onejayhawk Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 (edited) Top Ten players are expected to be ready to play, even at demanding positions like QB and WR. It does not take many more picks for that expectation to become unreasonable. However, other positions--the so-called nonpremium positions--can often start even when taken in the second round. Punters and kickers are frequently undrafted. On the other side of things, Anyone taken in the top 100 is expected to contribute as a rookie, albeit as a rotation player or depth. How late is it realistic to expect the following to start from Day #1? To rephrase, how many picks before a player does not routinely start training camp at the top of the depth chart? QB - WR - TE - RB - OT - IOL - DE/EDGE - DT - LB - S - CB - Edited March 4 by onejayhawk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 In general, or specifically in this class? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jebrick Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 (edited) how realistic is the rub here. I'll give it a shot. Highly dependent on the strength of the draft at that position QB - 2nd round WR - 3rd round TE - 4th round RB - 3rd round but could be much later OT - 3rd round IOL - 4th round DE/EDGE - 2nd round DT - 2nd round - I struggled with this one as the Steelers are a bit different on DT then most others. LB - 3rd round S - 3rd round CB - 2nd round for outside. 3rd round for slot Edit( I'll update based on the answer to @Daniel ) Edited March 4 by jebrick 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaddHatter Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 5 minutes ago, onejayhawk said: Top Ten players are expected to be ready to play, even at demanding positions like QB and WR. It does not take many more picks for that expectation to become unreasonable. However, other positions--the so-called nonpremium positions--can often start even when taken in the second round. Punters and kickers are frequently undrafted. On the other side of things, Anyone taken in the top 100 is expected to contribute as a rookie, albeit as a rotation player or depth. How late is it realistic to expect the following to start from Day #1? Starting is one thing, starting and playing well is another - I think you can find a day 1 starter this year at the following rounds: QB - 1st, maybe 2nd. WR - this year? 4th TE - not sure - depends on the O but in theory 5th+ RB - 7th OT - 3rd (LT maybe even into the 2nd) IOL - 5th potentially DE/EDGE - 2nd DT - 4th+ LB - 3rd S - 4th CB - 3rd 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 Just now, jebrick said: how realistic is the rub here. I'll give it a shot. Highly dependent on the strength of the draft at that position QB - 2nd round WR - 3rd round TE - 4th round RB - 3rd round but could be much later OT - 3rd round IOL - 4th round DE/EDGE - 2nd round DT - 2nd round - I struggled with this one as the Steelers are a bit different on DT then most others. LB - 3rd round S - 3rd round CB - 2nd round for outside. 3rd round for slot I think this is a pretty dang good list, actually. I would say with RBs, you can find starting RBs in UDFA pretty consistently, as long as you're not expecting them to be your bell cow. Those do happen, and it happens almost every year, but I still think that's rare enough to not expect it. For a full time, majority of your carries starter, third or fourth makes sense. I would say the same for WR. If you're looking for a WR1 (or even WR2), I think expecting to land that in the third is a bit much, unless it's the top of the third in a pretty deep class. But for like, a receiver that will be taking a lot of snaps and that you expect to take a lot of snaps, but not be your main guy, third is correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 It partly depends on how soon you expect them to start or even get rotational snaps. Coaches famously overestimate their ability to turn projects into finished products. Thus the workout warrior phenomenon. If the standard is the player should win a starting job by the end of their rookie year and show they are better than a minimum salary vet alternative, then I'd say a first rounder at any position should be able to meet that. Probably a second rounder too. By third round, I'd take off QB and LT, and probably outside CB. Teams can hide below-average players at other positions, whether rookies or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onejayhawk Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 24 minutes ago, jebrick said: how realistic is the rub here. I'll give it a shot. Highly dependent on the strength of the draft at that position QB - 2nd round WR - 3rd round TE - 4th round RB - 3rd round but could be much later OT - 3rd round IOL - 4th round DE/EDGE - 2nd round DT - 2nd round - I struggled with this one as the Steelers are a bit different on DT then most others. LB - 3rd round S - 3rd round CB - 2nd round for outside. 3rd round for slot Edit( I'll update based on the answer to @Daniel ) It's not reasonable to expect a QB to be NFL-ready outside the top 12-15. The whole first round is too much. It's a truism that WR are not ready until year three. Your list looks like eventual starters when we are talking about day one of training camp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onejayhawk Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 11 minutes ago, sparky151 said: It partly depends on how soon you expect them to start or even get rotational snaps. Coaches famously overestimate their ability to turn projects into finished products. Thus the workout warrior phenomenon. If the standard is the player should win a starting job by the end of their rookie year and show they are better than a minimum salary vet alternative, then I'd say a first rounder at any position should be able to meet that. Probably a second rounder too. By third round, I'd take off QB and LT, and probably outside CB. Teams can hide below-average players at other positions, whether rookies or not. Immediately. This is about starting on day #1 of the first training camp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jebrick Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 2 hours ago, Daniel said: I think this is a pretty dang good list, actually. I would say with RBs, you can find starting RBs in UDFA pretty consistently, as long as you're not expecting them to be your bell cow. Those do happen, and it happens almost every year, but I still think that's rare enough to not expect it. For a full time, majority of your carries starter, third or fourth makes sense. I would say the same for WR. If you're looking for a WR1 (or even WR2), I think expecting to land that in the third is a bit much, unless it's the top of the third in a pretty deep class. But for like, a receiver that will be taking a lot of snaps and that you expect to take a lot of snaps, but not be your main guy, third is correct. I did not want to go too far back for Wr because of the word " realistically " Sure you could get AB in the 6th round but how often does that happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jebrick Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 2 hours ago, onejayhawk said: It's not reasonable to expect a QB to be NFL-ready outside the top 12-15. The whole first round is too much. It's a truism that WR are not ready until year three. Your list looks like eventual starters when we are talking about day one of training camp. Then you are not realistically. Day one starters for Carolina is different than SF. For SF you have zero percent chance of drafting a day one starter. If a team sucks and is a talent gap then 1st round pick had better start as well as the 2nd and 3rd round picks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 7 minutes ago, jebrick said: I did not want to go too far back for Wr because of the word " realistically " Sure you could get AB in the 6th round but how often does that happen. Agreed. I was thinking more about finding a starting WR3 vs finding a starting WR1/2, because I think there's a significant difference there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onejayhawk Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 47 minutes ago, jebrick said: Then you are not realistically. Day one starters for Carolina is different than SF. For SF you have zero percent chance of drafting a day one starter. If a team sucks and is a talent gap then 1st round pick had better start as well as the 2nd and 3rd round picks. Finally a reasonable point--not all starters are equal. That said, what of the Chiefs in 2022? McDuffie could reasonably be expected to start immediately. What of George Karlaftis at #30? As storied as that draft turned out to be, only the first-round picks topped the depth chart all year. In 2021 they took Nick Bolton and Creed Humphrey late in the second round. They did start right away but was it reasonable to project it based on their positions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 Teams tend to draft for need so a bad team should expect their first and second round picks to be starters early in their rookie year. Good teams may draft for depth and a succession plan for an elderly vet. Doesn't mean the vet will be on the bench week 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jebrick Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 1 hour ago, onejayhawk said: Finally a reasonable point--not all starters are equal. That said, what of the Chiefs in 2022? McDuffie could reasonably be expected to start immediately. What of George Karlaftis at #30? As storied as that draft turned out to be, only the first-round picks topped the depth chart all year. In 2021 they took Nick Bolton and Creed Humphrey late in the second round. They did start right away but was it reasonable to project it based on their positions? Your point was day 1 at camp not eventually. Unless a team has a smoking black hole at a position, they will go into camp and figure it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onejayhawk Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 1 hour ago, jebrick said: Your point was day 1 at camp not eventually. Unless a team has a smoking black hole at a position, they will go into camp and figure it out. There I disagree. No smoking hole is necessary. Anywhere the team thinks it can get immediate improvement qualifies. The question remains how far into the draft is that likely to occur based on the position in question? Hence the reference to an IOL and a MLB drafted after pick #50. In the usual case, would immediate starters be expected? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.