The real value of draft picks...? | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

The real value of draft picks...?

NBP81

NBP81

Its what you know for sure... that just aint so...
Super Donator
Club Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,700
Reaction score
40,932
Location
Montreal
As many of you know, Im on the tanking bandwagon. This seems to be the hot topic these days on the board. Today @Dolphins81 replied to one of my posts with "Do your own research" after I replied to one of his posts listing top 5 QBs and their actual success in the NFL. This is by no means a call out as I think he has a point. Im out there pounding on the fact that picking earlier in the draft theorically holds an advantage and all I have to stand on is logic and theory.

I can do the research, I have some programming and playing with data ability but I'd like to have your input on a couple of things before I start with the project.

The main hurdle is quantifying success. This needs to be position specific as most stats make sense for some position groups but not for others. ie. OL play is very hard to quantify.

I think games started can be very misleading as its easier to start on bad teams and bad teams, on average, draft earlier...

I thought of using specific position stats, like TDs(or Rating, or TD%, or whatever) for QBS, Y/C for RBs(or total yards, TDs or whatever) but I feel like this approach is still dependant on the surroundings of the player.

What I've come up with is using the first contract value of each players. Of course we'd have to weigh in different positions as even bad QBs make more than great RBs... But I think judging success by the first contract should reflect actual return very well.

I want to know if you agree with that or better yet, have a better way to quantify success for a rookie player.

Thanks!
 
NBP81 said:
Im out there pounding on the fact that picking earlier in the draft theorically holds an advantage and all I have to stand on is logic and theory.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone disagrees in theory with your statement above. Picking earlier gives us choice of player(s) or trade choices if we want so yes earlier picks are more valuable.

We don't (can't) control anything the team is doing (winning a game or 2) or anything the team has done (time machine unavailable) ... wanting the team to lose on purpose (if that's part of your tirade) is ok, I guess, if you're hoping (thinking) the outcome will benefit the future ... but there is no way the players and coaches are going to risk their reputations and future to benefit a team by losing … that is career suicide … how could you ever trust someone that plays/coaches well only when they want to?

What would that do to benefit THEM?

I wish we could have it both ways ... win a few ... Steelers go winless ... Texans go winless ... AND somehow we get the first 3 picks ... but as my momma used to tell me ... I can poop in one hand and wish in the other and we will see which one fills up first

No matter if some agree with you and you spend all your time figuring out the matrix of why you're right ... we still don't KNOW how this will pan out regardless of draft position ... seems like mental masturbation to me.. JMO
 
mwestberry said:
I don't think anyone disagrees in theory with your statement above. Picking earlier gives us choice of player(s) or trade choices if we want so yes earlier picks are more valuable.

We don't (can't) control anything the team is doing (winning a game or 2) or anything the team has done (time machine unavailable) ... wanting the team to lose on purpose (if that's part of your tirade) is ok, I guess, if you're hoping (thinking) the outcome will benefit the future ... but there is no way the players and coaches are going to risk their reputations and future to benefit a team by losing … that is career suicide … how could you ever trust someone that plays/coaches well only when they want to?

What would that do to benefit THEM?

I wish we could have it both ways ... win a few ... Steelers go winless ... Texans go winless ... AND somehow we get the first 3 picks ... but as my momma used to tell me ... I can poop in one hand and wish in the other and we will see which one fills up first

No matter if some agree with you and you spend all your time figuring out the matrix of why you're right ... we still don't KNOW how this will pan out regardless of draft position ... seems like mental masturbation to me.. JMO
Click to expand...
Hey if you dont want to help out thats fine... Have a good one!
 
dolphins picking 1st overall
finheaven: they did exactly what they planned to do and got the must-have and most coveted 1st pick in the draft for tua or burrow.

dolphins win meaningless games and drop in the draft
finheaven: they did exactly what they planned to do. the 1st pick is overrated and tua or burrow arent gonna change anything.
 
I think this would be a waste of your time, tbh.

It's factually inarguable that the #1 overall pick holds the greatest chance of success for QBs and that's for a reason, but it's ridiculous that the counter-argument to this somehow turns into "my 250 picks vs your 5" as if this is an equivalent pool.

Yes, the top pick or top 5 picks guarantee nothing, but it still gives you the largest chance of a successful player over any other individual spot in the draft.

Can Tua bust? Absolutely. Can you find the best quarterback in the draft in the 4th round instead? Absolutely, but the % chance of this happening just turns out to be luck, and I don't want to be in a position where I need to really rely on luck. Just give me the best chance I can get.
 
NBP81 said:
As many of you know, Im on the tanking bandwagon. This seems to be the hot topic these days on the board. Today @Dolphins81 replied to one of my posts with "Do your own research" after I replied to one of his posts listing top 5 QBs and their actual success in the NFL. This is by no means a call out as I think he has a point. Im out there pounding on the fact that picking earlier in the draft theorically holds an advantage and all I have to stand on is logic and theory.

I can do the research, I have some programming and playing with data ability but I'd like to have your input on a couple of things before I start with the project.

The main hurdle is quantifying success. This needs to be position specific as most stats make sense for some position groups but not for others. ie. OL play is very hard to quantify.

I think games started can be very misleading as its easier to start on bad teams and bad teams, on average, draft earlier...

I thought of using specific position stats, like TDs(or Rating, or TD%, or whatever) for QBS, Y/C for RBs(or total yards, TDs or whatever) but I feel like this approach is still dependant on the surroundings of the player.

What I've come up with is using the first contract value of each players. Of course we'd have to weigh in different positions as even bad QBs make more than great RBs... But I think judging success by the first contract should reflect actual return very well.

I want to know if you agree with that or better yet, have a better way to quantify success for a rookie player.

Thanks!
Click to expand...

An intriguing idea. I'm guessing you mean 1st contract excluding the rookie contract. That's draft rank driven. A few items to consider. Any players performance is also team dependent. What would Foles have been offered were he QB under Gase? As you know, some years 5 teams need a DT. Some years one. My biggest problem is this . . . NFL has 32 teams. Pick any position. There are only 28 NFL caliber players to go around. (I picked that number at random.) There are only 23 'average' or above players. This is why contracts are so insane. Limited talent chased by too many suitors.
OTOH, I can think of no better factor to rate players. If you get time to do the research, I'd love to know what you find. Maybe it will give us an improved way of evaluating.
 
Vaark said:
@NBP81

Are you still upset that we passed on Dr. Laurent Duvernay-Tardif?
Click to expand...
You're slowly getting into the top 5 of people I'd want to have dinner with... Clearly, our opinions differ on this subject but I'd very much like to pick your brain on many others... Have a good one brother!
 
IMO, I would only use numbers that indicate averages or percentages (such as - avg yards per game, average yards per pass, completion %, etc) and stay away from totals, like total TD's, total yds, etc. If you use totals, you will start comparing apples and oranges because the quantity of games/years/whatever will be different.
 
NBP81 said:
You're slowly getting into the top 5 of people I'd want to have dinner with... Clearly, our opinions differ on this subject but I'd very much like to pick your brain on many others... Have a good one brother!
Click to expand...
et tu, mon ami :up:
 
Kamelion4291 said:
I think this would be a waste of your time, tbh.

It's factually inarguable that the #1 overall pick holds the greatest chance of success for QBs and that's for a reason, but it's ridiculous that the counter-argument to this somehow turns into "my 250 picks vs your 5" as if this is an equivalent pool.

Yes, the top pick or top 5 picks guarantee nothing, but it still gives you the largest chance of a successful player over any other individual spot in the draft.

Can Tua bust? Absolutely. Can you find the best quarterback in the draft in the 4th round instead? Absolutely, but the % chance of this happening just turns out to be luck, and I don't want to be in a position where I need to really rely on luck. Just give me the best chance I can get.
Click to expand...
Im curious as to the the actual numbers such a research would yield...
fansinceGWilson said:
An intriguing idea. I'm guessing you mean 1st contract excluding the rookie contract. That's draft rank driven. A few items to consider. Any players performance is also team dependent. What would Foles have been offered were he QB under Gase? As you know, some years 5 teams need a DT. Some years one. My biggest problem is this . . . NFL has 32 teams. Pick any position. There are only 28 NFL caliber players to go around. (I picked that number at random.) There are only 23 'average' or above players. This is why contracts are so insane. Limited talent chased by too many suitors.
OTOH, I can think of no better factor to rate players. If you get time to do the research, I'd love to know what you find. Maybe it will give us an improved way of evaluating.
Click to expand...
The big problem with the contracts is they're sky rocketing every single year. Recent success will have alot more weight than successes 5 years ago... This is not something we want... FWIW, Im not looking to prove people wrong with this, Im genuinly curious to find out just how much of a drop off there is between picks...
 
Ren said:
IMO, I would only use numbers that indicate averages or percentages (such as - avg yards per game, average yards per pass, completion %, etc) and stay away from totals, like total TD's, total yds, etc. If you use totals, you will start comparing apples and oranges because the quantity of games/years/whatever will be different.
Click to expand...
I've tought alot about this, but volume also implies longevity, which is a good thing in of itself...
 
Last edited:
NBP81 said:
Im curious as to the the actual numbers such a research would yield...

The big problem with the contracts is they're sky rocketing every single year. Recent success will have alot more weight than successes 5 years ago... This is not something we want... FWIW, Im not looking to prove people wrong with this, Im genuinly curious to find out just how much of a drop off there is between picks...
Click to expand...
I saw a chart a few months ago that had playoff record and winning % for all QBs in each round over the last 20 or so years so you may just be able to look for it. The first round had much more playoff wins overall than any other round which is to be expected and the winning % and playoff participation dropped each round except round 6... for obvious reasons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom