortem

Team fit5

How well this prospect fits each of the 32 team schemes

Will he be there?

Probability he's still on the board at each of your picks

Comps5

Historical players this prospect resembles

Film & notes

Clips, scout notes, voice memos, written reports

Draftanomics's take

Draftanomics had Andrew Van Ginkel at #187 on draft night — a Day 3 grade — and MIA took him at No. 151, 36 picks earlier than our grade. Bust risk projects at 17%, below the position median — the model has a tight grade.

Written from the live model's numbers — projected to round 6, and it updates whenever the model does. See methodology for what drives the take.

Draftanomics Pick?
#187
Day 3range #104–#238 · volatile
Bust Probability?
17%
0.79× EDGE / DL / LB class avg (21%)
≈ class avg
Model trust: MODERATE
Actual NFL Pick?
#151
MIA · Rd 5
Career Outcome · 7 seasons?
35.4
5.1 / season avg
Career outlook

Career outlook

How this is built →
5-year career arc
Elite
44%
Bust
0%
Starter
38%
Role
18%

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.

Second contract · signed
$2.6M/yr
1 years, $3M total.
We projected $18.3M/yr on draft night — richer than the market paid.
Bust risk
17%
from a model with a graded track record at this positionsecond opinion: 3 of 4 closest historical comps busted (75%)
Public-board consensus

No public-board coverage yet.

Pin a team in your account to see how this prospect fits your roster + cap.
Scout note
Private to this device — saved to your browser, never sent to a server.
Empty notes are auto-deleted.
Verdict
Model lower than NFL
Gap (actual − predicted)
-36

Film

Highlight reels indexed from YouTube. Loads only when you press play.

Working in his favor: his charted coverage grade career avg. Working against him: age and how many boards rank him top-100.

Age
-0.08
HS recruit rating
+0.02
Athleticism
+0.02
Scout consensus
-0.01

Model read

Model grade
0.38 of 1
Confidence?
99%
Predicted round
6

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.

Pulling the boards…
Mock-draft consensus
Pulling the mocks…
NFL play quality?
11
/ peak 33
Solid starter / role player
Across 6 NFL seasons.
4-tier outlook?
Elite
Model sees a real shot at Pro-Bowl-level career
Model trust: MODERATE
Elite
44%
Starter
38%
Role
18%
Bust
0%

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.

Model market value
$18.3M
($8.9M – $27.6M)
top-third at position
Actual: $2.6M(+$15.6M)
Model-predicted second-deal AAV ($M/yr).

Career trajectory + forecast

Solid points = actual NFL snap share per season. Dashed extension = forecast for upcoming years.

0%25%50%75%100%Y1Y2Y3Y4Y5Y6Y7
Actual Forecast (comp-based)
Risk dashboard

Elevated risk — watch the flags

Risk score29· WATCH

Everything that could go wrong with Andrew Van Ginkel, gathered in one place — the most serious flags listed first.

  • Public-board coverage0 sources
    No public big board has ranked this prospect yet. The grade rests entirely on stats, measurables, and age — hold it loosely.
  • Predicted-pick range#104–238 · 134-pick spread
    The model's own projections scatter widely for this prospect — the landing spot is genuinely uncertain.
  • Bust probability17%
    Modest bust risk — normal territory for the position.
  • Age23.8 yrs
    Within the typical LB draft-age band (~23.5).

Case for / case against

Named, concrete signals — every flag cites numbers, comp players, or schedule context.

Reasons to fade
Older prospect
medium
Age 23.8 at draft. Slightly older than the cohort median (~22.5); upside ceiling is trimmed.
Consensus skeptic
medium
1 board place him at mean rank #291; model has him #187 — a 104-spot gap. When boards fade a player this hard, the model is usually the one missing something.
Comp group bust rate
high
4 of 4 closest comps with NFL outcomes washed out: Vince Biegel, Antwione Williams, Duke Riley (+1 more). The neighborhood in feature space is dangerous.
Reasons to buy
No opportunity flags raised.
Scheme context
Loading…

Teams likely to draft

Based on each team's roster depth at EDGE / DL / LB, age, and recent capital invested.

TB#1 fit
Need at positionComfortableQuality starters9Roster spots short0Recent picks spent hereLittle
ARI#2 fit
Need at positionComfortableQuality starters9Roster spots short0Recent picks spent hereHeavy
IND#3 fit
Need at positionComfortableQuality starters11Roster spots short0Recent picks spent hereHeavy
JAX#4 fit
Need at positionComfortableQuality starters7Roster spots short0Recent picks spent hereHeavy
CIN#5 fit
Need at positionComfortableQuality starters10Roster spots short0Recent picks spent hereHeavy

Historical comps

Side-by-side with top comps →

Closest historical matches among prior EDGE / DL / LB prospects who were drafted, by overall statistical profile. A smaller distance means a closer match.

PlayerPosYearPickSnap trajectoryCareer arcDistance
Antwione WilliamsLB2016#169
→0 pts
Bust2.31
Vince BiegelLB2017#108
→0 pts
Bust2.33
Matthew WellsLB2015#178no dataTBD2.35
Duke RileyLB2017#75
→0 pts
Bust2.79
Matt MilanoLB2017#163
→0 pts
Bust3.00
Scout reports
Paste in any scouting report you trust; Draftanomics pulls out the concrete claims so you can weigh them against the model on the same page.
Loading…