Football Lifecycle by draft round

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by BSBEARS, May 18, 2014.

  1. BSBEARS

    BSBEARS Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,807
    Likes Received:
    631
    Ratings:
    +837 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    895ß
    • Like Like x 1
  2. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,298
    Likes Received:
    2,826
    Ratings:
    +3,406 / 9 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,586ß
    I looked at the charts, but didn't really read anything yet. The charts aren't surprising in the least, but part of that has to be b/c of the contracts and guaranteed money, and therefore the supposed "value" of higher round picks. But there is also the fact that the higher round picks are just better players also, more often then not please don't list the exceptions to that rule.

    Hub or Zach had a good stat right after the draft though, more UDFA's are in the HoF then first rounders, and like JABF pointed out, 30% of teams were made up of UDFA's last year. So there are some, at least, meat and potato's guys out there in the UDFA market if you can get them and coach em up.
  3. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston Position Coach

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,813
    Likes Received:
    1,403
    Ratings:
    +1,941 / 7 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,296ß
    Interesting, but they don't touch on UFDAs. Their impact may be higher than thr 6th and 7th round draft picks for a few reasons. First, they are much greater in number. There are only 64 6th and 7th rounds picks. Many hundreds of kids to pick as a UFDA, so consequently, their numbers may be higher because of their initial population.

    Secondly, every year there are kids that were rated as high as the 1st round in terms of talent that dropped and were not drafted. There is a pretty good pool of talent if you know how to sift through it. There are ALWAYS reasons why kids drop, but some can are are saved. Some are just kids that will always not get it.

    So between the higher numbers and the fact that the talent is there if you know how to look for it, it makes sense that there is a high percentage of UFDAs. This is ahuge part of the draft. It's basically a half day FA free for all at cut rate prices but with players that are unproven. You can win big and you don't have much skin in the game.
    • Like Like x 2
  4. BSBEARS

    BSBEARS Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,807
    Likes Received:
    631
    Ratings:
    +837 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    895ß
    Yeah I thought this really complimented the thread started on the 31% undrafted players.
  5. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99 Coordinator SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    9,586
    Likes Received:
    2,413
    Ratings:
    +2,775 / 3 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,357ß
    I think so too. In case it would be helpful, here's the link to the 10-year study that was done by Matt McGuire on WalterFootball.com a few years ago. It is older data. If I'm reading this correctly, they contend that over 40% of first round picks have been busts in the NFL for the data-years covered. I guess that for me, the bottom-line is that it is extremely tough to have a career in the NFL. Even a 1st round pick doesn't mean the guy is going to be a solid NFL player, and of course the odds are against you further as you are drafted later, or are a UDFA. That is one reason why I am amazed by how some players, who do have the talent to be a solid player, sometimes throw it all away on off-field stupid behavior. If I was a young draftable college kid I'd be a choirboy that last year of college. You have a lifetime to do stupid things - after - you get the fat NFL contract and have a nice career.

    LINK to the article

    Matt McGuire's NFL Draftology: The 10-Year NFL Draft Study: Round 1

    Here are numbers for the NFL Drafts from 1998-2007:

    [​IMG]
  6. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    4,946
    Likes Received:
    1,505
    Ratings:
    +1,914 / 7 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,760ß
    It comes out about as expected if not maybe a little too neat. The players in the first half of the draft rounds 1-4 have a little bit of an advantage not only because of the money invested but also the investment of the pick itself. GMs all have an ego or they wouldn't be GMs so giving up on higher draft picks is embarrassing so they'll get more time to prove themselves than a 7th round pick would get.

    What would be interesting is to see from the number of players drafted each year how many of those players actually made the opening day roster for the team that drafted them. What's the actual turnover rate of personnel in general and how much does it vary from year to year. What percentage of these guys actually make the team? Ten percent, twenty percent, one third?

Share This Page