Yesterday, I pointed out that since 1990, Kansas City had more All-Pro First Teamers, more Pro-Bowls and more seasons as a Primary Starter from rounds 3-7 combined than the team did in rounds one and two combined. I decided to see if that held true for the other 31 teams. But, the better question is why the Chiefs haven’t had a All-Pro First Teamer or Pro-Bowler from a single second round pick since 1990.
I was asked by a reader to determine if any other teams have had such bad results from second round draft picks over the same 21 seasons, so here is the answer.
COOL FACTOID: Kansas City is only one of two teams that have not produced a First Team All-Pro or a Pro Bowler from the second round since 1990. The other team is Cleveland. On the other extreme, Dallas has had nine First Team All-Pro selections 31 Pro Bowl selections from second round draft picks since 1990!
Obviously, when shut out (so to speak) on second round draft picks for 21 years, it’s going to have a direct affect on the number of wins the team produces during that time. But, that brings up the question as to the value of the second rounders.
I don’t think it takes a math degree to determine that second rounders are (on average) going to be more valuable than third rounders and less valuable than first rounders. What I wanted to do was to find a way to quantify the value of an average pick in each of the seven rounds.
Here are the number of player seasons for each of the seven rounds and for the three categories – First Team All-Pro selection, Pro-Bowl selection, Season Primary Starter. Also shown is the percentage of those picks for each category (example below table).
|
1st Team All-Pro |
Pro Bowls |
Primary Starter |
||||
|
# |
Pct |
# |
Pct |
# |
Pct |
|
| Round 1 |
202 |
56.1% |
667 |
51.7% |
2,976 |
31.5% |
| Round 2 |
64 |
17.8 |
243 |
18.9 |
2,066 |
21.8 |
| Round 3 |
39 |
10.8 |
141 |
10.9 |
1,372 |
14.5 |
| Round 4 |
17 |
4.7 |
62 |
4.8 |
1,093 |
11.6 |
| Round 5 |
22 |
6.1 |
80 |
6.2 |
761 |
8.0 |
| Round 6 |
11 |
3.1 |
64 |
5.0 |
617 |
6.5 |
| Round 7 |
5 |
1.4 |
32 |
2.5 |
575 |
6.1 |
| TOTAL |
360 |
100% |
1,289 |
100% |
9,460 |
100% |
Let me give you an example (bolded above) to help understand what the table shows. Suppose there were four players since 1990 that were drafted in the sixth round and made First Team All-Pro. One was selected five times and three other players were selected twice each. That would be a total of 11 selections for all sixth-rounders since 1990.
Since there have been 360 selections since 1990, that means round six accounts for 3.1% of them (11 / 360 = .031).
Unlike the case with the Chiefs where round one represents less than 50% of First Team All-Pro, the NFL gets 56% of its First Team All-Pro players from the first round.
Here are the Chiefs totals for this period of time split into two groups – Rounds 1-2 versus rounds 3-7.
|
Round |
All-Pro 1st Team |
Pro Bowls |
Seasons as Primary Starters |
|
1-2 |
7 |
23 |
113 |
|
3-7 |
8 |
25 |
136 |
It is worth pointing out that 3-7 is above average for KC and that 1-2 is below average. Take a look at the same thing for the NFL (all 32 teams).
|
Round |
All-Pro 1st Team |
Pro Bowls |
Seasons as Primary Starters |
|
1-2 |
266 |
910 |
5,042 |
|
3-7 |
94 |
379 |
4,418 |
You can clearly see that league-wide the value of first and second round picks combined far outweighs the value of round 3-7 picks – the opposite of the Chiefs.
———————-
THE MORAL OF THE STORY
It might be difficult to make too much of the Chiefs for All-Pro First Team or Pro Bowls because it only takes one Tony Gonzalez to affect those numbers. But, seasons as primary starters is a big enough sample size to learn from. It is noteworthy that Kansas City has fewer of those from round one or two picks (113) than from round three, four, five, six and seven picks (136). This is especially meaningful since the league as a whole clearly has more from rounds one and two (5,042 versus 4,418).
If a team were drafting with the intention that every player they picked had the potential to someday be in the Pro Bowl or to be All-Pro, then it would be essential to understand the ratios between rounds that I presented in the first table.
But, those ratios vary depending upon the three categories. If you are wanting a First Team All-Pro player with each draft pick, then the higher rounds have disproportionately more value. If all you want is a starter, then the lower rounds have disproportionately more value.
Either way, Kansas City has not received average value from Rounds 1+2 despite receiving above average value from Rounds 3-7. Most of the problem is from round two.
Here are all 32 teams in alphabetical order. Shown are the number of First Team All-Pro selections from second round picks and then the number of Pro Bowl selections from second round picks.
|
ARI |
0-8 |
DAL |
9-31 |
MIA |
3-9 |
PIT |
3-9 |
|
ATL |
3-15 |
DEN |
1-6 |
MIN |
0-2 |
SD |
2-9 |
|
BAL |
0-1 |
DET |
0-6 |
NE |
3-8 |
SF |
0-7 |
|
BUF |
0-6 |
GBY |
2-11 |
NO |
0-5 |
SEA |
4-12 |
|
CAR |
3-9 |
HOU |
0-2 |
NYG |
7-16 |
STL |
0-6 |
|
CHI |
6-7 |
IND |
3-5 |
NYJ |
0-1 |
TB |
3-6 |
|
CIN |
2-10 |
JAX |
2-4 |
OAK |
1-2 |
TEN |
2-3 |
|
CLE |
0-0 |
KC |
0-0 |
PHI |
5-13 |
WAS |
0-2 |
Martin Manley
Sports In Review
SportsInReview.com
Why are there no comments on SIR?
Subcribe to our RSS feed
Thanks for the information. I didn’t think any other team was as impotent as Kansas City in the second round, but I guess Cleveland is. Please don’t shoot me, but I wonder how far back Cleveland goes before it had a probowler or an all-pro player from the second round.
Spring:
Your request is my command. It’s actually pretty interesting. Both Cleveland AND Kansas City’s last pro-bowler drafted in the second round was 1990 – the year before I began this analysis.
And, almost as interesting, the last time Cleveland had a first-team All-Pro player from the second round was in 1988. For Kansas City, it was 1987.
Martin
That is interesting how round two makes the Chiefs totals completely different than the rest of the league as a whole. I’m assuming KC’s totals are also included in the league totals so the difference would be even a little bit more.
But, it is also encouraging that Kansas City has eight allpro first team selections and 25 pb selections from rounds 3-7. It appears to me the average team would 2.9 and 11.8. So, KC is a LOT better for those rounds.
CN:
KC’s totals ARE included in the league totals, so you are right, it’s a slightly bigger differential than it shows.
You are also right about the averages. Kansas City has eight first team All Pro selections from rounds 3-7 since 1991, but the league average is only 2.9. The Chiefs also have 25 Pro Bowl selections from rounds 3-7, but the average is 11.8.
So, just because they stink in round two doesn’t affect the other rounds.
Martin
The difference in round two between Dallas and Kansas City is huge. I wonder what the differences between the two would be for round 1 or rounds 3-7. I know you don’t have anything else to do now that you are not at the Star except answer our questions
GA:
Funny!
Actually, Kansas City is superior to Dallas in round one since 1990. KC has 7 first-team All-Pro selections and 23 Pro Bowl selections compared to 5 and 22.
KC also is superior to Dallas in rounds 3-7. The Chiefs have had 8 first-team All-Pro selections and 25 Pro Bowl selections compared to 5 and 16.
Feel free to ask me whatever you want. I’ll always try to find or figure out the answer.
Martin
Hey Martin,
This is really interesting – much more interesting than the stuff I hear on all the draft shows!! I confess initial surprise that the Chiefs have done mostly better overall than the rest of the league, but then I remembered the 90s when the Chiefs WERE better than most of the league – I wonder then, as you looked at the numbers was there a big dropoff in overall draft production after 1999 or so?? Thanks again – really enjoying the new site….
Hauke:
You make a very good point about the 90′s, but it’s almost wrong for me to try to answer your question. The reason I say that is because it takes about 10 years to maximize a draft (on average). What I mean is that after one year, you aren’t going to have many selections or starts from your draft picks. After two years, you will have more, three even more and so forth.
Here are all NFL seasons in which a player was a primary starter from all seven rounds.
2011 draftees, 49 primary starter seasons
2010 draftees, 106 primary starter seasons
2009 draftees, 177 primary starter seasons
2008 draftees, 242 primary starter seasons
2007 draftees, 316 primary starter seasons
2006 draftees, 330 primary starter seasons
2005 draftees, 459 primary starter seasons
2004 draftees, 522 primary starter seasons
2003 draftees, 554 primary starter seasons
2002 draftees, 553 primary starter seasons
2001 draftees, 597 primary starter seasons
After 10 years or so, it levels off. The point is that by comparing the 1990′s to the 2000′s it wouldn’t be fair to the 2000′s.
That’s the problem with drafts for people like me (and probably you and just about everyone else). You really don’t know exactly how good drafts are until well down the road. You might be able to know they suck if all the players are out of the league, but otherwise, it takes time to know just how good they are.
Martin
That is a great point that I had not considered… I agree with you on the draft being a bit complicated. It’s hard not to get excited/disappointed, but really you don’t have a clue (and I suspect, neither do the GMs/Coaches/Owners!!) for years to come. Thanks for the additional info!
This is awesome! Thanks so much for putting this together. I’d been thinking about these ratios all during the draft and it was driving me crazy.
What I really like doing is analyzing the comparative value of a player by round for the 3 success outcomes (all pro, pro bowl, primary starter). Looking at pro bowls a player drafted in the 1st round is X times more likely to go to a pro bowl in a given year than the other rounds as follows:
Round 2: 2.7
Round 3: 4.7
Round 4: 10.8
Round 5: 8.3
Round 6: 10.4
Round 7: 20.8
If I’m a good team, I use those ratios as my bible to draft and trade picks.
If I’m not a good team and I need a bunch of starters across the board, then I try to find many (hopefully rational) trade partners with good teams to take advantage of the different ratios for round 1 vs. other rounds for primary starters, which are:
Round 2: 1.4
Round 3: 2.2
Round 4: 2.7
Round 5: 3.9
Round 6: 4.8
Round 7: 5.2
The grid (based off Martin’s data) can be found at: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ak9DQaylNFGndFdfTFhFUUYyTnRrd0tLWmh1YlRMUXc&pli=1#gid=0
There are a bunch of follow on posts that could be done about this, like these numbers versus the fabled draft value chart vs. the actual data of traded picks (what round for what round & how many picks). You could then look at how teams have made trades versus their previous year’s records and see if the GM is doing the logically correct thing.
Michael:
Thanks for working up the ratios and chart!
You are absolutely right. That would make for an interesting analysis with the trade value chart and/or trades.
Thanks for the idea!
Martin
FYI, you should link to the article you did about the Chiefs (Rounds 4-7) where you provided the Chief’s data so that follow on readers can go from one to the other (IMHO).