Quote:Yeah there are a handful of notable undrafted (or after 7th round draft pick) QBs in the last quarter decade...Warner, Johnson, Delhomme, Romo. If you want to add those to the study along with the other hundreds of undrafted QBs that went on to make rosters, however, the % chance of a QB after the 2nd becoming a notable starter drops from 9% to right at 5%, so it's better just to ignore them. 

You know you can play this game with any position. There is no denying the correlation between round picked and chance of success. That is why they assign draft order in an attempt to help create parody.

 

I think the point people are trying to make regarding QB is that you don't have to take one in the first round every time you need a QB. The talent for a particular year may not be considered worthy of the selection, or more important, may not be as talented overall as a player you forgo to make that pick.

 

In economics they call this opportunity cost where the actual cost is not just what you put into something but also the difference in return of the alternate choice.

 

If you pass on a player who becomes a hall of fame player in the first to take a QB that turns out to be just decent because you are determined that you must take one in the first rd to be successful, the cost isn't just the pick you used, the cost becomes the hall of fame player.

 

 

I don't think anyone would mind if we took a QB because they thought he was the best player in the draft. Just don't do it just for the sake of being a QB. As shown, there are other routes to acquiring a successful QB. It's not a all or nothing scenario like Alfie is trying to present.

---