I'm not a huge football fan at this point of my life and mostly follow basketball, but when evaluating NBA draft picks, the analogy used to describe projected d

I'm not a huge football fan at this point of my life and mostly follow basketball, but when evaluating NBA draft picks, the analogy used to describe projected draft picks outcomes of player floors and ceilings is very interesting to me. For example, if a basketball player is judged to be very skilled (say he's a great outside shooter) and more likely than not to be useful to a team, but lacks the athleticism or some other attribute like height for his position to be a megastar, you might describe him as having a high floor but a low ceiling. If a player is a phenomenal raw athlete with size but who still needs time to develop some skills like his shooting and ball-handling and defense, then he's usually described as having a low floor and high ceiling. These kinds of players might be out of the league in 4 years, or all-stars. To bring this chain of thought back to the Wonderlic, I wonder if the outcome of that test is maybe a bit more highly correlated with a draft pick's floor and not his ceiling. A high Wonderlic score might not necessarily indicate stardom in the NFL, but a very low Wonderlic score might indicate a future inability to grasp complex defensive schemes and indicate a possible very low floor. This might be why an all-time great smart player like Tom Brady didn't necessarily have a particularly noteworthy Wonderlic score, but why NFL teams have found it somewhat useful to try and rule out low floors. I don't know for sure, I haven't crunched the numbers like others, but if there's any use to a test like the Wonderlic, some NFL team might find a competitive advantage in using it where others won't.