How'd we do vs the draft value chart?

[TPS]

You know how middling teams get their franchise guy? By having the ammo to get him...

This was the first draft in about 4 years that wasn't win now, but plan for the future. The last one got us EJ, but also Shady and Robert Woods. Quality players/circumstances come from all 7 rounds.

in McDermott 's presser, he used the phrase what's best in the short and long term. It's about time.

[Buffalo86]

That value chart is nonsense...much more accurate ones have been produced that actually analyzed the true values of the picks over time and used regression analysis to set values for each pick.

 

Typically in basic terms high picks were vastly overrated and lower picks were underrated. In this draft a 3rd is worth a 2nd in most other drafts because of how deep it is and the quality of the player you will likely get.

Which has been shown by many using analytics and regression analysis of many years of actual data on players selected there and how their careers played out to have no basis in reality

At the same time, 4 of the 6 trades last night lined up pretty closely with the chart. The 2 that didn't involved the Browns and our Bills.

Why is the Bills, by way of the Chiefs #1 next year only rated at 330 pts? Seems like an error to me, when the Bills #27 this year was rated 680 pts.

 

 

Even though the chart is nonsense, it is an error. The Bills came out ahead by over 150 points according to that chart, OP fix your bad math.

 

680 + 680 + 91 = 1451 - 1300 = +151

 

Factor in the Chiefs are not likely to pick 27th again, likely higher and a 3rd round pick this year will get you a similar player to a 2nd round pick most years and the Bills likely added another 200-300 points of "value".

 

(*Based on the guesstimate that the Chiefs will have the 25th pick next year, and the somewhat accepted rule that a 1st round pick this year = a 2nd round pick next year.)

[Bronxbomber21]

Same goes for if he isn't any good. They will have been fleeced for a 1st round pick by the Bills.

 

Regardless though - What would we really prefer?

 

Lattimore

 

or

 

White

2017 3rd Rounder

2018 1st Rounder

stay pat and take Hooker or trade down get the 1st 3rd and Foster

[NoSaint]

in the original thread i mentioned (going just by gut) that we would have gotten a little more based on the chart but that the limited drop in talent in this draft probably tightened that up pretty well.

 

Ultimately, this trade will NEVER be judged based on points, and itll matter only a little who we take... itll all be about whether the QB works out. If not, and we got a couple decent players then we win. if mahomes is the real thing -- we were big losers unless tyrod steps up huge.

[Big Turk]

Good analysis -- I didn't have the chart numbers, but it seemed to me at the time of the trade the Bills came up a little short. Looks like, according to the numbers, that it true. The caveat with that is that we may have wanted to move out of the pick more than the Chiefs wanted to move into it. If that is true, then we may have had to sweeten the pot a little.

Not a good analysis because he made up numbers to fit his narrative. The numbers and math are clearly wrong, the Bills won the "points" battle if that's what you want to go with by +151 points and likely more depending on where KC finishes next year

At the same time, 4 of the 6 trades last night lined up pretty closely with the chart. The 2 that didn't involved the Browns and our Bills.

 

 

 

 

(*Based on the guesstimate that the Chiefs will have the 25th pick next year, and the somewhat accepted rule that a 1st round pick this year = a 2nd round pick next year.)

Oh so now we are doing random math. Ok, then factor that in a deep draft, a 3rd round pick this year would be equivalent to a 2nd round pick most other years. But you dont want to do that, right? Got a narrative you need to maintain...

Edited April 28, 2017 by matter2003

[26CornerBlitz]

@mikerodak

By one trade value chart, Chiefs paid the Bills as if they had the No. 1 pick. "Enormous haul," says @billbarnwell.

https://t.co/UOewukbFs1

[Freddie's Dead]

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/the-comprehensive-guide-to-10-years-of-first-round-trades/

 

Here's a comprehensive list for all 1st round trades over the last 10 years. Compare away.

The closest I could find was Browns to Atlanta in 2011, from #6 to #26, and they got 4 picks, 26, 59, 124 (2011), and 22 (2012). We needed one more pick.

[Buffalo86]

Not a good analysis because he made up numbers to fit his narrative. The numbers and math are clearly wrong, the Bills won the "points" battle if that's what you want to go with by +151 points and likely more depending on where KC finishes next year

 

Oh so now we are doing random math. Ok, then factor that in a deep draft, a 3rd round pick this year would be equivalent to a 2nd round pick most other years. But you dont want to do that, right? Got a narrative you need to maintain...

 

I didn't make up any numbers; they all came from here: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/draft/draft_trade_value.htm

 

If you're too lazy to look at it yourself, that's fine, but don't let it be a reason to attack others.

 

A 3rd round pick this year would be equivalent to a 2nd round pick most other years? It doesn't feel like I'm the one who's making up numbers to maintain their narrative. In fact, my assumption that the Chiefs would have a worse season in 2017 was the opposite of that.

[Albwan]

welp at least i have something to root for...kc losing

[Turk71]

According to the Jimmy Johnson draft value chart:

 

Bills give up:

#10: 1300 pts

 

Chiefs give up:

#27: 680 pts

#91: 136 pts

Next year's 1st: 330 pts*

 

(*Based on the guesstimate that the Chiefs will have the 25th pick next year, and the somewhat accepted rule that a 1st round pick this year = a 2nd round pick next year.)

 

If you buy all of that, we gave up 1300 pts for 1146, a loss of 154. Per the chart, that's the equivalent of losing the #87 pick of the draft. In that sense, it looks like the Chiefs got the better end of the deal.

 

But what of this value chart? Do other teams actually go by it?

 

Here are the rest of tonight's deals, scored according to the value chart:

 

1. 49ers / Bears

49ers give up #2 (2600). Bears give up #3 (2200), 67 (255), 111 (72), and next year's 3rd (80*) - (2607).

The 49ers win by a whopping 7 points. A very even trade according to the value chart.

 

2. Browns / Texans

Browns give up #12 (1200). Texans give up #25 (720) and next year's 1st (330*) - (1050)

Texans win by 150 points. By these metrics, they lost the #88 pick. Not a totally unexpected outcome when dealing with the Browns, and poor value according to the chart.

 

3. Seahawks / Falcons

Seahawks give up #26 (700). Falcons give up #31 (600), #95 (120), and 249 (1) - (721).

Seahawks win by 21 points. A very even trade according to the value chart.

 

4. Packers / Browns

Packers give up #29 (640). Browns give up #33 (580) and #108 (79) - (659)

Packers win this trade by 19 points. A very even trade according to the value chart.

 

5. Seahawks / 49ers

Seahawks give up #31 (600). 49ers give up #34 (560), 111 (72) - (632).

Seahawks win by 32 points, the equivalent of the #138 pick. Pretty even trade according to the value chart.

 

Here are tonight's winners & losers according to Jimmy's value chart:

 

Chiefs: +154

Texans: +150

Seahawks: +53

Packers: +19

Bears: -7

Falcons: -21

49ers: -25

Bills: -154

Browns: -169

So, it seems the teams that won are the ones who gave up a next years pick. Maybe the GMs are using the wrong chart and don't know that next years picks aren't worth as much? You need to get this out on the wire, these guys are old and can't keep up.

[Rochesterfan]

According to the Jimmy Johnson draft value chart:

 

Bills give up:

#10: 1300 pts

 

Chiefs give up:

#27: 680 pts

#91: 136 pts

Next year's 1st: 330 pts*

 

(*Based on the guesstimate that the Chiefs will have the 25th pick next year, and the somewhat accepted rule that a 1st round pick this year = a 2nd round pick next year.)

 

If you buy all of that, we gave up 1300 pts for 1146, a loss of 154. Per the chart, that's the equivalent of losing the #87 pick of the draft. In that sense, it looks like the Chiefs got the better end of the deal.

 

But what of this value chart? Do other teams actually go by it?

Here are the rest of tonight's deals, scored according to the value chart:

 

1. 49ers / Bears

49ers give up #2 (2600). Bears give up #3 (2200), 67 (255), 111 (72), and next year's 3rd (80*) - (2607).

The 49ers win by a whopping 7 points. A very even trade according to the value chart.

 

2. Browns / Texans

Browns give up #12 (1200). Texans give up #25 (720) and next year's 1st (330*) - (1050)

Texans win by 150 points. By these metrics, they lost the #88 pick. Not a totally unexpected outcome when dealing with the Browns, and poor value according to the chart.

 

3. Seahawks / Falcons

Seahawks give up #26 (700). Falcons give up #31 (600), #95 (120), and 249 (1) - (721).

Seahawks win by 21 points. A very even trade according to the value chart.

 

4. Packers / Browns

Packers give up #29 (640). Browns give up #33 (580) and #108 (79) - (659)

Packers win this trade by 19 points. A very even trade according to the value chart.

 

5. Seahawks / 49ers

Seahawks give up #31 (600). 49ers give up #34 (560), 111 (72) - (632).

Seahawks win by 32 points, the equivalent of the #138 pick. Pretty even trade according to the value chart.

Here are tonight's winners & losers according to Jimmy's value chart:

 

Chiefs: +154

Texans: +150

Seahawks: +53

Packers: +19

Bears: -7

Falcons: -21

49ers: -25

Bills: -154

Browns: -169

 

 

 

The issue with this is you are using the assumption that the #1 next year is worth a second this year - therefore both the Browns and Bills that picked 1st rounders next year look bad.

 

If you keep them as 1st round picks they balance out - there are notes going both ways, but it seems obvious that the teams do not see the future pick the way you do.

[BarleyNY]

The issue with this is you are using the assumption that the #1 next year is worth a second this year - therefore both the Browns and Bills that picked 1st rounders next year look bad.

If you keep them as 1st round picks they balance out - there are notes going both ways, but it seems obvious that the teams do not see the future pick the way you do.

To add to this: There are many charts, valuation methods and variants. The Jimmy Johnson and Harvard charts are two big ones. Most methods (but not all) discount future picks. The one round rule is often modified for the first two rounds by breaking the first round into 3 parts and the second into 2. For instance, a future pick expected to be a mid 1st would be discounted to a late 1st round pick's value.

[Buffalo86]

The issue with this is you are using the assumption that the #1 next year is worth a second this year - therefore both the Browns and Bills that picked 1st rounders next year look bad.

 

If you keep them as 1st round picks they balance out - there are notes going both ways, but it seems obvious that the teams do not see the future pick the way you do.

 

To add to this: There are many charts, valuation methods and variants. The Jimmy Johnson and Harvard charts are two big ones. Most methods (but not all) discount future picks. The one round rule is often modified for the first two rounds by breaking the first round into 3 parts and the second into 2. For instance, a future pick expected to be a mid 1st would be discounted to a late 1st round pick's value.

 

Interesting points. If the Chiefs' 2018 pick is valued as the #41 or #42 pick of 2017, the trade becomes a wash. My analysis missed that.

[apuszczalowski]

Who cares if they made out and won the trade because of some value number system given on picks, or because they got a 1st next year. It will mean absolutely dick all if they don't end up with good players from those picks. Right now KC is a good team thats looking to upgrade a vital position of their team. If Watson ends up being atleast better then Alex Smith, its a win for them and I don't think they care if they gave up too much based off the pick point system. Even if Watson ends up a complete bust it won't mean anything if the Bills weren't able to use those picks to get players who are able to get them into the playoffs.

[1B4IDie]

I love how everyone knew you discount future draft picks during the Sammy Watkins trade and now completely forgot that future draft picks lose value in a trade discussion during the 2017 trade down.

 

"What do you mean you discount future picks?"

 

The Bills did not get as much in the trade down as compared to historical trade downs made by actual NFL GMs.

 

The chart is not a "point system" to judge trades. It is a way the actual GMs in actual NFL teams can have conversations and asses relative value of the draft picks.

 

Actual GMs use some type of chart to asess relative value evidence by the fact that most trades line right up with numbers in the chart.

Edited April 29, 2017 by 1B4IDie