To test this hypothesis I looked at historical draft results prior to 2004 so that each player has had plenty of time to prove if their draft spot was warranted. Before sharing the data, I want to talk a little about the difficulty in quantifying success for a football player. When discussing a baseball players contribution, the argument is easy because he alone is standing at the plate when the pitch comes. Sure there is still randomness, but his success at the plate has very little to do with his teammates. Football is a completely different story. Quarterbacks and running backs depend on the offensive line to block. Wide receivers depend on the quarterback to throw an accurate pass. Some things have been done to try to better evaluate a player such as the new Total Quarterback Rating, but this still doesn't really get at how good the offensive line is, or how good the WR's are at catching the ball.
In my opinion, especially at the very top of the draft, the goal should be to draft someone who is a sure thing contributor. I could argue there are some positions more valuable than others, but at the end of the day when you invest as much money as is required to sign a top pick, you want to be fairly confident that the money is not going to go to waste. Of course the hope is that they will go on to be the best at their positions and make it to countless pro bowls, but picking someone like Jamarcus Russell can set a franchise back for years. So, to keep things simple, lets think about comparing the success rates of quarterbacks and offensive linemen drafted in the top 20 picks of the draft. To make this comparison somewhat fair, let's first consider a player successful if they start at least 80 games. Next, let's look at whether they have ever made a pro bowl. Finally, let's consider a player elite if they have made at least four pro bowl bowls. Here are the results of offensive linemen taken in the top 20 from 1994-2003:
| OL | Pos | Successful | Pro Bowl | Elite |
| Bernard Williams | OT | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Wayne Gandy | OT | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Aaron Taylor | OT | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Todd Steussie | OT | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Tony Boselli | OT | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Ruben Brown | G | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Jonathan Ogden | OT | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Willie Anderson | OT | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Orlando Pace | OT | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Walter Jones | OT | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Chris Naeole | G | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Kyle Turley | OT | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Tra Thomas | OT | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| John Tait | OT | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Damien Woody | C | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Matt Stinchcomb | OT | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Luke Petitgout | OT | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Stockar McDougle | OT | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Leonard Davis | OT | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Kenyatta Walker | OT | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Steve Hutchinson | G | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Jeff Backus | OT | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Mike Williams | OT | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Bryant McKinnie | OT | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Levi Jones | OT | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Jordan Gross | OT | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| George Foster | OT | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Here are the results of QB's taken in the top 20 from 1994-2003:
| Qb | Successful | Pro Bowl | Elite |
| Heath Shuler | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Trent Dilfer | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Steve McNair | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Kerry Collins | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Peyton Manning | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Ryan Leaf | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tim Couch | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Donovan McNabb | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Akili Smith | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Daunte Culpepper | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Cade McNown | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Chad Pennington | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Michael Vick | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| David Carr | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Joey Harrington | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Carson Palmer | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Byron Leftwich | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kyle Boller | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Of the busts, some of these stories are tough luck stories like torn ACL's. Others maybe not so much unlucky, but stupid, like 15 failed drug tests for Bernard Williams or the Ryan Leaf fiasco. Some of the busts went on to successful careers elsewhere like Heath Shuler
who is a currently a congressman from North Carolina. In all cases, though, neither the drafting team nor any other NFL team got five good years out of a projected top player.
So what does the statistician say about all this data? Well 50% of the quarterbacks have gone on to successful careers while 74% of the linemen went on to successful careers. This wasn't enough to be statistically significant, but if I kept collecting data on to years past, my guess is the that it would have been. 44% of qbs made at least one pro bowl compared to 55% of linemen. Finally, 16% of qbs compared to 22% of linemen went on to elite careers. When you think about about it 3 pro bowl spots for qbs and 2-3 spots total for both left and right tackle means it is easier for a qb to make a pro bowl. If anything qbs have a better chance of making the pro bowl than any offensive tackle. Thus, my analysis doesn't prove my theory, but it certainly doesn't disprove it. If one of my dozens of readers feels motivated to continue on with collecting data prior to 1994 I think we should be able to show strong enough evidence to support my theory success rates in linemen. Another thing I think would be interesting to see is the actual talent rank compared to draft spot. For example, before the draft Cam Newton was ranked somewhere in the ballpark of the 30th best player. I would love to see the success rate on players that were drafted well above or below where they should have been, but haven't been able to find that data.
In summary, common sense says it is easier to project the success of almost any other position compared to the quarterback. Speed, vertical jump, size, intelligence, etc are much more predictive for other positions than quarterback. Three of the top quarterbacks in the league, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, and Aaron Rodgers were all left out of the top 20. That is why the Christian Ponder pick still absolutely kills me. I think we needed a left tackle and cornerback just as badly as we needed a quarterback. Sure he still might succeed in the NFL, but he is a prime candidate for a bust considering our aging offensive line. As an analogy the vikings bought this monitor,
for this computer
They should have bought a better computer first.
As always, thanks for reading. It might be a while before my next post. I am slowly trying to prove mutual funds are waste of resources. In the mean time I might make some quick blurbs on statistics in the news. Also, I think it would be cool to have guest authors. Especially if you have something interesting to share or theories you think need testing. Let me know.
In summary, common sense says it is easier to project the success of almost any other position compared to the quarterback. Speed, vertical jump, size, intelligence, etc are much more predictive for other positions than quarterback. Three of the top quarterbacks in the league, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, and Aaron Rodgers were all left out of the top 20. That is why the Christian Ponder pick still absolutely kills me. I think we needed a left tackle and cornerback just as badly as we needed a quarterback. Sure he still might succeed in the NFL, but he is a prime candidate for a bust considering our aging offensive line. As an analogy the vikings bought this monitor,
for this computer
They should have bought a better computer first.
As always, thanks for reading. It might be a while before my next post. I am slowly trying to prove mutual funds are waste of resources. In the mean time I might make some quick blurbs on statistics in the news. Also, I think it would be cool to have guest authors. Especially if you have something interesting to share or theories you think need testing. Let me know.
No comments:
Post a Comment