Not Necessarily Panthers Related but....

[Jon Snow]

17 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Is this broken down by round?

Lower to higher like the OP?

I am not grading on luck. I am grading based on "Was this QB successful based on round drafted in?"

That's why I am not being super specific because I don't think that will ultimately work. If I say that only QB's that have 3 SB appearances are "successful" I am literally excluding almost all the HOF players at the position. Similarly, if I say that only players with 3+ TD:INT ratio are "successful" I might be eliminating most of the HOF and almost all of the SB Champs. 

 

I am not against any input but it has to scale well across all rounds and be reasonably definable. That is how I came up with the criteria I did.

1. Accolades

2. Longevity 

3. Time as an NFL Starter

This should basically control for a lot of purely stats driven factors.

I say that because, if you aren't successful, you aren't going to garner many of the "accolades." Nor will you be in the league long or be a starter for long. 

That is the basis of what I have so far. 

How do you factor in the strength of the over class and year taken. Those details have some impact. How much of an impact i cannot say. Maybe im not understanding the exercise and should just bow out.

[kungfoodude]

1 minute ago, Jon Snow said:

How do you factor in the strength of the over class and year taken. Those details have some impact. How much of an impact i cannot say. Maybe im not understanding the exercise and should just bow out.

I don't really account for that because I am making an assumption based on the factors I have included(Accolades, Career Length, Starting Length) that it would largely control for those ups and downs of draft class strength. 

So, if your career was lengthy, that should eliminate class strength. Same with HOF, All Pro, MVP, Pro Bowl, etc. Same with starting length. If you came from a weak or a strong class, time will sort that out.

[Jon Snow]

Just now, kungfoodude said:

I don't really account for that because I am making an assumption based on the factors I have included(Accolades, Career Length, Starting Length) that it would largely control for those ups and downs of draft class strength. 

So, if your career was lengthy, that should eliminate class strength. Same with HOF, All Pro, MVP, Pro Bowl, etc. Same with starting length. If you came from a weak or a strong class, time will sort that out.

You would have to take out an outlier like Brady then because he will skew the numbers I would think. 

[kungfoodude]

Just now, Jon Snow said:

You would have to take out an outlier like Brady then because he will skew the numbers I would think. 

He doesn't at all. He ticks the boxes above him. 

In fact, based on what I have so far, the later rounds have higher "success" than predicted.

But, keep in mind that threshold(rounds 4-7) is 30+ games started OR 5+ year career.

I don't really think that is unfair, though. If we got a 5+ year backup in the 4-7th round, wouldn't you be pumped? How about 30+ starts? Same.

My thresholds could be off. Open to all debate on that.

[45catfan]

12 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I think you are hyperfocused on the QB aspect and not the QB success in relationship to round drafted.

I am not sympathetic to those aspects of a player but you are looking at things that are not only insanely hard ro quantify but extremely subjective. I need a lot of structure and input to even begin to have a workable solution for that kind of thing. I am absolutely open but I wouldn't even know where to start on those criteria.

Also, for Burrow, he took an occasional winner and made it into an occasional winner. He has accomplished(outside stats) an insanely low amount for his draft position. 

I can see that but based on the things you provided, what round relates to which? Fire it back to me with a Round: Minimum X

Also, consider that I am building this model on a "Any of the above." Would you modify that as a "has to meet X?"

Firstly, I would think "meets criteria" would be easier to quantify than "any above" and scale it from low to high. Day3 draft picks (UDFAs) have lower thresholds and first rounders have the highest thresholds. At that point it would be parsing out what would be a success at each draft level and then 'ticking boxes' of data.

[strato]

This could be NASA level complex. So many variables. 
 

Thought about including things like previous year’s record of the team they go to? Tiers of that? Because some years have a 4 win team picking first probably. I haven’t looked but there would variance there from draft to draft. 
 

Guys that fail initially but don’t sink and bloom later, which we have a couple of those in the league right now. 
 

Whether they sit and learn or are thrown into the fire? 
 

Like I said there are so many angle to consider. Those are just a couple of random situational factors. 

Edited 10 hours ago by strato

[kungfoodude]

1 minute ago, 45catfan said:

Firstly, I would think "meets criteria" would be easier to quantify than "any above" and scale it from low to high. Day3 draft picks (UDFAs) have lower thresholds and first rounders have the highest thresholds. At that point it would be parsing out what would be a success at each draft level and then 'ticking boxes' of data.

Well, look back at the original list. See that I have criteria for each level. But, again, I am basing this on a "any of this level" basis. 

That's why I am asking for "thresholds." 

I don't on the surface disagree with your additions but I need more input to test them.

So, what is the 1st round threshold for Comp% or TD:INT? 

I need to be able to test it out and see if it is reasonable. 

[Jon Snow]

1 minute ago, kungfoodude said:

He doesn't at all. He ticks the boxes above him. 

In fact, based on what I have so far, the later rounds have higher "success" than predicted.

But, keep in mind that threshold(rounds 4-7) is 30+ games started OR 5+ year career.

I don't really think that is unfair, though. If we got a 5+ year backup in the 4-7th round, wouldn't you be pumped? How about 30+ starts? Same.

My thresholds could be off. Open to all debate on that.

I think I have the jist of it but im going to think on it for a while and get back to you. Im thinking there has to be a cutoff in league years to separate league draft tendencies in there somewhere. Im a bit to toasted to be analyzing anything at the moment. 

[kungfoodude]

Just now, strato said:

This could be NASA level complex. So many variables. 
 

Thought about including things like previous year’s record of the team they go to? Tiers of that? Because some years have a 4 win team picking first probably. I haven’t looked but there would variance there form draft to draft. 
 

Guys that fail initially but don’t sink and bloom later, which we have a couple of those in the league right now. 
 

Whether they sit and learn or are thrown into the fire? 
 

Like I said there are so many angle to consider. Those are just a couple of random situational factors. 

I guess I would ask, for a QB career, why would that matter based on the variables in the OP?

I would ask that you consider the OP and how you think it relates to your personal opinion of "success." Do these criteria seem reasonable? Is this a fair measure of "QB draft pick based on round drafted" success? If no, what is not fair? What can be added/improved on?

[kungfoodude]

3 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

I think I have the jist of it but im going to think on it for a while and get back to you. Im thinking there has to be a cutoff in league years to separate league draft tendencies in there somewhere. Im a bit to toasted to be analyzing anything at the moment. 

Yeah, take a look at it and maybe a gander at Pro Football Reference to test out some of the variables(or I can publish them here if you guys want). 

I just want to be VERY clear, this is less about judging an overall QB career vs. other QB's careers as it is "What is a reasonable expectation for SUCCESS for a given QB based on the round they were drafted in?"

Additionally, "What are REASONABLE measures to judge QB success given the above statement?"

[Jon Snow]

1 minute ago, kungfoodude said:

I guess I would ask, for a QB career, why would that matter based on the variables in the OP?

I would ask that you consider the OP and how you think it relates to your personal opinion of "success." Do these criteria seem reasonable? Is this a fair measure of "QB draft pick based on round drafted" success? If no, what is not fair? What can be added/improved on?

Success means different things to everyone. So much of a qb's success depends on things beyond his control  that you have to find a way to find a way to narrow it down to only things he directly controls. 

[kungfoodude]

2 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

Success means different things to everyone. So much of a qb's success depends on things beyond his control  that you have to find a way to find a way to narrow it down to only things he directly controls. 

Well, it's a function of range drafted. Not so hyperfocused or maybe more so?

I am attempting to define a REASONABLE metric for success based on where a QB was drafted.

So, a 1st round QB SHOULD have much higher expectations than rounds lower, right?

[Jon Snow]

3 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Well, it's a function of range drafted. Not so hyperfocused or maybe more so?

I am attempting to define a REASONABLE metric for success based on where a QB was drafted.

So, a 1st round QB SHOULD have much higher expectations than rounds lower, right?

Im not sure expectations should be a factor. Because how do you define something undefinable? Is it based on cost invested? Is it based on draft position? Because we know players are overdrated all the time. This could take NASA to figure out.

[45catfan]

12 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Well, look back at the original list. See that I have criteria for each level. But, again, I am basing this on a "any of this level" basis. 

That's why I am asking for "thresholds." 

I don't on the surface disagree with your additions but I need more input to test them.

So, what is the 1st round threshold for Comp% or TD:INT? 

I need to be able to test it out and see if it is reasonable. 

That's what is so confusing to me.  Why do the categories have to be mutually exclusive based on draft round? It would seem to me a 7th rounder that starts 30 games with a 62% career completion percentage is a success, but I would say the same for a 3rd rounder too.

Alright, career numbers:

1st round:  Completion%: 64 or greater, 3:1 TD/INT or greater

2nd round: Completion%: 62 or greater, 2.5:1 TD/INT or greater

3rd round: Completion%: 60 or greater 2:1 TD/INT or greater

4th-7th round Completion %: 58 or greater; 1.5 TD/INT or greater