What are your realistic expectations of draft picks?

[Cyberjag]

I think it's reasonable to expect a first round pick to be a starter for years to come, but what are your thoughts on later rounds?  Do you really think that it's fair to expect a 5th round pick to develop into a starter?  Do you think that Gettleman is going to find regular contributors in every round?

 

What do you think  would be successful on a round by round basis?

[LinvilleGorge]

There's no way we're going to hit on all 9 picks. 

[toldozer]

Two starters and two guys that can eventually fill a role. Anything else is a bonus.

[juliosantos]

not every pick is going to be a starter. Id be happy with 3 of them being starters and keeping our streak of hitting on our first round selections .

if gettleman hits on all 9 picks and they all are starters then he is a lizard person . I wouldn't doubt it though if some one was to find 9 starters in a draft it would be gettleman

[OneBadCat]

Normally I'd say two starters and two decent players are a good draft. But the way DG has invested in the draft puts higher expectations on it. If he's not going to go after premier FA he has to nail the draft. Thus far he's done that and isn't afraid to keep doing so. Which I'm completely cool with.

 

We are possibly looking at 3-4 starters from the 2014 draft. If DG pulls that off again this year we are going to a fuggin super bowl.

[The NFL Shield At Midfield]

this is my dumb armchair GM belief system:

 

1st round - needs to be a productive, reliable starter within a season or two while showing something as a rookie.  the "starter" designation is less important if it's a position that gets rotated heavily or if it's a quarterback drafted to sit behind an established veteran.  in that case they just need to be productive when given snaps if they get the opportunity.  if a player from this round busts it hurts the worst.

 

2nd round - needs to eventually become a starter or fit into a rotation.  it would be disappointing if they don't show anything (think dwayne jarrett) as a rookie.  busts still hurt but the expectations are lower and the value of the pick is smaller the further away from the last pick of the first it is.  spending what turned into the 33rd pick in 2011 to get armanti edwards in 2010, for example, was a major blunder as that's about as valuable as a second round pick can be.  development time for DL and OL positions needs to be considered here as the prospects that fall to this point in the draft may not be as polished as their first round counterparts.  also need to look at position groups and consider whether it's reasonable for a non-first round rookie to challenge established veterans for snaps.

 

3rd round - needs to at least fit into a rotation or contribute on special teams at some point.  it's less disappointing but still slightly worrisome if they don't show any flashes as a rookie or second year player.  at this point it's to be expected that a rookie from this round would have trouble breaking into a stacked position group.

 

4th round - 6th round - players selected in these rounds don't earn the "bust" label if they fail to become starters or contributors.  expectations for prospects drafted in these rounds are depth/special teams.  if a player from this round turns into a good rotational player then it's a good pick.  if they turn into a starter or all pro/pro bowler then it's a great pick.

 

7th round - UDFA - i'm not disappointed by these picks not making the final roster.  if they challenge for playing time then they've exceeded expectations.  if they become productive starters then that's outstanding.

[Jangler]

If DG can't find 9 starters in this draft, then maybe he's not the GM we have been looking for.

[Leeroy Jenkins PhD]

Of our 9 picks I would like to see us draft:

 

Someone who can compete for the starting LT position.

 

Someone who can challenge for the WR2 spot.

 

Someone who can challenge for the starting SS  position.

 

Depth and eventual replacement at OLB

 

Depth at CB

 

Depth at DE

[Captain Morgan]

this year, I'd be happy with 2 starters, 2 eventual starters,

and much need depth at OL and DB.  

 

and I think we'll get that.

[Bartin]

One week 1 starter then one or two more that are starters by week 10. Two contributors. Two backup/ST'ers. Rest go to practice squad.

[Dex]

5 players ready to start week one if needed. Good depth.

[AU-panther]

I've linked this article before but I think it is appropriate for this question.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/18/4098882/2010-2012-nfl-drafts-team-by-team-draft-success-in-first-three-rounds

They looked at a three year sample and found the enrage number of starters per draft is 2.4. This would be inline from what have heard elsewhere that 3 quality players from a draft is considered good.

The interesting thing about the article is that their definition of a starter was a player that has started atleast 8 games over a 3 year period. That actually seemed to be a rather low threshold for qualifying to me.

Personally I think if you can average 3 starters a year over an extended number of years you are doing well. In theory that would mean 12 of your 22 starters would be on rookie contracts. At this point your cap would be in pretty good shape and would allow you some flexibility to resign your own players or free agents.

[Mother Grabber]

9 HOF players. I expect nothing less

[frash.exe]

It is literally impossible to select studs with every single pick. We've actually done really really well since Gettleman started managing the team. You should all be lining up to give him gift baskets and spare pairs of nipple shorts.