*UPDATED* Draft Success - Measured by AV

[JGMcD2]

Pro Football Reference updated their approximate value numbers today. This post is an update now that we have another year of information on these draft classes.

 

I'm not going to go back through every detail of how I put all of this together - I'll link my original post detailing that if anyone is interested. 

 

League Wide Draft Success 2017-2019 - A Follow Up - The Stadium Wall - Two Bills Drive

 

A quick blurb that can orient you here if you don't want to read the entire post:

 

DrAV = AV accumulated for team that drafted the player

 

CarAV is computed by summing 
100 percent of the AV of his best season,
95 percent of the AV of his next-best season,
90 percent of the AV of his third-best season,
and so on 

What I did was found the average value for a player drafted in each round (1-7) in each year (2017-2019) and the calculated what I am calling the Net Drafted Accumulated Value (NETDrAV) for each pick in each round. I only compared each draft to itself. I then found the Total Net Drafted Accumulated Value (TOT_NETDrAV) for each team in each draft and ranked them against each other. Rather than just looking at how much raw value the Bills brought in as compared to the 31 other teams, this gives an idea of how much extra value they extracted in each round as compared to the 31 other teams in the league. 

 

Image on the left is updated for 2017 - 2021 and is sorted by TOT_NETDrAV 

 

Image on the right is updated for 2018 - 2021 (For those who will shout that Beane didn't draft White, Dawkins and Milano) and is also sorted by TOT_NETDrAV. 

 

Bills would be #1 in TOT_NETCarAV for both.

 

[hondo in seattle]

I'm guessing you have Covid and you're not going to work.  So with all that spare time on your hands, you decided to do this.

 

It is interesting, though, because I wouldn't have guessed the Bills ranked so high.  You should send this to Beane to let him know he's doing a good job!

 

I haven't looked at PFR's Approximate Values enough to know how much I trust them, though.

 

Hope you get well soon!

 

Edited January 14, 2022 by hondo in seattle

[GunnerBill]

Who else had the bump this year OP, other than Josh? Presume Ed Oliver? He is very close to meeting my personal test for Brandon Beane - get me another star!

 

EDIT: I questioned Chicago pre-season and I am going to question it again. How the hell are they that high? Is it cos they have had lots of late round guys start? Cos they have started but they largely suck!

Edited January 14, 2022 by GunnerBill

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

25 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

Pro Football Reference updated their approximate value numbers today. This post is an update now that we have another year of information on these draft classes.

 

I'm not going to go back through every detail of how I put all of this together - I'll link my original post detailing that if anyone is interested. 

 

League Wide Draft Success 2017-2019 - A Follow Up - The Stadium Wall - Two Bills Drive

 

A quick blurb that can orient you here if you don't want to read the entire post:

 

DrAV = AV accumulated for team that drafted the player

 

CarAV is computed by summing 
100 percent of the AV of his best season,
95 percent of the AV of his next-best season,
90 percent of the AV of his third-best season,
and so on 

What I did was found the average value for a player drafted in each round (1-7) in each year (2017-2019) and the calculated what I am calling the Net Drafted Accumulated Value (NETDrAV) for each pick in each round. I only compared each draft to itself. I then found the Total Net Drafted Accumulated Value (TOT_NETDrAV) for each team in each draft and ranked them against each other. Rather than just looking at how much raw value the Bills brought in as compared to the 31 other teams, this gives an idea of how much extra value they extracted in each round as compared to the 31 other teams in the league. 

 

Image on the left is updated for 2017 - 2021 and is sorted by TOT_NETDrAV 

 

Image on the right is updated for 2018 - 2021 (For those who will shout that Beane didn't draft White, Dawkins and Milano) and is also sorted by TOT_NETDrAV. 

 

Bills would be #1 in TOT_NETCarAV for both.

 

I just looked at Josh and according to PFR he had a 19 this year compared 18 last.....so much for regression

7 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

Who else had the bump this year OP, other than Josh? Presume Ed Oliver? He is very close to meeting my personal test for Brandon Beane - get me another star!

 

EDIT: I questioned Chicago pre-season and I am going to question it again. How the hell are they that high? Is it cos they have had lots of late round guys start? Cos they have started but they largely suck!

Oliver has gone 6, 8 and 10 this year.

[JGMcD2]

6 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

Who else had the bump this year OP, other than Josh? Presume Ed Oliver? He is very close to meeting my personal test for Brandon Beane - get me another star!

 

EDIT: I questioned Chicago pre-season and I am going to question it again. How the hell are they that high? Is it cos they have had lots of late round guys start? Cos they have started but they largely suck!

I haven’t looked at individual drafts/players yet… I just updated my spreadsheet with the latest AVs. I can look at the Bills in a bit. 
 

A quick glance at Chicago… Eddie Jackson and Tarik Cohen in the 4th round provided a lot of value for them in 2017. In 2018 Roquan Smith and Bilal Nichols in the 5th. In 2019 David Montgomery in the 3rd. In 2020 Darnell Mooney in the 5th. 

 

They’re getting some pretty good players late and they’ve done well to find some higher end value later.
 

Most of their top picks have been poor, but they’ve done enough where they’re not astronomically below average for the round they’re drafted in. 

19 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said:

I'm guessing you have Covid and you're not going to work.  So with all that spare time on your hands, you decided to do this.

 

It is interesting, though, because I wouldn't have guessed the Bills ranked so high.  You should send this to Beane to let him know he's doing a good job!

 

I haven't looked at PFR's Approximate Values enough to know how much I trust them, though.

 

Hope you get well soon!

 

Lol today it was just a matter of updating some spreadsheets which took all of 30 minutes. 

 

Working from home leaves me with some time on my hands and it's a slower time of year for work. 

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

I haven’t looked at individual drafts/players yet… I just updated my spreadsheet with the latest AVs. I can look at the Bills in a bit. 
 

A quick glance at Chicago… Eddie Jackson and Tarik Cohen in the 4th round provided a lot of value for them in 2017. In 2018 Roquan Smith and Bilal Nichols in the 5th. In 2019 David Montgomery in the 3rd. In 2020 Darnell Mooney in the 5th. 

 

They’re getting some pretty good players late and they’ve done well to find some higher end value later.
 

Most of their top picks have been poor, but they’ve done enough where they’re not astronomically below average for the round they’re drafted in. 

 

 

Hmm. You haven't sold me on Chicago. Most of those guys are the definition of JAGs. They have played because Chicago has nobody else. 

 

No wanting to re-hash our debate from the previous thread but that remains my slight criticism of the methodology. I think it puts too much value on JAGs. That said, as we discussed in the summer the list isn't a mile off what I'd expect so it clearly has value. I just think it does have flaws as well. 

[JGMcD2]

9 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Hmm. You haven't sold me on Chicago. Most of those guys are the definition of JAGs. They have played because Chicago has nobody else. 

 

No wanting to re-hash our debate from the previous thread but that remains my slight criticism of the methodology. I think it puts too much value on JAGs. That said, as we discussed in the summer the list isn't a mile off what I'd expect so it clearly has value. I just think it does have flaws as well. 

Eddie Jackson, Darnell Mooney and David Montgomery are JAGs? 
 

It absolutely has flaws, if I had more time I’d definitely work on tweaking some things.

 

I think it does a decent job of objectively measuring draft results or at least providing some objectivity around the “Beane sucks at drafting” narrative. 

Edited January 14, 2022 by JGMcD2

[GoBills808]

6 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

Eddie Jackson, Darnell Mooney and David Montgomery are JAGs? 
 

It absolutely has flaws, if I had more time I’d definitely work on tweaking some things.

 

I think it doesn’t a decent job of objectivity measuring draft results or at least providing some objectivity around the “Beane sucks at drafting” narrative. 

Montgomery is really good

[JGMcD2]

1 minute ago, GoBills808 said:

Montgomery is really good

Eddie Jackson is an All-Pro too… 

[JGMcD2]

18 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Hmm. You haven't sold me on Chicago. Most of those guys are the definition of JAGs. They have played because Chicago has nobody else. 

 

No wanting to re-hash our debate from the previous thread but that remains my slight criticism of the methodology. I think it puts too much value on JAGs. That said, as we discussed in the summer the list isn't a mile off what I'd expect so it clearly has value. I just think it does have flaws as well. 

Guys that get drafted after RD3ish and contribute/play aren't really JAGs either.

 

JAGs are the guys that don't play or play for a season and get replaced. This methodology actually weeds those guys out and rewards you for finding contributors late... which we know is extremely hard to do.

 

I'm not saying it's not flawed in some way, shape or form... but I think we're in a decent amount of agreement on this. 

[GunnerBill]

5 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

Guys that get drafted after RD3ish and contribute/play aren't really JAGs either.

 

JAGs are the guys that don't play or play for a season and get replaced. This methodology actually weeds those guys out and rewards you for finding contributors late... which we know is extremely hard to do.

 

I'm not saying it's not flawed in some way, shape or form... but I think we're in a decent amount of agreement on this. 

 

It isn't hard to do if your team sucks. And the Bears suck. Guys who they draft late end up playing way too many games for them compared to their talent because there is not much else on that team. 

 

There is just no way at all they are a top 10 drafting team over the past 5 years. And the Bears agree. That is why their GM just got fired. 

 

As I say the rest of the list feels right. But it rewards you for guys who you take late and end up starting.... regardless of if they start because you are good or because your team is bad. This isn't Matt Milano starting. It is equivalent of Siran Neal being a full time starter for 3 or 4 years. 

19 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

Eddie Jackson is an All-Pro too… 

 

I was looking at the 2018 onward list. Jackson was a great pick, no doubt.

[freddyjj]

Love where the genius, BB and the Pats finish.  Might be why they spent $250mm in Free agency because they draft so poorly.

[JGMcD2]

18 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

It isn't hard to do if your team sucks. And the Bears suck. Guys who they draft late end up playing way too many games for them compared to their talent because there is not much else on that team. 

 

There is just no way at all they are a top 10 drafting team over the past 5 years. And the Bears agree. That is why their GM just got fired. 

 

As I say the rest of the list feels right. But it rewards you for guys who you take late and end up starting.... regardless of if they start because you are good or because your team is bad. This isn't Matt Milano starting. It is equivalent of Siran Neal being a full time starter for 3 or 4 years. 

 

I was looking at the 2018 onward list. Jackson was a great pick, no doubt.

I agree with you... it's a very good point. 

 

I'll have to think of ways to adjust... I have a feeling the longer things go those types of guys will no longer be overvalued.

 

That doesn't mean I can't find a way to account for it now. 

[GunnerBill]

23 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

I agree with you... it's a very good point. 

 

I'll have to think of ways to adjust... I have a feeling the longer things go those types of guys will no longer be overvalued.

 

That doesn't mean I can't find a way to account for it now. 

 

Yea I agree over the longer term presumably their AV will fall. 

[ghostwriter]

Time has proven to be very kind to McBeane. I pretty much see 3 or 4 hits in every draft since 2017. The one gripe I have is that they let Wyatt Teller walk after drafting him in the 5th round. 🤦‍♂️

 

Oh, and trading down with Kansas City so they could take Mahomes? Thy sins have since been forgiven! 😎

Edited January 14, 2022 by Victory Formation

[Mikie2times]

It's good work OP. I'm very familiar with AV, it's not an exact science but the guys at pro football reference do great with data collection and simple summary. All they attempted to build with AV is a way to compare different positions or the same positions across different eras. AV is far from perfect but anybody that slights it, I would happily challenge to create a better ranking system for what they're attempting to capture. They will even admit it's flawed in the summary but still fun and informative.      

Edited January 15, 2022 by KzooMike

[Rochesterfan]

I totally agree with @GunnerBill about Chicago being to high based upon how they have drafted, but there must be more to it than having a lot of low level Jags drafted that start.  That for 17 years was how the Bills drafted - our best guys were routinely 3rd through 5th and even UDFA’s that started and played a lot and therefore would appear better than average players at those rounds.

 

The reason I think Chicago may be slightly different is other teams like that - NYJs for example - still grade out low.  There must be a few Chicago players that are really driving the entire drafting AAV up - like an Eddie Jackson.

 

I think this is a great exercise to begin discussions, but somehow higher round failures need to be slightly more magnified.  You should not be considered really successful with a handful of day 3 guys over performing versus failing (or hitting) on multiple day 1 and 2 picks.

 

I love the work though - really drives home the point.

 

 

[NewEra]

18 hours ago, JGMcD2 said:

Eddie Jackson is an All-Pro too… 

He was an all pro.  
 

My two fanatical Bears fan buddies think he’s the most overpaid player in the league and would rather trade him for nothing just to rid themselves of his contract.  He’s at his best when blitzing and hasn’t been very good in coverage or vs the run in recent years. 
 

one of them compared him to Marcel Dareus after he got paid. 

Edited January 15, 2022 by NewEra

[JGMcD2]

2 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

I totally agree with @GunnerBill about Chicago being to high based upon how they have drafted, but there must be more to it than having a lot of low level Jags drafted that start.  That for 17 years was how the Bills drafted - our best guys were routinely 3rd through 5th and even UDFA’s that started and played a lot and therefore would appear better than average players at those rounds.

 

The reason I think Chicago may be slightly different is other teams like that - NYJs for example - still grade out low.  There must be a few Chicago players that are really driving the entire drafting AAV up - like an Eddie Jackson.

 

I think this is a great exercise to begin discussions, but somehow higher round failures need to be slightly more magnified.  You should not be considered really successful with a handful of day 3 guys over performing versus failing (or hitting) on multiple day 1 and 2 picks.

 

I love the work though - really drives home the point.

 

 

I’ve done a round by round breakdown in the past and I think it does a good job of showing where teams are getting more value than others. Whether it’s significant or just slightly. 
 

I haven’t gotten there yet, but will eventually. 

[Rew]

I think the challenge with evaluating this for some people is they expect that drafting well = winning and drafting poorly = losing.  Chicago may draft above average but do a poor job in FA and with coaching.  Or they may draft well at the individual level but do not draft strategically in a way that moves the team forward (the old position of need vs BPA argument).  This seems to be a good metric used in combination with other ways of evaluating a GM's performance, but not necessarily perfect in a vacuum.