Draft season is a mess. Every year, we watch the same cycle: scouts spend months grinding tape, analytical models build profiles based on decades of data, and then, about three weeks before the first round, everyone loses their minds because a quarterback ran a fast 40-yard dash in shorts. It’s exhausting. Honestly, it’s why the stick to the model mock draft has become such a cult favorite for people who actually want to understand where the value lies in the NFL Draft.
Instead of chasing the latest "inside scoop" from a guy who heard something at a pro day, these models look at what actually predicts NFL success. It’s cold. It’s calculated. It often tells you things you don’t want to hear about your favorite college superstar.
The Reality Behind the Stick to the Model Mock Draft
Most mock drafts you see on major networks are "intel-based." That’s just a fancy way of saying the writer is calling scouts and agents to find out what teams might do. That’s valuable for predicting the order, sure, but it’s terrible at predicting who will actually be good at football. The stick to the model mock draft flips that. It doesn't care if a GM likes a player's "grit" or "intangibles."
If the data says a 210-pound edge rusher with a slow 3-cone drill is going to bust, the model flags it.
Take the 2023 draft as a prime example. Most "intel" drafts had teams scrambling for Will Levis in the top five. Why? Because he looked the part. He had the arm. He "felt" like a franchise guy. But analytical models—like those used by guys like Kevin Cole or the PFF research team—were screaming about his sack rate and age-adjusted production. While the "intel" drafts were busy being wrong about Levis going early, the model-based approaches were much more skeptical.
Models generally weigh a few specific things above all else:
📖 Related: The Eagles and Chiefs Score That Changed Everything for Philadelphia and Kansas City
- Age-adjusted production: Did you dominate when you were 19, or did you only start winning when you were 23 against younger kids?
- Market share: What percentage of your team's yards and touchdowns did you personally account for?
- Physical thresholds: Are you actually big/fast enough to play the position at the pro level?
Why We Ignore the Data (And Why That’s a Mistake)
Humans are suckers for a good story. We love the "late bloomer" narrative. We love the guy who "overcame the odds." A stick to the model mock draft has no soul, which is its greatest strength. It won't get tricked by a highlight reel of a receiver making a one-handed catch against a cornerback who will be selling insurance in six months.
Think about the wide receiver position. History tells us that "Early Declare" players—those who leave college after three years—outperform those who stay for four or five years at a staggering rate. Yet, every year, a senior has a massive breakout season and climbs into the first round of "expert" mocks. The model stays disciplined. It remembers that the fifth-year breakout is often an outlier.
The "stick to the model" philosophy is basically the Moneyball of the NFL Draft. It's about playing the probabilities. You aren't trying to be right about every single player. You're trying to be right more often than the guy who is guessing based on "vibes."
The Quarterback Problem
Drafting QBs is basically gambling in a dark room. Models struggle here more than anywhere else because so much of QB play is mental and situational. However, even here, sticking to the model saves you from disasters.
High-level models almost always prioritize:
👉 See also: The Detroit Lions Game Recap That Proves This Team Is Different
- Adjusted Completion Percentage
- Pressure-to-Sack Ratio (This is huge—if you take too many sacks in college, you’ll take even more in the NFL)
- Rushing floor
If a quarterback has a high pressure-to-sack ratio, the stick to the model mock draft is going to bury them, regardless of how high "Mel Kiper" has them on a big board. It’s about risk mitigation. In a league where a first-round bust can fire a coaching staff, mitigating risk is the whole game.
The Intersection of Scouting and Data
Don't get it twisted. This isn't about ignoring the tape entirely. The best models actually incorporate "consensus big board" data as a proxy for what scouts see. But the "stick to the model" part means that when the data and the "hype" disagree, you side with the data. Every. Single. Time.
Look at someone like Kyle Hamilton. When he ran a "slow" 40-yard dash, he tumbled down boards. The "intel" mock drafts moved him out of the top 10. But the analytical models looked at his range, his height/weight profile, and his elite PFF grades. The models said: "Stay the course. He's elite."
The Baltimore Ravens, arguably the most model-forward team in the league, stuck to their board and got an All-Pro safety at pick 14. That is the stick to the model mock draft philosophy in action in a real-world war room.
Building Your Own Model-Based Perspective
You don't need a PhD in statistics to use this approach. You just need discipline. If you’re looking at a draft class, start by filtering out the noise.
✨ Don't miss: The Chicago Bears Hail Mary Disaster: Why Tyrique Stevenson and Bad Luck Changed a Season
Ignore the "he's a workout warrior" tweets. Look for the guys who produced early and often. Look for the players who stayed healthy.
Most importantly, look for the "red flags" that models hate.
- Small-school players with mediocre production (if you're at a small school, you have to dominate).
- Older prospects who didn't break out until they were 22.
- Players with poor agility scores (3-cone and 20-yard shuttle are often more predictive than the 40-yard dash).
When you build a stick to the model mock draft, it forces you to confront your own biases. You might hate a certain player because he plays for a rival school, but if his metrics are off the charts, the model won't let you ignore him.
The Actionable Pivot: How to Use This Information
If you want to actually win your draft pool or just be the smartest person in the room on draft night, stop following the "hype" mocks that change every time a reporter tweets. Instead, find a reputable data-driven source—think Establish the Run, PFF, or even certain creators on YouTube who focus on "Adjusted Production"—and track how their boards differ from the "Media Consensus."
The gap between those two is where the money is made.
Next Steps for the Savvy Fan:
- Audit the "Early Declares": Before the draft starts, make a list of every underclassman at WR and RB. These are your "green light" players.
- Check the Sack Rates: For the top QB prospects, look up their "Pressure-to-Sack" percentage. If it's over 20%, be very, very careful. That's a historic "bust" indicator.
- Ignore the 40-yard dash for Edge Rushers: Focus on their 10-yard split and 3-cone. That's the "burst" that actually translates to sacks.
The NFL Draft is a game of probability. No one knows the future, but the stick to the model mock draft approach gives you the best odds of being on the right side of history. It’s not about being "right" about a specific player; it’s about having a process that works over time. Trust the process, ignore the pro day fluff, and let the numbers do the heavy lifting.