continuing the discussion about drafting success we started
here and
here"Hit" Percent by Round (players rated 3, 4, or 5)
| Round | Broncos | Eagles | Steelers | Ravens | Cowboys | Chargers | Patriots | Colts |
|---|
| 1 | 71.4% | 75.0% | 87.5% | 66.7% | 83.3% | 71.4% | 77.8% | 100.0% |
| 2 | 45.5% | 40.0% | 42.9% | 50.0% | 18.2% | 60.0% | 37.5% | 50.0% |
| 3 | 11.1% | 28.6% | 30.0% | 20.0% | 33.3% | 28.6% | 14.3% | 11.1% |
| 4 | 18.2% | 23.1% | 37.5% | 55.6% | 10.0% | 12.5% | 16.7% | 22.2% |
| 5 | 0.0% | 12.5% | 9.1% | 11.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 12.5% | 20.0% |
| 6 | 30.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 16.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 10.0% | 10.0% |
| 7 | 0.0% | 11.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 9.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
"Hit" Percent Overall
| Broncos | Eagles | Steelers | Ravens | Cowboys | Chargers | Patriots | Colts |
|---|
| Hits | 16 | 17 | 17 | 18 | 10 | 15 | 15 | 17 |
| Total | 67 | 66 | 64 | 60 | 62 | 61 | 68 | 60 |
| % | 23.9% | 25.8% | 26.6% | 30.0% | 16.1% | 24.6% | 22.1% | 28.3% |
Pro-Bowl Caliber or Higher | Broncos | Eagles | Steelers | Ravens | Cowboys | Chargers | Patriots | Colts |
|---|
| PBC | 2 | 6 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Total | 67 | 66 | 64 | 60 | 62 | 61 | 68 | 60 |
| % | 3.0% | 9.1% | 4.7% | 10.0% | 4.8% | 8.2% | 8.8% | 6.7% |
Labels: draft, football
14 Comments:
It sure looks like the primary conclusion to draw from this analysis is that there isn't much difference among these teams when it comes to draft success. Most teams "won" a round when it came to hits per round. The overall hit % is fairly closely grouped in the 22-28% and the Pro-Bowl grouping is even closer.
Given the large variance in "Pro-Bowl" player talent (1 trip vs. multiple trips, DT vs. QB, etc.) and what we're calling hits, I'm not sure there is a statistical significance here. I'm sure you will find a large difference between this group of teams and the ARI, DET, and BUFs of the NFL.
i think that's definitely the next group to look at, teams we perceive as poor drafting teams. i think you're on target with ari, det, and buf. another 5 to contrast the other 8 seems to make sense.
what do you think about:
ari
det
buf
oak
no
cin
sf
hou
How about subbing STL for CIN who I think's done a fairly decent job over the past 4 or 5 years (Palmer, TJ, Johnsons)?
even though cin has the splashier draft hits (QB, WR, RB) i'd be willing to bet their overall hit rate is fairly low compared to the rams. remember the rams were generally competitive for most of the late 90s and early 2000's while the bengals were doormats.
my guess is that the bengals will end up in a similar category with the cowboys, who had the lowest hit rate of the 8 teams in the previous analysis.
some nice work TMG, although I do feel you severely under-rated some key guys on a few teams, examples
1. Shaun Phillips a 2? The guy is a key component and sack master on San Diego's D
2. Roethlisberger a 3? I guess a Super Bowl doesn't warrant a 4
3. Randel El a 2? No way! He has thrived as a return man and is now a dangerous receiving threat, 3 minimum.
4. Marion Butler a 2? the guy scores 10 TD a year.
5. Al Johnson a 2? He has been a starting center for two teams and is at least a 3.
6. Many disagreements with Pats picks, notably their phenomenal O linemen Kaczur and Mankins. Those guys kep Brady clean and they maul opposing D lines. Not sexy, but super players. Value of 4 to their team, but no Pat stands out as they're all an amorphous ball of team. Ditto David Thomas and Ty Warren. Both excel and add a ton of value to that team.
The Birds also heavily benefit from 3 players who ranked 3 or higher but make their plays elsewhere. Burgess is a 4 and has become a superstar post-Birds. Raheem Brock got cut and never played a snap only to be a solid DT in Indy. Lewis had some good years here but does his non covering elsewhere now. Not even sure I'd call him a 3. My point in this is that the Birds seem to lose key guys drafted (probably because they believe in their ability to draft and also because they are cheap) who do shine in the long run...elsewhere.
Also, look how many horrid drafts the Birds have had. 2001, 2003, 2005, 2006 (thus far but I still like that year). Aside from Dallas, no one seems to have had as many "only 1 useful player" drafts. 2003 and 2004 were absolutely terrible years. They are paying for that now with no depth and 3rd to 4th year guys ready to step in and excel.
I still stand by the notion that the Birds do not draft as consistently as other teams. I feel that 2002 is really carrying them as that was an excellent year with severl superstars and they have thrown a ton of stinkers in too. I do think 2005 and 2006 could be strong in the long run, perhaps 2002 level. 2007 looks like anothe rpotential bust, although I am not sure why Abiamiri is deactivated while they tolerate Kearse making 1 tackle. Victor looked stout in pre season on run and pass.
Bumble
1. Shaun Phillips a 2? The guy is a key component and sack master on San Diego's D
good catch. i meant to rate him at 3. thx.
2. Roethlisberger a 3? I guess a Super Bowl doesn't warrant a 4
roethlisberger played the worst superbowl game of any winning QB ever, far worse than mcnabb played in his superbowl. roethlisberger is no higher than a 3.
3. Randel El a 2? No way! He has thrived as a return man and is now a dangerous receiving threat, 3 minimum.
bottom line, over the course of his career, randle el has not been a solid starting player. a good return man and occasional big play guy makes him a 2.
4. Marion Butler a 2? the guy scores 10 TD a year.
barber has been a guy who steals goal line TDs. if he develops into a stud, so be it, but he hasn't been over the course of his career so far (though he's playing pretty well now).
5. Al Johnson a 2? He has been a starting center for two teams and is at least a 3.
yes, but he's been a below average starter in the nfl, so according to my definition he's a 2.
6. Many disagreements with Pats picks, notably their phenomenal O linemen Kaczur and Mankins. Those guys kep Brady clean and they maul opposing D lines. Not sexy, but super players. Value of 4 to their team, but no Pat stands out as they're all an amorphous ball of team. Ditto David Thomas and Ty Warren. Both excel and add a ton of value to that team.
agree that kaczur, mankins, and warren are all very good players, but that fits into the definition of 3. are you saying that all 4 of those guys are probowl caliber players? mankins i was on the borderline so i'll change to 4 and i can be talked into warren (though i believe he benefits from playing with seymour who i rated as a 5), but i think kaczur and thomas fit into 3 and 1 comfortably according to the definition.
The Birds also heavily benefit from 3 players who ranked 3 or higher but make their plays elsewhere.
i think if you look, you'll find the same is true of most teams. nobody is able to keep all of their players.
I still stand by the notion that the Birds do not draft as consistently as other teams.
i'm not sure how you can draw that conclusion based on the summary stats. i'll post my analysis of the summary stats later (hopefully today or tomorrow), but i think the numbers show that the eagles compare very favorably with the other top teams and that no team drafts consistently well except for the colts.
BTW - i've updated all three threads reflecting the rating increases for mankins and phillips.
my point on the Birds is consistently. They are living on 1 huge draft (2002) while other teams seem to get to the same ultimate place by 1-2 useful guys per draft. The Birds 2001, 2003, and 2004 drafts were really awful in comparison with other teams. 2006 could be strong but remains to be seen, and 2007 looks weak but remains to be seen.
Bumble
P.S., not true that other teams impact players are playign elsewhere. I looked at that. Aside from Portis (and they got Bailey in return so they upgraded), which talent was drafted in one palce and is now playing elsehwhere? Deon Branch, OK, but who else.
Bumble
P.S.S.
Randle El is a starter. He cannot be considered less than a 3. the guy thrww a TD in the Superbowl for God's sake!
Barber is a solid 3. He is becoming the number 1 back and he scores tons of TD. Who cares if they are from 1 or 100 yards. cannot be elss than a 3.
Big Ben sucked in the SB, but he didn't throw 3 costly picks to lose his team the game either. Maybe not a 4, but a 3.5 anyway. You have to rate him at least equally to McNabb and he has something on his mantle that Donny will never have.
Bumble
not true that other teams impact players are playign elsewhere. I looked at that. Aside from Portis (and they got Bailey in return so they upgraded), which talent was drafted in one palce and is now playing elsehwhere? Deon Branch, OK, but who else.
broncos - portis, hayward, o'neal, reagor, clark,
steelers - hope, bell, burress, porter
ravens - chester taylor, priest holmes, mughelli, baxter, hartwell, adalius thomas, jamal lewis, brandon stokely
cowboys - ekuban
chargers - brees
patriots - branch, woody
colts - thornton, washington, petersen, james
seems like eagles are middle of the pack to me.
my point on the Birds is consistently. They are living on 1 huge draft (2002) while other teams seem to get to the same ultimate place by 1-2 useful guys per draft. The Birds 2001, 2003, and 2004 drafts were really awful in comparison with other teams. 2006 could be strong but remains to be seen, and 2007 looks weak but remains to be seen.
2004 ravens, 2006 chargers, 2003 chargers, 2000 chargers, 1999 chargers, 2006 patriots, 2000 patriots, 1999 patriots
other than the steelers and the colts (the two most consistent drafting teams) every team has a some bust drafts mixed in.
Randle El is a starter. He cannot be considered less than a 3. the guy thrww a TD in the Superbowl for God's sake!
bumble, quantify for me how randle el is a better than average starting receiver and i'll bump him to a 3. mind you this is his first season as a starter so he's never even played a full season as a starter. a td pass in the superbowl and the odd return TD does not make him a better than average starter.
Barber is a solid 3. He is becoming the number 1 back and he scores tons of TD. Who cares if they are from 1 or 100 yards. cannot be elss than a 3.
barber has been a very good backup, but he's been a backup. this time next year, we may consider him differently, but we're talking about taking his career as a whole and up to this point he's been backup.
Big Ben sucked in the SB, but he didn't throw 3 costly picks to lose his team the game either. Maybe not a 4, but a 3.5 anyway. You have to rate him at least equally to McNabb and he has something on his mantle that Donny will never have.
again, please quantify this for me. on what basis are you making this statement. big ben in no way has been a better qb than mcnabb, unless you regard being a passenger on a superbowl team that won despite his awful play. adding mcnabb to that team would have made that an all-time type of team. replace mcnabb's 2003 o-line with big ben's o-line from 2005 and the eagles blow the patriots out of that superbowl.
Post a Comment
<< Home