1st round positional hit rate from 2000-2019

Risen Star

Risen Star

Likes Collector
Messages
87,169
Reaction score
204,901
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Very interesting and supports my theory. OL in general and interior OL in particular tend to be quality 1st round picks because teams don't value them that high. They're not the sexy ball in your hands making plays position. So you end up with better players on the board at OL than the guys being selected at other positions.

The C rate doesn't surprise me at all. You can steal a Pro Bowl C in the late 1st round routinely.
 
Aven8

Aven8

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,019
Reaction score
43,400
Risen Star said:
Very interesting and supports my theory. OL in general and interior OL in particular tend to be quality 1st round picks because teams don't value them that high. They're not the sexy ball in your hands making plays position. So you end up with better players on the board at OL than the guys being selected at other positions.

The C rate doesn't surprise me at all. You can steal a Pro Bowl C in the late 1st round routinely.
Click to expand...
You take the week off Ris? I know this is your favorite time of year
 
gimmesix

gimmesix

Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
Messages
37,948
Reaction score
34,965
Risen Star said:
Very interesting and supports my theory. OL in general and interior OL in particular tend to be quality 1st round picks because teams don't value them that high. They're not the sexy ball in your hands making plays position. So you end up with better players on the board at OL than the guys being selected at other positions.

The C rate doesn't surprise me at all. You can steal a Pro Bowl C in the late 1st round routinely.
Click to expand...
Right. They don't go earlier in the first because of positional value, not because they aren't among the best players in the round. I'm for getting the best players regardless of positional value. Obviously, all things being equal, you take the player with greater positional value, but I mainly just want to come out of the first round with a player who stand a real good chance of being a Pro Bowler/All Pro at whatever position he plays. That's not a sure bet at pick 24 for many positions.
 
gimmesix

gimmesix

Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
Messages
37,948
Reaction score
34,965
Hardline said:
So. JPJ or Frazier it is. And I have absolutely no problem with it.
Click to expand...
I think it is inevitable if we take either at 24 that there will be outcries that we could have traded down and got him.
 

Hardline

Well-Known Member
Messages
20,839
Reaction score
36,372
gimmesix said:
I think it is inevitable if we take either at 24 that there will be outcries that we could have traded down and got him.
Click to expand...
OLs are going to be flying off the draft board. There's no guarantee both are off the board before #24.
 
gimmesix

gimmesix

Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
Messages
37,948
Reaction score
34,965
Hardline said:
OLs are going to be flying off the draft board. There's no guarantee both are off the board before #24.
Click to expand...
Hopefully most teams will be going for the OTs. I'd still rather get the top C than the eighth-best OT unless that OT is much more of a sure thing.
 
John813

John813

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,306
Reaction score
34,174
Frederick was the only bust.





jk



Who is the lone soul center that didn't pan out? Are they considering Cameron Irving as the pick that didn't pan out?
 
gimmesix

gimmesix

Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
Messages
37,948
Reaction score
34,965
Risen Star said:
Very interesting and supports my theory. OL in general and interior OL in particular tend to be quality 1st round picks because teams don't value them that high. They're not the sexy ball in your hands making plays position. So you end up with better players on the board at OL than the guys being selected at other positions.

The C rate doesn't surprise me at all. You can steal a Pro Bowl C in the late 1st round routinely.
Click to expand...
The other thing that stood out to me is the RB rate, simply because it doesn't get better the later you take one. Since the rates are based on second contracts, I know the value of the RB position affects that, but those who think we can just pick up a starting running back late in the draft aren't paying attention to the percentages against that. You have to get lucky enough in the early rounds to find one worth keeping. In the later rounds, if you find one, you've beaten some pretty tough odds.
 
tm1119

tm1119

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,709
Reaction score
8,378
I would say this definitely needs more context.

If a player plays out their rookie deal and signs a mega deal elsewhere in free agency are they not “a hit”.

And if a player is mediocre, but the team reups them on a cheap deal for depth is that considered “a hit”?

Also, sample size is always very important
 

1942willys

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,306
Reaction score
1,964
tm1119 said:
I would say this definitely needs more context.

If a player plays out their rookie deal and signs a mega deal elsewhere in free agency are they not “a hit”.

And if a player is mediocre, but the team reups them on a cheap deal for depth is that considered “a hit”?

Also, sample size is always very important
Click to expand...
Agree, I think the hit or miss thing that was posted on QBs was full of crap. To me a hit is a near pro bowl player and above for all positions except QB. There if the QB does not make multiple Pro Bowls then he is a miss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top