Reaching in the draft

[Coach Tuesday]

Reach assumes an efficient marketplace. It assumes you can freely trade down and still select the player you're targeting, while picking up extra picks in the process. The problem with this concept is that the NFL is NOT an efficient marketplace. Few teams actually adhere to the so-called Draft Value Chart, there are barriers to free exchange (time limits, divisional rivalries, etc.), and there is far from perfect information on draft day - far from it.

 

But if you assume full information and the freedom to employ it by exchanging draft picks (like you would exchange goods), the concept of reaching makes perfect sense. It means you're giving up value for nothing in return.

[Lurker]

My definition of a reach: Selecting a player at more than one spot above the next team that you believe will want to select him.

Nice crystal ball you've got there. Any advice on which stocks I should buy?

[stinky finger]

bingo!!

Really? A "reach" can perform well, can't he?

[KD in CA]

Chris Johnson was considered a reach at the end of the first round.

 

Just sayin

 

Yup...and Brian Cushing would have been a huge "reach" last year for the Bills. Sure glad we didn't draft him over Maybin.

 

 

I recall that someone summed this up perfectly last year so I dug out the post. It was Ramius.

[stinky finger]

Yup...and Brian Cushing would have been a huge "reach" last year for the Bills. Sure glad we didn't draft him over Maybin.

 

 

I recall that someone summed this up perfectly last year so I dug out the post. It was Ramius.

Yep

[Coach Tuesday]

Yup...and Brian Cushing would have been a huge "reach" last year for the Bills. Sure glad we didn't draft him over Maybin.

 

 

I recall that someone summed this up perfectly last year so I dug out the post. It was Ramius.

 

The concept of reaching has NOTHING to do with how good you think a player will be - it's all about predicting where he will be picked. If you are able to predict where a player is likely to be picked, you can significantly avoid reaching, because (theoretically) you should be able to move down and still get him.

[Lurker]

I recall that someone summed this up perfectly last year so I dug out the post. It was Ramius.

And yet, Maybin was drafted about the same spot the talking heads had him rated....

[uncle flap]

If the player sucks, does it matter where you take him? Do you feel better if he went in the 2nd or 3rd round? Either way it was a bad pick. It has nothing to do with reaching.

 

You're not selling tires, you're running a football team. Draft Value is an artificial concept that has no bearing on performance. You either pick players who make you a winner or not. Where they were drafted stops meaning anything one day after the draft.

 

PTR

 

I get your point that "reaching" is arbitrary concept. If you got the player you wanted, you should be happy, and while it'd be nice to trade back and get your player AND something else out of it, that doesn't always work out.

And you're right that draft "value" has no bearing on performance.

 

But it DOES matter where you draft someone. The rookie contracts almost entirely depend where the player was drafted, especially in the first round.

[mjohns85]

As if the endless mock drafts weren't maddening enough, people also drone on about reaching for players in the draft. Now I can understand drafting a player projected to go in the 6th round, but if a player is a low first-rounder, and you want him, and you pick #9, and he isn't going to be there when your next pick comes around, how is it considered a reach if you grab him? And furthermore, if a player helps you win, who cares if you reached for him? I swear, this whole reach issue is the most meaningless, contrived, drama-for-drama's sake, invention since the mock draft.

 

Tell me why I'm wrong.

 

PTR

 

two words. donte whitner

[silvermike]

We've been sort of doubly burned on our 'reaches.' We not only took McCargo and Losman higher than they were projected to go, but their projections were themselves huge inflations of their talent. If we sat tight on our 2nd round pick and took Losman, he might have been considered a steal, but he still would have been a bust.

 

You do have to separate the gamesmanship of the draft itself with the actual value of the players you select. If there are 5 seconds on the clock and no answer from the other 31 teams' GM, you just pick the best player for your team who you don't believe will be there the next time you're up. So if that means you grab Joe Player at #9 because you heard Indianapolis is going to take him at #31 and there's no way to trade up, you do it.

 

But whenever possible, yes, you should trade down to try to pinpoint the right slot for the player, and get your guy at the lowest price, both in terms of dollars and draft value. But it can be very difficult to trade down, and you have to balance it against the risk of losing your man.

[merlin]

You're not selling tires, you're running a football team. Draft Value is an artificial concept that has no bearing on performance. You either pick players who make you a winner or not. Where they were drafted stops meaning anything one day after the draft.

 

PTR

 

I agree with your point. I think "reaching" really refers to taking a player higher in the draft than he ought to go just because you have a real "need" at a particular position, and he's the best one left, so you let that skew your judgement as to how good he really is. And even that really only matters at the top of the draft because of the ridiculous amount of money you tie up for years in terms of salary cap. If/when the new CBA addresses that issue (rookie salary cap), I doubt we hear so much about "reaches" anymore, because the consequences won't be as long-lasting.

 

GO BILLS!

[KD in CA]

The concept of reaching has NOTHING to do with how good you think a player will be - it's all about predicting where he will be picked. If you are able to predict where a player is likely to be picked, you can significantly avoid reaching, because (theoretically) you should be able to move down and still get him.

 

Except this isn't Madden. Accurately predicating where 31 other teams have valued each player and analyzing all the related permeations based on who else is being picked is near impossible. Every single pick impacts every team's draft board. And you don't have a week to analyze every situation...you have a few minutes. Not to mention, finding someone who wants to trade up to your exact spot is not a frequent occurrence, as it has to fit into their specific plans. If it falls in your lap, fine, but it's not the way to build a draft strategy.

 

There is a reason why teams that focus on evaluating talent (Colts, Steelers, etc.) maximize value in the draft no matter where they are picking.

[Coach Tuesday]

Except this isn't Madden. Accurately predicating where 31 other teams have valued each player and analyzing all the related permeations based on who else is being picked is near impossible. Every single pick impacts every team's draft board. And you don't have a week to analyze every situation...you have a few minutes. Not to mention, finding someone who wants to trade up to your exact spot is not a frequent occurrence, as it has to fit into their specific plans. If it falls in your lap, fine, but it's not the way to build a draft strategy.

 

There is a reason why teams that focus on evaluating talent (Colts, Steelers, etc.) maximize value in the draft no matter where they are picking.

 

Those teams' draft boards also tend to be pretty accurate predictions of where players will end up...

[C.Biscuit97]

Reaches are only reaches when the player doesn't live up to expectations. If he does, then it's a shrewd move...

 

Well said.

[DrDawkinstein]

Really? A "reach" can perform well, can't he?

 

but then once he performs well, it's no longer a reach.

 

the point is that the term has no real meaning, and is just used by "draft experts" who need a way of making their job sound like it has actual meaning and not just a big guessing game.

[ndirish1978]

Donte Whitner. He was a major reach for the Bills when they should have drafted Ngata who's player rating was much higher and right around where they were picking.

 

Wrong. Yes, the Bills should have taken Ngata, but the pick was not bad because they "reached" the pick was bad because it was a poor choice to take him at all.

 

I hate the "reach" label because it presumes you operate in a vacuum where: 1) You can trade back to a later spot if you want that player 2) pre-draft rankings are absolute and irrefutable. Ryan Leaf wasn't considered a reach when he was drafted.

 

The term identifies where a player is projected to be drafted and then evaluates if the player had good value for where they were taken. The fundamental flaw with the system is that players are rarely drafted at the spot they are projected to go in. Other posts have addressed this issue. The best of the best prognosticators are wrong 75% of the picks they make.

 

The only time I would think of using the term reach is if the player would have definitely been available with the team's next pick.

[DrDawkinstein]

Wrong. Yes, the Bills should have taken Ngata, but the pick was not bad because they "reached" the pick was bad because it was a poor choice to take him at all.

 

I hate the "reach" label because it presumes you operate in a vacuum where: 1) You can trade back to a later spot if you want that player 2) pre-draft rankings are absolute and irrefutable. Ryan Leaf wasn't considered a reach when he was drafted.

 

The term identifies where a player is projected to be drafted and then evaluates if the player had good value for where they were taken. The fundamental flaw with the system is that players are rarely drafted at the spot they are projected to go in. Other posts have addressed this issue. The best of the best prognosticators are wrong 75% of the picks they make.

 

The only time I would think of using the term reach is if the player would have definitely been available with the team's next pick. And that, we'll never know. So there is really no way to properly determine a "reach".

 

finished that paragraph for you.

[dollars 2 donuts]

Donte Whitner. He was a major reach for the Bills when they should have drafted Ngata who's player rating was much higher and right around where they were picking.

 

 

 

Is it possible for someone to be 1,000 percent correct on these boards?

 

 

Yep.

 

 

 

Congrats, 1billsfan.

 

 

 

Man o Man, from the moment the Bills picked Whitner instead of Ngata there was almost 20 seconds of silence at Bagel's house. Upon which, if memory serves me, he said, "Damn. Oh well."

[Lurker]

Those teams' draft boards also tend to be pretty accurate predictions of where players will end up...

Thank God the Bills front office has access to them, then...

[Coach Tuesday]

Thank God the Bills front office has access to them, then...

 

I'm not sure what your point is. Good GMs are better than others at predicting what other teams will do during the draft. The Bills have not been as good at that, historically. The Whitner pick is a perfect example - there is a fair amount of evidence out there that the Bills could've traded down and still taken Whitner, but Marv panicked when they were on the clock and ignored the requests of a team or teams trying to trade up. That's why the pick was a "reach" - not because Whitner wasn't worth the 8th selection (he wasn't), but because they could've gotten Whitner plus another pick or picks, but gave away that extra value for nothing.