Between 1981 and 2000, 79 Hall of Fame players have been selected
in the NFL draft. Let’s call it 80 when
Tom Brady finally retires. I used this
timeframe because almost everyone who was drafted 22 years ago has been retired
for 5 years and is now eligible. A few
more players may be inducted down the road, but I don’t believe it will raise
the number much higher. That averages
out to an even 4 per draft with a high of 8 and two drafts in which no player
was inducted. Now, let’s break it down
further.
Of those 80 Hall of Famers, 48 (60 %) were drafted in the
first round. 32 (40%) were among the top
10 picks). Just 7 were mid- first
rounders while 9 were late first rounders.
The remaining 32 were drafted outside the first round and though I didn’t
research, I would imagine that most of them were 2nd or 3rd
rounders. Therefore, yes you could say
that there is an incentive to tank in the NFL.
It may be better in the long run to have a couple horrible seasons than be
around .500 every year. After all, the
expected value of the 15th overall pick is probably not much higher
than the 30.th By contrast,
the 5th pick will be expected to be much better than the 14th. Expecting a high draft choice to be a Hall of
Famer is too much to ask. However, a
reasonable expectation is that he will have a prime window of several years in
which he is among the 5 best at his position (All Star/Pro Bowl caliber).
Because of the importance of high draft choices, I am
impressed when a franchise is able to remain a contender for more than about
7-8 consecutive years despite never drafting in the top 10 or even the top 20. The San Francisco 49ers never lost more than
6 games between 1981-1998 while winning 5 Super Bowls and making the playoffs
all but 2 years. The Pittsburgh Steelers
have been .500 or better every season since 2004. Lastly, New England had a winning record every
year from 2001-2019. Very impressive. In order to sustain that level of success, a
Franchise Quarterback is a necessity.
However, it is not a guarantee.
Green Bay had a few lean years even with Brett Favre and Aaron
Rodgers. Typically, these teams are able
to find greater value in the 2nd or 3rd rounds and make
wise free agent signings as well. In
some cases, they traded up in the draft and scored big as was the case with
Jerry Rice and the 49ers.
When it comes to Quarterbacks, it is increasingly difficult
to get a Franchise player or even a successful starter much beyond early Round
2. Nowadays, teams are desperate and may
reach for 3rd round talent. You’ve
got about a 50/50 chance of drafting a successful starter in the 1st
round, maybe a little less. It’s a
dilemma. Some teams are willing to give
up multiple first rounders for a veteran QB such as Russell Wilson or Matthew
Stafford. If it is a safe bet that you
won’t have any losing seasons with him at the helm, that can be a good call
especially when the next draft class is thin at the position. Again, there won’t be many Hall of Famers
drafted outside the Top 10.
Some teams can hedge their bets by signing a player who was
not a total bust but a bit of a disappointment with their original team while
remaining open to drafting a new QB. IMO,
it’s too soon to write off the likes of Mitch Trubisky and Baker Mayfield just
yet. Alex Smith and Ryan Tannehill both
thrived in new systems after shaky starts to their careers. Bringing in the 2nd coming of Ryan
Leaf or JaMarcus Russell for anything more than a shot at 3rd string
is really not smart. If a team has a
need at QB or will have a need very soon, depending on who is available,
trading up from say pick 16 to pick 8 could be a big win. After some internal debate, Pittsburgh
decided not to trade up for Roethlisberger but would take him if available at
Pick 11. They were very fortunate that at
least 2 QB needy teams elected to pass.
In a head scratcher, Cleveland chose to roll with Tim Couch and Kelly Holcombe
while Detroit stuck with a young Joey Harrington. If you make a mistake on a high first round
QB, it will set the franchise back 5 years and the coach will almost certainly
be fired.
Now, let’s look at baseball.
Within the same 1981-2000 timeframe, the 1st overall pick
produced just 2 Hall of Famers (Ken Griffey Jr. and Chipper Jones). Alex Rodriguez would have made it 3 if not
for the steroids. Surprisingly, there were only TWO OTHER
HOFers drafted in the top 10 in those years (Frank Thomas and Barry
Larkin). Edit: Barry Bonds would make it 3. Unless there is a consensus,
once a decade type talent available, tanking for a high draft choice is NOT the
answer. It seems like you are just
about as likely to get an All-Star caliber player in the mid-late first round
as you are with the number 2 or 3 overall pick.
Pitchers are especially risky given the increasing rate of UCL
injuries. Tommy John surgery is usually
successful but it’s hardly a guarantee.
Stockpile bats instead and trade for arms.
In recent years, several quality mid-level free agents have
gone unwanted and had to settle for low-ball one-year deals if that. The thinking is that it is not worth it to
sign a $10MM player to lift your team’s win total from 65 to 68. I would disagree. You can certainly strike gold on 3 mid-level
free agents and end up getting more combined value than from one
superstar. Suppose a couple other
prospects see unexpected break throughs. It is certainly possible for that team to be a
surprise contender.
I don’t know the full details of the new CBA agreement, but
I don’t believe anything substantive was done about the tanking problem. I have proposed having to go back ten spots
in the draft for back-to-back 100 loss seasons.
Another idea that I liked better was to re-order the draft such that the
team that just missed the playoffs gets the number 1 pick while the worst team gets
pick number 20. I don’t believe that
would have much of an impact. As stated
above, a high draft pick does not have the same value in baseball as it does in
football. My new solution is to penalize
tanking teams by cutting their stake in revenue sharing. I’d keep the penalty threshold at back-to-back
100 loss seasons. Any team can be hit
with terrible luck once. Consecutive
years with bottom of the league payroll and 100+ losses? No.
That is tanking.