Lavert Hill
Name: Lavert Hill
Height: 5’11”
Weight: 175 lbs.
High school: Detroit (MI) King
Position: Cornerback
Class: Freshman
Jersey number: N/A
Last year: Hill was a senior in high school (LINK). He made 12 interceptions, 3 of which he returned for touchdowns.
Final TTB Rating: 84
Hill has had a long relationship with Michigan. The younger brother of senior safety Delano Hill, Lavert originally attended Detroit (MI) Cass Tech – a Michigan pipeline for several years – before transferring to King for his last couple years of high school. Then he surprised many people by committing to Penn State. He seemed solid for a while, started waffling a bit, and eventually decommitted before picking the Wolverines. In the meantime, he was not known for making a bunch of big plays early in high school, but he capped his prep career by making 12 picks and scoring 3 TDs on defense. He was rewarded by earning a trip to San Antonio for the U.S. Army All-American Bowl.
This year Michigan’s top three cornerbacks return. There wasn’t much of a need for fourth corners to play last season, outside of Jabrill Peppers occasionally moving to the outside from his slot corner position. With Jourdan Lewis, Channing Stribling, and Jeremy Clark set to return – all of whom are seniors – Michigan needs to groom some people for a starting gig in 2017. I’m guessing that Hill’s classmate, David Long, will earn more playing time this season. Hill is in that swing spot where he could probably redshirt and use that time to get stronger, but then he would be inexperienced going into a redshirt freshman season that might see him starting. Regardless, Hill is probably no higher than the fifth corner on the roster, so the value he brings is relatively minimal.
Prediction: Backup cornerback
You need to login in order to vote
I think the 5th CB is important. You use 3 on a regular basis, so the 4th guy is essentially the top backup at 3 positions. CB doesn’t rotate a lot, but it’s a position where substitutions do occur. 2 injuries across 3 positions (far from impossible) turns your 5th guy into a starter. In short – they matter.
I think Hill is a near lock to play despite his size. Michigan needs to give their 2017 corners some experience (as they did with Lewis and Stribling) and there aren’t too many people who project to be ahead of Hill.
I do agree that Long belongs higher on the list than Hill – but both should play as they are likely to be starters or close to it (nickelback).
Michigan won’t NEED Hill in 2016, but he’s going to play. I don’t know if he’ll get meaningful snaps or not, but I imagine he’ll be in within the first couple weeks.
You need to login in order to vote
I love these. Thanks for taking the time to come up with these rankings, especially since you seem to mostly just get abused by people like me who disagree with some of them.
I’m curious why you put Hill so low? You put him behind Ron Johnson, who should RS, but Hill will play this year, even if it’s garbage time. I would argue that roughly around 50 players are ahead of Hill at this point. If you go 2 deep at every position, that’s 44 players, then there are others like Long and others. But I think Hill would be somewhere closer to mid-60s, maybe if you’re feeling crazy in the high 50’s. Thoughts?
Okay, that’s about all I’ve got. Frankly I love these posts and it doesn’t bother me where you put anyone as long as we’re talking football. Thanks again. I’d be curious to hear/see your response and see who you have ahead of Hill over the next two months.
-Go Blue
You need to login in order to vote
One reason is that Michigan has a fair amount of depth at CB. Aside from the starters (presumably Lewis and Stribling), you have an experienced Jeremy Clark, Brandon Watson, David Long, and Keith Washington. Let me put it this way: Would you mind going into a season with those six players at cornerback? That’s basically three quality starters, a high-quality freshman, a guy the coaches reportedly like a lot (Washington), and…well…Watson. Now I could put Hill into that group of six and take out one of the other guys, and I could say the same thing. But only two of these guys CAN redshirt, and I think Hill is more likely to do so.
Another reason is that he’s very scrawny. That’s a not a huge problem at cornerback, but it’s somewhat significant.
Another reason is that I wouldn’t be too concerned if he doesn’t get a lot of playing time. He could still play a lot in 2017 and be effective without playing a ton this season.
In summary, how much would the direction of this team be altered if Hill were to sprain an ankle and miss four weeks?
I’m glad you like the posts. I don’t mind criticism, as long as it’s well thought out. Plus, discussion is good. It gets boring when nobody comments, because then I feel like I’m talking to myself, even though I know people are reading.
You need to login in order to vote
Clark is essentially a co-starter. He Stribling and Lewis all played a ton of snaps and Peppers worked at corner too. I would bet that Stribling and Clark each played more snaps than some nominal starters (e.g., LB, FB). With Peppers duties poised to be expanded (in defending the run game from LB and on offense) the true nickelback duties may fall more heavily on Lewis and thus on Clark and Stribling outside.
In other words – we need a couple backups to the 3 CB starters (Lewis, Clark, Stribling?) Watson is a top candidate but it’s unclear how dependable he really is yet. Beyond him – freshmen. I have no clue if Washington or Long can play. To me they’re in the jumbled mix with Hill. We need somebody (or somebodies) to step up from that group and that somebody will be a key backup.
On top of that – there’s no clear candidate to replace Lewis as the one-on-one corner in space. Stribling and Clark are good corners but not guys you necessarily want locked in a speedy slot WR. Even Peppers had some hiccups in this role last year.
What if Michigan is playing a passing spread attack that dictates a lot of nickel and dime packages and Lewis tweaks an ankle. Maybe it’s Stribling/Clark who defend the slots in this case but maybe they give HIll a shot to sink or swim and keep Stribling and Clark outside.
As I said in the Pearson post – the depth and experience on top of the depth chart is spectacular, but the 2nd tier of guys pushing the starters isn’t there. Michigan may well be relying on freshman if a couple injuries strike in the secondary. The depth is very very unproven beyond the top 6 DBs and Michigan is likely to need 8-9 guys even if everyone stays pretty healthy. I suspect the 4th CB and 4th safety spot will be open competitions, perhaps well into the season.
Hill’s one of many options for an important supporting role in the secondary and I think he’ll play for the sake of development if nothing else. So I’d rank him a little higher than this.
I do feel more comfortable at CB than S because freshman can play there without creating a great amount of worry giving us a lot more options at CB. Also we have 3 proven guys for 2.5 positions (vs 2 for 2 at S). So I disagree less with this ranking than the Pearson one. I think losing Pearson would be a bigger deal than losing Hill.
I think that in general I believe the 8th to 10th DBs are more important and more uncertain than Thunder.
You need to login in order to vote
Your argument explains that backup defensive backs will play, but it doesn’t indicate that Hill himself will be any good. There’s really no reason to believe that he will be above Long, Washington, Watson, etc. Or maybe he will be, but maybe they will all be bad. The first three guys are important because they will play and they are pretty good. The next four guys are not so important, because they might play and they might not be any good.
You need to login in order to vote
There’s no real evidence that Long, Washington, Watson will be above Hill either.
You need to login in order to vote
Well, there’s kind of some evidence that other guys will be above Hill. Long was higher rated, and other guys are older. I know the higher rated guys and older guys don’t always win the job, but that’s some evidence, at least.
Furthermore, my point is simply that they’re all in a cluster. I can’t make a convincing argument that Hill is at/near the bottom of the depth chart, and you can’t make a convincing argument that Hill is nearer to the top/middle of the depth chart. I just don’t see much to argue here, because the only way to possibly “solve” the discussion is to see how things play out.
You need to login in order to vote
Agree they are all in a cluster. Given that uncertainty I would group them closer together (and higher up) in these rankings. That’s all I’m saying.
Again, I think the parallel to 2013 is worth considering. There were a handful of young players that people had hopes for (despite not doing much yet) and the talented freshman immediately surpassed them. I don’t mean to imply that all of our our red-shirt freshman or sophomores are going to sit the bench and then transfer away (like Terry Richardson or Josh Furman), but some of them probably will. If you assumed Richardson or Douglass were ahead of Stribling in 2013 (because of age or recruiting ranking) you would have been wrong.
You need to login in order to vote
But that’s not the point of the countdown. They’re not all important if none of them are important. If I don’t know who the starting QB is going to be, I’m not going to put three quarterbacks in the top ten. We have three starter-quality guys, and then a bunch of other guys who are probably not that great right now. Therefore, they don’t get ranked very high. If you want to argue that Hill is good, then I can see ranking him higher. But if you’re saying they’re all in a cluster so they should all be ranked higher, then you’re not grasping how I do this countdown.
You need to login in order to vote
As I understand it – it’s how much it hurts the team if the guy is gone (due to injury or whatever else).
Obviously the guys outside the top 40 aren’t going to be very important or missed very much if they are gone. At this point in the countdown we are splitting hairs.
I assume you are accounting for uncertainty in the countdown. If 2 guys (or more) are competing for the same role, they should be similarly ranked. Or am I wrong ?
You need to login in order to vote
If two guys are on a level playing field, then they’re not both important. It means either one is more expendable, because the other guy can fill the role. My prediction is that Hill is a guy who is not particularly ready to play or necessary to this team. It is a cluster with him near the bottom – not because he lacks talent, but because he is short on technique and size/strength. If you want to argue that he’s better than cornerback ____________ or cornerback ___________, then so be it. Like I said, we haven’t seen those guys on the field much or at all, so it’s all hypothetical right now.
But if you say Hill is the best of the backup bunch (beyond Lewis, Stribling, and Clark), then I say another corner in that cluster goes right around here at #74, whether it’s Keith Washington or Brandon Watson or whoever. You don’t need 7 cornerbacks who are important or ready to play. No team has that, and virtually no team needs that.
You need to login in order to vote
Although this year’s is way better, more talented, and more experienced I think there are some strong parallels here to the 2013 team’s secondary in terms of the layout of the depth chart.
Michigan had 3 fairly proven CBs coming into the season (Countess, Taylor, Avery) and a viable backup option (Hollowell). There were only 2 good options at S (Wilson, Gordon) with another hyped but unproven backup (Furman) and a few other young guys floating around (Clark, Richardson).
That year there were some bumps, bruises, and hiccups along the way and true freshman played huge roles. Stribling and Lewis saw a lot of meaningful snaps. Stribling even started against Indiana. Thomas got a snaps. Hill got in on special teams and so did Douglass (1 game). 3 true freshman played in the secondary, with 2 more getting special teams snaps. Only (eventual transfers) Dawson and Douglass got red-shirts.
Lewis, Stribling, and Clark are this year’s version of Countess, Taylor, and Avery. Much better, yes, but 3 proven guys is 3 proven guys. Thomas and Hill are this year’s Gordon and Wilson — again, they are older, more talented, and more experienced, but it’s 2 guys. Kinnell, Washington, Watson — I’m not sure they’re any better than Furman, Clark, Hollowell, and Richardson. We all had high hopes for those guys at one time too.
The big difference is that we have Peppers to paper things over if necessary, he can double as a DB on a lot of downs. Still, I would expect to see 3 or 4 freshman playing and potentially making some contributions. Hudson, Hill, Long seem very likely to play and I wouldn’t be too surprised if Metellus joined them. They probably won’t play as big of a role as Stribling and Lewis did in 2013 but you never know.
You need to login in order to vote