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.


×
×
  • Create New...