In reading the many discussions on the probability for success of Quarterbacks taken in the top 15 (top half of the first round of the draft), I did some analysis and the findings are quite interesting.
1. Super Bowl Quarterbacks: There have been 60 quarterbacks to appear in the super bowl. Top 15 QBs have appeared 48 times and have a record of 25-23; Non Top 15 QBs have appeared 56 times and have a record of 27-29; the average draft position for Super Bowl Quarterbacks is #28 and the median is #61. Slight Edge to Non Top 15 QBs
2. QBs have won Super Bowl MVP trophies 29 times: 12 trophies won by Top 15 QBs, 17 trophies won by Non Top 15 QBs; 21 QBs have won the Super Bowl MVP: 10 by Top 15 QBs, 11 by Non Top 15 QBs; Edge to Non Top 15 QBs
3. There are 20 Super Bowl Era HOF Quarterbacks and 7 active that will likely be inducted when eligible (Brady, P. Manning, E. Manning, Roethlisberger, Brees, Rodgers and Wilson)... 11 of the 27 were Top 15 draftees and 16 of the 27 were Non Top 15 draftees. The average draft position for HOF Quarterbacks is #59 and the median is #29; Edge to Non Top 15 QBs
4. Since 1966, there have been 584 QBs taken in the NFL draft; 80 were Top 15 and 504 were Non Top 15; meaning:
- 31.3% of Top 15 QBs made the super bowl v 6.9% for Non Top 15
- 12.5% of Top 15 QBs became Super Bowl MVPs v 2.2% for Non Top 15
- 13.8% of Top 15 QBs are/will be in the HOF v 3.2% for Non Top 15
Strong Edge to Top 15 QBs
This was interesting to me because it reconciles the passions of the great debate that is raging on this site. Those who are passionately calling for the Jints to take a QB with the number two pick are focused on the facts that 1 in 8 top 15 QBs will be HOFers and 1 in 3 will lead their teams to a Super Bowl. Those who are passionately calling for the Giants to trade the pick, are comfortable with the knowledge that there are more Super Bowl appearances, Super Bowl Wins and NFL HOFers by Non Top 15 QBs than by Top 15 Qbs... So why take the extraordinary franchise risk of drafting a QB when we have Davis Webb who may be just as good as any of the top candidates and we can get a haul of picks that will jump start our team back to playoff contention asap.
I thought this exercise would help me form an educated opinion, but I think it just clarified for me why there is such a heated debate and why it will likely rage on until April 26th... should be a fascinating month ahead...
This has to be from the start to FA on, because some teams were just bad forever, because they didn't have FA to help them get better.
With a full year spent in a offense that's been thrown out the door along with the coach who elected to start Geno Smith over Webb after eight months of work?
With a full year spent in a offense that's been thrown out the door along with the coach who elected to start Geno Smith over Webb after eight months of work?
The same reason that Joe Montana, a third round pick in 1979, was better than all of the first round picks in both 1979 and 1980 (and the rest of the 20th century for that matter...) Some of the first round picks in those two years other than Phil Simms: Jack Thompson, Steve Fuller, Marc Wilson and Mark Malone. Go read the commentary on Montana vs these guys at the time - it will make you laugh...
This. Look at the sample sizes. There are significantly less QBs drafted in the Top 15 vs. the field. 15 draft slots vs. hundreds of draft slots + UDFA. Your analysis actually reinforces the importance of prioritizing QB at the top of the draft.
I think it has less to do with Webb and more to do with whether these three quarterbacks are decidedly better than him. I certainly have no idea but posted this link earlier on a different thread. Pretty risky stuff...
Link - ( New Window )
Quote:
Those top 15 players are pretty much equal to the rest of the entire draft. Pretty overwhelming stats showing the importance of the top 15 players. Your odds of getting a SB QB are pretty good picking one out of 15 players versus the other 50 percent of the QBs come from trying to pick 1 out of 200 players.
This. Look at the sample sizes. There are significantly less QBs drafted in the Top 15 vs. the field. 15 draft slots vs. hundreds of draft slots + UDFA. Your analysis actually reinforces the importance of prioritizing QB at the top of the draft.
There is no doubt that picking correctly a Quarterback at the top of the draft is the single most important driver of franchise success... but picking incorrectly is just as important an indicator of franchise failure... Completely depends on the player...
THIS. These stats STRONGLY favor top 15 QBs. The SB appearances and records are 50/50, while we're comparing a pool of 80 vs 504 players. Also I feel a large bulk of those are concentrated on a few great players, Brady and Montana, which requires an inordinate amount of luck.
Can't wait to see what we do. With everyday day I've begun to think more and more that the Front Office strongly factors in the positional value of QB (as well as RB and OG) and will capitalize on the draft position by selecting the QB of the future or trading down if their guy isn't available.
Agreed. So consensus seems to be building that it is Rosen or trade back...I am just concerned about his injuries... just don't want another David Wilson!
Quote:
Of course. I don't think anybody is denying the ramifications of whiffing on a QB high. However, I'd rather proactively fail where the odds are in my favor than sit back and hope to get lucky on a longshot.
Agreed. So consensus seems to be building that it is Rosen or trade back...I am just concerned about his injuries... just don't want another David Wilson!
This is why imo the most important things to do for Rosen and his career is get him an offensive line that can run the ball and a running back. He can make avg wide receives look good in time. Especially if he can have as a priority of play action pass.
Drafting to get him 4 wide receiver sets will get him killed eventually.
Quote:
Of course. I don't think anybody is denying the ramifications of whiffing on a QB high. However, I'd rather proactively fail where the odds are in my favor than sit back and hope to get lucky on a longshot.
Agreed. So consensus seems to be building that it is Rosen or trade back...I am just concerned about his injuries... just don't want another David Wilson!
Definitely a concern, would have to think that the Giants had some control in place to evaluate his health. Also, concussion wise, I believe the proper medical evaluation is that the further you get away from having sustained one, your risk returns to that of an average person.
I think those that want Barkley at 2 also need to consider the same risk/reward at 2. Running backs have a notoriously short shelf life and are exposed to far more physical punshiment in a game than a qb should be, theoretically. He could be another ki Jana Carter and tear his acl on the first play and never be the same again. So again, is his position worth a number 2 pick?