“The draft is an absolute petri dish for every cognitive bias underneath the sun,”

[BTTA]

NFL teams know the best way to draft, so why aren't they doing it?

Only a few teams are curious enough to think differently, and even fewer are disciplined enough to act differently.

theathletic.com

A few excerpts relevant to our conversations here:

------------------------
Even Nobel Prize-winning scholars have spent decades mulling whether there is a single best way to draft. The answer, they’ve found, is a resounding yes. But only a few teams are curious enough to think differently, and even fewer are disciplined enough to act differently.
-------------------------
Teams massively overestimate their abilities to delineate between stars and flops, and because of that they heavily overvalue the “right to choose” in the draft.

-The treasured No. 1 pick in the draft is actually the least valuable in the first round, according to the surplus value a team can create with each pick.​

-Across all rounds, the probability that a player starts more games than the next player chosen at his position is just 53 percent.​

-Teams generated a 174 percent return on trades by forgoing a pick this year for picks next year.​

Thaler and Massey suggested that teams should accumulate picks by trading back and into the future more often. The more darts you have, the better your chance of eventually hitting the bull’s-eye.
---------------------------
The problem for everyone in sports is that nobody wants to admit how random and arbitrary it is,” the former executive said. “Admitting that it’s arbitrary takes away from your specific abilities.
---------------------------
Even true believers in trading down don’t hold to the dogma 100 percent of the time. Meers, who became the Browns’ director of research and strategy in 2016, said that exceptions are worth making at the quarterback position and if your team needs a star. (my emphasis)
---------------------------
Another consideration that prevents teams from accumulating more picks is the number of competing incentives among decision-makers. Teams preach collaboration, alignment and shared vision, but their end goals may conflict directly with different segments of the organization.

A general manager might be more focused on his job security over the long-term direction of the organization. A head coach may believe unreasonably in his own ability to mold a player. Coordinators and position coaches want to add talent to their groups, while scouts may quite literally pound the table for the players they unearthed during the pre-draft process.

“Everybody is spitting falsehoods about how good they think a player is because they want one more bullet in the chamber for themselves,” one longtime executive from another professional league said. “That’s reasonable and rational, that they would behave in their own self-interest, but you have to find a way to discount it as a GM."

 

[XLIX]

There is an inherent conflict of interest between a team's goals and a GM's goals. Many GM's are on the hot seat - and if they aren't, they will be after just a few losing seasons. So most GM's have to focus on the short term because if they don't, they won't be around for the long term.

Forgoing a pick this year for next may generate a high return of value for the team, but it is also a good way for a GM to get fired when the team limps to 6 wins for the 3rd year in a row.

 

[Stu Pidassle]

There is an inherent conflict of interest between a team's goals and a GM's goals. Many GM's are on the hot seat - and if they aren't, they will be after just a few losing seasons. So most GM's have to focus on the short term because if they don't, they won't be around for the long term.

Forgoing a pick this year for next may generate a high return of value for the team, but it is also a good way for a GM to get fired when the team limps to 6 wins for the 3rd year in a row.

The GM would need absolute job security to draft like this. Otherwise, the fanbase would be up in arms about the draft strategy every time the team did not perform well. At the risk of taking this off topic, the Pats had a GM that did many of those things. The fans hated the trade down mentality and mocked him openly, even when the team was winning.

 

[IcyPatriot]

I read an article that was comparing how well players are trained in college now vs the past and it is worse now.
The NIL has to be be impacting the process to some degree ... IDK.
Our smaller staff had to be a detriment to the modern approach needed to evaluate and draft.
Belichick valued the college coach opinion perhaps way to much.

 

[XLIX]

The GM would need absolute job security to draft like this. Otherwise, the fanbase would be up in arms about the draft strategy every time the team did not perform well. At the risk of taking this off topic, the Pats had a GM that did many of those things. The fans hated the trade down mentality and mocked him openly, even when the team was winning.

The problem wasn't the trading down, the problem was the drafting.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

The problem wasn't the trading down, the problem was the drafting.

Ultimately it was but everyone *****ed when he would trade down for more picks.

 

[Vindicate]

There is an inherent conflict of interest between a team's goals and a GM's goals. Many GM's are on the hot seat - and if they aren't, they will be after just a few losing seasons. So most GM's have to focus on the short term because if they don't, they won't be around for the long term.

Forgoing a pick this year for next may generate a high return of value for the team, but it is also a good way for a GM to get fired when the team limps to 6 wins for the 3rd year in a row.

Interesting way to look at it, and also introduces the elephant in the room when it comes to interests, or, to be more specific, the priority of interests, which is: the owner. Their interests are most at odds with the patience for bringing in long-term success.

 

[Stu Pidassle]

The problem wasn't the trading down, the problem was the drafting.

Your statement only applies to the last few years. It seems like the only time you followed the team given your posting history.

 

[SlowGettingUp]

It would be interesting to study how draft valuation charts have changed over the years - my impression is that the value have flattened over time (ratio of pick 1 to say pick 33 has declined a bit). That backs up the theory that more picks are now looked on more favorably than fewer higher picks.

Bill Belichick:

Bill Belichick: Every team uses the same draft chart

The 1990s Cowboys were built in large part by Jimmy Johnson's wheeling and dealing with draft picks, and Johnson developed a chart that demonstrated how to value draft picks.

www.nbcsports.com

Some charts:

2024 NFL Trade Value Chart

Hill:

2024 NFL Trade Value Chart

The Harvard Trade Value Chart (supposed to be more realistic)
old style Johnson:

Draft Pick Trade Value Chart | Pro-Football-Reference.com

Draft Pick Trade Value Chart

www.pro-football-reference.com

 

[raduray]

Interesting article in The Athletic. Selected quotes below.

"Teams massively overestimate their abilities to delineate between stars and flops, and because of that they heavily overvalue the “right to choose” in the draft."

"The treasured No. 1 pick in the draft is actually the least valuable in the first round, according to the surplus value a team can create with each pick."

"Teams generated a 174 percent return on trades by forgoing a pick this year for picks next year."

"Meers, who became the Browns’ director of research and strategy in 2016, said that exceptions are worth making at the quarterback position and if your team needs a star."

NFL teams know the best way to draft, so why aren't they doing it?

Only a few teams are curious enough to think differently, and even fewer are disciplined enough to act differently.

theathletic.com

 

[IcyPatriot]

I think there should be a 1st round hardon chart.
Then a trade value chart for rounds 2-7 ...
I think this is why there are way too many 1st round busts their brains in their **** for round 1.

 

[raduray]

But then, there's also this quote from the article: "Meers, who became the Browns’ director of research and strategy in 2016, said that exceptions are worth making at the quarterback position and if your team needs a star."

 

[1960Pats]

Ultimately it was but everyone *****ed when he would trade down for more picks.

Not me. Since it's a crap shoot anyway I like more picks. Bill seemed to like that too and drafted more players than the other AFCE teams.

 

[XLIX]

Your statement only applies to the last few years. It seems like the only time you followed the team given your posting history.

So how long have you been following the Patriots? Since '21...?

 

[Sicilian]

The problem wasn't the trading down, the problem was the drafting.

Exactly. They traded down and got Mayo. They traded down and got McCourty. They also traded down and took Cole Strange. The difference was in who they picked.

Conversely, they trade UP for Hightower and Chandler Jones. They also traded up for Chad Jackson and Tyquan Thornton. Both strategies can work (in an individual case), but you have to HIT on the guy(s) you pick, or none of these analytics matter.

 

[Stu Pidassle]

So how long have you been following the Patriots? Since '21...?

Sick burn, LOL. FWIW, what you perceive to be pro BB bias, is really perspective gained by following the team through many, many years of mostly bad football before the magical run.

 

[jlu52]

I read an article that was comparing how well players are trained in college now vs the past and it is worse now.
The NIL has to be be impacting the process to some degree ... IDK.
Our smaller staff had to be a detriment to the modern approach needed to evaluate and draft.
Belichick valued the college coach opinion perhaps way to much.

Been a very long time since most college players had 4 years experience before entering the draft. Now they're in the minors for the proverbial cup of coffee, hardly get to know their teammates and coaches. Imo, blocking and tackling get worse every year.

 

[XLIX]

Sick burn, LOL. FWIW, what you perceive to be pro BB bias, is really perspective gained by following the team through many, many years of mostly bad football before the magical run.

Then you know that the problem wasn't the trading down, the problem was the drafting.

 

[Stu Pidassle]

Then you know that the problem wasn't the trading down, the problem was the drafting.

LOL, I think the problem is that you can't read. I specifically referred to the winning period, while the drafts were good enough to stock super bowl teams. It really happened, you can check it out with a few googles.

 

[XLIX]

LOL, I think the problem is that you can't read. I specifically referred to the winning period, while the drafts were good enough to stock super bowl teams. It really happened, you can check it out with a few googles.

You know what else really happened? 4-13. That happened.