Grading Drafts Early: Incomplete Science

Posted on by

May 3, 2023

by David Earl

Re-grading the 2023 Draft Class

I realize that the posts below are in Spanish, so only some will be able to read the text, but the two charts have valuable information.  The first chart shows a summary of grades for the 2024 draft, and the second shows the 2023 draft grades:

Looking back at the 2023 draft class, the Philadelphia Eagles returned with a perfect report card across all major sites as Howie Roseman continued to add talent. Pittsburg and Indianapolis were relatively similar in score but still distant from the Eagles while the scored varied wildly for the rest of the league.  How does this draft class score following the 2023 season (clearer image of 2023 grades above click here)?

  • Philadelphia Eagles (overall rank 1st): Ranked 19th  after the season. DT Jalen Carter was the most impactful, playing in 16 games, including 1 starting and was a rookie of the year finalist. Carter had 6 sacks, 2 forced fumbles, and 1 fumble recovery returned for a TD. Nolan Smith played more of a rotational piece ending the season with 1 sack and 3 quarterback hits while not giving the kind of first-round production you’d hope. Of the remaining seven drafted rookies, they all combined for 12 games started with 6 of those starts from S Sydney Brown (selected round 3).
  • Pittsburgh Steelers (overall rank 2nd): The 2023 overall second-ranked grade held up, as they still came in second after the 2023 season . The Steelers’ first 4 picks accounted for a total of 40 games started while appearing in all 17 games each to some degree. Their first-round selection, OT Broderick Jones, settled into the right tackle starting role with 11 starts and entered the 2024 season as their top right tackle. Joey Porter was a finalist for Defensive Rookie of the Year hauling 1 interception and allowing a 47.6% completion percentage against.
  • Detriot Lions (overall rank 25th): The Lions ranked in the bottom 3rd in grades immediately following the 2023 draft, but that grade flipped drastically following completion of the 2023 season. This class yielded 4 instant contributors in RB Jahmyr Gibbs, LB Jack Campbell, TE Sam LaPorta, and S Brian Branch. To get 1 productive starter, or maybe even 2, in the first three rounds would be a successful class, but the Lions’ first 4 selections all were key to the Lions’ run to the NFC Championship game.
  • Notable Mentions: Washington’s ranked one of the worst stood true as CB Emanuel Forbes (16th overall selection) struggled all season while they got zero impact from any of the offensive linemen drafted. Green Bay’s mid-range grade (15th overall)rose to the 4th overall grade, not only from production from WR Jayden Reed (50th overall selection) and LB Lukas Van Ness (13th overall selection) but also from a couple of day 3 selections.

When revisiting a draft class a year later the grades tend to be much different in some cases while remaining stable for others. As shown above, the initial grades were on point with Pittsburgh and Washington but flipped in the cases of Philadelphia and Detroit. Whether those grades use a consensus ranking of these players or their objective evaluation, the whole process is subjected to an individual drafting philosophy. Either way, a philosophy relying heavier on game film vs analytics or whatever degree of preference between both will ultimately dictate varying points of view.

Let’s narrow this down to a decision over the most important position in football, the quarterback. Entering the 1998 draft the debate was over Peyton Manning or Ryan Leaf and who should go number 1 overall. While Manning carried a legacy and pedigree from his father Archie Manning, Leaf was that big armed, gunslinging quarterback many teams coveted. During that time, it was reported that “the overwhelming pick was Leaf, who received 14 of the 20 votes,” among 20 league general managers, including Buffalo’s John Butler. Now imagine any of these 14 general managers running football operations for the Indianapolis Colts and selecting Ryan Leaf.

At the very heart, the evaluators themselves were not aligned so how can we take grades immediately following the draft too seriously? That isn’t a slight against those who grade, because they could have been correct while the teams could have failed in developing these players. Below is a great example of Washington’s recent draft being graded as one of the best yet below we see one polar opposite. Marcus Whitman gave the selection of Jayden Daniels a “D” grade, not because he isn’t talented but because the selection was not Drake Maye. He goes on but this is a result of giving immediate grades as Washington didn’t go off his subjective best player available board; thus, he gave Washington a poor grade, which he later mentions.

Time Plus Production in Grading

I think we can all agree just how subjective and flawed the immediate grading of drafts is and the draft class should be given time. Before I dive into this let’s look at some overall success rates from the draft. A column by SB Nation analyzed the draft results from 1996 to 2016 draft. During that time:

  • 37% had minimal to no impact while 16.7% never stayed with the team that drafted them
  • 15.3% of overall performance was poor and 10.3% were just about average.
  • Only about 30% saw ample playing time with 6.9% considered great players (1% Hall of Fame caliber careers).

As you see it is more likely than not that the majority of Washington’s draft class, based on this study, won’t be significant producers for the team. This also shows why early grading just makes no sense. Taking the grades posted above for the 2024 draft you’d initially think over half the league will have a large number of successful and productive draftees. For a more detailed breakdown, follow The Odds of Success for a Draft Pick series.

As far as giving an accurate assessment to grading a draft, time plus production are necessary to provide an honest evaluation.  Chase Young is a prime example of a highly graded player many labeled as a “Generational Talent” and Washington was given an early draft Grade of A; however, he is now on his third team in 2 years. Although voted Defensive Rookie of the Year, he was never that game-changing rusher like Nick Bosa. Turning the clock back two years brings up a prime example of allowing time and production to dictate a true grade. Bleacher Report called the Daron Payne selection at 13 a mistake, yet Payne found himself on a path to a long-term deal. Recording 11.5 sacks in his 5th year and being selected to the Pro Bowl, his production certainly earned him a second contract. Even with his sack production dropping to 4.5 sacks the year after, he still recorded 11 quarterback hits while being a strong presence against the run. Last season was also a lost year in many respects as the team was terrible in every aspect of the game.

The point here is that regardless of what evaluator or media outlet you follow, these early draft grades are as valuable as the paper they are written on. There will be prospects that a set of evaluators may regard as top 50 talent while others barely make their top 100 on their boards. A good organization will work its boards accordingly and sink or swim with the decision they make during the draft process. Look at Adam Peters in this draft with the 36th overall selection drafting DT Jer’Zhan Newton. Even as a player regarded by most as a mid-first-round pick and a steal potentially at 36, it’s the fact he passed on addressing the left tackle position that caused many to ridicule this selection. Not that Newton wasn’t the best player available by most; it was the fact that Peters ignored the offensive tackle position until the 3rd round (67th overall selection) when the team selected OT Brandon Coleman. While it’s a justified complaint after drafting your franchise quarterback at the 2nd overall selection, it will be time and production for Coleman that ultimately determines how poor or good of a decision Peters made in this selection.