Never Trade Up -- Here's Why

[cage]

35 minutes ago, Chuck Wagon said:

What is the hit rate for QBs drafted after pick 20?

 

Just a hunch, but you aren't getting anywhere near 26%

 

Absolutely nowhere near 26%.  I did a quick and dirty assessment on that for the same timeframe and here are the results.  Only 7% chance of getting HIT beyond top 15 pics.  I rated the following pics in this group as HITS;  Flacco, Bridgewater, Carr, Dalton, Cousins, Garrapolo, R. Wilson and Foles.  Not sure if Foles belongs yet...

 

QB	Hit	So-So	Picked	Rounds
2015	0	0	5
2014	3	1	13	1,2,5
2013	0	1	11	3
2012	3	0	8	3,4
2011	1	2	8	2,6
2010	0	1	13	3
2009	0	0	9
2008	1	1	12	1,7
2007	0	1	9	6
2006	0	0	8
2005	0	4	11	4,6,7
Total	8	11	107
	7%	10%

 

 

28 minutes ago, skibum said:

So, what are the odds of hitting on a QB if you never pick one?

 

I'm definitely NOT saying not to pick a QB.  I'm questioning making a big trade-up move, 10+ slots.  We had Mahomes and Watson there for the taking last year and ironically to this thread, both were picked on big trade-ups that I wouldn't have done.  Perhaps thats why I'm not a GM and just spewing my opinion in a forum on Saturday morning....

 

24 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

I hope you are right.  Like the OP, I'm not opposed to trading up a few spots to take Mayfield, but I don't think it's possible for the Bills to get into the Top 4 short of sacrificing too much for a QB who's more likely to bust than not, which would likely be Rosen.  If Jackson was available at #21, I'd take him (not at #22!).  I don't know if I'd spend a first rounder on Allen or Rudolph.

 

 

Agree!

Edited March 3, 2018 by cage

[BillsVet]

The thing with statistical analysis is the past does not always predict the future.

 

There's obvious risk to trading assets to move up, especially when your team is thin elsewhere and those picks could be used to reinforce areas like OL, DL, LB, and perhaps WR.

 

At some point this team needs an answer at QB and it's unlikely to come through UFA, at least in a cost-effective manner. 

[MAJBobby]

Not to mention Positional Value flaws stats also here. 

 

Because teams will force and fall in love with a QB much faster than they will says a LBer 

[Green Lightning]

2 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

 

The Bills missed on a trade up in 2004, the Jests missed on a trade up in 2009, and Washington missed on a trade up in 2012.

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah you're right the last 17 years have been great. Let's continue. Let's sit on our hands and hope that something changes and not do anything about it. In the meantime I'll try to think of all the defensive backs, lineman, receivers, that will guarantee us a Super Bowl win. Geez, none come to mind.

[metzelaars_lives]

Classic TBD fallacies: our offensive line always sucks even when it doesn’t and we always need offensive line help even when we really don’t; trading down always good, trading up always bad. Tell that to the Rams, Eagles, Texans, Falcons (Julio Jones), Chiefs (if Mahomes works out), etc., etc., etc...

[White Linen]

I can't understand how anyone can take this breakdown seriously, in terms of why the numbers look that way and why you shouldn't care.  

[Heavy Kevi]

That's nice data and clearly you put work into it, but the fact is your chances of QB being elite is highest in the top 5 and deteriorates from there. Sure there are late rounders who are good, certainly; but if you want the best chance you draft the QB as eaarly as possible, whether it's a trade-up or not.

 

Aside from that- We have tried waiting till most are off the board and jumped up to grab one (Losman). We have waited until mid rounds (Edwards). We have waited until late rounds (Cardale, Peterman). We have traded DOWN in the first (EJ). None of that has worked. The one thing we haven't done is draft one at the top of the draft, and it's about freakin time we tried.

[MAJBobby]

You never hit on 100% of thr shots you dont take

[NoSaint]

5 hours ago, cage said:

With all the talk of trading up I thought I would take a look at how well teams pick at the top half of the draft.  I looked at just the top 15 pics over a decade 2005-2015 (11 years).  I graded each pick as HIT / SO-SO / BUST.  I defined HIT as someone who had their 5th year option picked up, was re-signed by team drafting them or signed a big FA contract once their rookie deal was up.  For those still on their rookie contract they had to be full-time starters from year 1 and made the Pro-bowl.  That's what you'd expect from a top 15 pick.

 

Here are the results by position:

 

Position	Hit	So-so	Bust
QB	26%	32%	42%
RB	31%	38%	31%
WR	39%	17%	44%
OL	38%	38%	24%
DL	43%	26%	31%
LB	57%	17%	26%
DB	33%	38%	29%
Offense	34%	32%	34%
Defense	44%	27%	29%
Total	39%	29%	32%

 

Other than at LB the drafting success of the entire league scouting system for the top 15 picks of the draft is less than a coin flip.  These should be the most sure-fire perennial Pro Bowlers.  If the league's collective wisdom can't be above 50% with these pics, why would you ever trade up?  Much less, for a QB, which is the worst performing position.

 

I further looked at QBs in just the top 5 in the same period.  The HIT rate "rises" to 38%,... certainly uninspiring.  With at least 4 QBs projected in the top 15 pics, we should expect that at least 2 of them will be BUSTs.

 

 

 

 

 

Now compare that to the bottom half?

 

and, be honest, is it possible you also skewed some judgement calls down to help find what you were looking for? What’s a hit vs a so-so?

 

and the top half all being perennial pro bowlers would require about 150 pro bowl slots and no one else getting in.... which leads me to believe your expectations are a bit off.

Edited March 3, 2018 by NoSaint

[cage]

8 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

 

Now compare that to the bottom half?

 

and, be honest, is it possible you also skewed some judgement calls down to help find what you were looking for? What’s a hit vs a so-so?

 

I didn't have an objective in looking for anything particularly related to QBs.  What gave me the idea to do this was a different thread a couple days ago that was suggesting that a trade-up was worth it for a "future HOFer" regardless of position.  The OP in that thread was suggesting G Quenton Nelson.  I wanted to see if OL or any particular position warranted any thought like that.  The point was to show that there's no such thing as knowing before a draft how might be a future HOFer.  The analysis was a comparison of all positions, but just devolved into talk about QB for obvious reasons...

Edited March 3, 2018 by cage

[JMF2006]

14 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

You never hit on 100% of thr shots you dont take

 

One missed swing for the fences one year into the new regime could define their tenure.

[MAJBobby]

3 minutes ago, JMF2006 said:

 

One missed swing for the fences one year into the new regime could define their tenure.

 

Just like sitting on their hands can. Then again they are ultra conservative sooooo

Edited March 3, 2018 by MAJBobby

[NoSaint]

8 minutes ago, cage said:

 

I didn't have an objective in looking for anything particularly related to QBs.  What gave me the idea to do this was a different thread a couple days ago that was suggesting that a trade-up was worth it for a "future HOFer" regardless of position.  The OP in that thread was suggesting G Quenton Nelson.  I wanted to see if OL or any particular position warranted any thought like that.  The point was to show that there's no such thing as knowing before a draft how might be a future HOFer.  The analysis was a comparison of all positions, but just devolved into talk about QB for obvious reasons...

 

My post contains both the letter Q and letter B... but never together. 

 

My point was that you used a measure that is hard to quantify, totally subjective to your own judgement which likely contains some bias, and has no comparative data to make a judgement against. 

 

Essentially you took a lot a lot of time to confirm something for yourself but not in a terribly meaningful way 

[Rico]

Never trade up

 

unless you have a bunch of extra draft picks from trading down and trading away misfits.

[buffalobloodfloridahome]

Well Buffalo has been starving for a real starting QB for decades now and even at around 30% chance to get that possible franchise QB I think it's time to take it. We obviously traded back last year and made moves to give us more picks and set ourselves up to trade up and get our guy. You only get so many opportunities and this is it. Let's stop the save the picks and build around baloney and get our guy so that we finally have something to build around. Yeah it will suck if we miss but It will suck more if we never take that chance and our guy goes somewhere else and torments us for years.

[Domdab99]

Good post and interesting stats, and it just reaffirms my thoughts that the draft is one big crapshoot - no one knows who is going to hit and who is not - especially when it comes to QB. 

 

However, a few points:

 

While I’m not usually a proponent of trading up, I do feel that having a plethora of picks like the Bills do this year somewhat mitigates that problem. We’d still have a decent number of picks this year and next if we were to trade up. 

 

That being said, everyone pointing to Wentz and Goff as successes for teams who traded up need to realize that one year of decent play (Goff) and one year of superior play (Wentz) does not mean these players will continue playing at a high level. Both QBs struggled as starting rookies, and both have been much helped by good coaching and schemes.

Wentz may have to play with a knee brace the rest of his career, and can we really say that Foles wouldn’t have gotten the job done for Pederson all year in his place? It seems that coaching elevated both QBs in that system. 

 

Im torn, as I believe both Rosen and Mayfield might be worth trading up for. But I hate giving up picks when the team needs so much help at other positions. 

 

The Bills could hedge their bets and wait to see which QB falls out of the top ten...and then make a trade...or, just stand pat, and if a QB falls to them not named Rudolph, pick him then. 

 

I also wouldnt mind if the Bills did what the Redskins did the year they took two QBs in the draft - and the second one was the one who hit. 

 

Its an an interesting dilemma. But I have to stick with believing that trading up is most likely NOT worth it. All the stats say so. 

[Lurker]

9 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

Essentially you took a lot a lot of time to confirm something for yourself but not in a terribly meaningful way 

 

And yet, 30 seconds of Googling finds ample support for his premise.   While some of his So-So's could be debated, the gist is generally correct.     

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/history-says-trading-up-for-a-first-round-quarterback-is-generally-a-terrible-idea/

 

https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2017/4/18/15340020/buffalo-bills-nfl-draft-mitchell-trubisky-nfl-history-trading-up-franchise-quarterback

 

http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2018/01/does_trading_up_for_a_quarterback_in_the_nfl_draft.html

 

 

[BuffaloBill]

6 hours ago, cage said:

With all the talk of trading up I thought I would take a look at how well teams pick at the top half of the draft.  I looked at just the top 15 pics over a decade 2005-2015 (11 years).  I graded each pick as HIT / SO-SO / BUST.  I defined HIT as someone who had their 5th year option picked up, was re-signed by team drafting them or signed a big FA contract once their rookie deal was up.  For those still on their rookie contract they had to be full-time starters from year 1 and made the Pro-bowl.  That's what you'd expect from a top 15 pick.

 

Here are the results by position:

 

Position	Hit	So-so	Bust
QB	26%	32%	42%
RB	31%	38%	31%
WR	39%	17%	44%
OL	38%	38%	24%
DL	43%	26%	31%
LB	57%	17%	26%
DB	33%	38%	29%
Offense	34%	32%	34%
Defense	44%	27%	29%
Total	39%	29%	32%

 

Other than at LB the drafting success of the entire league scouting system for the top 15 picks of the draft is less than a coin flip.  These should be the most sure-fire perennial Pro Bowlers.  If the league's collective wisdom can't be above 50% with these pics, why would you ever trade up?  Much less, for a QB, which is the worst performing position.

 

I further looked at QBs in just the top 5 in the same period.  The HIT rate "rises" to 38%,... certainly uninspiring.  With at least 4 QBs projected in the top 15 pics, we should expect that at least 2 of them will be BUSTs.

 

 

 

 

 

The problem with your analysis is that the probability of picking a franchise QB after the top of the first round and then into later rounds drops precipitously.  It is amazing that the single most important position in the league is such a crap shoot.  I’ve long said that if the league truly wants to be competitive that every team should have to carry a developmental QB on its roster.  You could then make it even more interesting if you had them become FA’s at the three year point.  I suppose you could say that this is no different than backup QB’s but those guys get buried and don’t seem to move much.

[NoSaint]

17 minutes ago, JMF2006 said:

 

One missed swing for the fences one year into the new regime could define their tenure.

 

I’d rather they get fired trying to get a star qb than be 7 years in and .500 with 3 wildcard games and 1 playoff win

[NoSaint]

23 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

And yet, 30 seconds of Googling finds ample support for his premise.   While some of his So-So's could be debated, the gist is generally correct.     

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/history-says-trading-up-for-a-first-round-quarterback-is-generally-a-terrible-idea/

 

https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2017/4/18/15340020/buffalo-bills-nfl-draft-mitchell-trubisky-nfl-history-trading-up-franchise-quarterback

 

http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2018/01/does_trading_up_for_a_quarterback_in_the_nfl_draft.html

 

 

 

To be fair, I’ll again point out I never discussed QB in those posts... but if you want me to, I’ll bite...

 

Yes, top QBs often bust. It’s the toughest position to transition and they often land with talentless disfunctional franchises.

 

know what also sucks? Drafting guys that are second to third tier qb prospects. But, again, only putting the success rates of guys in the top 5 and not having a comp point for guys taken later (say day 2) makes that hard to discuss as I pointed out. 

 

Yes- going out and making a move might be the end of Beane but surely not crippling for the franchise. We just cut/traded/didn’t re-sign every day one and two pick made across 4-5 years and still made the playoffs. 

Edited March 3, 2018 by NoSaint