I think most of you in this subforum are familiar with The Drafting Stage and if not this is taking some of their ideas, altering them slightly, and then updating their totals.
In terms of which positions they should focus on the obvious answer is QB if they believe in the prospect. QB is almost always the answer - it's easier to get in round 1 and it is by far the most valuable position in football. So let's leave that aside. I think for most people the next answers are either OT or WR.
We know WRs are more valuable producing wins but we also know that OTs are hard to find and you need a competent line to win consistently. LT is still more important than RT but RT only maybe 25% less important so it's still up there.
I was looking from 2011-2020 for hit rates of WR and OT. The buckets The Drafting Stage uses are as follows:
Small sample sizes as always. Also, I cheated a little for the top 10 picks of WRs as the 2021 and 2022 guys have already shown a lot so I added them.
What I am trying to do here is measure rookie contract production. For WRs I used yards per season benchmarks. For OTs I used PFF ratings - not ideal but the best we have. The drafting stage used second contracts - I wanted to avoid that and look at measurable production even if it just an aggregate of grades.
Wide Receivers:
Picks 1-10:
Rounds 2-3
Offensive Tackle:
Picks 1-10:
Rounds 2-3:
Here is the summary:
So while WR might be more valuable, it is much harder to find good tackles in rounds 2-3 and the Patriots need a tier 1-3 OT next year. Trent Brown is too unreliable and he isn't good for the culture.
You can still find top 20 WR types in rounds 2-3. It is at about half the hit rate of picks 1-10 but 27.6% is significantly higher than 15.6%.
I came into this thinking taking a game changing WR was the right move at the top of the draft but I think there is a persuasive argument that OT scarcity merits that position being taken first.
What do you all think?
In terms of which positions they should focus on the obvious answer is QB if they believe in the prospect. QB is almost always the answer - it's easier to get in round 1 and it is by far the most valuable position in football. So let's leave that aside. I think for most people the next answers are either OT or WR.
We know WRs are more valuable producing wins but we also know that OTs are hard to find and you need a competent line to win consistently. LT is still more important than RT but RT only maybe 25% less important so it's still up there.
I was looking from 2011-2020 for hit rates of WR and OT. The buckets The Drafting Stage uses are as follows:
- Top 10 - Elite Starter
- Top 15 - High Level Starter
- Top 20 - 2nd Level Starter
- Top 25 - Part Time Starter/Situational
- Top 30 - Part Time Starter/Situational
- Top 40 - Backup
- Top 50 - Stopgap
- Top 70 - Replacement Level
Small sample sizes as always. Also, I cheated a little for the top 10 picks of WRs as the 2021 and 2022 guys have already shown a lot so I added them.
What I am trying to do here is measure rookie contract production. For WRs I used yards per season benchmarks. For OTs I used PFF ratings - not ideal but the best we have. The drafting stage used second contracts - I wanted to avoid that and look at measurable production even if it just an aggregate of grades.
Wide Receivers:
Picks 1-10:
Rounds 2-3
Offensive Tackle:
Picks 1-10:
Rounds 2-3:
Here is the summary:
So while WR might be more valuable, it is much harder to find good tackles in rounds 2-3 and the Patriots need a tier 1-3 OT next year. Trent Brown is too unreliable and he isn't good for the culture.
You can still find top 20 WR types in rounds 2-3. It is at about half the hit rate of picks 1-10 but 27.6% is significantly higher than 15.6%.
I came into this thinking taking a game changing WR was the right move at the top of the draft but I think there is a persuasive argument that OT scarcity merits that position being taken first.
What do you all think?