2019 NFL Draft QB Analytics Guide

Introduction

The regular season is long over, the super bowl is done with, and it is officially draft season. This year, I want to commit to putting out a comprehensive analytics guide for each major position group. Using multiple predictive models, I want to go in depth with the top 10ish players for every position. Today, let’s start with the quarterback prospects:

Quarterbacks, at least for me, have to be evaluated much differently than other positions. And in my opinion, it’s not even necessarily because they are any harder to evaluate, it’s because opportunities for quarterbacks are controlled mostly by narrative and not by ability. Highly drafted QBs are given way more chances than deserved (looking at you Gabbert) and lowly drafted QBs are rarely given a second look. For that reason, much like Football Outsiders’ QBASE, I will only be looking at QB’s drafted in the first 100 picks of the draft. Doing this gives us a better sample of quarterbacks that actually get the chance to play. For this set, we are using QBs from 1990 to 2013.

Model Details

For each prospect, I have run 4 different models. One is a multiple linear regression that projects a prospect’s career per season approximate value. Approximate value is a metric created by pro-football-reference.com that boils a player’s seasonal performance down to a single number. It’s not a perfect metric, but I like using it to compare across different positions. The next three models are three logistic regressions that classify each prospect’s chance at getting 1 or more, 3 or more, and 5 or more seasons of above average era-adjusted adjusted yards per attempt. For each of those, I have set two thresholds to separate the prospects with high risk and the prospects with high upside. The following chart shows the success rates at these thresholds:

Model	High Upside	High Risk	1st Rounders	2nd-3rd Rounders
1+ Season	~82% Success	~21% Success	54% Success	27% Success
3+ Seasons	~69% Success	~15% Success	37% Success	16% Success
5+ Seasons	~36% Success	~10% Success	27% Success	7% Success

As you can see, the high upside and high risk thresholds outperform draft position for the majority of classes. However, the results are even better when you bake in draft position:

Model	1st + Upside	1st + None	1st + Risk	2nd/3rd + Upside	2nd/3rd + None	2nd/3rd + Risk
1+ Season	~84% Success	~43% Success	~29% Success	~50% Success	~35% Success	~16% Success
3+ Seasons	~71% Success	~33% Success	~20% Success	~50% Success	~30% Success	~12% Success
5+ Seasons	~45% Success	~50% Success	~15% Success	~20% Success	~0% Success	~6% Success

The big takeaway I found is that the 1+ and 3+ models follow the order of 1st + Upside, 2nd/3rd + Upside, 1st + None, 2nd/3rd + None, 1st + Risk, and 2nd/3rd + Risk. This is how I would expect the success rates to break out, suggesting to me that using the models will help us increase our chances of finding successful QB prospects. Using these we can break down the group of possible QBs down to different tiers, helping set expectations for each prospect. The 5+ model does not follow this trend, and I would chalk that up to a low sample size. Still, we can see the general trend that prospects that fall under the risk group are much more likely to not reach 5+ above average seasons.

Prospect Grading System

Before I take a closer look at each prospect, here’s an example of how I would grade a prospect based on these models. This would be the grade I would assign Baker Mayfield from his data last year: 10.66 UUN. The first number is the result of the linear regression I mentioned earlier, based on Baker’s data we can expect him to average 10.66 AV per season over his career, an extremely high number. The next three numbers stand for the category he falls into based in the categorical models: Upside for 1+ Season, Upside for 3+ Seasons, and None for 5+ Seasons. Overall, Baker would have been a blue chip QB in our grading system. The only piece he could have been better was the 5+ model, and that’s the one we take the least stock into. 

2019 QB Grades

Without further ado, let's get onto the grades for this year’s class. For each guy I’ll give his grade, and explain what the model likes and doesn’t like for each guy:

1. Kyler Murray: 8.10 UUU

The highly polarizing Kyler Murray lands as our top graded quarterback, and looks to be an excellent prospect at that. A rock solid 8.10 AV per season and passing all three categorical models means that Kyler is in this draft, or most other drafts. And get this: the 1+ and 3+ season models take into account his paltry size. An early starter at Texas A&M, the models love Kyler’s era adjusted completion percentage, production on the ground, and strength of competition. 

2. Dwayne Haskins: 6.47 NNN

Haskins represents a fairly large tier break compared to Murray. A below average score on the AV model, combined with the middling results in the logistic models means that there is some decent risk selecting Haskins early. Haskins had excellent production, but was unable to get a starting job until his Junior year, something all of the models ding him for. While there are exceptions to this, it is very rare for a prospect that breaks out that late to stick in the NFL. A team picking Haskins will hope that he will buck that trend, and that his high level production this year was for real.

3. Drew Lock: 5.67 NNN

I would place another tier break in between Haskins and Lock. Projected to go in about the same area, Lock is significantly lower than Haskins in the AV model. The model loves the fact that Lock was able to secure the starting job at Mizzou in his freshman year, but his production was only slightly above average in his final season. 

4. Daniel Jones: 5.45 NNN

Another disappointment, Jones is a similar level prospect to Lock. A long time starter with very bad production, Jones is buoyed by his underrated rushing work, age, and size. While I would not want to select either guy, I would probably take Jones over Lock, as he is projected to go 10 spots later than Lock and has a similar grade.

5. Will Grier: 4.36 NRR

Grier looks like he will be a perennial backup in the NFL. The AV model likes him better than the categorical models, but the capped upside makes him a tough sell. I would pass based on his current projected draft slot of 40. He’s more palatable if he were to slip until the high 3rd round.

6. Jarrett Stidham: 2.68 NRU

Stidham is a lottery ticket. While he is probably not going to turn into anything, Stidham passes the high upside check for the 5+ seasons model. While that model is somewhat unreliable, there is considerable potential upside still. If I’m a team with an already established starter, I would not be opposed to rolling the dice in the late 3rd, getting him working with our OC and QB coach, and hoping he can put the tools together.

7. Brett Rypien: 2.89 NRR

Rypien looks like another backup only type prospect. Experienced and accurate, Rypien’s weak college strength of schedule hurts him. His projected draft slot it 100, which puts him right on the bubble of being considered by the model.

8. Ryan Finley: 1.81 RRR

Finley is, simply put, not a prospect that I would consider. An older, late starter at NC State, Finley put together a respectable season last year, but was not enough to overcome the other negative aspects of his profile, including his very slight frame.