Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Brit Pack

Why not always trade up in the draft?

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, pgwingman said:

I think this is more of an indictment on our front office than it is a testament to how great it would be to draft first rounders. I think we'd have multiple super bowl wins if we had converted a few of those picks into pro bowlers and 1/3 of those picks into regular contributing starters. We've not had a decent draft in years, and I'd argue the jury is still out on Gutenkurst and staff, but the early results are not promising (josh jackson, gary)

 

That is exactly the point I'm trying to make it is not an issue with our front office but an issue with probabilities of hitting on good/great players outside of the first round. The nature of the beast is you will always miss more, to the tune of 89.7% of the time you will walk away with a JAG or a guy who doesn't see his second contract. At least the bust rate in the first round is much lower at 54%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Brit Pack said:

That is exactly the point I'm trying to make it is not an issue with our front office but an issue with probabilities of hitting on good/great players outside of the first round. The nature of the beast is you will always miss more, to the tune of 89.7% of the time you will walk away with a JAG or a guy who doesn't see his second contract. At least the bust rate in the first round is much lower at 54%.

What would your roster look like then? One top 15 pick every year, and the rest would be 5th-UDFA talent guys? In 6 years, you'd have selected 6 top 15 picks. Half of them would bust, so you'd have 3 pro bowlers. I'd have to think you'd have such glaring weaknesses you'd never contend for the playoffs. On top of that, any injury to a pro bowler would wipe you out almost immediately. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Brit Pack said:

I agree that is the hardest part of it. Easier getting into the bottom of the first then around pick 15 up. However, I would prefer to swap out my second round, third and fourth and possibly 5th to get into the bottom of the first rather than retaining those picks. Or even give up future pick like what Baltimore did to nab Lamar Jackson with the last pick of the first round. 

Let's make the assumption that teams are interested, how far do you think that our SRP, 3rd, and 4th round picks get us?  According to the TVC, you're looking at roughly 45th/46th overall pick.  Is two picks inside the top 46 worth more than three inside the top 96?  Depends on how the board shakes out, and where you view the tiers.  But again, you're looking at teams and their willingness to move down.  History is usually the best indicator, so looking back at least year's draft the Patriots traded their SRP (#56) and 3rd (#101) to the Rams for their SRP (#45).  Last year, we also saw the Saints deal their SRP (#62), 6th round pick, and '20 SRP to Miami for their SRP (#48) and 4th round pick (#116).  In 2018, the 49ers traded their SRP (#59) and 3rd (#78) to Washington for SRP (#44) and 5th round pick.  And if you deal future picks, it means you're hampered in future drafts.  Teams are reluctant to trade future picks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Brit Pack said:

Josh Jackson, Oren Burks, J'mon Moore, Josh Jones, Mo Adams, Vince Biegel, Jason Spriggs, Kyler Fackrell (JAG), Quintein Rollins, Ty Montgomery, Jake Ryan, Khyri Thornton, Richard Rodgers, Carl Bradford, JC Tretter, Jerel Worthy, Jerron McMillan.Alex Green, Davon House. If you look at the names you provided how many came in the later rounds. Guys like Morgan Burnett or Starks were easily replaceable. 

That's the problem.  You're looking at the players we've whiffed on, and not what we could possibly have.  You mention Josh Jackson, but what if the Packers had drafted Conor Williams, Dallas Goedert, or Christian Kirk?  Instead of Montravius Adams the Packers had selected Kenny Golloday, James Conner, or Eddie Jackson?  Instead of Jason Spriggs we had taken Deion Jones, Jarran Reed, or Yannick Ngakoue?  You're mad at the process, not that the process itself is inherently bad.  In the last five drafts with TT as GM, the Packers had 11 Day 2 draft picks.  Of those 11, the Packers got 3 starters (Eddie Lacy, Davante Adams, and Kevin King) out of those groups.  That's a 27% success rate.  Compare that to TT's first five drafts, his success rate on Day 2 was closer to 50%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

That's the problem.  You're looking at the players we've whiffed on, and not what we could possibly have.  You mention Josh Jackson, but what if the Packers had drafted Conor Williams, Dallas Goedert, or Christian Kirk?  Instead of Montravius Adams the Packers had selected Kenny Golloday, James Conner, or Eddie Jackson?  Instead of Jason Spriggs we had taken Deion Jones, Jarran Reed, or Yannick Ngakoue?  You're mad at the process, not that the process itself is inherently bad.  In the last five drafts with TT as GM, the Packers had 11 Day 2 draft picks.  Of those 11, the Packers got 3 starters (Eddie Lacy, Davante Adams, and Kevin King) out of those groups.  That's a 27% success rate.  Compare that to TT's first five drafts, his success rate on Day 2 was closer to 50%.

Yeah I was going to touch on this, when you get to hand pick every guy that busted after the fact and every free agent that worked out after the fact to say we could have got them instead, of course the draft looks stupid.

I could do the exact same thing in reverse. 

Edited by Norm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Norm said:

Yeah I was going to touch on this, when you get to hand pick every guy that busted after the fact and every free agent that worked out after the fact to say we could have got them instead, of course the draft looks stupid.

I could do the exact same thing in reverse. 

You mean like this................

16 hours ago, squire12 said:

You also traded away

Aaron Jones,  Jamaal Williams, Corey Linsley,  David Bahktiari, Elgton Jenkins, Davante Adams.

Kevin King, Blake Martinez, Kyler Fackrell.

In years past.....gone are

Jordy Nelson, James Jones, randall Cobb, Donald driver,  Lacy, Starks, Land, Sitton, Wells, Clifton, Tauscher, Finley.  Mike Daniel's, Desmond bishop, Morgan Burnett, nick Collins

From the first round , you traded up and gave up Bulaga, Clark, Aaron Rodgers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, squire12 said:

You mean like this................

 

I actually did see that post b4 and just forgot. But exactly. I was thinking especially with the OL since he went off on Spriggs, its like the 4 good ones we got right now all were drafted by us...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just look at all of the success that the Patriots have had with trading up - wait, they are far more likely to trade down than trade up.  I've heard the estimate that they have had the most draft picks in the Belichick era.  He believes that getting more bites of the apple are better for him, and he has had moderate success with this philosophy.  

On a side note, Bill has frequently gotten a QB with a late round pick.  I don't know the actual numbers, but if he has taken 12 and 3 turn out to be decent contributors, he is money ahead and has turned it into even more draft picks.  That was also a Ron Wolf tenet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Brit Pack said:

I agree that is the hardest part of it. Easier getting into the bottom of the first then around pick 15 up. However, I would prefer to swap out my second round, third and fourth and possibly 5th to get into the bottom of the first rather than retaining those picks. Or even give up future pick like what Baltimore did to nab Lamar Jackson with the last pick of the first round. 

When you give up a future pick, you are normally losing a round. To get a second round pick this year, you normally have to give a first round pick next year (or equivalent value if using it to move up). If you are planning on dumping low round picks to get an earlier pick, its literally the last thing you should be doing. Unless you don't think you will be around to use the pick next year.

I would argue the opposite - I would always be looking to trade a pick this year for one next year.

Its obviously Madden type strategy that is impossible in the real world but ideally you trade your 7th round every year for a 6th next year. Then next year trade that 6th for a 5th (as well as your 7th for a 6th) if you follow that through to its conclusion then you are laughing.

Be interested to know how many teams would be willing to be partners in next year trades.  In the heat of the moment,  I guess GMs would like another pick now to get that player. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, mikemike778 said:

Be interested to know how many teams would be willing to be partners in next year trades.

Carolina Panthers are stockpiling 2021 picks so they can grab Trevor Lawrence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

Carolina Panthers are stockpiling 2021 picks so they can grab Trevor Lawrence

Maybe ... but for this to work, you would need a lot of trade partners every year at the various levels of the draft. Would be great if you could though ....   maybe all teams really want another pick this year just have nobody to trade to get it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mikemike778 said:

Be interested to know how many teams would be willing to be partners in next year trades.  In the heat of the moment,  I guess GMs would like another pick now to get that player. 

Teams aren't usually fond of trading future picks in general.  They're less willing when you have someone like Lawrence available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2020 at 6:47 PM, Brit Pack said:

Take the 2017 draft, Kevin King, Josh Jones, Mo Adams, Vince Biegel you telling me that you wouldn’t trade that draft capital up for one better player? By the draft value chart that gets you to 15 in Round 1 a much better chance to get a player that fundamentally affects our team.

This is a poor argument though. You can't just cherrypick one example of anecdotal evidence to prove some sort of trend.  

18 hours ago, Brit Pack said:

just looking at the probabilities, being drafted in the first round has a much higher chance of success of being a stud than anywhere else in the draft.

but the problem is, you're only looking at half of the equation. yes, the higher pick has a better chance when compared with any other individual pick. but you're not making a 1-to-1 trade. the cumulative odds of multiple lower picks can give you a higher chance of a Pro-bowler than the odds of the higher pick. 

18 hours ago, Brit Pack said:

they don't make a large stain on a GM but failed 1st rounders do

I care more about the team being good than about how the optics are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In response to some valid points around what would the roster look like without 2nd, 3rd and 4th round picks and to give a larger sample size of what happens to our draft picks here is some data.

The roster we had for the 2019 season was comprised of the following:
5 x 1st rounders
5 x 2nd rounders
4 x 3rd rounders
10 x 5th to 7th rounders
7 x UDFAs
22 x FAs (these being street free agents and big money ones too)

So we are currently looking at 13 players who in my mind we would possibly be without if we played my game of trade up these picks. Those players are: 
Blake Martinez, Jamaal Williams, David Bakhitari, Dean Lowry, Jace Sternberger, Kyler Fackrell, Oren Burks, Mo Adams, Elgton Jenkins, Kevin King, Davante Adams, Josh Jackson, Jason Spriggs

How many of those players would you say are quite replaceable??? I would say 9 of them are for me.

As David Bakhitari is the oldest of that group and was drafted in 2013 let's look since then to now how many picks were made in that period on 2nd, 3rd and 4th round players by the Packers
2013 - 4 picks - 1 still on roster
2014 - 4 picks - 1 still on roster
2015 - 3 picks - 0 on roster
2016 - 4 picks - 1 re-signed, other three probably won't
2017 - 5 picks - 3 still on the roster
2018 - 3 picks - 2 still on the roster
2019 - 2 picks - 2 still on the roster

That's a total of 25 picks. 

Out of those 25 picks 10 are still on the roster (assuming Martinez, Fackrell and Spriggs don't re-sign)
Of those 10, 2 are Pro Bowlers. Which fits my initial stat that outside of the first round 10% of players selected will be Pro Bowlers.

Point being if we traded up those picks into first rounders we could of potentially (IF we could of found trade partners and have the right ammo to move that far up) have had 7 first round picks and if half of those busted we would potentially have 3.5 Pro Bowl players vs the 2 we currently have. I know no GM would do this but I just find it interesting and looking at draft history more and more makes me realise how the odds of getting a blue chip player out of the 1st round are really small.

Like I said before, if nothing else it makes me want to trade away our mid round picks for proven vets in trade deals e.g Emanuel Sanders etc... 





 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brit Pack said:

How many of those players would you say are quite replaceable??? I would say 9 of them are for me.

They aren't replaceble if you don't have draft picks. Replacement level veterans are going to be significantly higher cap hits. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×