jeanpierre

Yes.

Seer1

I'm okay with shared time for a couple of years, but by year three they need to be kicking ass or bust. I bet a bunch more make it into the bust category even with my forgiving definition. That's just the nature of the beast.

triman

I may have been mistaken about saying any 1st rd pick who does not start is a bust. I do think that it is reasonable to expect to contribute early and often

SloMotion

The higher you go in the draft, the better contract you get. I think it's reasonable to expect a first-rounder to be a starter & contribute immediately to a team or be considered a bust, considering the money it cost to draft said first-rounder; unless of course, the plan is to groom a player behind a superstar, ie Aaron Rodgers ... and the higher you go in the first round, the more should be expected.

FinSaint

I think the term "bust" is used much too freely when talking about draft picks who don't live up to the high expectations people have for them for a reason or another, but to me most of those "bust" players are just disappointments and possibly mistakenly scouted to begin with.

I'd reserve the harsh designation of a true "bust" to players like Jamarcus Russell, who deserves it both from a business and performance standpoint.