First round QB hit rate (CBS article)

[jetstream23]

I've come to think about drafting QBs very differently in recent years.  The guys going in the Top 2 or 3 are thought to be near flawless, physically gifted run/pass guys with supreme "arm talent."  But most of the ones who have failed have done so because of what's between their ears, their inability to adapt to the speed of the game mentally (not physically) and deficiencies in reading coverages, going thru progressions, etc.

Darnold and Wilson supposedly had two of the better arms drafted in recent year and the ability to "make all the throws" that scouts and GMs covet.  Darnold throwing dimes in the rain at the USC Pro Day.  Wilson scrambling left and then throwing 60+ yards across the field to the end zone.  Impressive stuff similar to how a shooting star is impressive I guess.  In other words, it can be momentary and fleeting.

So why has a guy like Brock Purdy succeeded?  Why is the Jets best drafted QB in recent memory not the guy they took at #2, #3, or #5, but Chad Pennington taken #8 when many teams passed on him?  IMHO it's because of their mental makeup and their ability to simply make good decisions with the football.

So my new and improved "can't miss" strategy?  Don't take the guy who can make 95% of the throws by trading up into the Top 3 of the Draft.  Use a mid-round pick each year on a guy that maybe can't throw a 60-yard rope to the opposite sideline but he can process information extremely well, he succeeded in college with his decision-making, he was a leader, etc.  I think that's how I would do it.  Be willing to sacrifice one of the two major physical dimensions that scouts want, rushing like Jalen Hurts or throwing like Patrick Mahomes.  If you're willing to go after guys who might be B- instead of A+ in those areas but are smart QBs you might hit.  And, if you don't, you go back again the next year and take another one because you only used a 3rd round pick on the guy.  The league's QB history is littered with guys who weren't physical specimens with "supreme arm talent" but who became successful.  Guys who weren't the biggest or strongest like Purdy, Russell Wilson, Drew Brees, etc, have all gone to Super Bowls and none were taken in the Top 30 of the NFL Draft.

I'd rather take a swing three years in a row on QBs in Round 3, than sacrifice a Draft up top at #2 or #3 on a guy who simply has amazing physical traits.  JMHO.

[Flea Flicking Frank]

8 hours ago, jetstream23 said:

I've come to think about drafting QBs very differently in recent years.  The guys going in the Top 2 or 3 are thought to be near flawless, physically gifted run/pass guys with supreme "arm talent."  But most of the ones who have failed have done so because of what's between their ears, their inability to adapt to the speed of the game mentally (not physically) and deficiencies in reading coverages, going thru progressions, etc.

Darnold and Wilson supposedly had two of the better arms drafted in recent year and the ability to "make all the throws" that scouts and GMs covet.  Darnold throwing dimes in the rain at the USC Pro Day.  Wilson scrambling left and then throwing 60+ yards across the field to the end zone.  Impressive stuff similar to how a shooting star is impressive I guess.  In other words, it can be momentary and fleeting.

So why has a guy like Brock Purdy succeeded?  Why is the Jets best drafted QB in recent memory not the guy they took at #2, #3, or #5, but Chad Pennington taken #8 when many teams passed on him?  IMHO it's because of their mental makeup and their ability to simply make good decisions with the football.

So my new and improved "can't miss" strategy?  Don't take the guy who can make 95% of the throws by trading up into the Top 3 of the Draft.  Use a mid-round pick each year on a guy that maybe can't throw a 60-yard rope to the opposite sideline but he can process information extremely well, he succeeded in college with his decision-making, he was a leader, etc.  I think that's how I would do it.  Be willing to sacrifice one of the two major physical dimensions that scouts want, rushing like Jalen Hurts or throwing like Patrick Mahomes.  If you're willing to go after guys who might be B- instead of A+ in those areas but are smart QBs you might hit.  And, if you don't, you go back again the next year and take another one because you only used a 3rd round pick on the guy.  The league's QB history is littered with guys who weren't physical specimens with "supreme arm talent" but who became successful.  Guys who weren't the biggest or strongest like Purdy, Russell Wilson, Drew Brees, etc, have all gone to Super Bowls and none were taken in the Top 30 of the NFL Draft.

I'd rather take a swing three years in a row on QBs in Round 3, than sacrifice a Draft up top at #2 or #3 on a guy who simply has amazing physical traits.  JMHO.

way way overthinking this. Bring in a coach who knows what they are doing, and you get your QB, its that simple

[PFSIKH]

17 hours ago, Beerfish said:

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

Phil Perry of NBC Sports Boston did a little research on it.  He said it is not so much Top 5 as the demarcation line, but 1st round. 

For every Zach, Darnold, Trey Lance drafted in the Top 5, you have the Burrows, Lawrence and maybe Strouds who actually pan out. It is not that you cannot have the unicorn like Tom Brady, but QBs usually drafted outside the 1st can be good, but Top 5 is a rarity. 

Purdy is nice is he top 5?  Jalen Hurts?  

As both are teams can attest to, drafting a QB in the first is no guarantee.  Your chances are better though.

 

[Jetsfan80]

10 hours ago, jetstream23 said:

I've come to think about drafting QBs very differently in recent years.  The guys going in the Top 2 or 3 are thought to be near flawless, physically gifted run/pass guys with supreme "arm talent."  But most of the ones who have failed have done so because of what's between their ears, their inability to adapt to the speed of the game mentally (not physically) and deficiencies in reading coverages, going thru progressions, etc.

Darnold and Wilson supposedly had two of the better arms drafted in recent year and the ability to "make all the throws" that scouts and GMs covet.  Darnold throwing dimes in the rain at the USC Pro Day.  Wilson scrambling left and then throwing 60+ yards across the field to the end zone.  Impressive stuff similar to how a shooting star is impressive I guess.  In other words, it can be momentary and fleeting.

So why has a guy like Brock Purdy succeeded?  Why is the Jets best drafted QB in recent memory not the guy they took at #2, #3, or #5, but Chad Pennington taken #8 when many teams passed on him?  IMHO it's because of their mental makeup and their ability to simply make good decisions with the football.

So my new and improved "can't miss" strategy?  Don't take the guy who can make 95% of the throws by trading up into the Top 3 of the Draft.  Use a mid-round pick each year on a guy that maybe can't throw a 60-yard rope to the opposite sideline but he can process information extremely well, he succeeded in college with his decision-making, he was a leader, etc.  I think that's how I would do it.  Be willing to sacrifice one of the two major physical dimensions that scouts want, rushing like Jalen Hurts or throwing like Patrick Mahomes.  If you're willing to go after guys who might be B- instead of A+ in those areas but are smart QBs you might hit.  And, if you don't, you go back again the next year and take another one because you only used a 3rd round pick on the guy.  The league's QB history is littered with guys who weren't physical specimens with "supreme arm talent" but who became successful.  Guys who weren't the biggest or strongest like Purdy, Russell Wilson, Drew Brees, etc, have all gone to Super Bowls and none were taken in the Top 30 of the NFL Draft.

I'd rather take a swing three years in a row on QBs in Round 3, than sacrifice a Draft up top at #2 or #3 on a guy who simply has amazing physical traits.  JMHO.

Purdy has made people go too far in the direction of “just use midround picks to find your guy”.  

Yes, the 1st/2nd round is littered with busts.  It’s also got the overwhelming majority of success stories.  The mid-late rounds (3-7) have produced just 4 solid starters in the last 15+ years:  Russell Wilson (2012 - 3rd), Cousins (2012 - 4th), Dak (2016 - 4th) and Purdy (2022 - 7th).  That’s it - end of list.  That’s less than 1 every 3 years, and under a 5 % overall hit rate in that span.  Tyrod Taylor, Nick Foles, Jacoby Brissett and Gardner Minshew are or have been "useful starters/high end QB2s"  you can add to that list as well if you wish.

And are we even sold that Purdy is a FQB yet?  I’m not.   Wilson, Cousins and Dak have their warts too.  

Look, I’m all for taking shots at lottery ticket QBs whenever you like a guy.  But relying on that as your entire strategy with QBs?  No.  Hell no.  

We know there’s very few ways to determine if a QB has the processing speed to cut it in the league but we also know you still need upside to contend for titles.  The top guys have the processing speed AND several other elite attributes that separate themselves and their teams from the rest of the pack.  And you’re just not going to find that guy in the middle rounds.  

A 41 % “hit” rate or 21 % “elite/solid” rate in round 1 that the article posted posits is still far better than the minuscule hit rate in Rds 3-7.

[varjet]

19 hours 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. 

I think you pick 11-32 and miss I give you another chance.

Miss 1-10 maybe I don’t.   

[UntouchableCrew]

16 hours ago, OtherwiseHappyinLife said:

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

He passed for like 100 yards in a game where the defense practically shutout a really good Chargers team. He was good in that Pats game -- but again the defense shut down the MVP of the league, GOAT Tom Brady for the majority of the game. People around here are insane, pretending this dude was slinging the ball around leading the team to victory.

16 hours ago, OtherwiseHappyinLife said:

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.

Does your memory recall that he was shutout in the first half and had a devastating strip sack? "Never got Sanchez the ball back" an utterly laughable phrase.

16 hours ago, OtherwiseHappyinLife said:

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.  

He did. He's associated with good times and seems like a good dude. But he's not why we won, he was along for the ride -- his best contribution is that unlike most of his career he didn't turn the ball over like crazy in the playoffs.

[Jet Nut]

So when I tell someone who posts JD is an idiot for missing on ZW and I respond that 85% of QBs miss and then are called out for defending JD I need to repost this?  

Thank you

[rangerous]

17 hours ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

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. 

True but another factor to consider is if the guy was a four year starter and graduated.  Note that all of the mentioned jet QBs were underclassmen or not four year starters when they were drafted.  Not good.

[Flea Flicking Frank]

2 minutes ago, rangerous said:

True but another factor to consider is if the guy was a four year starter and graduated.  Note that all of the mentioned jet QBs were underclassmen or not four year starters when they were drafted.  Not good.

The Jets have nobody in the building who knows what they are looking at when it comes to the QB, I have been saying this for years. Their first offensive hire was MLF, who was an offensive assistant and never developed or even was a part of the development of a QB before. Successful teams have coaches who know what they are looking for at the QB position, the Jets have not had that in a very long time, and therefore have not had a QB in a very long time, the rest is an exercise in excuses

[jetsfan56]

George Young used to say that if you were wrong on a qb it cost your franchise 3-5 years. Niners lucked out on the Lance miss due to an irrelevant pick (pun intended) . Parcells always wanted a guy who had played 4 years in college which leaves out some of the poor choices being discussed. Wash took Griffin in the 1st round and Cousins in a later round in the same draft and most called them crazy, later pick turned out the better player. The single game record holder for td’s in Green Bay signed a big FA contract in Seattle and lost his job to a 3rd round rookie. Can’t just throw all the marbles at a young kid and depend on him to carry a team, history has proven that it doesn’t work out very often. Need options 🤷‍♂️


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[funaz]

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

He has the most playoff wins in franchise history.

He is far from a miss. Not great but much better than everyone else by leaps and bounds


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[OtherwiseHappyinLife]

2 hours ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Does your memory recall that he was shutout in the first half and had a devastating strip sack? "Never got Sanchez the ball back" an utterly laughable phrase.

I’ll never debate the side he was a good QB.  Just adding context why some have some positive memories of him as a winner during the playoff runs.  Not regular season.

I truly believe if the Jets got the ball back late vs Pitt, Sanchez leads us on a game winning drive on the way to the SB.  He was a key driver in that second half comeback that fell short.  So my point is he had some clutch moments in the playoffs.

Since the world is often split into halves, I’ll show my independent side by stating I was very happy when the Jets got rid of Sanchez.  Very happy.  He was not a good QB overall.  

[Barry McCockinner]

4 minutes ago, funaz said:

He has the most playoff wins in franchise history.

He is far from a miss. Not great but much better than everyone else by leaps and bounds


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

Sanchez played his best ball in the playoffs but he was by and large just along for the ride. Those teams were stacked outside of QB.

It's hard for people to process because they're conditioned to believe football games are QB vs QB and they incorrectly assign W/L to QBs.

[jetstream23]

6 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Purdy has made people go too far in the direction of “just use midround picks to find your guy”.  

Yes, the 1st/2nd round is littered with busts.  It’s also got the overwhelming majority of success stories.  The mid-late rounds (3-7) have produced just 4 solid starters in the last 15+ years:  Russell Wilson (2012 - 3rd), Cousins (2012 - 4th), Dak (2016 - 4th) and Purdy (2022 - 7th).  That’s it - end of list.  That’s less than 1 every 3 years, and under a 5 % overall hit rate in that span.  Tyrod Taylor, Nick Foles, Jacoby Brissett and Gardner Minshew are or have been "useful starters/high end QB2s"  you can add to that list as well if you wish.

And are we even sold that Purdy is a FQB yet?  I’m not.   Wilson, Cousins and Dak have their warts too.  

Look, I’m all for taking shots at lottery ticket QBs whenever you like a guy.  But relying on that as your entire strategy with QBs?  No.  Hell no.  

We know there’s very few ways to determine if a QB has the processing speed to cut it in the league but we also know you still need upside to contend for titles.  The top guys have the processing speed AND several other elite attributes that separate themselves and their teams from the rest of the pack.  And you’re just not going to find that guy in the middle rounds.  

A 41 % “hit” rate or 21 % “elite/solid” rate in round 1 that the article posted posits is still far better than the minuscule hit rate in Rds 3-7.

Good post.  I think it's more of the ROI I'm focusing on.  And this is clearly lopsided for the Jets but using #2, #3, and #5 picks that don't even see second contracts (or shouldn't have in Sanchez's case) just seems so wasteful.  I'd almost rather accumulate that kind of Draft capital and do what the Jets did but for a younger version of Aaron Rodgers.  Go get the guy who has played for a few years successfully and overpay with Draft compensation if you need to.  Now, young franchise QBs are very, very rarely made available in a trade, but we've seen things happen (ex. Watson).  The Jets have simply squandered so many opportunities and have proven to literally no one that they can either select OR develop a young QB.  If that continues to be the case then it doesn't matter where in the Draft you take him.  

[dcJet]

All those turnovers.  He was a fumbling machine.  He couldn't sense the rush.

Ints.  He was color blind like early Vinny.

 

He single-handedly cost Philly a sure playoff spot after we traded him.  

 

 

[bicketybam]

4 hours ago, funaz said:

He has the most playoff wins in franchise history.

He is far from a miss. Not great but much better than everyone else by leaps and bounds


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

It's funny. When people used to use Wilson's W/L record to support their arguments, people screamed that W/L was a team stat and not a QB stat. Why doesn't that apply when we talk about Sanchez? It should. Sanchez was not a good QB by any metric. His passer rating as a Jet was 71.1!! 

[Beerfish]

7 hours ago, PFSIKH said:

Phil Perry of NBC Sports Boston did a little research on it.  He said it is not so much Top 5 as the demarcation line, but 1st round. 

For every Zach, Darnold, Trey Lance drafted in the Top 5, you have the Burrows, Lawrence and maybe Strouds who actually pan out. It is not that you cannot have the unicorn like Tom Brady, but QBs usually drafted outside the 1st can be good, but Top 5 is a rarity. 

Purdy is nice is he top 5?  Jalen Hurts?  

As both are teams can attest to, drafting a QB in the first is no guarantee.  Your chances are better though.

 

But the cost of trade ups and worth is a huge factor as well.

Missing on a QB like Zach Wilson at 2 overall is bad.

Missing on a QB 2nd overall after trading up and using lots of resources is a disaster.

[PFSIKH]

54 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

But the cost of trade ups and worth is a huge factor as well.

Missing on a QB like Zach Wilson at 2 overall is bad.

Missing on a QB 2nd overall after trading up and using lots of resources is a disaster.

**cough cough**  Trey Lance

Think how f'd the 49ers would have been if they did not draft Purdy in the 7th.

[Jetsfan80]

1 hour ago, jetstream23 said:

Good post.  I think it's more of the ROI I'm focusing on.  And this is clearly lopsided for the Jets but using #2, #3, and #5 picks that don't even see second contracts (or shouldn't have in Sanchez's case) just seems so wasteful.  I'd almost rather accumulate that kind of Draft capital and do what the Jets did but for a younger version of Aaron Rodgers.  Go get the guy who has played for a few years successfully and overpay with Draft compensation if you need to.  Now, young franchise QBs are very, very rarely made available in a trade, but we've seen things happen (ex. Watson).  The Jets have simply squandered so many opportunities and have proven to literally no one that they can either select OR develop a young QB.  If that continues to be the case then it doesn't matter where in the Draft you take him.  

The problem wasn't so much that the Jets used high picks on QBs that failed.  It's that they refused to "fail quickly" with said QBs.  Douglas allowed Zach Wilson to jettison 3 straight seasons as the unquestioned QB1 for his first 2 years and unquestioned QB2 in 2023 without bringing in any competition for those jobs.

The bolded last line of your post is what is significant here when it comes to QBs, adapted for the reverse scenario (I.E. using up a lot of draft capital to find one that works out):  Once you find your QB, no one cares what it took to get him.  That was the philosophy Brandon Beane utilized when he traded up 5 spots to take Josh Allen.  If it doesn't work out - he's gone anyways.  If it does - no one cares what they gave up to get him.  ROI doesn't matter much for QBs.  You just have to recognize quickly when someone doesn't have it, regardless of draft position. 

[Flea Flicking Frank]

2 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

The problem wasn't so much that the Jets used high picks on QBs that failed.  It's that they refused to "fail quickly" with said QBs.  Douglas allowed Zach Wilson to jettison 3 straight seasons as the unquestioned QB1 for his first 2 years and unquestioned QB2 in 2023 without bringing in any competition for those jobs.

The bolded last line of your post is what is significant here when it comes to QBs, adapted for the reverse scenario (I.E. using up a lot of draft capital to find one that works out):  Once you find your QB, no one cares what it took to get him.  That was the philosophy Brandon Beane utilized when he traded up 5 spots to take Josh Allen.  If it doesn't work out - he's gone anyways.  If it does - no one cares what they gave up to get him.  ROI doesn't matter much for QBs.  You just have to recognize quickly when someone doesn't have it, regardless of draft position. 

as usual, you are completely wrong on every level again...

The first problem is giving a bunch of morons the reigns who have no idea of what they are doing, and letting them draft a highly drafted QB. 

Andy Reid would not have failed on his highly drafted QB, neither will Sean Peyton.

ZW was given two seasons, not 3, last year they traded for a HOF QB, you don't do that if you believe in your QB

In your model, Allen would not have gotten a 2nd year, as you were so convinced he was terrible and would always be terrible, you guaranteed it on these very boards.

The difference is they had real coaching, who knnew what they were doing and fixed Allens flaws.

We have a bucnh of morons that if given another high draft pick, will 100% fail with that one as well.

The real problem is bringing in incompetent coaches yet again, its the Jets way, but instaed of blaming the incompetent coaches, you and your ICP blame the young QB who did not ask to be drafted here