CWood21 Posted October 23, 2017 Author Share Posted October 23, 2017 3 minutes ago, incognito_man said: interpretation is correct. I don't understand the question about leeway though *edit, or you mean like injuries and such? If we do a whole league comparison it should all even out. No reason to deviate from just a straight AV comparison at first IMO Like let's say the baseline for the 61st pick is 21. If the player has an AV of 20 (just throwing out a number), are we going with the black/white definition and calling that a bust? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 Ezpz https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/gnb/draft.htm Copy and paste the last 5 years of every team. Delete the columns that aren't career av or draft slot etc. Then using the incog link you can just make a column yes no on hit. And look at the projected av, then fill that in Could do all the teams in a night pretty easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 minute ago, CWood21 said: Like let's say the baseline for the 61st pick is 21. If the player has an AV of 20 (just throwing out a number), are we going with the black/white definition and calling that a bust? no, just record a '-1'. It's be a numerical comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 minute ago, CWood21 said: Like let's say the baseline for the 61st pick is 21. If the player has an AV of 20 (just throwing out a number), are we going with the black/white definition and calling that a bust? Might as well. Could ignore the word bust and go hit versus miss. Just saying you didn't get what the average value is. Rather than use a loaded word like bust or what not. Don't wanna get in an argument about what a bust is to everyone. As long as you do it the same for every team it'll be fine. Just wanna see where we're at more or less. Won't be a perfect way to do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 minute ago, incognito_man said: no, just record a '-1'. It's be a numerical comparison. Oh yeah that's a good way to do it. Good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 28 minutes ago, NormSizedMidget said: This has been done. I almost mentioned it. I have no idea where to find it anymore though. lol yea I feel like I did something like this a while back. haven't found it yet though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 hour ago, CWood21 said: As a baseline, I'm using these standards as my baseline. 1st Round - Above-Average Starter 2nd/3rd Round - Good Starter/High Quality Backup 4th/5th Round - Decent Backup/Key Special Teams Player 6th/7th Round - Good Special Teams Player To me, that's where my standards are. If you disagree, note why. And for the record, I won't say that a 6th or 7th round is a bust because those are guys that likely have a priority UDFA grades on them, and expecting anything out of them is setting yourself up for failure. I agree, this study should factor expected value of draft slot. 47 minutes ago, incognito_man said: I'd suggest this formula: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/index9a9b.html?p=527 And just use AV for every player. If you guys are interested in using AV or something from pro football reference, I found a spreadsheet I made that basically shows what the expected AV is for a given draft slot. Not sure how to link it. Anyways, to summarize some of the data: (AP1= all-pro 1st teams, PB= pro bowls, St= career starts, CarAV- career value, DrAV= career value provided to team that drafted plater, G=games played). CarAV is the key metric and seems to have a steady progression that mirrors the draft pick value chart pretty closely, though there are a few swings towards the 6th/7th round. I threw in the other numbers like PB's just for fun. Data was taken from 1993-2002 drafts (to make sure all the players in the study were retired and no longer accumulating AV). 1993 was the start of the free agency era, so I figured that was a reasonable stopping point.. Slot---------------------AP1----PB------St----CarAV---DrAV-------G Picks 001-016----0.58----2.04---7.04--54.89---38.43--129.99 Picks 017-032----0.29----0.89---5.16--38.51---28.06--107.49 Picks 033-048----0.20----0.72---4.48--32.88---23.59--104.21 Picks 049-064----0.07----0.28---3.41--25.39---16.73--91.10 Picks 065-080----0.09----0.39---2.94--22.63---15.02--81.59 Picks 081-096----0.08----0.24---2.29--17.62---11.03--71.42 Picks 097-112----0.01----0.08---1.93--15.84-----9.55--68.79 Picks 113-128----0.00----0.03---1.39--11.19-----6.55--56.46 Picks 129-144----0.04----0.12---1.39--10.09-----5.76--50.51 Picks 145-160----0.06----0.16---1.27--12.01-----6.69--56.27 Picks 161-176----0.01----0.13---0.84----7.05-----2.69--36.58 Picks 177-192----0.01----0.05---0.91----7.28-----4.05--42.64 Picks 193-208----0.05----0.21---1.33---10.34----6.14--43.06 Picks 209-222----0.01----0.11---0.73-----7.14----3.99--34.56 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 though there are some issues with using career AV since lots of the players picked by the league during TT's tenure are still accumulating AV. Due to the way the cuts work and the average length of nfl career, it might be safe to grade pre-2012 drafts without the CV verdicts changing much, but the jury's still out for alot of players taken in 2012 & beyond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugger Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 I don't think we should call a player from any round who never could get it going because of injury. No GM can account for that. Sherrod is an example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 7 minutes ago, Pugger said: I don't think we should call a player from any round who never could get it going because of injury. No GM can account for that. Sherrod is an example. It's a bit of a pain to weed that out for every team though. That's kind of the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 10 minutes ago, Pugger said: I don't think we should call a player from any round who never could get it going because of injury. No GM can account for that. Sherrod is an example. ideally, that's true. but not sure if that's gonna be feasibly possible to chart unless people really feel like googling all these thousands of players to make sure the ones that are cut weren't cut because of injury. I feel like the injury luck should balance out for everyone in the long run anyways, but I agree it'd be nice to account for if people are willing to dig that deeply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 14 minutes ago, TransientTexan said: ideally, that's true. but not sure if that's gonna be feasibly possible to chart unless people really feel like googling all these thousands of players to make sure the ones that are cut weren't cut because of injury. I feel like the injury luck should balance out for everyone in the long run anyways, but I agree it'd be nice to account for if people are willing to dig that deeply. It's probably not that hard. I would know a ton of them myself just scrolling through. I imagine over time it kind of washes out a little with everyone. Maybe not over five years. I'd like to just see this in a basic form first then maybe do more with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1f0ni7GZi5Sskgwxy2WiisNlzVK_eR2NCAqAwJmHWIG8/edit#gid=985318671 here's the spreadsheet I had. let me know if link doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 minute ago, TransientTexan said: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1f0ni7GZi5Sskgwxy2WiisNlzVK_eR2NCAqAwJmHWIG8/edit#gid=985318671 here's the spreadsheet I had. let me know if link doesn't work. It says we need to request permission to view it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 17 minutes ago, NormSizedMidget said: It says we need to request permission to view it. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1f0ni7GZi5Sskgwxy2WiisNlzVK_eR2NCAqAwJmHWIG8/edit?usp=sharing howbout now? I changed the permissions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.