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. Michael Jackson
Refreshed just now
Michael Jackson
2019 NFL Draft prospect

Michael Jackson

CB·Miami (FL)
age 22.3

On the live board, bust risk sits at 33% and the realistic range is No. 40 to No. 228.

120rank#120$1.2MCompArtie Burns
→ DAL's 2019 class
Print sheet
Backtest: model vs. reality

The model graded Michael Jackson at pick #120; he was actually picked #158 by DAL. 7 NFL seasons in, he's hung on the fringe of the rotation (grading 5.6 of 20 per season), and the market has paid him — a second deal at $0.7M a year. The 4-tier model has him as a likely role. NFL grades have been modest so far (2% recent-3, 8% peak across 6 seasons). Model predicted $6M/yr; actual $1M (over by $5M).

Michael JacksonCBDraftanomics #120
Print
Dossier
OverviewScouting reportWhy this gradeConsensusProduction6Risk2Team fit5Will he be there?Comps5Film & notes

Overview

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

Draftanomics Rank
Medium conviction
#120CB·Miami (FL)

We had him No. 120 on draft night; DAL didn't call his name until No. 158 — a 38-pick gap between our board and the league's. 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

Risk2

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 Michael Jackson at #120 on draft night — a Day 3 grade — and DAL took him at No. 158, 38 picks later than our grade. The model's case leans on his age curve and broad top-100 board coverage. Bust risk projects at 33%, near the position baseline. The room had him #90 pre-draft; our board sat 30 spots lower.

Written from the live model's numbers — projected to round 4, and it updates whenever the model does. See methodology for what drives the take.

Draftanomics Pick?
#120
Day 3range #40–#228 · volatile
Bust Probability?
33%
1.68× CB / S class avg (20%)
well above class avg
Model trust: WEAK
Actual NFL Pick?
#158
DAL · Rd 5
Career Outcome · 7 seasons?
38.9
5.6 / season avg
Career outlook

Career outlook

How this is built →
5-year career arc
Elite
13%
Bust
1%
Starter
28%
Role
58%

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
$0.7M/yr
2 years, $1M total.
We projected $5.7M/yr on draft night — richer than the market paid.
Bust risk
50%
comp-based — 2 of 4 closest comps busted
Model says: 33%⚠ the CB / S bust model has no real track record here — trust the comps above instead
Public-board consensus

5 public boards track this prospect. Per-board breakdown loads with the live board.

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 higher than NFL — outcome pending
Gap (actual − predicted)
+38

Film

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

Working in his favor: age and his charted total career snaps. Working against him: how many boards rank him top-100.

Age
+0.03
Conference strength
-0.02
Athleticism
-0.01

Model read

Model grade
0.48 of 1
Confidence?
99%
Predicted round
4

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?
2
/ peak 8
Below-average play
Across 6 NFL seasons.
4-tier outlook?
Role
Model expects a depth / rotational role
Model trust: MODERATE
Elite
13%
Starter
28%
Role
58%
Bust
1%

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
$5.7M
($0.0M – $12.5M)
rotational / depth
Actual: $0.7M(+$5.0M)
Model-predicted second-deal AAV ($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 score24· WATCH

Everything that could go wrong with Michael Jackson, gathered in one place — the most serious flags listed first.

  • Bust probability33%
    Elevated bust risk — the profile carries one-year-wonder, age, or athleticism red flags.
  • Predicted-pick range#40–228 · 188-pick spread
    The model's own projections scatter widely for this prospect — the landing spot is genuinely uncertain.
  • Age22.3 yrs
    Within the typical CB draft-age band (~23).
  • Public-board coverage5 sources
    Plenty of public boards have a read — the grade is well corroborated.

Case for / case against

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

Reasons to fade
No athletic testing
medium
No Combine drills or Pro Day numbers on file while most of the class has tested — the athletic part of the grade is unmeasured.
Comp group has bust risk
medium
1 of 2 closest comps with NFL outcomes ended up backups or busts: Maurice Canady. Mixed signal from history.
Reasons to buy
No opportunity flags raised.
Scheme context
Loading…

Teams likely to draft

Based on each team's roster depth at CB / S, age, and recent capital invested.

NE#1 fit
Need at positionComfortableQuality starters7Roster spots short0Recent picks spent hereLittle
LA#2 fit
Need at positionComfortableQuality starters9Roster spots short0Recent picks spent hereLittle
ARI#3 fit
Need at positionComfortableQuality starters4Roster spots short1Recent picks spent hereHeavy
SF#4 fit
Need at positionComfortableQuality starters9Roster spots short0Recent picks spent hereLittle
JAX#5 fit
Need at positionComfortableQuality starters7Roster spots short0Recent picks spent hereHeavy

Historical comps

Side-by-side with top comps →

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

PlayerPosYearPickSnap trajectoryCareer arcDistance
Artie BurnsCB2016#25
↑7 pts
Starter0.82
Will RedmondCB2016#68no dataTBD0.93
Harlan MillerCB2016#205
↓40 pts
Contributor0.96
Maurice CanadyCB2016#209
↑72 pts
Bust1.31
Juston BurrisCB2016#118
↑26 pts
Contributor1.40
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…