Here's Medians:

http://s9.postimage.org/9ynbgzywv/DT_Med.png

Very interesting stuff MagicHef. Good work :thumb:

mmmm. Pacman.

wocka wocka wocka

Ok, this makes me feel a little better. Plotting total snaps against experience changes things:

http://s9.postimage.org/hdggizdrz/DT_Snaps.png

5th year players played more snaps at DT than rookies did. 6th year players played only 6 fewer snaps than rookies over the course of 5 years. The first big drop off doesn't occur until year 10.

Good work looks interesting. Keep up the good work

so, the avg performance of all DT's starts off at 70% efficiency? that doesn't really seem right.

That's not performance, just number of snaps. Rookie DTs played 34173 snaps over the last 5 seasons, 2nd year DTs played 42510, etc.

Okay, Rain Man, what is the best way to weed out the players that never had a chance of succeeding?

The issue with that is that since I only have 5 years of data, if we limit it to guys with 10 year careers, that means we have no data for the first 5 years of anyone's career.

Here's something I came up with. If we limit it to guys who have a full 5 years of data, hopefully we can cover close to the entire range of experience while getting rid of the guys who can't play. Most players wouldn't play for 5 years if they were terrible. I made the graph below by limiting it to guys with 5 years of experience.

The pink line is their average rating, yellow is median, and blue is every player's rating summed, divided by the sum of their snaps, then multiplied by a constant (total snaps of all players divided by total player-seasons). If that makes sense. I'm not sure which line would give the best sense of typical development.

http://s1.postimage.org/b553fchwf/5_year_Comparison.png

Ok, one (maybe) last thing before I do DEs and OLBs. Here's the same draft position chart as before, but with some percentiles (90, 75, 50, 25, 10) added in. Hopefully it will give us something useful to compare with the draft data for other positions.

http://s9.postimage.org/4lboy9i4f/DT_Draft_P.png

I think the key to a really good DT is heart. It's a horrible job and can really wear you down. It's a job that has very little reward. You have to find a guy that will weather the storm because the transition from college to pro is a really tough one at that position. People like to look at size and strength when evaluating these guys but the motor and the desire to play football are the biggest factors imo. The good ones are always extremely driven.

If KC drafts a DT, I hope they draft Jenkins from Georgia (if he provs to want it bad enough). He is an experienced 3-4 NT and the learning curve might not be as bad. I know we probably won't be in a position to take him but, he would be my guy...

Ok, I've done DE/OLBs. I put them on the same graphs as the DTs to compare.

First, their "development" (snap weighted average grade by experience):

http://s14.postimage.org/kiqrz2utd/DTDE.png

Snap Count:

http://s7.postimage.org/7b6xbj9uj/DTDESnaps.png

Draft (just DE/OLBs, not DTs):

http://s9.postimage.org/9hgsn5m2n/DE_Draft_P.png

who in the **** thought Tyson Jackson was a good idea in the top 3 - holy ****....