semperkillz
Practice Squad
- Joined
- May 25, 2010
- Messages
- 310
- Reaction score
- 3
This thread makes me want a qb in the first more than ever.
The Myth of the First Round QB
Lets look at TODAYS NFL. From say 2003 on.
Brady
Brady
Ben
Peyton
Eli
Ben
Brees
Rodgers
2 were not first rounder in the last 8 years and Brees(had the Dolphins not taken Jamar Fletcher when they already had Surtain and Madison he would have been a 1st rounder but once again our franchise sucks) was just on the cusp of the 1st. You may never see a Brady situation again. Thats just luck to find the GOAT in the 6th round.. But you sure as hell will see 1st rounders win over and over. Hell Dilfer in 00 was a 1st rounder when the Bucs took him in the 90's.
But lets keep doing it the way we have done it since 1983. Its worked out just fine taking everyones castoffs and bargain basement draft picks. Outstanding logic. We need another lineman in the 1dt round cause god knows lineman NEVER bust no matter WHEN you take them.
Shula should have passed on Marino just in case he busted.
Brady
Brady
Ben
Peyton
Eli
Ben
Brees
Rodgers
2 were not first rounder in the last 8 years and Brees(had the Dolphins not taken Jamar Fletcher when they already had Surtain and Madison he would have been a 1st rounder but once again our franchise sucks) was just on the cusp of the 1st. You may never see a Brady situation again. Thats just luck to find the GOAT in the 6th round.. But you sure as hell will see 1st rounders win over and over. Hell Dilfer in 00 was a 1st rounder when the Bucs took him in the 90's.
But lets keep doing it the way we have done it since 1983. Its worked out just fine taking everyones castoffs and bargain basement draft picks. Outstanding logic. We need another lineman in the 1dt round cause god knows lineman NEVER bust no matter WHEN you take them.
Shula should have passed on Marino just in case he busted.
H4wt Pocket
Practice Squad
and...I still want Luck.
It's really not. I think you and others over-estimate the total amount of QBs taken every year.
Since 1983 there have been 342 QBs taken in the NFL draft and 72 have been chosen in the first round. That means 21% of NFL QBs were chosen in the first round.
So no, I'm not casting "literally THOUSANDS" aside. Sorry. But I am using the facts. That is strange around here, I know.
Now let me continue....
As I said in my initial post out of the 68 first round QBs chosen since 1983 (not including the 2011 class), only 11% have won a Super Bowl. Now the odds of the standard QB (from ANY ROUND) to have won the Super Bowl in that time (the 330 chosen not including the 2011 class), is 8%. 28 Super Bowls since 1983 divided by the 330 QBs. That means at 11%, the First Round picks as a whole are over performing from sheer chance, but not by much.
Beyond that though, of the last 20 Super Bowls 60% have been won by First Round QBs. Well, as I pointed out, they do make up 20% of the league. So again, as a whole we see they are over performing, here it is a little more obvious. So, is the chance of finding a worthwhile QB 3x greater in the First Round than not? Perhaps. But even then, it is not the exponential difference it is made out to be in general, and in this thread.
And how is it that all QBs have an 8% chance of winning a Super Bowl, and yet only 11% of First Round picks win Super Bowls, and yet 60% of Super Bowls are won by First Round picks? Well it's because the Aikmans, Elways, etc., of the world over perform so much that they bring up the rest of the First Round QBs which under perform.
And actually this estimate of your's adds up. The 60% of Super Bowls divided by 4 (the 25% chance) you get 15%, which is close to the 11% of the number of First Round QBs that actually win the Super Bowl.
This is dead wrong though. No we cannot really account for UDFA, but for actual picks, it's simple math. There have been 262 non-First Round QBs taken since 1983. And out of those, 6 have won a Super Bowl, or about 2.3%. However, 40% of Super Bowls in the last 20 have been won by a Non-First Rounder. Again we see over achievers, like Brady, and just anomalies like Dilfer, among others. Now 80% of QBs are non-First Rounders, and if they win only 40% of the Superbowls, obviously they are under performing, but not by as much as one might think.
We can look at this another way: 11% of First Round QBs win a Super Bowl and 2.3% of Non-First Round QBs win a Superbowl. And a QB from any round has an 8% chance of winning. Well, first Round QBs are then over performing only by a factor in the range of 3 - 4.
So a random QB taken in the First Round has a 3-4 times greater chance to succeed than a random QB taken outside of the First Round. This isn't as big as many make it out to be.
And again, I think a lot of people here have missed a key point to my post and argument. I believe it is important to note that the #1 overall QB picks over perform at a substantial amount that we need to recognize the difference between "any first round QB" and the Best Overall QB.
Since 1983 (not including Newton) 15 QBs were selected #1 overall. That means 15 of 330 QBs selected (not including 2011) were #1 overall picks, 4.5%. And yet, out of the last 20 Super Bowls that group has won 8 of the Superbowls, or 40%. They over perform at such a substantial rate that it cannot be ignored.
Think of it this way since 1983:
#1 Overall QBs made up 4.5% of QBs and won 40% of the Super Bowls.
First Round QBs (not including #1 overall) made up 16% of QBs and won 20% of Super Bowls.
Conclusion
Again, I'm bolding and underlining this so people do not skip this. I feel it is important to note how much #1 over all QBs over perform based on the numbers. But it is still important to note that in that case it is a small sample size (talking about 15 QBs out of 330).
However, the general First Round QB, they do not over perform by much, when it comes to straight up statistics, and thus the feeling "any First Round QB, or Bust" is very short sighted.
Non-First Round QBs obviously underperform, but not by as much as most people would think. Would most people really think a random First Round QB only has a 3-5 times greater chance of winning a Super Bowl compared to a random non-First Round QB? I think not.
ArmyFin7
U cry about the $$$, we do the dirtywork
Every year this team sucks....every year this is a debate. Every year we don't draft a 1st rd qb and every year we continue to suck....can we please break the pattern?
You can argue with this all you want, but if we have a top 5 pick and don't take a QB, I will lose my ****ing mind. I am pretty certain at this point Ross wouldn't allow Ireland to go any other direction than getting a QB.
You can argue with this all you want, but if we have a top 5 pick and don't take a QB, I will lose my ****ing mind. I am pretty certain at this point Ross wouldn't allow Ireland to go any other direction than getting a QB.
armyphin
Active Roster
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2007
- Messages
- 1,216
- Reaction score
- 10
OK, the cliff notes:
A higher percentage of non-first round QB's have reached the playoffs and won at least one game. 51.4%
A higher percentage of first round QB's have won the Superbowl. 57%
In a nutshell, having a QB drafted in the first round will slightly improve a teams odds of reaching the superbowl but not by as much as most people tend to believe.
Got it.
A higher percentage of non-first round QB's have reached the playoffs and won at least one game. 51.4%
A higher percentage of first round QB's have won the Superbowl. 57%
In a nutshell, having a QB drafted in the first round will slightly improve a teams odds of reaching the superbowl but not by as much as most people tend to believe.
Got it.
ArmyFin7
U cry about the $$$, we do the dirtywork
Ive been in Afghanistan for the first 1/4 of the season, so I haven't been forced to endure the misery of watching 0-4....maybe that's why this feels like the best 0-4 Ive endured in 28 yrs of being a fins fan. Or maybe it's the Luck and Barkley factor that awaits come April....Ireland better not **** up this golden opportunity.
QB has been a problem for the last three regimes. First Rounders do well by your records. It is time to not miss a solid first round choice, it's time to finally gamble what should have been planned 10 years ago. End of Story.
taylormvp99
Starter
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2007
- Messages
- 641
- Reaction score
- 150
#1 overall QBs have a higher success rate than others because they are usually better QBs. Nobody is taking a QB #1 overall so they can be a game manager. They're taking that QB specifically to win them a Super Bowl.
2012 - Andrew Luck ***********
*********** denotes holy ****ing **** **** we need to draft this guy if we are in the position to so we can stop having ****ty ****ing seasons because of piss poor quarterback play and therefore a guy that can eventually lead us to a super bowl so i don't have to go through my life rooting for a miserable team that always sucks *** and wastes a goddam top 10 pick on a guy who can be tackled by a toddler but his parents are pretty cool so i guess we can waste that pick and money on him and remember suck and luck rhyme?
*********** denotes holy ****ing **** **** we need to draft this guy if we are in the position to so we can stop having ****ty ****ing seasons because of piss poor quarterback play and therefore a guy that can eventually lead us to a super bowl so i don't have to go through my life rooting for a miserable team that always sucks *** and wastes a goddam top 10 pick on a guy who can be tackled by a toddler but his parents are pretty cool so i guess we can waste that pick and money on him and remember suck and luck rhyme?
