OT Musing: Are the Patriots Undervaluing mid/late 1st Round Picks?

[Schmo]

Not necessarily about money, but the rookie contract for dugger should be around $7 mil. #23 would be around $12 over 4 years. If you think of them as free agents, and there isn't a draft pick that warrants $3 mil a year, trade back for more chances.

I think Bill has a hard time shelling out money for guys that haven't played NFL football.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

But if he's good a late first rounder would control for 5 years. A second round pick does not ??

 

[Water Boy]

But if he's good a late first rounder would control for 5 years. A second round pick does not ??

I believe they have changed the salary structure on the 5th year option under the CBA, so its not quite the bargain it used to be.

I almost always favor a trade back from the first round. For multiple 2nds/3rds.

I think Dugger + Uche >>>> Murray or Queen.

 

[BTTA]

I honestly think Bill undervalues the entire draft. Bill thinks he can get 1st and 2d round talent in the UDFA pool and 7th rd...sure he's gotten some players late but it's the old horses vs ponies...Bill would rather have a bunch mid-late round ponies than a top 10 horse

I think the bigger issue is that fans overvalue the draft as it relates to future team success, and in addition are grossly misled by the celebrity star system. There's a very successful industry now that separates fans from their money, started almost single handedly by Kiper as someone pointed out.

That industry relies on the same thing that fools many Americans about many things: that one or a few individuals can save the day with heroic action. The Patriots are about the machinery of a consistent system that focuses on people fitting into roles. They are the collectivist antidote to the foolishness of individual hero culture.

History shows that the likelihood of success for a player picked #28 vs a player picked #37 is so small as to be irrelevant. And if the player the Pats have identified as a good fit for their needs and system is likely to be there at 37, they are happy to give up 30 to add 179 or whatever.

 

[Kasmir]

I think the bigger issue is that fans overvalue the draft as it relates to future team success, and in addition are grossly misled by the celebrity star system. There's a very successful industry now that separates fans from their money, started almost single handedly by Kiper as someone pointed out.

That industry relies on the same thing that fools many Americans about many things: that one or a few individuals can save the day with heroic action. The Patriots are about the machinery of a consistent system that focuses on people fitting into roles. They are the collectivist antidote to the foolishness of individual hero culture.

History shows that the likelihood of success for a player picked #28 vs a player picked #37 is so small as to be irrelevant. And if the player the Pats have identified as a good fit for their needs and system is likely to be there at 37, they are happy to give up 30 to add 179 or whatever.

Disagree that such a difference is irrelevant. The draft trade value charts provide a specific consensus quantification of expectation of such differences. And as we saw in the trades during this draft, NFL teams really do make trades based on those quantifications.

The difference between #28 and #37 is a late 3rd round pick, i.e. Value(#28) = Value(37) + Value(93) + 2.

That is literally how trades are executed between teams. "VALUE" is really "GENERIC EXPECTED VALUE"; the reason that two teams execute trades is because each believes that the expected value for them at that point in that draft is higher or lower than the generic expected value based on who's actually available and their assessment of how much the best available player can help their team.

I used...
2020 NFL Trade Value Chart
...but they are all pretty similar and accurately predict trades.

 

[BTTA]

Disagree that such a difference is irrelevant. The draft trade value charts provide a specific consensus quantification of expectation of such differences. And as we saw in the trades during this draft, NFL teams really do make trades based on those quantifications.

The difference between #28 and #37 is a late 3rd round pick, i.e. Value(#28) = Value(37) + Value(93) + 2.

That is literally how trades are executed between teams. "VALUE" is really "GENERIC EXPECTED VALUE"; the reason that two teams execute trades is because each believes that the expected value for them at that point in that draft is higher or lower than the generic expected value based on who's actually available and their assessment of how much the best available player can help their team.

I used...
2020 NFL Trade Value Chart
...but they are all pretty similar and accurately predict trades.

And as I've said in other threads, the value charts are only useful across all drafts, on average. They need to be recalculated for any single draft, given how talent is distributed in that year. And for the Pats, given that they filter players differently than this anyway, they only use the value charts to gauge how to negotiate with other teams. They don't use it to value their own picks, because they only care about who is on their list and where in the draft they need to pounce in order to make sure they get that player.

 

[PYPER]

I think you're overstating getting back a bounty for moving back a few spots. This isn't Madden.

.

nonsense. If a another team wants to move up from 3 to 1 or 6 to 3, or from anywhere, its bc they’ve fallen in love with a particular player. When that happens, they often overpay. Even if they dont overpay and you simply go by trade value chart, multiple picks is the better play most of the time....

 

[DropKickFlutie]

nonsense. If a another team wants to move up from 3 to 1 or 6 to 3, or from anywhere, its bc they’ve fallen in love with a particular player. When that happens, they often overpay. Even if they dont overpay and you simply go by trade value chart, multiple picks is the better play most of the time....

Yes if it's a top10 pick. A lower 1st rounder netted one second and one third. Not a bounty....

.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Bb’s strategy is sound. There are only about 16 to 20 guys with first round grades in most of these drafts. Trading down is perfect strategy given the large numbers of players with second round grades in most of these drafts.

It is failing to execute on his picks that keeps getting us in trouble. Bb’s continues to waste draft capital by overdrafting terrible defensive backs year after year in round two! Tavon, richards, Cyrus, joejuan, etc, etc, etc.

If he hits on just half those picks, we are not the least talented team in the nfl outside of the cornerback position!

 

[DropKickFlutie]

Bb’s strategy is sound. There are only about 16 to 20 guys with first round grades in most of these drafts. Trading down is perfect strategy given the large numbers of players with second round grades in most of these drafts.

It is failing to execute on his picks that keeps getting us in trouble. Bb’s continues to waste draft capital by overdrafting terrible defensive backs year after year in round two! Tavon, richards, Cyrus, joejuan, etc, etc, etc.

If he hits on just half those picks, we are not the least talented team in the nfl outside of the cornerback position!

I think it's mis-evaluating the bottom guys in tier 1 that keep causing these busts? Belichick trades down thinking 3 guys left are all just as good but actually they are worse.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Mid to late (implying some are mid) is not the same as mid-late to late (the reality is that they are always in that range.)

Belichick has often talked about there being maybe 12-15 real stud players that are no brainers. Sometimes that number is 20. Sometimes a few guys drop (Jones, Hightower good example of trading up for guys they actually had as real elite grades.). After that you get into a murky B/B+ prospect range that lasts until about pick 50. Not a huge difference between most of these guys in terms of success probability.

So they’re almost always picking at 29-32 ever since 2010, and this year at 23. Those aren’t positions where you usually get an elite player.

This is stuff BB has acknowledged...not speculation. And this isn’t a mere Patriots philosophy either. I wonder if their trade returns are diminishing because more teams see it this way now.

 

[NG Pats Fan]

He’s sucked at drafting since 2013. Bottom Line.

 

[Hyped]

I think it is simply the difference between sacrificing draft capital for an B+ player versus two C+ players.

I cannot argue with that kind of logic other than that you can ONLY put 11 guys on the field at once...

 

[Danger Zone]

Rationale:
1. Before 2011, first round picks were massive contracts that could ruin a team's cap on unproven rookie players
2. After the new CBA in 2011, rookies are tied to a rookie wage scale making significantly less. Control of 4 years plus a fifth-year team option for first-rounders.
3. Top10 picks are still expensive, about 9M/yr to 7M/yr for unproven rookie players
4. Mid to late first round picks are making similar $ as second round picks, around 2-3M.

Seems like mid to late 1st rounders are excellent value if you hit. Also likelier to take the top player of their position here compared to leftover players in round2 in the "same" tier of value grouping. I'm not a fan of the outdated Patriots thinking from the early 2000's that 2nd round picks are better value than 1st round picks.

Question: are the Patriots undervaluing the value of mid to late 1st round picks ??

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtba...hat-burrow-tua-and-chase-young-will-make/amp/

But when was the last time the Patriots had a "mid" range first round draft pick?

EARLIEST TWO PICKS
2001  #6   Richard Seymour
2003  #19  Ty Warren (traded up to #13)

From 2000 to 2019 Belichick has on average (before trades) gotten his first draft pick at spot #31.25 (calculating the three first round draft forfeitures)

(This spot rises to the #27 pick if you simply drop the three forfeited years from the average which is hardly fair when determining his overall first round draft capital in my opinion.)

From 2011 to 2019 Belichick has on average (before trades) gotten his first draft pick at spot #33.5 (calculated using the one first round draft forfeiture)

(This spot rises to the #30.5 pick if you simply drop the one forfeited year from the average.)

I know some will deny that how late in each round Belichick is forced to make draft picks is very significant or that it is a poor excuse for his draft mistakes. They are wrong. Nut yes Belichick makes mistakes but he's forced to pick after everyone else has gotten their choice first.
How can this NOT be a serious detriment?

I still insist that the draft is very much like poker. The earlier the pick, the more certain GMs can be of the player and the more certain the outcome of pick. The draft has a lot of luck involved in it and much of the skill involved in drafting at this level is in how you handle that aspect of it.

And since 2000 Belichick has been playing cut-throat, big boy poker with the least amount of draft capital/chips in his starting pot that all other GMs. Period.

 

[Doctor DDS]

A high percentage of draft picks fail regardless of when they were selected. They just reported that only 1 of the first 5 picks in 2017 had their option picked it. It's a hard process. And the Patriots have not sucked at drafting since 2013 despite how many times that gets repeated by some (cue NG). If you look at Career AV (not an ideal stat but decent for a high level comparison) the Pats drafted the 15th (Mason) 18th (Brown) and 30th (Flowers) rated players in 2015. 2014 had White, Jimmy G, Cam Fleming and Jon Halapio (all of whom are still contributing in the league) Joe Thuney is the 10th rated player from 2016 class per CAV. They've clearly had some misses and 2017 was an obvious dud. 2018 and 2019 classes are now in the spotlight and we'll see if players like Wynn, Michel. Williams, Stidam and Bentley are ready to make their mark.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

But when was the last time the Patriots had a "mid" range first round draft pick?

EARLIEST TWO PICKS
2001  #6   Richard Seymour
2003  #19  Ty Warren (traded up to #13)

From 2000 to 2019 Belichick has on average (before trades) gotten his first draft pick at spot #31.25 (calculating the three first round draft forfeitures)

(This spot rises to the #27 pick if you simply drop the three forfeited years from the average which is hardly fair when determining his overall first round draft capital in my opinion.)

From 2011 to 2019 Belichick has on average (before trades) gotten his first draft pick at spot #33.5 (calculated using the one first round draft forfeiture)

(This spot rises to the #30.5 pick if you simply drop the one forfeited year from the average.)

I know some will deny that how late in each round Belichick is forced to make draft picks is very significant or that it is a poor excuse for his draft mistakes. They are wrong. Nut yes Belichick makes mistakes but he's forced to pick after everyone else has gotten their choice first.
How can this NOT be a serious detriment?

I still insist that the draft is very much like poker. The earlier the pick, the more certain GMs can be of the player and the more certain the outcome of pick. The draft has a lot of luck involved in it and much of the skill involved in drafting at this level is in how you handle that aspect of it.

And since 2000 Belichick has been playing cut-throat, big boy poker with the least amount of draft capital/chips in his starting pot that all other GMs. Period.

Fair points. But even picking at #30 or later on average, there are still some guys as #1 in their position compared to moving back 15 spots and taking the #6 player at their position. Seems likelier to hit on a guy regarded as best at their position than the guesses of a couple leftover people of "same" skill ?