Connect with us

Madden NFL 18 Player Ratings - All First Round Draft Picks

Madden NFL 18

Madden NFL 18 Player Ratings - All First Round Draft Picks

ESPN has posted the Madden NFL 18 player ratings for all 32 first round draft picks. Check them out and post your thoughts.

  • Myles Garrett (Overall – 83)
  • Mitchell Trubisky (Overall – 77)
  • Solomon Thomas (Overall – 79)
  • Leonard Fournette (Overall – 81)
  • Corey Davis (Overall – 79)
  • Jamal Adams (Overall – 81)
  • Mike Williams (Overall – 79)
  • Christian McCaffrey (Overall – 81)
  • John Ross (Overall – 77)
  • Patrick Mahomes II (Overall – 76)
  • Marshon Lattimore (Overall – 76)
  • Deshaun Watson (Overall – 76)
  • Haason Reddick (Overall – 73)
  • Derek Barnett (Overall – 75)
  • Malik Hooker (Overall – 76)
  • Marlon Humphrey (Overall – 75)
  • Jonathan Allen (Overall – 73)
  • Adoree’ Jackson (Overall – 74)
  • O.J. Howard (Overall – 82)
  • Garett Bolles (Overall – 77)
  • Jarrad Davis (Overall – 74)
  • Charles Harris (Overall – 73)
  • Evan Engram (Overall – 75)
  • Gareon Conley (Overall – 75)
  • Jabrill Peppers (Overall – 76)
  • Takkarist McKinley (Overall – 75)
  • Tre’Davious White (Overall – 78)
  • Taco Charlton (Overall – 75)
  • David Njoku (Overall – 78)
  • T.J. Watt (Overall – 74)
  • Reuben Foster (Overall – 76)
  • Ryan Ramczyk (Overall – 78)
Continue Reading
35 Comments

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Discussion
  1. Madden's ratings guy consistently blows these ratings. Guys coming in with ratings (Garrett, OJ Howard) that exceed solid/good veterans with actual production?
    Come. On.
    I'm not even touching McCaffrey's 81 (huge eyeroll) anyone who plays Madden knows he'll be a HUGE weapon until he proves he isn't--when it should be the other way around.
    I 100% agree...but how are you suppose to rate rookies? Some will be better than vets...unless you want all rookies to come into Madden with a 60overall rating, which is unrealistic
    Kushmir
    Madden's ratings guy consistently blows these ratings. Guys coming in with ratings (Garrett, OJ Howard, that exceed veterans with actual production?
    Come. On.
    I'm not even touching McCaffrey's 81 (huge eyeroll) anyone who plays Madden knows he'll be a HUGE weapon until he proves he isn't--when it should be the other way around.

    Some of it is expectation based off of draft slot also, I mean do you not think these guys wouldn't have been drafted as highly as they were if they weren't on par, and better than some NFL veterans talent wise??
    Outside of QB, no one drafts top 10 picks that they don't expect to come in day one typically as a starter and be productive. I'm at a point where I don't care so much about the overall, I look at the players skill set for the position.
    Now once we get to the bottom of the 1st, and into the 2nd and beyond I think that's where we can really begin to question higher ratings. However when constricted to the top 10-15 I think some arguments can be made that these guys are better than some starters on NFL teams already.
    Bradohan
    I 100% agree...but how are you suppose to rate rookies? Some will be better than vets...unless you want all rookies to come into Madden with a 60overall rating, which is unrealistic

    You sure? ok i'll bite...other than Bosa, Zeke and Tunstill which first rounders played at AVERAGE NFL starter level? and sure--i'll wait.......
    Oh, and for kicks which 2016 draft picks who were rated high and didn't produce went down? THAT'S WHY they can't be exceeding guys who are actually solid/good UNTIL they actually...you know...play well. Mister Ratings Guy rarely gets around to fixing bad ratings.
    Christian McCaffery is God, apparently. Holy moley that's quite a rating for him.
    When you look at the list, almost every first round pick is rated as a quality starter in Madden. This rating scale blows my mind.
    Dj_MyTime
    Some of it is expectation based off of draft slot also, I mean do you not think these guys wouldn't have been drafted as highly as they were if they weren't on par, and better than some NFL veterans talent wise??

    I think we'd both agree that expectation/potential goes out of the window when the games actually start. And with 1,600 players to rate? Historically, bad/way off Madden ratings have lingered for much too long.
    Being on a par (or better) with NFL veterans talent-wise and meeting their production are two completely different things. Every year we have countless examples of draft workout warriors and guys with "potential" who never become average NFL starters.
    The #1 draft pick (a "cant miss prospect" btw) had 5TDs and 7INTs...his QB rating was 63.6. He had as many fumbles as TD passes....so tell me, did he play at average NFL starter level?....and if not, what's his rating now?
    Gosens6
    Christian McCaffery is God, apparently. Holy moley that's quite a rating for him.
    When you look at the list, almost every first round pick is rated as a quality starter in Madden. This rating scale blows my mind.

    It blows mine too. I can't imagine a rating scale where rookies are coming in rated higher than 75 or so....
    these ratings seem all over the place to me, and many are too high. I wish they showed their development traits - won't know how good these guys are in CFM until we see that.
    The skill set of player can be high, but what should separate a rookie from vet is the mental game how fast the learn the playbook. Adjusting to the game. I think they are only a few ratings that address the mental aspect is awareness, play recognition , and maybe consistency rating.
    Kushmir
    You sure? ok i'll bite...other than Bosa, Zeke and Tunstill which first rounders played at AVERAGE NFL starter level? and sure--i'll wait.......

    Based on PFF's player grades: Carson Wentz, Jalen Ramsey, Ronnie Stanley, DeForest Buckner, Jack Conklin, Karl Joseph, Taylor Decker, Keanu Neal, Ryan Kelly, Artie Burns
    I'd say the Madden rankings are right where they need to be for the most part considering pre-draft analysis, etc.
    rich7sena
    Based on PFF's player grades: Carson Wentz, Jalen Ramsey, Ronnie Stanley, DeForest Buckner, Jack Conklin, Karl Joseph, Taylor Decker, Keanu Neal, Ryan Kelly, Artie Burns
    I'd say the Madden rankings are right where they need to be for the most part considering pre-draft analysis, etc.

    PFF is solid but not infallible...but ok fine, i'll give you those (all of those guys were at-best average level starters) So 13 of the 31 picks played at average NFL starter level or higher and you're ok with guys rated 81-83? Rookies are generally below average, anyone who pays attention KNOWS this.
    The other issue is Ramsey was rated (get ready to laugh) an 85....he was solid in coverage had 65 tackles, 2TFLs, 2INTs, 1FF, 14 PDs and 1TD...those are solid but nothing to write home about.
    Guys like Corey Coleman (78) with production like 33rec, 413yds and 3TDs? c'mon...no way.
    Gold standard for rookie ratings are Moss, Freeney, Peppers and AP. Recently guys like Von Miller, Jake Long and Suh got added to that list. All were rated in the 80s at the end of their rookie years when their production validated those ratings--not before.
    Who can forget when Reggie Bush came into Madden rated an 87? Ridiculous....every year we go through this. There have been less than 10 guys in the past 20yrs who deserved 80+ ratings at the END of their rookie seasons....soooo yeah.
    BreakingBad2013
    Surprised that there's such a difference between Garrett and Barnett.

    You're going to love Derek Barnett in Philadelphia. He brings a non-stop motor every single play and plays with pure anger. He got his sacks against the best of the best OL's including Alabama. I remember him as a true freshman beating the all-American Iowa left tackle in the bowl game time after time. Philadelphia made a great pick with him.
    Kushmir
    PFF is solid but not infallible...but ok fine, i'll give you those (all of those guys were at-best average level starters) So 13 of the 31 picks played at average NFL starter level or higher and you're ok with guys rated 81-83? Rookies are generally below average, anyone who pays attention KNOWS this.

    Unfortunately, there is no way to know which 13/31 players will be average to above average starters their first year so it would be at least equally unfair to unilaterally rate rookies below veterans (many of whom are below average themselves). I follow the draft pretty closely and I'd say the first round ratings are more or less within the ballpark of appropriateness. If the Madden team sees fit, they can lower or raise a players rating during the year.
    Kushmir
    The other issue is Ramsey was rated (get ready to laugh) an 85....he was solid in coverage had 65 tackles, 2TFLs, 2INTs, 1FF, 14 PDs and 1TD...those are solid but nothing to write home about.

    Ramsey was at least a top 15 corner last season - no hyperbole. The 85 rating was spot on.
    Kushmir
    Guys like Corey Coleman (78) with production like 33rec, 413yds and 3TDs? c'mon...no way.

    Coleman got hurt and only played 10 games in 2016 and his pre-season rating was a 76. Secondly, pedigree matters. Coleman was a very good playing at Baylor and he should be given a chance to live up to projections. How realistic would it of been to debut Odell Beckham at 65 overall? How realistic would it of been to drop Melvin Gordon significantly after his rookie year? Fact is, there is plenty of data on these players before they play a down.
    Kushmir
    There have been less than 10 guys in the past 20yrs who deserved 80+ ratings at the END of their rookie seasons....soooo yeah.

    How can that be when there were at least 6 guys (by my count) who did at the end of last season? (Prescott, Ramsey, Elliott, Tunsil, Conklin, Bosa).
    Kushmir
    Rookies are generally below average, anyone who pays attention KNOWS this.

    That's not the case at all. Especially with 1st rounders, which all of these guys are.
    I can name a ton of rookies the past few years who were major components on their teams their rookie seasons and a lot of them weren't even first rounders.
    Kushmir
    There have been less than 10 guys in the past 20yrs who deserved 80+ ratings at the END of their rookie seasons....soooo yeah.

    Are you serious with this? At this point I just think you're trolling because nobody who follows the NFL even casually would think this.
    rich7sena
    Ramsey was at least a top 15 corner last season - no hyperbole. The 85 rating was spot on.

    That's hilarious. I can't even respond to that.
    rich7sena
    Prescott, Ramsey, Elliott, Tunsil, Conklin, Bosa

    I should have been more specific...guys like Moss, AP, Freeney, Peppers, Von, Watt and Long (and sure Zeke and Bosa are in that group) DESERVED an 80+ rating after their rookie seasons. Their production was outstanding....the fact that Madden's rating guy gave players like Ramsey (lol) Tunsil and Dak an 80+ means little--almost the opposite in fact...its almost the opposite of credibility.
    BA2929
    That's not the case at all. Especially with 1st rounders, which all of these guys are.
    I can name a ton of rookies the past few years who were major components on their teams their rookie seasons and a lot of them weren't even first rounders.

    1st rounders? lol...wow. I dunno....maybe look at those guys actual production again? Its accepted that most NFL players make their biggest leaps in year 2--but ok....curious: you consider 48 rec, 756 and 4TDs above average for a WR? I don't...guess what? Those are Calvin Johnson's rookie numbers. Even he didn't set the world on fire......and there's no shame in it--most rookies don't. Look at guys like Vick, Carson Palmer, Eli, Mario Williams, Stafford's rookie production....you'll notice a theme.
    Naming rookies who were major components to their teams AFTER they've produced isn't the trick, remember? Doing it BEFORE the draft is.....and unless you can do that? What you mentioned isn't really a thing. My point is it makes sense to rate guys higher after they produce--you know, since there's such a thing as roster updates and all.....*shrug*
    I am just glad rookies aren't incredibly over-rated like they have been in years past. I am comfortable with the first round guys mostly being in the 70s.
    Kushmir
    That's hilarious. I can't even respond to that.
    I should have been more specific...guys like Moss, AP, Freeney, Peppers, Von, Watt and Long (and sure Zeke and Bosa are in that group) DESERVED an 80+ rating after their rookie seasons. Their production was outstanding....the fact that Madden's rating guy gave players like Ramsey (lol) Tunsil and Dak an 80+ means little--almost the opposite in fact...its almost the opposite of credibility.

    Jalen Ramsey was a legit top 15 cornerback...I don't see what's so blasphemous about that. He was in the top 10 in passer rating allowed (68.0) despite facing 90 targets which was significantly more than almost every other elite cornerback. Whether or not you agree with PFF, the numbers speak for themselves.
    I guess my argument is that you'll get a handful of rookies that will outperform their launch ratings and a handful that will underperform. That will happen regardless if the benchmark is set in the 70s overall for 1st rounders or the 60s...
    Joey Bosa, Deforest Buckner (look at his tape, dude was a beast and one of the most durable players in the nfl last season), Ezekiel Elliot, Jalen Ramsey, Ronnie Stanley (one of the top up and coming left tackles in the game during the second half of last season. Did not surrender a sack during his final 8 games I believe), Jack Conklin (a top 10 tackle), Keanu Neal, Ryan Kelly and Artie Burns each outperformed their launch ratings. Setting the benchmark lower just shifts the problem rather than solving it. Sure, you can rate them all low and just wait until they play to up their ratings, but what about the users who play with the day one rosters? I don't think you could justify having all rookies rated at 65 or lower on the day one roster, when it is a surefire fact that many of them will be starting on their respective teams at some point during the season. Again, I know it's essentially a crapshoot as to which players will end up starting, but I think the method that EA currently uses is probably the most reasonable way of going about it.
    I think the distribution of ratings is fine. You can quibble with some of the numbers individually, but low 70s to low 80s feel like good, conservative estimates to me given recent performance of rookie classes.
    But I came here mostly to quibble that McCaffrey is not an 81 at this point IMO, especially considering Madden doesn't weight HB receiving stats heavily in its OVR calculation. Mahomes is way too high at 76 (most said he's extremely raw and he can't play for 2-3 years during the evaluation process) and certainly shouldn't be the same OVR as Watson.
    BigOrangeVol4Life
    You're going to love Derek Barnett in Philadelphia. He brings a non-stop motor every single play and plays with pure anger. He got his sacks against the best of the best OL's including Alabama. I remember him as a true freshman beating the all-American Iowa left tackle in the bowl game time after time. Philadelphia made a great pick with him.

    I always thought if the Browns would have took Trubisky that the best thing for them was to come back and take Barnett with their second first round pick. I think he's going have the better career over Garrett and I'm surprised of the ratings difference between him and Garrett as well.
    I think we just gotta come to realize that there is no reason to complain when we can just edit the ratings as we see fit when we get the game. I do like the idea of lower OVRs with Superstar Development to give that extra boost.
    DucksForever
    I guess my argument is that you'll get a handful of rookies that will outperform their launch ratings and THE VAST MAJORITY that will underperform.

    FIXED.
    We simply disagree then.
    Passer rating? lol...you don't think it's awfully convenient you select the one stat where he's top 10 while ignoring that none of his other measurables (save tackles) stand out? That's not how grading players works. It's a combination of those metrics that determines rating (or should) Ramsey may very well be a legitimately rated 85 one day....but its not today--maybe look at the production of "real" 80+ guys and do a comparison.
    Kushmir
    Passer rating? lol...you don't think it's awfully convenient you select the one stat where he's top 10 while ignoring that none of his other measurables (save tackles) stand out? That's not how grading players works. It's a combination of those metrics that determines rating (or should) Ramsey may very well be a legitimately rated 85 one day....but its not today--maybe look at the production of "real" 80+ guys and do a comparison.

    Your logic is flawed on grading players - particularly cornerback. How good a corner is isn't directly linked to the box score. You have to actually watch the games.
    A few points...
    These OVR are the raw OVR and will obviously change once the rosters are imported into CFM. OLB Watt to the Steelers will likely go up in their 3-4 Pass Rush OLB scheme, McCaffrey might likely go down if the Panthers still have Powerback set as their scheme archetype at HB.
    They can't predict busts ahead of time, firstly because you can never tell (2013 draft anyone? Trent Richardson's Rookie OVR??). But also these 1st round picks are the future stars of the NFL market and I suspect there would be a crap storm if the ratings guy marked some down based on "bust or boom potential".
    The problem with these rookie ratings highlights 2 problems with ratings in Madden. No1 is the progression system, XP doesn't work well as unless that rookie has a shot at being a starter in year 1 or 2 then they never make enough XP to jump up when they're entering their veteran years AND the XP cost jumps up by then too. A hidden "potential" and "progression/regression" rating system would allow jumps in attributes and OVR without being tied to playing time (I wonder what Kam Chancellors and Richard Sherman rookie ratings were?). I explain this in my expanded attributes thread (see signature).
    The other problem is also linked to the lack of attributes in the fact that there are so many characteristics of a player that don't get captured in the current system. So Pat Mahomes, as someone correctly identified is a raw low floor - high ceiling player, but because QB attributes are limited to 7 (THP, TAM, TAS, TAD, PLA, TOR, AWR), there is no scope for consistency, charisma, film study, drive, heart etc. For instance, Joe Mixon is coming in as a 79ovr HB because the attributes measure his physical tools, sure he might get a Slow Dev to mimic his off the field concerns but that is it. Who knew Albert Haynesworth basically played for a payday and then spent the game napping on the turf once he reached Washington or that Blaine Gabbert likes to throw passes with his eye's closed, or RG3 refused to develop the mental aspect of his game and became a toxic locker room presence. (again, see signature)
    For later round rookies, it would be awesome to have a Special Teams rating, so when choosing between that 5th round fallen star or that hard nosed UDFA with great ST rating as a backup/ST player... That 3rd string and 4th string TE battle would be ace if one was a freak project but the other had a high Long Snapper and ST ratings.
    Malik Hooker was a projected top 10 pick and get a 76 while others that were boarderline 1st rounders (White) got a 78? Wow, plus his speed rating seems a little low for a guy that is touted with range like Ed Reed and Earl Thomas. Probably wouldn't have made his PRC as good and upped his speed. We shall see, hopefully his development trait is at least quick.
    mvb34
    The skill set of player can be high, but what should separate a rookie from vet is the mental game how fast the learn the playbook. Adjusting to the game. I think they are only a few ratings that address the mental aspect is awareness, play recognition , and maybe consistency rating.

    That has been a problem in madden for a long time. It is way to easy to make a stupid player smart. If they are not smart by the time they come out of college they are not becoming a genius. Those dumb players with physical gifts should be long shots to become stars but in madden they are almost guaranteed. That is why these rookie overalls are meaningless. Most are within 5 points of each other so whoever amon them has the lowest awareness rating is actually the best player because awareness has such a big impact on overall and is so cheap to upgrade.
    There is almost no benefit in madden to come out of college as a great intangible player because he is never going to get much better physically under the current xp system but those stupid athletes are going to make up all those years of studying and extra practice you spent your life doing in a year or two. Put another way, it is very hard in madden to take a player who runs a 4.8 40 into a player that runs a 4.4 which is as it should be. Howeved, it is very easy to take someone who would score a 12 on the wonderlic test and make him into a player that would score a 30. That is just wrong.
    rich7sena
    Your logic is flawed on grading players - particularly cornerback. How good a corner is isn't directly linked to the box score. You have to actually watch the games.

    This. Sometimes (not always, but sometimes) the good corners are the ones with the fewest numbers. I haven't looked closely at Ramsey enough to say he fits that description, but the principle of numbers not being representative of talent for corners is very true. There's no stat for covering a route well enough that the QB won't try.
    I'm glad Jimbo pointed out the HUGE flaw in your reasoning, Rich...more often elite CBs have measurables you can actually use. look at Revis' first three years....see that huge jump in year 3 when he became what most people believe was the best CB in football? (31 PBUs is insane) He had a good rookie year (but certainly wasnt rated 85) and built on that in year 2....notice how the production is like...you know--tangible.
    2007 NYJ 16 74 13 87 - 0.0 0 3 20 0 1 17 0
    2008 NYJ 16 45 13 58 - 1.0 9 5 38 1 1 16 0
    2009 NYJ 15 47 7 54 - 0.0 0 6 121 1 0 31 0
    Here's Richard Sherman....again, tangible production: 53 tackles, 4INTs, 0TDs, 1 FF and 17 PBUs as a rookie.....also wasn't rated 80+ after year one. So you'll have to forgive me laughing hysterically at the numbers Ramsey put up allegedly validating an 85 rating...
    2011 SEA 16 46 7 53 0 0.0 0 4 45 0 1 17 0
    2012 SEA 16 53 10 63 0 1.0 16 8 57 1 3 24 0
    2013 SEA 16 38 11 49 0 0.0 0 8 125 1 0 16 0

More in Madden NFL 18

Trending


To Top
%d bloggers like this: