Draftnics: Success rate for 1st round QBs

[Bennessee01]

Taken from 1999-2019
Total QBs taken in round 1 (61)

Elite (13)
McNabb
Vick
Eli Manning
Rivers
Big Ben R
Rodgers
Ryan
Stafford
Luck
Mahomes
Watson
L. Jackson
Murray (proj)

Good (9)
C. Palmer, Alex Smith, Newton, Tannehill, Bridgewater, Goff, Wentz, Allen (Buf), D. Jones (proj)

Mediocre (7)
Bradford, Bortles, Winston, Mariotta, Trubisky, Mayfield, Darnold,

Busts (31)
Worsts of the Busts
Demarcus Russell 1st overall 2007
Akili Smith (Ore) 3rd overall 1999
Joey Harrington (Ore) 3rd overall 2002
Tebow why because he's Tebow.

So I've always heard about 50% make it. With 31 busts out of 61 I'd say that's pretty darn accurate.
Enjoy!

 

[Knox-a-rue]

This is fair, imo. Is Trubisky really mediocre? Maybe so. I think its too early to say on Darnold. (I thought he would be the best in that draft class.) I might not call some of those guys elite. But there could be a "very good" class in between good and elite.

Interesting. Thanks for posting.

 

[n_huffhines]

Furthermore, only one QB that was taken first in the draft this century has won the SB (Eli).

 

[95 Vol Alum]

Furthermore, only one QB that was taken first in the draft this century has won the SB (Eli).

But, I think I have this right, 7 of the 12 SB QBs who won this century were drafted in the 1st round. Brady, Johnson, Brees (almost), Wilson, and Foles were not. Of course, a first round pick in Wentz contributed greatly to the Foles season.

 

[n_huffhines]

But, I think I have this right, 7 of the 12 SB QBs who won this century were drafted in the 1st round. Brady, Johnson, Brees (almost), Wilson, and Foles were not. Of course, a first round pick in Wentz contributed greatly to the Foles season.

Sounds right. What % of starters are 1st rounders?

 

[n_huffhines]

It looks like about 16-20 last year, depending on how you want to count starters (Haskins, Jones, Big Ben, Stafford).

 

[95 Vol Alum]

It looks like about 16-20 last year, depending on how you want to count starters (Haskins, Jones, Big Ben, Stafford).

That’s not a very good indicator of anything as 1st rounders inherently start. Even if bad, see my beech Mitch.

 

[n_huffhines]

That’s not a very good indicator of anything as 1st rounders inherently start. Even if bad, see my beech Mitch.

Well, that's kind of my point. If the guys inherently getting the playing time are 1st rounders, then the guys getting to the conference championships, SB's, and SB winners would more likely be 1st rounders.

Obviously physically, 1st rd QB's are typically more gifted. But teams invest so much in these 1st round picks that they usually get first-team reps right away and then teams don't give up on them easily...but they give up on 3rd-7th rounders pretty easily when they don't perform right away. So that's one reason I would expect 1st rounders to be a good portion of SB winners and have a higher success rate than guys from subsequent rounds. I didn't come up with this idea, I remember there was some research on it 15 years ago when I took sports econ, but I don't know what updated data might say. They showed that when you controlled for reps, 2nd and 3rd rd QB's performed almost as well as 1st rounders...may have included 4th rounders.

 

[95 Vol Alum]

I’d be interested in seeing that.

League is full of career backups from later rounds. If true, they should eventually rise to the top.

 

[dobre_shunka]

Need to throw out all the Browns first round QB picks. That unfairly slants the analysis.

Couch
Quinn
Weeden
Manziel
Mayfield

 

[Chippo]

Taken from 1999-2019
Total QBs taken in round 1 (61)

Elite (13)
McNabb
Vick
Eli Manning
Rivers
Big Ben R
Rodgers
Ryan
Stafford
Luck
Mahomes
Watson
L. Jackson
Murray (proj)

Good (9)
C. Palmer, Alex Smith, Newton, Tannehill, Bridgewater, Goff, Wentz, Allen (Buf), D. Jones (proj)

Mediocre (7)
Bradford, Bortles, Winston, Mariotta, Trubisky, Mayfield, Darnold,

Busts (31)
Worsts of the Busts
Demarcus Russell 1st overall 2007
Akili Smith (Ore) 3rd overall 1999
Joey Harrington (Ore) 3rd overall 2002
Tebow why because he's Tebow.

So I've always heard about 50% make it. With 31 busts out of 61 I'd say that's pretty darn accurate.
Enjoy!

I know never thought Detroit would be rid of Harrington. Ty Detmer was no prize either
threw seven!!! interceptions in one game for the Lions. Never could understand why the coaching staff ( no matter who) would not put a backup in. Some of them were better than the starters. Mc Mahan and Hill , first ones I can think of. Any other Detroit fans are free to correct me.

 

[n_huffhines]

I always wondered, and some insiders now confirming that the Bears didn't need to move up to get Trubisky. They bid against themselves

"I don't know where they were getting their information [on needing to move up], but it was not great sources," said a source close to the team. "To give up four picks to move up one spot, that was another ridiculous thing. Especially on a team that didn't have great talent anyways. They [the 49ers] kind of duped [Chicago]."

Pace had taken over as GM in 2015 and had looked into trading up for Marcus Mariota in the '15 draft and Carson Wentz in '16. A source close to the team says that not making moves for those quarterbacks motivated Pace in '17. He would do whatever it took to get Trubisky. So when the Bears' front office caught wind that there was one team threatening to move up and select Trubisky, Pace made certain Trubisky would be a Bear.

Across the league, scouts, GMs and coaches were stunned by the Bears' move. "Everyone was like, 'Holy ****! They just took Mitch Trubisky No. 2?'" said a scout whose team drafted a quarterback that year. "There was no way we thought they were going to get Trubisky. That was so far removed from what we thought could be reality."

The shock was partly because Pace had kept his intentions quiet, but mostly it was because, for many teams, Trubisky was ranked as the third quarterback and a late first-round pick.

"I'm not sure anyone had Trubisky as high as the Bears did," said a scout who closely evaluated quarterbacks that year.

"The division is glad Chicago picked him," said an evaluator who worked in the NFC North at the time. His team graded Trubisky as a third-round pick.

 

[95 Vol Alum]

That’s not new information. Most knew that the night of the draft. Pace was an idiot chasing his QB missed opportunities the previous two years.

 

[GoDucks349]

Question: What really is the reason first round pick are successful 50% of the time? Is it the athlete? The scouting? Is it a matter of how long they get to adjust to the speed of the NFL? Lots of factors to consider in my opinion.

As a Duck, I thought Joey Harrington was a great college QB, he certainly was smart enough, I suspect he didn't have the arm or the quickness.

I though Akili would be a good NFL QB.

Justin Herbert just makes me smile. Now all he has to do is cut down on the critical turnovers and stay healthy

 

[n_huffhines]

Herbert does look pretty competent. I wasn't high on him because the Oregon offense didn't open up as much as it probably should have, but maybe that's on the play-calling.

 

[05_never_again]

Question: What really is the reason first round pick are successful 50% of the time? Is it the athlete? The scouting? Is it a matter of how long they get to adjust to the speed of the NFL? Lots of factors to consider in my opinion.

As a Duck, I thought Joey Harrington was a great college QB, he certainly was smart enough, I suspect he didn't have the arm or the quickness.

I though Akili would be a good NFL QB.

Justin Herbert just makes me smile. Now all he has to do is cut down on the critical turnovers and stay healthy

I think it is just because the nature of the position makes it so difficult to scout. You have to understand the whole offense, read a defense, be able to physically make the throws, etc. I don't think there's another position on the field that has anywhere near the variables as QB. And college QBs are more frequently playing in offenses that are not pro style in the slightest.

There have been some guys who have flamed out because they didn't have it upstairs (Leaf, Russell). Based on what I know about those guys' stories, the Chargers and the Raiders had kind of figured out in the pre-draft process that neither of those guys were the sharpest knives in the drawer, but they drafted them anyway because they were mesmerized by the physical talent. You could put Manziel into that category too, but there were also physical reasons to doubt him. There have also been guys who failed pretty clearly because there was never any talent around them (Harrington, David Carr, Brady Quinn).

It seems like big misses because the QB in question is an idiot are more predictable than misses that occur because of other reasons.

 

[n_huffhines]

Updated. It's interesting that from 2016-2018, 11 of 12 QB picks were the result of someone trading up and the last 2 years, only 1 of 7 traded up. Are teams changing draft strategies or is it just the way those two drafts played out? I feel like this next year we're going to have the same thing where teams just let the pick come to them.

 

[n_huffhines]

Dilfer was on Russillo talking about Lawrence and saying the distance between he and Fields is tight. To be clear, he thinks Lawrence is the best but he also said he hadn't done enough film study. He didn't talk much about Fields, but said physically he's just more imposing and then he's actually been doing more complicated reads than Lawrence this year.

His critique of Lawrence was interesting. He was saying his throwing motion is too long and things get hard for him when the pocket gets pushed up front. He was saying he can't make the phone booth throws that Wilson and Rodgers make. He said his arm is an 8/10. He said that his reads are easy. He's very good at checking down to the 2, but the 2 is always right in front of him because they split the field for him and he only reads half. He doesn't think people should expect him to be awesome right away.

When he was talking about checking down to the 2, he was saying RGIII only did it six times his entire college career.

One other interesting thing he said about the narrative with Lawrence as #1 is that it's all based on media opinions. He said NFL teams haven't even started scouting these guys yet.

 

[zjcvols]

Dilfer was on Russillo talking about Lawrence and saying the distance between he and Fields is tight. To be clear, he thinks Lawrence is the best but he also said he hadn't done enough film study. He didn't talk much about Fields, but said physically he's just more imposing and then he's actually been doing more complicated reads than Lawrence this year.

His critique of Lawrence was interesting. He was saying his throwing motion is too long and things get hard for him when the pocket gets pushed up front. He was saying he can't make the phone booth throws that Wilson and Rodgers make. He said his arm is an 8/10. He said that his reads are easy. He's very good at checking down to the 2, but the 2 is always right in front of him because they split the field for him and he only reads half. He doesn't think people should expect him to be awesome right away.

When he was talking about checking down to the 2, he was saying RGIII only did it six times his entire college career.

One other interesting thing he said about the narrative with Lawrence as #1 is that it's all based on media opinions. He said NFL teams haven't even started scouting these guys yet.

I trust Russilo has done his homework for sure, but there is no way I’m grading Lawrence’s arm an 8/10. It might not be Josh Allen but it’s a bazooka.

 

[n_huffhines]

I trust Russilo has done his homework for sure, but there is no way I’m grading Lawrence’s arm an 8/10. It might not be Josh Allen but it’s a bazooka.

It was Dilfer who said it, not Russillo.

I don't think he was specifically talking about total arm strength, I think he was talking about everything you'd grade about an arm, but it wasn't clear.

 

[zjcvols]

It was Dilfer who said it, not Russillo.

I don't think he was specifically talking about total arm strength, I think he was talking about everything you'd grade about an arm, but it wasn't clear.

Ah gotcha with Dilfer.

I still Lawrence has an elite level arm, better than Fields IMO.

 

[n_huffhines]

Updated. It's interesting that from 2016-2018, 11 of 12 QB picks were the result of someone trading up and the last 2 years, only 1 of 7 traded up. Are teams changing draft strategies or is it just the way those two drafts played out? I feel like this next year we're going to have the same thing where teams just let the pick come to them.

View attachment 325599

Updated...getting too long to include the whole thing, but here are the recent years with updates. They weren't good updates, for the most part.

 

[n_huffhines]

When all they had to do was draft Herbert

 

[n_huffhines]

Updated

 

[YankeeVol]

I think it is just because the nature of the position makes it so difficult to scout. You have to understand the whole offense, read a defense, be able to physically make the throws, etc. I don't think there's another position on the field that has anywhere near the variables as QB. And college QBs are more frequently playing in offenses that are not pro style in the slightest.

There have been some guys who have flamed out because they didn't have it upstairs (Leaf, Russell). Based on what I know about those guys' stories, the Chargers and the Raiders had kind of figured out in the pre-draft process that neither of those guys were the sharpest knives in the drawer, but they drafted them anyway because they were mesmerized by the physical talent. You could put Manziel into that category too, but there were also physical reasons to doubt him. There have also been guys who failed pretty clearly because there was never any talent around them (Harrington, David Carr, Brady Quinn).

It seems like big misses because the QB in question is an idiot are more predictable than misses that occur because of other reasons.

I also think the situation they walk into plays a big role (franchise, coach on the hot seat, etc).