Wednesday, May 29, 2019

NFL Draft 2019: Who's Screwed Wrap Up


Wrapping up the 3 Part Series

During the 2019 NFL Draft, we tracked each teams’ progress toward picking up players at positions of need.  That’s not such a big deal, right?  Until you start tracking the impact of each player coming off the board before your pick on your ability to meet your teams’ needs.  In the first round, five DE’s flew off the boards…how did that impact the overall supply for the teams who waiting in line desperate of pressure off the EDGE?  Were there enough “quality” DE’s to ensure each team with need got their guy?

We left our pre-Day 3 analysis without reconciliation of how teams in peril of not filling needs ended up at the end of the draft.  Today, we determine conclusively, who’s screwed going into the 2019 season.
Methodology
In summary, we took each NFL team’s top 5 draft needs (ranked from 5 for greatest to 1 least critical) and counted the total number of each position in the top 160 players. 

So, if there was a need for 15 cornerbacks and we counted 10 in the top 160 prospects, the position would be considered a “Critical Position” because there is a 50% deficit of talent to fill the needs. (For detail on the methodology, please follow this link.)


Hit the Phones

These teams either had just enough picks remaining to secure quality prospects for their several Critical Priority needs or their needs were not that urgent.


ATL:  Began Day 3 with Critical Priority Needs at DL (5), CB (3) and LB (2)

Result: 2 out of 3
The Birds used their first pick of Day 3 to address CB depth with Kendell Sheffield of OSU to provide support for Desmond Trufant and Isaiah Oliver.  They then went on to meet their “most critical need” (rated a number “5”) at DL in the form of 6’4” 286 lbs John Cominsky at #135; he has been wreaking havoc at Charleston for the last few years. He immediately adds to an already stout DL rotation.  While I like the Cominsky pick, the team decided not to draft a LB which is not dire since it was a low priority position.  Can’t say I know their backers, but the DLine and defensive backend are both pretty solid.



DAL:  Critical Priority Needs: S (4) and TE (3)
Result: 1 out of 2
While the team picked up two members of The Jacksons (including Papa Joe, one of my sleepers) before addressing the need at safety, they waited until # 213 in the 6th to grab Donovan Wilson (formerly of TAMU), the 11th safety picked that day.  Definitely outside the window of the Top 160 players from our 3 sources, but in this exercise, we just check to see if they address the need before the Top 160, not if they actually pick one from our list of Top 160 players.  Evidently, in Witten they trust because the team didn’t draft any TE despite the pretty obvious need.


NE: Critical Priority Needs: TE (5), DL (4) and S (2)
Results:  1 out of 3
Always the “Get off my lawn” guy of the league, the Pats don’t surprise by refusing to take a TE this draft despite the position being listed as their top priority. Veteran TEs Ben Watson and Austin Seferian-Jenkins will have to hold down the fort this year for the Pats. When it was time to go DL, NE used their 3rd pick of the day to grab Bryon Cowart of Maryland at #159 overall.  This is so Patriot-esque. They took the former top #1 recruit in all of HS football who underperformed mightily in college and was long forgotten by the mainstream.  This is a classic Patriots move; he is all but assured a bust in Canton after Belichik works his mojo on him.  While they picked the need position within the top 160 spots, Cowart was not considered a Top 160 player. And, for their final need of safety they just ignored the position. Hey, who needs safeties anyway?  Especially with McCourty in the last year of a large contract – what’s the problem?  But that’s the Pats.  They make moves like this and still win, so…


NO: Critical Priority Needs: LB (3) and CB (2)
Results:  1 out of 2
First off, the Saints went into Day 3 with not a lot of firepower in terms of draft capital.  However, when you look at their depth chart, there are not a whole lot of pressing needs for the team.  Regardless, they made a couple of trades and, as a result, they added LB depth through Idaho’s Kaden Elliss, whose dad was a 2x Pro Bowler; they didn't feel a lot of pressure as they got him way outside the Top 160 picks (#244).  Depth at CB was not a front office concern as the team didn’t draft any corners.


NYJ: Critical Priority Needs: CB (3) and TE (2)
Results:  2 out of 2
While I was not convinced the need was there, the Jets agreed with the league by picking up a TE in the 4th round at #121 overall, Trevon Wesco from West Virginia, making him their 6th TE on roster (currently trimmed down to 5). At #196, they fulfilled their CB need with Blessuan Austin from Rutgers who has a history of injuries and has missed significant time over his college career; the NYJ doctors evidently gave him the all clear. While there were several CBs drafted after #196 who are capable of participating Day 1, that the Jets GM was fired post draft, shows me their draft can be entirely tossed out in terms of grading.

Start Pointing Fingers

These guys were under the gun with Criticality scores > 100% which means at least one high priority need will likely not get picked because a team has too few picks.  

PHI: Critical Priority Needs: LB (5), S (3) and CB (2)
Results: 0 out of 3
The Eagles couldn’t care less about our little project…Linebacker?  No thanks.  Safety?  Defiant still, they reject the notion of drafting a safety.  The CB cupboard seems stocked right now but there are 4 CBs going into free agency in 2020 and the Eagles salary cap situation looks pretty rough for next year so bringing on a rookie CB to groom would have provided flexibility.

SF: Critical Priority Needs: S (4), CB (3) and DL (2)
Results: 0 for 3
I’m not going to lie, it looks like the Niners have put together a nice roster based on the current depth chart but I don’t know if you start out the day picking a punter.  He may be All-World but they likely could have traded back and still gotten him.  Regarding safeties, they only have 2 coming up for free agency in 2020, so they decided to stand “pat” on their top “priority” position.  They also would not be bullied into rushing to pick a CB, what with Richard Sherman added to the squad to complement Ahkello Witherspoon, so they waited until #198, their last pick of the day to call in Tim Harris out of Virginia. Given neither of their backup DTs participated in more than 25% of the defensive snaps, I can see why perhaps they wanted to increase depth with another guy in the rotation, but they stood pat here, again.  We will see how this all fares for the Niners in 2019.

Polish up the Resume

Although the worst Criticality score that can be calculated is 500%, these teams have been assigned a score of 501% which means they were screwed because they have no remaining quality picks (top 160) with needs multiple needs remaining.

KC: Critical Priority Needs: LB (4) and CB (3)
Results:  1 out of 2
It all started with the decision to use their 3 top 84 picks on WR and S (both had a surplus of acceptable prospects at the time and selection of these positions could have been delayed) and DT, the latter being a timely pickup since the shortage at this position was its worst at the beginning of Day 2.  They struck for a CB with the 201st pick in Rashad Fenton (GO COCKY!!!) so while they didn’t get one of the top propects at CB, they filled the need with a solid player.  Although they chose not to look at LB, now that we know they had an offer on the table for former 1st round pick Darron Lee (recently traded from the Jets), it makes sense they took no action.  Looks like it turned out for them after all.

LAR: Critical Priority Needs: DL (4) and LB (1)
Results:  1 out of 2
So long, Suh and that means Donald and Tanzel Smart (who sat nearly all of 2018 behind Suh) needed some help in the depth department at DT, a position with a critical deficiency of quality players to draft.  After several trades with the Patriots (please see below), they took a liking to Greg Gaines and got him within the first 160 picks at 134.  They took the 243 pick (also from NE) and picked up LB Dakota Allen, the last backer picked in 2019. 




Wrap up:  While many teams filled their priority spots, several were not able to address those we deemed critical due to lack of top tier talent to fill those needs.  If a team was not able to address their critical positions within the first 160 picks, we worry about talent quality at a position of need.  But we will have to wait until the end of the upcoming season to see which teams got it right and which teams should have pulled the trigger faster.  The wins and losses are the ultimate validator of who is a contender and who is a pretender.  



Bonus commentary:  What is up with the Rams and Patriots trades?

These two teams pulled off 3 trades on draft day: 
  • Pats get #45; Rams get #56 and #101
  • Pats get #101 (!) and #133; Rams get #97 and #162
  • Pats get  #162 (!) and #167 ; Rams get #134 and #243
The exclamation points indicate some Looney Toons stuff going on here.  Did the Rams just send back 2 of the picks they got from the Pats, thereby negating the impact of those selections on the overall outcome?
Let's cross multiply:
  • Pats get #45; Rams get #56
  • Pats get  #133; Rams get #97
  • Pats get  #167; Rams get #134 and #243
No idea how to look at this trade for value.  If I look at the contract values at those slots, I get the Pats got about a 15% premium per player. Can any of you draftniks provide clarity?



*******************************************************************

Check out the 3rd Annual People's Top 100 - NFL Draft 2019





Monday, May 27, 2019

UPDATED: The 2017 DraftTwitter Top 100 in Review

Time for a Checkup

In 2017, I released the first DraftTwitter Top 100 survey for mooks like you to be heard and there was solid participation. As a result of that exercise, there have been two more such survey's.

Although the Third Annual People's Top 100 (formerly the DraftTwitter Top 100) was published just recently (you can see it here) I wanted to give an update on progress for the 27 scouts who participated in the original version of the survey.   Of course, we are supposed to wait to review drafts after the third year but why wait? 


Methodology

Anyone who has been around awhile understands the measure used to determine a player's value is his % of offensive or defensive snaps.  And because a 2nd year safety or offensive lineman will get more snaps than a rotational defensive lineman, the snap %s are rated on a peer position basis. 

The peer position rankings were integrated into one list based on each player's differential compared to the top player in their position group. 




 Based on the above, each peer position player with the highest % of team snaps will be #1 for that position with a score of 100% .  Every player would then be ranked based on his differential from the position leader.  For example, Tre'Davious White leads the CB group in % snaps and is valued at 100%; the next player in the group, Adoree Jackson's % of defensive snaps was 5% fewer than White's so he is CB2.  Lattimore, CB2, generated a rate equal to 91% of White's and so forth.  

Note:  I had to jack up Mahomes to #1 overall, giving him a 101%.  Not in line with the analysis methodology but no one wants to hear any debate so he's #1. 

The "P-Rank" or Performance Rank reflects the process above.  The DraftTwitter rank is how they were ranked by the scouts in the original report so you can see how each player measured up to our rankings.

Scout Performance

The scouts invited to vote were primarily DraftTwitter maniacs just like you, most amateur, some professional. The ranking methodology above was applied to evaluate the strength of each voter's selections based on the 2018 season.  By way of example, your number 1 pick would be worth 100 points, your 2nd would be worth 99 all the way down to your 100th pick which would be worth 1 point.  To regard for the % snap valuation method,  if you selected Myles Garrett #1 overall in 2017 you were granted 100 points since you would get 100% of his 1st overall pick credit of 100 points.  If you had a player at #1 overall who earned only 85% based on snap % value, your 1st round pick would be worth only 85 points (1st overall pick value of 100 points times 85% snap % value). 

Each scout received a score based on the aggregate value their entire Top 100 (their Raw Score). Then that score was adjusted downward for each player in a scout's top 100 who was not in the actual final aggregate Top 100 (and thus, the scout got 0 points) and also players selected by the scout who did not generate any meaningful snap count % in 2018 (their Scrubbed Score).
 This gives us two scores which are averaged for the final rank.  Scouts are ranked below...(drumroll...)


Notes




  • Attack of the Killer B's - The above scores are for scouts who averaged a "B" or better, based on my grading system.  While we still have a long way to go while monitoring the careers of the 2017 draft class so these rankings will definitely change over the years.
  • The A Team -  Mathbomb emerged as top dog (not a shock).  With Brian J and Jonah Tuls rounding out the top 3.
  • Fewest Misses shocked the world (well, not really) by having zero misses...that is, every player he selected had a % snap count in 2018.  Everyone else had a player who was injured, is not a contributing player or is no longer in the league.  GMs would love to have that kind of track record. 
  • Miss Me with All That -  Speaking of misses, the top half of the list (the B grades) had far fewer misses than those in the bottom half  (not shown) who had 10% more misses on average. 
  • Joe's over Pros - Based on the information, it looks like the professional contributors were out gunned by the amateurs...since I won't be showing grades below a B, you're going to have to trust me. 
That's were we are two years into the 2017 draft class.  Can't wait until this time next year when we can see how they look after the requisite 3 years in the league!

Thanks!

Updated 7/21/19

Jim Coburn asked for the detail on the top evaluators by position through 2 seasons and here are the results. 

Note: CB reflects a tie for first between NFLDS and MJKist.

The table above shows the results per position in terms of an evaluator getting 1st, 2nd or 3rd best score.   If we award 3 points for first place, 2 points for second and 1 point for third, the table looks like this.



Thanks for your support and if you want to be included in the survey and receive a ballot for the 4th Annual survey for the 2020 NFL draft, please let me know by leaving a comment below. 






Friday, May 10, 2019

Building the Perfect Beast - Breakdown of Position Salaries for NFL Contenders vs. Pretenders for 2018

Mo' Money, Mo Problems

Decisions, decisions.  NFL GMs are tasked with spending an enormous amount of money to compile a winning team.  Obviously, the salary cap provides an additional challenge limiting the amount that can be spent.  
I took the 2018 payrolls listed on www.spotrak.com and compared the average salaries across all positions to the spending habits of the successful teams making the playoffs (contenders) and those who brought up the rear (pretenders).

"Da Numbahs"


Of course since this is based on averages, teams come in at different values around the mean. For example,  within the QB average for Contenders we have the lowest QB salaried team (Baltimore) and the second highest (New England).  But for the 12 teams making the playoffs in 2018, the average is $17.9MM for QBs.  Pretenders spent more for  QBs at $18.4MM.  But looking at the entire league, both groups paid less than average at the QB position.










The table above shows the percentage above average the test groups spent in 2018.

Here is a graphical representation of the data:


Observations

  • "You the Real MVP" - In 2018 Contenders paid way more of a premium than Pretenders for wide receivers, 19.1% more (11.3% above average compared to 7.8%  below average, respectively), than any other position.
    • Clearly, playoff teams value veteran, experienced receivers who command a higher salary.

  • You Don't Have to Overpay the Quarterback - While QB is considered the most important position in all team sports, neither side really broke the bank for signal callers even paying below average in both groups.
    • Since this would mean the teams in the middle are paying a premium for signal callers, perhaps the idea that overpaying your QB doesn't leave much money to build around him is true...

  • The Rodney Dangerfield Award - Although WRs are valued the most by Playoff Teams in terms of paying premium salaries, the widest salary differential came at the Tight End position and not because the Contenders overpaid.  Quite the opposite; they came in at only 1.1% higher than average.  It's the Pretenders who really undervalue the TE position coming in at 19.2% under the average league TE salary.  
    • This represents the largest "premium" the Contenders paid,  but, in true winner fashion, they don't have to pay big bucks since the market is undervalued.  Schmartz!

  • As a Jets Fan, This Particularly Worries Me  - The position the Pretenders really valued (or should I say, overvauled) in 2018 was Running Back.  If you are an offensive player with a 3 in the tens digit of your uniform, go immediately to your nearest crappy team -  they will back up the Brinks truck for you, paying a 19.8% premium.
    • Contenders likely look for younger RBs on rookie contracts or scout out talented vets buried in the depth chart to secure a 7.5% discount.

  • Cliche, but... - Coaches always tell us, "There are three phases to the game: offense, defense and SPECIAL TEAMS."  Contenders embrace this by paying their Kickers, Punters and Long Snappers 5.2% above league average for that position.  But do Pretenders listen? No.  Pretenders don't have time for those throw away positions...they are too busy collecting bottles and cans to pay for that running back over there!
    • The differential on specialists is 9.7%. which, evidently, goes a long way.

  • The only other positions Contenders pay a premium for are:
    • Defensive Backs are both respected by Contenders who pay 1.6% on of every dollar and disrespected (I cringed just writing that) by Pretenders who have alligator arms to the tune of paying less than 4.9% than the league.  
    • Offensive Linemen are so close to the mean on both sides with the lowest differential of 1.4% between Contender and Pretender salaries, this obviously comes down to coaching and scouting for the playoff teams to get more for their money.

Position Value Table



The data on the left reflects the order of importance of position players for Contenders; the right, Pretenders.  Everything the Pretenders love to wine and dine (RB/FB, LB and DL) the Contenders take out on cheap dates.

Conclusion  

Not sure I can draw a conclusion from these numbers.  Last year's survey of salaries by position had totally different results.  Perhaps the teams shake up their focus from year to year prioritizing different positions.  Or maybe it's all random.  Although there is no material statistical correlation between Team Winning Percentage and Position Salary, it seems the winning formula in 2018 lies in the allocation of salaries, which, as always, relies on the talent evaluation and negotiating skill of the GM.  Perhaps an analysis of GMs would be a better way to forecast team success.   But, that would be boring as hell.

**************************************
Coming up next:

Review of the 2017 People's Top 100 3 years later!






Wednesday, May 8, 2019

The Third Annual People's NFL Draft Big Board

Third Time is a Charm?

The NFL Draft is a couple of weeks on the shelf so what better time than now to show off the Third Annual Top 100 Big Board for the people, by the people!  The outpouring for support was tremendous with college football talent evaluators from all over the world offering their input into the aggregate Top 100 prospects in the 2019 NFL Draft.

Experiencing Technical Difficulties...Please Stand By

For the prior editions of the Top 100 (2017 seen here and 2018 seen here), we released the Pre-Combine list immediately before the Underwear Olympics and the Final Survey was distributed prior to the Draft.  Unfortunately, due to a technical error totally on my part, release of this, the Final Top 100, was delayed and I estimate about half the evaluators had glitches in their ballots.  I wholeheartedly apologize to one and all; many lessons learned.  

But enough self loathing...ON TO THE TOP 100!!!

The Deal

Here's the deal...talent evaluators were asked to provide their Top 100 to be aggregated to represent the choices of the people.  The evaluators are regular Jill's and Joe's like you who have just one thing in common...a love of the NFL draft!  

They painstakingly populated the ballot (drop and drag is coming next year, I promise!) from #1 (100 points) all the way to #100 (1 point).  The scores for each player were averaged out with the Top 100 being selected to the final list.  

Who's Responsible?

Here are the evaluators for the pre and post Combine ballots:

All of the above are top quality guys who gave up their time and brain cells to make this project continue for another year.  Thank you all!

The Top 100

The table below lists the Top 100 with their ranking in the Pre-Draft ballot (found here);  their final average score is found in the last column. 




Notes

  • I'm Still Number ONE - Alabama DT Quinnen Williams ended where he started at the number one spot overall.  Not that it was easy as he beat out Nick Bosa of Ohio State by just 0.22 points!
  • NCSU OL Garret Bradbury was a favorite late riser for the People, jumping to #13 overall without even placing in the Top 100 in the pre Combine list.
  • Florida EDGE rusher Jachai Polite would sink the farthest, dropping 46 spots from #8 overall to 54 on our list; Polite would like to have a do-over on the Combine, I think. 
  • Steady Eddies on our list, those who remained nearly unchanged over our two surveys in the Top 20 were:
    • Unchanged 
      • Williams (remained at #1)
      • Bosa (remained unchanged at #2)
      • Kansas State OL Dalton Risner (unchanged at #20)
    • Moved up or down just 1 space
      • Kentucky EDGE rusher Josh Allen (down 1 to #4)
      • Florida State EDGE Brian Burns (up 1 to #5)
      • Mississippi State DT Jeffery Simmons fell one spot to #17 (despite an ACL injury)
      • Arizona State WR N'Keal Harry took a step forward to #18



Scout's Honor

This Top 100 will have periodic reviews to see how our picks stood up against the players actually drafted into the NFL.  To compare talent evaluators in selecting the Top 100, we judge them based on the lowest variance from the average.  


  • Blue= Methodical Analysts:  I know I told them to have fun, but some guys just have no chill. Good job for coming in at the top tier which means you were very practical...NOW LOOSEN UP!
  • Green = Mullet Analysts: They can party and take care of business at the same time.  Solid analysis with a few curveball picks sprinkled around.
  • Yellow= James Dean Analysts: These Rebels have a cause. They are going to tear down the establishment and make sure their Top 100 reflects their own thoughts, not those of the talking heads on the four letter network.
  • Orange=Maverick Analysts:  These guys likely couldn't pick Mel Kiper's hair out of a line up and certainly couldn't tell you what his top 100 looked like.  These guys watch their own game footage and make their own decisions without other people's lists as a template.  We need more people like this!
No one "wins" or is right or wrong here, they just mixed it up more or less.  In the coming years, we will keep track of this draft, comparing the evaluators to each other as well as looking at how well the People's draft, as a whole, fares to the actual NFL draft in terms of player contribution to the team justifying their draft selection.

Thanks!
********************************************************************

Next up: 

Bang for the Buck - How NFL Contenders Spend Money vs Pretenders

And

Review of the 2017 People's Top 100 3 years later!