Dibs Posted January 24, 2013 Author Share Posted January 24, 2013 (edited) True. There are a lot of ways to assemble a roster good enough to contend for the Super Bowl, and there are all kinds of ways teams have gone about it. Drafting well is somewhat of a consensus most important way. But signing big free agents, signing "cog" free agents, signing street free agents, re-signing your own players, and trades, are all important. And you'll find contributors from most all if not all of these ways on all contenders. In specifics to QBs though(since that is the position covered in this thread).....it seems to be a great deal harder to find a QB who will lead your team to a SB win outside of drafting him. It certainly happens....but there have not been many SB wins in recent times by QBs who were not drafted by the winning team. The Brees situation was an extraordinary and solitary situation as far as I am aware. I can't think of any other young star QBs who have hit the FA market and changed teams. Edited January 24, 2013 by Dibs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPS Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Ta. To me the stats show that only a 1st round pick can be considered a major draft investment when considering the QB position. The two 2nd round starters were Brees(who KellyDog pointed out was the 32nd pick)....and Favre who was the 33rd pick. If you are picking outside the 1st round(& #1 in R2) you are looking at needing to pick 20ish guys on average to find a 5+ year starter. How do you account for Schaub? He's a 3rd rounder who was traded for two 2nd rounders.... I know the Bills must take a QB. But I kinda feel like they're buying apples in the wrong season and shouldn't pay too much. Other than Vick, Sanchez and Tebow, I'm wondering what other options the Bills have. If I'm a tarnished FA, I'm targeting Buffalo as a landing spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted January 24, 2013 Author Share Posted January 24, 2013 How do you account for Schaub? He's a 3rd rounder who was traded for two 2nd rounders.... I know the Bills must take a QB. But I kinda feel like they're buying apples in the wrong season and shouldn't pay too much. Other than Vick, Sanchez and Tebow, I'm wondering what other options the Bills have. If I'm a tarnished FA, I'm targeting Buffalo as a landing spot. I counted Schaub as if he "qualified" on the one team due to the uniqueness of the QB position.... But I don't think that was what you were asking.... In terms of the two 2nd round picks.....they are irrelevant and are ignored. The reason for this is that picks used for trades will be used by the trading team to draft other players. Those players will then be assessed in their relevant group(QB, LB, RB etc). The analysis was not about how much one spends on any given group....rather how well the player drafted performs for the team that spent the pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPS Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Ahh...Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 I will be discovering if you are correct about hit rate as I go through the other positions. What I said was correct though....outside of the top 4 the hit rate is very low. Even including Rodgers it would be only 3 in 22. Rodgers is not a star player under the criteria that I set.....hence me specifically mentioning him. Rodgers is a star player, you may want to adjust your criteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 How do you account for Schaub? He's a 3rd rounder who was traded for two 2nd rounders.... I know the Bills must take a QB. But I kinda feel like they're buying apples in the wrong season and shouldn't pay too much. Other than Vick, Sanchez and Tebow, I'm wondering what other options the Bills have. If I'm a tarnished FA, I'm targeting Buffalo as a landing spot. Actually, Vick and Sanchez are under contract. The one most likely to be available is Alex Smith. Other options are: Tavaris Jackson, Matt Cassel (He could be let go in KC), Matt Flynn (Could be had from Seattle), Matt Moore(Miami). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPS Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Actually, Vick and Sanchez are under contract. The one most likely to be available is Alex Smith. Other options are: Tavaris Jackson, Matt Cassel (He could be let go in KC), Matt Flynn (Could be had from Seattle), Matt Moore(Miami). I thought Smith and Flynn are under contract too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Excellent start to the analytics way , I like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted January 28, 2013 Author Share Posted January 28, 2013 (edited) First, thanks and great stuff, Dibs. I do, however, agree with Alpha on this one. Plus, since you are going down to 1986 - 2005, drafts, maybe you should have a second version, because of the expansion teams added in 1995 and 2002 (and maybe more. I have long contended, for example, that Drew Brees was not really a #2 pick but more of a #1 pick because he was the 31st player taken overall. So maybe picks 1-32 should be first round, 33-64 should be second round, etc. Because that is where the league is at now. Mark Brunell, for example, was drafted in the 5th, #118 overall. Today, 118 overall is middle of the 4th round. ( i didnt check what the added draft picks awarded from FA affect the numbers) Though continuing the expansion teams aspect is virtually impossible(due to compensatory picks), I have come to see a relevance in separating the top of the 2nd round. As the only relevant "true" 2nd round pick was Favre (#33), I have done three new divisions.....Top 4......5-33.....34-end of 3rd round. I believe these divisions clearly show that the QB position is very easy for scouts to analyze. The few QBs who show that "special" potential rocket up the draft board and are invariably selected in the top 4 in the draft. Very few QBs(percentage wise) outside of this select group ever become solid starters for their drafted teams. R1 Pick 1-4 19 players selected 4 Stars 21% (1 in 4.8) 9 Starters 47% (1 in 2.1) 9 probowlers 47% (1 in 2.1) R1 Picks 5-33 25 players selected 2 Stars 8% (1 in 12.5) 4 Starters 16% (1 in 6.3) 8 probowlers 32% (1 in 3.1) Picks 34-end round 3 40 players selected 0 Stars 0 Starters 4 probowlers 10% (1 in 10) Edited January 28, 2013 by Dibs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 I thought Smith and Flynn are under contract too. Correct. But I think the chance of Alex Smith being release is pretty high while Vick and Sanchez are slim due to the contract they have signed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trader Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Thanks for the clarification AlphaD. All's good In terms of the goal, I'll elaborate/discuss a bit.... My main goal was to determine the average chance of getting a player who will minimally have 5 seasons where he is good enough to start for the drafting team. It is more a reflection of "bang for bucks" with the draft picks. I was focusing in that particular way due to the fact that every draft, a large number of fans(and media) assume that their 1st, 2nd, usually 3rd and sometimes 4th round selections are going to solve the problems at whatever position for a good number of years to come. Effectively I was trying to find out how many players drafted actually do that. That is why I won't count a superstar who gets injured and then has reduced ability or retires after the 3rd year.....nor players that start for 4 years for the drafted team and then leave....nor players who play mediocre and then play like superstars at another team. It's not an analysis of how many players end up being good players.....it's an analysis of how many players end up plugging the required holes for the team that drafted them....because in the crux of it, that is what they are drafted to do in the first place. I hope I've explained myself well enough there. Yes you have and you have done a very nice job of it!! What is your opinion of how New England drafts by Frequently trading down for more picks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted January 28, 2013 Author Share Posted January 28, 2013 (edited) Yes you have and you have done a very nice job of it!! What is your opinion of how New England drafts by Frequently trading down for more picks? At this point I have only broken down the QB position and the LB position(here: http://forums.twobil...ing-success-lb/).....more positions to come over the next few weeks/months. I actually made comment in the LB thread of the sense in doing exactly that....trading down for more picks. With regards to LBs, I wouldn't necessarily trade out of the 1st round to find a Starter as you have twice the chance to find one in the 1st over the 2nd round. I would however suggest that trading down in the 1st is a wise move as the percent success chance of 37% was fairly uniform throughout the 1st round.....though Star chance is doubled in the top 10 selections. The 2nd to 5th rounds however reveal quite a different situation. The Starter percentages for those rounds were... 2nd 18%, 3rd, 11%, 4/5th 8% When comparing percentage chances to the standard "Trade Value Chart" (here: http://www.drafttek....tradechart.html), it is clear that if one is after a LB(or two), trading down in/from the 2nd round will give a much higher chance of coming away with a starting calibre LB. Using this years Bills for example.... We have the #41 pick valued at 490 In theory, if that pick was traded for picks 57(2nd), 110(4th), 122(4th) & 140(5th).....(value 330+74+50+36=490).....and all were used to pick LBs(makes sense as we need multiple LBs).... The percentage difference is.... Pick 41 = 18% chance of drafting a 5+ year starter Picks 57+110+122+140 = 36% chance of drafting at least one 5+ year starter. Obviously there are a great number of variable not factored in.....but with the LB position it is clear that a good percent of LBs can be had in the 3rd to 5th rounds. Theoretically one could use the same process with the QB position.....but....there are a number of factors why it is not feasible to select and groom more than a couple of QBs at a time. It should also be noted how important it is in the modern NFL to have a Star QB......apart from the aberration of Brady there was not a single legit Star QB selected outside of the top 34 picks in the 20 years analyzed. Edited January 28, 2013 by Dibs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Hi all, As a Bills fan looking forward to this draft where we have the #8 pick and desperately need a good QB….this study has depressed me somewhat. Theoretically one could use the same process with the QB position.....but....there are a number of factors why it is not feasible to select and groom more than a couple of QBs at a time. It should also be noted how important it is in the modern NFL to have a Star QB......apart from the aberration of Brady there was not a single legit Star QB selected outside of the top 34 picks in the 20 years analyzed. Typical Bills fan - not backing up his feelings with any stats! However, another way to look at that is to validate having a consistent FO drafting/team building philosophy in place. To whit - looking at NE* since BillyBoy* took over in 2000. They've drafted QBs about every other year. Last one was Mallett in 2011 3rd Round. They may be getting ready to draft another one this year. Mallett I think only has a 3 year rookie contract. They could trade him away and grab another couple of picks and get another developmental QB to replace him. That's one of the ways they've built such a strong team - and further points to the positional stability that Marcia has afforded them in their drafting for other needs, i.e., they could trade Bledsoe, Cassell, and now, perhaps Mallett. Having a stable front office that builds a team through the draft is a fundamental way to success. I'm not saying don't make trades and FA acquisitions - all teams do that, but you have to have a sound drafting plan that's kept in place for years and not thrown in the crapper every 5 years when a new sheriff gets hired. PS - GREAT work Dibs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted January 28, 2013 Author Share Posted January 28, 2013 (edited) Typical Bills fan - not backing up his feelings with any stats! However, another way to look at that is to validate having a consistent FO drafting/team building philosophy in place. To whit - looking at NE* since BillyBoy* took over in 2000. They've drafted QBs about every other year. Last one was Mallett in 2011 3rd Round. They may be getting ready to draft another one this year. Mallett I think only has a 3 year rookie contract. They could trade him away and grab another couple of picks and get another developmental QB to replace him. That's one of the ways they've built such a strong team - and further points to the positional stability that Marcia has afforded them in their drafting for other needs, i.e., they could trade Bledsoe, Cassell, and now, perhaps Mallett. Having a stable front office that builds a team through the draft is a fundamental way to success. I'm not saying don't make trades and FA acquisitions - all teams do that, but you have to have a sound drafting plan that's kept in place for years and not thrown in the crapper every 5 years when a new sheriff gets hired. PS - GREAT work Dibs! Thanks Nanker. I totally agree with the philosophy that you mention re: Patriots. From the looks, they started this philosophy from 1999(or at least they picked a QB in the year prior to Bellecheat). Though this philosophy isn't likely to get you a Star QB, it certainly seems a good strategy in obtaining a decent backup or a QB of Starter calibre. The other team that seems to follow this philosophy is the Packers. They have been a veritable QB factory having produced 2 Starter quality QBs who achieved multiple pro bowls(Hasselbeck & Brunnell) as well as Rodgers.....all having been backups to Favre. For those interested.... Patriots QB draft each year since 1999.... 7th, 6th, no, 4th, 6th, no, 7th, no, no , 3rd, 7th, 7th, 3rd, no Packers QB draft each year since 1989.... 3rd & 4th, 9th, no, 9th, 5th, no, 5th, 7th, 7th, 6th, 4th, no, no, 5th, no, no, 1st, 5th, no, 2nd & 7th, no, no, no, 7th Compared to the Bills.... Bills QB draft each year since 1995....(the two bolded "1st" represents our trade for Rob Johnson & Bledsoe) 2nd, no, no, 1st, no, no, no, no, 1st, 1st, no, no, 3rd, no, no, 7th, no, no. Nearly all of those Patriot & Packers draft picks were used when they actually had a Star/Starter in place whereas nearly all of ours were years where we didn't. Edited January 28, 2013 by Dibs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cash Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Thanks Nanker. I totally agree with the philosophy that you mention re: Patriots. From the looks, they started this philosophy from 1999(or at least they picked a QB in the year prior to Bellecheat). Though this philosophy isn't likely to get you a Star QB, it certainly seems a good strategy in obtaining a decent backup or a QB of Starter calibre. The other team that seems to follow this philosophy is the Packers. They have been a veritable QB factory having produced 2 Starter quality QBs who achieved multiple pro bowls(Hasselbeck & Brunnell) as well as Rodgers.....all having been backups to Favre. For those interested.... Patriots QB draft each year since 1999.... 7th, 6th, no, 4th, 6th, no, 7th, no, no , 3rd, 7th, 7th, 3rd, no Packers QB draft each year since 1989.... 3rd & 4th, 9th, no, 9th, 5th, no, 5th, 7th, 7th, 6th, 4th, no, no, 5th, no, no, 1st, 5th, no, 2nd & 7th, no, no, no, 7th Compared to the Bills.... Bills QB draft each year since 1995....(the two bolded "1st" represents our trade for Rob Johnson & Bledsoe) 2nd, no, no, 1st, no, no, no, no, 1st, 1st, no, no, 3rd, no, no, 7th, no, no. Nearly all of those Patriot & Packers draft picks were used when they actually had a Star/Starter in place whereas nearly all of ours were years where we didn't. This (and your other posts in this thread) are wonderful analysis. Thanks so much for taking the time to post them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts