Getting Straight Keynesian On Your …
Another economist, S.M. Olivia, who writes for the Mises Economics Blog takes looks at the NFL Draft and concludes that there are a number of reasons that payers contracts are as bloated as they are, also positing that first round Quarterbacks are generally an unwise business investment.
Of the 32 players who started the majority of the 2008 season at the quarterback position, the mean draft position was 90 and the median 62. (These averages are actually generous, since three starters went un-drafted, so for purposes of this analysis I assigned them one spot below the last player selected.) As for quarterbacks selected in the draft’s first round, the recent evidence suggests at least a 50% failure rate. Taking the 16 quarterbacks selected between 2002 and 2006 – that is, quarterbacks with three full playing seasons since the NFL expanded to 32 teams – only eight are still with the team that selected them, and only seven are considered starters today. (And two of these seven may lose their starting jobs before the season begins.)
For all the hype around Sanchez and the desire for him to be the franchise player, maybe it is hard to put a finger on, but for the very reason that pundits applauded the Jets draft, it’s the exact same reason to be concerned about how this affects the team’s cap and overall progress.
The Jets had two guys on the roster who would command below market wages for work that didn’t necessarily require they make top ten money. Now they don’t have that option, and they better get what they pay for … problem is, if you read the paragraph above, there’s a less than 50% chance that will happen.
Thanks to my boy Andy for sending this on …
Filed under: Links, Main Page, News
This is exactly why I thought going after Sanchez was a bad move.
I’ve been brainwashed by the media I guess because now I can’t help but be optimistic about our new shiny play toy
Gotta roll the dice w/ QB”s
I don’t think that the 2002-2006 sample size was necessarily intentionally cherry-picked, but if you factor in 07 (Quinn and Russell) and 08 (Ryan and Flacco), you get four more guys who are going to certainly be starting this year and are in no danger of losing their jobs, and no one who is already a bust. That’s not to say they’re all particularly good yet, but it does seem relevant. Additionally, if you factor in 01 (Vick) and 00 (Pennington), you get two more quarterbacks that have been consistently successful (notwithstanding federal charges and prison terms) and no busts.
I’m not trying to intentionally poke holes in the argument or cast aspersions, and I do think he makes a strong point regarding the failure possibilities. It just struck me that the timeframe he looked at was a particularly bad stretch. And I’m not saying I’d be happy if Sanchez turned out like Pennington, Vick or Russell, but I do think it’s fair to point out the difference between starter/contributor and outright worthless bust. For example, Heath Shuler and Trent Dilfer, the top two QBs in 94, are both considered busts, but one was passable enough to be carried to an SB, and the other was washed out in a couple of years from the league.
But then we also have to think about the likelihood than KC is successful: The percentage of successful 2nd round QB, successful 6th round QBs, and successful, undrafted FA QBs are all lower than the 50% success rate of a 1st round graded QB. Though they may cost less, it’s much closer to running in place, the lower the chances that your QB can be successful.
So right now, at QB, we’re in the best position that we’ve been in a long time. And it makes a lot of sense.
Heeeeey, now let’s just get something straight. Trent Dilfer wasn’t carried anywhere. That was great offense that underacheived but still made it to the SB, in no small part because of Dilfer.
Another thing to take into account is that the worst teams get the top picks. These teams are bad because they have bad players, bad coaches and/or bad management. Couple that with the fact that it’s a team game and these top QBs are thrown onto teams that just plain suck, and it’s difficult for that QB to succeed. It’s very important that a QB’s first few years are not spent in a dysfucntional system. Look, for example, at the draft where Manning, Rivers and Roethlisberger went in the first round — they all went to teams that had a rough prior year, but had good personnel and management already in place. And they all thrived. Aaron Rodgers wnet through his paces in a very good NFL system.
Now, I’m not saying that Akili Smith, David Klingler, Andre Ware or Joey Harrington would have been good if they weren’t on Cincinnati or Detroit, but the fact the Bengals and Lions were so badly coached and managed had a lot to do with their lack of success. When Tampa was horrible, they drafted Steve Young and Vinny Testeverde, who both struggled at Tampa. Their careers blossomed in different places.
Yet another article on how it would have been economically wise not to draft Sanchez and to keep KC and BR to fight it out for the starting role. Yea, maybe it would have been cheaper, but we wouldn’t have had a shot to make the playoffs in our division with those players, let alone even be Super Bowl Contenders. We aren’t Super Bowl contenders now, but at least Sanchez gives us that chance that we would have never gotten with these other two QBs.
You know what other team is economically wise? The Milwaukee Brewers. And, they’ve only won one pennant.
You can also look at it this way: How many of the QBs who went to the playoffs last season were selected in the 1st round?
Eli Manning, Peyton Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Joe Flacco, Chad Pennington, Matt Ryan, Donovan McNabb, Philip Rivers… thats 8 out of 12 QBs.
Guess, quick question here;
I just noticed the Bills took steroid freak Aaron Maybin over Brian Orakpo.
Where they high?
listen its a big risk that sometimes teams need to take, but i wish we could have found out what we had in clemens first. hopefully clemens will start this season.
relative to the lower round QBs it’s actually not that big of a risk. But it seems like we’re all on the same page that this article kind of looks past the reality of drafting at this position. So good. THE SAN MAN IS IN THE BUILDING!
Bundgaard, Kerry Collins was also a first round pick. So 9 of 12 playoff QBs were first rounders; only Kurt Warner (UDFA), Jake Delhomme (UDFA), and Tarvaris Jackson (2nd round) weren’t.
More to the point, more than half of last year’s playoff QBs (Eli, Peyton, Ben, Rivers, Ryan, McNabb and Collins) were Top Ten picks.
mmmm…Mises was the anti-Keynes.
As ridiculous as it is, McShay has a 2010 mock draft up. I am curious to see what he says about us and how far up we will be. Has has us above the Fish and Bills, at least in the top half.
But it is “insider” only… can someone copy/paste that for us, thanks!
I’m a strong believer that any QB can be successful given 2 conditions.
One, the QB has to be smart and dedicated. The Jets are pretty good in selecting players in that regard. So Sanchez probably is both smart and dedicated.
Second, a rookie/young QB has no NFL experience, so the rest of the team is going to have to carry him for a few years until he can develop.
Luckily for Sanchez, the Jets have a good O-line, assuming no injuries, and good running backs, who can run, catch, and block.
While the Jets don’t have a great receiver, Cotch and Keller are very good. While Stuckey, Smith, and Clowney have potential and have shown to have reliable hands (No Justin McStoneHands on the team).
I think the biggest concern I have about Sanchez has more to do with Schotty calling the plays. Maybe it was Mangini’s fault for the bad play calling last year, but Schotty has to take some blame. If Schotty expects Sanchez to come in and run every play like a 10 year veteran then the Jets are screwed and Sanchez will be a bust.
Walterfootball’s 2010 has us picking 12 and taking Dez Bryant. 12 is a little high for my taste but I wouldn’t expect to be picking 32 if I were you guys.
It may only be 50% of first rounders turn out decent, as the saying goes…You miss 100% of the chances you DON’T take…
The Jets were due to try another first round QB either this year or next.
yea Bassett, Mises and Keynes are the polar opposites of the economic spectrum!
I was hoping for the KC/BR battle this summer, and did feel bad for KC, because this probably means he wont be getting his shot to be the JETS starting QB for long; but then I came to my sense- realized the organization was hoping for KC to beat out CP last year, he couldnt, so the jets brought in Favre. Last year was KC shot, he couldn’t prove himself, so i dont feel as bad for him. So the Jets did the right thing, they got the man that impressed them, has the right tempermant to handle NY, and can play pretty well too.
A trade i would be interested in is T. Jones to cinci for ocho cinco and we throw in a 2-3rd. pick. They can use a good RB,
Why can’t we expect to be in the AFC Championship at least next year. Look at the Baltimore roster and tell me that they have a better team than us. You can’t, our defense is definitely more talented as a whole than Baltimore last year and our offense has more weapons than Baltimore has had. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO REASON WHY WE CAN’T MAKE IT TO THE BIG GAME THIS YEAR. Defense wins championships and we are going to dominate in the running game!
whooooaa, Jeff… give it some time buddy. The Ravens? Our new defense hasn’t played a down yet. And our QB is a rookie. Anything less than an entire season to gel is just flat out luck. Let’s just let the chips fall.
And go get our WR right now. lol.
Bassett, we know you didn’t/don’t like the Sanchez pick, but come on, what’s done is done man.
I have an article on my site that I wrote last year breaking down the success rates of players drafted at the various positions. I have to disagree somewhat about what he says.
Now I didnt go very in depth in what I put on the site and only did the first round, but here are the full numbers on the QBs. I looked at the drafts from 1997 thru 2006 and for QBs selected in the top 10 I came up with a 47% success rate(defined as not being a total bust), 33% went on to have good careers, and 25% would be pro bowl caliber players. I estimated at the time 15% of those taken will likely go to the Hall of Fame. They are producing players that also reach the conference championship games. The interesting stat came that basically almost all of your successful QBs are coming either in the top 11 choices in the NFL draft or are being found on the scrap heaps (a few UDFAs and a few 6th rounders).
Here are the numbers for the rest of the draft which is why I think the author is way off on not taking the top of the draft chance on a QB
Picks 11-32: 39% success rate, 6% pro bowlers
2nd round: 33% success rate, 16% pro bowlers
3rd round: 9% success rate, 0% pro bowlers
4th round: 14% success rate, 0% pro bowlers
5th round: 0% success rate; 0% pro bowlers
6th round: 17.3% success rate. 9% pro bowlers
7th round: 0% success rate, 0% pro bowlers
Just a few notes:
Almost all the productivity from 11-32 comes from pick 11. That has included Cutler, Culpepper, and Roethlisberger. The next best QB selected in that range is Chad…. The sample size of the 2nd round is very small (just 6 players that a judgement could be made on at that time) which I attributed to teams pushing 2nd round QBs into the late 1st round such as JP Losman and Rex Grossman. The last few years have seen the drafts trend more towards teams not jumping on players in round 1 and taking them in round 2. After no 2nd round QBs from 2002-2005 there have been 8 selected since 2006. None have been any good and 4 look to have lost their chance to be starters.
The 6th round has proven to be most interesting with Tom Brady and Matt Hasselbeck leading the way. Marc Bulger also was a pick in the 6th. Derek Anderson too. The question is does a team have the patience with them as Brady is the only guy to “hit” with the team that drafted him. More likely Id say you wont find your starter drafting here, but may find another teams.
The last thing I want to hear is words coming from some flaky economist. It’s like going to a “financial adviser or counselor” just to tell you that you need more money, then you have to pay some fee, a la “The Simpsons”. When they fix the monstrosity that is the salary of educators, then they have earned the right to talk garbage. Have them explain the salary given to Tommy Kelly and previously Gibril Wison. What would happen with guys like Kerry Rhodes, Polumalu, Ed Reed, etc. ?
True that 50% of QB’s drafted in the first round make it, but between 2004 and 07 only 6 out of 38 QB’s drafted after the first round became serviceable starters. So which odds do you like better?
I hate getting caught up in all of this stuff. Football is qualitative not quantitative. The variables are far too different for any mathematical equation to accurately predict a damn thing. This guy just wasted his time.
Another flaw in this argument is that, while QBs get a premium, every high draft pick is paid a tremendous amount of money relative to his potential production. I found this article interesting:
http://www.scoresreport.com/2009/04/17/which-position-is-the-safest-bet-in-the-first-round/
If you want to get a star at QB, a team has a 1 in 4 chance, but if you want just a starter, then the chances are below 50%. I think that this reflects the importance and difficulty of the position more than anything. But, as for the Jets, the alternate position that most fans wanted was WR. But, WR has a similar risk/reward profile. So, I would argue, that given the choice between a 1st round QB or WR, shouldn’t the choice be QB because the overall reward of getting a star QB is greater than getting a star WR?
So, I’ve seen folks criticize the pick, especially (for example and not to single him out) Bassett. But, if Bassett had his druthers, my guess is he would’ve wanted Crabtree at 5 or Maclin at 17. The problem is that WR is just as risky!
If you don’t want risk, then always trade down and always draft OL, DL and LB. The risk goes way down with those picks, but what is important to note is that the reward is usually no better. QB was a need for the Jets, the Jets acted aggressively to fill that need, and let’s hope that Sanchez is a star.
And, the consequences of any top ten first round pick failing (and 1/3 of all 1st rounders do not end up being starters) is devastating from a cap perspective. Look at the millstone that is VG’s contract and then let’s pray for him to become, at least, a starter or that there’s an uncapped year in 2010 to redo and clear out potential crushing dead money for 2011 and beyond.
wow. never expected to see a reference to Ludwig Mises on a Jets site. very impressive Andy.
If the Jets win a Superbowl or more in the coming years it will make all the economic sense in the world for this franchise. I’m so excited about the Jets right now that I’m looking to purchase Jets gear from drinking glasses to clothing (not just because of Sanchez, but the addition of Rex as well). I have to believe I’m not the only one that feels this way right now, so just imagine if they start winning!! Ka-ching!!
I was really disappointed when they traded up for Sanchez, though I felt a little better about it when I found out they didn’t give up so much (though trading away the starting DE with very little depth at that position makes me nervous). The economic thing doesn’t bother me as much as losing the draft picks. If you look at how the draft played out, they could have had two really good players at 17 and 52 – some combination of Freeman, Maclin, Pettigrew, Brown, McCoy and a host of others – instead of Sanchez. Given that there is a 50% bust rate with first round QBs, why not stand pat and pick Freeman and another player that would likely be decent, or simply go for Maclin (who most people said could NEVER fall to us at 17) and a good RB at 52? Of course, as a Jets fan, I’m behind Dirty Sanchez now that he’s on the team, but it doesn’t on paper seem to me to be the wisest move. You build the team through the draft. Hard to do with only 3 picks.
The ESPN AFC East blog just posted another mathematical formula thing, and this time it ranked Sanchez as the 3rd best draftee with this formula.
Gotta love math.
The only times the Jets have drafted a QB in the first round: Joe Namath, Richard Todd, Ken O’Brien, Chad Pennington, Mark Sanchez. In the Jets entire history, they have never made the playoffs unless their starting QB was drafted in the first round. Every playoff game (with the exception of those started by Pat Ryan, who was in for an ineffective Kenny O) was started by a first-round pick.
For what we gave up to get a Potential Franchez QB, in a weak draft, It’s a win win situation.
The perception in the NFL is that the Jets was one Franchise QB away from competing for the championship.
At the very minium Defensive Coordinators have to game plan against this Kid beacuse they don’t know what he can do on the field ,that will benefit the running game!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It wasn’t a weak draft. It was actually one of the strongest drafts ever, which is why I hate the Shonne Green trade. The draft this year just wasn’t as top heavy. Trust me. We’re going to be talking a lot in the NFL about players from later in this draft.
21. New York Jets — DeMarcus Granger, DT, Oklahoma
Granger is arguably the most talented defensive lineman in the country, but durability and character issues have prevented him from reaching his full potential to this point. A healthy and productive 2009 campaign could land him a spot in Round 1.
McShay’s thing has the Jets going to the playoffs
He has Terrence Cody going (DT Alabama) going to the Steeler’s. He’s a beast. I think I like him better than DeMarcus Granger.
He has the Pats picking 32 and the Eagles picking 31.
These economic models are as good as the ones that Bush used. If you play the probabilities you will end up a mediocre team. In football you have to take calculated RISKS. And I do not mean like the Favre risk. That was an extremely bad calculation or rather a bad business move!.
Everyone is touting the genius of teams like the Pats for getting out of this draft and into next years because this was a weak year. That seemed to be the general concensus from the “pros”
Our defense, on paper of course, should be a top five defense this year. Dirty just needs to manage the game and we can win it all guys. Come on just look at the 2000 Ravens and the 2002 Bucs.
You gotta roll the dice on a QB eventually. I don’t buy the total success rate, all you need is one. In the end, honestly if Stafford sucks and Sanchez is great, it will be 50% and we’ll end up with the winner. You gotta take the risk and I commend the organization for taking it. I just hope he pans out…
Bundgaard has it exactly right… you take the risk because when you do get it right, your odds increase dramatically of making the post season and getting to the superbowl and that’s what it is all about.
The draft is a crapshoot. If you have the chance to do so cheaply, (and the trade was CHEAP), you MUST roll the dice on a possible franchise QB.
Even if this doesn’t pan out it was the right decision.
Realistically we have a 1 in 32 chance of winning the SB.
I wanted to give Ratty and KC a hance this year then draft QB next if it didn’t pan out, but what’s done is done.
I am going pull for Sanchez and Greene to be big contributors to our success.
I hope Ainge is cut by June.
Go JETS!!!!!!
“Look at the millstone that is VG’s contract and then let’s pray for him to become, at least, a starter or that there’s an uncapped year in 2010 to redo and clear out potential crushing dead money for 2011 and beyond.”
Unfortunately, there are rules in place to stop teams cutting players and taking the dead money hit in the uncapped year. Apparently the dead money will count against the next year in which a cap applies. Let’s hope he can become a starter, or that there is some way out of the reported committed money if he never makes it (Jason believes/was hoping there may be).