This has been pointed out to you over and over again, but you still ignore it. The success rate on
second round picks is much, much higher than 18%. Your odds of drafting a
Pro Bowler between 30-45 are about 20%, but I hope you're smart enough not to be claiming that only Pro Bowlers are successful draft picks. Anyways, if you ever decide to check up on the facts, feel free to go here:
Advanced NFL Stats: Career Success by Draft Order
As you can see, the average second round pick starts in the NFL for 2.5-3 years, and does so at a very reasonably salary. For teams that draft well, the picture looks even better. Also note that your odds of drafting a future Pro Bowler between picks 30 and 45 are about the same as drafting one at #16 overall. Second round picks are extremely valuable.
Could you please point out where you get that 18% from? I'm assuming that it's just the 'success' odds of all draft picks, with no regard for round, but whatever it is, I'm fairly certain that you're misapplying it. We could clear that up very quickly if you show us where you got it.
The question started out to be would Cooley help us. I brought this up weeks ago. Think Clark or Whitten to a lesser degree. How is this 18%?-Simple; 7 Draft picks per team as usual. 18% success rate within three years if the player is 1) Quality long term starter, 2) Long term higher profile contributor (K, KR. P, solid rotation player), or 3) Pro Bowl worthy or the highest success rate. It can be a first round, second third or seventh. You take your pick. You state that a second rounder starts 2.5-3 in the second year. On an average, this is true but if you document our weakness in the Draft in the second round it evens out. We do better in later rounds. A University of Illinois study suggested only 14.8%. The 18% success rate (actually predicted 17.7%) at 20% higher, is approximate to a realistic 2010 roster by refined draft technique within the last few years. Yes, the 18% success rate should rise as more evaluation processes increase.
My point is 43% of the top ten Draft choices in the first round will make at least 1 NFL Pro Bowl (Kraft Search Associates Inc.). But 57% do not. The percentage dwindle as the Draft round goes to a lower round until the 7th (I feel like I am doing a term paper!). But alas, I have checked my facts by statistics done by the corporate world on the success of the NFL Draft. So I guess I can back my statements up.
My point is that an NFL Draftee (yes from top to bottom and no I am not rattling off round by round but if you look at the Pats 2nd round picks the last half dozen years it would completely ruin your documentation of round 2 success especially in NE) has about an 18% rate of success (not just a roster filler and those points are negotiable). It's average and not Team specific. I am sure if we had seven first round picks, the success rate would be higher than 18% that's true. Look, we are splitting hairs. I have proved my point. Your additional information is credible as well. I am saying the following as fact:
AS EXAMPLE: You give me WR Brandon Marshall for a first rounder. Hate Marshall? Then give me DE/OLB Ray Edwards for #22 ( RFA 1).
TE Chris Cooley in a trade of some sort (player or pick)
DE Adam Carriker in a trade of some sort
OLB Chris Gocong (RFA 3) (SEE ABOVE)
ILB Andra Davis as an FA
And j
ust two of those top 53 choices, and this year and next I will have a better team than you will with your Draft of #22, #45, #47, #53. Take anyone on the board you want. My choices will be still young but proven and not all STARS as in Madden that some throw out like garbage. The percentage of success is increased substantially with those "trades" above rather than gamble on picks. Then you get to keep all of your present favorites on the Roster, where as I would move some of them for above if possible.
Davis, Gocong, Carriker and Cooley (two time Pro Bowler) are all very salary reasonable, and with escalation of current Draftees especially. Marshall and Edwards would be resigns so they would be much higher. All in all not bad money expended for the return on quality.
Living and dying to make your Team successful in year one or two of this years' Draft class is risky at best. If you want to see a better Team in 2013 you might be correct if we hit above average. In 2010 and 2011 even three or four decent hits does not make up for the holes and lack of positional talent.
Thanks for the retort and challenge Cousin. Hopefully you can see my compelling argument ("pointed out over and over"...?).
DW Toys
