PDA

View Full Version : History - 1st Pick of Entire Draft


Jack Bauer
01-17-2006, 09:27 AM
Do you know how many players who were the first pick in the entire draft made it to the Pro Football Hall of Fame? From 1936 to 1989 (60 drafts, includes NFL and AFL drafts) there are a total of 11 Hall of Famers!

Here is the list, which will change this year when Troy Aikman joins the list:

1942 Bill Dudley, HB Pittsburgh Steelers
1945 Charley Trippi, HB Chicago Cardinals
1949 Chuck Bednarik, C/LB Philadelphia Eagles
1957 Paul Hornung, QB/HB Green Bay Packers
1963 (AFL) Buck Buchanan, DE/T Kansas City Chiefs
1968 Ron Yary, T Minnesota Vikings
1969 O.J. Simpson, RB Buffalo Bills
1970 Terry Bradshaw, QB Pittsburgh Steelers
1976 Lee Roy Selmon, DE Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1978 Earl Campbell, FB Houston Oilers
1983 John Elway, QB Baltimore Colts

Here is the link:

HOF Selected Number One in Draft (http://www.profootballhof.com/history/general/draft/number_one.jsp)

Using data from 1936 to 2005: The number 1 over all pick played a total of 654 years combined in the NFL and 154 of those years are "Pro Bowl" years. The number 2 overall picks played a total of 632 years combined in the NFL and 175 of those years are "Pro Bowl" years. This comes out to 25% of the years played for the number 1 overall pick and 28% of the years played for the number 2 overall pick.

Note: I am not sure what criteria they used before the Pro Bowl existed, but there are Pro Bowl years listed all the way back to 1939.

Texas_Thrill
01-17-2006, 09:38 AM
This is a bit skewed considering the best player isn't always picked first in the draft in any given year. There are even years *cough2001cough* where there was no clear cut number 1 but a franchise sweared upon heaven it needed to take a qb first.

And 11 out of 60 is dang near 20%. Do you know how many folks on Wall Street wish they could get that kind of return on their investments? I say this doesn't support the trade down folks....and I am one of them but this doesn't help at all.

Spoda
01-17-2006, 09:41 AM
yes but vince is a sure thing...haven't you read all the threads? he's from houston for god's sake...and he wants to play here....he won't be a hall of famer because after his 30 year career it will be called the vince of fame..he will be a vince of famer....vince drops back...offensive line crumble....eludes everyone...lets it fly from his own 1....he's got a man...it's vince!!! wide open at the opponents 1!!! TD vince to vince!!!...man that is gonna be sweet

MorKnolle
01-17-2006, 09:48 AM
I would say this doesn't necessarily help or hurt the trade down argument, we don't have to have a future hall-of-famer, which is usually determined by a combination of personal stats and their team's success, and many times other circumstances come into play, like injuries and whether the "best" player in the draft fits into a particular system or not. Bottom line, we need to do what is best for our team, I personally think that would be trading down, if we make a good trade and use those acquired picks and free agency properly, but we'll have to wait and see what the team does and then give it a year or two to see how it impacts the team and wait even longer to examine how all the players' careers pan out. Hopefully the addition of Kubiak and his staff and then the advice of Dan Reeves will lead to better judgments and decisions on the part of our management.

Jack Bauer
01-17-2006, 09:54 AM
This is a bit skewed considering the best player isn't always picked first in the draft in any given year.

This isn't skewed at all. These are facts. I believe that the team that selects number one in the entire draft DOES select the top player on their board. Does the player end up being the best player in the NFL? Not usually. This is my point; if the post has to have one. I am simply providing some statistical information on the number 1 pick and what has happened in the past. I am not trying to argue whether we should draft a RB, QB or trade down. I just threw in those comments because I believe it does give credence to the trade down faction.

Jack Bauer
01-17-2006, 10:05 AM
I would say this doesn't necessarily help or hurt the trade down argument, we don't have to have a future hall-of-famer

MorKnolle, this is why I included the additional facts about "Pro Bowls". My argument is that the draft is an inexact science and all these people saying that Vince or Reggie is one of the all-time greatest success or bust don't really know. Even those in the NFL front offices don't know yet.

Another point is that of all QBs taken number one in the draft, they have played a total of 215 years with 43 years in the "Pro Bowl." This is 20%. Of all RBs taken number one in the draft, they have played a total of 136 years with 34 years in the "Pro Bowl." This is 25%, but you also see that RBs played 79 less years in the NFL. The RBs selected with the first pick of the draft played an average of 5.23 years in the NFL, while the QBs taken with the first pick played an average of 9.34 years in the NFL.

I am just providing the stats, I am not trying to voice my opinion for a RB, QB or for trading down.

MorKnolle
01-17-2006, 10:15 AM
I agree Zephyr, I've been in the trade down camp since November and I do acknowledge that no one is a guaranteed success and I'd rather take my chances on an extra 3-4 high round picks than one QB or RB that will be coming in and splitting time and yet has the local media scrutinizing their every move and has the weight of the franchise on their shoulders.

Kaiser Toro
01-17-2006, 11:05 AM
This is a bit skewed considering the best player isn't always picked first in the draft in any given year. There are even years *cough2001cough* where there was no clear cut number 1 but a franchise sweared upon heaven it needed to take a qb first.

And 11 out of 60 is dang near 20%. Do you know how many folks on Wall Street wish they could get that kind of return on their investments? I say this doesn't support the trade down folks....and I am one of them but this doesn't help at all.

Indeed Wall Street would like a 20% return depending on the initial investment and which lines of business are seeing the return. Simply it is risk vs reward and in the salary cap era it is extremely risky when you look at the bottom line of Super Bowl wins.

I could care less about ticket sales, jerseys, concessions, etc. I am a Texan's fan and I want to win games. Being a fan of the NFL at large gives me the ability to see other great players every week that do not effect our cap. The most enjoyable teams to watch, in my opinion, are just that, a team. A superstar led team does not usually have a shelf life in the playoffs. Money has divided more entities than it has put together. Hopefully we will get it right.

Grid
01-17-2006, 11:07 AM
ive said it in every other post like this.. so i might as well say it in this one too.

The stats on the success of #1 overall picks is skewed by the fact that most of the time, the team making the pick is a bad team. They either have a bad GM making poor decisions.. or they are bringing a good player into a situation where he has no help. Not every #1 pick can be Barry Sanders. A player talented enough to carry a bad team is rare in football.

Jack Bauer
01-17-2006, 12:50 PM
ive said it in every other post like this.. so i might as well say it in this one too.

The stats on the success of #1 overall picks is skewed by the fact that most of the time, the team making the pick is a bad team. They either have a bad GM making poor decisions.. or they are bringing a good player into a situation where he has no help. Not every #1 pick can be Barry Sanders. A player talented enough to carry a bad team is rare in football.

Good points. I am not trying to prove anything. Just providing statistics. Food for thought. That's all.

eclem5
01-17-2006, 02:46 PM
Do you know how many players who were the first pick in the entire draft made it to the Pro Football Hall of Fame? From 1936 to 1989 (60 drafts, includes NFL and AFL drafts) there are a total of 11 Hall of Famers!

Here is the list, which will change this year when Troy Aikman joins the list:

1942 Bill Dudley, HB Pittsburgh Steelers
1945 Charley Trippi, HB Chicago Cardinals
1949 Chuck Bednarik, C/LB Philadelphia Eagles
1957 Paul Hornung, QB/HB Green Bay Packers
1963 (AFL) Buck Buchanan, DE/T Kansas City Chiefs
1968 Ron Yary, T Minnesota Vikings
1969 O.J. Simpson, RB Buffalo Bills
1970 Terry Bradshaw, QB Pittsburgh Steelers
1976 Lee Roy Selmon, DE Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1978 Earl Campbell, FB Houston Oilers
1983 John Elway, QB Baltimore Colts

Here is the link:

HOF Selected Number One in Draft (http://www.profootballhof.com/history/general/draft/number_one.jsp)

Using data from 1936 to 2005: The number 1 over all pick played a total of 654 years combined in the NFL and 154 of those years are "Pro Bowl" years. The number 2 overall picks played a total of 632 years combined in the NFL and 175 of those years are "Pro Bowl" years. This comes out to 25% of the years played for the number 1 overall pick and 28% of the years played for the number 2 overall pick.

Note: I am not sure what criteria they used before the Pro Bowl existed, but there are Pro Bowl years listed all the way back to 1939.

A lot of so called talent scout make bone head picks at #1, Earl Campbell no Brainer was taken but I'm sure some nuckle head objected.
Was Tony Dorsett #1 overall should he had been?, How about Walter Payton?
Do You honestly believe Carr will ever be a Hall of Famer? Do you honestly think Carr will win 12 games in a season?

Kaiser Toro
01-17-2006, 03:16 PM
ive said it in every other post like this.. so i might as well say it in this one too.

The stats on the success of #1 overall picks is skewed by the fact that most of the time, the team making the pick is a bad team. They either have a bad GM making poor decisions.. or they are bringing a good player into a situation where he has no help. Not every #1 pick can be Barry Sanders. A player talented enough to carry a bad team is rare in football.

Your points are valid. Grid I believe that you and I both want the trade down route. This is nothing more than a historical argument to support that notion.

eclem5
01-17-2006, 05:24 PM
Did you see the USC vs UT game? To me AN INDIVIDUAL be 2 Heisman trophy winners. You can say well he had a team too, but you have to admit any other player could have been replaced except Vince Young and the outcome would or could be the same. Take Vince Young out of that game they lose point blank.

You have to admit it even though you do not want to, He's just that good

BuffSoldier
01-17-2006, 06:26 PM
yes but vince is a sure thing...haven't you read all the threads? he's from houston for god's sake...and he wants to play here....he won't be a hall of famer because after his 30 year career it will be called the vince of fame..he will be a vince of famer....vince drops back...offensive line crumble....eludes everyone...lets it fly from his own 1....he's got a man...it's vince!!! wide open at the opponents 1!!! TD vince to vince!!!...man that is gonna be sweet

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Thats the funniest post ive read in a while.

thunderkyss
01-17-2006, 06:36 PM
How many have gone to the probowl??

That's what I want to know.

Jack Bauer
01-17-2006, 09:24 PM
How many have gone to the probowl??

That's what I want to know.

40 of the 60 have gone to Pro Bowls.

LBC_Justin
01-17-2006, 11:34 PM
yes but vince is a sure thing...haven't you read all the threads? he's from houston for god's sake...and he wants to play here....he won't be a hall of famer because after his 30 year career it will be called the vince of fame..he will be a vince of famer....vince drops back...offensive line crumble....eludes everyone...lets it fly from his own 1....he's got a man...it's vince!!! wide open at the opponents 1!!! TD vince to vince!!!...man that is gonna be sweetNow that is FUNNY!!!!! Had me rolling.:redtowel:

LBC_Justin
01-17-2006, 11:42 PM
Did you see the USC vs UT game? To me AN INDIVIDUAL be 2 Heisman trophy winners. You can say well he had a team too, but you have to admit any other player could have been replaced except Vince Young and the outcome would or could be the same. Take Vince Young out of that game they lose point blank.

You have to admit it even though you do not want to, He's just that goodActually this 100% not true.

On the key 4th & 2 play, Michael Huff ingnored the play call and did not stay back in coverage when he was suppose to, and ran up and is the reason Lendale White did not get the 1st down to end the game.

Lets also not forget Michael Griffin interception at the goal line.

No Micheal Huff or Michael Griffin = Game Over = USC Champs again = No Vince Young hype.