GunnerBill's mock versus the world

[Billy Claude]

 

I thought it would be interesting to see how @GunnerBill ’s mock objectively compared to others.   To do this, I used the Jimmy Johnson draft pick value chart and assign penalty points based on how far the mock pick was from the actual pick.   For example, if a mock had Derek Stingley picked 5th (1700 draft points) whereas he was actually picked 3rd (2200 draft points), the mock draft was assigned 500 penalty points.  This was done for 14 mock drafts.

 

Long story short, it appers that GunnerBill knows what he is talking about as his draft finished first.

 

1.      GunnerBill                                         6950 penalty points (lower is better)

2.      Michael Renner (PFF)                     7046

3.      Trevor Sikkema (PFF)                     7090

4.      Chris Traapsso (CBS)                     7136

5.      Ari Meirov (PFF)                              7290

6.      Ryan Wilson (CBS)                          7586

7.      Charles Davis (NFL.com)                7690

8.      Josh Edwards (CBS)                      8045

9.      Chris Collinsworth (PFF)                8546

10.   Pete Prisco (CBS)                            9080

11.   Doug Kyed (PFF)                              9577

12.   Kyle Stackpole (CBS)                      10175

13.   Christian D’Andrea (USA Today)     12291

14.   Vinnie Iyer (Sporting News)            13445

 

So GunerBill’s mock was the best match by a narrow margin.   One can argue the top five drafts were similar in quality.  For example, Michael Renner would have won easily based on the top 31 picks but he had Sam Howell who was picked in the 5th round as his pick #32.

 

Some other points of interest:

 

19 players appears in all 14 mock drafts.  One, Malik Willis, was not selected in the first round.

23 players appears in 12 or more mock drafts.  Two, Willis and Andrew Booth were not selected in the first round.

 

Only one player selected in the first round did not appear in any mock draft (Cole Strange)

 

Kaiir Elam appears in 6 out of the 14 mock drafts with the earliest at #25 (to the Bills).

 

 

[cage]

I always read @GunnerBill posts as he has excellent insight, but is that the best way to evaluate?  There's a big point slide scale across Round 1.  Won't that over-penalize for inaccuracy at the top of the round vs. those at the bottom.  Make a mistake on one guy in the top 10, Stingley was picked much higher than many expected, and you've blown the whole mock.  Perhaps some of these guys in the lower end of your list did much better later in the round, where the picking is far more difficult.

Edited May 2, 2022 by cage

[GunnerBill]

Ha! What an accolade! I do take @cage's point about whether it is the best way to score mocks. There are multiple methods out there. @eball linked to one a few weeks ago against which I was very much middle of the pack last year. I will score this year's effort against it. Despite only getting 4 exact matches this year I was pretty happy with how my mock went. Calling 27 of the 32 first rounds is the best I've ever done in that regard. Normally around 24. And by the method being used here I benefit from the fact that my 5 misses were Malik (who everyone missed on) and then Mafe, Booth, Gordon and Watson - all of whom went in the first 10 picks of day 2. 

[PetermansRedemption]

15 minutes ago, cage said:

I always read @GunnerBill posts as he has excellent insight, but is that the best way to evaluate?  There's a big point slide scale across Round 1.  Won't that over-penalize for inaccuracy at the top of the round vs. those at the bottom.  Make a mistake on one guy in the top 10, Stingley was picked much higher than many expected, and you've blown the whole mock.  Perhaps some of these guys in the lower end of your list did much better later in the round, where the picking is far more difficult.

Wouldn’t this also be an argument for why you do it this way? It penalizes the easier picks at the top of the round far more than it penalizes the more difficult late round picks. 

[Clark Rotary]

Wow, nice analysis and that's impressive GunnerBill!

[GunnerBill]

By the method here https://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/mock-drafts.php I'd have come 57th out of 164. By that method my weak spot was picks 11-20. I aced 1-10 and did well 21-32. But those middle 10 picks with all those trades and trades involving players etc knocked me off course. 

[BringBackFergy]

25 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

By the method here https://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/mock-drafts.php I'd have come 57th out of 164. By that method my weak spot was picks 11-20. I aced 1-10 and did well 21-32. But those middle 10 picks with all those trades and trades involving players etc knocked me off course. 

Josh Rosen liked this post. 
 

 

😂

[Billy Claude]

1 hour ago, cage said:

I always read @GunnerBill posts as he has excellent insight, but is that the best way to evaluate?  There's a big point slide scale across Round 1.  Won't that over-penalize for inaccuracy at the top of the round vs. those at the bottom.  Make a mistake on one guy in the top 10, Stingley was picked much higher than many expected, and you've blown the whole mock.  Perhaps some of these guys in the lower end of your list did much better later in the round, where the picking is far more difficult.

 

 

I specifically chose this method to penalize misses at the beginning of the round more than ones later in the round.   A miss by 3 slots in the top 5 is not very good, but a miss by 3 slots in 28 to 32 range is doing a pretty good job.

 

 

[Dr. Who]

2 hours ago, Billy Claude said:

 

I thought it would be interesting to see how @GunnerBill ’s mock objectively compared to others.   To do this, I used the Jimmy Johnson draft pick value chart and assign penalty points based on how far the mock pick was from the actual pick.   For example, if a mock had Derek Stingley picked 5th (1700 draft points) whereas he was actually picked 3rd (2200 draft points), the mock draft was assigned 500 penalty points.  This was done for 14 mock drafts.

 

Long story short, it appers that GunnerBill knows what he is talking about as his draft finished first.

 

1.      GunnerBill                                         6950 penalty points (lower is better)

2.      Michael Renner (PFF)                     7046

3.      Trevor Sikkema (PFF)                     7090

4.      Chris Traapsso (CBS)                     7136

5.      Ari Meirov (PFF)                              7290

6.      Ryan Wilson (CBS)                          7586

7.      Charles Davis (NFL.com)                7690

8.      Josh Edwards (CBS)                      8045

9.      Chris Collinsworth (PFF)                8546

10.   Pete Prisco (CBS)                            9080

11.   Doug Kyed (PFF)                              9577

12.   Kyle Stackpole (CBS)                      10175

13.   Christian D’Andrea (USA Today)     12291

14.   Vinnie Iyer (Sporting News)            13445

 

So GunerBill’s mock was the best match by a narrow margin.   One can argue the top five drafts were similar in quality.  For example, Michael Renner would have won easily based on the top 31 picks but he had Sam Howell who was picked in the 5th round as his pick #32.

 

Some other points of interest:

 

19 players appears in all 14 mock drafts.  One, Malik Willis, was not selected in the first round.

23 players appears in 12 or more mock drafts.  Two, Willis and Andrew Booth were not selected in the first round.

 

Only one player selected in the first round did not appear in any mock draft (Cole Strange)

 

Kaiir Elam appears in 6 out of the 14 mock drafts with the earliest at #25 (to the Bills).

 

 

Didn't know Gunner had a burner account.

[Billy Claude]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

By the method here https://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/mock-drafts.php I'd have come 57th out of 164. By that method my weak spot was picks 11-20. I aced 1-10 and did well 21-32. But those middle 10 picks with all those trades and trades involving players etc knocked me off course. 

 

I didn't know there was a website that already did something like this.

 

I agree that a slight change in the metric would change the order.  Moving one pick in the top five mocks would put them first.  So I don't doubt the order at the top would have changed if the Bill's secret point value system was used instead.

[SoCal Deek]

The only important measure would be the points earned by correctly guessing that the Bills would select the SD State punter. Everything else is just noise. 😉

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

Nice work! You have earned my respect.

[FireChans]

@GunnerBill is basically must read on TBD and he has been for many years now. No one else is close.

[cage]

2 hours ago, Billy Claude said:

 

 

I specifically chose this method to penalize misses at the beginning of the round more than ones later in the round.   A miss by 3 slots in the top 5 is not very good, but a miss by 3 slots in 28 to 32 range is doing a pretty good job.

 

 

 

I don't want to belabor it as I have much respect for Bill's insights, but a miss of a few slots in the top 5 penalizes almost as much 2+ round misses on QBs that people were projecting going in the 1st

Edited May 2, 2022 by cage

[Royale with Cheese]

4 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

Ha! What an accolade! I do take @cage's point about whether it is the best way to score mocks. There are multiple methods out there. @eball linked to one a few weeks ago against which I was very much middle of the pack last year. I will score this year's effort against it. Despite only getting 4 exact matches this year I was pretty happy with how my mock went. Calling 27 of the 32 first rounds is the best I've ever done in that regard. Normally around 24. And by the method being used here I benefit from the fact that my 5 misses were Malik (who everyone missed on) and then Mafe, Booth, Gordon and Watson - all of whom went in the first 10 picks of day 2. 

Ill let you buy me a drink if I’m ever in England.

[The Dean]

Fantastic!  

 

BTW, what were Kiper and Shay's scores?

[Nextmanup]

To the OP:  I assume this means Mel Kiper did not finish in the top 14.

 

Did you add up a score for him?  I'm just curious how bad it is.

 

 

[Billy Claude]

12 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

To the OP:  I assume this means Mel Kiper did not finish in the top 14.

 

Did you add up a score for him?  I'm just curious how bad it is.

 

 

 

24 minutes ago, The Dean said:

Fantastic!  

 

BTW, what were Kiper and Shay's scores?

 

 

I did not do Kiper and Shay's scores since they are behind a paywall so I don't have access.   The CBS and PFF were chosen just because they had all their mocks easily accessible from a single webpage and the other 3 were national sites that came up early on Google.

 

2 hours ago, cage said:

 

I don't want to belabor it as I have much respect for Bill's insights, but a miss of a few slots in the top 5 penalizes almost as much 2+ round misses on QBs that people were projecting going in the 1st

 

 

Certainly there are other metrics that one could use and might be better but I don't want to make up my own.   I chose Jimmy Johnson's draft points since it is well known and from the GM's point of view drafting a total bust with #2 pick is much more likely to get you fired than a total bust at #32.  That should hold for mock drafters also -- but again there can certainly be better metrics.

 

[TPS]

I appreciate the work and like your thread title.  I much prefer to read these types of threads than something Talley's wife said....

[Solomon Grundy]

On 5/2/2022 at 6:56 AM, GunnerBill said:

By the method here https://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/mock-drafts.php I'd have come 57th out of 164. By that method my weak spot was picks 11-20. I aced 1-10 and did well 21-32. But those middle 10 picks with all those trades and trades involving players etc knocked me off course. 

I value your opinion of players/prospects more than Joe Marino from the Draft Network 

[NoSaint]

On 5/2/2022 at 5:42 AM, PetermansRedemption said:

Wouldn’t this also be an argument for why you do it this way? It penalizes the easier picks at the top of the round far more than it penalizes the more difficult late round picks. 

but the scope of the penalty is grossly out of balance. 

[John from Riverside]

Bottom line....Gunner knows his *****

[Buffalo716]

What realistically people should be comparing... If that's what this thread is for

 

Is gunners top 100-150 prospects and see how they pan out in 3 years 

 

Mocking people to where they go is good but it doesn't really have a value... 

 

If he mocked pickett to the Steelers in the first... That means he knows the Steelers were looking at quarterback

 

If he had pickett his 20th ranked player in the draft and he turns out he sucks... Well it doesn't matter he mocked him to Pittsburgh 

 

If he was his 130th ranked player... Projected to be a backup.. and he mocked him to the Steelers in the first... That's more impressive

 

 

Edited May 8, 2022 by Buffalo716

[GunnerBill]

10 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

What realistically people should be comparing... If that's what this thread is for

 

Is gunners top 100-150 prospects and see how they pan out in 3 years 

 

Mocking people to where they go is good but it doesn't really have a value... 

 

If he mocked pickett to the Steelers in the first... That means he knows the Steelers were looking at quarterback

 

If he had pickett his 20th ranked player in the draft and he turns out he sucks... Well it doesn't matter he mocked him to Pittsburgh 

 

If he was his 130th ranked player... Projected to be a backup.. and he mocked him to the Steelers in the first... That's more impressive

 

 

 

Mocking and evaluating are two very different things. I keep the two very separate. To me mocking is about piecing information about the TEAMS together. The evaluations are a separate they about the PLAYERS.

 

Example: I mocked Walker to the Jags #1. He was my 31st player on my board and a high 2nd round grade, but by draft week he was obviously going #1.

Edited May 8, 2022 by GunnerBill

[Buffalo716]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

Mocking and evaluating are two very different things. I keep the two very separate. 

Well I think that was my point

 

Mock drafts have really no value... Whether is kiper, you or me.. it just shows people are in tune with team needs.. and to say look I'm right

 

I've never looked at anybody's mock draft once and thought damn that guy knows football

 

But when I read scouting reports , or talk football with a coach or a scout... It's very easy to pick up if they know what they're talking about 

 

And I'm not trying to say you don't know football... I'm saying that your big board shows your football knowledge a lot more than your mock draft

 

 

 

 

 

 

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Buffalo716 said:

Well I think that was my point

 

Mock drafts have really no value... Whether is kiper, you or me.. it just shows people are in tune with team needs.. and to say look I'm right

 

I've never looked at anybody's mock draft once and thought damn that guy knows football

 

But when I read scouting reports , or talk football with a coach or a scout... It's very easy to pick up if they know what they're talking about 

 

And I'm not trying to say you don't know football... I'm saying that your big board shows your football knowledge a lot more than your mock draft

 

 

Yes the two exercises are different. I don't think mocks are about showing you know Xs and Os. If you do them well they do show you are in touch with the league, team trends and situations etc. There is value as a fan in knowing a bit about all 32 teams and their rosters and their plan and where they are in the cycle. But generally the value in mocks is pre-draft in terms of helping to sort through the kinds of scenario that might arise and the sort of choice a team may be faced with. They don't have ongoing value and they don't have Xs and Os value, but understanding how teams are being built does have a value. 

[Buffalo716]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yes the two exercises are different. I don't think mocks are about showing you know Xs and Os. If you do them well they do show you are in touch with the league, team trends and situations etc. There is value as a fan in knowing a bit about all 32 teams and their rosters and their plan and where they are in the cycle. But generally the value in mocks is pre-draft in terms of helping to sort through the kinds of scenario that might arise and the sort of choice a team may be faced with. They don't have ongoing value and they don't have Xs and Os value, but understanding how teams are being built does have a value. 

NFL front offices and scouts will run mock drafts predraft.. to run situations and see what possibilities might arise.. where the scouts will play the gms

 

You're obviously in tune with what NFL teams need and the trends of the league .. and you have a good understanding of the game 

 

I think it's just during the long off season.. after seeing and hearing about 500 mock drafts.. I just hate the word mock draft