As I mentioned in part one of this series, I have gone back and forth on the best use for draft picks. Is it better to make the picks and hope they turn out or is it better to trade them away for players who have shown something already in the NFL. While I’m not sure I can fully answer that, I decided to do a little investigation into exactly how often a draft pick turns into a fantasy starter to help myself and all of you be as informed as possible. The results of the general examination in part 1 showed that only about a fourth of all first and second round draft picks are actually “hits.” This is much lower than I expected.
I went back through the 2013-2017 draft classes and broke all of the players down into one of the following categories:
Stud: The name says it all. These players are the cream of the crop and what we hope every draft pick will become when we make those picks. These players are top 10 if not top 5 at their position multiple years in a row.
Starter: While these players might not be the best of the best, they are still likely to be an every week starter on most fantasy teams. For this examination, they needed to be at this level for multiple years.
Backup: These players are definitely on rosters, but they are nothing more than a spot starter, flex play, or an injury fill in. In a few cases they are players who have had one good year, but they haven’t been consistent enough to be counted upon.
Bust: Many of these players are out of the league. If they are still in the league, they have shown so little that they are often on the waiver wire or barely hanging on to the end of the bench spots in leagues.
In part two, I’m going to break this data down a little bit more to see what I can uncover in terms of draft position. Maybe there will be some trends and patterns we can use to our advantage when it comes to drafting. With that said, lets start breaking things down in a few different ways to see what we can find.
First vs Second Round Picks
Total: 60 picks for each round
First Round Studs: 12 Players or 20 percent of the time
First Round Starters: 9 Players or 15 percent of the time
Second Round Studs: 6 Players or 10 percent of the time
Second Round Starters: 5 Players or 8.3 percent of the time
As conventional wisdom would suggest, first round picks have a higher hit rate than second round picks. In fact, they hit about twice as often as the second round picks. First round picks hit at just over a third of the time while second round picks are a touch under one out of every five picks hitting. Lets break it down a little bit further. For the rest of the article, I’ll consider the studs and starters as both being “hits” in terms of the draft pick.
Early, Middle and Late First Round Hits
PREMIUM MEMBERSHIP REQUIRED
Gain Instant Access to this article and much more.
Join DLF with a Monthly Subscription or Annual Membership.
Or, open a DraftKings account for only $10 and receive a full year DLF PREMIUM FOR FREE!
Join DLF PremiumAlready a DLF Premium Member?
Log in now
Want more info about DLF Premium?
Find out more
Have questions or need some help?
Contact Us
Total: 12 studs and 9 starters
First 4 picks: 6 of the 12 studs (50 percent) and 5 of the 9 starters (55 percent). 11 out of the 20 players or 55 percent hit overall.
Middle 4 picks: 4 of the 12 studs (33 percent) and 2 of the 9 starters (22 percent). 6 out of the 20 players or 30 percent hit overall.
Last 4 picks: 2 of the 12 studs (17 percent) and 3 of the 9 starters (33 percent). 5 out of the 20 players or 25 percent hit overall.
While I’m sure we all expected the early first round to be the most productive part of the round, I was a little surprised that the first four picks were almost twice as productive when it comes to the overall hit rate at the rest of the first round. The middle and later parts of the first had very similar hit rates with the middle producing slightly better quality when it hits than the last part of the round.
Early, Middle and Late Second Round Hits
Total: 6 studs and 5 starters
First 4 picks: 2 of the 6 studs (33 percent) and 3 of the 5 starters (60 percent). 5 out of the 20 players or 25 percent hit overall.
Middle 4 picks: 1 of the 6 studs (17 percent) and 2 of the 5 starters (40 percent). 3 out of the 20 players or 15 percent hit overall.
Last 4 picks: 3 of the 6 studs (50 percent) and 0 of the 5 starters (0 percent). 3 out of the 20 players or 15 percent hit overall.
While the first round distribution made a lot of sense, the second round is a bit more scattered. Over the five years of the sample, half of the studs came from the last few picks of the round while the majority of the hits came from the first part of the round. This will be explained a little bit more in the positional breakdown in part three. The more important piece is the 15 percent hit rate for all but the first part of the second round. This is a pretty terrible return rate. I know some of us like to think we can be better than the norm, but the question is how much better? Even if you are twice as good as the norm, that is still less than one out of every three draft picks for the middle and later parts of the second round on any given year.
Later Rounds
I’m not going to break down the later rounds quite as closely as I did the first two rounds. The reason is that it really isn’t needed. If you start looking at players who were drafted in the third round or later in rookie drafts it is for the most part a wasteland of players. For example, if you look at the 2016 rookie draft, out of the 24 players who were drafted in the third or fourth rounds in most rookie drafts I see only a single player I would consider a hit, Stefon Diggs. You could maybe make an argument for Jamison Crowder, but a career best line of 67 receptions, 847 yards and 7 scores really means he is more of a flex play than an every week starter. That means we are talking about one hit in 24 picks or a miserable 4 percent hit rate.
The 2016 draft class isn’t really an exception. The 2017 draft class might have only a single hit if things work out for Austin Hooper. The 2015 draft class might have as many as three players with Jarvis Landry, Derek Carr, and Jerick McKinnon. However, McKinnon hasn’t proven anything yet and Carr might be a bit of a stretch to fit into the hit category at this point in time. The 2018 draft class looks a little better due to our optimistic nature and how we view potential, but even the most optimistic of us might only project seven or eight hits out of the 24 players, the majority of which come from the quarterback or tight end positions. That means even with the best case for the 2018 draft class, this five year time period about a 10 percent hit rate in those later rounds. Keep in mind, this is the best case and likely inflated quite a bit by the 2018 draft class. The majority of the years feature less than a 5 percent hit rate in those later rounds.
Conclusion for Draft Position
As we would all expect, the draft position has a lot to due with the success rate of our draft picks. However, I was pretty surprised at how draft a difference it makes. I was expecting the first round to be about a 50 percent hit rate with the second round being about a 33 percent hit rate. This was way too optimistic on my part as both numbers were about double what reality actually is when you break down these draft classes. This doesn’t paint a very pretty picture when it comes to building through the draft. I know some of you pride yourselves on your ability to uncover those hidden gems in drafts, but try taking an objective look at your draft record. The numbers for the average person really don’t look very good.
In the third and final part of this little hunt through the recent draft classes, I’ll work on breaking things down by position to see what we can learn.
Jacob Feldman
Find Jacob on Twitter at @feldmanjacob
Latest posts by Jacob Feldman (see all)
- April 2019 Dynasty Rookie Mock Draft: Round Three - April 14, 2019
- April 2019 Dynasty Rookie Mock Draft: Round Two - April 13, 2019
- April 2019 Dynasty Rookie Mock Draft: Round One - April 12, 2019
Stephen Lee
December 7, 2018 at 5:37 am
This is an interesting debate and one well worth having. However, this article and frankly most of that I have read on this topic, seem to do a disservice to the strategy of building a team through the draft. The hit rates you cite assume quite reasonably, that all 12 players have equal ability to assess future productivity of rookie players. But if we assume the major alternative setting aside (WW acquisition) is building through trades, then making the same assumption that all players are equally good at predicting the future in trading, the net hit rate (at least in trading veterans) will be ZERO (future fantasy points traded away= future fantasy pos acquired). So the only viable argument (which I assume is what you rely on) is that there is a structural market imbalance that can be used for profit by virtue of a proportion of owners who over-value draft picks. However, I would argue that these hit rates of 33% for 1st rd picks and 10-20% for second rounders are fairly well known.
I’d like to make the case for building through the draft with 2 further points. Firstly, if you are “building” a team then by definition, you are not a playoff team and therefore in the upper half of the draft. That makes your draft picks more likely to hit and even if they miss, you will likely have a chance to go round again in the following year by virtue of your record. In that sense, assuming infinite patience, your ability to build through the draft is almost inevitable. Also, because the productivity of most rookies develops beyond the 1st season, you essentially get deferred value enabling you to gain access to higher picks while that talent emerges. Finally, I would argue that evaluating talent (unlike gaining an advantage via a trade) is a learnable skill- with enough time and effort, given the avaiability of conveniently packaged game film and athletic metrics. I guess you could argue trading is a learnable skill also, but I think the incremental improvement you can achieve is less. it only takes a small improvement in college player assessment relative to peers, to yield big dividends in the draft. So while I do use strategic trading as an important element to building my high stakes dynasty teams, I do believe building through the draft is significantly under appreciated.
In short, I find people taking the position against building through the draft rely on the fact that everybody is equally good (or bad) at drafting, but have no problem jettisoning that same assumption for predicting the future in advocating the value of building through trading.
Jacob Feldman
December 7, 2018 at 8:59 am
Good points Stephen! However, I think the main reason that most people assume all drafters are roughly equal is because it is closer to the truth than saying they are drastically different. Over my decade plus of doing dynasty leagues, I’ve found that in an active league (which is a key part. Inactive leagues are going to be drastically different on everything) typically the “good” drafters aren’t quite as good as they think, and the “bad” drafters aren’t quite as bad as they think. You might have a great streak, but like all things it typically evens out over an extended period. Some people might be slightly better or slightly worse than the norm, but they are all pretty close to it over a string of many years.
As far as the idea of trading being a zero sum game, it all depends on what you are trading for. If you are trading picks for unproven players with “potential”, then I fully agree with you that it is roughly equal. However, if you are trading picks for a proven commodity with a multi-year track record of success, your chances of getting an every week starter are drastically higher in the trade than by making the pick. For example if you were able to flip your 1st round pick for a receiver who has already produced multiple 1000 yard seasons, that would be a definite win in my book. If you are trading that 1st round pick for someone without that proven track record it is very different. You are correct that it all depends on the details though.
Thanks for the thoughts!
Stephen Lee
December 7, 2018 at 3:34 pm
Yeah Jacob- I still think you are missing my point. In order to profit from a trade, regardless of its composition, it MUST depend on the other side having less ability to evaluate future value than you (whether that be composed of proven veterans, promising youth, future or current picks). That’s not a proposition that is up for debate..its a necessary truth. My point is that people are happy to accept the ability to be superior in trading while denying the ability to be superior in drafting. That’s all.
Jacob Feldman
December 7, 2018 at 8:09 pm
No, I didn’t miss the point. In a trade, people look for different things. The value of picks isn’t a set commodity. Everyone views them differently. If someone thinks that the 1.03 is a sure bet to land a stud, they are going to value it differently than someone who thinks it is a 30% chance to land something of value. That difference in perception is where you can actually gain value in a trade. It has nothing to do with a superior ability to trade and/or draft. It has everything to do with the perception of value of draft picks. I think the community as a whole tends to overvalue them which means you can often times get more bang for your buck on the trade market.
Todd Michaels
December 7, 2018 at 5:56 am
T Cohen was a later round pick in 2017, if Hooper is a “hit” you have to include Cohen as well.
Jacob Feldman
December 7, 2018 at 8:02 am
Cohen was actually undrafted in the vast majority of leagues (unless you are drafting an unusual number of rounds) and was a Waiver Wire bid part way into the season. Just looking at raw numbers, there are actually more free agent pick-ups who are successful than late round picks in most years.
Todd Michaels
December 7, 2018 at 8:47 am
Fair enough, Cohen was drafted in the 5th round of 7 (10 team with full IDP) of our league. Diggs went undrafted in my league when he came out and was a WW pick-up.
Jacob Feldman
December 7, 2018 at 9:30 am
Cohen wasn’t drafted in any of my leagues, and the ADP data I looked at had him just outside the top 48. Diggs was just inside it. Either way, it doesn’t change a whole lot. Late round picks are typically in the 5-10% hit rate range.
Alex King
December 7, 2018 at 8:04 am
Also helps to note that Hooper was 2016, not 2017. Also 2017 had late round players like Mack, Godwin, Kupp, Aaron Jones, and Kittle who still have plenty of potential. I would argue that the later rounds are where you can really make a difference, not a wasteland if you know what you’re doing.
Jacob Feldman
December 7, 2018 at 9:19 am
Depending on trade value in your leagues, the later rounds might definitely be worth holding on to. If the trade value is minimal, even a 5% chance is worth a swing. Just don’t expect much to hit every year. As far as Mack, Godwin, Kupp, etc all being hits. They all look that way right now. However, if history has taught us anything it is that some of them will end up being duds. If you go back and look at the 2015 draft. In early 2016, there was a lot of talk about Jeremy Langford, Matt Jones, and others who turned out to be splash in the pans. Other years had future starters like Tre Mason, Terrance West, Martavius Bryant, etc. Chances are that in a few years if we look back at the late round picks from 2017 that we think are going to be every week starters, a few of them just won’t turn into that either due to injury, off the field, or just not performing.
Alex King
December 7, 2018 at 9:32 am
Definitely possible, I agree. I just looked back at my main league’s rookie drafts and there were some great picks and obviously plenty of duds. 3rds and 4ths in this league are usually used as throw ins to rebuilding teams so that a playoff team can get a win now player and then they just throw darts.
Ryan Meyer
December 7, 2018 at 8:24 am
Phillip Lindsey is a stud
Jacob Feldman
December 7, 2018 at 9:29 am
He could be, but short of Barkley I don’t know that there is any 2018 rookie I’m willing to say is a surefire hit. Lots of them look very promising, but we typically have players each year who flash as rookies but end up falling apart for one reason or another.
steven manies
December 7, 2018 at 10:06 am
My strategy is often to use my rookie draft picks to trade for established veteran players. This year’s trade involved my 1st round pick (# 3, gained through a trade) for WR Davante Adams. I believe I made a great trade that has lead my team to be the highest scoring in my dynasty league. Although in 2017, I did not trade my 1st rounder (pick #4) and used it to draft CMAC. I’ve been burned so many times over the years by over hyped rookies, in the first round, that I am always looking at trade offers. Jacob, I have enjoyed your well written articles. I can’t agree more, building through the draft is difficult.
Jacob Feldman
December 7, 2018 at 10:32 am
It all depends on what kind of offers you can get of course, but a 1st for Adams was a steal in my opinion. There isn’t anyone at that point in the draft who was worth Adams. Nice work! I think that might be a bit of an extreme case in terms of value, but it all depends on the league!
steven manies
December 8, 2018 at 8:22 am
What was even better in my trade for WR Davante Adams, I also traded my 2019 1st rounder for QB Alex Smith. I immediately traded Smith for a 2018 1st round pick (#7) to a QB hungry team, which I used to draft RB Kerryon Johnson. My league mates thought I reached for Johnson, but I think his rookie season has proven his potential value. Thanks to DLF and all its valuable information on rookie players which I use to be the most prepared team owner, in my dynasty league, when it comes to the draft!
Shaun Tetreault
December 7, 2018 at 11:47 am
I watch a TON of college football. Most of the owners in my leagues dont. I would say I see a clear difference in “rookie draft ability”. Some (most) people only draft rookies based on commonly spread ESPN, Mel Kiper, Todd McShay, talk radio knowledge. They could not tell you more than 3 prospect names heading in to any particular season. They are the people that confidently draft B.Sankey or J.Manziel and are shocked when they are bagging groceries 3 years later. If you are a perpetual cellar dweller I think the only way to get relevant quickly is to trade veterans and gather draft picks, bottom out and restart. If you are a contender, adding 1 or 2 quality rookies via draft or FA is enough to sustain a future. I believe having an understanding of college systems, prospects quality of opponents and other factors and using that crossed with knowledge of potential for PT opportunity in the NFL= should allow you to draft better than most others. For instance I liked M.Mack seeing the aging Gore and no one else. Or Golladay and the small (in size) cast of aging WRs around him. Godwin and D.Jax aging/Humphries is below average. I love James Washington moving forward.
Jacob Feldman
December 7, 2018 at 8:13 pm
It sounds like your league would fit into what I consider the “casual dynasty” category. In leagues like that, someone who is active can definitely gain a huge advantage over everyone else. I wouldn’t consider that a very even playing field, which means a lot of the strategy ideas we talk about don’t really apply to your league. If you were in a league with people who did the same kinds of things you do, you might see some different results.
Stephen Lee
December 9, 2018 at 6:05 am
Of course exactly that same argument applies to trading draft picks for established players..outside of “casual” leagues- all owners should be demanding multiple first round picks for say a true WR1 (e.g. the Davante Adams example above), based on the discounted rate for probability of that pick hitting…..I’d simply argue that outside of “casual” leagues ..they already are…
Gregory Massa
December 8, 2018 at 7:38 am
A friend and I have talked about this topic a lot over the fantasy football seasons. Unless you’re hitting on all of your rookie picks, you can end up with really shallow depth.
If you can’t position yourself in that top 4 area, you might be best served trading that pick for a proven stud—assuming someone wants your pick!
Derek Lipski
December 8, 2018 at 8:08 am
Jacob, I love everything you write, and have for the however many years I’ve been on this site. And, that’s even if I don’t totally agree with you(which is very rare, as we have the same views on Dynasty it seems). It sounds like I’m trying to slap a ring on your finger and are really marrying you up lol, but, when I see you are the author of an article, I immediately read the whole thing and will reread most of them. Also, I thoroughly enjoy reading your answers and retorts to these comments on your articles. You are blunt and to the point and have no problem speaking your mind. Love it man, and I wish they gave you more to write…hope you never leave this site, thanks.
Jacob Feldman
December 9, 2018 at 1:50 pm
Thanks for the kind words! Just so you know, I’m already taken! Life gets busy at times, which means the writing takes a bit of a backseat. More will be coming soon though. Don’t worry!
steven manies
December 8, 2018 at 8:57 am
I thought I’d mention a draft strategy that’s worked me over the years. Being there are so many misses in rookie drafts, I try to acquire as many 2nd and 3rd round picks that I can afford. I call it the “shotgun” approach. This year, I had 2 second rounders and 3 third rounders which I used to draft WR Michael Gallup, WR Tre’quan Smith, TE Mark Andrews, QB Kyle Lauletta, and RB Ito Smith. If 2 rookies out of this group hit and become valuable players, you are doing well. If not, trade them for future draft picks and rinse and repeat. Don’t be that owner who has a bunch of middling veteran & rookie players, on their squad, who will never return value. Use them in trade for future rookie draft picks.
Chris Alkhoury
December 8, 2018 at 9:52 pm
For those advocating strongly for the rookie draft approach, scroll through your last 5 rookie drafts and post all of your picks… I happened to hit on three picks in two leagues in the same draft (Mahomes, OJ Howard, and Godwin) and in another (OBJ, A. Robinson, and DJ Johnson) and it really turned those two franchises entirely around.
Conversely, I was surprised by how many “sure fire can’t miss” products are currently on the waiver wire or out of the league entirely (and an avid dynasty reader like myself drafted a ton of them and/or cut them because I lost faith too soon – I’m looking at you Tyler Boyd).
So, two thoughts. One, stay flexible. I’m willing to move any pick for an elite asset – why play the lottery when you can have a sure thing. But, don’t take a base hit when you can hit a home run. I’m not moving a top 10 pick for a okay RB or WR2, I’d rather swing for the fences. Second, the dynasty community and DLF included should do more to help us know who to cut. I see lists upon lists on every website on who I should add or take a flyer on every single week, but few write ups on who I should cut (this off season Boyd was ranked in the late 70s or something on here, but we all should have remembered the age old adage about 3rd year WRs). There are inherent opportunity costs that come with taking each flyer, it’d be great to get a bit more insights – particularly before keeper deadlines this off season, even in dynasty you gotta make room for players coming off IR – on who the collective community thinks we can kick to the curb.
Jacob Feldman
December 9, 2018 at 2:00 pm
Thanks for the feedback. Cut lists are definitely tough to manage because so much of it comes down to league specifics. How many teams in the league, how deep are the rosters, how many starters are required, scoring system, other players on your roster, etc. Ken does cover a little bit of it in his weekly dynasty aftermath article, but I definitely understand you wanting a little bit more.
The other part of it is that dynasty owners as a whole are a very optimistic bunch and believe a little too much in potential. Writing an article about it being time to cut/trade a young player tends to bring down the fire and brimstone from some owners, no matter how it is backed up. I remember a few weeks into the 2013 season, I wrote an article advocating that owners should trade Trent Richardson just like the Browns did a few weeks prior. Even with all of the stats and data people were out for blood on that one. With that topic, it seems like even if you’re right, you’re wrong. None the less, I’ll bring it up. Thanks!