I’ve gathered boards from 43 different rankers (Kiper was a late addition), 13 of them “Big Draft” media types and the other 30 as amateur evaluators. I’ve also updated the big boards from CBS, Matt Miller and NFL.com as well as a few others, but for the most part rankings haven’t changed since the last time I’ve posted them.
To go over the process again, you can click here. It describes how the board is built, and how we come up with the different categories, like “most polarizing player,” “biggest disagreements” and so on. As a quick summary, we’ve separated the rankings into two big boards: “forecasters” and “evaluators.”
Forecasters are primarily in the business of predicting how the draft will go (or, more accurately, their big boards tend to do that) in large part because of their access to information the NFL has, which can be good and bad—critical information like the nature of off-field issues and injuries are incorporated, but so are the lies teams feed the media.
Evaluators rely more on the data they can acquire from game tape (when available), the broadcast angle of games and publicly available quantitative information, like combine measureables and statistics. Many will rely on media reports, but recognize the limitations of that when applying injury or character information.