Upcoming draft: Understanding Value

[The Bopkin]

With the draft coming up, and nothing really to discuss other than whether or not to take Tua at 5, trade up for Tua, or pass on Tua, I thought we could delve into a topic I find interesting.
There are some extremely knowledgeable posters here who can explain this, and I would love to hear the different takes.
So, here goes:
When it comes to the NFL draft in its current format, how do you define VALUE?
What are the highest value positions at what points in the draft, what players and positions are the best value for us in round 1 considering where our picks currently are?
I always used to view value as getting a player at the right draft slot, or getting him later than projected.
But now that is not the case.
I would love to hear people's takes on value, and how value will serve us.

 

[SF Dolphin Fan]

The salary cap has drastically changed a players value IMO. You can draft great players, but you can't always keep them.

Watching how the good teams manage the cap compared to the bad teams has been interesting. Even the bad teams lose talent.

That's why the premium positions are so vital. That's where a team needs to spend their money and those are the players you need to keep.

It's why teams without a good quarterback can't sustain a winning program. You may be able to win with a good defense. but sooner or later you've got to pay those players.

Premium positions are where Miami should focus starting with quarterback, pass rusher, corner, offensive tackle and wide receiver.

 

[fansinceGWilson]

With the draft coming up, and nothing really to discuss other than whether or not to take Tua at 5, trade up for Tua, or pass on Tua, I thought we could delve into a topic I find interesting.
There are some extremely knowledgeable posters here who can explain this, and I would love to hear the different takes.
So, here goes:
When it comes to the NFL draft in its current format, how do you define VALUE?
What are the highest value positions at what points in the draft, what players and positions are the best value for us in round 1 considering where are picks currently are?
I always used to view value as getting a player at the right draft slot, or getting him later than projected.
But now that is not the case.
I would love to hear people's takes on value, and how value will serve us.

First hurdle to jump is accepting there are 32 teams and 32 descriptions of value. That being true, value is subjective. Even if FH there are debates who is the best OT or where does a particular rank on the overall board. The second variable, no offense to the pure BPA cluster, is valuing positions of needs. In this case, if two players are ranked essentially equal - one is OT and the other OG - Miami will likely "value" the OT higher.KC will "value" Herbert lower than Miami will.

Once those are accepted, it makes determining "value" quite complex and, dare I say it, arbitrary. Yes, overall, some positions (e.g., QB) are generally 'valued' above, say, DT, but, again, KC may disagree in 2020.

OTOH, all things being equal,finding a player by a specific team ranked as mid-R2 available in early R3 is a value pick. Trades, by definition, are two teams negotiating the value of a draft slot and the players available. That word 'negotiation' indicates values aren't intrinsic. I know this isn't the specific answer you may want, but, bottom line is Grier/Flo make the decision on value based largely on evaluations and the definition of anyone here is difference of opinion.

 

[jimthefin]

i wold not include WR as a Premium position.I feel that if you have a good QB and a good OL then you will succeed with lesser talent at WR and RB.And WR and RB are wasted when you don't have a QB or and OL.

For me it would be QB/Pass Rusher/CB/OT

QB is obvious.Can't win without a good one.Very hard to win BIG without a great one.

After QB I would spend by Cap and Draft resources on the trenches and the secondary.

I would make exceptions for an Elite TE or FS.

And all this depends on the makeup of your team. I would be more likely to invest in an elite WR or RB if my roster was very deep and they would be the final piece to an outstanding offense. The same with a LB.But they would have to be truly exceptional players.

But in general I am not spending my cap space or my draft capital on RB/WR/LB/. If I am strong on both LOS then my B- skill guys will flourish and my LB will as well.

That is how I would try to build a team for long term success.

I concede that it is hard to find a top QB, but both LOS are very doable if you target those areas.

 

[Russ57]

I think the best you can do is look at current franchise tag prices per position. Then compare this with four year contracts for top rated players.

Compare all of that with what a draft pick will cost based on when he was picked. For example, the Bengals with pay around 30-31 million for the first year of their number 1 pick. However they will only pay about 6 million for years 2 thru 4. So basically call it a 4 year 37 million contract with 31 million guaranteed. Cheap for a good quarterback but stupid money for many other positions.

I'll leave it to you to find out what positions are paid the most and decide where they should be drafted to offer value.

 

[The Bopkin]

First hurdle to jump is accepting there are 32 teams and 32 descriptions of value. That being true, value is subjective. Even if FH there are debates who is the best OT or where does a particular rank on the overall board. The second variable, no offense to the pure BPA cluster, is valuing positions of needs. In this case, if two players are ranked essentially equal - one is OT and the other OG - Miami will likely "value" the OT higher.KC will "value" Herbert lower than Miami will.

Once those are accepted, it makes determining "value" quite complex and, dare I say it, arbitrary. Yes, overall, some positions (e.g., QB) are generally 'valued' above, say, DT, but, again, KC may disagree in 2020.

OTOH, all things being equal,finding a player by a specific team ranked as mid-R2 available in early R3 is a value pick. Trades, by definition, are two teams negotiating the value of a draft slot and the players available. That word 'negotiation' indicates values aren't intrinsic. I know this isn't the specific answer you may want, but, bottom line is Grier/Flo make the decision on value based largely on evaluations and the definition of anyone here is difference of opinion.

That is an awesome answer- makes tons of sense. Also maybe part of what was throwing me; I was looking for some specific one line truism, where maybe there just isn't one.

 

[The Bopkin]

i wold not include WR as a Premium position.I feel that if you have a good QB and a good OL then you will succeed with lesser talent at WR and RB.And WR and RB are wasted when you don't have a QB or and OL.

For me it would be QB/Pass Rusher/CB/OT

QB is obvious.Can't win without a good one.Very hard to win BIG without a great one.

After QB I would spend by Cap and Draft resources on the trenches and the secondary.

I would make exceptions for an Elite TE or FS.

And all this depends on the makeup of your team. I would be more likely to invest in an elite WR or RB if my roster was very deep and they would be the final piece to an outstanding offense. The same with a LB.But they would have to be truly exceptional players.

But in general I am not spending my cap space or my draft capital on RB/WR/LB/. If I am strong on both LOS then my B- skill guys will flourish and my LB will as well.

That is how I would try to build a team for long term success.

I concede that it is hard to find a top QB, but both LOS are very doable if you target those areas.

So, would you EVER extend a LB to a second contract? I know that is vague and may depend on your team's current salary cap situation, but if you were in our situation, and let's say Jerome Baker as a pro bowl type season, is he bad value to extend, even if he becomes a top 10 LB?

 

[jimthefin]

There is always room for exceptions, of course.

But they would be rare.

As for Baker specifically, he would have to play at an All Pro level to make me give him the kind $$$ on a 4-5 year extension.Now it this particular case Miami will have cap space to do it and won't have many young guys coming up on expensive extensions for a while, so it would be financially less onerous.

But he would have to be truly outstanding and Flores would have to tell me he has to have him to make his defense work.If my HC and DC tell me we can get by with a FA for significantly less cash, then I would swap him out for a lesser player for much less money which i will invest elsewhere.

The plan would be to build the kind of depth at those positions that I don't want to overpay have an in house replacement ready to go.

Pitt has been doing it for years.

You have to Draft well and consistently well, especially in the mid rounds to do this and obviously Miami has not been doing that for some of your lifetimes.

 

[jimthefin]

But for Baker I would have to know just how well he played and how much money we are talking about.

I have some strict guidelines to how I would build and manage a roster but no absolutes.

Except maybe 1st round RB's.

Unless Walter Payton comes back.

 

[LargoFin]

When it comes to the NFL draft in its current format, how do you define VALUE?

Value is a beast. For example AJ Dillon, 240 lbs running back, running 4.5 40. That's rare. Tjat's a Bus.
Henry Ruggs, that's value. Special talent.

 

[PSU Cane]

With the draft coming up, and nothing really to discuss other than whether or not to take Tua at 5, trade up for Tua, or pass on Tua, I thought we could delve into a topic I find interesting.
There are some extremely knowledgeable posters here who can explain this, and I would love to hear the different takes.
So, here goes:
When it comes to the NFL draft in its current format, how do you define VALUE?
What are the highest value positions at what points in the draft, what players and positions are the best value for us in round 1 considering where our picks currently are?
I always used to view value as getting a player at the right draft slot, or getting him later than projected.
But now that is not the case.
I would love to hear people's takes on value, and how value will serve us.

Value is defined by each team, each organization. You can assign value based on position. QB/OT/Rush are hard to come by and rare in FA (and costly if they make it), so there's inherent value in those positions. If you hit, it's gold.
You can assign value based on scheme. Maybe you want to run a 3-4 and put space eaters on the Dline and highly value LBs and DBs. Maybe you want a fast paced offense and value pass blockers, fast WRs and RBs that can catch. Power run game? Bigger Olineman, blocking TEs, bigger RBs and a game managing QB.

Everyone's idea of value is different and can change based on the situation at hand. Where one might find value with Ruggs at 18 bc of his freaky speed and athleticism, others might think it's better value with passing on Ruggs and taking a Reagor or Shenault later and prioritizing a value position like OT at 18 or rush with Chiasson/Kinlaw. Me personally? I would choose the latter.

In a perfect would, I value QB/DL-Rush/OT.....that's how i would start building a roster if elite guys or those i considered Day 1 starters were available. Then i'm looking for the highest rated guys at the other positions, mainly looking for specific traits (athletic or on field) and guys that fit the scheme and locker room. Every case is different and that's what makes the draft so much damn fun. I envy all the guys who get to do it for a living.

 

[Awsi Dooger]

I've changed on this a lot. These days you have to value scoring points. The league has shifted to such extent that you aren't going to threaten relevance year after year unless you can manage that 27+ points per game range. The 49ers quietly averaged 30 last season.

Even if you have that rugged chess piece team it's just not likely to hold up against the elite quarterbacks, if you lack one.

I value quarterback even if it means drafting several of them and seeing how it shakes out. Who gives a flip about conventional wisdom or fan review? Eventually it's going to be understood this way. Golfers for decades carried only 2 wedges even though experts were asserting it should be 3 or 4, based on shot distribution. Now 4 is standard.

I agree that wide receiver is overrated. Actually it's like running backs decades ago. The ultra elite ones are gold, the type you can go to even if the opponent fully expects it. But those receivers are rare now like the Earl Campbell types were rare at running back then. Don't make the mistake of over valuing those nice but not difference making receivers. For example if Jeudy slips to mid first round I'd start to get interested, but no chance at 5.

I've reluctantly realized that offensive linemen make sense early, since they tend to stick around and the connect rate is higher than other positions. We have several picks slotted where offensive linemen make sense. But try to get some athletic ability and not pluggers like Deiter. That's the type of lineman pick that makes me cringe because it seems like conceding net ability to the league.