NFL draft success analysis

Mike the Brit said:

This is factored in to the SBnation article by looking at the picks actually made by teams, valuing them according to a draft value chart, and then dividing the value of the total return by that number. Believe me, the guy who did this isn't stupid.

Click to expand...

But you refuse to acknowledge he used a crap sample size of draft picks used in the article to prove his point. I don't think he purposely close that sample size to prove a point, but 2006, 2007,and 2008 were three of the worst years in terms of draft picks selected of the Belichick era. If you included 2002 and 2003 in sample, the results would be radically different. If you included 2010-2012 (2013 too early), it would be radically different too.

I am sorry, but saying it is proven that the Pats draft poorly based on an article that uses a sample size of five drafts and include three of the worst drafts of the Belichick era (and 2006 is arguably the absolute worst draft of the Belichick era) and including none of the top 5 drafts of the Belichick era (2002, 2003, 2010, 2011, and 2012 and 2013 may replace one of them) is just misleading at best. If he used 2002-2008 for his sample size and got the same results, then I would say this article is valid.

Mike the Brit said:

This is factored in to the SBnation article by looking at the picks actually made by teams, valuing them according to a draft value chart, and then dividing the value of the total return by that number. Believe me, the guy who did this isn't stupid.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm sorry. I don't think that starts alone is the best way to rate draft picks.

For example: the Colts receive much more credit with this system for mismanaging their team and refusing to have a backup plan for Manning.

They had the same number of "starts" capital as the Patriots, but their mismanagement cost them two to three years of being the worst team in the NFL.

And that being terrible got them the #1 pick and Luck. Luck of course goes on to start every game... because of the Colts mismanaging their team.. and this system rewards them for that.

Patriots draft Mallet who like Cassel is insurance to a 2006 like injury and they receive no credit for this what so ever (well, for at least the years that Cassel and Mallet was/is Brady's backup)... just as they receive no credit for winning games and staying competitive year in and year out. Unlike any other team in the NFL... or the Colts.

Who was the better GM here?


And still from what I can see, the system does nothing at all to address the fact that the Patriots for example, simply aren't picking from the same talent pool of players as everyone else.

That means something very tangible when trying to grade who got the best talent for their picks.


I read some comments by Eagles fans about the hypothetical possibility of New England giving them a 3rd round pick for Jackson. Their response was "Not New England's, that's practically a 4th round pick."

They're right. It is. Its like this every year for 13 years now.

unoriginal said:

Just to bust your balls for a moment.

Three picks each with a 30% chance of success means each has a 70% chance of failure.

The chance that all three fail is therefore 70% ^ 3. That winds up being a 34.3% chance that all three of those draft picks crap out.

Versus 25% chance of failure for the one draft pick.

So that's not a great example of the Patriots' draft wisdom.

Click to expand...

Well, with 3 picks, youi have a chance for 2, or even all 3 to succeed.

The chance for two would be .3 squared, or 9%.

The chance for all three would be .3 cubed, or 2.7%.

So you have to factor that in as well. Just sayin'.

Deus Irae said:

Nothing really surprising here. When you eliminate 2000-2004, you cut

Seymour
Branch
Warren
Wilfork
Light
Graham
Wilson
Watson


from the equation. Then, since you're using games played in the analysis, you short change the latest draft classes, especially if a player in them gets hurt one year. Since the Patriots lull in drafting hit mostly from 2006-2009, this is pretty much exactly what people should expect to see in an analysis of this sort.

Window choice is huge in these types of discussions, which is why we've often had problems with 'cherry picking'.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Here's a similar draft analysis done for 2001-2010 that rates the Patriots #1:

Decade in the making: the ultimate NFL draft grades

Kasmir said:

Exactly. Here's a similar draft analysis done for 2001-2010 that rates the Patriots #1:

Decade in the making: the ultimate NFL draft grades

Click to expand...

This is the problem with analyzing and quantifying the draft in general. Every team has peaks and valleys in the draft and the sample size of draft years used can radically alter the analysis of the quality of drafting. Add to the fact that there is no exact science to judge the quality of a draft pick.

I would say the change in defensive philosophy had the biggest impact on the Patriots draft success.

Brandon Meriweather
Terrence Wheatley
Shawn Crable
Jonathan Wilhite
Pat Chung
Ron Brace
Darius Butler
Jermaine Cunningham
Brandon Spikes
Brandon Deaderick

Those players were all suited for a 3-4 scheme and zone coverage, the safeties were enforcers and not good in coverage. Even McCourty was drafted and was better suited to play CB in a zone, fortunately he was able to move to safety and become an all pro but that was not the case for these other players.

Mike the Brit said:

No.

"For most of my analysis, I've relied upon a couple of pre-existing statistical models. The first was Pro-Football-Reference's Career Approximate Value (CarAV) score. For starters, Approximate Value (AV) is Pro-Football-Reference's attempt at reducing a player's overall value to a single number. This season, Peyton Manning and Richard Sherman led the league in AV with 19. LeSean McCoy had 15, Tony Romo had 13, et cetera. This stat should be handled carefully -- "approximate" is right there in the dang name -- but it's quite useful for comparing the value of large groups of players across different positions.

CarAV represents the AV of a player throughout every season of his career, but weights it so that his best seasons count a little more. That's swell for our purposes, since a player's maximum potential is what we're really after."

CarAV is not perfect, but it doesn't make the silly mistakes you say.

Click to expand...

That except isnt in the linked article that I read.
The article linked ranks on games started divided by players picked.
So if I trade you my #1 for your entire draft class, and you draft a bust who starts 32 games and I take your 7 picks and 2 of them start 50 games each and play better than your guy, and the other 5 never make the league, you get a 32, 32/1 and I get a 14.3 100/7. You did not have a better draft than me, that analysis says you destroyed me.

Brady6 said:

I would say the change in defensive philosophy had the biggest impact on the Patriots draft success.

Brandon Meriweather
Terrence Wheatley
Shawn Crable
Jonathan Wilhite
Pat Chung
Ron Brace
Darius Butler
Jermaine Cunningham
Brandon Spikes
Brandon Deaderick

Those players were all suited for a 3-4 scheme and zone coverage, the safeties were enforcers and not good in coverage. Even McCourty was drafted and was better suited to play CB in a zone, fortunately he was able to move to safety and become an all pro but that was not the case for these other players.

Click to expand...

I think the failure of many of those players caused the scheme change not the other way around.
Half of your list is DBs which really wouldn't be scheme based.

AndyJohnson said:

I think the failure of many of those players caused the scheme change not the other way around.

Half of your list is DBs which really wouldn't be scheme based.

Click to expand...

We played a lot more zone and had enforcers for safeties, now we are much more man to man based. I'm sure what you say is part of it probably even more so but I do think a player like Chung did well when he wasn't in coverage and allowed to roam and lay players out.