50% Hit Rate on Top 5 Picks Since 2012

[3rdand12]

That's why you pretty much should always trade down and strive to acquire quantity. Just give yourself more chances to get a hit. I would rather have two 20ish picks than one top-5.

This is my thinking.

Your percentages of a hit per pitch don't go up, but your times at bat do !

easier said than done trading down the further away you get from the #1 pick i might guess.

[PlayoffsPlease]

This is another example to put into perspective a GM's draft and look at their overall body of work.

The best way to put a GM and his staff's results into perspective is in the win/loss column over time. Nothing much else matters.

[PromoTheRobot]

I've been told the Bills suck because all of our draft picks and UDFA's are not pro bowlers. Are you telling me I've been mislead?

[H2o]

That's why you pretty much should always trade down and strive to acquire quantity. Just give yourself more chances to get a hit. I would rather have two 20ish picks than one top-5.

 

In most cases? Yes. But in some cases the top 5 pick is really a fluke occurrence that needs to be handled wisely. The Cowboys this year for instance. They have their choice of a number of the elite prospects being at #4 when they are usually in the late teens or early 20's. They have a shot at Tunsil, Ramsey, Jack, Stanley, Wentz, Goff, Bosa, Elliott, whoever is left after the first three and they have rated highest on their board. Jerry better be doing his homework because this opportunity doesn't come along too often for him.

[OldTimer1960]

This is my thinking.

Your percentages of a hit per pitch don't go up, but your times at bat do !

easier said than done trading down the further away you get from the #1 pick i might guess.

Your percentages of a hit per pitch go down with later picks.

[3rdand12]

Your percentages of a hit per pitch go down with later picks.

The potential value will go down. such a as single compared to over the fence. but with enough singles you can move the runners towards home

But the chances of finding a gem go down . thats another story though. Coaching and patinec come into play with the more raw draftee

Give me 4 picks in the second and third rounds and take away my first.

As long as i am not in dire need of a Franchise QB

[chris heff]

NFL.com has an interesting article ranking the top 5 picks of the draft since 2012. To demonstrate how difficult this is, there's only a 50% hit rate...on TOP 5 picks.. amazing. Clearly not very good. And we all know that if any of these players were passed over in the top 5, they would have been picked in the #6-10 slots and the team grabbing them there would have been graded an "A++" having scored the "steal of the draft" at the time...

How did you arrive at 50%? Who are the ten guys that your wrighting off? There seems to be three or four guys that are yet to be determined. Top ten are pretty solid.

[JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS]

Whaley sucks.

And Pegs is cheap lol

[machine gun kelly]

I understand the notion of trading down, but you need a suitor. If the other 31 teams don't see one they have to get at 19 which is not likely as 19 is most likely out of the elite draft choices, then we're going to pick at 19. In no way would I want to give up picks to move up. We have 8 shots this year with no real chances of free agency.

 

It's boring, but we'll most likely pick at 19.

[Fadingpain]

As a counterpoint, the best player on the team right now is arguably Marcell Dareus.

 

He was also taken 3rd overall with the Bills' highest draft choice in years.

[OldTimer1960]

The potential value will go down. such a as single compared to over the fence. but with enough singles you can move the runners towards home

But the chances of finding a gem go down . thats another story though. Coaching and patinec come into play with the more raw draftee

Give me 4 picks in the second and third rounds and take away my first.

As long as i am not in dire need of a Franchise QB

I am not sure that is true. There have been some tremendous players drafted after the early first round - into later rounds - think Tom Brady, Shady McCoy, etc, but the probability of hitting a tremendous player - or a good starter - goes down the later in the draft you go.

[cage]

How did you arrive at 50%? Who are the ten guys that your wrighting off? There seems to be three or four guys that are yet to be determined. Top ten are pretty solid.

 

I'm writing off the bottom 10... its true that 1-2 of them might turn things around yet, but that's still a poor hit rate for top 5 picks, don't you think??

[Dragonborn10]

If a player or two "falls" early in the round the possibilities of a trade start to go up. Unless of course the media and draft pundits are just totally clueless and all the GM's agree those falling players are terrible.

[SinceThe70s]

The potential value will go down. such a as single compared to over the fence. but with enough singles you can move the runners towards home

But the chances of finding a gem go down . thats another story though. Coaching and patinec come into play with the more raw draftee

Give me 4 picks in the second and third rounds and take away my first.

As long as i am not in dire need of a Franchise QB

 

When I was growing up I had a board game called NFL Pro Draft. You had to build a team thru the draft and players were rated either "A" or "B". "A" players were rated something like 0-30 or 70-100 and B players were from 30-70, but you didn't know their actual rating until you drafted the player. It was a pretty simplistic model of the real draft and you weren't winning unless you hit on your A picks.

 

These days the draft gets analyzed to death even though by and large draft picks amount to educated guesses and/or filling a need. What would be interesting to me is to look at the top 10% of players in the league and see the distribution of which round they were drafted in. My guess is that unless you have a great roster you should take your best shot with your first rounder.

[bbb]

Whaley sucks.

 

No ****. I can't believe he missed on 50% of the top 5 picks...

[simpleman]

That's why you pretty much should always trade down and strive to acquire quantity. Just give yourself more chances to get a hit. I would rather have two 20ish picks than one top-5.

I tend to agree with you on that just based on gut feeling. But I'm not sure the facts/statistics/history would back us up. I would like to see someone calculate the odds of this strategy achieving the type of results our gut feelings tell us it would by comparing the success rate of 2 mid 1st pick vs picks over single top 10 picks similar to how this article rated the success rate for top 5 picks.

 

I wonder about this. In 2013 we basically got EJ, Kiko, Gragg & Goodwin in exchange for a #8 that STL used for Austin. In that case I think trading back was a good move. But that was only a single year trade, not a huge sample and may be cherry picking.

 

And this year I would gladly trade away my first if there was a way to get 3 2nd round picks doing multiple trades. The talent is so good at areas of need in the 2nd round this year. I'd even be glad to trade all this years picks for 3 2nds and a 4th. Beyond the top 7 there does not seem to be a huge drop in talent potential between the later first round and the mid 2nd round.

 

I am not even sure the trade value chart would get you two mid 20s picks for a top 5. Maybe a top 2 pick. I'd think this type of evaluation must be a big part of what the job description is of the new trend in sports of hiring an "analytics" guy. Anyone up for some serious work?

Edited March 26, 2016 by simpleman

[mannc]

NFL.com has an interesting article ranking the top 5 picks of the draft since 2012. To demonstrate how difficult this is, there's only a 50% hit rate...on TOP 5 picks.. amazing. Clearly not very good. And we all know that if any of these players were passed over in the top 5, they would have been picked in the #6-10 slots and the team grabbing them there would have been graded an "A++" having scored the "steal of the draft" at the time...

On the other hand, maybe the lesson is not to waste a top 5 pick on an offensive lineman. Five of the "bottom 11" are O-lineman. Maybe it's just a difficult position to project.

[3rdand12]

 

When I was growing up I had a board game called NFL Pro Draft. You had to build a team thru the draft and players were rated either "A" or "B". "A" players were rated something like 0-30 or 70-100 and B players were from 30-70, but you didn't know their actual rating until you drafted the player. It was a pretty simplistic model of the real draft and you weren't winning unless you hit on your A picks.

 

These days the draft gets analyzed to death even though by and large draft picks amount to educated guesses and/or filling a need. What would be interesting to me is to look at the top 10% of players in the league and see the distribution of which round they were drafted in. My guess is that unless you have a great roster you should take your best shot with your first rounder.

That would be a good statistic you evaluate! Makes sense about hitting on A picks. When you miss with your first pick , that's a setback nearly !

Luckily Whaley has alright last couple years with "hitting " ha ha!

Elaborate on what you mean about about taking your best shot with the first rounder, please?

Would you not take an offer to move down a couple picks and get an extra 3rd ?

I agree once your roster is filled out nicely it really should become BPA

 

No ****. I can't believe he missed on 50% of the top 5 picks...

and this is why 50% of the board want to hang him!!

 

LOL

[RevWarRifleman]

This is another example to put into perspective a GM's draft and look at their overall body of work.

I agree with this 100%.

[Observer]

This is why trading down for MORE picks is a good strategy. The draft is a lottery in a lot ways. Getting more balls in the hopper is always worth it. See New England's strategy for the last 15 years. Always stockpiling later picks. Some miss, some don't. But they have more picks so get more hits.