Out of the box, useful concepts for building great NFL teams...

[Russ57]

To me, the elephant in the room, is what a given years draft has to offer.

In the 2020 draft I see three offensive tackles with first round grades. Problem is only one of them is a left tackle and I wouldn't (usually) pick a ROT in the first round. Now we need a LOT badly as well as a ROT. So do we pick worse value, but better player, and draft a ROT at 18 (assuming Wirfs or Wills are there and Thomas is long gone)? Or do we reach, and get best of LOT Becton, Jones or Jackson? I think Jackson is the only LOT worth 18 and even that is a big reach. At that point I consider the DT/DE's better value at 18 with any of Brown/Kinlaw or Epenesa/Gross-Matos.

I could argue that there will be better value at 28 with a CB than a WR in this draft assuming one of Fulton, Henderson, Diggs is left.

At 5 I think we have to take Burrow/Tua/Herbert. If we can't I'd hope for Love/Eason/Fromm at 1C or 2A. In that case I'd grab LOT Thomas at 5.

It will be interesting to see how it goes. Seems to me we should be able to walk away with 5 solid prospects at QB/OL/DL/CB/WR if we care to.

 

[NBP81]

Here's how you butcher analytics... Here's a graph trying to illustrate draft success rate for QBs. They are slapping a linear model on data that clearly isnt linear, and further more, linear models are not bound between 0 and 1 which is clearly wrong(Approximated Value per game cannot be negative). I mean its fine to illustrate a quick point, but using it for any other purpose is just irresponsible.

https://www.rotoworld.com/article/numbers/nfl-draft-analytics-qb

 

[39wildman]

Coaching. Little luck, good drafting,good F/a pick. Being able too adapt to change in nfl.

 

[Fin-Loco]

To me, the elephant in the room, is what a given years draft has to offer.

In the 2020 draft I see three offensive tackles with first round grades. Problem is only one of them is a left tackle and I wouldn't (usually) pick a ROT in the first round. Now we need a LOT badly as well as a ROT.

Keep in mind the priority on LT vs RT gets switched if Tua is the pick as he's a South Paw...

 

[SF Dolphin Fan]

Part of the success is finding those players you have to keep and balancing that with roster turnover.

That's where you have to give New England a lot of credit. Yes they lucked into an all-time great at quarterback. But they've successfully played musical chairs at other positions.

That said, they have almost always had an above average defensive line and at least a serviceable offensive line.

 

[NBP81]

Part of the success is finding those players you have to keep and balancing that with roster turnover.

That's where you have to give New England a lot of credit. Yes they lucked into an all-time great at quarterback. But they've successfully played musical chairs at other positions.

That said, they have almost always had an above average defensive line and at least a serviceable offensive line.

I think optimally, you'd like to play musical chairs with the most expensive positions by using the draft almost exclusively for those high value positions. That would put your team in a position to have the most valuable players on your team playing for peanuts on rookie contracts. You'd always have a healthy cap situation to fill the supporting roles in FA.

 

[Eesti]

A huge part to me is having a staff of teachers who can take a player, teach the fundamentals, identify what he does well and let him do it. Beyond that the FO has to find players that fit the schemes. This team has been lacking in that area for decades. It also seems to be the clear vision going forward. No more trying to put a square peg into a round hole.

It's how NE takes 3rd and 4th rounders or low cost, cast-offs from other teams and helps them have career years. When they get too expensive they let some of them leave and then get compensated for it with picks. Shaq Mason, David Andrews, Kyle Van Noy, Joe Thuney, Trey Flowers, Trent Brown. The list goes on and on and has for years.

 

[SF Dolphin Fan]

I think optimally, you'd like to play musical chairs with the most expensive positions by using the draft almost exclusively for those high value positions. That would put your team in a position to have the most valuable players on your team playing for peanuts on rookie contracts. You'd always have a healthy cap situation to fill the supporting roles in FA.

I think optimally, you'd like to play musical chairs with the most expensive positions by using the draft almost exclusively for those high value positions. That would put your team in a position to have the most valuable players on your team playing for peanuts on rookie contracts. You'd always have a healthy cap situation to fill the supporting roles in FA.

Optimally, yes, but you'd have to hit on those draft picks.

I think those premium positions are the players you pay, at least if they are producing.

Honestly, I don't know if it makes sense to draft anyone high who doesn't play one of those premium positions. I know there are exceptions like a Zeke Elliott etc.[/QUOTE]

 

[The Bopkin]

I’ve spent quite a lot of time the last couple of months trying to understand how the NFL works. Most of what I’ve found I’ve been arguing to death around here for quite some time now, but some of it is hard to get across when splattered over multiple conversations and different threads. I expect to get bombarded in this thread and that’s fine. You probably won’t agree with most things I have to say here but my hope is that I can provide and few things that will make you view things differently.

The Fins are really in a special position this time around as they have the opportunity to start over with tons of assets and space under the cap. They’re basically an expansion team on steroids. In this post I will just illustrate some of the flaws in thinking that plague a lot of teams in the NFL and how the Fins can avoid them and then explain some of the edges that exist in the NFL and how they can exploit them.

“We are 1 or 2 players away”

This is the most obvious flaw around in the NFL. Teams are trying to win next season and it causes them to make crucial mistakes that they weren’t making when actually building that team to be 1 or 2 players away, it causes them to go flat out bonkers and puts them in all or nothing mode where everything falls apart when that window closes.

“Defense wins championships”, “Passing is crucial for scoring points and winning games” are heavily debated here and both hold some truth, but reality is great teams win championships. Most focus on how to win next season instead of focusing on how to build great teams that last.

Spend most of your time trying to illustrate what a good decision looks like in every aspect of building a team, and then just focus on making the right call at every decision point, regardless of the outcomes. Outcomes are full of noise and are very likely to steer you in the wrong direction more often than not.

I think most GMs truly believe that their edge lies in their ability to identify talent better than other teams. I might catch some flak here but I think that thinking is fools gold and very likely to be a losers game. Ever heard something around the lines of “80% of people believe they are above average drivers ” ? Well Im flat out certain that this also applies to NFL GMs.

Instead of trying to outsmart everyone, look for unexploited edges that are splattered all over the place in all aspects of team building and football strategy and pound them.

The NFL draft

“Best player available”, “Filling needs” and a combination of both is outdated. Ever since they installed the rookie wage scale, the draft has been a completely different animal, yet most teams still draft the same way they used to before that event. It isn’t about filling needs and trying to find the best players any more, it’s about getting value.

The reason I’m saying that is because draft picks have actually become free cap space tickets. Literally. The rookie you pick will get paid a pre determined amount regardless of the position he plays. In a way, having a starting QB(picked in round 1 or 2) on his rookie contract will save you from around 12M per to 8M per for 5 years depending on his draft slot.

For comparison sake, a RB drafted in the same rounds will actually net you at least -3M per against the cap since they are such an underpaid position. I picked the most extreme case to illustrate my point but it’s absolutely something teams should consider.

Ignoring this concept because you are 1-2 players away doesn’t make it any less of a mistake, filling teams needs or trying to outsmart everyone thinking you can ID good players better than anyone while ignoring value is a mistake. Small mistakes add up pretty fast in the NFL and this is how you end up in cap hell.

I’ve already gone deeper on this subject, if you’re interested to read more about it, the following posts explain the concept in more depth and also include visuals.






“Offensive Coordinators”

J-off-her-doll is actually the one who caught my attention on this subject and while I haven’t done any research about it, I feel the role is just to important these days to keep it out of the discussion.

This is all opinion but I feel the role is mismanaged in general. Most of them hold the responsibility of teaching players how to execute different plays on top of having to elaborate an overall offensive strategy and execute/call that strategy in game.

Call me crazy but those 2 roles are so far from another when it comes to the skillset required to be good at one or the other that Im sort of baffled as to why teams feel the need to give both those roles to one person. Again, this is only my opinion but teams should absolutely explore the possibility that they would be better off having 2 specialists for the job.

Get the best teacher you can get your hands on to teach the players how to execute your plays, and go out and get the best strategist you can get your hands on to build and execute your strategy in game. The offensive coordinator and the playcaller.

Most NFL teams do stupid things

… And it’s understandable. Most of these guys get hired and have so little time to show results that the long term is not something they can afford. They flat out start behind and are most often forced into making costly mistakes that accumulate fast and quickly become a big part of their demise.

I think the Fins FO and CS just might have a decent enough leach that they’d have the time to really build a strong foundation of making good decisions that profit the long term as well as the not so long term. Don’t try and “win this season”, make decisions that are optimal at every turn and the great team will follow, and it will be a sustainable one.

Further discussion

While I’m pretty much done with this post, there are many many more edges to be exploited in the current NFL, those were just some obvious ones to me. Free agency and in game strategies are full of them and I’d encourage anyone who has some ideas on this subject to post them in this thread.

I don’t expect anyone to agree with everything I just said, TBH I expect that alot of you will flat out throw rocks at me and that’s fine. My hope is that some take some nuggets in there and it gets you to think about how the NFL truly works behind the scenes.

So WOW, what a post(and I have no urge to throw stones at you)
I am fascinated by all the discussion of value; I thought I understood what was meant by drafting for value, but I don't think I truly got it until I read this and read everyone's fantastic follow-ups. So much more sense now.
I want to ask this, more just to see what you reply:
Let's say a team is drafting at 16. A pro bowl caliber guard is sliding and is available at 16. The team really needs a starting guard because they lost their starter in FA and hasn't adequately addressed the position. But guard is not a value position. The next best player is a CB, but he is the third ranked CB, and considered a major drop off from the first two. No DE's who fit the team's scheme are ranked mid teens, and the team is already WR laden. No round one OT's are left.
No decent trade out is being offered.
So, should the team take the guard any way, even though that position is of need but lacks value, or should the team take the value CB anyway due to the depth need of secondary players?

 

[NBP81]

So WOW, what a post(and I have no urge to throw stones at you)
I am fascinated by all the discussion of value; I thought I understood what was meant by drafting for value, but I don't think I truly got it until I read this and read everyone's fantastic follow-ups. So much more sense now.
I want to ask this, more just to see what you reply:
Let's say a team is drafting at 16. A pro bowl caliber guard is sliding and is available at 16. The team really needs a starting guard because they lost their starter in FA and hasn't adequately addressed the position. But guard is not a value position. The next best player is a CB, but he is the third ranked CB, and considered a major drop off from the first two. No DE's who fit the team's scheme are ranked mid teens, and the team is already WR laden. No round one OT's are left.
No decent trade out is being offered.
So, should the team take the guard any way, even though that position is of need but lacks value, or should the team take the value CB anyway due to the depth need of secondary players?

Thank you for showing interest! Your scenario highlights the fact there's always going to be judgement calls involved in any strategy.

In this case my goal was to illustrate a concept moreso than make it perfectly accurate. There are many things to be taken from it, the biggest gaps are likely to remain the same with even more precise results while close clusters might change a bit. So I'd be more inclined to put position groups in different tiers and use judgement when 2 groups are in the same tier....

But even then, those change throughout the draft. ie. Interior OL is 8th at the top of the draft but climbs all the way to 3rd at the end.

In your particular scenario, the call would be made depending on cap situation if it were up to me. The closer you are to the cap, the more inclined I would be to tip the scale towards the more valuable position. There are many other variables to consider. For one I think interiolOL will gain alot of value in the coming years.

The team really needs a starting guard because they lost their starter in FA and hasn't adequately addressed the position

This is exactly the kind of mistake I wouldnt want my team to make. Not because its about Guard speciffically, but because they'd consider making a mistake to plug an urgent need with the draft. In other words, dont compound the failure to adress the position correctly by making another mistake out of pure desperation.

I want to emphasize here that this is not about the Guard position at all, maybe picking the guard is absolutely the correct decision all things considered. Its about the thought proccess behind making that decision. If that makes any sense...

 

[The Bopkin]

It absolutely does...great reply. Thank you.

 

[Russ57]

Hey, if the guard will play right away....and the CB will be nothing but depth as the team already has starters there....and if picking the CB forces the team to "have to" get a guard in the FA market right away at any cost......then grab the guard. Otherwise you hope that CB develops enough to let one of yours go in the future...either in trade.....or at least as a comp pick.