for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

A "New" Approach to the Traditional Draft Value Chart

M.S. : 2/26/2024 7:41 am

"New" is a relative term since the attached analysis ("How to Value NFL Draft Picks" by Kevin Meers) was generated back in 2011 but nevertheless makes for interesting reading. Don't let the nitty-gritty stats analysis get in your way. What's important is the overall message that can be summarized as follows:

(1) The same Draft Value Chart, created by Jimmy Johnson in the 1980s, is still the one most fans and draft sites use when assessing possible trades.

(2) The problem is that it was based solely on judgement with no data analytic underpinning. For example, the #1 pick has a point value of 3000 and #16 has a value of 1000. Bottom line: there is no historical data to prove that the first pick is indeed 3-times better than the sixteenth. It's arbitrary!

(3) The author's Draft Value Chart utilizes a statistic known as "Career Approximate Value" that, "...compare(s) players across seasons and positions..., which is exactly the objective here." For a deep dive into the CAV: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/about/approximate_value.htm#:~:text=Weighted%20Career%20Approximate%20Value&text=For%20each%20player%2C%20the%20following,%2C%20and%20so%20on...

(4) The authors primary finding: "The old system massively over values the earliest picks and significantly undervalues mid-to-late round picks."


Link - ( New Window )
A single point value  
gridirony : 2/26/2024 9:05 am : link
such as 3,000 points for the #1 pick is not accurate. The point value should be a range, to reflect reality, like 0-3,000 for the #1.
I have always thought  
mfjmfj : 2/26/2024 9:10 am : link
the value chart was meaningless. If it is actually used by teams, it is just another example of how conventional wisdom can be commonly accepted and used even though it is wrong. I would love to see an update to the 2011 analysis, that could both show the values and also see what values teams are using in actual trades. If teams are using the made up chart and the "new" chart better reflects values, there is a huge opportunity for arbitrage.
Interesting article..  
Capt. Don : 2/26/2024 10:09 am : link
Assuming that I am reading it correctly, we could package #6 overall with a 4th rounder to get to #2 overall.
The value  
pjcas18 : 2/26/2024 10:20 am : link
of the chart isn't the actual numbers or "value" given to each pick, it's that all the teams generally agree on it or you wouldn't be able to come to terms on a trade.

if one team value pick #6 as x, but another team uses a different scale and values pick #6 as y it would be hard to come to terms on trade agreement.

the volume of draft pick trades indicates team generally operate under the same understanding/scale
RE: I have always thought  
Section331 : 2/26/2024 10:28 am : link
In comment 16408064 mfjmfj said:
Quote:
the value chart was meaningless. If it is actually used by teams, it is just another example of how conventional wisdom can be commonly accepted and used even though it is wrong. I would love to see an update to the 2011 analysis, that could both show the values and also see what values teams are using in actual trades. If teams are using the made up chart and the "new" chart better reflects values, there is a huge opportunity for arbitrage.


Agreed. It provides a starting point for negotiations, but if you have a situation like multiple teams angling for NE’s #3 pick, that chart won’t mean diddly.
Over the years  
M.S. : 2/26/2024 10:45 am : link

I've analyzed numerous trades based on the traditional Value Chart.

My overall finding is that for the majority of trades the traditional Value Chart holds up quite well. It's not perfect, but it seems clear to me that numerous teams are using it as a starting point for discussion and do not stray too far from the actual values.

Where it can fall apart is when someone wants to trade up to the #1 pick, as well as #2 and #3. That's when the chart values fall apart. Typically, the team that trades up pays with a lot more points than the chart would suggest.
Good post  
Rod in St Cloud : 2/26/2024 11:07 am : link
It is a better predictor of typical value than the present one. Thanks for sharing. In time, it may be the chart more used. Currently, teams will go by the better known and followed chart, even if less worthy of support. Right now, the teams using the newer chart will have an advantage in making trades returning middle and late round draft picks since they are more valuable.
Jimmy Johnson  
Rico : 2/26/2024 12:41 pm : link
put a higher value on early first round picks because he never missed on them!
M.S.- the answer is pretty obvious  
Dave on the UWS : 2/26/2024 12:53 pm : link
The only reason to move to #1 or 2 is for a QB. When you are talking about THAT position, the value chart is not really relevant. Making that trade is not about points, its about need, desperation, greediness (on the part of the team holding those picks).
The value chart works reasonably well once you get down a ways, and the QB "need" variable is out of the equation.
RE: M.S.- the answer is pretty obvious  
M.S. : 2/26/2024 1:15 pm : link
In comment 16408391 Dave on the UWS said:
Quote:
The only reason to move to #1 or 2 is for a QB. When you are talking about THAT position, the value chart is not really relevant. Making that trade is not about points, its about need, desperation, greediness (on the part of the team holding those picks).
The value chart works reasonably well once you get down a ways, and the QB "need" variable is out of the equation.

Definitely... spot on!
The only valuations that matter  
Bill in UT : 2/26/2024 5:49 pm : link
are the ones made by teams in trade talks.
Makes you realize how stupid DG was  
chuckydee9 : 2/27/2024 8:44 am : link
for not trading the second pick..
Back to the Corner