Character and Injury Arbitrage

[Coach Tuesday]

Have been wanting to start this discussion for awhile now and the Harvin signing brought it back to the forefront.

 

First of all if you don't know what arbitrage is, I can't get into all of it but you should Google it and read up. Basically it's using bond trading/value investing strategies to figure out what the market is undervaluing, and buying more of that to gain an advantage. Billy Beane and Paul DePodesta brought it to sports in the form of Moneyball and now it's pretty prevalent. I DO NOT wish to get into a discussion about stats vs. scouts - that is not the point of this thread; please go elsewhere for that.

 

Anyhoo, I read somewhere recently that Mike Brown has tried to make up for having a skeletal scouting staff (because he's cheap) by arbitraging "character flag" players, that is, drafting and signing players with character red flags whose value has diminished as a result. Burfict is a perfect example of this - they were able to get him as a UDFA because of character concerns in college, and he has thrived. The thinking is, you can rely on cheaper, mass-marketed scouting services like BLESTO and not hire as many scouts, and wait for players with character issues to fall in the draft to a better value-point.

 

Now onto the Bills: it seems to me that the Bills have quietly been pursuing this strategy over the last few years, taking more "risks" on players with injury issues and character concerns in order to get better talent at a reduced value. I'm not sure why they're doing it, because they don't have a cheap owner (anymore) and they seem to have a robust scouting department. But they're definitely doing it. Incognito is a good example of a positive outcome - the Bills got him on the cheap because of the Miami bullying nonsense, and he has worked out well for them. But by and large, it has failed. The character issue players I can think of off the top of my head are Karlos Williams, who promptly ate himself out of the league (he was also an injury risk because of his concussions), and Dareus, who doesn't appear to love football and is now eating up a chunk of salary cap space to do very little. And similarly, the injury-arbitrage investments have mostly face-palmed: Harvin can't stay on the field (I cannot believe they're doubling - tripling? - down on this), Kujo fell in the draft because of injury issues and hasn't worked out, Seantrel falls somewhere in the spectrum of character/injury as well. I'm sure I'm missing some good examples (McGahee?) - by and large, however, the strategy just hasn't been very successful for the Bills. Yes there was Thurman Thomas, so that's an example that goes in the "success" column obviously - but that was eons ago.

 

That said, I'm not saying it's not a good strategy. If you're going to take risks, simple math says to take more of them, not less, because then you increase your chances of "hitting." Myles Jack intrigued me in the draft as someone with a potentially huge ceiling who fell because of injury issues, and I would've been fine with using our second round pick on him (instead of, ironically, a lower-ceiling LB who promptly got injured).

 

But I'm interested in what others have to say about it (unlike about 60% of you, I'm actually open to being convinced of other points of view). Do the Bills pursue this strategy, and if so, should they?

[HamSandwhich]

But what do the tea leaves say about the scouts vs. staff?

[K-9]

Interesting food for thought.

 

I wonder if Mike Brown did the cost benefit analysis of Burfict's melt down and subsequent handing the game to the Steelers in last year's playoffs.

[quinnearlysghost88]

a kind of hedged investment meant to capture slight differences in price; when there is a difference in the price of something on two different markets the arbitrageur simultaneously buys at the lower price and sells at the higher price.

[thebandit27]

Good topic.

 

My initial impulse was to say that they don't pursue the strategy, but a second thought says that yes, indeed, they do.

 

Just looking at Whaley's tenure, you have guys like:

 

Kiko Alonso (arrested in college)

Duke Williams (arrested in college)

Sammy Watkins (arrested in college)

Cyrus Kouandjio (injury)

Seantrel Henderson (arrested in college)

Ronald Darby (implicated as part of the Jameis Winston investigation)

Karlos Williams (arrested in college)

Shaq Lawson (injury)

Adolphus Washington (arrested in college)

 

And those are just the drafted players.

 

As to whether or not they should, well, I tend to ignore the arbitrage side of things and focus more on positional value and football character. I think you need to get yourself comfortable with (a) how much a guy loves the game, and (b) if he's an upstanding enough citizen to stay out of serious trouble. For me, arrests that involve violent tendencies are a major red flag, because those are the incidents that can make a guy unavailable for long periods of time (again, setting my moral compass aside).

[BringBackOrton]

It could be argued that taking Karlos in the fifth round for his 2015 year of production was worth it, IMO. How many fifth round picks produce as much over their careers as Karlos did in one season?

 

I agree with you that the Bills are following this approach, and I also think they aren't going far enough in certain respects. Like anything else, you either go all the way or none of it.

 

The Bills still have their fair share of "safe" picks and I think that's been a major problem. If I was in the FO, I would never ever ever take a high floor/low ceiling prospect.

[NoSaint]

you can shoot for more talent out of your 53, or you can shoot for more reliable but lesser talent.

 

when the risky end pays off you can be very good. we have done it. you see the pats do it with guys. plenty of teams do it.

 

the really risky play is paying the elite premium contract to a guy that also has those risks (see harvin in seattle as a bad risk, harvin here as an acceptable risk as a timely comparison on a guy that ive sung very different tunes on)

Good topic.

 

My initial impulse was to say that they don't pursue the strategy, but a second thought says that yes, indeed, they do.

 

Just looking at Whaley's tenure, you have guys like:

 

Kiko Alonso (arrested in college)

Duke Williams (arrested in college)

Sammy Watkins (arrested in college)

Cyrus Kouandjio (injury)

Seantrel Henderson (arrested in college)

Ronald Darby (implicated as part of the Jameis Winston investigation)

Karlos Williams (arrested in college)

Shaq Lawson (injury)

Adolphus Washington (arrested in college)

 

And those are just the drafted players.

 

As to whether or not they should, well, I tend to ignore the arbitrage side of things and focus more on positional value and football character. I think you need to get yourself comfortable with (a) how much a guy loves the game, and (b) if he's an upstanding enough citizen to stay out of serious trouble. For me, arrests that involve violent tendencies are a major red flag, because those are the incidents that can make a guy unavailable for long periods of time (again, setting my moral compass aside).

its very much been a whaley thing. like you said, those are just the drafted and doesnt take into account percy, incognito....

 

and seemingly a rex thing too (look at him adding santonio and edwards as high profile guys but plenty others--- helped get them AFC championship games, but also into a full meltdown... especially after tying themselves to holmes and his troubles that turned to effecting the on the field product).

It could be argued that taking Karlos in the fifth round for his 2015 year of production was worth it, IMO. How many fifth round picks produce as much over their careers as Karlos did in one season?

 

I agree with you that the Bills are following this approach, and I also think they aren't going far enough in certain respects. Like anything else, you either go all the way or none of it.

 

The Bills still have their fair share of "safe" picks and I think that's been a major problem. If I was in the FO, I would never ever ever take a high floor/low ceiling prospect.

disagree with the latter half completely. i think having a small, calculated, group of risky plays within a strong locker room is the way to maximize talent while minimizing the melt down potential. if you put 53 inmates together, i dont think you can count on them actually achieving their potential. Edited November 1, 2016 by NoSaint

[Fadingpain]

Interesting topic of discussion.

 

I would say there is some evidence to suggest you are onto something here, no doubt.

 

One thing working against this theory, though, is Whaley not getting it when it comes to the draft and throwing picks away to move up. He should be doing that the other way around because, as you say, it's more valuable to get more kicks at the can.

 

It's also worth noting the Patriots seem to pursue a similar scheme, because they have to shoot for undervalued guys b/c they are always drafting so low.

 

But they have a different spin on the idea. They are looking for overlooked value not in the form of bad character or injured players, but in the form of what they perceive to be good or serviceable players not on everyone's talent radar.

 

They also place an emphasis on intelligence/character over raw athleticism, which seems to work well. They want guys who can take orders, follow a plan, slot into a system, and not screw it up with meathead play.

[Coach Tuesday]

Interesting topic of discussion.

 

I would say there is some evidence to suggest you are onto something here, no doubt.

 

One thing working against this theory, though, is Whaley not getting it when it comes to the draft and throwing picks away to move up. He should be doing that the other way around because, as you say, it's more valuable to get more kicks at the can.

 

It's also worth noting the Patriots seem to pursue a similar scheme, because they have to shoot for undervalued guys b/c they are always drafting so low.

 

But they have a different spin on the idea. They are looking for overlooked value not in the form of bad character or injured players, but in the form of what they perceive to be good or serviceable players not on everyone's talent radar.

 

They also place an emphasis on intelligence/character over raw athleticism, which seems to work well. They want guys who can take orders, follow a plan, slot into a system, and not screw it up with meathead play.

 

Good post. And to your point about stockpiling draft picks, it's no coincidence that the Browns have been stockpiling picks since bringing in DePodesta; doing so let them trade one away yesterday for an ascending star whom they may or may not be able to sign.

a kind of hedged investment meant to capture slight differences in price; when there is a difference in the price of something on two different markets the arbitrageur simultaneously buys at the lower price and sells at the higher price.

 

No, that's not it.

[NoSaint]

Interesting topic of discussion.

 

I would say there is some evidence to suggest you are onto something here, no doubt.

 

One thing working against this theory, though, is Whaley not getting it when it comes to the draft and throwing picks away to move up. He should be doing that the other way around because, as you say, it's more valuable to get more kicks at the can.

 

It's also worth noting the Patriots seem to pursue a similar scheme, because they have to shoot for undervalued guys b/c they are always drafting so low.

 

But they have a different spin on the idea. They are looking for overlooked value not in the form of bad character or injured players, but in the form of what they perceive to be good or serviceable players not on everyone's talent radar.

 

They also place an emphasis on intelligence/character over raw athleticism, which seems to work well. They want guys who can take orders, follow a plan, slot into a system, and not screw it up with meathead play.

they also take character risks. that UF pipeline they loved produced a lot of talent, but a lot of troublemakers.... obviously one very noteworthy fail in their evaluating where to draw the line.

[BringBackOrton]

disagree with the latter half completely. i think having a small, calculated, group of risky plays within a strong locker room is the way to maximize talent while minimizing the melt down potential. if you put 53 inmates together, i dont think you can count on them actually achieving their potential.

There's a point there but not every "risky" pick is a criminal or psycho. Some guys fall due to injuries etc etc. I just don't know how feasible it is to draft leaders who are stars with no concerns. Leadership is hard to find in the NFL.

 

Football character is important no doubt, 53 Martavis Bryants, Karlos Williams, Percy's etc. is a recipe for disaster

[The Wiz]

But what do the tea leaves say about the scouts vs. staff?

Dunno about the tea leaves but the magic 8-ball says "accountable".

[Coach Tuesday]

There's a point there but not every "risky" pick is a criminal or psycho. Some guys fall due to injuries etc etc. I just don't know how feasible it is to draft leaders who are stars with no concerns. Leadership is hard to find in the NFL.

 

Football character is important no doubt, 53 Martavis Bryants, Karlos Williams, Percy's etc. is a recipe for disaster

 

Well, but under Nix, they stayed true to that approach - Nix focused on players from big, winning programs who were team captains and, preferably, had played well in big games. Nix was a disaster as a GM...

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

Good topic.

 

My initial impulse was to say that they don't pursue the strategy, but a second thought says that yes, indeed, they do.

 

Just looking at Whaley's tenure, you have guys like:

 

Kiko Alonso (arrested in college)

Duke Williams (arrested in college)

Sammy Watkins (arrested in college)

Cyrus Kouandjio (injury)

Seantrel Henderson (arrested in college)

Ronald Darby (implicated as part of the Jameis Winston investigation)

Karlos Williams (arrested in college)

Shaq Lawson (injury)

Adolphus Washington (arrested in college)

 

And those are just the drafted players.

 

As to whether or not they should, well, I tend to ignore the arbitrage side of things and focus more on positional value and football character. I think you need to get yourself comfortable with (a) how much a guy loves the game, and (b) if he's an upstanding enough citizen to stay out of serious trouble. For me, arrests that involve violent tendencies are a major red flag, because those are the incidents that can make a guy unavailable for long periods of time (again, setting my moral compass aside).

 

I wonder though how that list compares to the league average. In other words, do like 50% of the pool of players all have some type of character flag, and we are just at the league average rate in picking those guys.

[Coach Tuesday]

There's a point there but not every "risky" pick is a criminal or psycho. Some guys fall due to injuries etc etc. I just don't know how feasible it is to draft leaders who are stars with no concerns. Leadership is hard to find in the NFL.

 

Football character is important no doubt, 53 Martavis Bryants, Karlos Williams, Percy's etc. is a recipe for disaster

 

Interestingly, both on the Steelers now...

[BringBackOrton]

 

Well, but under Nix, they stayed true to that approach - Nix focused on players from big, winning programs who were team captains and, preferably, had played well in big games. Nix was a disaster as a GM...

Not sure I agree with that. Many of our blue chippers came from Nix. We definitely make riskier moves now with Whaley,

 

 

Interestingly, both on the Steelers now...

Steelers undoubtedly follow this approach.

[NoSaint]

There's a point there but not every "risky" pick is a criminal or psycho. Some guys fall due to injuries etc etc. I just don't know how feasible it is to draft leaders who are stars with no concerns. Leadership is hard to find in the NFL.

 

Football character is important no doubt, 53 Martavis Bryants, Karlos Williams, Percy's etc. is a recipe for disaster

i could re-word it for guys with concussion history too and say that yea you take a few but you need a sturdy base around them.... ignore karlos off the field and say for the sake of discussion its just the concussion question marks, maybe you ID that you arent going to pair him with another back that has the injury issues and could leave you very short on talent very fast crippling the run game ((again, using it as a not real example just to make a bar napkin math kind of argument))

 

you dont push the chips ALL IN on the strategy, you diversify try to maximize potential while also reducing the catastrophic risks.

Edited November 1, 2016 by NoSaint

[Fadingpain]

 

I wonder though how that list compares to the league average. In other words, do like 50% of the pool of players all have some type of character flag, and we are just at the league average rate in picking those guys.

Look at how many of those guys on the list have "arrested in college" after their name.

 

You raise a good point. Exactly how many draftees each year have had some sort of run-in with the law?

 

A lot of NFL players come from at-risk environments for that sort of thing.

[Coach Tuesday]

Look at how many of those guys on the list have "arrested in college" after their name.

 

You raise a good point. Exactly how many draftees each year have had some sort of run-in with the law?

 

A lot of NFL players come from at-risk environments for that sort of thing.

 

Right but you have to also assess whether their draft stock fell as a result of it - in Watkins' case, it clearly did not; in the case of Karlos it probably did.

[Blokestradamus]

Like with anything, it's not necessarily about the risk. It's just about taking the right ones. I'd shy away from guys like Burfict because there was a sustained level of ill-discipline that plagued him on and off the field. However, don't let yourself be swayed out of selecting someone like Dak Prescott. Really good kid, ticked a lot of boxes, ended up with a stupid DUI.

 

I think it's pretty clear, especially looking at Bandit's list, that the Bills are willing to give out chances. A team shouldn't preclude itself from taking risks like those, it's a talent accumulation business after all. Just have to know when to cut your losses when it doesn't pan out (like they did with Karlos).

 

With the medical side of things, I think every team is different. Denver (or a team that plays in the AFC West) likely steers clear of anyone with known sickle cell traits due to altitude. As a rule, I'd never chase a skill player up the board with an ACL injury in their history. The 49ers have tried something in recent years, taking chances on those ACL victims and, for the most part, it's not worked out. The result of "wasting" those picks has undoubtedly helped them dismantle their depth in the past couple of years.

 

It's a really interesting discussion but I think you have to have either a trade down approach to accumulate picks or a roster that can sustain a few whiffs. Not sure it's a great strategy if you're looking to build almost from scratch with a depleted roster.