I've been a Savage apologist and I was not happy to see him go, but there has been an ongoing debate about how well or poorly he did his job. A simple metric that has been used on this site is the number of players currently on the roster. I decided to look into this further and have run the numbers for all 32 teams'draft picks from 2005 - 2008 (the Savage drafts) and compared them to the current rosters as listed by ESPN. The results are listed below. I don't know what conclusions can be made from these results because it has no real measure of the value of the pick. For example, Charlie Frye shows up as a miss against Savage as a 3rd rounder, but backup QB Alex Smith (#1 overall in 2005) shows up as a hit for the 49ers. I'd argue that both were misses, but it is much harder to start quantifying what is a "hit" and what is a "miss", so we are left with the metric of "is the player on the roster of the team that drafted him?" (note: players traded after draft day like Jay Cutler also show up as misses). Here are the results in descending order by overall hit rate. Also provided is the hit rates by rounds (all data obtained via ESPN):
| Rank | Team | # OF HITS | # OF PICKS | Overall HIT RATE | First | Second | Third | Forth | Fifth | Sixth | Seventh |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | New York Giants | 21 | 26 | 0.808 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.667 | 0.25 | 0.667 |
| 2 | San Francisco | 22 | 35 | 0.629 | 1 | 1 | 0.833 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.667 | 0 |
| 3 | Baltimore | 21 | 34 | 0.618 | 1 | 0.75 | 0.5 | 0.714 | 0.75 | 0.6 | 0 |
| 4 | San Diego | 16 | 26 | 0.615 | 1 | 1 | 0.667 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.25 | 0.4 |
| 5 | Green Bay | 26 | 43 | 0.605 | 1 | 0.625 | 0.8 | 0.714 | 0.167 | 0.714 | 0.429 |
| 6 | Seattle | 18 | 30 | 0.6 | 1 | 1 | 0.667 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0 | 0.429 |
| 7 | Carolina | 21 | 35 | 0.6 | 1 | 0.75 | 0.571 | 0.333 | 0.429 | 0.333 | 0.667 |
| 8 | Dallas | 18 | 30 | 0.6 | 1 | 0.333 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.333 | 0.6 |
| 9 | Oakland | 18 | 30 | 0.6 | 0.75 | 1 | 0.667 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.333 | 0.5 |
| 10 | Buffalo | 19 | 32 | 0.594 | 0.75 | 1 | 0.75 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.75 | 0.375 |
| 11 | Washington | 16 | 27 | 0.593 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.5 | 0.333 | 0.625 | 0.167 |
| 12 | New York Jets | 16 | 28 | 0.571 | 1 | 0.5 | 0.667 | 1 | 0.333 | 0.2 | 0.25 |
| 13 | Houston | 15 | 27 | 0.556 | 0.75 | 1 | 0.667 | 0.75 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 0.25 |
| 14 | Indianapolis | 19 | 35 | 0.543 | 1 | 1 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.286 | 0.571 | 0.75 |
| 15 | Atlanta Falcons | 19 | 35 | 0.543 | 1 | 0.8 | 0.667 | 0.667 | 0.4 | 0.143 | 0.4 |
| 16 | Philadelphia | 20 | 37 | 0.541 | 1 | 0.857 | 0.4 | 0.714 | 0.5 | 0.167 | 0.25 |
| 17 | Arizonia Cardinals | 14 | 26 | 0.538 | 1 | 0.75 | 0.2 | 0.667 | 0.5 | 0 | 0.5 |
| 18 | Chicago | 18 | 34 | 0.529 | 0.667 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 0.75 | 0.667 | 0.333 | 0.125 |
| 19 | Tennessee | 20 | 38 | 0.526 | 0.75 | 1 | 0.25 | 0.7 | 0 | 0.4 | 0.5 |
| 20 | Pittsburgh | 15 | 32 | 0.469 | 1 | 0.667 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.333 | 0.5 | 0 |
| 21 | New Orleans | 13 | 28 | 0.464 | 1 | 0.667 | 0.333 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0 | 0.6 |
| 22 | Denver | 12 | 26 | 0.462 | 0.667 | 0.5 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 0.333 | 0.333 | 0.667 |
| 23 | Minnesota | 12 | 26 | 0.462 | 0.5 | 0.833 | 0 | 0.667 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 0 |
| 24 | St Louis | 17 | 37 | 0.459 | 0.75 | 0.5 | 0.571 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0 | 0.444 |
| 25 | Cincinnati | 14 | 32 | 0.438 | 0.75 | 0.5 | 0.75 | 0.5 | 0 | 0.2 | 0.429 |
| 26 | Cleveland | 13 | 30 | 0.433 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 0.286 | 0.4 |
| 27 | Miami | 13 | 31 | 0.419 | 0.75 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0 | 0.4 | 0.25 |
| 28 | Tampa Bay | 15 | 39 | 0.385 | 0.75 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0 |
| 29 | Kansas City | 13 | 35 | 0.371 | 1 | 0.333 | 0.667 | 0 | 0.333 | 0 | 0.167 |
| 30 | Jacksonville | 11 | 30 | 0.367 | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.667 | 0.333 | 0.286 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | Detroit | 11 | 30 | 0.367 | 0.75 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0 | 0.2 | 0 | 0.2 |
| 32 | New England | 11 | 33 | 0.333 | 1 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.25 | 0 | 0 |
By this simple metric Savage was a little below average (21st) until Ruckerwas released and that dropped him to the position you see here. Perhaps the most interesting result of this exercise is that there appears to be some correlation to how well teams are performing. One could argue, for the mostpart, that the teams at the top of this list are on the rise and the teams on the bottom are in decline or standing still at best.
This is a fan-created post. Dawgs By Nature assumes no responsibility for the content listed.
There are 50 Comments. Load Now.
Shortcuts to mastering the comment thread. Use wisely.
C - Next Comment
X - Mark as Read
R - Reply
Z - Mark Read & Next
Shift + C - Previous
Shift + A - Mark All Read
Comment Settings
Live comment alert: Hide it!
Comments for this post are closed.