Draft History since 2002

smileyman · 2010-02-24T11:45:29-08:00

Every time we talk about the draft we end up talking about bust vs success. There's lots of misconceptions about which position busts out more and which draft picks bust out more. I wanted to actually go out and do some research and get hard data on it so I did. I went to drafthistory.com and looked at all the first round drafts since 2002. I then used nfl.com for stats purposes to determine rankings. I also had to come up with some sort of reasonable definition of bust. For me a first round pick should come in and be an almost immediate starter for you. They should also be a long term starter for you--if you have a guy that only plays for one or two seasons for you that's a waste of a pick. I also think that a first round pick should be better than most of the rest of the league. Here's how I decided to grade the players. Criteria #1--Are they a starter by their 3rd season? Criteria #2--If they were a starter during their 3rd season are they still a starter during the last year of their original contract? (Generally the 4th or 5th season) Criteria #3--If they met criteria from #1 and #2 were they in the top 30% at their position? With the top 30% rule I tried to be as generous as possible. For players with stats (basically everybody but offensive lineman), I used their best year and their best statistical category. For offensive linemen I had to dig a little deeper. Profootballfocus has rankings from 2007 through 2009 so I used those to help determine a player's ranking. For players not in that database I hasd to do some searching to see how they were viewed during their playing days. One final note--if players left their original team and then turned it on with a new team I still counted them as busts, since they were not successful with the team that drafted them. I didn't want to overwhelm myself with doing too much research, so I limited myself to players drafted from 2002 through 2009. The reason I did this was because that was the expansion year of the Houston Texans and I wanted to make sure that each team had the same number of years to choose from. That still gives us 256 players to choose from and 8 drafts so I think it's a large enough sample to give us a pretty good idea of where things stand. I created a spreadsheet to help me sort the data--for those interested you can download it and play around with it or add to it if you would like to. http://www.mediafire.com/?zwmzjzikhmm First let's look at which teams are the best and worst at drafting in the first round. Here are the worst five teams at drafting. Surprisingly enough it's not the Lions who hold the number one spot. It's the Bills. Now the Lions aren't very good either, striking out on 5 out of their 6 first round picks, but the Bills haven't had a single success in the first round. The results from the best teams are surprising as well. As bad as the Lions were drafting the Steelers were that good. Drafting badly won't make you a perennial loser (Cardinals made the Superbowl and the playoffs despite not drafting well), but drafting excellently will certainly improve your chances of being a playoff team. Now let's look at the positions in the draft and see which ones are safe bets and which ones aren't. The highest bust rate will surprise you, and the safest selection will also surprise you. Some very interesting stuff there. Wide Receiver is the most overdrafted system--it looks like a WR's success in college might be solely based on the type of system being run not on the skill set of the receiver. QB is not the biggest bust, only landing 4th on the list. I had no idea that DE would be such a tough spot to draft for either. On the other hand if you want a successful draft pick, you'd better go get yourself a guard. Not a single one of the guards drafted since 2002 has busted out. TE and LB are pretty safe bets too, coming in at 25% each. Offensive Tackle is just under 50%--it's basically a coin flip as to whether or not a tackle will succeed in the NFL. Now let's look at it by position to see if being drafted top 10 or bottom 10 makes you more or less likely to be a bust. Contrary to perceived wisdom you're more likely to suceed in the NFL if you're drafted top 10. You're more likely to be a bust if you're drafted in the bottom 3rd, though not by much (55% failure rate in the middle of the 1st, 57% in the bottom). Overall it looks like more busts than successes come out of the first round (102 busts to 90 successes). Last I wanted to take a look at the year and see if that has anything to do with success rate. Looks like 2006 was a pretty good year for drafting, while 2005 was pretty bad and the rest have been about 50/50.

Feb 24, 2010 at 11:49 AM

English
Moderator
Posts: 41,384

Very interesting and I would very much like more info, but I have to say that anyone who claims Raiders are not in the bottom 5 at drafting loses a lot of credibility!!!

Feb 24, 2010 at 11:55 AM

smileyman
Info N/A

Originally posted by English:
Very interesting and I would very much like more info, but I have to say that anyone who claims Raiders are not in the bottom 5 at drafting loses a lot of credibility!!!

Did you bother reading the criteria? Al Davis gets a bad rap for his crazy decisions, but he actually makes pretty solid drafting choices.

He's had two crazy picks since 2002--Jamarcus Russel and DHB and we don't know how DHB will turn out (though probably not very good).

Janikowski was drafted in 2000. That's three out-of-nowhere picks in the last 9 years which isn't too bad all things considered. (And Janikowski has been a solid starter and a very good place kicker--the only crazy thing about that pick was making it in the first round instead of the 2nd).

Feb 24, 2010 at 12:03 PM

English
Moderator
Posts: 41,384

Originally posted by smileyman:
Originally posted by English:
Very interesting and I would very much like more info, but I have to say that anyone who claims Raiders are not in the bottom 5 at drafting loses a lot of credibility!!!

Did you bother reading the criteria? Al Davis gets a bad rap for his crazy decisions, but he actually makes pretty solid drafting choices.

He's had two crazy picks since 2002--Jamarcus Russel and DHB and we don't know how DHB will turn out (though probably not very good).

Janikowski was drafted in 2000. That's three out-of-nowhere picks in the last 9 years which isn't too bad all things considered. (And Janikowski has been a solid starter and a very good place kicker--the only crazy thing about that pick was making it in the first round instead of the 2nd).

Did I bother reading the criteria? Yes.

Exclamation marks are often used to identify flippant or non serious remarks. Thought you should know that.

Feb 24, 2010 at 12:05 PM

smileyman
Info N/A

Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by smileyman:
Originally posted by English:
Very interesting and I would very much like more info, but I have to say that anyone who claims Raiders are not in the bottom 5 at drafting loses a lot of credibility!!!

Did you bother reading the criteria? Al Davis gets a bad rap for his crazy decisions, but he actually makes pretty solid drafting choices.

He's had two crazy picks since 2002--Jamarcus Russel and DHB and we don't know how DHB will turn out (though probably not very good).

Janikowski was drafted in 2000. That's three out-of-nowhere picks in the last 9 years which isn't too bad all things considered. (And Janikowski has been a solid starter and a very good place kicker--the only crazy thing about that pick was making it in the first round instead of the 2nd).

Did I bother reading the criteria? Yes.

Exclamation marks are often used to identify flippant or non serious remarks. Thought you should know that.

Sorry. Sarcasm doesn't translate well on the interwebs and there are enough people who think crazy things that I couldn't be sure

Feb 24, 2010 at 12:08 PM

Ninefan56
Member
Posts: 5,106

With the statistics you have found it looks like SF stayed out of the bottom of draft pickers. It also looks like statisticly the draft is a high stakes gamble. How did Mc do as a draft picker?

Feb 24, 2010 at 12:12 PM

English
Moderator
Posts: 41,384

Originally posted by smileyman:
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by smileyman:
Originally posted by English:
Very interesting and I would very much like more info, but I have to say that anyone who claims Raiders are not in the bottom 5 at drafting loses a lot of credibility!!!

Did you bother reading the criteria? Al Davis gets a bad rap for his crazy decisions, but he actually makes pretty solid drafting choices.

He's had two crazy picks since 2002--Jamarcus Russel and DHB and we don't know how DHB will turn out (though probably not very good).

Janikowski was drafted in 2000. That's three out-of-nowhere picks in the last 9 years which isn't too bad all things considered. (And Janikowski has been a solid starter and a very good place kicker--the only crazy thing about that pick was making it in the first round instead of the 2nd).

Did I bother reading the criteria? Yes.

Exclamation marks are often used to identify flippant or non serious remarks. Thought you should know that.

Sorry. Sarcasm doesn't translate well on the interwebs and there are enough people who think crazy things that I couldn't be sure

I forgive you (!) As I said in my original I really like what you did, although I haven't had time to do more than skim it yet.

Feb 24, 2010 at 12:12 PM

kronik
Veteran
Posts: 4,316

Thanks for the hard work and info. Interesting stuff. Still want to draft Iupati somehow.

Feb 24, 2010 at 12:16 PM

smileyman
Info N/A

Originally posted by Ninefan56:
With the statistics you have found it looks like SF stayed out of the bottom of draft pickers. It also looks like statisticly the draft is a high stakes gamble. How did Mc do as a draft picker?

From 2002 to 2007 the 49ers drafted 3 busts and 4 successes.

Eventually I'm going to expand this database to back to 1990 as well as include schools and conferences.

Feb 24, 2010 at 12:17 PM

smileyman
Info N/A

Originally posted by kronik:
Thanks for the hard work and info. Interesting stuff. Still want to draft Iupati somehow.

Statistics say that if we draft Iupati in the first he'll be a success for us. No guard drafted in the first round since 2002 has been a bust.

Feb 24, 2010 at 12:19 PM

#10

lamontb
Veteran
Posts: 33,136

Nice break down. Only thing I don't agree with is you calling a guy a bust though he's moved on to another team and is playing well. I just don't' think that makes any sense. Good info

Feb 24, 2010 at 12:42 PM

#11

miked1978
Veteran
Posts: 12,522

Great info.

Things I learned:
Stay away from WR. We had success last year but got bit in the ass on R. Woods.

Don't draft who the Bills want.

More luck drafting oline (guard especially) in the first round.

Feb 24, 2010 at 12:43 PM

#12

smileyman
Info N/A

Originally posted by lamontb:
Nice break down. Only thing I don't agree with is you calling a guy a bust though he's moved on to another team and is playing well. I just don't' think that makes any sense. Good info

He's a bust for the team that drafted him.

You don't draft a guy in the first round expecting him to do well with his next team.