The Draft is a Total Crapshoot (Per Science)

[SoCal Deek]

8 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

 

That's not the point really, nor anything I'm doubting.  McBeane have proven time and again they'll use draft picks to move up, as they did with Kincaid and Elam in RD1 these last 2 years.

 

The issue is, people like to claim the draft is a total crap-shoot and that's surface-level analysis.  You can be a decent drafting team without prioritizing the riskier positions to draft and look OK or better.  You can get burned drafting the higher positions and be viewed not so good.

 

Drafting well is finding talent primarily at the harder to find positions because it more than likely shows up in W-L column.  I don't think the question to ask is whether the draft is a crap-shoot, which in this discussion is mostly RD1-2 picks.  It's more about are teams bold enough there to go after the premium positions to find elite talent.  When they do, they're more likely to win if they have decent personnel people. 

Both can be true. I don’t think the point of the thread is to say that teams might as well use a blindfold when throwing darts at the draft board. Every team has a scouting department. Every team spends months looking at film. Every team attends the Combine. Every team interviews players. But…once you’ve done all of that it’s still far from a sure thing. I’ve always held that one of the biggest reasons is that these kids are still very young and for most they’re going through a major life change. It’s their first job. It’s almost surely far away from home. It’s their first time making real money. That’s a lot to adjust to for ANY young person, not just football players. 

[Yobogoya!]

Drafting is a crap-shoot because of the human element. There's maybe an infinite number of intangible variables that will go into how a selected player interacts with his coaches, teammates, scheme -- and of course his off-field environment.

 

It's not like Madden where the highest score is automatically the best score, and there's largely no reason not to use the highest rated players.

 

All the sports science/ psychology in the world will never be able to perfectly predict how a prospect pans out. And if it eventually can, it will mean that AI has figured us out and we have far bigger things to worry about than football. 😅

[mjt328]

If the draft was a total crapshoot, the best strategy would be continually trading down (over and over and over) until you had 20-25 picks in the 6th & 7th Round.  With 3x the selections of anyone on the rest of the NFL, your odds of success would drastically increase.

 

Of course this idea is utter nonsense.  

 

Each draft season, everyone totally craps all over GMs and Scouts.  We hear the stories of Tom Brady falling until the 6th Round, and JaMarcus Russell going first overall.  And the moral of the story is that draft "experts" are actually total idiots, and are really just throwing darts at a board. 

 

The truth is, the scouting community does a very good job identifying which prospects have the greatest chance for success.  It's not an exact science, and they have to consider a million different factors.  How hard will this 22-year-old work after becoming a millionaire?  How does his skillset fit into our scheme/system?  Then you have injuries that can completely blow-up everything.

 

Think about how many Quarterbacks are in all of college football.  Yet 75% of the NFL's starting QBs were taken in the 1st Round and 90% were taken by the end of the 3rd Round.  At the other two most premium positions (Edge Rusher and Left Tackle), over 50% of NFL starters are taken in the 1st Round.  That doesn't happen if GMs/Scouts are just randomly guessing.  

[Mr. WEO]

On 4/16/2024 at 7:18 AM, Coach Tuesday said:

https://theathletic.com/5416007/2024/04/16/nfl-drafting-methods-insight-massey-thaler/?source=user_shared_article
 

Great article from the Athletic.  Basically says that teams routinely over-estimate their own ability to predict player performance and as a result overestimate the value of their own specific picks.  Instead, they should maximize the number of lottery tickets they’re buying.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

it's a great article.

 

the most eye opening part is the claim that almost all teams are aware of this specific paper on maximizing draft strategy---they simply ignore it because every FO thinks they are smarter than every other FO. 

 

The theory proves itself every year.  These GMs/HCs/owners aren't very good at drafting players based on their own research---they simply won't/can't acknowledge this.

[SoonerBillsFan]

38 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

 

That's not the point really, nor anything I'm doubting.  McBeane have proven time and again they'll use draft picks to move up, as they did with Kincaid and Elam in RD1 these last 2 years.

 

The issue is, people like to claim the draft is a total crap-shoot and that's surface-level analysis.  You can be a decent drafting team without prioritizing the riskier positions to draft and look OK or better.  You can get burned drafting the higher positions and be viewed not so good.

 

Drafting well is finding talent primarily at the harder to find positions because it more than likely shows up in W-L column.  I don't think the question to ask is whether the draft is a crap-shoot, which in this discussion is mostly RD1-2 picks.  It's more about are teams bold enough there to go after the premium positions to find elite talent.  When they do, they're more likely to win if they have decent personnel people. 

Agreed.  This is a draft where 1&2 must hit and contribute for us on a high level.  I would argue both 4th rounders need to as well.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

On 4/16/2024 at 7:18 AM, Coach Tuesday said:

https://theathletic.com/5416007/2024/04/16/nfl-drafting-methods-insight-massey-thaler/?source=user_shared_article
 

Great article from the Athletic.  Basically says that teams routinely over-estimate their own ability to predict player performance and as a result overestimate the value of their own specific picks.  Instead, they should maximize the number of lottery tickets they’re buying.

 

Thoughts?

I've been saying this for years. 

We are lucky Allen was available when he was. You know if Cleveland or the Jets take Allen, Beane would have chose one of the other QBs that have been busts. 

That said Harrison Jr and Nabers look as close to sure hits at the WR spot as any other.

Trade down is easy to say. You need a trade partner. And with a roster that had been stacked for years trading down didn't make a lot of sense because there was just not that many open roster spots.

 

However this year is a bit different with holes at WR x 2, safety, edge, dt, RB#2, and backup C.  With a deep deep WR group and no 3rd round pick a trade out of the first round wouldn't be the worst decision. 

[NORWOODS FOOT]

10 hours ago, 4BillsintheBurgh said:

You'd also have to consider the coaching staff dynamic as well. Here in Pittsburgh drafting changed when Cowher left and Tomlin came in.

Definitely. While I understand what the OP is getting at I think you can really only take things by a case by case basis.

 

For example, when Ozzie Newsome was picking for Baltimore no one will convince me that he would have been better off throwing darts at a board of names. The man was a very gifted evaluator of talent.

 

Your point is well taken: the coach wants to run a particular system. That’s going to affect the selections. And then, does the player get to grow in that system or is there a coaching change. 
 

This is a massively complex topic.

 

 

 

Edited April 17 by NORWOODS FOOT

[Rubes]

11 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

it's a great article.

 

the most eye opening part is the claim that almost all teams are aware of this specific paper on maximizing draft strategy---they simply ignore it because every FO thinks they are smarter than every other FO. 

 

The theory proves itself every year.  These GMs/HCs/owners aren't very good at drafting players based on their own research---they simply won't/can't acknowledge this.

 

I agree, that was pretty interesting to read. I also thought it was interesting to read about all of the different individuals basically acting in their own best interest, rather than "for the good of the team."

 

[BigDingus]

I agree. This is also why I don't want us trading up to the top 10 & giving away a ton of picks. 

 

There are so many colleges and so many players, there's no way you can get a good look at all of them. A lot of it has to do with the situation they're drafted into, the coaching, opportunities, surrounding talent, etc.

 

I didn't want the Bills to draft Allen, if only because I still had PTSD from the drought & had zero confidence they could develop a raw QB. Thankfully this was a much different organization, and the support, coaching & FO were significantly more capable than in the past. 

 

You have great WRs like Diggs, Hill, & Nacua all drafted late, or guys like Terrell Owens from colleges nobody pays attention to like Chattanooga. I hope the Bills don't get hung up on one guy & trade away the farm to grab him, but instead cast the widest net possible to scour every corner for potential quality starters 

[Malazan]

On 4/16/2024 at 6:41 AM, Sweats said:

The quality of these threads is a total crapshoot IMO

 

Are they though?

[Sweats]

31 minutes ago, Malazan said:

 

Are they though?

 

 

 

 

Anything i put out is a crapshoot for sure.

[ticketssince61]

On 4/16/2024 at 5:59 AM, finn said:

That could just be the laws of probability at work. If every team just threw darts at their draft board, at least some would have good results.

 

I've always thought the best draft strategy, at least for teams drafting high, would be to trade down incrementally for as many second-round picks as possible, and do the same from the other direction, trading up into the second round. End up with, say, six or seven second-round picks. The odds of hitting gold seem much higher than just two high picks. 

 

 Totally agree (but would say the 2nd and 3rd rounds)  - that way you are getting a whole slew of theoretically good players and all on relatively cheap contracts

[RyanC883]

if true, another reason (beyond need for 2), to draft 2 WR early

[strive_for_five_guy]

23 hours ago, BigDingus said:

I agree. This is also why I don't want us trading up to the top 10 & giving away a ton of picks. 

 

There are so many colleges and so many players, there's no way you can get a good look at all of them. A lot of it has to do with the situation they're drafted into, the coaching, opportunities, surrounding talent, etc.

 

I didn't want the Bills to draft Allen, if only because I still had PTSD from the drought & had zero confidence they could develop a raw QB. Thankfully this was a much different organization, and the support, coaching & FO were significantly more capable than in the past. 

 

You have great WRs like Diggs, Hill, & Nacua all drafted late, or guys like Terrell Owens from colleges nobody pays attention to like Chattanooga. I hope the Bills don't get hung up on one guy & trade away the farm to grab him, but instead cast the widest net possible to scour every corner for potential quality starters 

They say, don’t put all your eggs in one basket.  You sell the farm for one guy and he doesn’t live up to expectations or  tears an ACL in training camp, then trading all those other assets away looks stupid.

[papazoid]

Over the past 10 years only 35 percent of first round picks ended up making a Pro Bowl

[hondo in seattle]

1 hour ago, papazoid said:

Over the past 10 years only 35 percent of first round picks ended up making a Pro Bowl

 

35% of UDFAs don't make the Pro Bowl - not even close - so it sounds like scouts are doing a good job.