Analysis: Drafting a QB in the 1st round
The question being asked around Baltimore among football fans is: If Boston College QB Matt Ryan falls to No. 8, should the Ravens pick him?
I've been writing about the draft on this blog since February, and the readership seems to be split. In a baltimoresun.com poll, 61 percent of you said yes, they should take Ryan, while 39 percent said no, the Ravens should pass.
I wanted to take a look at the success rate for quarterbacks taken in the first round to help you formulate an opinion. Make sure you check out Childs Walker's story from Sunday's Sun on this topic.
For my research, I looked at quarterbacks taken in the first round from 1995-2004. Here's the list:
2004
Eli Manning (No. 1 to San Diego -- traded to Giants)
Philip Rivers (No. 4 to Giants -- traded to San Diego)
Ben Roethlisberger (No. 11 to Pittsburgh)
J.P. Losman (No. 22 to Buffalo)
2003
Carson Palmer (No. 1 to Cincinnati)
Byron Leftwich (No. 7 to Jacksonville)
Kyle Boller (No. 19 to Baltimore)
Rex Grossman (No. 22 to Chicago)
2002
David Carr (No. 1 to Houston)
Joey Harrington (No. 3 to Detroit)
Patrick Ramsey (No. 32 to Washington)
2001
Michael Vick (No. 1 to Atlanta)
2000
Chad Pennington (No. 18 to the Jets)
1999
Tim Couch (No. 1 to Cleveland)
Donovan McNabb (No. 2 to Philadelphia)
Akili Smith (No. 3 to Cincinnati)
Daunte Culpepper (No. 11 to Minnesota)
Cade McNown (No. 12 to Chicago)
1998
Peyton Manning (No. 1 to Indianapolis)
Ryan Leaf (No. 2 to San Diego)
1997
Jim Druckenmiller (No. 26 to San Francisco)
1996
No QBs selected.
1995
Steve McNair (No. 3 to Houston)
Kerry Collins (No. 5 to Carolina)
By the numbers
23 - Number of quarterbacks drafted in the first round from 1995-2004.
8 - Number of quarterbacks that have been success stories: E. Manning, Rivers, Roethlisberger, Palmer, McNabb, Culpepper, P. Manning and McNair. You could probably make the case for Vick. He's a three-time Pro Bowler and led the Falcons to the conference championship in 2005 and the second round of the playoffs in 2003. But given the devastating effect he's had on the Falcons franchise, I don't think it's right to list him with the success stories. You could also make a case that Palmer (zero playoff wins) and maybe Culepper don't belong, but both have been among the league's elite at one time or another since they were drafted.
9 - Number of quarterbacks that have been serious disappointments: Boller, Leftwich, Carr, Harrington, Couch, Akili Smith, McNown, Leaf, Druckenmiller. Before Ravens fans start ripping me for Boller-hating, let me lay out the facts. He's thrown 45 touchdowns and 44 interceptions. He's never been considered better than mediocre. He has no playoff wins. And he hasn't come close to reaching a Pro Bowl. Now, I know some of you will argue that his lack of success has been due to a poor offensive line and poor coaching, etc., but the bottom line is he's been a disappointment.
3 - Number of quarterbacks who have won Super Bowls -- E. Manning, Roethlisberger, P. Manning. These three quarterbacks have been on the last three Super Bowl champs.
7 - Number of quarterbacks who have reached the Super Bowl -- add McNabb, McNair, Grossman, Collins.
10 -- Number of quarterbacks who have reached a conference championship game -- add Culpepper, Vick and Rivers.
13 -- Number of quarterbacks who have led their teams to the playoffs -- add Palmer, Leftwich and Pennington.
9 -- Number of quarterbacks who have made a Pro Bowl -- Rivers, Roethlisberger, Palmer, Vick, McNabb, Culpepper, Manning, McNair, Collins.
The best and worst
The 2004 draft was clearly the best group during the era I looked at. E. Manning and Roethlisberger have both already won Super Bowls, and Rivers has gone to the conference championship game. Roethlisberger and Rivers have made Pro Bowls.
The worst group was probably 2002, which produced Carr, Harrington and Ramsey (although he was the 32nd pick). A case could be made for 1999, which gave us Couch (No. 1), Akili Smith (No. 3) and McNown (No. 12). But that draft also gave us McNabb and Culpepper.
Rule of 11?
Obviously, you'd expect the higher picks to have more success than the lower first-round picks, but the correlation is pretty interesting. All eight of the quarterbacks I listed as success stories were taken among the top 11 picks. Rob Demovsky of the Green Bay Press Gazette wrote an interesting piece on this yesterday. According to Demovsky, in the last 20 drafts, there have been 42 quarterbacks selected after the 11th pick in the first round, and none has ever made a Pro Bowl.
Wrapping up
So there is the data. From 1995-2004, about one third of the quarterbacks taken in the first round turned out to be great picks. Just about the same amount (depending on who you're asking) turned out to be disappointments. So, what conclusions can we draw? Not many. On one hand, the past three quarterbacks on Super Bowl champs were taken in the first round. On the other hand, numbers indicate that teams have just as much of a chance choosing a dud as they do a great player. It's risky, but the payoff can be tremendous. And yes, it is possible to find a great one in the late rounds (Tom Brady, sixth round of 2000 draft).
Now that you've seen the numbers, is Ryan a no-brainer for the Ravens if he's there at No. 8? Or is he too much of a risk?
Comments
Too risky. How many SB victories vs how many busts going all the way back to Peyton? Not good. RB and WRs are also risky though.
Barry Sanders was my favorite player but never really was a threat to win a SB.
It takes a monster O line and a stout defense to give your team the best chance.
Average Qbs have proven to be capable when they have the surrounding talent, more than a HOF type offensive player trying to do too much.
Posted by: Jeremiah | April 21, 2008 10:55 AM
You bring interesting facts to consider but your flaw is as glaring as all the so called Ravens fans who blindly join the mob to bash Boller... which you admittedly provided more amo for.
Football is not golf or tennis. A QB does not win or lose a game, let alone a superbowl. You mention that Collins made the SB but not that he lost to a team led by Dilfer (also a 1st round pick but considered mediocre and probably a failure if it weren't for that ring). By the way, Boller was the starter for a playoff team, though injured that year. I'm sure if you consider injury you'll find others you listed having the same case.
My comment isn't to criticize your analysis (well that's not all it is). I'd also like to bring light to the reality behind the thought that drafting this great QB will take a team to the promiseland. It just isn't the case. The truth is, if Ryan falls to 8 then he will be the best player on the board at a position of relative need. In which case, the Ravens should take him. However, trading up for him is a mistake b/c the Ravens have lots of needs and there will be other players who could be top 3 picks still available (Ellis is just one that comes to mind).
Boller was never thought in the light that Ryan is currently, but his numbers are comparable with every QB the Ravens have had since he was drafted... including McNair. Any perception of him being a bust started with the bad decision to start him in the first game of his rookie year for a team looking at the playoffs. Sounds like many want them to do the same with Ryan. Get the pitchforks ready.
Last comment... if we're talking about success and failure on the football field than there's really no excuse to give Palmer and Culpepper credit but not Vick. He's had more success ON the field than either and the pro bowls to match them. Personal feelings aside, his effects on the Falcons only shows how horrible a team they are without him. He's one of the FEW cases where his ability alone made a significant difference. In terms of talent, if Ryan could be Vick this would be a no brainer.
Posted by: Will W | April 21, 2008 12:04 PM
The Ravens, if they are smart, should take Gholston with the 8th pick. Ryan, even though I think he could develop into a very good QB with the right organization, would be pushed into the spotlight (like Boller) and forced to do more than he can handle. The pressure that comes with a Top 10 QB is too great on the organization, look no further than Leinhart, who was much better in college than Ryan. Getting Gholston would mean you could either play him at OLB or DE and move Suggs back to the line. Thus creating depth at both positions. The Ravens can always pick up a QB in the second round. Henne, Brohm and Flacco all have good poise and a well-rounded skill set. Josh Johnson and Dennis Dixon can also be picked up in the later rounds for depth and packages can easily be made for them at other positions too. Our O-line is fine. Ogden is retiring. Wait, I thought that happened last year? But Mcgahee still had statisically his best year in the pro's. The young talented line will be fine. With nine picks at our disposal, we can certainly add some secondary depth. Prude,a late rounder, is coming along as a possible replacement at dime and remember, Landry wasn't a glamourous 1st or 2nd rounder either. If I had it my way. . .
8:Gholston -DE/OLB out of Ohio State
38:Brohm - QB out of Louisville
99:Godfrey- CB out of Iowa
106:Hubbard - WR out of Wisconsin
133:Finley - TE out of Oklahoma
173:Johnson - QB out of San Deigo
206:Dunlap - OT out of Auburn
215:Adams - S out of Michigan
240:Hall - MLB out of VA Tech
Posted by: Reagan Bryce | April 21, 2008 4:43 PM
Reagan Bryce-- Thats to say Gholston is still there at 8. I doubt it, I also doubt that the Ravens would go with Ryan if a guy like Ellis or Gholston IS there. Come on guys, all us Terps fans saw Matt Ryan get blown up by a mediocre Maryland defense last season. No way this guy is a 8th overall pick. New England sports-media bias strikes again.
Posted by: Justin | April 21, 2008 8:14 PM
rule of 11?
"42 quarterbacks selected after the 11th pick in the first round, and none has ever made a Pro Bowl."
Tom Brady never made the pro bowl? i don't even like the pats.
----
Chris--
That indicates from picks 12-32 in the FIRST ROUND, no Pro Bowlers have been selected. Brady was a sixth-round pick. Thanks for reading.
--Sheil
Posted by: chris b | April 22, 2008 12:37 AM
This type of analysis always fails to put the selections in any sort of context. You have to draft somebody, so you need to tell us how many, for instance, defensive ends selected in the first round (or within in the first 11 picks) won Super Bowls or went to Pro Bowls. Then we would know for sure which position is best to draft early in the first round. Eight out of 32 "successes" looks like a losing record, but maybe the first-round QB success rate is higher than that of cornerbacks, wide receivers, etc. Without having the same data for all other positions, the QB numbers are meaningless.
----
Marc,
You're absolutely right and this is something I thought of before writing the piece. The success rate of quarterbacks needs to be compared to other positions. I plan on doing that in the offseason.
--Sheil
Posted by: Marc | April 22, 2008 6:04 AM
Nice presentation. I found the "Rule of 11" particularly interesting. And regardless of who the Ravens pick, this is a critical draft, and Ozzie Newsome and Eric DeCosta better nail it, or else we're going to be paying the price for many years to come.
Posted by: skaybaltimore | April 22, 2008 8:13 AM
"...the readership seems to be split. In a baltimoresun.com poll, 61 percent of you said yes, they should take Ryan, while 39 percent said no...".
I'm sorry, am I wrong or does it look like the MAJORITY of the readers said yes to drafting Ryan. It doesn't look like a split to me (which by the way is 50-50). Clearly the readers want Ryan. I hate when writers don't get it right with simple math.
------
Bruce,
Maybe I should have said that readers don't overwhelmingly favor Ryan. You're right, it's not a perfect split.
--Sheil
Posted by: Bruce | April 22, 2008 9:08 AM
Sheil,
Good article. Ultimately most teams drafting a QB that high are doing so because they are bad teams. Putting those kind of expectations on a rookie (no matter how good) and then surrounding him with a bad team built by a bad organization is a recipe that naturally often leads to failure leading to more high draft picks.
Its actually surprising more of these QB's aren't busts.
Posted by: Bobbonner | April 22, 2008 7:09 PM