There are 184 users in the forums

Draft record failure

Shop Find 49ers gear online
Originally posted by PRIMETIME21:
Only thing that gets me is we could have had Micah parsons instead of Trey lance… like we might be hoisting one already by that move Alone

1. Why would we have taken Parsons based on our roster at the time?

2. Parsons had some red flags before the draft.

So easy to take this point of view 4 years later.
I have been keeping up with draft grades for all 32 teams since the 2000 draft and if we are talking 1st rounders then there is about a 70% hit rate. When I say hit rate I mean that player is a C or above on a grading scale. Mike McGlinchey is a C or borderline B. His 2nd contract kinda proves that he is a B. But to each his own.

So we have hit on 3 of 7 picks which is 43%. That's lower than the league Avg for sure. Foster had the talent and his on field performance he was a hit but his off field issues with his crazy girlfriend did him in.

But if you take into account an entire draft class, like we do in real life, the hit rate for all teams is 28%. This means a teams draft classes will only produce 2 players that are viewed as hits (Grade C or above) per year. 49ers are well above that. I don't have my spreadsheet to give you the exact #

So the 49ers are good at drafting but not good in the first round. I'm going to go back and see if any other teams are as bad as us in the first round. I'm sure there are some.
Originally posted by PRIMETIME21:
Only thing that gets me is we could have had Micah parsons instead of Trey lance… like we might be hoisting one already by that move Alone

I wouldn't look at it that way. Niners were taking a QB no matter what that year. They were fed up with Jimmy G. It was either Trey Lance, Mac Jones or Justin Fields.
Originally posted by Crown:
Originally posted by Predator85:
Lynch/Kyle draft base on feels and fits, they don't take the best player available like the Ravens and Steelers etc.

How are the ravens/steelers doing these days?

Im convinced some fans want us to be worse.
I'm not sure that the 1st round hit rate is that far off the league average. You'd have to do a proper analysis of what goes on across the league.

Here's some 30 second research stats I just looked up -

Among first-round draft picks selected between 2010-2017, only 31% signed a second contract with the team that drafted them.

More Than 50% Of First Round Picks Are Busts - the success rate broadly fluctuates around 50%, with no year doing better than 55%.

Of draft picks overall (from any round) - 12.3% were considered good; 6.9% were considered Great; 1% were considered legendary.

1st round gives more chance of unearthing a starter, but probably not as much as people think:
Round --- % starters
1 --- 29.9
2 --- 17.5
3 --- 12.6
4 --- 10.8
5 --- 6.4

I don't have time to research this, but my bet is that people would be surprised at how low the hit rate is for drafted talent, even at the 1st round stage.
  • Crown
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 34,866
Originally posted by LifelongNiner:
Originally posted by Crown:
Originally posted by Predator85:
Lynch/Kyle draft base on feels and fits, they don't take the best player available like the Ravens and Steelers etc.

How are the ravens/steelers doing these days?

Im convinced some fans want us to be worse.

Perhaps.

I have been disappointed by some picks yet its not in my control and I happen to like this coach/GM.

I suspect many are not in work positions that truly helps them understand how hard it is to hire/train/develop and retain an elite staff.
Originally posted by LifelongNiner:
Originally posted by Crown:
Originally posted by Predator85:
Lynch/Kyle draft base on feels and fits, they don't take the best player available like the Ravens and Steelers etc.

How are the ravens/steelers doing these days?

Im convinced some fans want us to be worse.

Yes, if we're not winning the Super Bowl, we should be bottom feeders, apparently.
Originally posted by miked1978:
I have been keeping up with draft grades for all 32 teams since the 2000 draft and if we are talking 1st rounders then there is about a 70% hit rate. When I say hit rate I mean that player is a C or above on a grading scale. Mike McGlinchey is a C or borderline B. His 2nd contract kinda proves that he is a B. But to each his own.

So we have hit on 3 of 7 picks which is 43%. That's lower than the league Avg for sure. Foster had the talent and his on field performance he was a hit but his off field issues with his crazy girlfriend did him in.

But if you take into account an entire draft class, like we do in real life, the hit rate for all teams is 28%. This means a teams draft classes will only produce 2 players that are viewed as hits (Grade C or above) per year. 49ers are well above that. I don't have my spreadsheet to give you the exact #

So the 49ers are good at drafting but not good in the first round. I'm going to go back and see if any other teams are as bad as us in the first round. I'm sure there are some.

They need to drastically increase the rate for offering their 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks second contracts. I've always looked at that as a measure of drafting success, along with other teams offering those players solid second contracts.

You're not going to be able to keep everyone but hopefully you're drafting well enough that other teams want the guys that you can't sign so you wind up with a steady supply of comp picks.

This next draft is going to be absolutely crucial. They are running out of cap space and running low on depth. They need to have a really good draft to refill the cupboard, especially for a few years down the road when, if everything works out with Purdy, he'll be looking for a huge new deal.

No more getting cute or blowing picks on non-core positions. I hope they seriously address OL, DL, CB and S to build up crucial depth for more future playoff runs.
Top 5 offense and rhe best defense niners the NFL says they are drafting fine.
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Top 5 offense and rhe best defense niners the NFL says they are drafting fine.

Two things can be true at once. Their early drafting record is atrocious, Steve Keim like and they've done a good job of making value picks late in the draft. Imagine how better they'd be if they weren't continually blowing their 1st round picks, might be enough to bump them from conference game loser to SB winner.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Top 5 offense and rhe best defense niners the NFL says they are drafting fine.

Two things can be true at once. Their early drafting record is atrocious, Steve Keim like and they've done a good job of making value picks late in the draft. Imagine how better they'd be if they weren't continually blowing their 1st round picks, might be enough to bump them from conference game loser to SB winner.


So imagine how they could be ranked better than 1st in defense? the offense could have been better but it only had its new stud FQB in for 6 games.

The results of the draft are the roster and the roster is measured by rankings.

There is no draft record failure, the point is moot.
Originally posted by TD49ers:
Originally posted by PRIMETIME21:
Only thing that gets me is we could have had Micah parsons instead of Trey lance… like we might be hoisting one already by that move Alone

1. Why would we have taken Parsons based on our roster at the time?

2. Parsons had some red flags before the draft.

So easy to take this point of view 4 years later.

Parsons was an off-ball LB right? We had Dre & Warner & Azeez, plus we wouldn't be able to afford both Bosa & Parsons long term.
we just suck at day1 and day 2 picks... we just need to do a Jimmy Johnson and trade all those picks for day 3 picks and have about 20 selections per year, the odds would really favor us then

but still, we can bag on ShannaLynch all we want concerning their early round draft record, they must be doing something right to have one of the most talented rosters in the league for 3 years going now
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
So imagine how they could be ranked better than 1st in defense? the offense could have been better but it only had its new stud FQB in for 6 games.

The results of the draft are the roster and the roster is measured by rankings.

There is no draft record failure, the point is moot.

Good enough to not lose to the Chiefs? Good enough to not lose to the Rams in the NFCCG?

No matter how good you are, you can always be better and since the 49ers as of yet don't have a Mahomes that can make up for a lot of shortcomings, they need to max out the value of their draft picks. Using a total of four 1st rounders and one third round pick on Kinlaw and Lance, getting zero back in production for those five picks is not maxing the value of those picks.

Had they gotten even gotten average return on those picks its likely that they have 6 SB trophies right now and a better overall roster.
Originally posted by AB81Rules:
Originally posted by TD49ers:
Originally posted by PRIMETIME21:
Only thing that gets me is we could have had Micah parsons instead of Trey lance… like we might be hoisting one already by that move Alone

1. Why would we have taken Parsons based on our roster at the time?

2. Parsons had some red flags before the draft.

So easy to take this point of view 4 years later.

Parsons was an off-ball LB right? We had Dre & Warner & Azeez, plus we wouldn't be able to afford both Bosa & Parsons long term.

Not being able to afford to sign your draft picks 2nd contract is a good problem to have IMO
Share 49ersWebzone