First round QB hit rate (CBS article)

[dcJet]

Final tally

Over the last 15 years, there have been 46 QBs selected in the first round. Here's the final tally:

GRADE	TOTAL	PERCENT
Home run	7	15%
Solid result	3	6%
Mixed result	9	19%
Incomplete	4	8%
Miss	23	50%

If you combine home runs and solid/mixed results, that's 19 of 46 (41%) who at least left some level of positive impact. That's not necessarily an awful hit rate, considering the volatility of picks at every position. It's also not great! And it's obviously including a wide range of outcomes; Mark Sanchez and Deshaun Watson, for example, are both mixed results because their success was short-lived in their original homes, and yet the latter was far more productive during his days as a Texans starter.

Sanchez got major help from a vaunted Jets defense during his two playoff runs; he was sloppy but occasionally clutch in four years as QB1.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2024-nfl-draft-regrading-every-first-round-qb-pick-of-last-15-years-from-justin-fields-to-mark-sanchez/

[southparkcpa]

1 minute ago, dcJet said:

Final tally

Over the last 15 years, there have been 46 QBs selected in the first round. Here's the final tally:

GRADE	TOTAL	PERCENT
Home run	7	15%
Solid result	3	6%
Mixed result	9	19%
Incomplete	4	8%
Miss	23	50%

If you combine home runs and solid/mixed results, that's 19 of 46 (41%) who at least left some level of positive impact. That's not necessarily an awful hit rate, considering the volatility of picks at every position. It's also not great! And it's obviously including a wide range of outcomes; Mark Sanchez and Deshaun Watson, for example, are both mixed results because their success was short-lived in their original homes, and yet the latter was far more productive during his days as a Texans starter.

Sanchez got major help from a vaunted Jets defense during his two playoff runs; he was sloppy but occasionally clutch in four years as QB1.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2024-nfl-draft-regrading-every-first-round-qb-pick-of-last-15-years-from-justin-fields-to-mark-sanchez/

Take out NY Jets QB's and the results improve tremendously.

 

[dcJet]

I would have labeled Sanchez a miss.  Dude was a turnover machine.

[GangGreened]

5 minutes ago, southparkcpa said:

Take out NY Jets QB's and the results improve tremendously.

 

LOL I was going to post how much do the Jets skew this??

[Rich Thornburgh]

6 minutes ago, dcJet said:

I would have labeled Sanchez a miss.  Dude was a turnover machine.

Won 4 playoff games and is 1,000x better than eh eh ergh eh

[mrcoops]

8 minutes ago, dcJet said:

I would have labeled Sanchez a miss.  Dude was a turnover machine.

Sanchez could only play in the playoffs. We should have had a different QB for regular season games.

[Sonny Werblin]

10 minutes ago, dcJet said:

Final tally

Over the last 15 years, there have been 46 QBs selected in the first round. Here's the final tally:

GRADE	TOTAL	PERCENT
Home run	7	15%
Solid result	3	6%
Mixed result	9	19%
Incomplete	4	8%
Miss	23	50%

If you combine home runs and solid/mixed results, that's 19 of 46 (41%) who at least left some level of positive impact. That's not necessarily an awful hit rate, considering the volatility of picks at every position. It's also not great! And it's obviously including a wide range of outcomes; Mark Sanchez and Deshaun Watson, for example, are both mixed results because their success was short-lived in their original homes, and yet the latter was far more productive during his days as a Texans starter.

Sanchez got major help from a vaunted Jets defense during his two playoff runs; he was sloppy but occasionally clutch in four years as QB1.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2024-nfl-draft-regrading-every-first-round-qb-pick-of-last-15-years-from-justin-fields-to-mark-sanchez/

 I guarantee the homerun plus solid result rate is even lower if you limit it to QBs taken with picks 1 though 9. The hit rate is much better for 10 through 32. Why? Because teams are less prone to start a rookie QB taken with the 10th pick or later, and they are typically taken by teams that are not so terrible that they earned a top pick in the draft. 

[jamesr]

17 minutes ago, southparkcpa said:

Take out NY Jets and results improve tremendously.

 

Fixed that for you.   

[Barry McCockinner]

21 minutes ago, dcJet said:

Final tally

Over the last 15 years, there have been 46 QBs selected in the first round. Here's the final tally:

GRADE	TOTAL	PERCENT
Home run	7	15%
Solid result	3	6%
Mixed result	9	19%
Incomplete	4	8%
Miss	23	50%

If you combine home runs and solid/mixed results, that's 19 of 46 (41%) who at least left some level of positive impact. That's not necessarily an awful hit rate, considering the volatility of picks at every position. It's also not great! And it's obviously including a wide range of outcomes; Mark Sanchez and Deshaun Watson, for example, are both mixed results because their success was short-lived in their original homes, and yet the latter was far more productive during his days as a Texans starter.

Sanchez got major help from a vaunted Jets defense during his two playoff runs; he was sloppy but occasionally clutch in four years as QB1.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2024-nfl-draft-regrading-every-first-round-qb-pick-of-last-15-years-from-justin-fields-to-mark-sanchez/

This is why I think it's ridiculous people don't ever want to give a GM a second chance at picking a top QB. As if the fact that they missed on a coin toss indicates they're incapable of winning the coin toss. That's just the bust rate. It's only 1 in 5 that turn out to be great/solid.

It's just one of those silly things that permeates sports culture. 

[CTJetsFan]

All draft picks & positions seem to be 50/50 at best....regardless of round. Any GM that hits on more than 50% of his picks (and by hit I'd say on the team and contributing after 3 years) has done his job.

I'd be curious to see the "hit rate" on QBs in rounds 2-4.

[UntouchableCrew]

6 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

This is why I think it's ridiculous people don't ever want to give a GM a second chance at picking a top QB. As if the fact that they missed on a coin toss indicates they're incapable of winning the coin toss. That's just the bust rate. It's only 1 in 5 that turn out to be great/solid.

It's just one of those silly things that permeates sports culture. 

Agreed.

"He can't evaluate QBs!"

Nobody, can, really. It's a position heavily skewed toward intangibles.

[HighPitch]

8 minutes ago, CTJetsFan said:

All draft picks & positions seem to be 50/50 at best....regardless of round. Any GM that hits on more than 50% of his picks (and by hit I'd say on the team and contributing after 3 years) has done his job.

I'd be curious to see the "hit rate" on QBs in rounds 2-4.

exactly

 

the hit rate would be half

Think of the best young qbs today. the majority have been first rounders

[THE BARON]

1 hour ago, mrcoops said:

Sanchez could only play in the playoffs. We should have had a different QB for regular season games.

The reason Sanchez was good at those come from behind wins and the playoff wins points to what his problem was as a pro QB.  It also explains the butt fumble.

To put it simply... Sanchez really had his head someplace else.  I'm not suggesting that he is not a tuff person or a good athlete.  He simply wanted to do other things vs play football.  The only times his mind did not wander when he was on the field were the times when the situation and circumstances were intense.  That was the only time he stayed focused.  All the silly interceptions and the butt fumble were all concentration errors.  Not football IQ errors or physical limitations.  

Sanchez is now doing what he would have really preferred to be doing in the first place.  

[Larz]

It’s almost like throwing a rookie out there with a crap team around him and a new coaching staff isn’t great planning 

 

The jets problem is mostly doing that and also having a culture that accepts losing. 
 

Thats a big reason why after another failed rookie The jets have to trade for a guy that was developed properly in a winning environment 

Im a smidgen optimistic that the culture is changing.  Just a smidge 

[Lupz27]

45 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

This is why I think it's ridiculous people don't ever want to give a GM a second chance at picking a top QB. As if the fact that they missed on a coin toss indicates they're incapable of winning the coin toss. That's just the bust rate. It's only 1 in 5 that turn out to be great/solid.

It's just one of those silly things that permeates sports culture. 

Let’s also throw in the fact they are usually undermined by either the HC or the owner on such big decisions.

Maybe not all the time but it definitely happens a lot.

[bicketybam]

1 hour ago, Rich Thornburgh said:

Won 4 playoff games and is 1,000x better than eh eh ergh eh

Wins are a QB stat until they aren't.

[viffer]

1 hour ago, mrcoops said:

Sanchez could only play in the playoffs. We should have had a different QB for regular season games.

Who got them to those playoff games? I thought Sanchez was the quarterback in the regular season too...

[Barry McCockinner]

2 minutes ago, viffer said:

Who got them to those playoff games? I thought Sanchez was the quarterback in the regular season too...

mostly the defense, oline/running game and special teams.

[Jetsfan80]

1 hour ago, Rich Thornburgh said:

Won 4 playoff games and is 1,000x better than eh eh ergh eh

He "won" 4 playoff games much the same way the Key Grip on Gladiator "won" an Oscar.

[Jetsfan80]

7 minutes ago, viffer said:

Who got them to those playoff games? I thought Sanchez was the quarterback in the regular season too...

The 2009 Jets were one of the 3 most loaded Jets teams in franchise history and we only won 9 games in the regular season because of Sanchez.  Had to sneak into the playoffs under some pretty lucky circumstances.

He managed to lose a game that year despite the running game accounting for over 300 yards and the defense holding the Bills O to 16 points in an overtime game.

For reference, the 2015 Jets won 10 games yet missed the playoffs.  

[slimjasi]

Yep, the NFL is really bad at projecting how college QBs will fare in the NFL. As others have noted, that’s because being a good decision-maker who delivers the ball on time is largely mental, not physical. 

[Sperm Edwards]

The rest weren't available to the Jets, or were also horrible, or both. Also a couple of opportunities (like 7 + 9 below) I could at least accept that the same GM who just drafted a 1st round (or in Geno's case, still inside the top 40) pick QB wasn't then taking another QB the next year in round 1. 

QBs Jets took in round 1

1. Sanchez
2. Darnold
3. Wilson

QBs passed up by Jets + taken in round 1, over that same span, when they needed a QB

1. Goff (Jets could've traded up like the Rams; Maccagnan passed up moving up to #1 because he wouldn't give up Mo Wilkerson, who was tagged & already holding out, only to then turn into one of the worst-decision contract extensions in team history)
2. I guess Wentz, too, if including Goff; but he wasn't the target at #1
3. Watson (took a safety)
4. Mahomes (yeah, a SAFETY!!)
5. Allen (took Darnold, after trading away three 2nd rounders to move up enough to get him)
6. Jackson (Darnold)
7. Love (Becton)
8. Fields + M.Jones (Zach. Meh, Fields is at least exciting with his legs, but really they all suck)
9. Bridgewater (Coples)

This ****ing dumbass team...

[Sperm Edwards]

33 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

He "won" 4 playoff games much the same way the Key Grip on Gladiator "won" an Oscar.

Vernon Gholston won 4 playoff games

[Flea Flicking Frank]

There was a video someone put out that stratified drafted QB's success/failure rate. It was very clear that the situation the QB's go to is far more important than where they are drafted. QB's who go to good situations are far more likely to be successful than QB's who go to bad situations. This concept is completely lost on Jets fans. 

[Beerfish]

I'd also like to see a break down of top 5 picks vs outside top 5 and trade ups vs not trade ups.

Josh allen 7th pick, mahommes 10, lamar 30

[OtherwiseHappyinLife]

59 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The rest weren't available to the Jets, or were also horrible, or both. Also a couple of opportunities (like 7 + 9 below) I could at least accept that the same GM who just drafted a 1st round (or in Geno's case, still inside the top 40) pick QB wasn't then taking another QB the next year in round 1. 

QBs Jets took in round 1

1. Sanchez
2. Darnold
3. Wilson

QBs passed up by Jets + taken in round 1, over that same span, when they needed a QB

1. Goff (Jets could've traded up like the Rams; Maccagnan passed up moving up to #1 because he wouldn't give up Mo Wilkerson, who was tagged & already holding out, only to then turn into one of the worst-decision contract extensions in team history)
2. I guess Wentz, too, if including Goff; but he wasn't the target at #1
3. Watson (took a safety)
4. Mahomes (yeah, a SAFETY!!)
5. Allen (took Darnold, after trading away three 2nd rounders to move up enough to get him)
6. Jackson (Darnold)
7. Love (Becton)
8. Fields + M.Jones (Zach. Meh, Fields is at least exciting with his legs, but really they all suck)
9. Bridgewater (Coples)

This ****ing dumbass team...

Great post!

#8 obviously was still a big miss but context of who was available including in the next QB class (Pickett) is very important.

JD swung and missed on a young franchise QB but that doesn’t make it the wrong decision at the time.  Darnold had and has proven not to be the guy and it’s easier said than done to wait until the rest of the offense is ready before selecting your next QB.  When the opportunity arises, it’s tough not to take a bet on a franchise QB.  Otherwise, it could cost you 2-3 first rounders to move up in some future draft while still assuming the risk of failure.  

What is indefensible to me is that JD brought Zach back as the main backup in year 3.  That’s a big miss that could (maybe should) have cost him his job.

I’m very interested to hear what he’s learned about this situation and what he would do different in the future.  If only we have beat writers who asked these types of questions.

[Flea Flicking Frank]

Ill say this until it happens, get the right coach in here and the QB position will be solved, continue to hire moron HC's and we will continue to have busts at the QB position, its really that simple

[UntouchableCrew]

1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

The 2009 Jets were one of the 3 most loaded Jets teams in franchise history and we only won 9 games in the regular season because of Sanchez.  Had to sneak into the playoffs under some pretty lucky circumstances.

He managed to lose a game that year despite the running game accounting for over 300 yards and the defense holding the Bills O to 16 points in an overtime game.

For reference, the 2015 Jets won 10 games yet missed the playoffs.  

The 2009 Jets defense was 1st in yards allowed per game, 1st in points allowed per game, 1st in passer rating against.

The 2009 Jets were 1st in rushing yards per game and 3rd in rushing yards per attempt.

And yet, they went 9-7. Seems odd? 

That's because the QB was 28th in passer ratings, 29th in QBR and had a league leading 27 turnovers.

I swear to god, the "Mark Sanchez was a winner" crowd might be worse than the Zach truthers (if they still exist.)

[OtherwiseHappyinLife]

1 hour ago, UntouchableCrew said:

The 2009 Jets defense was 1st in yards allowed per game, 1st in points allowed per game, 1st in passer rating against.

The 2009 Jets were 1st in rushing yards per game and 3rd in rushing yards per attempt.

And yet, they went 9-7. Seems odd? 

That's because the QB was 28th in passer ratings, 29th in QBR and had a league leading 27 turnovers.

I swear to god, the "Mark Sanchez was a winner" crowd might be worse than the Zach truthers (if they still exist.)

The winner point might be because he was a significant contributor to back to back AFC Championship game appearances.

From memory, he was on the verge of getting us into the SB in a comeback at Pitt in year 2.  Defense failed to hold and Sanchez never got the ball back.

Those 2 runs actually provided us some actual positive memories.  (looked back and he threw 9 TDS to 3 INTs).

Do I think he was a good QB?  No

Do I think we should have kept him?  Hell no

But the guy had some winning moments.  

[southparkcpa]

42 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

The 2009 Jets defense was 1st in yards allowed per game, 1st in points allowed per game, 1st in passer rating against.

The 2009 Jets were 1st in rushing yards per game and 3rd in rushing yards per attempt.

And yet, they went 9-7. Seems odd? 

That's because the QB was 28th in passer ratings, 29th in QBR and had a league leading 27 turnovers.

I swear to god, the "Mark Sanchez was a winner" crowd might be worse than the Zach truthers (if they still exist.)

Now I am depressed.

 

[jeremy2020]

Eh.. this list counts running backs as homerun QBs!!

[neckdemon]

48 minutes ago, OtherwiseHappyinLife said:

The winner point might be because he was a significant contributor to back to back AFC Championship game appearances.

From memory, he stepped up to get us into the playoffs in a win & in game in 2009 (last at the old stadium if i recall) and was on the verge of getting us into the SB in a comeback at Pitt in year 2.  Defense failed to hold and Sanchez never got the ball back.

Those 2 runs actually provided us some actual positive memories.  (looked back and he threw 9 TDS to 3 INTs).

Do I think he was a good QB?  No

Do I think we should have kept him?  Hell no

But the guy had some moments.  

sanchez sucked. plain and simple. a very good, superbowl caliber roster was wasted on that butt fumbling piece of crap

[Jetsfan80]

53 minutes ago, OtherwiseHappyinLife said:

The winner point might be because he was a significant contributor to back to back AFC Championship game appearances.

From memory, he was on the verge of getting us into the SB in a comeback at Pitt in year 2.  Defense failed to hold and Sanchez never got the ball back.

Those 2 runs actually provided us some actual positive memories.  (looked back and he threw 9 TDS to 3 INTs).

Do I think he was a good QB?  No

Do I think we should have kept him?  Hell no

But the guy had some winning moments.  

Bruh.

[OtherwiseHappyinLife]

1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Bruh.

I'm just saying he had a couple moments :).  

 

[jeremy2020]

1 hour ago, OtherwiseHappyinLife said:

I'm just saying he had a couple moments :). 

yea, he did...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butt_Fumble