Best QBs since 1998: Just a little pre-draft exercise and QB discussion

[Deus Irae]

Peyton Manning came into the NFL in the year 1998. Starting with that year (and including Peyton, as a result), list the 10 best QBs to enter the NFL, and give their draft round (or UDFA if applicable).

Another interesting exercise is to note the QB (and round taken) who was the best of each draft class (including UDFAs, if applicable) over the same time period.

 

[Boomer B]

Tom Brady - 6
Peyton Manning - 1
Drew Brees - 2
Aaron Rodgers - 1
Ben Roethlisberger- 1
Russell Wilson - 3
Matt Ryan - 1
Philip Rivers - 1
Tony Romo - UDFA
Matt Stafford - 1

 

[supafly]

So, just to get the discussion moving, we’d have the following, not in any order:

Manning (first)
Rodgers (first)
Brees (first) EDIT: second, but at #32
Roethlisberger (first)
Ryan (first)
Brady (sixth)

Hard to come up with 4 more, because they’re all going to be ridiculous sub-par names that many won’t agree with, but I’d probably have to include guys like Rivers (first), Palmer (first), etc.

Who else? Surely, we don’t include Eli (first).

 

[Deus Irae]

So, just to get the discussion moving, we’d have the following, not in any order:

Manning (first)
Rodgers (first)
Brees (first)
Roethlisberger (first)
Ryan (first)
Brady (sixth)

Hard to come up with 4 more, because they’re all going to be ridiculous sub-par names that many won’t agree with, but I’d probably have to include guys like Rivers (first), Palmer (first), etc.

Who else? Surely, we don’t include Eli (first).

Not to slot any, but just to toss out some other names (Just a quick add, with all but Wilson being first rounders):

McNabb
Wilson
Luck
Flacco
Newton
Palmer

 

[supafly]

Not to slot any, but just to toss out some other names (Just a quick add, with all but Wilson being first rounders):

McNabb
Wilson
Luck
Flacco
Newton
Palmer

Definitely seems to be a common theme, here. Aside from Brady, Wilson in the 3rd would be the lowest selection.

 

[Deus Irae]

Definitely seems to be a common theme, here. Aside from Brady, Wilson in the 3rd would be the lowest selection.

And, yet, 4 of the top ten in Boomer's list are outside the first round (Brees - 2, Wilson - 3, Brady - 6, Romo - UDFA).

It seems to be a quirk of the system that you have the best chance of a hit in round one, but any hit can be a big hit

 

[Deus Irae]

My take on Best QB from each draft:

1998 - P. Manning - 1
1999 - McNabb - 1
2000 - Brady - 6
2001 - Brees - 2
2002 - Garrard - 4
2003 - Palmer - 1 (could have put Romo, but gave Palmer a bit of pre-injury credit)
2004 - Roethlisberger - 1
2005 - Rodgers - 1
2006 - Cutler - 1
2007 - Stanton - 2
2008 - Ryan - 1
2009 - Stafford - 1
2010 - Bradford - 1
2011 - Newton - 1
2012 - Wilson - 3 (with Luck missing last year, and Wilson continuing to improve, I give him the nod)
2013 - Smith - 2?, Glennon - 3?, Jones - 4? absolute train wreck of a QB draft
2014 - Derek Carr - 2 (JAG doesn't have the starts to compare, IMO, though others may disagree)
2015 - Mariota/Winston - 1
2016 - I'd say it's too soon to be sure, but put Wentz as the tentative leader (first round pick)
2017 - Too soon to even put up a tentative leader, IMO, though Watson (round 1) showed well


To me, and as of this moment only, that makes 7 of 18 years (I didn't include 2016 or 2017 as I consider them still open) where the best QB in the draft came after round 1. It's almost 50/50 (1 off, at 8 of 18) if you put Romo above Palmer.

And, whoa boy, some of those years were real dogs.

 

[TB_Helmet]

My take on Best QB from each draft:

1998 - P. Manning - 1
1999 - McNabb - 1
2000 - Brady - 6
2001 - Brees - 2
2002 - Garrard - 4
2003 - Palmer - 1 (could have put Romo, but gave Palmer a bit of pre-injury credit)
2004 - Roethlisberger - 1
2005 - Rodgers - 1
2006 - Cutler - 1
2007 - Stanton - 2
2008 - Ryan - 1
2009 - Stafford - 1
2010 - Bradford - 1
2011 - Newton - 1
2012 - Wilson - 3 (with Luck missing last year, and Wilson continuing to improve, I give him the nod)
2013 - Smith - 2?, Glennon - 3?, Jones - 4? absolute train wreck of a QB draft
2014 - Derek Carr - 2 (JAG doesn't have the starts to compare, IMO, though others may disagree)
2015 - Mariota/Winston - 1
2016 - I'd say it's too soon to be sure, but put Wentz as the tentative leader (first round pick)
2017 - Too soon to even put up a tentative leader, IMO, though Watson (round 1) showed well


To me, and as of this moment only, that makes 7 of 18 years (I didn't include 2016 or 2017 as I consider them still open) where the best QB in the draft came after round 1. It's almost 50/50 (1 off, at 8 of 18) if you put Romo above Palmer.

And, whoa boy, some of those years were real dogs.

Also it's worth noting where other QBs were taken in each of those drafts. In 2009, there were three QBs in round 1, one in round 2, one in round 4, and the rest were round 5 or later. So in cases where the best QB of a given draft came in round 1, it could be that this outcome was also the most probable because round 1 provided the largest pool of QBs (Edit: Also the case for 2011, 2010, 2008 (tie), and 2006; didn't check any others).

 

[Deus Irae]

Also it's worth noting where other QBs were taken in each of those drafts. In 2009, there were three QBs in round 1, one in round 2, one in round 4, and the rest were round 5 or later. So in cases where the best QB of a given draft came in round 1, it could be that this outcome was also the most probable because round 1 provided the largest pool of QBs (Edit: Also the case for 2011, 2010, 2008 (tie), and 2006; didn't check any others).

Looking at the years where I had a non-1st rounder as the best QB:

Brady - 7th QB taken overall, one of 5 in round 6 (most in the draft)
Brees - 2nd QB taken overall, one of 3 in round 2 (round 4 also had 3 taken)
Garrard - 5th QB taken overall, one of 2 in round 4 (3 taken in rounds 1 and 7, 4 in round 5)
Stanton - 5th QB taken overall, one of 3 in round 2 (most in the draft)
Wilson - 6th QB taken overall, one of 2 in round 3 (4 taken in round 1)
2013 disaster - Smith in round 2 and 2nd overall, Glennon in round 3 and 3rd overall, Jones in round 4 and 7th overall
Carr - 4th QB taken overall, one of 2 in round 2 (round 1 had 3 taken and round 6 had 5 taken)


So there's no real patter there, either. One could probably craft a decent argument about a "top X" QB, regardless of draft year, as how to get the best of any draft. That seems increasingly obvious as you start getting into a larger number for "X", though, so I'm not sure if that's something you'd find particularly helpful. You'd have to insist on a hard and fast "X" for that to have any real value (Imagine passing on Brady because your "X" was firmly at 6 for QBs...).

 

[Tony2046]

Interesting stuff Deus. Out of curiosity I went through and made a list of all the QB's that either won or lost a SB (EDIT: since 1995). IOW, QB's that made it to the SB.

Haven't gone through how each won or lost but I'd bet we could credit some wins via defense, some coaching and some by complete team.

Notes:

1. There are more Super Bowl winners from the bottom 14 of this list than the top 14.
2. Aside from Brady all the top multiple winning QB's are from the top 14.

Anyway hopefully this isn't OT and adds to the discussion.




Edit: Corrected the Trent Dilfer SB count error clawed ...er .. I mean caught by @SammyBlueCat .

 

[Deus Irae]

Interesting stuff Deus. Out of curiosity I went through and made a list of all the QB's that either won or lost a SB. IOW, QB's that made it to the SB.

Haven't gone through how each won or lost but I'd bet we could credit some wins via defense, some coaching and some by complete team.

Notes:

1. There are more Super Bowl winners from the bottom 14 of this list than the top 14.
2. Aside from Brady all the top multiple winning QB's are from the top 14.

Anyway hopefully this isn't OT and adds to the discussion.

Thanks for the idea, Tony, and I don't think you're taking us too far off the beaten path.

I have to admit that I'm confused by your list, though. It's got some QBs who were obviously around from before 1998 (i.e. O'Donnell), but not others (i.e. Montana). Could you clarify the parameters of your list for me, please? I'm missing something.

 

[supafly]

Interesting stuff Deus. Out of curiosity I went through and made a list of all the QB's that either won or lost a SB. IOW, QB's that made it to the SB.

Haven't gone through how each won or lost but I'd bet we could credit some wins via defense, some coaching and some by complete team.

Notes:

1. There are more Super Bowl winners from the bottom 14 of this list than the top 14.
2. Aside from Brady all the top multiple winning QB's are from the top 14.

Anyway hopefully this isn't OT and adds to the discussion.

Boy, I’m hoping that we can find the next Brad Johnson when we pick in the 9th round this year.

 

[Tony2046]

Thanks for the idea, Tony, and I don't think you're taking us too far off the beaten path.

I have to admit that I'm confused by your list, though. It's got some QBs who were obviously around from before 1998 (i.e. O'Donnell), but not others (i.e. Montana). Could you clarify the parameters of your list for me, please? I'm missing something.

Thanks. That list (and I should have clarified) is of all the Super Bowl winning or Losing QB's since 1995. I simply used the year after the salary cap was introduced as a cut off point. I was interested in seeing draft status vs SB participation.

Edit: I made that list before seeing your thread. But thought it might fit so added it.

 

[PittPatriot]

Boy, I’m hoping that we can find the next Brad Johnson when we pick in the 9th round this year.

Brad Johnson...Trent Dilfer...if it nets us a Super Bowl, I’ll take it.

I noticed on the lists that are presented, not much mention of Eli Manning. He has to be a top 15 quarterback of the last 20 years, correct? He has more Super Bowls than every quarterback except TB12 and Big Ben.

 

[patfanken]

Here are my conclusions on this topic.

1 Whoever becomes the next QB of the Patriots will NOT be as good as the current one.

2. That being said it has been proven over and over again that you don't need a great QB to get to the Superbowl IF you are a very good and well coached team.

3. Lats year might be the best example. Clearly the Pats had the better QB, but the Eagles had the better team talent. So in a close game,the team with the lesser can win.

4. So while it is OBVIOUS that it would be ideal to have the most physically talented player coming out of the draft, that ISN'T going to happen when you are picking at the end of each round on those years when the pricks at the league office even allow you to have a pick in the first round.

5. While it is hard, it has been proven that you CAN find guys who can become "capable" QB's in the draft.

6. THAT is the reality of what our expectations should be in the post Brady era. What we want each year is a competitive team who has the chance to go deep in the playoffs. Can be done without having a superstar QB. The Pats won 2 superbowls before Brady became elite, and they can do so again.....IF they continue to build solid WELL COACHED teams.

We may not get there as often without Brady, but we will get our shots without him. I think the way colleges are throwing the ball these days that it is more likely that we can find that "capable" QB eventually. Hopefully we can find one who can grow to be more than just "capable". But it will be a fools errand to expect Brady's replacement to be AS good as the GOAT. jumho

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

I think time after time, scouts and everyone else gets enamored with a prospects workouts and forgets to see who is a winner. Last year was a perfect example, Watson lost what 2 games in college, yet somehow the Bears traded away a fortune to draft a guy nobody ever heard of, and then KC drafts Mahomes. Watson was clearly the best QB coming out last year and as soon as he saw the field he showed it. The kid is a winner and will be for a long time. Brady was a winner in college, who people kept wanting to replace with a kid with a bigger arm. I remember saying that Jamarcus Russell was going to be the biggest draft bust ever, before his draft. he did nothing in college to make you think that he could carry a team. I don't give a rat's ass, how big of an arm you have, if you don't have the smarts, and if you don't inspire the guys around you, you are not going to be a great QB. Anyone who has ever played football at any level will tell you, if your team doesn't believe in your QB, you don't have a shot at winning.

Brees was a winner at Purdue. Peyton was not a winner at Tennessee, the year after he left, Tee Martin led basically the same team to a national championship. Wilson won at both Wisconsin and NC State.

Darnold, Rosen and Allen are not winners, Mayfield (for all his faults) at least is a winner. I look at Mayfield as a Brad Marchand type of player, a guy you love if he is on your team, and loathe if he is not. I don't think any of the QBs coming out this year are going to be great. I hope that the Pats beef up the defense and pass (pun intended) on a QB this year.

 

[RDS11]

The Bradys, Romos and Wilsons are exceptions because the scouts had doubts based on certain things : for Brady, it was the lack of commitment to him from his own coach (because Henson was the blue chip prospect they had to play so he wouldn't decide to play baseball exclusively), Romo was playing in Division II against inferior competition and Wilson wasn't 6 feet tall.

But otherwise, most good QBs are taken in the first round. Because it's such an important position, most teams are overdrafting QB, so in the 1st round we get guys that are true 1st rounder material, and then we get guys like Trubisky, probably a 3rd round talent that became a high draft pick because of the need at the position.

2. That being said it has been proven over and over again that you don't need a great QB to get to the Superbowl IF you are a very good and well coached team.

3. Lats year might be the best example. Clearly the Pats had the better QB, but the Eagles had the better team talent. So in a close game,the team with the lesser can win.

It's true to some extent. While a well coached team with good players can win any given game, there's a reason why the trio of Brady, Roethlisberger and P Manning have represented the AFC in 15 of the last 17 Super Bowls.

So from a GM perspective, while it seems to make sense to build a well balanced team all around, I can understand why some of them are investing very high draft capital trying to find the next great QB, or crippling their cap with an enormous contract to an above-average QB.

 

[patfanken]

The Bradys, Romos and Wilsons are exceptions because the scouts had doubts based on certain things : for Brady, it was the lack of commitment to him from his own coach (because Henson was the blue chip prospect they had to play so he wouldn't decide to play baseball exclusively), Romo was playing in Division II against inferior competition and Wilson wasn't 6 feet tall.

But otherwise, most good QBs are taken in the first round. Because it's such an important position, most teams are overdrafting QB, so in the 1st round we get guys that are true 1st rounder material, and then we get guys like Trubisky, probably a 3rd round talent that became a high draft pick because of the need at the position.



It's true to some extent. While a well coached team with good players can win any given game, there's a reason why the trio of Brady, Roethlisberger and P Manning have represented the AFC in 15 of the last 17 Super Bowls.

So from a GM perspective, while it seems to make sense to build a well balanced team all around, I can understand why some of them are investing very high draft capital trying to find the next great QB, or crippling their cap with an enormous contract to an above-average QB.

Bill will NEVER give up 4 quality picks for the chance to get just one guy, even if he is a QB.

One of the first pieces of advice I got when I got my first HCing job. It was, "football is a numbers game". It's not only what talent you have, but also how MUCH you have of it. I didn't understand it at the time, but you eventually come to realize the truth of that small saying.

Right now the Pats are on the edge another critical reboot, just like they had in 2010. That is why Bill eschewed picks last season to go for it all, and now wants to accumulate them this year. the Pats need to start to build that new layer of core players, and they have 5 good picks to do that.

So in the end, its a simple matter of players vs one, and the one isn't a sure thing. Its just not how Bill (or any other good program) builds a football team

 

[Froob]

Brady is just a product of Guerrero. Without him BB and Brady would be outta the league.

 

[Deus Irae]

The Bradys, Romos and Wilsons are exceptions because the scouts had doubts based on certain things : for Brady, it was the lack of commitment to him from his own coach (because Henson was the blue chip prospect they had to play so he wouldn't decide to play baseball exclusively), Romo was playing in Division II against inferior competition and Wilson wasn't 6 feet tall.

But that's going to be true of all players who get drafted after the so-called blue chips, right? A guy runs a slow time at the combine, and he's suddenly not a first round pick anymore. The question for GMs and scouts is how to look at a player who deviates from the perceived standard and know whether or not he's still worth taking. When does it matter than the QB is only 6' tall, or that the RB runs a bit too upright for a team's taste, or that the WR was busted by the police a few times in college?