5 YEAR NFL DRAFTING STATISTICS

[CanadaSteve]

There has been a lot of talk about drafting failure, and how you should spend draft capital in the first three rounds.  So I thought I would do some digging.

AFC

OFFENSE

QB: 17           RB:  16

WR: 31          TE: 14

T: 23              G: 16

Center: 4      TOTAL PICKS: 121

On offense, the overwhelming position is WR on how draft capital has been spent this past five years.

DEFENSE

Unfortunately, the source I used did NOT break down S and CB in the DB category, but by looking at the names, I would say it was about a 75/25 split favoring CB.

DE: 32      DT: 24    LB: 31:   DB:  47    TOTAL PICKS: 134

Interestingly, DB far outweigh any other position drafted on the defense side of the ball. 

NFC

OFFENSE

QB: 10       RB: 18

WR: 31      TE: 10

T: 21          G: 13

Center: 12    Kicker: 1 (Buccaneers)

Again, overwhelming number of WR.  Seems to me an indication of the pass-happy nature of the league, compared to drafting RB's early.  It seems to indicate more teams are feeling good RB's can be drafted later compared to WR's.  A weird anomaly in the NFC as there are 4x the amount of centers drafted. 

DEFENSE

DE: 22   DT: 24   LB: 27   DB:  54

Equal capital spent on DE/DT/LB< but a 2:1 ratio on DB.  Again, seems to be an indication of a pass-happy league, and the best way to combat that is high-quality secondary play.

 

OTHER INTERESTING NOTES

Most teams spend equal amounts of capital on both sides of the ball (within a few picks).  Teams that spend more on one side of the ball than the other OFFENSE/DEFENSE:  Titans (10/5), Texans (10/6) Rams (10/3)  Seahawks (10/6), 49ers (7/12), Packers (4/12), Cowboys (5/9), Chiefs (4/11), Jets (5/9).

Browns have had an UNBELIEVABLE 25 picks in the first three rounds in the past five years.

Both conferences together have almost drafted a QB per team, but 11 teams have not drafted one in 5 years.  Browns have drafted 4.

JETS SPECIFIC

We have drafted 2 QB's, 2 WR's, 1 TE on offense, and 1 DE, 1 DT, 3 LB's, and 4 DB's on defense.  We are behind league average on WR's drafted.  Jets are the ONLY team in the NFL to NOT spend any draft capital on the OL in five years, which is remarkably short-sighted (IMO).

 

[Beerfish]

Some of those stats must be wrong, mac has drafted devin smith, hansen and stewart as wr

He has used a 5th rounder on jarvis Harrison and a 5th on shell.  Also idzik picked olineman his last draft as well i think.

[CanadaSteve]

I can break this down further if there is interest, but for now, that gives you a good idea.  I would love to find a site that has number of drafted players still with original teams in the past 5 years to see what the league average is on success rates.

 

[greenwichjetfan]

2 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

There has been a lot of talk about drafting failure, and how you should spend draft capital in the first three rounds.  So I thought I would do some digging.

Here is how the AFC in the past five years has used all its draft picks:

OFFENSE

QB: 17           RB:  16

WR: 31          TE: 14

T: 23              G: 16

Center: 4      TOTAL PICKS: 121

On offense, the overwhelming position is WR and how draft capital has been spent this past five years.

DEFENSE

Unfortunately, the source I used did NOT break down S and CB in the DB category, but by looking at the names, I would say it was about a 75/25 split favoring CB.

DE: 32      DT: 24    LB: 31:   DB:  47    TOTAL PICKS: 134

Interestingly, DB far outweigh any other position drafted on the defense side of the ball. 

NFC

OFFENSE

QB: 10       RB: 18

WR: 31      TE: 10

T: 21          G: 13

Center: 12    Kicker: 1 (Buccaneers)

Again, overwhelming number of WR.  Seems to me an indication of the pass-happy nature of the league, compared to drafting RB's early.  It seems to indicate more teams are feeling good RB's can be drafted later compared to WR's.  A weird anomaly in the NFC as their are 4x the amount of centers drafted. 

DEFENSE

DE: 22   DT: 24   LB: 27   DB:  54

Equal capital spent on DE/DT/LB< but a 2:1 ratio on DB.  Again, seems to be an indication of a pass-happy league, and the best way to combat that is high-quality secondary play.

 

OTHER INTERESTING NOTES

Most teams spend equal amounts of capital on both sides of the ball (within a few picks).  Teams that spend more on one side of the ball than the other OFFENSE/DEFENSE:  Titans (10/5), Texans (10/6) Rams (10/3)  Seahawks (10/6), 49ers (7/12), Packers (4/12), Cowboys (5/9), Chiefs (4/11), Jets (5/9).

Browns have had an UNBELIEVABLE 25 picks in the first three rounds in the past five years.

Both conferences together have almost drafted a QB per team, but 11 teams have not drafted one in 5 years

JETS SPECIFIC

We have drafted 2 QB's, 2 WR's, 1 TE on offense, and 1 DE, 1 DT, 3 LB's, and 4 DB's on defense.  We are behind league average on WR's drafted.  Jets are the ONLY team in the NFL to NOT spend any draft capital on the OL in five years, which is remarkably short-sighted (IMO).

 

Thanks for this - this is good work. Fun to see the comparisons.

The thing that stuck out to me is that the Titans, Texans, Rams all have drafted QB high in the last 5 years, and the offense is where their draft capital has gone. The Packers are doing the right thing in drafting defense while knowing that Rodgers will carry the offense, but they've been kind of inept at drafting defense considering their heavy skew to defense vs. defensive production the last 5 years.

I really want to see the Jets numbers tilt heavily towards offense. Buy an OL, invest heavy draft capital in offensive skill position playmakers, and get a DC that can scheme his way to a productive defense with the pieces the Jets already have. The only thing worth spending any picks or cap space on is a premier pass rusher.

[greenwichjetfan]

5 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

Some of those stats must be wrong, mac has drafted devin smith, hansen and stewart as wr

He has used a 5th rounder on jarvis Harrison and a 5th on shell.  Also idzik picked olineman his last draft as well i think.

I think Steve limited it to the first three rounds. Smith and Stewart are part of the 5.

[pajet]

interesting...thanks for doing this.   Its no wonder our offense is horrendous.  Other interesting fact is that KC and GB who are known more as offensive teams have spent more draft capital on defense than offense in your study period.

[pajet]

1 hour ago, Beerfish said:

Some of those stats must be wrong, mac has drafted devin smith, hansen and stewart as wr

He has used a 5th rounder on jarvis Harrison and a 5th on shell.  Also idzik picked olineman his last draft as well i think.

I think the breakdown listed was just for the first 3 rounds

[Sperm Edwards]

38 minutes ago, pajet said:

I think the breakdown listed was just for the first 3 rounds

I glossed over that as well. Also he's saying the past 5 years he meant the 5 prior drafts not the 5 prior years' drafts; 2013 was 5 years ago but it was 6 drafts ago, which is why Winters didn't count.

[RutgersJetFan]

2 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I glossed over that as well. Also he's saying the past 5 years he meant the 5 prior drafts not the 5 prior years' drafts; 2013 was 5 years ago but it was 6 drafts ago, which is why Winters didn't count.

Time is a flat circle.

[Sperm Edwards]

The breakdown would change dramatically if the first 4 rounds were counted.

That would 4 would add 7 more players, and 6 of those 7 were picks for offense: 3 more WRs, an OL, a QB, a CB, a TE. 

The  part of that is, discounting the current rookie TE, the only ones still on the roster in any capacity are backups Burris and Dozier. 

[greenwichjetfan]

13 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Time is a flat circle.

A close cousin to:

[CanadaSteve]

1 hour ago, Beerfish said:

Some of those stats must be wrong, mac has drafted devin smith, hansen and stewart as wr

He has used a 5th rounder on jarvis Harrison and a 5th on shell.  Also idzik picked olineman his last draft as well i think.

These are 1st 2nd and 3rd round ONLY.

[CanadaSteve]

To Clarify:

Past 5 drafts

1st, 2nd, and 3rd round ONLY.

 

[CanadaSteve]

16 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The breakdown would change dramatically if the first 4 rounds were counted.

That would 4 would add 7 more players, and 6 of those 7 were picks for offense: 3 more WRs, an OL, a QB, a CB, a TE. 

The  part of that is, discounting the current rookie TE, the only ones still on the roster in any capacity are backups Burris and Dozier. 

It would, but I used 1-3 rounds as cuttoff.

If you are hitting consistently with your top three picks, you are going to do well.  If you draft guys to develop later, that is always a bonus.

But if looking at first three rounds, that is how the breakdown went.  There was A LOT of talk on how the top picks should be used, specifically OL, QB's, and Rush LB'S.  The NFL deosn't seem to agree.

 

[RutgersJetFan]

18 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

It would, but I used 1-3 rounds as cuttoff.

Understandable, but the problem is that investing in skill positions in the first and skill positions in the third is a huge gap. The Jets should not be given credit for attempting to address WR with Stewart and Smith in the same vein as a team that has used firsts. Big difference in putting first rounders into WR/CB/LT/QB/DE than thirds and even seconds, especially when it comes to QB, LT, and DE. That's why those three positions tend to go #1 overall.

[RutgersJetFan]

Also worth noting, that the Jets have only used mid-late rounders on OL is fine, that's generally where you can find OL to get you by. Excepting blind side tackles that's where the majority of these guys get taken, especially interior OL. The Jets' problem with drafting OL isn't that they don't use high picks, it's that they don't use almost any picks at all. When you look at teams with consistently good lines, often it's because they are continuously replenishing their lines with mid-late round talent and not giving out fat contracts to anyone that's only average, like we did with Winters. You find average OL (and linebackers, and safeties) in the mid-late part of the draft. Those are the positions where average players are absolutely fine to have. Average gets you by with guards and safeties and interior linebackers.

Essentially, we've taken the opposite approach with everything. We try to find skill positions in the parts of the draft that don't have them, and we overdraft positions that can be found way later. Then we pay guys that most good teams would let walk. And the icing on the cake is almost none of these guys wind up being any good.

 

[20andOut]

Nice work on the breakdown. What I would love to see is some sort of breakdown of the production of top 3 or 4 rounds of draft picks over the last few years. Even in the most basic terms of # of starts or % of snaps. I imagine such a breakdown would be seriously time consuming..

[Creepy Lurker]

4 hours ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Also worth noting, that the Jets have only used mid-late rounders on OL is fine, that's generally where you can find OL to get you by. Excepting blind side tackles that's where the majority of these guys get taken, especially interior OL. The Jets' problem with drafting OL isn't that they don't use high picks, it's that they don't use almost any picks at all. When you look at teams with consistently good lines, often it's because they are continuously replenishing their lines with mid-late round talent and not giving out fat contracts to anyone that's only average, like we did with Winters. You find average OL (and linebackers, and safeties) in the mid-late part of the draft. Those are the positions where average players are absolutely fine to have. Average gets you by with guards and safeties and interior linebackers.

Essentially, we've taken the opposite approach with everything. We try to find skill positions in the parts of the draft that don't have them, and we overdraft positions that can be found way later. Then we pay guys that most good teams would let walk. And the icing on the cake is almost none of these guys wind up being any good.

 

I agree and I’ve been thinking about all the 1st round O-line busts lately. I get that it’s such a risk for a player that may not seem important but to not take a chance on ANY prospect in round 1-3 is crazy. Use 1st round for other needs if o-line seems shaky but round 2-3 aren’t a bad place to look.

Regardless, 1 late round offensive line prospect should be taken every draft given the busy factor and the fact that you have to groom these guys and build a pipeline. 

[CanadaSteve]

2 hours ago, 20andOut said:

Nice work on the breakdown. What I would love to see is some sort of breakdown of the production of top 3 or 4 rounds of draft picks over the last few years. Even in the most basic terms of # of starts or % of snaps. I imagine such a breakdown would be seriously time consuming..

Will try!

 

[Sperm Edwards]

9 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

It would, but I used 1-3 rounds as cuttoff.

If you are hitting consistently with your top three picks, you are going to do well.  If you draft guys to develop later, that is always a bonus.

But if looking at first three rounds, that is how the breakdown went.  There was A LOT of talk on how the top picks should be used, specifically OL, QB's, and Rush LB'S.  The NFL deosn't seem to agree.

 

That's fair, on your initial point.

But regarding your last one, the NFL is filled with cowards and fools; some convinced that there's value in lower level positions while far higher ones are still vacant; some convinced their jobs are safest by avoiding drafting a bust, even if the team still isn't noticeably any better with the non-busts that were drafted; some are just not particularly smart people in the first place. 

For example, Adams isn't yet as good as advertised (certainly not as good as he advertises himself); but it's still very early in his career, he's a comparatively solid player already, he's surely better than some give him credit for being, and it's unlikely he's already reached his ceiling. Say you wanted to also felt the same regarding both Williams and Lee. Even with all 3 on the field 100% healthy, the Jets are perfectly capable of being a bottom-5 overall team with all 3, with a bottom 5-10 defense as well.

I'm just not heavily swayed by some bad decision-makers making bad decisions for their respective front offices. There's no evidence to suggest the average NFL GM is any particular genius (nor the people hiring them). A good percentage of GMs - perhaps a large majority for all I know - seem to just be ex-players or qualified-to-do-nothing interns who worked their way up to scouting to GM over the course of 20 years or so. That's fine, but at the same time it's not like it was either this or teaching quantum physics at MIT. I'm not sure half of them can spell quantum physics...or MIT. 

[Creepy Lurker]

19 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

That's fair, on your initial point.

But regarding your last one, the NFL is filled with cowards and fools; some convinced that there's value in lower level positions while far higher ones are still vacant; some convinced their jobs are safest by avoiding drafting a bust, even if the team still isn't noticeably any better with the non-busts that were drafted; some are just not particularly smart people in the first place. 

For example, Adams isn't yet as good as advertised (certainly not as good as he advertises himself); but it's still very early in his career, he's a comparatively solid player already, he's surely better than some give him credit for being, and it's unlikely he's already reached his ceiling. Say you wanted to also felt the same regarding both Williams and Lee. Even with all 3 on the field 100% healthy, the Jets are perfectly capable of being a bottom-5 overall team with all 3, with a bottom 5-10 defense as well.

I'm just not heavily swayed by some bad decision-makers making bad decisions for their respective front offices. There's no evidence to suggest the average NFL GM is any particular genius (nor the people hiring them). A good percentage of GMs - perhaps a large majority for all I know - seem to just be ex-players or qualified-to-do-nothing interns who worked their way up to scouting to GM over the course of 20 years or so. That's fine, but at the same time it's not like it was either this or teaching quantum physics at MIT. I'm not sure half of them can spell quantum physics...or MIT. 

I agree and although Mac sucks, so do a lot of front offices. I think many of us can agree that premium positions and a certain formula that has been discussed seems to be the no brainer for team building. Things may change again in the NFL but as of right now, there is a very specific way to prioritize drafting picks vs FA targets. 

[Jet_Engine1]

6 hours ago, Creepy Lurker said:

I agree and I’ve been thinking about all the 1st round O-line busts lately. I get that it’s such a risk for a player that may not seem important but to not take a chance on ANY prospect in round 1-3 is crazy. Use 1st round for other needs if o-line seems shaky but round 2-3 aren’t a bad place to look.

Regardless, 1 late round offensive line prospect should be taken every draft given the busy factor and the fact that you have to groom these guys and build a pipeline. 

Robert Gallery was a total bust at Tackle. Played for over a decade as a starting guard. LOL. 

We could use that kind of bust.

[Sperm Edwards]

3 minutes ago, Jet_Engine1 said:

Robert Gallery was a bust at Tackle. Played for over a decade as a high level guard. LOL. 

 

Hows Stephen Hill doing?

Not really. He was a merely-decent guard for a handful of years, and it's possible the coaching and blocking schemes changing every year for his first 3 years did him in at tackle as much as anything (or so a then-close Raider buddy of mine used to say, right before I'd respond with a short comment containing the word delusional. Of course a decent guard is way better than a horrible LT, but nobody in the organization or in their fanbase was content with that being the return on investment for a #2 overall pick, as though they'd make Gallery the pick again if they could.

But to that point, if he was a bust at guard he wouldn't be likely to start for years at LT. If a safety busts is he going to play CB? If a DE/DT busts is he going to become an OLB?

However a bust at corner could still be a useful NB or possibly he could play safety if he's big enough and his tackling is sound. An edge rusher who doesn't start can at least be a dedicated pass rusher who's pulled off the field often, or maybe he becomes a decent all-around LB even if he never becomes the pass-rushing force he was drafted to be (e.g. Calvin Pace).

Because Stephen Hill was a bust 2nd round pick that means what? Whatever you think it means because of his position, it means a bit less considering 2 picks later was Alshon Jeffery, so it means we just made a bad pick based purely on theoretical upside regardless of position. Plenty of below-expectation pick WRs can still carve out careers for themselves as situational receivers and returners (e.g. Ginn); they aren't all total busts like Stephen Hill, or even worse like the 2 waste of picks WRs we drafted just last year, or Devin Smith before them. 

[jamesr]

17 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Some of those stats must be wrong, mac has drafted devin smith, hansen and stewart as wr

He has used a 5th rounder on jarvis Harrison and a 5th on shell.  Also idzik picked olineman his last draft as well i think.

Macc has drafted 2 OL in the 4 drafts he's had. In that same span we've taken 4 DL (for a team that plays a 3-man front), 4 LB, 6 DBs (insert lame Safety reference here), 3 QBs, 2 TEs, 4 WR, 2 RB and a punter.

[bla bla bla]

I should have finished my research but it was taking forever. I was looking into the last 10 years worth of drafts and noted which players were still on their current team, which players were still bouncing around the league and which players were out of the league. For what I was able to come up with the majority of teams hold onto players for 3-4 years and then anything after that is a bonus. The NFL is a young mans game which is why the rookie salary cap is so massive, there are not a ton of success stories on 2nd contracts. The NFL is mostly made up of 1st round picks whether they are on their current team or are cut and picked up by other franchises.

 

I think at one point there was an argument for taking defense early because the rules are skewed towards offense. Meaning you should be able to get production out of slightly lower picks. Now I with the tackling rules it almost makes no sense to take defense high as the entire NFL is up to video game level stats regardless of how good your defense is.

[nico002]

Makes sense you need multiple WR/DB on the field at all times... only 1 QB/RB/C etc...

[Beerfish]

1 hour ago, nico002 said:

Makes sense you need multiple WR/DB on the field at all times... only 1 QB/RB/C etc...

5 olineman on the field at a time, thus, never draft them!

[nico002]

5 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

5 olineman on the field at a time, thus, never draft them!

These are league stats...

[Integrity28]

21 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

Browns have had an UNBELIEVABLE 25 picks in the first three rounds in the past five years.

Damn. Almost impossible to not eventually become competent.

[j4jets]

23 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The breakdown would change dramatically if the first 4 rounds were counted.

That would 4 would add 7 more players, and 6 of those 7 were picks for offense: 3 more WRs, an OL, a QB, a CB, a TE. 

The  part of that is, discounting the current rookie TE, the only ones still on the roster in any capacity are backups Burris and Dozier. 

Well it’s a shame when we have to include 4th rounders to prove Mac has invested into the offense. 

[HessStation]

On 10/5/2018 at 11:50 AM, Beerfish said:

Some of those stats must be wrong, mac has drafted devin smith, hansen and stewart as wr

He has used a 5th rounder on jarvis Harrison and a 5th on shell.  Also idzik picked olineman his last draft as well i think.

First 3 rounds bruh get wit it

[JustInFudge]

Sometimes I think about what this team would look like if I was drafting and I just laugh at how ridiculously talented we'd be on offense.  We'd be scary good.

Maybe I should start a go fund me page?

[CanadaSteve]

6 hours ago, bla bla bla said:

I should have finished my research but it was taking forever. I was looking into the last 10 years worth of drafts and noted which players were still on their current team, which players were still bouncing around the league and which players were out of the league. For what I was able to come up with the majority of teams hold onto players for 3-4 years and then anything after that is a bonus. The NFL is a young mans game which is why the rookie salary cap is so massive, there are not a ton of success stories on 2nd contracts. The NFL is mostly made up of 1st round picks whether they are on their current team or are cut and picked up by other franchises.

 

I think at one point there was an argument for taking defense early because the rules are skewed towards offense. Meaning you should be able to get production out of slightly lower picks. Now I with the tackling rules it almost makes no sense to take defense high as the entire NFL is up to video game level stats regardless of how good your defense is.

I was going to do ten years for this, but didn't want to do the work!

I also want to look at the five years and see which players are still in the league....but same excuse!