Draft hit rate by position

[Knucklehead]

How crappy is the crap shoot? Pretty crappy. Basically, your chances of hitting on players in the 1st round, regardless of position, is 43%. Makes you wonder why these picks carry so much value 

Adam Schefter
@AdamSchefter
ESPN content producer
@PaulHembo
calculated the percentage of 1st-round picks that “hit” or “miss,” based upon whether that player signed a second contract with the team that drafted them. The data encompasses the 20 drafts spanning 2000-2019. Here are the positional hit rates:

This chart overwhelmingly lays out the case for drafting a punter in the first. 100% hit rate. Ray Guy

[Kentis]

So, we’ve already failed at the easiest choice, on the other hand we’ve excelled at the hardest!? Clear as mud, the draft is… 

[Havoc]

I didn’t realize WR was that bad. You would think that would be one of the easier ones to project. It often makes me wonder how much the big paycheck impacts performance moving forward - how much it impacts the drive.

[medaille]

It's not perfect, but it's probably the only way to measure it. 8 times out of 10, a 2nd contract means you didn't miss.

Nah, there’s a million ways you could measure things.  PFF grade.  WAR compared to rest of position group.  % of Games started.  If they made the Pro Bowl X number of times.  There’s a ton of ways to measure how good a player is and they’re probably all equally as valid or more valid than if they were resigned by the team that drafted them.

[MaroonBells]

Nah, there’s a million ways you could measure things.  PFF grade.  WAR compared to rest of position group.  % of Games started.  If they made the Pro Bowl X number of times.  There’s a ton of ways to measure how good a player is and they’re probably all equally as valid or more valid than if they were resigned by the team that drafted them.

There are lies, damn lies and statistics. But you know what never lies? The checkbook.

[purplefaithful]

There are lies, damn lies and statistics. But you know what never lies? The checkbook.

Ha! 

Truth....

I find the data-set misleading for QB...Too many of those kids come into the league with good tools, good brains and into horrible situations with crappy teams. Football is the most interdependent sport there is, especially @ QB.

[medaille]

Checkbook sometimes lies. You can’t resign every starting caliber player you want because of the salary cap. Coaching schemes change and guys lose their fit. Ezra Cleveland would have been ruled out of this metric, but he went to get $8M a year. Greenerd, our prized free agent, would have been a bust according to this metric, but he’s well paid, just not by the team that drafted him. Same with Van Ginkle (although maybe his 2023 $2M thing counts?)

If we’re talking checkbooks, it’d probably be better to see if they get a top 32 or 64 contract at their position from any team indicating that they are paid as a starter. The metric shouldn’t get flawed just because a team is tight against the cap or changes their schemes.

[pattersaur]

I did a much less exhaustive or well-researched post on this a while back. My conclusion was that first round QBs don't really bust at any higher rate than most other positions. If we're gonna roll the dice, may as well try to roll them for the jackpot.

[kmillard]

I think they should just keep drafting CB's with top draft capital. that has worked well for them.