dave mcbride Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 http://www.vox.com/2014/5/7/5683448/how-nfl-teams-ignore-basic-economics-and-draft-players-irrationally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 http://www.vox.com/2...rs-irrationally Nice find and read. Pretty much encapsulated in these lines: "The truth is that teams are imperfect talent evaluators, so having two later picks is better than a single early one. Risk diversification at work." I was unfortunate enough to never get into a Thaler class but starting with irrational markets, his ideas have a lot of merit. I too think the Bills should not trade up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Probablilty, baby! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted May 8, 2014 Author Share Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) Nice find and read. Pretty much encapsulated in these lines: "The truth is that teams are imperfect talent evaluators, so having two later picks is better than a single early one. Risk diversification at work." I was unfortunate enough to never get into a Thaler class but starting with irrational markets, his ideas have a lot of merit. I too think the Bills should not trade up. It's pretty convincing, and all you have to do is look at the Bills. Trading down last year netted them Alonso, who they otherwise wouldn't have. The last couple of times the Bills traded up into the first round, they ended up with JP Losman and John McCargo and lost picks in the process (including their first rounder in 05). Edited May 8, 2014 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 It's pretty convincing, and all you have to do is look at the Bills. Trading down last year netted them Alonso, who they otherwise wouldn't have. The last couple of times the Bills traded up into the first round, they ended up with JP Losman and John McCargo. Heck when they traded up in the third round they got TJ Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 http://www.vox.com/2...rs-irrationally Great article. Thanks. It should be pinned--and posted next to the Big Board at OBD. Winning teams generally trade down, not up, because they understand that talent evaluation is far from a perfect science, no matter what some scout might think he "knows" about Watkins, Clowney or Mack. Unfortunately, I have a horrible feeling that the Bills will trade up, not down. If so, it is a move they will almost certainly regret. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted May 8, 2014 Author Share Posted May 8, 2014 Heck when they traded up in the third round they got TJ Graham Forgot about that one! Thaler and Massey do say that mid round trades don't exact as heavy as a toll on the buyer as first round ones, so they're not as opposed to those (it seems). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Forgot about that one! Thaler and Massey do say that mid round trades don't exact as heavy as a toll on the buyer as first round ones, so they're not as opposed to those (it seems). Yep. One of the Bills' few successful trades up was moving into the second for Levitre. On the other hand, they moved to the top of the second round to take Poz, when they could have stayed put and had him, or drafted David Harris instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juice_32 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 I totally agree with this analysis. I am really hoping that the trade up talk is a smokescreen. The purpose of each draft should be to select 3 starters, if you get lucky maybe 4. Trading down and adding a second rounder is my hope. We shall find out in a few hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 I'm in agreement with their assessment. Risk management is a hell of a concept, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted May 8, 2014 Author Share Posted May 8, 2014 Yep. One of the Bills' few successful trades up was moving into the second for Levitre. On the other hand, they moved to the top of the second round to take Poz, when they could have stayed put and had him, or drafted David Harris instead. The Ravens and the Pats are the best at this. The Ravens have also figured out how to maximize comp picks - let your own players go, and sign good players in response who were salary cap cuts (and hence don't count against your own losses). Check this out: http://mmqb.si.com/2014/05/01/2014-nfl-draft-baltimore-ravens-compensatory-picks/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big C Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 But if no one trades up, how can we trade down?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted May 8, 2014 Author Share Posted May 8, 2014 But if no one trades up, how can we trade down?? Dan Snyder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maryland-bills-fan Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 It's not their imperfect player evaluation, but something more basic — their refusal to follow the principle of risk diversification . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jahbonas Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) And it could be argued it killed our franchise when in the 2004 draft Tom Donahoe decided not to trade up 3 spots to select QB Ben Rothlesberger but instead stood pat and drafted WR Lee Evans. Many of the non playoff years could be attributed to that refusal to trade up. Each situation has to be evaluated on its own Furthermore the 1987 Cornelius Bennett trade was the ultimate 'trade up' in exchange for future draft choices - we had no 1st rd choice in 1988 or 1989 due to the trade. We only went on a string of Division Titles and Superbowl appearances and playoff appearances in 10 of the 11 following years. Polian realized he needed one more piece to put us over the top - the future was 'now' Edited May 8, 2014 by jahbonas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big C Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 And it could be argued it killed our franchise when in the 2004 draft Tom Donahoe decided not to trade up 3 spots to select QB Ben Rothlesberger but instead stood pat and drafted WR Lee Evans. Many of the non playoff years could be attributed to that refusal to trade up. Each situation has to be evaluated on its own Furthermore the 1987 Cornelius Bennett trade was the ultimate 'trade up' in exchange for future draft choices - we had no 1st rd choice in 1988 or 1989 due to the trade. We only went on a string of Division Titles and Superbowl appearances and playoff appearances in 10 of the 11 following years. Polian realized he needed one more piece to put us over the top - the future was 'now' I maintain that there are a select few situations where a team should trade up. These are good examples. But, when a team has a ton of holes, trading up is too big of a risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) And it could be argued it killed our franchise when in the 2004 draft Tom Donahoe decided not to trade up 3 spots to select QB Ben Rothlesberger but instead stood pat and drafted WR Lee Evans. Many of the non playoff years could be attributed to that refusal to trade up. That's probably a bad example, because in that same 2004 draft, Donahoe burned a 2nd, 5th and a future #1 to move up to select JP Losman. Edited May 8, 2014 by Brandon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted May 8, 2014 Author Share Posted May 8, 2014 That's probably a bad example, because in that same 2004 draft, Donahoe burned a 2nd, 5th and a future #1 to move up to select JP Losman. He didn't burn a second - that pick accelerated into the first round. We ended up losing a first and fifth only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) I maintain that there are a select few situations where a team should trade up. These are good examples. But, when a team has a ton of holes, trading up is too big of a risk. I don't think this team has "a ton" of holes.... And if they feel like one of the glaring ones can't be reliably filled at 9 AND at a reasonable price (something we've heard attached to many of the rumors) they can move up to get one of the only guys they believe in to fill that hole... Wouldn't be upset at all. Edited May 8, 2014 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jahbonas Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 That's probably a bad example, because in that same 2004 draft, Donahoe burned a 2nd, 5th and a future #1 to move up to select JP Losman. And that poor decision by Donaho trading up for Losman only occurred because he refused to do so earlier .... If the future is 'now' thats the time to pull the trigger - a greater argument could be made that the Patriots for years have cost themselves superbowls by refusing to give Brady that 1 guy to put them over the top,,,, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts