Belichick was right! Economics and the NFL draft

[Golden Spur]

Interesting article on putting value to 1st-round picks:

Belichick’s strategy, however, has a strong endorsement from at least one surprising place: the world of high-level economics. A research paper published in March by two university economists suggests he may be taking exactly the right approach.
...

Given the high salary that a first-round pick is able to command and the inherent—even wild—uncertainty about what he will really accomplish on the field, Massey and Thaler suspected from the start that first-round picks were overvalued. When they ran the numbers, the problem was even more extreme than they realized. “We had no idea of the magnitude,” Thaler said. “In fact, the magnitude of it is still kind of shocking.”

According to their research, published in March in the journal Management Science, teams significantly overvalue first-round picks, paying too much to draft one player over another. They found that second-round NFL Draft picks are, on average, 15 percent more valuable, on the dollar, than first-round selections. And while Massey and Thaler hesitate to assign exact values to exact draft slots — there are simply too many variables in any given draft, they say — some picks early in the second round offer nearly 25 percent more value.

Massey and Thaler analyzed more than a decade of draft results to make these conclusions, examining the value of thousands of players. And still, Thaler notes, many NFL executives are skeptical. “Teams don’t seem to listen to the data,” Thaler noted. “Except Belichick.”

 

[JDM]

He'll move up for the right guy, though. The numbers only go so far. If you didn't already realize Belichick knows what he's doing, you don't watch a lot of football.

 

[JDM]

The numbers are interesting though.

 

[Golden Spur]

He'll move up for the right guy, though. The numbers only go so far. If you didn't already realize Belichick knows what he's doing, you don't watch a lot of football.

Edit: fixed the link. Yeah, I think that last part is obvious, the way he puts teams together. But the article put some numbers to things - it's harder to 'moneyball' the NFL in all contexts, but kind of interesting how it plays out with the draft, here.

 

[JDM]

It's absolutely an interesting article. Looking at an economists take on all kinds of things are interesting, and similar principles applied to football are most definitely cool. I think the math will come to do more of that as time goes on.

 

[USCDoom]

This Might have made sense before the new CBA, but makes no sense now.

» Over the Cap- 2013 NFL Draft Rookie Pool Allocations

As you can see, the Difference between the Top spending team(Dolphins) and the lowest spending team (Bucs) on Draft picks is 4.5 Million.

4.5 Million is chump change to ensure a Top Level Talent in a Draft.

Now obviously this was a weak draft, but if the Pats follow this Strategy then they are going to have fewer and fewer Great players and More and More Cap Space, but not huge amounts of cap space.

 

[USCDoom]

Here is a better link from after the draft for each draft pick.

» Over the Cap- 2013 NFL Draft Pick Contract Estimates

 

[JDM]

It's not about the money in their rookie contracts if I'm understanding this correctly. It is the money they are making down the line being used as a measure of their value. The point isn't that 2nd rounders save money; it's that two picks that add up to a first rounder using the value chart will bring more production than the first rounder they are traded for.

Someone correct me if this is an inaccurate view of the study.

 

[USCDoom]

It's not about the money in their rookie contracts if I'm understanding this correctly. It is the money they are making down the line being used as a measure of their value. The point isn't that 2nd rounders save money; it's that two picks that add up to a first rounder using the value chart will bring more production than the first rounder they are traded for.

Someone correct me if this is an inaccurate view of the study.

It is saying that. For a team like the Patriots currently it makes more sense to draft players in lower rounds to get more production than out of the single 1st round player. What I am saying is this cannot be a long term strategy or even a mid term strategy.

For example. It makes sense for the Pats to trade out of the first round and get a RB and some other position (then add an undrafted RB), instead of taking a Doug Martin in the 1st. Not only can you match the production at the RB spot but add production at another position as well as Special Teams.

The problem is, what happens when Brady loses it, gets hurt or cannot produce. I like the Pats TEs but they are not the type you rely on for production as #1 guys on the team.

Only really good teams with Great Players can do this. And then they have to be Very Careful of finding themselves with a bunch of role players who production cannot match Top Players.

2010 was the year I think this strategy really screwed up the Pats. They should have traded up multiple times and landed 3 Impact players from that Draft.

I was not clear, but maybe the old CBA had something to do with that. With this new CBA there is no reason to not go up and get impact players. I think having 1 Top Tier CB is better than 3 producing CBs.

 

[JDM]

You need elite players to win, absolutely, but you also need depth. Teams all have injuries every year, and the ones best able to handle them are the ones who are successful. Also keep in mind that they are typically drafting after 25. Elite players are generally to available.

I think something that is missed when talking about Belichick is that he will trade up for the right player as well. Last year he traded up twice for Hightower and chandler jones, and he has traded up almost as much as he has traded down.

Regardless of the economics or anything else, Belichick has completely rebuilt this team while being a legitimate Super Bowl contender every single year. They currently could use a star receiver and better safety play, but there are no other real holes, and I don't see anyone doing a better job of rebuilding than Belichick.

 

[USCDoom]

You need elite players to win, absolutely, but you also need depth. Teams all have injuries every year, and the ones best able to handle them are the ones who are successful. Also keep in mind that they are typically drafting after 25. Elite players are generally to available.

I think something that is missed when talking about Belichick is that he will trade up for the right player as well. Last year he traded up twice for Hightower and chandler jones, and he has traded up almost as much as he has traded down.

Regardless of the economics or anything else, Belichick has completely rebuilt this team while being a legitimate Super Bowl contender every single year. They currently could use a star receiver and better safety play, but there are no other real holes, and I don't see anyone doing a better job of rebuilding than Belichick.

I am not denying a thing you said.

Only certain teams can do this. The writer makes it sound like this is a trend or something. The Jaguars could not do this for at least 4 years. The Bucs could not do it till this up coming year. But even good talented teams cannot do this, the Saints need another Impact player. They could have traded down gotten an equal or lesser safety as well as fill their DT need with a better prospect. Those 2 players would have produced more. But the Saints need Impact.

What this article should be about, is how Good the Pats are that they can now Dictate to the Draft, rather than the Draft dictating to Them, like almost every other team in the NFL, not almost, every other team.

 

[JDM]

I don't think it should be taken as "everyone should do this". It is just a look at how teams view draft picks and where the actual value lies. Perhaps if some of the worse teams focused more on building a complete team instead of throwing an elite athlete into the fire (in a lot of cases hampering their career - see most elite QB prospects put behind shitty lines) they would be better able to rebuild. You see teams who consistently go for the sexy pick and just never improve, and it is usually because of everyone below the elite players, not their superstars.

This article doesn't have to be claiming that everyone can do it to interest me though, TBH. I am a big fan of seeing applications of economic theories to areas you wouldn't think of (Freakonomics by Steven Levitt, outliers by Malcolm gladwell, for some fairly popular examples), so seeing it in a sport I love interests me.

 

[USCDoom]

I got the exact opposite message for them. The headline itself reads "Don't be blinded by your love for a top pick, warn two researchers". Then it end with this "If Massey had a top pick in the draft, he knows exactly what he’d do with it. “I’d be having a sale,” he said."

Then this gem, "Massey and Thaler analyzed more than a decade of draft results to make these conclusions, examining the value of thousands of players. And still, Thaler notes, many NFL executives are skeptical. “Teams don’t seem to listen to the data,” Thaler noted. “Except Belichick.”

I think these guys are trying to say because the Pats have a luxury when drafting that somehow it is the Right Way to draft for All.

It sure sounds like they would have traded out of Luck and RGIII for more production at more positions.

 

[USCDoom]

Perfect Example. Last Years Draft.

Do you trade Luck or RGIII for Doug Martin and Lavonte David?

The Pats can make this Trade. The Colts could Not.

 

[JDM]

They word things more strongly for attention. If there is a truly elite option there I'd take it. I don't think they are necessarily contradicting that, but this year that wasn't there, so trading down makes more sense.

If you're a 2-14 team, with luck available, sure take him. If there's a similarly hyped but slightly less elite prospect, let teams throw multiple first rounders at you.

 

[JDM]

If they had shopped the pick, it would be more than a Doug Martin level pick. You could probably get a mid first, a first the next year, and at least 2 seconds. Your comparison isn't a real trade.