Premium/Non-Premium Positions and Super Bowl Wins Over 10 Years

[Cheech]

I understand your philosophy and so does every single NFL fan.  It isn't new or innovative.  Sorry to burst that bubble.  I probably wouldn't draft a running back in the first round because they clearly can be found in the 5th.  That **** is common knowledge.  I also wouldn't spend a high pick on a back because their shelf life is 5 to 6 years.  

This is also the reason why GM's get fired.  They over-draft a guy due to him playing a premium position and end up getting lesser talented players.  Go back and do your same analysis for ****ty teams.  You're going to find first round busts at those same premium positions.

Ahmad Carroll was drafted because he could fly and played a premium position.  Justin Harrell was drafted because (who tf knows...?) Sherrod, Perry, Jones - all were over-drafted because they played at premium positions and all ended up being the wrong pick.

We all try to find patterns to make more sense of the world.  

If you want to find what all good to great teams have in common, look at their drafts from 2 and 3 years ago.  Seattle was good because they hit on two drafts.  Denver around the same time.  Now the Saints, Bears and Rams are good because they have all had good drafts over the last few years. 

Young talent playing on rookie deals plus a big UFA or two makes a team competitive awfully quickly.  

 

 

 

[pacman5252]

29 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

 

But you won't acknowledge that because you don't get it. 

WR/TE/RB/IOL - There is literally every single year talent there in the later rounds. 

How often do you find the pass rushing equivalent of MVS in the 6th round? 
How often do you find the greatest pass rusher in NFL history in the second round like the Patriots did with Gronkowski?  Never. 

I think one of the things you and the never draft a wr segment high is missing are;

1. Nobody is calling for us to use 12 on a wr

2. Define later rounds. I had a post in a different thread looking at wrs drafted after round 4 in like a 3 year period and there was like a 10 % wr 3 hit rate.

3. Teams that win still are using high and a lot of resources on talented wr. You saw multiple firsts on here. There were many seconds. Many big cap spends (Jeffrey just past year)

4. We are talent deficient at  wr (not a lot of super late rounders played on these teams outside on NE). Even like MVS was mega inconsistent and struggled with basic things (catching, press coverage). He was wr 95 on pff which puts him as a guy who shouldn’t have seen the field (but had to because outside Adams we really suck there). We legit need help and   the analysis done says a late one/second is acceptable especially if the only edge/OT prospects are gone (you don’t just beat your head and take a position if the prospect isn’t great)

[MacReady]

Just now, pacman5252 said:

1. Nobody is calling for us to use 12 on a wr

Wait. 

Quote

2. Define later rounds. I had a post in a different thread looking at wrs drafted after round 4 in like a 3 year period and there was like a 10 % wr 3 hit rate.

I'm fine with second round when it's a need.  I don't think it's a need this year with MVS/ESB having strong rookie seasons, but generally speaking I'm fine with 2nd round receivers.

Quote

3. Teams that win still are using high and a lot of resources on talented wr. You saw multiple firsts on here. There were many seconds. Many big cap spends (Jeffrey just past year)

This is a part of my principles.  You go to free agency for the non-premium positions.  Spend on receivers in free agency.  As far as the teams on that list who did take receivers, they weren't necessary.  The Saints took Stallworth 13th overall and won a Super Bowl five years later after he wasn't on the team.  Imagine how good the Saints would have been after their Super Bowl win, instead of frequently missing the playoffs, if they had taken Ed Reed.  Or Albert Hayensworth.  Or imagine if instead of Meachem, the Saints took Joe Staley.  The point is, even when these Super Bowl winners hit on receivers, they didn't really need the receivers. 

Quote

4. We are talent deficient at  wr (not a lot of super late rounders played on these teams outside on NE). Even like MVS was mega inconsistent and struggled with basic things (catching, press coverage). He was wr 95 on pff which puts him as a guy who shouldn’t have seen the field (but had to because outside Adams we really suck there). We legit need help and   the analysis done says a late one/second is acceptable especially if the only edge/OT prospects are gone (you don’t just beat your head and take a position if the prospect isn’t great)

I'm anticipating a huge second year jump from MVS.  Like 60 receptions, 800 yards, 8 touchdowns huge.  MVS proved he belongs in this league, now let him get a full year with a better head coach and a second year with Rodgers and people are gonna be coming to me telling me I was right at this time next season when we're talking about who will win the Wild Card round and who we will play after our bye. 

[squire12]

15 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

The Saints took Stallworth 13th overall and won a Super Bowl five years later after he wasn't on the team.  Imagine how good the Saints would have been after their Super Bowl win, instead of frequently missing the playoffs, if they had taken Ed Reed.  Or Albert Hayensworth.  Or imagine if instead of Meachem, the Saints took Joe Staley.  The point is, even when these Super Bowl winners hit on receivers, they didn't really need the receivers

So instead of drafting a WR in round 1, draft the future all Pro player, or better yet, the HoF player.

Dam, that is genius.  

[cannondale]

1 hour ago, Cheech said:

Right...  but what bothers me is that those picks have absolutely made the offense what it is today - moreso than Ramwhatever at OT.  

Thomas is putting up Jerry Rice type numbers and absolutely should have gone first round.  The new Raiders GM had us taking Kamara late first.  The fact that those guys slid, and they both ended up being picked by the same team, and they both ended up being top 5 players at their respective positions shouldn't be used as evidence to promote the idea that the Saints are winning because they took certain positions in the first round.

They are winning because they hit a grand slam in the 2017 draft.  

 

How many passes did Rodgers complete after his snapped collarbone - twice ??

How was Rodgers throwing motion after his busted knee ?

The "Ramwhatevers" are pretty important I'd say

[pacman5252]

3 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Wait. 

I'm fine with second round when it's a need.  I don't think it's a need this year with MVS/ESB having strong rookie seasons, but generally speaking I'm fine with 2nd round receivers.

This is a part of my principles.  You go to free agency for the non-premium positions.  Spend on receivers in free agency.  As far as the teams on that list who did take receivers, they weren't necessary.  The Saints took Stallworth 13th overall and won a Super Bowl five years later after he wasn't on the team.  Imagine how good the Saints would have been after their Super Bowl win, instead of frequently missing the playoffs, if they had taken Ed Reed.  Or Albert Hayensworth.  Or imagine if instead of Meachem, the Saints took Joe Staley.  The point is, even when these Super Bowl winners hit on receivers, they didn't really need the receivers. 

I'm anticipating a huge second year jump from MVS.  Like 60 receptions, 800 yards, 8 touchdowns huge.  MVS proved he belongs in this league, now let him get a full year with a better head coach and a second year with Rodgers and people are gonna be coming to me telling me I was right at this time next season when we're talking about who will win the Wild Card round and who we will play after our bye. 

I guess I’d say we fundamentally see ESB/MVS  differently. You see more potential. I see fringe prospects who put up some numbers because we were incredibly thin. Maybe one pans out, but I think we need to drop a resource here.

 

To the saints point using the draft hindsight game goes both ways. Shane Ray and Sylvester Willians might have been “premium” positions picks but they still only were replacement level guys who didn’t/won’t make it to to their second contract with the team that drafted them. I get if you’re in the top 10 and you have a blue chip edge and wr go edge, but especially last 12 picks of round 1, the edges will have flaws and you are better off taking a high % wr hit over a low % edge

 

[MacReady]

Just now, squire12 said:

So instead of drafting a WR in round 1, draft the future all Pro player, or better yet, the HoF player.

Dam, that is genius.  

It's not a hindsight type post though.  Stallworth was 13th overall.  Taking a shot on an equal player at a different position is a better choice always. 

One of my other posts on this topic was to show that the only WR taken since 2000 where there wasn't a better option at a more important position within 5 picks was Hopkins for the Texans.

Even Larry Fitzgerald counts in this.  Phillip Rivers was literally the next pick.  Even Julio Jones.  JJ Watt was taken 5 picks later.

When for 20 years there has been a better option at a more important position taken within 5 picks, I'm risking the more important position. 

[squire12]

Just now, Outpost31 said:

It's not a hindsight type post though.  Stallworth was 13th overall.  Taking a shot on an equal player at a different position is a better choice always. 

One of my other posts on this topic was to show that the only WR taken since 2000 where there wasn't a better option at a more important position within 5 picks was Hopkins for the Texans.

Even Larry Fitzgerald counts in this.  Phillip Rivers was literally the next pick.  Even Julio Jones.  JJ Watt was taken 5 picks later.

When for 20 years there has been a better option at a more important position taken within 5 picks, I'm risking the more important position. 

Fitzgerald 1 super bowl appearance, Rivers 0

Jones 1 super bowl appearance,  Watt 0

Interesting trend

[Cheech]

6 minutes ago, cannondale said:

How many passes did Rodgers complete after his snapped collarbone - twice ??

How was Rodgers throwing motion after his busted knee ?

The "Ramwhatevers" are pretty important I'd say

Yup.  

Missing the point completely though.  Too many players are over-drafted due to position.  

Was Josh Allen worth the 12th pick?  Hell no.  Was Quinten Nelson worth the 6th?  F yes he was.

 

[CWood21]

9 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

I guess I’d say we fundamentally see ESB/MVS  differently. You see more potential. I see fringe prospects who put up some numbers because we were incredibly thin. Maybe one pans out, but I think we need to drop a resource here.

And as I asked you before, why?  If they were Day 1 or Day 2 picks, you'd be THRILLED with their performance.  But they weren't, and somehow you've managed to discredit them.

[CWood21]

1 hour ago, Cheech said:

I understand your philosophy and so does every single NFL fan.  It isn't new or innovative.  Sorry to burst that bubble.  I probably wouldn't draft a running back in the first round because they clearly can be found in the 5th.  That **** is common knowledge.  I also wouldn't spend a high pick on a back because their shelf life is 5 to 6 years.  

This is also the reason why GM's get fired.  They over-draft a guy due to him playing a premium position and end up getting lesser talented players.  Go back and do your same analysis for ****ty teams.  You're going to find first round busts at those same premium positions.

Nobody is suggesting that the Packers should go off the reservation to pick a premium position.  That isn't what's being argued.  The argument being made is that when the values are close, you take the one with a higher positional value.  Like you said, that's nothing groundbreaking.  But the question needs to be posed, what do you do when the value is overwhelmingly in favor of the "less valuable" position?  Do you take that less valuable position OR do you trade down?  Probably depends on how big a gap in the tier.  I think the only time I had a WR where they had a grade lean over a player was Dez Bryant over Bryan Bulaga, but the value wasn't big enough to overwhelm positional value.  In that same situation, when the Packers took AJ Hawk I had only Vernon Davis in that same tier and there was a big enough drop that made me hesitate moving down.  I absolutely hate to play the "what if" game, but what happens if the Browns actually used the picks they got from the Julio Jones trade correct.  Are you going to tell me that Julio Jones provides more value than Cameron Jordan (21st, 2011), Justin Houston (59, 2011), Julius Thomas (124th, 2011), and Harrison Smith (22nd, 2012)?  LOL no.  Hell, even two of those four you could make an argument would be more valuable than what Julio Jones has brought to the Falcons.  At the end of the day, it probably depends on what is being offered.  But I'd be willing to bet that there is at least one franchise who finds that player more valuable than you do, and willing to pay that premium.

1 hour ago, Cheech said:

Ahmad Carroll was drafted because he could fly and played a premium position.  Justin Harrell was drafted because (who tf knows...?) Sherrod, Perry, Jones - all were over-drafted because they played at premium positions and all ended up being the wrong pick.

Lulz.  This is revisionist history at it's finest.  Ahmad Carroll was before my time, so I can't really speak too much about him.  From what I recall, he flew up the board when he posted that 40-yard dash and was a response to Randy Moss.  Obviously a bad pick.  Justin Harrell was incredibly talented, but he had the injury concern.  I believe it was Mike Shanahan who later came out and admitted that if the Packers hadn't taken him they were planning on taking him right after the Packers picked.  Unfortunately, injuries did him in and we never got to see what he actually was.  TBH, I think if he would have gone back and had a healthy year at Tennessee, we would have been talking about a top 10 pick minimum.  Derek Sherrod wasn't a reach, nor was Nick Perry.  Just for comparison, Matt Miller had Sherrod as the 27th best prospect, SI had him 23rd, NE Patriots Draft had him 26th, and we drafted him 32nd.  The Packers drafted Nick Perry 28th overall, and he was ranked 49th by Mike Mayock, Walter Football had him 24th, Sports Daily had him 22nd, etc.  They weren't over drafted because of the position they played.

[MacReady]

Just now, squire12 said:

Fitzgerald 1 super bowl appearance, Rivers 0

Jones 1 super bowl appearance,  Watt 0

Interesting trend

Now imagine Julio Jones on the Texans. 
Now imagine Larry Fitzgerald on the Chargers.

Next, imagine JJ Watt on the Falcons.
After that, imagine Phillip Rivers on the Cardinals. 

You can't tell me with a straight face the Falcons don't win that 2014 Super Bowl with a healthy Watt instead of Julio Jones. 
Phillip Rivers... Eh.  Now you're getting into a guessing game, I'll admit. 

JJ Watt is more valuable than Julio Jones.  If you think otherwise, well...

[Packerraymond]

All those teams had good QB play, that's why they won the Super Bowl. 

The draft isn't an exact science where you can go in saying "well you can eliminate WR, RB, TE, OG, C, ILB, run pluggers and S and just draft the highest ranking QB, OT, pass rusher or CB in round 1. Every GM hopes they can land a premium position in round 1, if I've got a clear tier lean on a WR over any OT/pass rusher in the board am I going to reach? No.

If the norm is you passing on Khalil Mack to take Sammy Watkins, sure this is a valid point, but to say a single pick of a non premium position in round 1 hurts your SB chances is flawed.

[CWood21]

7 hours ago, rcon14 said:

I think this is an interesting starting point to a discussion. There is one piece missing from the methodology that I think has to factor in as well, and that is replacability. Looking at the draft from an economic perspective, an important piece to consider is the cost of players at a particular position in free agency. I did a study last winter (pre-FA 2018) on the average cost of player contracts by position. For positions with only one starter (QB, RB, TE, etc.) I used the top-20 at position, for those with two starters I used top-40. It isn't a perfect methodology by any means, but here were the results

QB: 20.7M, LT: 10.2M, EDGE: 9.2M, WR: 8.8M, IDL: 8.4M, CB: 7.2M, TE: 7.2M, FS: 7.1M, C: 6.3M, RT: 6.3M, OG: 5.5M, Off-ball LB: 5.4M, SS: 5M, RB: 4.9M

There are some oddities in the data as well. IOL contracts are starting to increase now, so we're seeing some more appreciation of their skill, same is happening with RT. However, it is clear that as a tier it is clearly behind the others. If I had to tier out the value of a position, which I think works better than ranking them, I'd do it like so:

QB

LT, EDGE

WR, IDL, CB, FS

TE, IOL, RT

Off-ball LB, SS

RB

One thing to note is that TEs do get paid highly, but in terms of production, they're a pretty terrible value dollar-for-dollar.

I'm glad to see stuff like this on the forum. It's stuff that used to be very prevalent a decade or so ago, little research projects. Glad to see another one.

A couple of things I'd like to add.  I'd argue that CB is probably in that tier above the on it's currently in in your tiers.  We've seen the impact of guys like Darrelle Revis, Richard Sherman, etc.  When you can effectively shutdown half the field, it really limits what opposing teams can do offensively and gives an advantage to the defense.

Secondly, I'd argue the value of IOL is actually going up because we're seeing a premium on interior pass rush.  Guys like Aaron Donald, Geno Atkins, etc. are putting a bigger premium on IOL who can hold up in terms of pass protection.  Teams are willing to roll out guys who are less capable in the run game in order to get those pass rushers on the field.

[squire12]

9 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Now imagine Julio Jones on the Texans. 
Now imagine Larry Fitzgerald on the Chargers.

Next, imagine JJ Watt on the Falcons.
After that, imagine Phillip Rivers on the Cardinals. 

You can't tell me with a straight face the Falcons don't win that 2014 Super Bowl with a healthy Watt instead of Julio Jones. 
Phillip Rivers... Eh.  Now you're getting into a guessing game, I'll admit. 

JJ Watt is more valuable than Julio Jones.  If you think otherwise, well...

Are you asking about the 6-10 Falcons from 2014 that finished in 3rd place in the NFC South.  Yes, they do not win the super bowl that year.  Watt has yet to help his team to a conference title game.