Jump to content
  • Hey There!

    Please register to see fewer ads and a better viewing experience:100_Emoji_42x42:

Bartin

Panthers snaps by youth versus the rest of the NFL

Recommended Posts

Came across this from overthecap.com where they have assigned a valuation to the number of snaps played by drafted players in the first four years of their rookie contracts in a sortable table for every year since 2011 which is coincidentally the first year Ron became coach. It's also when the new CBA began which is why the site chose that year as a start point. So I thought it would be interesting to note where Ron and the staff have ranked at playing youth versus veterans against the rest of the NFL given how often it is said that Ron never plays young guys and always prefers vets.

I should note that this is not solely a metric that shows preference to vets vs youth as it also will factor in how well teams hit on players in the draft.

https://overthecap.com/rookie-class-evaluation/

Here is where the Panthers rank in the NFL for most snaps by players on a rookie contract since 2011:

2011 - 13th

2012 - 10th

2013 - 20th

2014 - 5th

2015 - 23rd

2016 - 27th

2017 - 24th

2018 - 15th

Overall - 19th

So we are pretty squarely in the middle of the pack in the NFL. There also doesn't appear to be a ton of correlation between rank and team success. The better teams over this time period are more favored toward the bottom half but there are plenty of successful teams in the top half.

Edited by Bartin
Edited to clarify that it is not just snaps by a rookie but by players on rookie contracts.
  • Pie 4
  • Beer 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


    So...do we like rookies now? Or do we still hate them? Or is it, some rookies yea, and some rookies nah? Inquiring minds and all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

    So...do we like rookies now? Or do we still hate them? Or is it, some rookies yea, and some rookies nah? Inquiring minds and all that.

It appears the less rookies we start the better our record is according to those rankings. Still skewed, because if you have a stud for a rookie - this means nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

It appears the less rookies we start the better our record is according to those rankings. Still skewed, because if you have a stud for a rookie - this means nothing.

 

    I don't think that is what it means at all. All that shows is the amount of playing time. Not where the team ended up.

 

    This is the qualifier in the OP. "There also doesn't appear to be a ton of correlation between rank and team success. The better teams over this time period are more favored toward the bottom half but there are plenty of successful teams in the top half."

 

    We are in the middle of the pack where it comes to playing rookies. So I guess it means we don't hate em. We just aren't in love with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

    I don't think that is what it means at all. All that shows is the amount of playing time. Not where the team ended up.

 

    This is the qualifier in the OP. "There also doesn't appear to be a ton of correlation between rank and team success. The better teams over this time period are more favored toward the bottom half but there are plenty of successful teams in the top half."

 

    We are in the middle of the pack where it comes to playing rookies. So I guess it means we don't hate em. We just aren't in love with them.

Compare the season's record based on our rookie play time ranking..... That's how I got the answer I got.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

Compare the season's record based on our rookie play time ranking..... That's how I got the answer I got.

 

    Well, damm. That could work...ish

 

    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

    Well, damm. That could work...ish

 

    

still skewed, but an impartial baseline.

  • Beer 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it means we aren't desperate enough to send a rookie onto the field before we think they are ready, but that we do get them out there and put them into play eventually. A bit conservative, but not stodgy.

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice data. I'd done some tables on rookie starts awhile back. But this is much more comprehensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bartin said:

 There also doesn't appear to be a ton of correlation between rank and team success. The better teams over this time period are more favored toward the bottom half but there are plenty of successful teams in the top half.

So in other words, find and put good players on the field, whether green or seasoned.

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatcha wanna bet the vast majority of those rookie snaps came from rookie defenders?

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tiger7_88 said:

Whatcha wanna bet the vast majority of those rookie snaps came from rookie defenders?

 

    Not sure you should make that bet. Just off the top of my head, it's pretty close to a toss up.

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×