Skip to main content

.

This one comes to us via Tankathon, work done by a Haaavad crew

They show their methodology for valuing a draft pick. The old Jimmy Johnson chart over-values the top picks and undervalues the mid round picks in their view. Lots of different trade charts these days, I'm guessing you could find 4-5 different methods and results. This one leans on " Approximate Value" - the metric developed by Pro Football Reference

https://harvardsportsanalysis....lue-nfl-draft-picks/

Taking data from www.pro-football-reference.com, I have created a much better system that more accurately values each pick in the NFL draft, similar to the work done by Chase Stuart. Pro-Football-Reference uses a metric called Career Approximate Value (CAV) that allows one to compare players across seasons and positions. It is not meant as the ultimate NFL statistic. It is useful for comparing large groups of players across time and positions, which is exactly the objective here.

@Satori posted:

.

This one comes to us via Tankathon, work done by a Haaavad crew

They show their methodology for valuing a draft pick. The old Jimmy Johnson chart over-values the top picks and undervalues the mid round picks in their view. Lots of different trade charts these days, I'm guessing you could find 4-5 different methods and results. This one leans on " Approximate Value" - the metric developed by Pro Football Reference

https://harvardsportsanalysis....lue-nfl-draft-picks/

Taking data from www.pro-football-reference.com, I have created a much better system that more accurately values each pick in the NFL draft, similar to the work done by Chase Stuart. Pro-Football-Reference uses a metric called Career Approximate Value (CAV) that allows one to compare players across seasons and positions. It is not meant as the ultimate NFL statistic. It is useful for comparing large groups of players across time and positions, which is exactly the objective here.

One thing that the charts may not take into account enough is how much more value a pick at the end of round 1 is relative to a pick at the top of the 2nd round. If you hit on a first-round pick, you get to control them for an additional year by extending that 5th-year option.

The difference in value between the 32nd pick and the 33rd pick is probably the largest in the draft outside of maybe 1st vs. 2nd overall.

That option allows the Packers to extend Jordan Love at about 20 million for year 5 this off-season. If he would have been the top pick in the second round, they'd be forced to make a decision on whether to franchise tag him or sign a big extension after this off-season.

Of course, Gutey made a poor decision on Savage, but it did help with Jaire Alexander and gave them more leverage to negotiate the extension.

One thing that the charts may not take into account enough is how much more value a pick at the end of round 1 is relative to a pick at the top of the 2nd round. If you hit on a first-round pick, you get to control them for an additional year by extending that 5th-year option.

Its a very important consideration for sure, but the rate of 5th year options isn't 100%. The Packers and Ravens ( both good-drafting teams) are tied with 61 % of their options exercised and they are exactly in the middle of all 32 teams in term of rate.

Houston is tops at 100 % and the Browns, Raiders and Jags bring up the rear with 32 % of their 5th year options exercised.

Sometimes teams don't exercise and instead sign a new extension so while that option certainly has a value, its tough to nail down given the variety of outcomes.

I would also push back on the Savage 5th year extension being a poor decision-  that story isn't fully written yet. It may be, it may not.
For some its a forgone conclusion, but that's premature in my view.
2023 should bring us some answers

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×