Ending the Debate on QB Draft Positions

[gattis]

I got tired of seeing posts trying to claim that we shouldn't draft a QB in the first round because so-and-so was a bust, so I made this simple chart to illustrate how poor your critical reasoning skills are.

Data taken from http://www.pro-football-reference.com/draft/QB-1980-now.htm​

As you can see, there is a clear relationship between draft position and success in the NFL, indicating that NFL scouts are indeed better than monkeys at their jobs, as conventional wisdom might suggest. If you want to maximize the expected career value of the QB you pick, pick him as early as possible.

Yes, Jamarcus Russell was a bust. Yes, Vince Young may have been a bust. But at least they STARTED in the NFL. As you can see from all the zeros in the right hand portion of the graph, the vast majority of QBs taken in the later rounds never even ended up starting a game. Yes, Tom Brady was taken in the later rounds. But as you can see, he was a statistical anomaly.

If you see anyone posting this nonsense, please link them here.

 

[mmikel30]

I do not understand this graph

 

[gattis]

I do not understand this graph

Those little dots are quarterbacks. The further right they are, the later their draft position. The higher they are, the better quarterback they were.

 

[Lilseb93]

:err::tumbleweed::confused: I don't get it.

 

[Lilseb93]

Those little dots are quarterbacks. The further right they are, the later their draft position. The higher they are, the better quarterback they were.

Oh I see now.

 

[andyahs]

Won't get much of an argument about a first round QB in next years draft on this board.

 

[HarryBagpipe]

Im with u logic wise but how do you have manning that much higher than Brady value wise. Did u arbitrarily assign value?

 

[gattis]

Im with u logic wise but how do you have manning that much higher than Brady value wise. Did u arbitrarily assign value?

It's a stat called career approximate value. They detail how they calculate it here: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?page_id=518

 

[Oradeana]

It's a stat called career approximate value. They detail how they calculate it here: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?page_id=518

Maybe they need new ways to calculate "value". BRADY's got a bunch of SB Rings and appearances. MANNING doesn't, and MARINO has none at all. By the way, which dot is JOHN UNITAS? Did you know that he was drafted in the 6th Round as well? And which dot is RYAN LEAF? (Just curious) The hypothesis is dumb.

 

[gattis]

Maybe they need new ways to calculate "value". BRADY's got a bunch of SB Rings and appearances. MANNING doesn't, and MARINO has none at all. By the way, which dot is JOHN UNITAS? Did you know that he was drafted in the 6th Round as well? And which dot is RYAN LEAF? (Just curious) The hypothesis is dumb.

Let me know your favorite career QB stat... I guarantee it will be the same outcome.

 

[Wildbill3]

Maybe they need new ways to calculate "value". BRADY's got a bunch of SB Rings and appearances. MANNING doesn't, and MARINO has none at all. By the way, which dot is JOHN UNITAS? Did you know that he was drafted in the 6th Round as well? And which dot is RYAN LEAF? (Just curious) The hypothesis is dumb.

unitas had a career of 206, dan was 219 on this career. dan's career was the number 7 overall career.

 

[mega-fin-love]

actually if anything this graph shows me that it's more evenly spread out than I thought. IT shows tons of midround success

 

[Clipse]

Maybe they need new ways to calculate "value". BRADY's got a bunch of SB Rings and appearances. MANNING doesn't, and MARINO has none at all. By the way, which dot is JOHN UNITAS? Did you know that he was drafted in the 6th Round as well? And which dot is RYAN LEAF? (Just curious) The hypothesis is dumb.

Colts = 0-6 without Manning

Patriots = 11-5 without Brady. And that was after Brady having maybe the best statistical season a QB has ever had.

I also seem to remember the Dolphins losing 5 straight to end the season in 1993 without Marino, after starting 9-2, ultimately missing the playoffs.

Manning is far more valuable to his team than Brady to his. Brady most likely doesn't even have any rings if not for his defenses and running game in the early 2000s.

 

[Dr. Phin]

Basically it all comes down to statistics....and drafting early results in a "statistically better probability" that you get a good QB the earlier a QB was drafted...and that is all we really want. Give us a damn chance at a decent QB...he may now work out...but he will have a better chance than the myriad of 2nds that have come through here lately.

Those that get it...already know this...those that don't get it already ....will never understand the concepts you are presenting...

 

[Dr. Phin]

Won't get much of an argument about a first round QB in next years draft on this board.

That isn't true. There is some bozo putting up an argument every other day on here that drafting a QB in the 1st is not a guarantee. Which it isn't, but it does give us a better chance...and that's all I'm asking for.