NFL Draft Top 5 Pick Success Rate - Page 9

MIAdragon · 02-25-2009, 10:21 AM

I got this emailed to me today and thought Id share. IDK anything about Mays but I like numbers.

http://sportsfountainhead.blogspot.c...cess-rate.html
Top 5 Pick Success Rate

Originally published by me at Draft Tek.

The debate rages on! Actually, this debate happens nearly every year. QBs are hot commodities; everyone wants to find the next Peyton Manning, Troy Aikman, or John Elway. In the 2009 Draft we are left with three prospects considered elite and possible first rounders: Matt Stafford (Georgia), Mark Sanchez (USC), and Josh Freeman (Kansas State). Generally speaking, Stafford and Sanchez are viewed as Top 10 picks - as Draft Tek Correspondent Mike Schottey pointed out here. However, our model and correspondents seem to disagree on team needs and the talent available compared with other mocks, “experts”, and you, the readers.

Let’s look at this using statistics. What are the odds that a player taken in the Top 5 will become an All Pro/Pro Bowl-caliber performer? Looking at 43 seasons of data (1966 through 2008, or the “Super Bowl Era”) we get these percentages for each position:

QB - There have been 39 taken in the Top 5 since 1966. Of those only 4 (~10%) have been named 1st Team All Pro with 20 (~51%) making the Pro Bowl at least once. But when using a high draft pick you’re not expecting someone to make the Pro Bowl once, you expect multiple trips - like an average of once every three seasons. That brings down the list to 11 out of 39 (~28%). Basically, 1 out of every 4 QBs selected in the Top 5 will really be worth that status and be “franchise” QBs. But because of sample size there are some outliers. Here is the list of the 10 “franchise” QBs drafted since 1966: Eli Manning, Carson Palmer, Michael Vick, Peyton Manning, Drew Beldsoe, Troy Aikman, John Elway, Donovan McNabb, Vince Young, Philip Rivers, and Bob Griese. Vick and Young? Not viewed in that light anymore. There’s also the some young QBs that could fall off and not have prolonged success: Eli Manning, Carson Palmer, and Philip Rivers. Assuming those three maintain their high level of play over the last three years that really leaves us with 9 out of the 39 (~23%) QBs that were Top 5 picks who are/were truly worthy of the “franchise” label; someone you’d actually want to take in the Top 5. As of now, 4 of the 39 (~10%) have been elected to the Hall of Fame (Troy Aikman, John Elway, Terry Bradshaw, and Bob Griese). There will be at least one more joining them after Peyton manning retires. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~23%

RB - There have been 34 selected Top 5 since 1966, with 13 (~38%) being selected 1st Team All Pro at least once. 20 of the 34 (~59%) have made at least one Pro Bowl. Going back to the “1 Pro Bowl for every 3 years as a starter” rule, we’re left with 16 “franchise” RBs, which is ~47%. Of those 16, 3 have/had 5 or less years of playing experience (Billy Sims, Ronnie Brown, and Brent Fullwood) so their sample size comes into question. We’ll keep them in but I wanted to point that out. Anyway, of those 16 “franchise” RBs, 6 have made the Hall of Fame (Earl Campbell, O.J. Simpson, Eric Dickerson, Tony Dorsett, Barry Sanders, and Walter Payton). Most likely two more will join them in the near future (Marshall Faulk and LaDainian Tomlinson). FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~47%

WR - There have been a mere 16 taken in the Top 5 in the last 43 drafts. Only 3 of them (~19%) have made 1st Team All Pro, all only once. However, 10 of the 16 (~63%) have made at least one Pro Bowl. Expanding to our”franchise” requirement of 1 Pro Bowl every 3 years as starter leaves 7 of the 16 (44%). One of them, though, is Desmond Howard, more known for his return skills than for his receiving skills. He has only one accrued season as a WR (according to Pro Football Reference, where all these stats are from) and during it he made the Pro Bowl (most likely as a returner). We’ll throw him out, leaving 6 of the 16 (~38%). Three of the six have 5 or less years as a starter but are all young players (Braylon Edwards, Larry Fitzgerald, and Andre Johnson). We’ll say they stay on their current pace and keep them in. It is interesting to note that none of the 16 Top 5 picks have been elected to the Hall of Fame… and it may not happen until Edwards, Fitzgerald, and Johnson hang it up for good. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~38%

TE - There has been only one TE taken in the Top 5, Riley Odoms (Houston) by Denver in 1972. He was a 10-year starter, made 1st Team All Pro twice, and was selected to 4 Pro Bowls. He was a success by my measure but the overall sample size is too small. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: N/A

OT - There have been 24 selected Top 5 since 1966. Of the 24, 8 have been named to the All Pro 1st Team (~33%) and 14 have made at least one Pro Bowl (~58%). Using the “1-every-3″ rule for a true franchise player we’re left with 11 out of 24, which is ~46%. Two of those 11 are young (Jake Long and Joe Thomas) but are viewed as perennial Pro Bowl players so they will remain in the group. There are currently 2 HOF Top 5 tackles - Ron Yary and Anthony Munoz. They’ll be joined by Jonathan Ogden and Orlando Pace in the coming years (and possibly Chris Samuels). FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~46%

OG - There have been 7 taken in the Top 5 in the last 43 drafts. Though I’d like to have at least 10 players for this analysis, I’ll go ahead with the OGs anyway. Four of the 7 made the All Pro 1st Team at least once. The same 4 made the Pro Bowl on multiple occasions. And all 4 count as “franchise” guards by making at least 1 Pro bowl every 3 years: Bill Fralic, Tom Mack, John Hannah, and John Niland. Mack and Hannah are in the HOF. It’s a small sample size but the position looks promising. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~57%

OC - Like the TE position, OCs are not normally selected high. There has been only one OC taken in the Top 5 in the “Super Bowl Era”, Bob Johnson (Tennessee) by the Bengals in 1968. He was the #2 overall pick, just behind HOF Tackle Ron Yary. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: N/A

DE - 34 have been selected in the Top 5 since 1966. Of those 34, only 10 have made an All Pro squad (~29%) with 13 making at least one Pro Bowl (~38%). Following my “franchise player rule” results in 10 elite players, which is again ~29%. Mario Williams is the youngest “franchise” player. We’ll keep him on the list because he has shown the skills necessary for a perennial Pro Bowl performer. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~29%

DT - Since 1966, 17 players have been selected Top 5. Of the 17, 7 (~41%) have made the All Pro 1st Team and 9 (~59%) have made at least one Pro bowl. However, only 5 ( are considered a “franchise” player and worthy of a Top 5 pick. Two of the 17 have made the Hall of Fame (Randy White and Joe Greene). It’s possible Cortez Kennedy could join them soon. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~29%

LB - There have been 26 taken in the Top 5 since 1966. ~39% have made the All Pro 1st Team (10 of 26) while 14 have made at least one Pro Bowl appearance (~54%). Satisfying the “franchise” player and justifying their draft position has been done so by 10 players, or ~39%. Two currently reside in the Hall of Fame (Lawrence Taylor and Derrick Thomas). In about 5 years Junior Seau will join them. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~39%

DB - Unfortunately Pro Football Reference doesn’t distinguish between cornerbacks and safeties so we have the ambiguous “defensive back” category. In the last 43 drafts only 16 DBs have been taken in the first 5 selections. Five of the 16 have been named to the All Pro 1st Team (~31%) and 10 have made at least one Pro Bowl (~63%). Once again five justify their draft position by reaching the limits for a “franchise” player. Only one (Mike Haynes) has made the HOF, though he may be joined by Deion Sanders and/or Charles Woodson in the future. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~31%

K/P - No kickers or punters have been selected in the Top 5 of any draft since 1966 (though one K did go #6 overall; Charlie Gogolak from Princeton by the Redskins in 1966). FINAL SUCCESS RATE: N/A

So there is a statistical analysis of players picked in the Top 5 of any draft during the “Super Bowl Era”. What does it tell us? Well here’s a quick reminder of the success rates:

QB: ~23%
RB: ~47%
WR: ~38%
TE: N/A
OT: ~46%
OG: ~57%
OC: N/A
DE: ~29%
DT: ~29%
LB: ~39%
DB: ~31%
K/P: N/A

The safest positions to draft early seem to be offensive lineman. The OG group had a small sample size but the highest success rate and OT had the 3rd highest success rate. RBs had the 2nd highest rate. That really is not a surprise. It has been said for years that the easiest position to fill through the draft is RB because there is little change from their duties in college to those in the NFL. Want the safe pick? Go with a RB or OG/OT. But stay away from… QBs and defensive lineman! They had the worst success rate at fulfilling the “franchise” label and earning their Top 5 pick paycheck. WRs and LBs can be decent picks too.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR 2009?

This really doesn’t apply to just 2009 but for any draft. Teams in the Top 5 should not go for QBs because they are more miss then hit and they can set back and already dismal frnachise another 5-10 years. The 2009 QB class is already considered weak so why reach for someone now when there are many more needs to fill? I say grab that OT (like Joe Thomas in ‘07 and Jake Long in ‘08 ) or stud RB; the future dividends could be huge. Detroit, St. Louis, and Seattle should all be thinking “OT” with their 1st pick. There are at least three that could go in the Top 5 and statistically speaking they are less likely to bust then QBs. Add in a can’t-miss WR in Michael Crabtree and you should know who the Top 4 are come April 25. In no particular order it should be Andre Smith, Eugene Monroe, Jason Smith, and Michael Crabtree.

This in no way means a QB should never be taken. There are going to be times when a team may actually be a QB away from contending. Maybe a team had some injuries and bad luck the prior year and just need a QB. Whatever the case may be. It seems that scouts, front office personnel, and fans put the QB position on such a high pedestal that when one doesn’t go early it’s a travesty. Stafford, Sanchez, and Freeman are not Top 10 picks. 1st round, most likely. They would have much better value between picks 15-25 than Top 5. If a QB-needy team like Detroit or Kansas City really wants one, they can maneuver to get him there. Just not at 1 or 3.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-26-2009, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Oh, great, you've reverted back to child status. Shall we try again?

You made assertions. The assertions were wrong. Just because you made different arguments elsewhere, you think I should read those links and overlook what you wrote here. I don't agree.

And, as far as the specifics, your opinion does not equal fact. The FACT is that his brother is entering new territory. No matter what previous training he's had, this is a first for him. All the "yeah, but" crap in the world doesn't change that. It's still a legitimate issue to be brought up, whether you like it or not.

Do you ever answer anything? Or do you just resort to empty obfuscation?

This is ridiculous.

The "questions" about Sanchez hiring his brother where based upon an entirely false premise. They are, by definition, illegitimate. He has outside advisers, he isn't flying by the seat of his pants.

I've never seen someone whose entire posting schtick relies entirely upon tautology, outside of Believer.

I'm a "child" because you say I am. You refute nothing. You speak in vagaries and offer no support for any claim that you make.

Sanchez hiring his brother is a legitimate concern because he his brother isn't qualified and he has no other help, even though he is and he does.

I don't know where you learned rhetoric--check that, you obviously didn't--but when people make claims, they support them with evidence. That's why we link posts here. That's why we seek outside sources.

Again, you must have a serious reading comprehension question.

A baseless question is not a legitimate one.

Mark Sanchez is an idiot for hiring his brother who is some guy off the street as his only representation is the same level of idiocy as "Aaron Curry ****s tabby cats."

Just Passin' By · 02-26-2009, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdeg

True.

Think about this from Sanchez's perspective for a moment. I imagine his brother is a smart guy with Sanchez's trust and respect. If he came to me, said, "Hey, I can do this. I'll be advised by a real agent, and I can actually look out for YOU, not just my bottom line." it could be pretty persuasive.

Absolutely, and it might have been a stroke of genius on the part of Sanchez. That is entirely possible. As I noted, I don't see anything wrong here at first blush. However, it's still open to questioning. Hell, people make assumptions/evaluations even when players choose established agents.

htismaqe · 02-26-2009, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

It's not a cop-out. Your logic there IS terrible and it makes your attempt to bring the Sims example into it a waste of time. What more do you want said about it?

Can you even explain to me what you think my logic is? At this point, I'm not sure we're even debating the same subject, but I could be wrong.

Are we not talking about the riskiness of players and the likelihood that certain players will flame out? Consider this a concession because I'm so confused now, I'm not even sure what the original point was.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

I never made that assumption

Two separate times you said "you and Hamas and company". To anyone with any shred of dignity, that looks like you're lumping me in with them. Don't assert that that wasn't your intention when it clearly was. However, in the interest of not furthering this pissing match, I'm done commenting on it.

SenselessChiefsFan · 02-26-2009, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I didn't see Doomy's post. I swapped the roles definitely, but those who were denigrating Sanchez were doing so on the premise that he hired his brother as his agent and his brother only, and that his brother was unqualified.

This isn't a Master P situation.

Furthermore, not only is Sanchez's brother a lawyer, but he is also advised by an agency that represents several NFL quarterbacks.

Thus, I refer to my prior assertion: claims about his lack of maturity or stupidity vis-a-vis that selection were, and remain, completely erroneous and without merit.

Even if his brother were an agent, I don't think it is wise to hire them. Agents need to be advocates, but also be able to distance themselves from the situation.

Doctors are told to never operate on their own family. The risks are too high, and their decision making is clouded by emotional connections.

Agents have to be pro athlete at the table, but objective away from it.

How objective would a brother be?

Also, it isn't just the one thing. It is a mixture of things.

It is blowing off Carroll and his parents when they advised him to stay in school. This is the biggest thing.

It is also hiring his brother as an agent.

And, even though he didn't get charged, the fact that he was even accused of sexual assault has to at least raise a question in your mind.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-26-2009, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

It's not a cop-out. Your logic there IS terrible and it makes your attempt to bring the Sims example into it a waste of time. What more do you want said about it? .

Again with the circular reasoning. His logic is terrible because it's terrible.

That's ridiculous. Please, offer some substantive evidence or get the **** out.

**DaKCMan AP** · 02-26-2009, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Can you even explain to me what you think my logic is? At this point, I'm not sure we're even debating the same subject, but I could be wrong.

Are we not talking about the riskiness of players and the likelihood that certain players will flame out? Consider this a concession because I'm so confused now, I'm not even sure what the original point was.

Two separate times you said "you and Hamas and company". To anyone with any shred of dignity, that looks like you're lumping me in with them. Don't assert that that wasn't your intention when it clearly was. However, in the interest of not furthering this pissing match, I'm done commenting on it.

That's this dupe's schtick. Doesn't address the actual issues, lacks reading comprehension, disputes any and everything, doesn't backup assertions with details and/or evidence, resorts to name calling and generalizations, etc.

Just Passin' By · 02-26-2009, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Do you ever answer anything? Or do you just resort to empty obfuscation?

This is ridiculous.

The "questions" about Sanchez hiring his brother where based upon an entirely false premise. They are, by definition, illegitimate. He has outside advisers, he isn't flying by the seat of his pants.

I've never seen someone whose entire posting schtick relies entirely upon tautology, outside of Believer.

I'm a "child" because you say I am. You refute nothing. You speak in vagaries and offer no support for any claim that you make.

Sanchez hiring his brother is a legitimate concern because he his brother isn't qualified and he has no other help, even though he is and he does.

I don't know where you learned rhetoric--check that, you obviously didn't--but when people make claims, they support them with evidence. That's why we link posts here. That's why we seek outside sources.

Again, you must have a serious reading comprehension question.

A baseless question is not a legitimate one.

Mark Sanchez is an idiot for hiring his brother who is some guy off the street as his only representation is the same level of idiocy as "Aaron Curry ****s tabby cats."

Here we go again...... at this point I feel like I'm picking on a reeruned puppy.

Who's Sanchez' agent?

Is he related to Sanchez? If he is, is this a potential problem?

Has he been a football agent before?

In all his years of experience as this agent, how has he done for his clients?

Just Passin' By · 02-26-2009, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Again with the circular reasoning. His logic is terrible because it's terrible.

That's ridiculous. Please, offer some substantive evidence or get the **** out.

Read the posts. That's what you accused me of not doing even as you weren't reading them, remember?

**DeezNutz** · 02-26-2009, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

And, even though he didn't get charged, the fact that he was even accused of sexual assault has to at least raise a question in your mind.

Passin' By just sent me a PM that accused you of enjoying shark pron.

I'm sorry, Sensible, but this has raised serious questions about your character.

bdeg · 02-26-2009, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

Even if his brother were an agent, I don't think it is wise to hire them. Agents need to be advocates, but also be able to distance themselves from the situation.

Doctors are told to never operate on their own family. The risks are too high, and their decision making is clouded by emotional connections.

Agents have to be pro athlete at the table, but objective away from it.

How objective would a brother be?

Also, it isn't just the one thing. It is a mixture of things.

It is blowing off Carroll and his parents when they advised him to stay in school. This is the biggest thing.

It is also hiring his brother as an agent.

And, even though he didn't get charged, the fact that he was even accused of sexual assault has to at least raise a question in your mind.

You don't ever wonder if a holdout could be about a player blindly obeying an agent holding out for another 100k in his pocket? How much happier is that extra half a mil going to make a player compared to getting to training camp on time?

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-26-2009, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

Even if his brother were an agent, I don't think it is wise to hire them. Agents need to be advocates, but also be able to distance themselves from the situation.

I can't think of a better advocate for someone than a family member. I highly doubt he's going to try and screw over his own brother for an extra few K in commission by signing him to a bad deal, he's definitely no more likely to do so than John Q. Agent.

My god, the annals of sports history are littered with predatory agents who screw over their clientele for their own personal gain.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-26-2009, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Read the posts. That's what you accused me of not doing even as you weren't reading them, remember?

I'm sorry, I don't feel the need to read links.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-26-2009, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Here we go again...... at this point I feel like I'm picking on a reeruned puppy.

Who's Sanchez' agent?

Is he related to Sanchez? If he is, is this a potential problem?

Has he been a football agent before?

In all his years of experience as this agent, how has he done for his clients?

Is he a lawyer? Yes.

What do most lawyer's do in their jobs?

Does he have outside advisers? Yes

What do those advisers do? Represent professional athletes, including NFL quarterbacks.

But yes, I'm sure that Nick Sanchez will just sign over Mark's soul with a big X since he has ~~no legal experience and no one else to fall back on for advice~~

**DaKCMan AP** · 02-26-2009, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

My god, the annals of sports history are littered with predatory agents who screw over their clientele for their own personal gain.

See: Scott Boras, Drew Rosenhaus, Hadley Engelhard.

Mark probably trusts his brother more than anyone else.. I don't see a problem with that.

SenselessChiefsFan · 02-26-2009, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Passin' By just sent me a PM that accused you of enjoying shark pron.

I'm sorry, Sensible, but this has raised serious questions about your character.

Again, if it were ONLY that... fine.

But, it ISN'T.

I don't know this kid... all I can do is form opinions based on what I know of him.

He didn't listen to his parents or his coach about going back to school.

He hired his brother, and he was at least accused of sexual assault.

Now, that all fits together in my mind.

Perhaps these are three isolated incidents that don't show the full story. But, there are THREE things I am looking at here... not just one.

02-25-2009, 10:21 AM
MIAdragon Someone pass the antifreeze Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Miami (North Cuba) Casino cash: $-2212181	Top 5 Pick Success Rate I got this emailed to me today and thought Id share. IDK anything about Mays but I like numbers. http://sportsfountainhead.blogspot.c...cess-rate.html Top 5 Pick Success Rate Originally published by me at Draft Tek. The debate rages on! Actually, this debate happens nearly every year. QBs are hot commodities; everyone wants to find the next Peyton Manning, Troy Aikman, or John Elway. In the 2009 Draft we are left with three prospects considered elite and possible first rounders: Matt Stafford (Georgia), Mark Sanchez (USC), and Josh Freeman (Kansas State). Generally speaking, Stafford and Sanchez are viewed as Top 10 picks - as Draft Tek Correspondent Mike Schottey pointed out here. However, our model and correspondents seem to disagree on team needs and the talent available compared with other mocks, “experts”, and you, the readers. Let’s look at this using statistics. What are the odds that a player taken in the Top 5 will become an All Pro/Pro Bowl-caliber performer? Looking at 43 seasons of data (1966 through 2008, or the “Super Bowl Era”) we get these percentages for each position: QB - There have been 39 taken in the Top 5 since 1966. Of those only 4 (~10%) have been named 1st Team All Pro with 20 (~51%) making the Pro Bowl at least once. But when using a high draft pick you’re not expecting someone to make the Pro Bowl once, you expect multiple trips - like an average of once every three seasons. That brings down the list to 11 out of 39 (~28%). Basically, 1 out of every 4 QBs selected in the Top 5 will really be worth that status and be “franchise” QBs. But because of sample size there are some outliers. Here is the list of the 10 “franchise” QBs drafted since 1966: Eli Manning, Carson Palmer, Michael Vick, Peyton Manning, Drew Beldsoe, Troy Aikman, John Elway, Donovan McNabb, Vince Young, Philip Rivers, and Bob Griese. Vick and Young? Not viewed in that light anymore. There’s also the some young QBs that could fall off and not have prolonged success: Eli Manning, Carson Palmer, and Philip Rivers. Assuming those three maintain their high level of play over the last three years that really leaves us with 9 out of the 39 (~23%) QBs that were Top 5 picks who are/were truly worthy of the “franchise” label; someone you’d actually want to take in the Top 5. As of now, 4 of the 39 (~10%) have been elected to the Hall of Fame (Troy Aikman, John Elway, Terry Bradshaw, and Bob Griese). There will be at least one more joining them after Peyton manning retires. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~23% RB - There have been 34 selected Top 5 since 1966, with 13 (~38%) being selected 1st Team All Pro at least once. 20 of the 34 (~59%) have made at least one Pro Bowl. Going back to the “1 Pro Bowl for every 3 years as a starter” rule, we’re left with 16 “franchise” RBs, which is ~47%. Of those 16, 3 have/had 5 or less years of playing experience (Billy Sims, Ronnie Brown, and Brent Fullwood) so their sample size comes into question. We’ll keep them in but I wanted to point that out. Anyway, of those 16 “franchise” RBs, 6 have made the Hall of Fame (Earl Campbell, O.J. Simpson, Eric Dickerson, Tony Dorsett, Barry Sanders, and Walter Payton). Most likely two more will join them in the near future (Marshall Faulk and LaDainian Tomlinson). FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~47% WR - There have been a mere 16 taken in the Top 5 in the last 43 drafts. Only 3 of them (~19%) have made 1st Team All Pro, all only once. However, 10 of the 16 (~63%) have made at least one Pro Bowl. Expanding to our”franchise” requirement of 1 Pro Bowl every 3 years as starter leaves 7 of the 16 (44%). One of them, though, is Desmond Howard, more known for his return skills than for his receiving skills. He has only one accrued season as a WR (according to Pro Football Reference, where all these stats are from) and during it he made the Pro Bowl (most likely as a returner). We’ll throw him out, leaving 6 of the 16 (~38%). Three of the six have 5 or less years as a starter but are all young players (Braylon Edwards, Larry Fitzgerald, and Andre Johnson). We’ll say they stay on their current pace and keep them in. It is interesting to note that none of the 16 Top 5 picks have been elected to the Hall of Fame… and it may not happen until Edwards, Fitzgerald, and Johnson hang it up for good. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~38% TE - There has been only one TE taken in the Top 5, Riley Odoms (Houston) by Denver in 1972. He was a 10-year starter, made 1st Team All Pro twice, and was selected to 4 Pro Bowls. He was a success by my measure but the overall sample size is too small. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: N/A OT - There have been 24 selected Top 5 since 1966. Of the 24, 8 have been named to the All Pro 1st Team (~33%) and 14 have made at least one Pro Bowl (~58%). Using the “1-every-3″ rule for a true franchise player we’re left with 11 out of 24, which is ~46%. Two of those 11 are young (Jake Long and Joe Thomas) but are viewed as perennial Pro Bowl players so they will remain in the group. There are currently 2 HOF Top 5 tackles - Ron Yary and Anthony Munoz. They’ll be joined by Jonathan Ogden and Orlando Pace in the coming years (and possibly Chris Samuels). FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~46% OG - There have been 7 taken in the Top 5 in the last 43 drafts. Though I’d like to have at least 10 players for this analysis, I’ll go ahead with the OGs anyway. Four of the 7 made the All Pro 1st Team at least once. The same 4 made the Pro Bowl on multiple occasions. And all 4 count as “franchise” guards by making at least 1 Pro bowl every 3 years: Bill Fralic, Tom Mack, John Hannah, and John Niland. Mack and Hannah are in the HOF. It’s a small sample size but the position looks promising. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~57% OC - Like the TE position, OCs are not normally selected high. There has been only one OC taken in the Top 5 in the “Super Bowl Era”, Bob Johnson (Tennessee) by the Bengals in 1968. He was the #2 overall pick, just behind HOF Tackle Ron Yary. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: N/A DE - 34 have been selected in the Top 5 since 1966. Of those 34, only 10 have made an All Pro squad (~29%) with 13 making at least one Pro Bowl (~38%). Following my “franchise player rule” results in 10 elite players, which is again ~29%. Mario Williams is the youngest “franchise” player. We’ll keep him on the list because he has shown the skills necessary for a perennial Pro Bowl performer. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~29% DT - Since 1966, 17 players have been selected Top 5. Of the 17, 7 (~41%) have made the All Pro 1st Team and 9 (~59%) have made at least one Pro bowl. However, only 5 ( are considered a “franchise” player and worthy of a Top 5 pick. Two of the 17 have made the Hall of Fame (Randy White and Joe Greene). It’s possible Cortez Kennedy could join them soon. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~29% LB - There have been 26 taken in the Top 5 since 1966. ~39% have made the All Pro 1st Team (10 of 26) while 14 have made at least one Pro Bowl appearance (~54%). Satisfying the “franchise” player and justifying their draft position has been done so by 10 players, or ~39%. Two currently reside in the Hall of Fame (Lawrence Taylor and Derrick Thomas). In about 5 years Junior Seau will join them. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~39% DB - Unfortunately Pro Football Reference doesn’t distinguish between cornerbacks and safeties so we have the ambiguous “defensive back” category. In the last 43 drafts only 16 DBs have been taken in the first 5 selections. Five of the 16 have been named to the All Pro 1st Team (~31%) and 10 have made at least one Pro Bowl (~63%). Once again five justify their draft position by reaching the limits for a “franchise” player. Only one (Mike Haynes) has made the HOF, though he may be joined by Deion Sanders and/or Charles Woodson in the future. FINAL SUCCESS RATE: ~31% K/P - No kickers or punters have been selected in the Top 5 of any draft since 1966 (though one K did go #6 overall; Charlie Gogolak from Princeton by the Redskins in 1966). FINAL SUCCESS RATE: N/A So there is a statistical analysis of players picked in the Top 5 of any draft during the “Super Bowl Era”. What does it tell us? Well here’s a quick reminder of the success rates: QB: ~23% RB: ~47% WR: ~38% TE: N/A OT: ~46% OG: ~57% OC: N/A DE: ~29% DT: ~29% LB: ~39% DB: ~31% K/P: N/A The safest positions to draft early seem to be offensive lineman. The OG group had a small sample size but the highest success rate and OT had the 3rd highest success rate. RBs had the 2nd highest rate. That really is not a surprise. It has been said for years that the easiest position to fill through the draft is RB because there is little change from their duties in college to those in the NFL. Want the safe pick? Go with a RB or OG/OT. But stay away from… QBs and defensive lineman! They had the worst success rate at fulfilling the “franchise” label and earning their Top 5 pick paycheck. WRs and LBs can be decent picks too. WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR 2009? This really doesn’t apply to just 2009 but for any draft. Teams in the Top 5 should not go for QBs because they are more miss then hit and they can set back and already dismal frnachise another 5-10 years. The 2009 QB class is already considered weak so why reach for someone now when there are many more needs to fill? I say grab that OT (like Joe Thomas in ‘07 and Jake Long in ‘08 ) or stud RB; the future dividends could be huge. Detroit, St. Louis, and Seattle should all be thinking “OT” with their 1st pick. There are at least three that could go in the Top 5 and statistically speaking they are less likely to bust then QBs. Add in a can’t-miss WR in Michael Crabtree and you should know who the Top 4 are come April 25. In no particular order it should be Andre Smith, Eugene Monroe, Jason Smith, and Michael Crabtree. This in no way means a QB should never be taken. There are going to be times when a team may actually be a QB away from contending. Maybe a team had some injuries and bad luck the prior year and just need a QB. Whatever the case may be. It seems that scouts, front office personnel, and fans put the QB position on such a high pedestal that when one doesn’t go early it’s a travesty. Stafford, Sanchez, and Freeman are not Top 10 picks. 1st round, most likely. They would have much better value between picks 15-25 than Top 5. If a QB-needy team like Detroit or Kansas City really wants one, they can maneuver to get him there. Just not at 1 or 3.
Posts: 15,944