Refreshed just now
rank#50$2.2M
Big Ten→ SDG's 2016 class
Backtest: model vs. reality
The model graded Max Tuerk at pick #50; he was actually picked #66 by SDG. Model expects a second-deal AAV around $7M/yr.
Overview
Headline grade, verdict, and the one-line scout take
Draftanomics Rank
Low conviction#50C·USC
We had him No. 50 on draft night; SDG didn't call his name until No. 66 — a 16-pick gap between our board and the league's. His career is settling that argument now.
Draftanomics's take
Draftanomics had Max Tuerk at #50 on draft night — a Day 2 grade — and SDG took him at No. 66. The model's case leans on broad top-100 board coverage. Bust risk projects at 3%, below the position median — the model has a tight grade. The room had him #157 pre-draft; our board was 107 spots higher.
Written from the live model's numbers — projected to round 2, and it updates whenever the model does. See methodology for what drives the take.
Draftanomics Pick
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
Production
Measurables, traits, and college play quality
Risk
Bust probability, injury history, character flags, pre-mortem
Team fit
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
Comps
Historical players this prospect resembles
Film & notes
Clips, scout notes, voice memos, written reports