Refreshed just now
rank#79$1.4M
Limited public-board coverage (1 board) — grade leans on stats + athleticism alone
Backtest: model vs. reality
The model graded Trey Hill at pick #79; he was actually picked #190 by CIN. 3 NFL seasons in, he's barely gotten on the field (grading 1.1 of 20 per season), and the market has paid him — a second deal at $0.4M a year. So far, the league's caution is winning the argument. The 4-tier model leans toward the bust tier as the most likely outcome; elite upside is only 2%. NFL grades have been modest so far (0% recent-3, 0% peak across 3 seasons).
Overview
Headline grade, verdict, and the one-line scout take
Draftanomics Rank
Low conviction#79OL·Georgia
We had him No. 79 on draft night; CIN didn't call his name until No. 190 — a 111-pick gap between our board and the league's. His career is settling that argument now.
Draftanomics's take
Draftanomics had Trey Hill at #79 on draft night — a Day 2 grade — and CIN took him at No. 190, 111 picks later than our grade. The model's case leans on his age curve. Bust risk projects at 54%, elevated against the position baseline. The room had him #65 pre-draft; our board sat 14 spots lower.
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
Production3
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