2014 NFL Draft

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Sports Argument Stadium > The Football Funhouse > 2014 NFL Draft

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

This is something from a couple years ago I thought was interesting. It's an analysis of how much a pick is worth (e.g., for trading picks). If anyone has anything newer along these lines I'd like to see it. I don't watch the draft but I love to look at past drafts and scouting reports with the benefit of hindsight. http://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/

# ¿ Oct 24, 2013 15:41

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 11, 2024 08:06

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

NFL contracts should be called term sheets or MoUs or something. What proportion of non-rookie 3+ year deals actually stick?

# ¿ Oct 29, 2013 16:13

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

euphronius posted:

What is wrong with calling them contracts. Contracts can be and often are broken before their term is up.

I was just making a joke as they are of course technically contracts, but yes while contracts can be full of conditional propositions (and most terminations aren't really "breaking" them, which would be a breach) in general a contract means a binding agreement and NFL contracts aren't that binding.

pangstrom fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Oct 29, 2013

# ¿ Oct 29, 2013 16:24

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Okay I know this is boring to everyone so this is the last I'll post on this.

Doltos posted:

Man you must work in procurement or something.

What NFL players sign are undoubtedly contracts. Breech of contracts are incredibly common everywhere you go and usually lead to amendments to the contract. There is probably an unbelievable amount of paperwork that goes into every transaction in the NFL and I don't envy the person who has to do them.

People don't often breach the contracts -- there is a clause specifically saying the team can terminate the contract if it decides the player isn't worth it anymore. Which is why I made a joke that it's not much of a contract. HILARIOUS I know especially after explaining it twice.

Emanuel Collective posted:

You can see the contract on page 273. It's nearly indistinguishable from any form contract you'd come across.

Hey, interesting thanks.

# ¿ Oct 29, 2013 17:35

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

I didn't think long and hard about it but I honest to god thought it was Jamarcus Russell

# ¿ Oct 29, 2013 23:59

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

AAA DOLFAN posted:

About 30 yards too short

And 5 pounds too light

# ¿ Oct 30, 2013 00:17

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Doltos posted:

I hate being wrong about QB prospects. I'm usually dead on and the only blatant ones I've missed so far are Matt Ryan and Bradford. drat Ryan for being a frat boy and making me see red instead of the good QB.

Edit oh and Ponder but that was because arguing that Ponder is a good QB is fun

I know this is basically impossible and if you're even a third right you get full credit, but how would you rate/rank some of the QBs (individually) in this class?

# ¿ Oct 31, 2013 15:24

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

bewbies posted:

He was one of the most impressive physical specimens we've ever seen in the draft. He had arguably the strongest arm of any player I've ever seen. He was solid mechanically and had a great throwing motion. He was coming off of one of the better seasons (from an NFL scouting perspective) by a college QB in recent memory; was extremely productive against one of the nation's toughest schedules. In other words, there was a LOT to like about Jamarcus.

Should the Raiders have taken him #1? You had a generational WR prospect, and in my opinion two elite guys (Joe Thomas and AD, and AD had some relatively significant red flags) as the other real possibilities. I don't think they would have been wrong to take any of those 4 guys. Sucks for them that the other three will likely wind up in Canton I guess.

I imagine the mental aspect is very tough to scout, because you're looking at ~20 year olds. The kids that seem stable/motivated usually stay that way, but most 20 year olds who have been semi-worshiped their whole life "throw up red flags". JaMarcus Russell was almost as bad grit-wise as he was good tools-wise but nobody really knows how to measure that.

The other aspect is a NFL team is not a law firm or something -- a gifted player can be pretty unmotivated and immature and self-indulgent and still do fine in the NFL. (Not as fine as they would have otherwise, of course) So you're left almost with tea leaves trying to determine if someone is just a regular lazybones or a super lazybones.

# ¿ Nov 3, 2013 02:12

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Is there a good analysis on body size and injury prone-ness?

# ¿ Nov 18, 2013 14:35

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Declan MacManus posted:

That would require us to agree where he should be taken.

Well, to take the valence out of it: it's safe to say a team is going to pick Manziel earlier than many other teams would have picked him even if they were just drafting best-player-available, and that discrepancy is larger for him than it is for most other players. Basically, he's an odd duck and opinions are going to differ on his chances to fly in the NFL.

# ¿ Nov 18, 2013 19:46

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Ozu posted:

Absolutely. The $7.5m in dead money for 2014 stings though.

Jesus, they still have to count that? Did the Vikings have to eat cap space after Stringer died?

# ¿ Jan 8, 2014 19:11

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Also, just hypothetically if I thought everyone else was drafting dumb but *I* was relatively excellent at valuing prospects, it would be optimal to trade down to get as many picks as possible.

But really based on what teams in the past have received in return I think it's best to trade down for the same reasons everyone else does, i.e. teams over-value earlier picks and over-estimate the steepness in the prospect-decline over the course of the draft.

# ¿ Jan 13, 2014 23:10

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Sataere posted:

I just want to know why I'm not allowed to say that trading down a bunch is overrated!

You can say it and we can disagree. I understand we're talking "in general" here and hypothetically if teams started giving much less to teams who trade down it might even make more sense "in general".

And yes, sometimes it's a team's only way to get something they really want. Interestingly, though, that is probably part of the reason teams that trade up tend to get the short end. The team trading down knows the team trading up really wants what they have, and that's a strong negotiating position. If, say, the Texans were DESPERATE to trade down this year to build depth and none of the other 31 teams were that interested you might see the reverse happen, but for various reasons things tend to go the other way.

# ¿ Jan 14, 2014 16:11

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Intruder posted:

I enjoyed seeing him run the ball and completely blow by the safety who was trying to take an angle on him while at the same time wondering how in the world he was going to tackle him if he did catch him

I liked all the tiny RBs trying to help the tackle with a chip and their body language is just "oh gently caress" even before he blows past them.

# ¿ Feb 19, 2014 21:42

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Quest For Glory II posted:

I just think it is insane to use the #1 pick on anyone other than the best prospect. gently caress position of need.

Well, it depends on the degree of need, the other options, and how much better the "best" prospect is.

(I would pick Clowney because barring injury I think he will almost certainly be great but that's admittedly sort of a chicken poo poo approach and yeah they could use a QB!)

# ¿ Mar 4, 2014 23:00

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Alouicious posted:

the man who hit him with the baseball bat, presumably

TBI increases your schizophrenia chance by 60% so it's possible. And maybe the subsequent football hits didn't help.

Then again sometimes schizophrenia just happens. Or maybe he's bipolar who knows. Football isn't the most important thing here obviously but in the context of the thread: If he's bipolar there is a decent chance he could be medicated and feel okay / have a football career. Schizophrenia, yeah not much chance.

# ¿ Mar 12, 2014 21:05

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Ehud posted:

I found this on the internet

http://m.livescience.com/15659-traumatic-brain-injury-increases-schizophrenia-risk.html

Yeah that's the one (though I came across it in a summary paper that cited the article that is being cited in that story)
http://schizophreniabulletin.oxfordjournals.org/content/38/3/642.abstract

# ¿ Mar 13, 2014 12:16

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Toymachine posted:

The way the Raiders have been signing players so far makes me think they're going to go QB with their 1st rounder and WR with their 2nd. In this draft you can essentially grab a #1 WR on top of the 2nd.

The way the Raiders have been signing players so far makes me think they're going to let the clock expire on round 1, cut their round 2 prospect after he fails a physical, and trade their round 3 pick to the Titans for nothing :smuggo:

# ¿ Mar 14, 2014 15:24

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

ROSS MY SALAD posted:

Yeah.

I was kind of holding out hope that maybe he'd have someone responsible in his ear knock some sense into him and that he'd show up for the pro day. Instead he just posted this:

I know this sounds sanctimonious (honestly was hoping someone else would say something so I didn't have to be this douche) but just in the interest of public education: unless this is performance art or something the guy is *seriously* mentally ill, it's not a thing you can knock him out of or even one of the mental illnesses where some people can "grit it out" (like, say, OCD). He's bipolar and/or schizophreniform/schizophrenic and someone needs to get him in front of a psychiatrist.

# ¿ Mar 21, 2014 15:09

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Those trade-ups are usually confusing to me. Are staffs looking at next season like an embattled CEO looks at next quarter's profit? "Win more now or we're gone anyway?"

# ¿ Apr 25, 2014 16:32

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Disillusionist posted:

AFAIK most UDFA jump at the first opportunity they get because they know their chances are slim anyway. I cant see many guys saying "Well I didn't get drafted but sorry Cleveland, I think I'll wait on an offer from Seattle or New England and maybe get back to you."

Also 7th rounders get 4yr contracts don't they? It's rare for a UDFA to get paid more than a drafted player.

They're paid a little-to-no signing bonus, but the 7th rounders only get like $50k signing bonus anyway. If they make the 53-man roster then for all intents and purposes they're both getting the league minimum.

How many years is a typical UDFA contract, though? If you were a gem in the rough it would be better to get a 1 year deal than the 4 year deals the 7th rounders are locked into. If you fall out of the league it won't matter either way, since that "4 year contract" is really just the team's obligation to pay IF THEY KEEP YOU.

# ¿ Apr 25, 2014 21:47

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

My basic point was that making the squad moots the difference between being a 7th round draft pick and being an UDFA. In the context of the NFL (the same context that lets most of us say things like "Blaine Gabbert is a bad QB) $50k really isn't that much.

# ¿ Apr 25, 2014 22:07

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Rap posted:

I actually do think either approach could work just fine, depending on what your team needs and what the prospects are like. It's hard to really talk in terms of "I'd rather pick 10th" vs "I'd rather pick 30th and 40th" or whatever, without knowing who the prospects are.

Based on that analysis I posted early in the thread, for that trade it's a ~350 Career Approximate Value Over Average guy for a ~200 and two ~150 guys. I don't think you can say 350<500 so DO IT because you can't play an infinite number of players at one time and like you said you might really benefit from a specific team-changing player, but in a vacuum I would trade down in that situation.

http://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/

# ¿ Apr 28, 2014 23:06

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

IcePhoenix posted:

Yeah but I'm just talking about the top of the draft, not the whole thing. Like top ten, top 20, that sort of thing. Martin wouldn't be in that. It would be interesting to see the hit/miss percentages by position for that range over the past ten or so years.

Just to finally lock myself into doing something like this: I'll take a look at this based on those pro-football-reference.com "career approximate value" numbers and post the results (tonight or, if it's harder than I think it will be, tomorrow night). The CAV numbers aren't perfect but they're better than anything else that I've seen.

pangstrom fucked around with this message at 14:24 on Apr 30, 2014

# ¿ Apr 30, 2014 14:16

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

I finished a draft of a draft pick boom/bust analysis (using Doug Drinen's career approximate value/CAV: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=525). This is basically a slightly updated/different version of what Kevin Meers did here: http://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/

Data are from the 1980-2006 drafts. Average CAV starts falling off after 2006 because players haven't been in the league long enough to assess their career, though you could get a couple/few more recent years in there with an adjustment if you had to. I dumped everything after pick# 250, so we're looking at 7 rounds + a little into 8 pre-1993. Data from here: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/.

Finally, for some reason the vast majority of CBs and FS/SSs were all called "DBs" in the dataset. I am going to post an updated version of this on my website at some point and I'll update that and have more to say about each graphic. If I get time I'll do a quick look at how different teams have drafted differently.

Let's start with what kind of Career Approximate Value you see at Draft, by Draft position.

That QB at pick 199 is, of course, Tom Brady. The distribution is very bottom-heavy no matter where you slice it, but the first pick average CAV is ~67, your average pick CAV~=16, and your median pick CAV~=6.

Breaking that down by position:

Drinen wisely didn't let any K or P or FB have a stratospheric CAV

TE would probably look different in recent years/will look different going forward. First thing that jumps out at me is that your best bet, historically, late in the draft are Guards and Centers, and they're similar positions so that higher plateau might not be a fluke.

So when have teams tended to pick which position?

This isn't a great graphic, and a lot of it is "no duh" stuff. Most of the action is in the first line segment (difference between picks 1-25 and 26-50), and this would be my summary:
-Positions that were disproportionately selected in early/mid round 1: QB, T, RB, DE
-Positions that were disproportionately NOT selected in early/mid round 1: LB, DB, G, C, TE
-Positions that were rarely picked early, mostly picked later in the draft: P, K, FB
-Positions that were selected steadily through draft: WR, DT

Not sure if that plunge in late-round-7 flyers on LBs and DBs is due to a pre/post-1993 difference or what.

So splitting the CAV by position sort-of looked at boom/bust potential, but let's approach that in a more focused way. Here is a plot with the players at CAV "deciles" (20% = better CAV than 20% of players at that pick and worse CAV than the other 80% at that pick), with lines fitted to each decile.

One could make a case for different definition of a bust pick or boom pick, but I went with:

Bust: Below the "30%" curve OR CAV <=1. (Late in the draft more than 30% of picks are CAV <=1)
Boom: Above the "70%" curve AND CAV AT LEAST 15 (Late in the draft less than 30% of picks are CAV >=15)
Middling: Everything else

Note that this means an average player picked in round 7 is a boom pick, while an average player picked in round 1 is a bust. The overall picture is the following:

Finally, let's look at the proportion of boom/busts by draft pick window and position:

QBs were the most prone to boom/bust (have the thinnest green ribbon), unsurprisingly.
Early picks on TEs and RBs have been prone to bust.
OLs drafted early rarely bust, as IcePhoenix suggested.
Punter(s) have been selected in picks 25-50 before :monocle:

(still looking at this last one, happy for suggestions / feedback)

# ¿ May 3, 2014 17:36

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

BougieBitch posted:

That early drop in FB value is interesting to me- it looks like that is the position with the greatest fluctuation from 1-25 to 26-50. Is that just a sample size thing or something?

Yeah, sample size. It's comparing these 2 guys:

Year Rnd Pick Name CAV
1983 1 13 James Jones 42
1986 1 15 John Williams 66

With these 4:

1991 1 27 Jarrod Bunch 7
1994 1 28 William Floyd 22
1999 2 43 Rob Konrad 9
1990 2 42 Carwell Gardner 7

# ¿ May 3, 2014 18:03

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Okay, it feels like I'll never be done because I think of things to look at faster than I can look at them but here is my updated historical draft analysis (you can skip to about halfway down if you read my long post 20ish pages ago, though I cleaned up some of the graphics) http://www.bradybutterfield.com/nfl/?p=1

# ¿ May 6, 2014 21:47

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Elotana posted:

Lol Jacksonville last

Sounds to me like maybe they've never made a drafting mistake!

# ¿ May 7, 2014 00:31

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Industrial posted:

2005 had the worst first round I can remember.

1 1 San Francisco 49ers Alex Smith� QB Utah MWC
1 2 Miami Dolphins Ronnie Brown� RB Auburn SEC
1 3 Cleveland Browns Braylon Edwards� WR Michigan Big Ten
1 4 Chicago Bears Cedric Benson RB Texas Big 12
1 5 Tampa Bay Buccaneers Carnell "Cadillac" Williams RB Auburn SEC
1 6 Tennessee Titans Adam "Pac-Man" Jones CB West Virginia Big East
1 7 Minnesota Vikings Troy Williamson WR South Carolina SEC from Oakland
1 8 Arizona Cardinals Antrel Rolle� CB Miami (FL) ACC
1 9 Washington Redskins Carlos Rogers� CB Auburn SEC
1 10 Detroit Lions Mike Williams WR USC Pac-10
1 11 Dallas Cowboys DeMarcus Ware� LB Troy Sun Belt
1 12 San Diego Chargers Shawne Merriman� LB Maryland ACC from New York Giants
1 13 New Orleans Saints Jammal Brown� OT Oklahoma Big 12 from Houston
1 14 Carolina Panthers Thomas Davis LB Georgia SEC
1 15 Kansas City Chiefs Derrick Johnson� LB Texas Big 12
1 16 Houston Texans Travis Johnson DT Florida State ACC from New Orleans
1 17 Cincinnati Bengals David Pollack LB Georgia SEC
1 18 Minnesota Vikings Erasmus James DE Wisconsin Big Ten
1 19 St. Louis Rams Alex Barron OT Florida State ACC
1 20 Dallas Cowboys Marcus Spears DE LSU SEC from Buffalo[7]
1 21 Jacksonville Jaguars Matt Jones WR Arkansas SEC
1 22 Baltimore Ravens Mark Clayton WR Oklahoma Big 12
1 23 Oakland Raiders Fabian Washington CB Nebraska Big 12 from Seattle
1 24 Green Bay Packers Aaron Rodgers� QB California Pac-10
1 25 Washington Redskins Jason Campbell QB Auburn SEC from Denver
1 26 Seattle Seahawks Chris Spencer C Ole Miss SEC from New York Jets via Oakland
1 27 Atlanta Falcons Roddy White� WR UAB C-USA
1 28 San Diego Chargers Luis Castillo DT Northwestern Big Ten
1 29 Indianapolis Colts Marlin Jackson CB Michigan Big Ten
1 30 Pittsburgh Steelers Heath Miller� TE Virginia ACC
1 31 Philadelphia Eagles Mike Patterson DT USC Pac-10
1 32 New England Patriots Logan Mankins� G Fresno State WAC

The later rounds were pretty uneventful too with the exceptions of Vincent Jackson, Frank Gore, and Justin Tuck. Hell, the undrafted players (Brandon Browner, Cameron Wake, Josh Cribbs, Robbie Gould) were some of the best producers of the whole draft.

http://www.bradybutterfield.com/nfl/sumCAVbyYear_1980-2006.svg

If you look at 1980-2006, 2005 is the second worst

# ¿ May 8, 2014 05:28

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

The Puppy Bowl posted:

I saw a stat that I am too lazy to look up but by far 1st rounders are the draft picks that find the most success in the NFL. Second most successful, UDFAs.

I'm educated-guessing that's because there are a lot more than 32 UDFAs.

# ¿ May 8, 2014 05:31

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

The Puppy Bowl posted:

True, but it's still sort of funny. What I wonder about is how much of a first round draft pick's success and longevity is due to greater commitment and patience from the team.

Yeah I agree. The fact that that much talent is left on the table after the draft does says something about the process in general.

# ¿ May 8, 2014 05:37

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 11, 2024 08:06

pangstrom: Jan 25, 2003; Wedge Regret

Industrial posted:

I wish 2007 was on there, half of the top 14 players are perennial pro-bowlers (AP, Megatron, Joe Thomas, Patrick Willis, Revis Island, Marshawn Lynch). It kind of fell off after that, but that top half was STACKED!

Yeah, unfortunately it's hard to say (that stat starts dropping after 2006 because players haven't been in the league long enough... you can "adjust it" for other purposes but that adjustment relies on some assumptions on years being similar in aggregate so the only legit option is to re-calculate the stat for every player's first 6 years in the league and look at it that way). At a glance it looks average-ish in aggregate, though maybe a little more boom/bust-y.

# ¿ May 8, 2014 16:20

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Sports Argument Stadium > The Football Funhouse > 2014 NFL Draft