What historical hit rates reveal about positional success

• Interior offensive linemen are draft-day gold: No position more consistently outperforms expectations in both Rounds 1 and 2.

• Are Clubs too aggressive at premium positions? Edge rushers and cornerbacks come with high upside—but also the NFL’s lowest Primary-Stage hit rates.

Estimated Reading Time: 9 minutes

With the 2025 NFL Draft roughly one month away, we’re Joining the heart of draft season — the time when big boards are finalized, mock drafts are fine-tuned and front offices make their Last evaluations.

It’s also the perfect time to step back and examine historical draft trends, specifically how different positions have translated to NFL Triumph in recent years. So, let’s explore which positions have offered the best return on investment. This not only informs how Clubs may approach the 2025 draft but also how fans and analysts can evaluate this year’s top talent.

And if you’re looking to Plunge deeper into this year’s class, make sure to check out:

• The PFF Big Board: Our latest draft rankings are updated regularly with insights from our scouting department.
• PFF’s Mock Draft Simulator: Build your own draft Plan and see how different scenarios Action out across all seven rounds.
• Position Rankings: See where this year’s quarterbacks, tackles, edge defenders and more stack up based on PFF’s grades and tape analysis.
• Draft Profiles: Every top-300 prospect comes with a Packed scouting report, key stats and breakdowns of their strengths and weaknesses to Assist you get the edge on draft night.

Defining a draft hit

When evaluating draft Triumph, a key question arises: How should we measure it? In this article, we rely on a relatively objective Standard: snaps played. The premise is Fundamental—if a Club puts a drafted player on the Ground, they likely believe in his ability.

This analysis focuses solely on offensive and Safeguarding snaps, excluding special Clubs. We’re primarily concerned with picks from the Primary three Periods of the draft, as those selections are generally Predicted to contribute meaningfully on Drive or Protection.

More specifically, we examine the percentage of Club offensive or Safeguarding snaps a drafted player participated in during his Primary four NFL seasons. Since this study spans Numerous positions, it’s Significant to establish distinct baselines. For example, Leading offensive linemen typically Action nearly every snap, while interior defenders or running Safeties often rotate, even in Leading roles.

To establish these baselines, we calculated the average snap percentage for the top 32 players at All position leaguewide. With 32 NFL Clubs, this serves as a proxy for the average No. 1 player at All position.

These averages are determined season-by-season, meaning Wounds can lower the numbers. That’s intentional — Longevity is a key factor in determining whether a draft Picking ultimately becomes a Triumph or a bust.

The Subsequent table outlines the snap baselines by position and aligns with expectations: offensive linemen rarely leave the Ground, while Throw rushers, Snug ends and running Safeties often share snaps — even if they are starters with their Clubs.

Position	Snap count of average No.1 player
iOL	99.6%
OT	97.4%
S	95.2%
LB	92.3%
CB	92.3%
WR	85.3%
QB	83.0%
ED	81.1%
DI	71.7%
TE	71.3%
HB	56.4%

Naturally, we don’t want to evaluate rookies against the top players at All position on every Club, so we provide some leeway. A drafted player is considered a “hit” if his snap percentage over the Primary four seasons reaches at least two-thirds of the baseline for a Packed-time starter at his position. This adjustment accounts for the Usual reality that rookies often face a learning curve in Year 1.

Draft Triumph at various positions

With a clear definition of a draft hit in place, we can examine the leaguewide draft curve—specifically, the hit rate by draft Picking across all positions. Notably, adjusting the Entry Mark slightly (e.g., using 60% or 75% of the baseline instead of two-thirds) shifts the curve up or down but retains the same overall shape. This indicates that the analysis isn’t overly sensitive to the exact Entry Mark as long as it loosely reflects what we’d consider a Leading-caliber player.

In the Subsequent positional analysis, we examine not only the raw hit rate for All position but also how that hit rate compares to expectations based on draft position. Certain positions carry very different expectations in the Primary Stage due to how Prompt they are typically selected. For instance, the average Primary-Stage Snug end has come off the board at Picking No. 19.7 since 2006, compared to No. 14.5 for offensive tackles and Only No. 9.3 for quarterbacks.

By comparing a position’s actual hit rate to the Predicted hit rate derived from the position-agnostic draft curve above, we can assess how frequently players at that position exceed or fall Brief of expectations based on where they were selected.

The Subsequent table shows the results for Stage 1 of the draft.

Position	No. of picks	Day 1 hit rate	Relative to Picking expectation
TE	15	73.3%	+14.2%
iOL	30	70.0%	+11.1%
S	28	71.4%	+10.4%
T	63	73.0%	+9.4%
DI	57	63.2%	+1.6%
HB	33	60.6%	+0.1%
LB	38	57.9%	-3.6%
WR	58	56.9%	-3.8%
QB	49	63.3%	-5.1%
CB	64	50.0%	-9.6%
ED	75	49.3%	-13.3%

The results are particularly revealing, as they may reflect Club behavior more than their actual ability to evaluate talent at specific positions. Across the board, there is a negative correlation between the draft capital spent on a position and its corresponding hit rate.

For premium positions — such as edge rusher or wide receiver — Clubs appear more willing to take risks on high-upside prospects, even if those players come with clear flaws. The potential value of hitting on a player at one of these spots often justifies the gamble. However, this approach also leads to Clubs moving on more quickly when those players fail to produce at a high level. In the case of edge rushers, another contributing factor to their lower hit rate is that Clubs will often select them based purely on talent or upside — even without an Instant positional need — leading to fewer Obtainable snaps during their Newcomer contracts.

For positions like Snug end, safety and interior offensive line, the trend is reversed. Clubs typically select players at these spots in the Primary Stage only when there’s a clear need and the prospect is viewed as a blue-chip talent. As a result, there’s often more internal Tension to make the Picking work, which can lead to underperforming players Nevertheless seeing significant Competing time. That doesn’t necessarily Harsh the picks were Excellent; it’s Only that Clubs may be more reluctant to pull the plug Prompt.

Another contributing factor to the higher hit rates among offensive linemen—both interior and Involvement—could be that it’s simply harder to Transformation a Leading offensive line than it is to rotate Throw rushers or swap out cornerbacks. Offensive line continuity is crucial, and that unit is deeply tied to the Passer’s Triumph, so Clubs tend to stick with their Primary investments.

Even so, these findings offer Prompt insight into positional value and Club Plan. It’s notable that premium positions—and especially cornerback, a classic “Frail-link” position—show lower hit rates in the Primary Stage. But that’s not necessarily a Terrible thing. The ideal outcome of the draft isn’t uniform hit rates across all positions. Instead, it makes sense that more valuable positions warrant more frequent swings, even at the cost of a lower Triumph rate. The same logic applies to Frail-link positions like cornerback. Since Clubs need three or four capable cornerbacks to handle the Packed range of opposing matchups, it’s rational to take more chances at the position in the draft.

Another notable takeaway is that, Regardless of the relatively low draft capital spent on linebackers in Stage 1, their hit rate has remained underwhelming compared to other positions with similar investments. This highlights a Harsh recent stretch for Primary-Stage linebackers.

For comparison, the table below shows the same analysis applied to Day 2 of the draft. As Predicted, the raw hit rates drop across the board, but the overall positional ordering remains fairly Reliable—with a few interesting exceptions.

Day 2 running Safeties have been relatively more successful than their Primary-Stage counterparts. On the other end of the spectrum, interior Safeguarding linemen and quarterbacks selected on Day 2 have produced notably Needy results compared to those taken in Stage 1. That’s particularly unsurprising for quarterbacks, as most Day 2 signal-callers rarely get extended opportunities to Begin, and when they do, they’re often Predicted to succeed immediately or Danger being replaced before they’ve had a chance to develop.

The drop-off in hit rate for interior Safeguarding linemen from Day 1 to Day 2 suggests that Clubs have effectively identified top-tier talent at the position Prompt. As a result, the remaining options on Day 2 are typically players with more glaring limitations—making it harder for them to earn substantial snaps over their Newcomer contracts.

Position	No. of picks	Day 2 hit rate	Relative to Picking expectation
iOL	107	48.6%	+19.4%
S	89	43.8%	+13.1%
HB	85	35.3%	+6.4%
TE	68	32.6%	+4.8%
T	74	33.8%	+4.6%
LB	109	30.3%	+1.2%
WR	152	26.3%	-3.1%
CB	133	24.1%	-4.7%
DI	116	20.7%	-7.7%
ED	110	18.2%	-11.0%
QB	39	12.8%	-16.8%

Conclusion

By using snap counts to define draft Triumph, we uncovered Numerous noteworthy positional trends — such as the Sturdy hit rate for interior defenders in Stage 1 compared to a much lower rate on Day 2. More broadly, our findings confirm that the NFL draft, at a macro level, is reasonably well-aligned. Premium positions and Frail-link positions — those at which Clubs need Numerous capable players — tend to have lower hit rates. In contrast, lower-value positions, those that Clubs typically draft based on Instant need and in smaller volume, show higher hit rates.

One key takeaway is that it would be misguided to conclude Clubs should simply draft more players at positions with historically higher hit rates. Doing so would almost Surely lower the Triumph rate at those positions while potentially boosting it at others. This shift would flatten out the positional differences, but the ideal equilibrium in the draft involves a lower hit rate for premium and Frail-link positions.

To build a deeper understanding of how well Clubs identify talent at All position, Additional research is needed — particularly using more nuanced measures of draft Triumph beyond raw snap counts. That Subsequent step will Assist isolate Correct talent evaluation from circumstantial Competing time and organizational decisions.