With the NFL draft less than a week away, optimism among the league’s 32 fan bases abounds. Everyone is hoping their team will land a solid draft class that will plug the holes they need filled and provide depth to sure up areas of weakness.

Will they, though? I’m not here to burst any bubbles or crush any dreams, but the truth is, most players about to be selected will never make it in the league or will wash out quickly. The success rate for NFL draft picks is shockingly low, especially with the teams who initially select them. And, depending on what position a prospect plays, that rate varies wildly. Certain position groups have a reasonable rate of success while others are long shots no matter when they’re selected. This article takes a deep dive on both of those subjects.

To begin, Lance Zierlein of NFL.com did an interesting evaluation recently where he broke down all the position groups by potential in the 2024 draft. He identified star-caliber players, future starters and overall depth. Generally speaking, he concentrated on prospects who are most likely to be drafted in Rounds 1 through 5 and he weighed star players and future starters twice as heavily as players who should simply provide depth.

In the end, offensive tackle, wide receiver and quarterback were the top three groups in Zierlein’s rankings. CBS Sports did a similar study, and determined the same three position groups to be the strongest, except the CBS study flip-flopped receivers and tackles at the top. The safest bets in this draft exist at receiver, tackle and quarterback, it seems, where teams in need of those players should find good value.

What does history tell us about these position groups, however? All drafts are different, and this current crop of receivers, tackles and quarterbacks are independent of any other draft. Still, when we go back and look at which groups have been most successful in recent years, and those that have traditionally struggled, we can get a feel for what to expect from this season’s draft class.

First, though, let’s think more globally. In a typical draft, how many players can a team expect to actually stick and make an impact? Examining these numbers should give us an idea on what to anticipate from a team’s draft class as a whole.

From the data I’ve gathered, between 2011-2020, approximately 95% of players taken in Rounds 1 and 2 made the roster of the team that drafted them. That number fell to 85% for 3rd rounders, 66% for 4th round picks, 53% for 5th rounders, and a combined 33% for rounds 6 and 7. Cumulatively, in a typical draft where seven players are selected, at least five should make the opening day roster. If your team cuts more than two players from its draft class, it either means they are exceptionally deep and not really in need of young talent or – more likely – they made some mistakes in their evaluation process.

While five or six draft picks making the roster seems like a good number, many of those are short timers, meaning they are cut or released after a year or two. The average length of an NFL career is just over three years, not all of which is typically spent with the team who originally selects a player. The reality is that most of the players your team picks won’t pan out. Whether they’re busts, didn’t live up to their draft position, had injury or off-field issues or just never made an impact, most come and go rather quickly.

A more insightful metric on how effective a team’s draft class is than simply how many make the roster is to look at those who become long-term producers with that team. The 33rd Team did a study, based on the 2010-2017 NFL draft classes, which have now all completed their rookie contracts, to gauge the effectiveness of all the players selected in those drafts, and in particular how many signed a second contract with their original team. Here’s what they found:

Of the 2,000+ players taken in those eight drafts, 69% were either cut outright or released within two seasons.

23% became reliable starters – which was defined as two-to-three years as a starting player – but did not sign second contracts with the team who drafted them.

8% were considered great – meaning long-term starters, Pro Bowl players and even guys worthy of Hall of Fame consideration.

In that same time, about 12% of those 2,000+ players signed second contracts with their original team. 12% — that’s it. The odds of drafting a player who will become a fixture for their original franchise are slim.

Where might you find these fixture-type players in the draft? Not surprisingly, Round 1 is your best bet. 54% of Round 1 picks in that 2010-2017 period became starters for at least 2-3 seasons with their original teams, and 31% signed second contracts. From there, the numbers fall off significantly. So, while we’re all optimistic that our favorite teams will check off the boxes that need checking, the numbers say if you get two guys from the draft who become starters for your team over the next few seasons, you’ve done pretty well. If you get a player or two to add depth for a few years, even better. And maybe, just maybe, you’ll even get a star.

As for this draft, Zeirlein, CBS and just about everyone else doing draft analysis has pegged tackles, receivers and quarterbacks as the marquee position groups. There’s a caveat to that, however, and it goes like this: if you’re selecting players from these groups, you have a pretty good chance of landing a starter or even a star at tackle and receiver, but much less so at quarterback.

Between 2011-2020, 83% of offensive tackles drafted in Round 1 became starters. In Round 2, 70% became starters, and in Rounds 3-4 it was 34%. All of those numbers rank highest for any position group. So, if you want a starting-caliber offensive tackle, odds are high you can find one between rounds 1-4.

At wide receiver, the numbers aren’t quite as good but are still pretty strong. 58% taken in the 1st Round became starters, 49% in the 2nd Round and then 25% in rounds 3-4.

For quarterbacks, the window on finding your guy is extremely small. 63% of all 1st Rounders became starters, but there’s a cut-off line within the round. Quarterbacks taken in the Top 5 had a 71% rate. Outside the Top 5, it plummeted, with only 24% earning significant starting time.

Beyond Round 1, finding a starter at quarterback is nearly impossible. The 2nd Round produced a 24% success rate, Round 3 was at 14% and beyond Round 3 it falls to 4%. Dak Prescott, Gardner Minshew, Brock Purdy. That’s about it. There are some guys like Sam Howell, Jarett Stidham and Aidan O’Connell who were post-Round 3 picks who are listed as current starters, but they don’t fall within the parameters of the study and honestly it’s too early to tell if any of them will become more than just place-holders at the position until their respective teams find someone they like better.

Bottom line –  if you’re looking for a starting quarterback in this draft, and you’re picking outside the Top 5, good luck.

What does this mean in real terms? Well, for the teams at the top of the draft – namely Chicago, Wash and NE, who pick one, two and three and are all expected to take quarterbacks – they have about a 70% chance of finding a long-term starter or even a star. For the Vikings and Broncos, who pick 11th and 12th and are also QB-needy, their odds of doing the same are just 24%. Do the Vikings or Broncos trade up to take their quarterback? Do they sit where they are and bet that the fourth-best quarterback in this draft – whomever that might be – will become a quality starter too, even if he’s taken outside the Top 5? This is some of the best intrigue of the draft, and what makes being a general manager so hard. You have to get your board right, you have to get your data right, the draft has to fall a certain way for you, and then you have to hope the coaches you’ve hired can turn the prospect you’ve drafted into a quality NFL player. Your job is riding on all of it. Good luck.

For teams drafting tackles and receivers, there’s a much better chance for success. There were four OTs taken in Round 1 last season – Paris Johnson Jr, Darnell Wright, Broderick Jones and Anton Harrison – and all were starters by midway through their rookie seasons. All graded out as above average players per PFF. That’s pretty impressive for a group of rookies. The 1st Round wasn’t as good for receivers, with Jaxon Smith-Njigba, Quentin Johnson, Zay Flowers and Jordan Addison chosen. Like the tackles, all four were starters but they didn’t rate as highly. The two best rookies in the class, arguably, were Puka Nakua and Rashee Rice, both of whom were taken much later, which suggests you can find productive receivers further down in the draft. It’s harder to do so with tackles, and nearly impossible with QBs.

As for last season’s Round 1 quarterbacks, the jury remains out. Bryce Young struggled on a bad team, CJ Stroud flourished on a surprisingly good one, and Anthony Richardson got injured and missed most of the season. History says 71% of signal-callers taken in the Top 5 become reliable starters, which suggests two out of the three just mentioned will succeed, while one won’t. Anyone want to wager on the odd man out? Early impressions hint it will be Young, but let’s see what a new coaching staff and a year of experience can do for him.

Let’s put a bow on this, then. Every draft is different, and trends are not absolutes. But for the analytics crowd out there, if your team needs a tackle or a wide receiver, this is a good draft to get one. And the numbers say that players taken fairly early at those positions tend to succeed. If you need a quarterback, you’d better get him early. Like really early. Top 5 or bust.

Oh, and if you need a tight end? Well, other than Brock Bowers, who seems like a lock, good luck. In all of the studies I researched, tight ends had the highest bust rate of any group by far.

This article was the subject of my podcast, The Call Sheet, which airs every Thursday. You can access the episode below: