2024 NFL Draft: Which Quarterback Is Statistically Superior?

We've known for a long time that the crop of quarterbacks in the 2024 NFL Draft was going to be good.

Ever since Caleb Williams shined as a true freshman, it was clear the top of the board would bring some firepower.

But with the draft now just a couple of months away, it's suddenly the depth of the class that stands out.

There are six quarterbacks -- Williams, Drake Maye, Jayden Daniels, Michael Penix, JJ McCarthy, and Bo Nix -- who have gotten at least some first-round buzz, and there's a legitimate chance the first three picks are all quarterbacks. Not everybody can equal the hype around Williams, but we've got some sick consolation prizes on the table.

And the data says most of those players would be deserving first-rounders.

I have a model that evaluates quarterbacks based on their collegiate resumes coming out: their age, experience, and final-year efficiency, to be specific. Within this model are all 248 quarterbacks invited to the combine from 2010 to 2024 (NOTE: This piece originally ran before all 2024 combine invitees had been announced. It has been updated to reflect the standing of 2024 prospects after adding in additional combine invites for this season).

All six of these quarterbacks rank in the 66th percentile or better among that group.

And one of them is the model's new top-ranked prospect across all 15 draft classes.

Today, we're going to dig into that model and see what it says about all six quarterbacks based strictly on the numbers. The opinions of scouts matter, so this is not how I'd rank the prospects, and it's not to say it's how NFL teams should rank them, either. But the data does have a good track record.

Let's start there, outlining why this is a worthwhile exercise to begin with, and then we'll go through the ranking of these six signal-callers.

Why the Numbers Matter

As you probably could have guessed, there's no single number that can tell you whether a quarterback will be good. Otherwise, we wouldn't have first-round busts.

But in general, players with better collegiate resumes are more likely to pan out than those with lesser numbers.

When I reference a player's collegiate resume, I'm looking at the inputs the model uses to evaluate them. That's their age when drafted, the number of collegiate games with 10-plus pass attempts, their final-year adjusted yards per attempt (AY/A), and their final-year Total QBR, an ESPN metric that adjusts for schedule and game context while accounting for the value added as a rusher.

Since 2010, 43 quarterbacks have been selected in the first round. Here's their average collegiate resume, which you can use as a reference for later on. The pre-draft model rank is the percentile rank of those players among all quarterbacks invited to the combine since 2010.

So, on average, first-rounders are in the 74th percentile of the model before you account for draft capital.

Five of the six quarterbacks we're looking at today are in that range. Again, this class is deep.

That tells us nothing about whether these players wound up being successful pros, though. And it's tough to define what "success" is, so there's no perfect parameter to set here. For our purposes, we'll be looking at Total Net Expected Points (NEP).

NEP is numberFire's EPA metric, with Total NEP being the number of expected points a player added in a year, both as a passer and a rusher. We'll be looking at how often these guys have ranked inside the top 5, 10, and 15 in Total NEP in their qualified seasons (minimum 200 drop backs) in the NFL.

The difference-makers at the position are the guys who consistently rank inside the top 10 in Total NEP. Not only have they held down starting jobs, but they are efficient year after year.

Of the 43 first-rounders, 14 have ranked inside the top 10 in Total NEP in at least one-third of their qualified seasons. This is where you find guys like Patrick Mahomes, Lamar Jackson, Josh Allen, Joe Burrow, and C.J. Stroud -- the kinds of players you're hoping to get when taking a quarterback early.

That leaves 29 others who fail to reach this threshold. Of those 29, three (Kenny Pickett, Bryce Young, and Anthony Richardson) are within their first three years in the league, so we'll omit them for the time being and withhold judgment.

That leaves us 14 successful first-rounders and 26 who have left something to be desired. Here's the average collegiate resume of the players in each group and how the model viewed them coming out.

As mentioned, there's no one stat that signals a player will or won't be a success. But on average, the hits were younger, more experienced, and more efficient coming out. Thus, the model had them graded a good amount better than the rest of the group.

This is despite the fact that two players in the "hit" category -- Allen and Jordan Love -- were poor prospects in the eyes of the model. That means two things.

First, quarterbacks the model dislikes can still be awesome players. Numbers will never tell a full story. There are no definitives here.

Second, a grand majority of the hits had really good prospect profiles. The other 12 successful first-rounders were all in the 80th percentile of the model or higher, and 8 of them were in at least the 90th percentile.

The 80th percentile range has some true home runs in it, and the difference between a player in the 80th percentile and 90th percentile doesn't seem all that drastic. It's after that when things start to fall off.

The 26 first-rounders who were 80th-percentile prospects or better before the draft have finished in the top 10 in Total NEP in 32.4% of their qualified seasons. The 17 lower-ranked prospects have done so just 14.3% of the time, and Allen is the only player to do so twice (though Love appears on his way to joining that list).

Again, this all proves you don't need to have a great resume coming out to be a star. It certainly does boost your odds, though.

That bodes well for this year's class. As mentioned, all six of the top guys are in the 64th percentile or better of the pre-draft model, and four of them are in at least the 88th percentile. But only one of them can be the top-ranked prospect since 2010.

That guy is Jayden Daniels.

Let's dig into what makes Daniels so dazzling and then discuss the pros and cons of the rest of this group through the lens of the model.

1. Jayden Daniels, LSU

Age: 23.4 | Games: 55 | AY/A: 13.6 | Total QBR: 95.7 | Model Percentile: 100.0%

Relative to most quarterback prospects, Daniels is on the older side of things. The average first-rounder is 22.2 years old on the day of the draft, and it's 23.0 for all quarterbacks at the combine. Daniels clears both of those marks.

But the rest of his profile is so sick that he's still the top guy in the history of the model.

Daniels' 13.6 AY/A this year tied the all-time NCAA record and is the best of any player in his final year before a combine invite. And that number doesn't even factor in Daniels' legs.

Daniels turned 55 scrambles into 721 yards, according to PFF, a whopping 13.1 yards per attempt.

Unsurprisingly, Daniels' 95.7 Total QBR led the nation by nearly five points and is the third-highest mark in the prospect model.

From strictly an efficiency perspective, Daniels had one of the most dominant seasons in college football history.

That definitely bolsters Daniels' outlook. Of our 14 successful first-round quarterbacks, 11 had a Total QBR of at least 80. First-rounders with a Total QBR of 80 or higher in their final year have finished in the top 10 in Total NEP in 30.7% of their qualified NFL seasons, up from 17.5% for those who were less efficient.

He emphatically checks that portion of the resume.

Let's talk about the age, though, because that does matter. Assuming Daniels goes in the first round, he'll be the fourth-oldest prospect to do so since 2010, trailing only Pickett, Brandon Weeden, and Ryan Tannehill. He's just a hair older than Burrow, who turned into a superstar, but the track record of older prospects is spotty at best.

It helps Daniels that he was a starter the entire time he was in college. He had a 9.4 AY/A as a true freshman and had three seasons at 9.0 or higher (though one was just a four-game sample due to the Pac 12's abbreviated COVID-19 schedule). In all, he had 10-plus pass attempts in 55 games, which would surpass Pickett for the most for a first-rounder in this span.

We want quarterback prospects who are young because it signals they earned playing time right away and were good enough to declare early. Daniels checks only one of those boxes, and it does ding him. But it's not as if he was a backup who couldn't crack the starting lineup.

Of the 13 first-rounders aged 22.5 or older when drafted, only three had both experience (at least 35 games of 10-plus pass attempts) and efficiency (a QBR of 80.0). One is Pickett, who has struggled, but another was Andrew Luck. Luck finished in the top 10 in Total NEP in 4 of 6 qualified seasons and didn't have the same physical traits of Daniels. Thus, I'm hesitant to hold Daniels' age against him too much, even if it does and should hurt him.

The final key point here is that the pre-draft model does correlate well to draft capital. The model's top-ranked quarterback has been the first overall pick in 5 of 14 seasons (35.7%) and was the second overall pick 3 additional times. NFL teams seem to value the same things the model does.

Right now at FanDuel Sportsbook, Caleb Williams' betting odds to be the first overall pick are -1200. Daniels is +3000, just 3.2% implied odds.

We're still relatively early in this process, and Williams' odds are where they are for a reason. Scouts love him, and based on the data, they should. But Daniels is coming off of a bananas season and is only 11 months older than Williams.

The market says there's more than a 96% chance that a bet on Daniels to go first overall loses, and we should keep that in mind. But given Daniels' standing and the model's historic correlation with draft capital, I think we've got the green light to consider Daniels as a longshot to be the first name off the board.

If he doesn't go first, Daniels should be a consideration to go second, as well. Both Mel Kiper and Lance Zierlein have already put Daniels second overall in early mocks, meaning he's got a puncher's chance against Maye.

FanDuel has Daniels' odds to go second at +170 (37.0%). You're not getting as big of a discount here, but it also means Daniels doesn't have to leapfrog Williams for the bet to cash. I'm less inclined, personally, to take the dive here, but it's a fair route if you want to take Williams out of the equation.

2. JJ McCarthy, Michigan

Age: 21.3 | Games: 29 | AY/A: 9.8 | Total QBR: 89.2 | Model Percentile: 95.1%

I don't think the model will get much pushback for loving Daniels. He's electric, and he won the Heisman for a reason.

But JJ McCarthy? That might be a different story.

You saw the criticisms of McCarthy during the National Championship. He averaged just 22.1 pass attempts per game during the Michigan Wolverines' title run as they leaned heavily on their impressive ground game. Why should an NFL franchise trust McCarthy to sling it if Michigan didn't?

As always, it's a bit more complicated than that. Michigan had the nation's best defense by Bill Connelly's SP+ and won 15 games by an average of 25.5 points. When you add in their ground game, they didn't air it out because they didn't have to.

Plus, when they did decide to drop back, McCarthy had great numbers.

His 89.2 Total QBR was third in the nation, trailing only Daniels and Nix. Both of those guys are at least two years older than McCarthy, who just turned 21 in January.

McCarthy's Total QBR is more impressive than his AY/A (9.8) partly due to the schedule he faced. More than 63% of his pass attempts came against top-50 defenses by SP+, and the average opposing defensive rank was 38.8. Both were toughest of the six quarterbacks we're looking at today.

That average defensive ranking will be the seventh-toughest for any FBS quarterback drafted since 2010 once McCarthy gets the call.

That plus efficiency wasn't just because of Michigan's run game and positive game script. McCarthy had a whopping 13.1 AY/A on 3rd and 6 or longer, spots where the defense knew a pass was coming.

That 13.1 AY/A easily led this class and is the third-best mark for any quarterback prospect since 2010, trailing just Tua Tagovailoa and Kyler Murray. McCarthy's (relatively) lower AY/A is also excusable given 17.8% of his pass attempts came in these obvious passing situations.

The biggest boon of McCarthy's resume, though, is his age. He's nearly a half-year younger than everybody else on this list, but he still managed to log 10-plus pass attempts in 29 games. He also did earn playing time as a true freshman, even if he wasn't the starter at that time.

Age alone doesn't make a player a great prospect, otherwise Sam Darnold, Josh Rosen, and Christian Hackenberg would have been stars. But when it's paired with some experience and efficiency, then we can cook.

Since 2010, 8 first-round quarterbacks have been young (21.6 or younger when drafted), decently experienced (25-plus games), and efficient (a total QBR of 80 or higher). That group includes two MVPs in Mahomes and Jackson and others who have had NFL success in Stroud, Jared Goff, and Trevor Lawrence. You have some busts in there, too, but it's clear this blend is a formula for upside.

Of course, that all depends on where McCarthy goes in the draft. FanDuel hasn't yet posted a market on whether McCarthy will go in the first round, and there's no pick over/under yet, either.

The aforementioned mock drafts by Kiper and Zierlein both have McCarthy in the first round, as does Dane Brugler's, though McCarthy was not in Daniel Jeremiah's initial mock. Given Jeremiah's stout track record, that's reason for some pause. But in general, it does seem the scouting sentiment on McCarthy is high.

When you pair that with what the numbers say, we should dig into McCarthy markets when they're posted. It's hard to see him cracking the top five, but McCarthy should be very much in play once teams drafting in the teens are on the clock.

3. Bo Nix, Oregon

Age: 24.2 | Games: 61 | AY/A: 11.2 | Total QBR: 91.0 | Model Percentile: 93.9%

Take every slider on Jayden Daniels' resume and make it two ticks worse. That gives you precisely Bo Nix's profile.

It's just a question of how much each downgrade should hurt his profile.

The similarities between Nix and Daniels are staggering. Both started as true freshmen, eventually transferred, continued starting, and put up great efficiency stats in their final seasons. Thus, it makes sense the model is also high on Nix.

I do think there are more downsides with Nix, though, and we'll touch on those later. Let's discuss the sunny side first.

Nix ranked second in the nation in Total QBR, trailing just Daniels, and was the only other quarterback to top 90 in that stat. It's the 10th-highest Total QBR for a quarterback to get a combine invite since 2010. The only quarterback in that group not to go in the first round is Russell Wilson.

Nix also has unparalleled experience. His 61 games played is the most among combine-invitees in this span, topping Case Keenum's previous high of 56. It's worth noting, though, that Daniels may have topped that mark had the Pac-12 had a more robust schedule during 2020.

So, Nix is experienced and efficient. Those are two things we want out of a high pick, thus it's less surprising to see Nix in the first round of Jeremiah's initial mock. Again, Jeremiah's track record is good, so that's a mark in Nix's favor.

Now let's get to the negatives.

The big one is in one of the tables above with McCarthy: Oregon's schedule.

The average defensive ranking for Oregon's opponents was 79.2, and only 41.1% of Nix's pass attempts came against top-50 defenses. The averages for FBS quarterbacks drafted since 2010 are 59.0% and 48.9%, respectively. It's not the easiest road a quarterback has faced, but it is close.

Additionally, Nix didn't necessarily light it up when he did face tougher foes. His AY/A sagged to 8.9, down from 11.2 for the full season.

The second factor is something that's not in the model: Nix's aDOT.

Nix finished the year with a 6.8-yard aDOT, and only 10.9% of his throws traveled 20-plus yards downfield, according to PFF. Both of those were easily the lowest of this group.

Having a low aDOT isn't necessarily a bad thing. Nix is running the offense in front of him, and he ran it well.

It gets more concerning when you account for context, though. As you can see in this tweet from Nick Miller, Nix threw beyond the sticks on 3rd or 4th and long only 31.8% of the time.

Finally, we get to the age discussion. Even though they're in the same year, Nix is nearly 10 months older than Daniels, in turn meaning he's nearly three years older than McCarthy. He'd be the second oldest first-rounder in our sample, trailing only Weeden. Like Daniels, Nix did earn playing time right away, but the negatives do start to pile up here.

Similar to McCarthy, FanDuel's odds Nix gets drafted by various teams center around a bunch of teams drafting in the teens. That's despite the fact that Nix went ahead of McCarthy in only one of the four mocks linked above.

If we get any head-to-head markets between Nix and McCarthy, McCarthy would be intriguing at anything even money or longer. Even though the model views both favorably, there's more shakiness in Nix's profile than McCarthy's, and it seems like the early sentiments of scouts reflect that.

Nix's resume, though, is impressive enough to think he'll potentially wind up in the first. That'll be pertinent once markets about the number of first-round quarterbacks are posted.

Three seem very likely to go in the first. McCarthy seems like a solid bet to wind up there, too, and Nix has a good enough profile to justify it. Thus, I'm assuming the over/under will wind up at 4.5. It feels like a big number, but pretty much anything at +120 or higher will at least be enough to warrant consideration.

4. Caleb Williams, USC

Age: 22.4 | Games: 35 | AY/A: 10.3 | Total QBR: 82.3 | Model Percentile: 88.6%

It probably looks odd to see Caleb Williams this low on the list, and maybe that is an indictment of the model. There's no doubt that Williams is a better prospect than Nix.

But it's important to remember that this ranking is well above average for a first-rounder, and a lot of guys in this range have turned into stars. Williams deserves the hype he has gotten.

Williams is the one guy in this class who checks every box. He has plus efficiency at a young age, and he brings one more year as a full starter than McCarthy and Maye. He's the prototypical guy you target at the top of the draft.

Let's circle back to the discussion around first-rounders who have panned out. As a reminder, these are the 14 first-round picks who have finished inside the top 10 in one-third of their qualified NFL seasons. Williams' resume measures up well against theirs.

As mentioned, a lot of those hits were in roughly the same range of the model as Williams. Between the 85th and 95th percentile of the pre-draft model, you'll find Mahomes, Jackson, Burrow, Stroud, Luck, Goff, and Watson, all of whom have been -- or will be -- regulars at the top of the Total NEP leaderboard.

That's what the numbers say. When you watch Williams, you understand why scouts are infatuated, as well.

Williams can work his way out of poor situations and still make plays. It gives you confidence about his ability to excel even if his surrounding context isn't pristine.

So, the question is why the model isn't as high on him. It's a couple of factors. The amount of weight you put on them will determine how concerning they are.

One big factor is sacks. Williams had a 7.8% sack rate, the highest of the six quarterbacks in this sample. It's nowhere near as concerning as what we had with guys like Malik Willis and Sam Howell a few years ago, but it's definitely not low.

That dragged down Williams' Total QBR, as did the level of competition he faced. Williams had three games against defenses outside the top 100 of SP+ and three others against defenses outside the top 80. The model weighs Total QBR heavily, so a (relatively) lower number there did hurt him.

The sack rate is easy to understand, though. Williams' time to throw was 3.16 seconds, according to PFF, a truly massive number. He was trying to make plays, which makes sense when you consider that 46.1% of his drop backs came while trailing. That doesn't mean his high sack rate is a good thing, but you can at least understand why it happened.

The bummer is that we likely can't profit off of the model's liking of Williams. He's -1200 to go first overall at FanDuel (92.3% implied odds), and as mentioned in the section on Daniels, I think that's too high.

It should give us faith, though, in whichever team drafts Williams both in the short- and long-term. He's a good prospect whose data backs up what scouts say, and that has proven to be a good combo for finding successes in the past.

5. Drake Maye, UNC

Age: 21.7 | Games: 26 | AY/A: 8.7 | Total QBR: 78.8 | Model Percentile: 75.3%

If Nix is the more flawed version of Daniels, then Maye is the more flawed version of Williams, at least in the eyes of the model. There's more shakiness here, even if there's still an obvious path to upside.

Maye's 75th-percentile ranking is right in line with the average for a first-round pick. It's below, though, the 81st-percentile mark for those home-run picks we ran through earlier on, so Maye's the first guy we've looked at who fails to clear that bar.

This is due to a couple of factors. Maye's efficiency was middling this year, and he's not as experienced as either Williams or McCarthy.

Maye's 78.8 Total QBR from this past year ranks in the 72nd percentile for all combine invitees, but it's a bit below the average for a first-rounder (80.1) and a successful first-rounder (81.5).

His 26 games are also the fewest of this group. Although he declared in his first season eligible, Maye redshirted behind Sam Howell in 2021 while Williams and McCarthy were seeing some game action.

Of course, logically we know that sitting behind Howell isn't some sort of red flag. Howell, himself, was an early declare and -- even if it didn't go well -- did earn playing time in the NFL. But that lack of experience puts another dent in Maye's profile.

The question is how much all of this matters. Sure, Maye's statistical profile is flawed, but scouts seem to love him, and, quite frankly, it's easy to understand why.

So, what tends to happen with prospects with middling -- but not bad -- profiles who go early in the draft?

Unsurprisingly, it's a mixed bag. There are 7 quarterbacks ranked between the 60th and 85th percentile of the model who went within the top 10 picks. Here are their resumes alongside Maye's.

Justin Herbert has flashed star-level potential and had a lower Total QBR than Maye. That's a positive for Maye.

Herbert rated out better in the model, though, because he had two extra years as a starter and wasn't that much older than Maye coming out. So while it's a hopeful comp, it's probably not the best one.

More realistically, Maye fits in the Jameis Winston bucket as a guy who was young, started two years, declared early, but didn't set the earth on fire the year he declared. Maye's Total QBR was 82.7 in 2022, which is an improvement but still doesn't alter things a ton.

The other reason for hope in Maye -- despite the numbers -- is his physical skillset. Maye was listed at 6'4", 230 pounds, and he has a big arm. That projectability is part of why a guy like Josh Allen was able to outperform the model's low expectations. And Maye also has a bit of Allen's patented DGAF in him.

So, the model implies Maye's median expectations are lower than those of Williams and Daniels at the top of the draft. The guys most similar to him have busted at a pretty high rate. But he still has a clear path to upside, given his age and physical skills. It's a more nuanced outlook than we have with some of the others.

That's a big part of why I'd have interest in opting for Daniels over him to go second overall. We've already seen some wavering from scouts on Maye's draft stock. Maye's draft position over/under will likely come in at 2.5, and I'd at least want to see what the over looks like as an alternate route to fading him, even if I fully understand why he's looked upon favorably.

6. Michael Penix, Washington

Age: 24.0 | Games: 47 | AY/A: 9.2 | Total QBR: 83.4 | Model Percentile: 66.3%

It was largely sunshine and daisies for the first five prospects, given all had what the model would consider a first-round grade.

It's far cloudier with Michael Penix.

The issue for Penix is that -- unlike his peers -- he isn't a standout in any one category. He ranks below the 80th percentile in age, experience, and efficiency while most of the others have at least one category in the 90th percentile.

Penix's age is actively a negative. He ranks in the 14th percentile there among combine invitees, besting only Nix among this group. He does that while having 14 fewer games of 10-plus pass attempts, in large part due to all the injuries from when he was at Indiana.

As you saw in the College Football Playoff Semifinals, though, Penix is an accurate passer who can make quality throws. His Total QBR is also above average relative to first-rounders, and he does at least have gobs of experience. It's not a hollow profile. It's just more underwhelming than the other guys on this list.

It's not unprecedented for a player with Penix's model ranking to wind up in the first. Four of 21 quarterbacks ranked between the 60th and 69th percentile have been first-rounders. But three of those four were still 21 years old when drafted, so you could better talk yourself into the upside. Penix doesn't bring that to the table.

Thus, it's not a surprise to see Penix outside the first round in all four mocks linked above. If we do get markets on whether Penix will go in the first, we can likely use the model's data as a guide: only 19.0% of quarterbacks in this range have come off the board that early.

If we can get Penix at +450 or longer to go in the first, maybe you can talk yourself into the efficiency angle. I'd just doubt we get a number that favorable, leaving Penix more on the fade side of the spectrum unless the scouting sentiment turns soon.

Which props stand out to you for this year's draft? Check out FanDuel Sportsbook's latest NFL Draft betting odds to see the full menu of options.

Sign up for FanDuel Sportsbook and FanDuel Daily Fantasy today!

The above author is a FanDuel employee and is not eligible to compete in public daily fantasy contests or place sports betting wagers on FanDuel. The advice provided by the author does not necessarily represent the views of FanDuel. Taking the author's advice will not guarantee a successful outcome. You should use your own judgment when participating in daily fantasy contests or placing sports wagers.