Quandry Of The First Round WR

[Playmaker]

First Round WR's starting in the NFL
18 out of roughly 64 total.
28% of total starting WR's
Michael Crabtree
Larry Fitzgerald
Michael Floyd
DeMaryius Thomas
Dez Bryant
Andre Johnson
Percy Harvin
Dwayne Bowe
Calvin Johnson
A.J. Green
Kenny Britt
Roddy White
Julio Jones
Justin Blackmon
Jeremy Maclin
Santono Holmes
Hakeem Nicks
Reggie Wayne

Total First Round Picks (starting) at WR that have played in a Super Bowl
5 (Crabtree, Fitzgerald, Holmes, Nicks, Wayne)

Total First Round Picks (starting for original team) that have won a Super Bowl
3 (Homes, Nicks, Wayne)

Non First Round WR's that Started (for original team) in the NFL that have played in a Super Bowl
9
Anquan Boldin
Brandon Stokely
Greg Jennings
Peirre Garcon
Torry Smith
Victor Cruz
Mike Wallace
Marques Colston
Devery Henderson

Non First Round WR's that Started (for original team) and won a Super Bowl
6
Brandon Stokely (Baltimore)
Greg Jennings (Green Bay)
Torry Smith (Baltimore)
Victor Cruz (NY Gants)
Marques Colston & Devery Henderson (New Orleans)

So twice as many (active) non-first round WR's started for, and won a Super Bowl starting for their original team than first rounders did in the same situation. And nearly twice as many active non-first rounders started a Super Bowl (9) than active first rounders (5)

Furthermore 72% of the current starting WR's in the NFL are non-first round picks. I have always felt like the "Madden Generation" has over rated the WR position over the past 13 years or so. WR is nowhere near as important as what they think. Look at Calvin Johnson. For as hyped (and good) as he has been, he's played on one winning team in six years. He's played in one playoff game. If he was that much of a difference maker, wouldn't you think the Lions would be more successful?

What the winning teams have figured out is you have to have 3 good WR's instead of one great one. Look at Baltimore this year. Torry Smith, Jacoby Jones, and Anquan Boldin. None of these are Pro Bowl WR's at this point. But are all good at what they do. They have two middle round TE's that fill roles in Dennis Pita and Ed Dickson.

That is how to build the modern day WR/TE corps. It's like building a starting 5 in basketball. You have your Point Guard which is your Slot WR. Smaller than everyone else but a lot of the passing game now-a-days is at or inside of the hash marks. So a lot of the passing game runs through what he does. Then you have the Shooting Guard. That's your prototypical "possession WR" Someone that runs underneath routes, deep comebacks outside the numbers, and once and a while goes deep. Then you have you Small Forward. That is usually your best athlete, not necessarily your best player. He's your do it all guy. He's got to have size, speed, and be the red-zone threat. He runs the entire route tree. He is the guy you look to get the best match-up for. Then your have your Power Forward. This will usually be your TE. Especially your "move TE" He's your "20 and 10" guy in basketball. In football he is going to bang it around inside and then box out in the red zone. Then there is your Center. This could be a 2nd TE or a 4th WR. This is your dirty work guy. Stats are not going to be great. This is going to be the guy that converts 3rd downs, goes across the middle, etc...

 

[ReddingRam]

Great post and I concur with your thoughts. Very good read, thanks!

 

[-X-]

I agree with the premise and your findings, but I believe this Organization is at the point to where it has to attack the problem from every angle, while employing every available resource. You don't go through 30 receivers in 3 years (that's right - 30) without taking one in the first round, and not draw some sort of conclusion from that. Typically the better receivers are found in the first round.

Megatron's lack of team success notwithstanding, I'd take him any day, and I'd give up A LOT to get him.

 

[Playmaker]

I agree with the premise and your findings, but I believe this Organization is at the point to where it has to attack the problem from every angle, while employing every available resource. You don't go through 30 receivers in 3 years (that's right - 30) without taking one in the first round, and not draw some sort of conclusion from that. Typically the better receivers are found in the first round.

Megatron's lack of team success notwithstanding, I'd take him any day, and I'd give up A LOT to get him.

My philosophy is simple

#1. QB is the most important position on the team. But I would never pay the QB so much that it hurts the team.

#2. RB is non-essential to me. If I build a good Offensive Line and have a good QB, I can find RB's late in every draft to fill a role and cycle them out every 4 years without paying them much

#3. I would never spend a high pick on WR. Why spend a high pick on a player who will touch the ball 5-6 times a game?

#4. I'll never take a first round TE. Too many cases of good TE's in the middle rounds now-a-days

#5. I feel like if you build your offensive line right, you can get by with some lesser talent at RB and TE.

#6. feel like if you build your defensive line right (4-3 scheme) you can get by with lesser talent at LB.

#7. Linebacker is like RB. I can find a MLB to get 130 tackles a year every 3 drafts. If I put my LB's behind a good defensive line, I can go cheap at LB.

#8. I don't believe in the lockdown CB anymore. Rules favor the WR and the passing game. So like the WR position, give me a mix at CB. I want a bigger, physical CB that beats you up at the LOS and can jump with bigger WR's. I want a smaller, quicker CB that sticks in the WR's hip. I want a nickel CB that is a solid wrap-up tackler that can beat up the smaller slot WR's in the league

#9. At FS I want a ball hawk. I do not want two big box safeties. I want guys that can play the pass first. Give me a Center Field FS that then a SS that is a physical presence to any WR or TE that wants to come across the middle.

My order of importance (where I allocate my money).

#1. QB
#2. Weak Side DE (DRE)
#3. OLT
#4. Center
#5. 3-Technique DT
#6. OLG
#7. ORG
#8. Strong Side DE (DLE)
#9. CB
#10. FS
#11. ORT
#12. NT
#13. WR (#1 outsde the numbers WR)
#14. Nickel CB
#15. SS
#16. TE (Primary TE)
#17. MLB
#18. WR (Slot WR)
#19. CB (#2 CB)
#20. WLB
#21. RB (primary)
#22. WR (#2 WR outside the numbers)
#23. TE (second TE)
#24. FB
#25. RB (change of pace RB)

 

[bluecoconuts]

I wouldn't want to spend a high pick on any player unless I felt they as a player earned it. I'd spend a first overall for Calvin Johnson in a heartbeat. I'd spend a top 5 on AJ Green, and a top 10 on a Julio Jones. Dynamic players are hard to come by in any position.

 

[ReddingRam]

Just looking at our current roster ... we are no doubt going to draft another CB. Only 3 currently and Pointer listed as a DB. Johnson may or may not have some legal issues ... Rams HAVE to protect themselves. I'd be hot on Mathieu as he fits greatly with his versatility (CB, S, PR).

 

[iced]

I really don't like the comparisons. Almost feels like you're trying to make something out of nothing.

Calvin Johnson is a phenomenal receiver - And I do believe this man just broke and set records and goals...but most of them are single player records..

Is the offense the problem? No. The defense is - and how pathetic its been..

A better comparison would have been those offenses' outputs.

The most complete team usually wins the dance...and usually, only the most complete teams make it to the playoffs.


But I'll say this much - how much of those 1st round WR's that had a QB had bad offenses?

 

[-X-]

My philosophy is simple

#1. QB is the most important position on the team. But I would never pay the QB so much that it hurts the team.

#2. RB is non-essential to me. If I build a good Offensive Line and have a good QB, I can find RB's late in every draft to fill a role and cycle them out every 4 years without paying them much

#3. I would never spend a high pick on WR. Why spend a high pick on a player who will touch the ball 5-6 times a game?

#4. I'll never take a first round TE. Too many cases of good TE's in the middle rounds now-a-days

#5. I feel like if you build your offensive line right, you can get by with some lesser talent at RB and TE.

#6. feel like if you build your defensive line right (4-3 scheme) you can get by with lesser talent at LB.

#7. Linebacker is like RB. I can find a MLB to get 130 tackles a year every 3 drafts. If I put my LB's behind a good defensive line, I can go cheap at LB.

#8. I don't believe in the lockdown CB anymore. Rules favor the WR and the passing game. So like the WR position, give me a mix at CB. I want a bigger, physical CB that beats you up at the LOS and can jump with bigger WR's. I want a smaller, quicker CB that sticks in the WR's hip. I want a nickel CB that is a solid wrap-up tackler that can beat up the smaller slot WR's in the league

#9. At FS I want a ball hawk. I do not want two big box safeties. I want guys that can play the pass first. Give me a Center Field FS that then a SS that is a physical presence to any WR or TE that wants to come across the middle.

My order of importance (where I allocate my money).

#1. QB
#2. Weak Side DE (DRE)
#3. OLT
#4. Center
#5. 3-Technique DT
#6. OLG
#7. ORG
#8. Strong Side DE (DLE)
#9. CB
#10. FS
#11. ORT
#12. NT
#13. WR (#1 outsde the numbers WR)
#14. Nickel CB
#15. SS
#16. TE (Primary TE)
#17. MLB
#18. WR (Slot WR)
#19. CB (#2 CB)
#20. WLB
#21. RB (primary)
#22. WR (#2 WR outside the numbers)
#23. TE (second TE)
#24. FB
#25. RB (change of pace RB)

I agree with some of that. I'll address them point by point since you took the time yourself.

1. You'd be in the minority. The EXTREME minority. That's the one position you can't fill year in and year out with different players. You have to keep the one that can prove to be consistently good, and nearly every team in the league ends up paying the bulk of their cap space on that one position. The new CBA allows teams to defer that expense for a while, but it's inevitable. If SF or SEA wants to keep Kaepernick or Russell, then they're going to end up shelling out 7 figures when their contracts are up.

2. I agree.

3. If it's an area of need, or an area that can put you into contention, then I most certainly would. That's like saying the GSOT could have gotten by without the likes of Holt or Bruce in favor of guys like Looker or McDonald or Bennett. I realize Isaac Bruce was a 2nd rounder, but just barely.

4. I tend to agree with that as well.

5. True

6. Depends on the scheme. Not entirely true and not applicable to every team. This one? Not true.

7. Not sure what to derive from that. Sounds like fantasy or wishful thinking to me.

8. That's your preference, but I'd put a very high premium on a lockdown corner. Very high.

9. I agree.

Our order of importance is a bit different, but no real extraordinary differences. I'll also once against point out the discrepancy between your reluctance to pay a QB a high premium, and having him ranked #1 overall in the area of importance. I assume you'd try to be smart with his salary, and try to make it commensurate with his production, but in the end you're going to have to bend over and take it if you want to keep him. That, or you better have one hell of a backup (Kurt Warner). But even that's a crap shoot.

 

[Stranger]

First Round WR's starting in the NFL
18 out of roughly 64 total.
28% of total starting WR's
Michael Crabtree
Larry Fitzgerald
Michael Floyd
DeMaryius Thomas
Dez Bryant
Andre Johnson
Percy Harvin
Dwayne Bowe
Calvin Johnson
A.J. Green
Kenny Britt
Roddy White
Julio Jones
Justin Blackmon
Jeremy Maclin
Santono Holmes
Hakeem Nicks
Reggie Wayne

Total First Round Picks (starting) at WR that have played in a Super Bowl
5 (Crabtree, Fitzgerald, Holmes, Nicks, Wayne)

Total First Round Picks (starting for original team) that have won a Super Bowl
3 (Homes, Nicks, Wayne)

Non First Round WR's that Started (for original team) in the NFL that have played in a Super Bowl
9
Anquan Boldin
Brandon Stokely
Greg Jennings
Peirre Garcon
Torry Smith
Victor Cruz
Mike Wallace
Marques Colston
Devery Henderson

Non First Round WR's that Started (for original team) and won a Super Bowl
6
Brandon Stokely (Baltimore)
Greg Jennings (Green Bay)
Torry Smith (Baltimore)
Victor Cruz (NY Gants)
Marques Colston & Devery Henderson (New Orleans)

So twice as many (active) non-first round WR's started for, and won a Super Bowl starting for their original team than first rounders did in the same situation. And nearly twice as many active non-first rounders started a Super Bowl (9) than active first rounders (5)

Furthermore 72% of the current starting WR's in the NFL are non-first round picks. I have always felt like the "Madden Generation" has over rated the WR position over the past 13 years or so. WR is nowhere near as important as what they think. Look at Calvin Johnson. For as hyped (and good) as he has been, he's played on one winning team in six years. He's played in one playoff game. If he was that much of a difference maker, wouldn't you think the Lions would be more successful?

What the winning teams have figured out is you have to have 3 good WR's instead of one great one. Look at Baltimore this year. Torry Smith, Jacoby Jones, and Anquan Boldin. None of these are Pro Bowl WR's at this point. But are all good at what they do. They have two middle round TE's that fill roles in Dennis Pita and Ed Dickson.

That is how to build the modern day WR/TE corps. It's like building a starting 5 in basketball. You have your Point Guard which is your Slot WR. Smaller than everyone else but a lot of the passing game now-a-days is at or inside of the hash marks. So a lot of the passing game runs through what he does. Then you have the Shooting Guard. That's your prototypical "possession WR" Someone that runs underneath routes, deep comebacks outside the numbers, and once and a while goes deep. Then you have you Small Forward. That is usually your best athlete, not necessarily your best player. He's your do it all guy. He's got to have size, speed, and be the red-zone threat. He runs the entire route tree. He is the guy you look to get the best match-up for. Then your have your Power Forward. This will usually be your TE. Especially your "move TE" He's your "20 and 10" guy in basketball. In football he is going to bang it around inside and then box out in the red zone. Then there is your Center. This could be a 2nd TE or a 4th WR. This is your dirty work guy. Stats are not going to be great. This is going to be the guy that converts 3rd downs, goes across the middle, etc...

Major rule in statistics: correlation does not mean causality. Hence, these statistics maybe interesting but one cannot conclude anything from them.

 

[RamFan503]

Major rule in statistics: correlation does not mean causality. Hence, these statistics maybe interesting but one cannot conclude anything from them.

Almost exactly what I was thinking.

Doesn't mean I don't like reading it though. It's an interesting perspective.

 

[kurtfaulk]

Major rule in statistics: correlation does not mean causality. Hence, these statistics maybe interesting but one cannot conclude anything from them.

Almost exactly what I was thinking.

Doesn't mean I don't like reading it though. It's an interesting perspective.

yeah but they don't mean anything unless you correlate them against the bust rates of all the other positions that were drafted in the 1st round.

even then it shouldn't influence who a team takes in the 1st round. Every player is unique, it's up to the team to work out if he will help them.

.

 

[jrry32]

Other than QB and pass rushers, no position is overwhelmingly important. That's why you should always draft the best value. If a WR is that, you draft him. Simple.

 

[RamFan503]

Major rule in statistics: correlation does not mean causality. Hence, these statistics maybe interesting but one cannot conclude anything from them.

Almost exactly what I was thinking.

Doesn't mean I don't like reading it though. It's an interesting perspective.

yeah but they don't mean anything unless you correlate them against the bust rates of all the other positions that were drafted in the 1st round.

even then it shouldn't influence who a team takes in the 1st round. Every player is unique, it's up to the team to work out if he will help them.

.

Agreed. I wasn't agreeing with the premise of the OP except that I think having three good receivers is a viable strategy. That's why I also dug what Interference noted.

I find stats interesting. If for no other reason than to see how many ways they can be construed. Y'know... you could take the first stat and say that what it really shows is that over a quarter of the WRs starting in the NFL were taken in the first round. There are 7 rounds plus UDFAs. Obviously by that stat, you would conclude that overwhelmingly, the most sure place to find a starting caliber WR is in the first round.

You could say that there is a 10% chance (on average) of pulling a starting WR if you pick after the 1st round or you could say that it is somewhere close to the following as you bump down the draft. Round 2 - 20% chance; Round 3 - 15% chance; Round 4 - 11% chance; Round 5 - 8%; Round 6 - 5%; Round 7 - 1%; UDFA - Fuhgetaboutit%

Even if those stats are accurate, which they are not, they are virtually useless from year to year. If a player is sitting there that you tagged as the best player for your team, you take him no matter what round you're in. Maybe some don't think that player should ever be a WR. That's cool.

All that said, I still like reading people's takes even if I don't agree with them. I also have fun with stats and the way people use them (I know I'm weird). I did like the OP's premise of the 3 good receivers vs 1 great one. I think it holds water. But if Calvin Johnson is sitting there and you're on the clock - you fucking take him.

Unfortunately, there is no sure fire stud WR in this draft. So if we don't go WR in the first, I won't be disappointed. Yeah - I'd love it if we got Tavon and he turned out to be a game changer. So all this back and forth is almost comical - and I don't mean you KF. Almost anytime someone uses stats to prove they are right, I just generally tune in and grin while I read it.

 

[Rabid Ram]

Major rule in statistics: correlation does not mean causality. Hence, these statistics maybe interesting but one cannot conclude anything from them.

Almost exactly what I was thinking.

Doesn't mean I don't like reading it though. It's an interesting perspective.

yeah but they don't mean anything unless you correlate them against the bust rates of all the other positions that were drafted in the 1st round.

even then it shouldn't influence who a team takes in the 1st round. Every player is unique, it's up to the team to work out if he will help them.

.

Agreed not just this but of course you have a chance of doubling statistics when you compare 1 rd vs 6 other rds there are many more taken in the other 5 then in 1st rd alone

 

[max]

I look at the draft as a balancing of impact level and bust probability.

By way of example, the WR position is of moderate impact, not as important as QB or LOT, but more important than OG or RB. Unfortunately, the bust factor for WR is relatively very high. That means that although WRs bust at a higher frequency in the first round than most other positions, it just gets worse in the later rounds. Finding quality WRs in the 3rd round an later is a low probability exercise. If you want a quality WR, you need to address it in the 1st or 2nd round if you want to have a reasonable chance of success.

Do the Rams need to spend one of those 2 first rounders on a WR to get a quality WR? No. The 2nd round is acceptable. But practically speaking, if your sitting there in the 2nd half of the first round and a guy like Nicks or Harvin is staring you in the face, why wait one more round?

OTOH, with OGs, the bust factor is relatively low. You can get good ones after the 2nd round. So there is no need to spend a first rounder on one. And that's a big reason why teams don't usually draft OGs in the first round.

Then take the LOT position, they don't have a high bust rate, but because they are a high impact position, they go fast. If you wait until the 3rd round, the cupboard is bare.

The RB position doesn't have a high bust factor nor a high impact level, hence the only reason for drafting a RB in the first round is because he is very special. If not, it's not a good use of resources, I don't care how badly you need a RB.

Anyway, that's they way I see it, impact level and bust probability.

 

[Ram Quixote]

In some interview somewhere, Snead made the comment that the Draft is about players, not positions. In other words, the value of a player is tied to his measurables and intangibles, not where you plan to play him. At least if you're plan is to pick the BPA.

So, I don't find the OP's position all that compelling.

 

[max]

In some interview somewhere, Snead made the comment that the Draft is about players, not positions. In other words, the value of a player is tied to his measurables and intangibles, not where you plan to play him. At least if you're plan is to pick the BPA.

So, I don't find the OP's position all that compelling.

The OPs position is just that, a position. Certainly, there are different ways to build a championship team as evidenced by the different type of teams that have won the SB. The one constant is a quality QB, other than that it's a matter of style and playing to the strengths of the the HC and the environment of the home field. SB winning teams have had weaknesses in every other area. The Saints won a SB with weaknesses all through their defense. So did the Colts. The Giants won the SB with subpar LBs, and the Steelers won with superb LBs. The Giants won the SB with mostly lower round picks on their OL, and the Niners almost won with 3 first round picks on their OL. And so it goes.

What Snead said about measurables and intangibles, and what Demoff said about getting bigger, stronger, and faster, just means they want difference makers. Well, who doesn't want that? That doesn't mean they ignore the importance of a position when making their picks. And it doesn't mean they ignore how deep a draft is at certain positions or the bust rate implications of positions.

I give high marks to Snead for picking Givens in round 4. Historically, that's a pick with less than 10% chance of success. But they did draft a WR with the 33rd pick, as well. They know the odds of hitting on WRs. I highly doubt they thought Quick was the pure BPA at 33. They felt he was the best WR available, and they had a big need, and they knew if they waited the bust rate for WRs was just going to get worse.

Look at the Niners. The drafted AJ Jenkins 30th overall. No way he was the 30th BPA. Need, position importance, and bust rate were big factors in that selection.