Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Statistical look at Draft Success by Position and Round


MHS831

Recommended Posts

Historic Success Chart (2005-14)

The numbers show us the following outline for finding consistent starters:

1st Round - OL (83%) LB (70%) TE (67%) DB (64%) QB (63%) WR (58%) RB (58%) DL (58%)

2nd Round - OL (70%) LB (55%) TE (50%) WR (49%) DB (46%) QB (27%) DL (26%) RB (25%)

3rd Round - OL (40%) TE (39%) LB (34%) DL (27%) WR (25%) DB (24%) QB (17%) RB (16%)

4th Round - DL (37%) TE (33%) OL (29%) LB (16%) WR(12%) DB (11%) RB (11%) QB (8%)

5th Round - TE (32%) DB (17%) WR (16%) OL (16%) DL (13%) RB (9%) LB (4%) QB (0%)

6th Round - TE (26%) OL (16%) DL (13%) WR (9%) DB (8%) RB (6%) LB (5%) QB (0%)

7th Round - DB (11%) OL (9%) QB (6%) WR (5%) DL (3%) LB (2%) RB (0%) TE (0%)

https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2015/2/20/8072877/what-the-statistics-tell-us-about-the-draft-by-round

This was an interesting breakdown I found on a chief's website. 

Notables, based on our needs: 

  • Draft the OL in the first three rounds.  We have 4 picks.  The sixth round is not bad either.
  • WR in the first is not a good idea.
  • TE (except for the seventh) and OL are the safest draft picks.
  • Drafting a RB is never a good idea

Based on this data alone, I developed a strategy based on our needs (prioritized) where each pick has the best chance to succeed.

1st RoundDB (64%) While an OL or LB is higher, WR and RB are nearly a coin toss.   S or CB in round 1, considering our needs and before free agency, is the statistically smart pick. 

2nd Round - OL (70%) Only LB and TE are above 50%, so if we need a rookie G or G/C, here is where you take him. 

3rd RoundWR (25%)  RB (16%) This is depressing, but WR is only above 50% in the first round and RB is always a bad idea. 

4th Round - DL (37%)  Remarkably, the DLs in the 4th round were 10% more successful than those selected in the 3rd round. At the moment, we have no 4th rounder, but this is important because if we wanted a DT or DE, this is where trading down from the third round would be smart.  Here, I grab that rotational DT (if we get a fourth via trade)

5th Round - TE (32%) TE was 33% in the fourth, so why not trade down into the fifth and grab one?  There are some decent TEs in the draft--grab one in the fifth.

6th Round - OL (16%)  Even if only one in six becomes successful, drafting a developmental OL is your best bet in the sixth if you have a TE.   Here, I take a T or C for 2019.

7th Round - DB (11%)  A one in nine chance for DBs in the seventh round is actually pretty good if you consider that is the same success rate DBs had for 4th rounders.  Here, I take a S.

 

Deep Thought:  Experts watch hours of film, interview candidates, weigh them, put them through drills, etc.  and the success rate for first and second rounders is about 50%????

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how they're defining "consistent starter" because damn if they're haven't been a TON of 1st round OL busts in recent years.

Just because a guy IS starting doesn't mean he's a starting caliber player who SHOULD be starting. Lord knows every Panthers fan understands this, especially when it comes to OL - particularly OT. Byron Bell, Nate Chandler, Mike Remmers... oh god, I'm gonna have nightmares now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I wonder how they're defining "consistent starter" because damn if they're haven't been a TON of 1st round OL busts in recent years.

Just because a guy IS starting doesn't mean he's a starting caliber player who SHOULD be starting. Lord knows every Panthers fan understands this, especially when it comes to OL - particularly OT. Byron Bell, Nate Chandler, Mike Remmers... oh god, I'm gonna have nightmares now.

Frankly, I think they checked to see who was starting after a 3 years--but this is really measuring the immeasurable.  Some players are worth it based on special teams contributions and reserve roles.  Is a nickel CB a starter?  A situational pass rusher?  Still, I think this is interesting.  Do you draft a RB, based on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

Frankly, I think they checked to see who was starting after a 3 years--but this is really measuring the immeasurable.  Some players are worth it based on special teams contributions and reserve roles.  Is a nickel CB a starter?  A situational pass rusher?  Still, I think this is interesting.  Do you draft a RB, based on this?

A RB at #24? Absolutely not. We already drafted a RB #8 overall last year. The only way I'd draft a RB at #24 is if Saquon Barkley was still on the board. But unless he's indicted for murder or somehow physically mangles himself between now and draft day that's not gonna happen. I really hope we don't take another RB until the 3rd at the earliest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

A RB at #24? Absolutely not. We already drafted a RB #8 overall last year. The only way I'd draft a RB at #24 is if Saquon Barkley was still on the board. But unless he's indicted for murder or somehow physically mangles himself between now and draft day that's not gonna happen. I really hope we don't take another RB until the 3rd at the earliest.

Based on this data, you do not draft a RB ever!

In light of this data focused on busts, let's pay tribute to the NFL BUST POSTER CHILD (Jamarcus Russell  deserves honorable mention)

image.thumb.png.5a37a1dfbba0a52711a1a85ff22bdb59.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

Based on this data, you do not draft a RB ever!

It's one of the things that makes me question the data. Always question unqualified data. "Consistent starter"? What does that even mean? Would Alvin Kamara, the reigning NFL Rookie of the Year qualify as a "consistent starter" per their definition?

Depending on their definition, that type of usage very well could be what's driving down their RB percentages. It seems like more and more teams are going away from the bellcow RB approach and having RBs share the load. Let's say the Saints decide Kamara's current role is the best way to use him and decide to continue to pair him with another RB moving forward. Three years down the road we're going to say that he doesn't qualify as a "consistent starter" so he wasn't worth that 3rd round pick?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

Deep Thought:  Experts watch hours of film, interview candidates, weigh them, put them through drills, etc.  and the success rate for first and second rounders is about 50%????

Investors/Traders spend countless time analyzing fundamental and technical aspects of various equities, finally deciding that this or that is worth a strong position...only to have it drastically devalued by a fart in the wind.

Predicting the future can be hard. :tongue:

Interesting information, though. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Snake said:

Honestly I hope we address OL the first two rounds. We need a bunch of talent there. 

I think the best value is there.  I hope we do not need to draft a DE in the first 2 days--not any value there.

Me:  CB, G, S, and RB first 2 days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • If we pay Bryce like a franchise QB we're completely and utterly buttfuged.
    • In my view, the realistic expectation for this team to compete will start 2027.  At that time, I think we could be looking at the following (this is HIGHLY speculative):   QB:  You know, Bryce.  I am not a fan, but they don't ask me.  But there is reason for hope--and here it is.  Bryce will be entering his prime.  Since we are likely to pay him, there will be changes that I include throughout this exercise--I realistically speculate on what they are going to do with Bryce and then I realistically speculate on what means in terms of the cap and other positions. Bryce HAS IMPROVED.  The idea is that if you give him more weapons and protection, that will continue.  His career:   At this rate, if his growth continues, by 2027 we should expect nearly 30 TDs and about 12 Interceptions and a Rating of about 98.  His completion percentage should settle at 65-66% or so.  If that happens, you can win with it. The following stats demonstrate how the Panthers will be able to afford it (and re-sign Ickey) My guess is they will require about $60m per year. This is why rookies who can play are important.  It also helps us see the blueprint.  You may disagree, but this is the cruel realities of the salary cap. Robert Hunt:  Cut post June 1 and save $19m.  Who do you replace him with?  Ickey. Tershawn Wharton:  Cutting him saves nearly $15m.  We should all hope to see Aaron Hall (UDFA) make the roster and play well.  Regardless, this is a position we would likely have to address in the next draft. Trevin Moehrig:  Cutting Moehrig as the starting SS saves this team $16.5m.   Ransom will be on year 3 of a cheap rookie deal and should be more than ready to take the reins.  their styles are similar.  Furthermore, FS Wheatley (R, 4th round) will be starting. Taylor Moton:  So much depends on his knee, but I have an idea that he can play another 3 years.  extending him could save the team about $5m per year.  Cutting him outright would save the team about $21m. In the most drastic situation, we have to cut Moton and the other three players mentioned.   We would need (in all likelihood) a starting DT and RT.  It is possible that the DE would be addressed, but Wharton's production (so far) could be equaled by a rookie.  Look for a cut free agent and a 2027 draft pick here.  If you cut Moton, you save $21m, and that would be the only big hole to fill.  Having Ickey at RG gives you some depth at T, and Ickey could be the guy.  T could be pick in the 2027 draft (first round), fwiw.  It saves you $21m while costing you $5m, for example. We get younger, creating a core of Freeling, Hecht, and the RT first rounder in 2027) along with Ekownu (second contract in the $15m range, and Lewis, whose contract would be in the $16m range if not extended.)  The OL cuts (Hunt, Moton) would save $40m.  The OL would get younger and still solid with veterans at G.   By cutting Wharton (no brainer if his play stays the same) and Moehrig (good player--but we have Ransom on a rookie contract who would not be that much of a drop off--if any) in addition to Hunt and Moton, we would save over $70m in cap room. We would be able to give Bryce bag  and we would have enough to re-sign Ickey (if the knee is not too risky) to a Guard contract (probably at a discount, coming off that injury).  Furthermore, we could add a RT in the draft (or a RG if Ickey moves to RT) and that would be the only large hole to fill. Correct my logic if you see issues-- On defense, in addition to the aforementioned, Scott ($2m contract) is out, replaced by a 4th round rookie contract. CB Jackson's contract ($7.8m) expires and he is (possibly) replaced by a rookie contract.  At Edge, patrick Jones II's $10m contract expires and he is likely a reserve, and his role is absorbed by Phillips, Scourton, Princely, and possible an UDFA like Isaiah Smith or a 2027 draft pick.   These productive developmental players over the past 2 drafts will pay huge dividends.  On paper, I see the team getting much younger and possibly better while cutting nearly $100m and reallocating that money to get more production.          
    • If everything played out and that last thing happened, I probably just quit. 
×
×
  • Create New...