Batman1876 Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 (edited) I took a look at the drafts between 2000 and 2016 looking at the success rate of drafted QBs I picked those years because the 2017 QBs are too early to tell and 2000 is the oldest draft with a QB still playing. Picks 1 -5 of the 1st round,-21 total taken (Though I will leave Bradford out as his injuries make him hard to categorize. ) Hits-Vick, Palmer, E.Manning, Rivers, A. Smith, Ryan, Stafford, Newton, Luck, Mariota, Winston, Wentz, Goff Misses- Harrington, Carr, Young, Russell, Sanchez,RG3, Bortles Success Rate 13/20 65% Picks 6-10 of the 1st Round -5 taken Hits- Tannahill Misses- Leftwich, Leinert, Gabbert, Locker Success Rate 1/5 20% Picks 11-32 of the 1st Round - 22 Taken (Bridgewater is left out because his injury makes him too hard to categorize) Hit- Flacco, Cutler, Rogers, Big Ben Misses-Pennington, Ramsey, Grossman, Boller, Losman, Campbell, Quinn, Freeman, Tebow, Ponder, Weeden, Manuel, Manziel, Lynch Success Rate 4/19 21% for the later rounds I'll only list success, I will end with the most marginal of successes so that the tipping point between success and failure can be seen. Round 2 Hits- brees,Carr, Garoppolo, Dalton Success Rate 4/18 22% Round 3 Hits- Wilson, Foles, Schaub Success Rate 3/22 13% Round 4 Hits- Gerard, Cousins, Prescott Success Rate 2/22 14% Round 5 Hits- Absolutely no one! Success Rate 0/30 0% Round 6 Hits- Brady, Bulger, Taylor Success Rate 3/37 8% Round 7 Hits- Fitz Success Rate 1/32 3% The Top 5 picks are far and away the most successful, after that the success rate drops from 65% to 20% and slowly declines from there. Besides Brady the 5th, 6th and 7th rounds have all produced marginal successes at best. from 2000 through 2011 there were no 4th round successes. There were no second round success prior to Dalton. You can mediate top 5 risk by looking at bust patterns, 1 year wonders (sanchez, Russell) should be avoided. Running quarterbacks are 50/50 (Vick, Newton Vs Young, RG3). If you are running an expansion team don't draft and start a rookie QB, they'll get killed. The most common thread through busts is that they were not football first people, either focusing on their own brand (RG3, Russell) or they were not prepared for criticism (Harrington, Young) . If Bortles doesn't turn his career around he will be the only QB who was primarily a pocket passer, who had a multi year college career, had his head on straight and did not play for an expansion team to be a bust, since at least 2000. Edited February 9, 2018 by Batman1876 1
simool Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 This has zero meaning without understanding what metric was used to define success. 5
offsides#76FredSmerlas Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 I think Leftwich and Pennington were better then some you had labeled as hits. 2
whatdrought Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 Good job with leg work, but I think it's a little skewed because you're dealing with an very strong curve regarding the definition of success. A first round pick has a completely different metric for success than a fifth round pick. You have to have some form of comparison to really make this work. For instance, you have both Taylor and Brady rated as 6th round successes... How is it fair to rate them the same when they have had such drastically different careers? Also, the fact that you eliminated Bradford, while it makes sense, also skews the data because at the end of the day, he either is or is not a success. They don't give the pick back because he was injured. This is really a great post because it opens the doors to conversations about these ideas, and if that was your intent then you nailed it. It's just up to us to investigate/discuss the data that you've presented. 1
eSJayDee Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 I think you've got an oversight/mistake in your compilation. Wasn't Losman taken in the 1st round the same yr Rothleisberger(sp?) was? I'd categorize him as a miss. 1
Batman1876 Posted February 8, 2018 Author Posted February 8, 2018 There is obviously a subjectivity to it. I tried to lower the standard for the later rounds. People often say "pick a later QB and develop them into a starter." I tried to use that as my metric, were they developed into a starter, not necessarily a great starter but a starter. The helpful thing to note is that even if you would have a player or two added or removed from the success pool it only shifts the data a few points in the later rounds.
simool Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 This is a much more thorough evaluation... Albeit still flawed. https://www.milehighreport.com/2017/6/28/15880748/success-rates-of-drafted-quarterbacks
offsides#76FredSmerlas Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 Bulgers record a starter 41-54 Pennington 44-37 Foles has been a back up who got hot this year the last 5 games. Leftwich wasn't as good as I thought he was after looking over the stats so I would agree he was a bust.
K D Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 when was the last time we picked a QB top 5? oh, never?? hmm that's weird that we have only had 1 good QB in our entire history. i wonder why 3
Batman1876 Posted February 8, 2018 Author Posted February 8, 2018 9 minutes ago, eSJayDee said: I think you've got an oversight/mistake in your compilation. Wasn't Losman taken in the 1st round the same yr Rothleisberger(sp?) was? I'd categorize him as a miss. Fixed it. I simply didn't type his name but he was included in the data. I must want to forget him for some reason. 2 minutes ago, offsides#76FredSmerlas said: Bulgers record a starter 41-54 Pennington 44-37 Foles has been a back up who got hot this year the last 5 games. Leftwich wasn't as good as I thought he was after looking over the stats so I would agree he was a bust. If Pennington had been drafted in a later round I would have included him as a success, however he never threw for much more than 200 ypg average and was a borderline starter at best. If the Bills draft a QB in the 1st round who has those kinds of numbers we would likely not call it a success. If we drafted him in the 6th wed probably be happy. 2
BillsFan130 Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 59 minutes ago, Batman1876 said: I took a look at the drafts between 2000 and 2016 looking at the success rate of drafted QBs I picked those years because the 2017 QBs are too early to tell and 2000 is the oldest draft with a QB still playing. Picks 1 -5 of the 1st round,-21 total taken (Though I will leave Bradford out as his injuries make him hard to categorize. ) Hits-Vick, Palmer, E.Manning, Rivers, A. Smith, Ryan, Stafford, Newton, Luck, Mariota, Winston, Wentz, Goff Misses- Harrington, Carr, Young, Russell, Sanchez,RG3, Bortles Success Rate 13/20 65% Picks 6-10 of the 1st Round -5 taken Hits- Tannahill Misses- Leftwich, Leinert, Gabbert, Locker Success Rate 1/5 20% Picks 11-32 of the 1st Round - 22 Taken (Bridgewater is left out because his injury makes him too hard to categorize) Hit- Flacco, Cutler, Rogers, Big Ben Misses-Pennington, Ramsey, Grossman, Boller, Losman, Campbell, Quinn, Freeman, Tebow, Ponder, Weeden, Manuel, Manziel, Lynch Success Rate 4/19 21% for the later rounds I'll only list success, I will end with the most marginal of successes so that the tipping point between success and failure can be seen. Round 2 Hits- Carr, Garoppolo, Dalton Success Rate 3/18 17% Round 3 Hits- Wilson, Foles, Schaub Success Rate 3/22 13% Round 4 Hits- Cousins, Prescott Success Rate 2/22 9% Round 5 Hits- Absolutely no one! Success Rate 0/30 0% Round 6 Hits- Brady, Bulger, Taylor Success Rate 3/37 8% Round 7 Hits- Fitz Success Rate 1/32 3% The Top 5 picks are far and away the most successful, after that the success rate drops from 65% to 20% and slowly declines from there. Besides Brady the 5th, 6th and 7th rounds have all produced marginal successes at best. from 2000 through 2011 there were no 4th round successes. There were no second round success prior to Dalton. You can mediate top 5 risk by looking at bust patterns, 1 year wonders (sanchez, Russell) should be avoided. Running quarterbacks are 50/50 (Vick, Newton Vs Young, RG3). If you are running an expansion team don't draft and start a rookie QB, they'll get killed. The most common thread through busts is that they were not football first people, either focusing on their own brand (RG3, Russell) or they were not prepared for criticism (Harrington, Young) . If Bortles doesn't turn his career around he will be the only QB who was primarily a pocket passer, who had a multi year college career, had his head on straight and did not play for an expansion team to be a bust, since at least 2000. So you’re saying peterman is not going to be elite?! 1
Batman1876 Posted February 8, 2018 Author Posted February 8, 2018 3 minutes ago, billsfan11 said: So you’re saying peterman is not going to be elite?! The odds are not in his favor.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Batman1876 said: I took a look at the drafts between 2000 and 2016 looking at the success rate of drafted QBs I picked those years because the 2017 QBs are too early to tell and 2000 is the oldest draft with a QB still playing. I always appreciate people who put in some effort, so I don't want to rain on that You really need to specify your sort criteria though, because otherwise it's hard to assess your work. Why is Vick a hit but Bortles and RGIII a miss, for example? Why is Ryan Fitzpatrick a hit? I did a post about a month ago where the criteria were explicitly defined and clearly explained. The overall conclusion is not dissimilar, but the point is: if you're gonna put in the work, so that we can trust your conclusion, please show your work. Edited February 8, 2018 by Hapless Bills Fan 1
Batman1876 Posted February 8, 2018 Author Posted February 8, 2018 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: I always appreciate people who put in some effort, so I don't want to rain on that You really need to specify your sort criteria though, because otherwise it's hard to assess your work. I did a post about a month ago where the criteria were explicitly defined and clearly explained. The overall conclusion is not dissimilar, but the point is: if you're gonna put in the work, so that we can trust your conclusion, please show your work. My goal was to be a platform for conversation. We all have different metric for success so we will all have different charts. Evidenced by the fact that the Bills haven't started a QB in 20 years without extensive fan debate about him. My First round criteria is that the players became long term starters in the league or in the case of younger players show every indication of doing so. My criteria for later round picks was did they develop into a starter, its a lower standard but is the highest reasonable expectation a team has when drafting a later round player. I feel quite confident that my breakdown of top 5 successes and failures would be pretty well agreed upon. Beyond that I was being too generous if anything. Edited February 8, 2018 by Batman1876
BillsFan130 Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 15 minutes ago, Batman1876 said: The odds are not in his favor. Lol I know, was just being sarcastic. Good topic on a serious note 1
Jay_Fixit Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 43 minutes ago, offsides#76FredSmerlas said: I think Leftwich and Pennington were better then some you had labeled as hits. Tyrod comes to mind.
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 29 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: I always appreciate people who put in some effort, so I don't want to rain on that You really need to specify your sort criteria though, because otherwise it's hard to assess your work. Why is Vick a hit but Bortles and RGIII a miss, for example? Why is Ryan Fitzpatrick a hit? I did a post about a month ago where the criteria were explicitly defined and clearly explained. The overall conclusion is not dissimilar, but the point is: if you're gonna put in the work, so that we can trust your conclusion, please show your work. I wouldn't consider Fitz or Taylor as hits - because their success was not with the team who drafted them.
Real McClappy Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 (edited) I would say Pennington was not a miss at all. Edited February 8, 2018 by Real McCoy
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Real McCoy said: I would say Pennington was not a miss at all. Yeah, I would agree. Also - i think Mariota is kind of bad. For a #2 pick i expect something better than Tyrod Taylor. Tannehill is the definition of meh. Winston doesn't impress me. Edited February 8, 2018 by dneveu
Batman1876 Posted February 8, 2018 Author Posted February 8, 2018 6 minutes ago, Real McCoy said: I would say Pennington was not a miss at all. For me he was tough to judge he was always steady if unspectacular. I put him as a miss because his play was rarely good enough to make his team feel their QB situation was settled. Including him with Cutler, Ben, Rogers and Flacco would put the success rate at 26%
Recommended Posts