Go look at drafts from like 2009 and earlier and by and you'll notice a big drop in talent as the draft goes deeper. You can't get all the good undrafted players. Most of them suck. Most late round picks don't make it. Top 3 rounds is where you build teams.

I think the better question is 'Would you give up your entire draft for the next 2 years to get Andrew Luck' because that is about what it will take to move up to get him, even if it is the team with the #2 pick. Its actually more likely that a team will give up something like 4 1st round picks and a few more 2nds and 3rds. If he somehow wins the national championship lol its going to take like 5 whole drafts.

Actually hope the team that drafts him needs a QB and keeps him. Want to see how good he can be, and it would suck if he not only went into a ****ty situation, but one where they would have to wait a year or two after he is drafted to start rebuilding around him (though I think it would be the correct move for the franchise to make that sacrifice to get him).

Sure, but though I didn't say it, I also don't believe his value is the same as an entire draft, either.

You're basically moving up like 9 spots in the first round (10th to 1st) and trading away your early 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th round picks to do so.

There's also opportunities to grab good value in the 10 spot since there are enough picks in front of you that will be awful (like running backs, etc.) that your 10th pick may feel more like 8th or 7th. When you trade all that for Luck, you are assuming he's the #1 pick, and praying he'll stay healthy.

It's going to take a bunch of picks + quality NFL players to make the trade happen. Only teams that MIGHT be able to get the trade done with exclusively picks are Cincy, NE, and Cleveland. Even then, probably not.

Which is what I should've been getting at more clearly, at least as it pertains to the question.

Theoretically, if your 4th thru 7th rounders are mostly rolls of the dice anyways, diligent and competent scouting should be able to produce undrafted replacement-level bodies who come into camp and compete for roster spots much in the same way. Perhaps one or two pan out, perhaps none of them do, but who cares; your impact guys are taken in rounds 1 thru 3.

So if you think Luck is good enough to justify trading 3 top 90 picks, this is a snapcall, right?

I've seen more college games this year but mostly just Clemson and Michigan. Have not seen any major prospects outside of Sammy Watkins (who is clearly worth an entire draft heh).

The 10th pick in the 1998 NFL draft was Duane Starks.
Not much value in moving up to #1 amirite


You're not "praying he'll stay healthy," you're making a value assessment of him based on the range of probabilities of what can happen based on the data that you currently have, and comparing that value to the range of values from one pick in each round.

The fact that there are outcomes where you are wrong doesn't mean that your choice as a whole can't be net +EV and +EG for your franchise.


Luck is like Lebron James, except instead of coming out of HS you have 3 more years of data to base your assumptions on, and the fact that the projected dropoff from #1 to #2/#4/#10 is much higher.

So? Every single contender in the NFL is praying their starting QB stays healthy. If any top team has their starting QB seriously injured, they have little to no shot of winning a SB.

'05 Bears baby, 11-5 season and a division title with Kyle Orton posting QB ratings lower than his jersey number!

Half of 1st rounders turn out not to be even above replacement level or flat out busts anyways. Can skimp at some other positions. Will take a QB a few years to become elite also.

Peyton Manning vs the 10th pick of every round in his draft:

Duane Starks
Cameron Cleeland
EG Green
Lorenzo Bromell
Ryan Sutter
Eric Ogbogu
Ephraim Salaam

Has anyone ITT considered luck may have a WIL complex? He was guaranteed a top-10 pick last year and opted to finish his architectural engineering (??) degree. I can fully understand why he did that- family has money, super tough/valuable degree from great school consuming him. I can only think of the Peyton/Eli as elite prospects going back for senior year - but idk where they were ranked as juniors and are probably special cases.

Edit: Eli was a late 1st rd prospect in 03, behind Palmer, Leftwich and Rexxy.

Well that's a fair point.

After trading away an entire draft, you aren't praying he'll stay healthy? (Not to mention be awesome)? Also those are some big words without saying much.

I don't watch college football because I think it sucks huge nuts so I really shouldn't be talking wrt Luck anyway. I'll bow out. In general though I do think SE regs go way overboard wrt the value of #1 picks.

Yes, obv that later rounds picks aren't worth much comparatively.

or is it WIM? Best season in school history, stomps VT in the Orange Bowl, and comes back anyway because he wants to win a title?

This is 100% true, but you have to realize the difference between "the average value of a #1 pick" and "the best #1 pick in the recent history of the NFL and possibly ever"

Now that doesn't mean that he ABSOLUTELY won't be a bust or won't get hurt or won't translate to the NFL. Guys like Leinart and Leaf were thought to be sure things and ended up busting.

But if the normal QB #1 pick has a 50% bust rate, Luck's has got to be 15% or lower, and if the normal QB #1 pick has a 3% HOF rate (or whatever) Luck's has got to be 10% or higher. Idk what the #s are, but you see what I'm saying.

Matt Leinart went back!

Starks was sandwiched between 3 Pro Bowlers on either side of 10th overall, Cleeland came after 2 Pro Bowlers - including 5-timer Flozell Adams - and Green was taken one spot ahead of Jeremiah Trotter.

I know what you're getting at here, but this specific sample is a bit misleading, because there was clearly tons of value in and around the top end of picks from your list.

LOL, please never compare basketball picks to football. LeBron was a 99.99% to be elite. Super blue chip basketball prospects are incredibly low risk. Not only low risk but you can gauge their ceiling reasonably well before they ever play. I'd argue this has never been true for a football prospect. Cannot miss players bust ALL THE TIME.

Dude probably has a sick college lyfe. Can't fault the kid.

Was actually guaranteed #1 pick; Carolina declared they would take him a few days before Luck announced his decision.

the point wasn't ZOMG SAMPLE SIZE ONE SEE IT WORKS, the point is that there is risk both ways and just because you are getting more players doesn't mean there is all of a sudden NO RISK, it's just less risk, as a counterpoint to phb's post.


high EV + high std dev vs. lower ev lower std dev, fill in the blanks and figure out which is better. In most cases ldo 7 picks > #1 pick, in this case it's probably ldo the other way around

Leinart was absolutely nothing close to can't miss, you can't even get that right. Bunch of teams in need of QB passed on him. Why would they do.that?

Not to mention NBA starts 5 guys instead of 22.

He was the 10th pick and behind only VY who had his meteoric rise due to the goat bowl game performance. I remember pundits saying Matty made a mistake not going pro in '05 after his 'slide' in '06. I doubt there was much credibility though.

('05 had Alex Smith and then 20 picks before godgers)

http://www.faniq.com/blog/Alex-Smith...ews-Blog-11512

By the time he was drafted he wasn't "can't miss" though. There were questions about his work ethic and the key selling point was "he's ready to step right into an NFL system". His selling point wasn't exactly "the sky's the limit with this guy". I thik what the Cards got out of him his rookie year was about right at the level they expected/hoped for. I don't think they anticipated him quitting on his development so soon though. Back when they pulled him it was kinda like "how has Leinart slacked off SO much that they are putting in Kurt Warner instead!?" Which ended up being the best decision Arizona has made in .... well at least since drafting Fitz top 3.