TT drafting vs the other GM's (Career approx Value)

[squire12]

1 hour ago, skibrett15 said:

David wilson, Manziel?  It hasn't happened often, but sherrod was pick 32, so has it happened to high 2nds? High 3rds?  It's a slippery slope type of thing and the draft value chart for low 1sts and 2nd rounders isn't all that different.

 

@squire12 any interest in putting a correction factor on the rookie deals, and limiting CAV to rookie contract AV (i.e. first 5 years AV for 1st rounders, first 4 years AV for 2nd-7th)?  Perhaps a better way to do that would be to stick with CaV, but count the rookie contract seasons as double.  So CAV+RookAV = DraftPickAV(DPAV)

In terms of a correction, I'd say that 2nd year guys get a 2x bump, 1st year guys get a 2.5x bump, and 3rd year guys get 1.5x bump to their AVs.

Any interest in opening up the data so that I might copy it?

I think altering the formula that it is based on affects things.  SOme teams rely more heavily on rookies to contribute sooner vs other teams.  

I gave you access to the google sheets.  

[skibrett15]

7 minutes ago, squire12 said:

I think altering the formula that it is based on affects things.  SOme teams rely more heavily on rookies to contribute sooner vs other teams.  

I gave you access to the google sheets.  

Thanks.

So, I think that's true to an extent, but no team is gonna stop a really good player from hitting the field and thus upping his CAV.  

On the other hand... you really draft a player for his rookie contract, and then you make another decision to resign the guy or to let him walk.  If you draft a guy who had some success as a rookie, leaves and then blossoms with another team and becomes an all-pro, then I don't think the original drafting team gets the bulk of the credit there.  Some of the blame goes on the coaches for not making it happen sooner, but you also made a "decision" to let him walk to to resign him for a certain amount of the cap. 

Certainly in GB you see a general trend of draft-resign/retain.  That's not always the case on other teams with regime changes and turnover.  So i'd like to balance the weighting of Career  AV vs the Value of the draft pick.  Certainly all time players are all time draft picks, but those guys are also extremely productive as rookies/2nd/3rd/4th year players.

So we're asking ourselves now... what is the criteria for a good draft pick?  Was eddie lacy a good draft pick even though his career looks to be over so he won't have a high CAV but would have a good AV over his first 4 years?

[incognito_man]

20 hours ago, skibrett15 said:

This isn't reflected in the scores i posted.

This is true. Your's is a good method for just comparing exactly what a GM does with the picks they use in the draft. This is a straightforward comparison in that regard. No arguments here.

20 hours ago, skibrett15 said:

Hypothetical:

So, BB trades 2010's 20 chase stuart points for 2011's 26 chase stuart points by trading his 2nd for a 1st.  But you are saying let's treat 2010 as if he invested the full amount of draft capital of the 29th ranked team.  But he didn't.  He invested 140% of the 32nd ranked team in 2011 and 70% of the 29th ranked team in 2010.  The metric should reflect that

Long-term this all evens out is my point. BB's 1st round 2011 pick's CAV will be what he gained from 2010's draft capital. This is a career comparison, not a yearly comparison. And further at any point along their respective careers 2010 2nd rounder will have 1 extra year of potential AV, hence the 'short-term' bonus. But a GM, in the long run, will be able to recoup that value with, hypothetically, the last year of 2011's pick (in which the 2010 pick is hypothetically not playing).

20 hours ago, skibrett15 said:

If you game the system and whiff on the pick vs gaming the system and hit on the pick.... many times... to a statistically significant level... one is a much better GM and drafter than the other.  So i think you want to factor in the capital of the comp pick. 

Even if the comp pick is "earned" in the traditional sense, the GM should be penalized for whiffing on a 3rd round pick that he got for a good player leaving.  Fact is, he had extra chips that year and he should have extra CAV that year.

Your point below is good.  I think you want to adjust the CAV/investment by including a factor which would adjust for "actual capital" earned vs "capital assigned" due to team rank.

Well, the better GM will be rewarded more by the 'bonus' AV collected from his better compensatory selections regardless of whether the draft capital is included in the metric. Compensatory picks have a different psychological feel to them as well, I suspect GMs treat them more as 'house money' (and until recently couldn't be traded either) - so I still don't think it's appropriate to include them in my ideal comparison of a how a GM withstands the forces of reducing draft capital as his team has success.

[squire12]

52 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

Thanks.

So, I think that's true to an extent, but no team is gonna stop a really good player from hitting the field and thus upping his CAV.  

On the other hand... you really draft a player for his rookie contract, and then you make another decision to resign the guy or to let him walk.  If you draft a guy who had some success as a rookie, leaves and then blossoms with another team and becomes an all-pro, then I don't think the original drafting team gets the bulk of the credit there.  Some of the blame goes on the coaches for not making it happen sooner, but you also made a "decision" to let him walk to to resign him for a certain amount of the cap. 

Certainly in GB you see a general trend of draft-resign/retain.  That's not always the case on other teams with regime changes and turnover.  So i'd like to balance the weighting of Career  AV vs the Value of the draft pick.  Certainly all time players are all time draft picks, but those guys are also extremely productive as rookies/2nd/3rd/4th year players.

So we're asking ourselves now... what is the criteria for a good draft pick?  Was eddie lacy a good draft pick even though his career looks to be over so he won't have a high CAV but would have a good AV over his first 4 years?

Rodgers is a prime example of how using only a rookie CaV would be way under valuing his production.  

So would Nelson, Cobb, Burnett as well.

[AlexGreen#20]

31 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Rodgers is a prime example of how using only a rookie CaV would be way under valuing his production.  

So would Nelson, Cobb, Burnett as well.

Which is why "Drafting" in the traditional sense is a tough way of looking at things. Being an NFL GM isn't divided into neatly separated compartments. It's not like there's 3 boxes, Free Agency, Trades, Drafting, that a GM chooses to pull one out of a drawer and spend his time tinkering in at the expense of the other.

Rodgers is an example of an absolutely home run "Free Agency" signing.

Jordy Nelson's contract from 2011 to 2013 ($10,150,000) for: 3332 yards and 30 TDs is robbery.

[skibrett15]

yeah.  So i think taking Career AV and then weighting it again with rookie contract AV is not a bad way to look at it.  Basically double count the initial contract years.

[AlexGreen#20]

1 hour ago, skibrett15 said:

yeah.  So i think taking Career AV and then weighting it again with rookie contract AV is not a bad way to look at it.  Basically double count the initial contract years.

Probably a fair way to do it all things considered. ****s over teams with established rosters with guys not getting day 1 snaps, but somebody's always going to get screwed over. Obviously it isn't meant to be gospel.

[skibrett15]

Bumping this with some methods i was tinkering with:

[pacman5252]

The numbers say pretty much what we already knew, GB between 2005-2010 had epic drafts and since has been mediocre.

No all pros drafted. The only player who was drafted by us who’s gone to more than 1 PB since 2010 was Casey Hayward (didn’t go with us). It’s been a lot of blah and Rodgers 

[incognito_man]

What is draft value surplus/defecit?

[skibrett15]

29 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

What is draft value surplus/defecit?

rookie contract AV minus expected rookie contract AV for the draft capital

[pgwingman]

Just curious, but what do you think is the larger cause of the decline in TT's drafting:

a) The new CBA (started in 2011 i thought), which limits practice time (thus hurting draft and develop teams)

or

b) the Packers sustaining year after year of picks in the bottom 1/3 of the round

[squire12]

1 hour ago, pgwingman said:

Just curious, but what do you think is the larger cause of the decline in TT's drafting:

a) The new CBA (started in 2011 i thought), which limits practice time (thus hurting draft and develop teams)

or

b) the Packers sustaining year after year of picks in the bottom 1/3 of the round

Probably the natural ups and downs of predicting player success from college to NFL.  Just about all teams and GM'S will have great drafts <-> crappy drafts on a continuum.   

The draft is and always has been a big crap shoot in acquiring talent. 

[Stevein2012]

I don't really love taking average of AV for all picks.  If GB had say 10-15 more 7th round picks than another team that's going to be a huge penalty when those players aren't really expected to be anything.  I don't know if that's actually an issue here but it feels like we did end up with a lot of late picks over the years.

[Mr. Fussnputz]

Thanks for doing this! Super!!!