A Path To Picking At 15

[DFWJC]

Pat Mahomes is a good example. He went pick to and was traded for pick 27, 91 & future 1st (ended up being pick 22)

Pick 10 = 1300

27 = 680
91 = 136
Total = 716 points

That values the future 1st at just under 600 points which IMO is about right considering they had a good team and Alex Smith who is solid if unspectacular. Based on that I think a reasonable trade with New England might be 15 + 46 (1,490 points) for 10 + 99 + 115 (1,480 points).

Hey Dan. Good stuff

fwiw...for that Mahomes trade.....That's 816 (not 716)

The future 1sts almost always get devalued to between the mid to slightly upper 2nd round.
That's what happened here in the Mahomes trade.....the future 1st got a value of 484 ...or between pick 41 and 42

Not that the chart is the bottom line. Teams value what they value. But they do stick to it pretty closely.
Usually, the team trading up slightly underpays.

I did once see a team overpay more than 5% for the 10th overall pick at QB
Jacksonville paid 108% for the 10th pick...Blaine Gabbert. lol...oops

 

[McKDaddy]

Here is an interesting exercise and one plausible scenario --

I have even considered a scenario where we trade back even further say mid 20's. Yes we would be missing out on some players that I really like .... BUT there seems to be quite a bit of value at positions of need from late round 1 thru top 100 or so. Having ammunition to move around in that range could net a fantastic draft.

 

[Proof]

Not exactly 100% directly in line.....but very close.....say within about +/- 5%...some lower, some higher.
Also, I think that might apply to some in the top 3 vs top 2. Sam Darnold, Goff, and Wentz all were in the 80-90% instead of 95+% match.
Future picks make it less perfect, as you would expect.

But
Jackson (pick 10, btw) was a 95% match
RG3 a 97% match
Watson...95% match
etc

The non-QBs were even more accurate.

Surprising, I know, it's a bit surprising.

Oh, and also...if you get WAY down in the draft (mid 6th to end of 7th)...when little move means 30-100% change of the value....it becomes a blur. At that point, GMs are just throwing in picks to fill the gaps/differences of the real trades in rounds 1-4

I ran all the trades from 2020 thru the entire draft, not just 1st round.
They almost all were at 95-98%, but there were 2-3 that were closer to 90%.
The teams trading up usually were the onces at 95%....so 5% underpay.

Also, once actual players are also involved in a trade as well as picks, it becomes really hard to measure. So if there was a player thrown in, I did not include the trade in the study.

pretty cool. Thanks for sharing

 

[nathanlt]

Don’t pass on a player you love at 10 to get a player you like at 15. That’s all I ask.

Due to the volume available at CB, and the zone scheme, you can't really separate out a corner as being so necessary that you can't trade down.
Adding 3 players in the top 46 is so much better than having only 2 in the top 44.

JOK - Collins or Bolton - Grant is a premium! Or Newsome, Collins/Bolton, Grant. A huge upgrade for the defense, I wouldn't mind trading up from 75 to nab an additional starter like Wilson.

 

[john van brocklin]

Here is an interesting exercise and one plausible scenario --

Lawrence and Wilson go 1-2 and the 49ers really take Jones. Atlanta wants to trade 4 but can't get the king's ransom they almost have to have to do it without looking bad. So they sit there and take Pitts.

The Bengals take Chase at 5 to keep their QB happy. The Dolphins follow with Smith. The Lions take Sewell. The Panthers also don't like their trade options and take Surtain. The Broncos take their QB -- Lance or Fields.

Now the Cowboys sitting at 10 are far enough away from the last QB trade that they can make a good deal but not be pressured to hit a home run. This is the 10th pick rather than top 5.

The Patriots must overpay for a QB, but coming up from 15 to 10, their 2nd round pick is an overpay. They get to 10 without moving a future number 1.

The Cowboys are at 15 and the following are on the board from 11 -- Horn, Parsons, JOK, Collins, Ojulari, Phillips and Slater.

But Waddle would likely go somewhere from 11-14, even if via trade. So would Slater. I think people will be surprised that Darrisaw and Tucker could also be in that mix.

The Cowboys could be looking at a choice among Parsons, JOK, Collins, Moehrig and Horn, though I think the latter will likely have gone. If you like a wild card, they could also consider Ojulari, Phillips and Barmore. I think Phillips is too risky, and I'm not sure they value DT enough to take Barmore, even if they do see him as somewhere near top 15. Parsons might also be gone, especially if I am wrong about a run on OL.

But at 15 JOK, Collins, Ojulari and Moehrig almost certainly would be in play. I could see them taking either of those LBs. In different ways, both could be chess pieces.

Some things I assume -- a 6th QB will be taken before the Cowboys draft in round 2.

A couple of RBs will come off the board late in round 1 or early in round 3. Maybe even one more.

Whether early to mid round 1 or later in the round, there will be a run on OL. I bet as many as 10 are gone by the middle of round 2. Nearly every club has some need for an OL. Seven or so WRs will have gone before 44. Also 1 or 2 TEs.

In other words, at 44, Dallas will certainly have a chance to draft a top 15-20 defender. Given the Pats' number 2, they could be positioned to take another one.

Would you be happy with this choice of options for the first 2 rounds?

1) Parsons, JOK or Collins
2a) Newsome, Farley, Melifonwu or Joseph
2b) Onwuzeriki, McNeil, Nixon, Oweh, Ossai, Basham, Grant or Molden?

I love this line of thinking.
We need to maximize our draft position and not get locked into just taking the best player on our board when it's our turn.
Jimmy was great at this in the early 90s