2018 Regular Season Cap Allocation vs Wins correlation by position

[Augie]

2 minutes ago, PlayoffsPlease said:

I don't think there are two many variables. Compared to other complex systems, there really are not.  I think the problem is that there are multiple strategies that have equal chance for success, and I suspect coaching and adaptability to available assets is more important than having the right "philosophy" or "focus"  .   I

The Rams and NE have nearly identical spends at every position except for QB and Defensive Line.   Essentially the Rams have invested the difference in Brady and Goff in Donald. (Oline too)

 either you are making a lame facetious remark, or you don't get the concepts at all. In either case. ?

 

Oh, please try to relax. I realize you went to a lot of work and spent some time on this, but I’m just kidding around. There are so many variables I’m honestly not sure what to think of this. What does, say, a 5 or 10 year trend look like. Are these numbers consistent, or is this just a random snapshot for the period you looked at? There are a lot of different ways to build a roster. This raises more questions than it answers IMO. But I respect you efforts. 

[hondo in seattle]

2 hours ago, PlayoffsPlease said:

The QB thing has multiple things going on.  Teams like the Browns, Redskins and Vikings and 49ers have huge cap hits on QB with no production out of the spot. Other teams like the Chiefs and Rams have small cap hits and great production. 

 

One of the things that skews the correlation is the cost of players on rookie contracts.  If a team is able to draft well at a certain position, it won't have to allocate a lot of cap dollars for that position.

 

I know some teams plan cap allocation by position.  I wonder how they take this into account.  

[Just Joshin']

Thanks for the analysis.  It seems there is an assumption that cap = quality which is not the case. 

 

Seems like there should be some gold here - need to figure out how to get from the data.

[formerlyofCtown]

3 hours ago, PlayoffsPlease said:

I don't think there are two many variables. Compared to other complex systems, there really are not.  I think the problem is that there are multiple strategies that have equal chance for success, and I suspect coaching and adaptability to available assets is more important than having the right "philosophy" or "focus"  .   I

The Rams and NE have nearly identical spends at every position except for QB and Defensive Line.   Essentially the Rams have invested the difference in Brady and Goff in Donald. (Oline too)

 
 

either you are making a lame facetious remark, or you don't get the concepts at all. In either case. ?

Bad deals, excellent drafting,  Who has a QB, injuries, and probably a lot more,  The more variables there are the more difficult it is to have an accurate study.  I believe the study is accurate because it says there is no direct correlation.  But I believe there is an indirect correlation.  If you spread it out over a longer period of time I think you would find that there is more of a correlation.

[PlayoffsPlease]

I believe there is no correlation between spend and what positions it is spent on, because that pales in comparison to how effectively it is spent.  Kirk Cousins for 25 million is not as good as Patrick Mahomes for 3 million. 

The best GM is the person who gets the most production in excess of the expected production for a position.   In 2019, I would expect Mahomes is that guy. I suspect Goff is right up there too.   Take Khalil Mack, he is a great player at 20 million.  He was an equally great player and an incredibly better value at 5 million.  

Coaching is also a huge component. I think Bill Belichek somehow has figured out a way to make Julian Edelman (and wes welker before him) produce at 8 to 10 million of production above cost.  Some positions , QB and DE have a huge amount of production variance between best and last, so the opportunity to exceed value is greater than at center or RB, where the production values between best and worst have a narrower range.  Exceeding value is the key, far more important than weather the value is exceeded on offense or on defense.