Zombo Posted November 29, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 Griffin will break his neck on his first snap behind the firm of Bailey, Erving, Django and Pazstor. Joe Thomas will contain his man and Pryor will be open. Z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 As published in the Harvard Sports Analysis... How to Value NFL Draft Picks Posted on November 30, 2011 by kevinmeers by Kevin Meers https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/ The old system massively over values the earliest picks and significantly undervalues mid-to-late round picks. The regression line is clearly a better predictor of future value than the old chart. A. First question: is this indeed the chart that essentially the NFL GMs use to value a trade proposal involving draft picks? B. OK then....now tell us, what would it take for us then to move our Philly Pick up into the #2 slot under this chart. Make your best assumption about where the Eagles pick may land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingfooldoug Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 According to reports, RG3PO is cleared for contact and will be in competition with Kess and McClown for the starting QB position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 except Hue said on the news that there is no competition... No QB competition distraction; Hue Jackson names RG III starter ... www.espn.com/.../no-qb-competition-distraction-hue-jackson-names-rg-i... Aug 8, 2016 - In a move that ends speculation and frees Robert Griffin III from a mental burden, Cleveland Browns coach Hue Jackson named RG III his ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wargograw Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 In a 3.5 month old interview... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 As long as this line is as porous as it is I think you've got to finish out the year with McCown. I mean this guy's both old and he stinks, but he's tough. Let him take all the punishment until you can get that line addressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoorta Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 I saw Hue cry about losing??????? So Tom Hanks was right. There's no crying in baseball. It must be for football. I can't say it made me proud to see our 0-12 HC shed tears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 A. First question: is this indeed the chart that essentially the NFL GMs use to value a trade proposal involving draft picks? B. OK then....now tell us, what would it take for us then to move our Philly Pick up into the #2 slot under this chart. Make your best assumption about where the Eagles pick may land. A. The Harvard is the chart I think we would use when trading up... no guarantee the holder of #2 would agree with our choice. When trading down I assume even we would try to use the old chart since it results in more picks. But setting that aside for now... B. The #2 is valued at 435.7. Assume the Eagles finish with the 12th worst record.... #12 is valued at 283.6... so need another 152.1. That might well be met by the Titans' 2nd rounder we own. But were I the holder of the #2 then I'd argue for it to be valued at 494.6... the value of the #1 overall... leaving us needing 211.0. That takes our 1st pick in round 2 (175.2) and we're still 25.8 shy.... which could come from a 7th round comp pick, if we are awarded one, otherwise it'd be our 7th rounder from the Colts... probably #240 or so after all the compensatories are handed out. So in summary: #2 <+++> #12 + #33 + #240-ish or R1.12 + R2.01 + R7.20(?) by the Harvard chart would be a starting negotiating point... but now for "the rub". But by the old, "JJ chart"? #2 (2600) <+++> #12 (1200) + #33 (590) + 2018 #1 (510*) + #65 (265) + #141 (35) or R1.12 + R2.01 + 2018 R1.09 + R3.01 + R5.01 *Note: Future picks are generally discounted by one round per year, so our 2018 #1 carries a 2nd round value. I'm guesstimating we have the 9th worst record in 2017. The final deal? Somewhere between the two I'd think... depending upon how much other interest the #2 overall is drawing. How much are you willing to spend? And for what? Here's our current estimate of 2017 picks: http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2016/08/what_picks_do_the_browns_have.html In a 3.5 month old interview... Why would anything have changed? In Hue's eyes the only QB investment that has not been well vetted is RG3... "the chosen one"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 When googling our pick inventory for 2017 up popped the deal we struck with the Titans when we traded out of #8. Thought it'd be interesting to check the charts for an actual deal. Browns Traded • 2016 first round pick (#8-Jack Conklin) • 2016 sixth round pick (#176-Andy Janovich) to Titans for • 2016 first round pick (#15-Corey Coleman) • 2016 third round pick (#76-Shon Coleman) • 2017 second round pick (?-?) on 2016-04-28 So per the Harvard: we gave up: 318.0 + 50.9 = 368.9 and we got: 264.7 + 116.4 + 111.6 = 492.7 But by the JJ: we gave up: 1400 + 20.6 = 1420.6 and we got: 1050 + 210 + 185 = 1445 I think we know which chart the Titans use... how about the Eagles? Traded • 2016 first round pick (#2-Carson Wentz) • 2017 fourth round pick (?#102-->#134?) to Eagles for • 2016 first round pick (#8-Jack Conklin) • 2016 third round pick (#77-Daryl Worley) • 2016 fourth round pick (#100-Connor Cook) • 2017 first round pick (?#12-->#44?) • 2018 second round pick (?#52-->#116?) on 2016-04-20 Harvard: we gave: 435.7 + 72.6 = 508.3 we got : 318.0 + 115.4 + 95.5 + 155.9 + 84.0 = 768.8 JJ: we gave: 2600 + 39 = 2639 we got : 1400 + 205 + 100 + 460 + 62 = 2227 Looks like a deal two different chart users would strike... Conclusion: We need to do more deals with the Titans... Eagles? Not so much... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 When googling our pick inventory for 2017 up popped the deal we struck with the Titans when we traded out of #8. Thought it'd be interesting to check the charts for an actual deal. Browns Traded • 2016 first round pick (#8-Jack Conklin) • 2016 sixth round pick (#176-Andy Janovich) to Titans for • 2016 first round pick (#15-Corey Coleman) • 2016 third round pick (#76-Shon Coleman) • 2017 second round pick (?-?) on 2016-04-28 So per the Harvard: we gave up: 318.0 + 50.9 = 368.9 and we got: 264.7 + 116.4 + 111.6 = 492.7 But by the JJ: we gave up: 1400 + 20.6 = 1420.6 and we got: 1050 + 210 + 185 = 1445 I think we know which chart the Titans use... how about the Eagles? Traded • 2016 first round pick (#2-Carson Wentz) • 2017 fourth round pick (?#102-->#134?) to Eagles for • 2016 first round pick (#8-Jack Conklin) • 2016 third round pick (#77-Daryl Worley) • 2016 fourth round pick (#100-Connor Cook) • 2017 first round pick (?#12-->#44?) • 2018 second round pick (?#52-->#116?) on 2016-04-20 Harvard: we gave: 435.7 + 72.6 = 508.3 we got : 318.0 + 115.4 + 95.5 + 155.9 + 84.0 = 768.8 JJ: we gave: 2600 + 39 = 2639 we got : 1400 + 205 + 100 + 460 + 62 = 2227 Looks like a deal two different chart users would strike... Conclusion: We need to do more deals with the Titans... Eagles? Not so much... Why the disparity in these two charts anyway? Anyone know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 The Harvard one was created from scratch a few years ago using data of how good players are on average when drafted at each spot, while the other is basically the one dreamt up by the jimmy johnson and the cowboys ~25 years ago. It may have been valid then but times have changed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingfooldoug Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Hue isn't naming RG3PO to start.....yet. It's supposed to be open among the 3. MKesin? I think he just wants to keep the bungholes guessing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 The Harvard one was created from scratch a few years ago using data of how good players are on average when drafted at each spot, while the other is basically the one dreamt up by the jimmy johnson and the cowboys ~25 years ago. It may have been valid then but times have changed? Exactly... who knows the 'Boys basis for the one they cooked up? These values are completely arbitrary: there is no statistical evidence to back up the relative values of these draft picks. There is no reason why the 156th pick is 100 times less valuable than the first overall pick. “The Chart” simply dictates how much each pick is worth. These values also have no grounding in the real worth of the players drafted at a given pick. This system is a ridiculous way to value picks because there is no reason behind the values it gives. There must be a better approach. On the other hand Harvard used Pro Football Reference's Career Average Value (CAV) rating of pro careers. Taking data from www.pro-football-reference.com, I have created a much better system that more accurately values each pick in the NFL draft, similar to the work done by Chase Stuart. Pro-Football-Reference uses a metric called Career Approximate Value (CAV) that allows one to compare players across seasons and positions. It is not meant as the ultimate NFL statistic. It is useful for comparing large groups of players across time and positions, which is exactly the objective here. Using data from 1980 through 2005, I analyzed each overall draft pick from 1 to 224 (the 32nd pick of the 7th round in today’s draft). I found the mean, median, and standard deviation of the CAV for each pick from those 25 years, creating one set of data that represented the historical value of each pick. I then found the mean, median and standard deviation for this new dataset to determine the expected value of a normal draft pick. I then used that normal pick to standardize my data, finding the percentage value over average, or Career Approximate Value Over Average (CAVOA), for every pick in the draft. For example, the first overall pick, historically, has had a mean CAV of 66.7. The standard draft pick had a mean CAV of 15.03. . Thus the first overall pick was 443.39% more valuable than the standard pick. Using this method, I found the CAVOA of every pick in the draft, and then regressed it against overall pick number. The regression equation was with an R2 of 0.91599. The R2 means that the variance in overall pick number explains 91.599% of the variance in CAVOA. Using this equation, I found the expected CAVOA for every pick in the draft. All excerpts are from: https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/ Interestingly the original work used a cut off 6 years before the paper's 2011 publication date. I assume this was to limit/reduce the impact of incomplete careers still in progress. Most certainly the work has been updated since then... probably continuously by true believers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jiggins7919 Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 I was bitching about the bye week all year long because I thought we really needed it earlier in the season (which we DID), but it now arrives at a pretty good time. With RG III recently being totally cleared for play, the bye week will grant us an additional THREE practices before we play the struggling Bengals in Cleveland. When you're 0-12, there are NO games which "look good", but this one will be about as good as it gets for us. The Bengals play the Eagles this weekend, who are fighting for their playoff life (probably no chance, but still technically in it). I'm figuring on the Bengals losing yet again, as it continues to look ugly in Cincy. By all accounts, RG III has been keeping his head in the game and has been a terrific teammate. Just how much knowledge he retained about the offense is yet to be determined, but I'm guessing he knows how much is riding on this opportunity, and he'll attack the classroom and practice field with vigor. Now that we've lost John Greco, it's safe to say that our OL will be playing even worse, and yes that's possible. Our QB won't have the luxury of a running game, and Kevin Hogan won't be catching anybody off guard with his running plays. Does RG III's athletic ability give us a better chance to pick up first downs? It probably does, but even when Robert was playing, it appeared to me that he struggled with knowing when to run, and knowing when to stay in the pocket. It seemed like he was FORCING himself to stay in the pocket, and I'm not so sure that's a good thing. You gash the defense a few times for QB runs, and you make THEM adjust to US. I thought Cody was out for the year, and he still might be. Two concussions in 30 days is no joke, especially for a young kid. Would Hue really want to risk putting him out there again? I honestly don't know. Concussions aside, would it even be the right choice? Cody appeared to regress the last two times I saw him play, and I'm not sure if our receivers weren't getting open, or if he was hesitant to throw. Whatever the case, he sure as hell wasn't getting rid of the ball. I'd LOVE to see a film breakdown of his last game to see if we had open guys. The last film breakdown I DID see showed that it wasn't entirely his fault. Cody definitely missed two EXCELLENT deep opportunities, but there were also a ton of times where we had nobody open, or Erving just completely sucked. If I was a betting man, I'd say RG III plays against the Bengals. Hue Jackson reminded everyone recently that Robert won the job in camp and preseason practice, and analysts who saw practice stated the competition "wasn't even close." RG III...may the force be with you. You won't have a running game, you'll be under constant pressure, and you're probably going to be trailing on the scoreboard from the get-go. Let's see what ya got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 A. The Harvard is the chart I think we would use when trading up... no guarantee the holder of #2 would agree with our choice. When trading down I assume even we would try to use the old chart since it results in more picks. But setting that aside for now... B. The #2 is valued at 435.7. Assume the Eagles finish with the 12th worst record.... #12 is valued at 283.6... so need another 152.1. That might well be met by the Titans' 2nd rounder we own. But were I the holder of the #2 then I'd argue for it to be valued at 494.6... the value of the #1 overall... leaving us needing 211.0. That takes our 1st pick in round 2 (175.2) and we're still 25.8 shy.... which could come from a 7th round comp pick, if we are awarded one, otherwise it'd be our 7th rounder from the Colts... probably #240 or so after all the compensatories are handed out. So in summary: #2 <+++> #12 + #33 + #240-ish or R1.12 + R2.01 + R7.20(?) by the Harvard chart would be a starting negotiating point... but now for "the rub". But by the old, "JJ chart"? #2 (2600) <+++> #12 (1200) + #33 (590) + 2018 #1 (510*) + #65 (265) + #141 (35) or R1.12 + R2.01 + 2018 R1.09 + R3.01 + R5.01 *Note: Future picks are generally discounted by one round per year, so our 2018 #1 carries a 2nd round value. I'm guesstimating we have the 9th worst record in 2017. The final deal? Somewhere between the two I'd think... depending upon how much other interest the #2 overall is drawing. How much are you willing to spend? And for what? Here's our current estimate of 2017 picks: http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2016/08/what_picks_do_the_browns_have.html Why would anything have changed? In Hue's eyes the only QB investment that has not been well vetted is RG3... "the chosen one"... Well, giving up #12, #33 and a 7th rounder would certainly be more palatable than having to give up say #12, #33 #45, #67. In your scenario we could still keep our mid second round pick and our top 3rd round pick. I would make that trade....to get both Garrett/Allen and Trubisky. Sure. And, you know...it may in fact have been the Browns FO plan all along to stockpile picks just so they could do something like this. Do you think they had this kind of foresight? (of course, they have to get the 9ers/Bears to go along with the deal) And yes, I think now that there is no doubt that a system devised by a Harvard geek....is going to be followed by our Harvard geeks. And being one that has referred to the PFR CA a lot, yes, I have to go along with that system. Thanks for the dope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 And, you know...it may in fact have been the Browns FO plan all along to stockpile picks just so they could do something like this. Do you think they had this kind of foresight? Ah...........................................................................No! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 If I was a betting man, I'd say RG III plays against the Bengals. Hue Jackson reminded everyone recently that Robert won the job in camp and preseason practice, and analysts who saw practice stated the competition "wasn't even close." RG III...may the force be with you. You won't have a running game, you'll be under constant pressure, and you're probably going to be trailing on the scoreboard from the get-go. Let's see what ya got. Agree... nice analysis... And given the OL injuries you mention, may I suggest some designed roll outs? I'd even put the Hogan-esque read option in... bigly. No time to coddle RG... let's see him in all his potential glory and how well he protects himself with smart running. Do you think they had this kind of foresight? (of course, they have to get the 9ers/Bears to go along with the deal) Thanks for the dope. Foresight? Yes, but they are not pulling the trigger on a deal that requires substantially more than the Harvard chart's minimum... and that's what it is. It takes two to tango. Would you pull the trigger on the old, JJ chart deal? You're welcome, Gip... enjoy the follow up analysis of our 2016 pick trades Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Agree... nice analysis... And given the OL injuries you mention, may I suggest some designed roll outs? I'd even put the Hogan-esque read option in... bigly. No time to coddle RG... let's see him in all his potential glory and how well he protects himself with smart running. Foresight? Yes, but they are not pulling the trigger on a deal that requires substantially more than the Harvard chart's minimum... and that's what it is. It takes two to tango. Would you pull the trigger on the old, JJ chart deal? No, but I would under the Harvard chart. The question is: would the 49ers or Bears do it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 No, but I would under the Harvard chart. The question is: would the 49ers or Bears do it? Not likely... if for no other reason than there would be other, better offers. How many and how much better? Depends on who we pluck at #1... So the question back to you is: How much more than the Harvard deal are you willing to offer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombo Posted November 30, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Griffin will break his neck on his first snap behind the firm of Bailey, Erving, Django and Pazstor. Joe Thomas will contain his man and Pryor will be open. Z I stand corrected. In Pluto's column today he says Cooper will start at RG. So it'll be Thomas-Django-Cam-Coop-Paz. I'm sure that will work out fine. Z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoorta Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Not likely... if for no other reason than there would be other, better offers. How many and how much better? Depends on who we pluck at #1... So the question back to you is: How much more than the Harvard deal are you willing to offer? Assuming we have the #1, will the Niners or Bears follow Cleveland's lead to amass picks? If we take Mitch, would one of them just take Watson, or want a king's ransom for Garrett? Or the other way around? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Not likely... if for no other reason than there would be other, better offers. How many and how much better? Depends on who we pluck at #1... So the question back to you is: How much more than the Harvard deal are you willing to offer? I dunno. I will have to defer to our Harvard educated front office to make that decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 I stand corrected. In Pluto's column today he says Cooper will start at RG. So it'll be Thomas-Django-Cam-Coop-Paz. I'm sure that will work out fine. Z So, by that you mean: no sacks, 150+ rushing yards vs. Bungles. I am waiting with bated breath for that. (or is it baited breath)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Assuming we have the #1, will the Niners or Bears follow Cleveland's lead to amass picks? If we take Mitch, would one of them just take Watson, or want a king's ransom for Garrett? Or the other way around? That's the franchise question isn't it? I'm not sure either would be after QB leftovers... Watson's stock has fallen plus Kaep has played pretty well and this past Sunday Barkley looked like a freakin' pro.... reminded me of Cousins. Matt made some awesome throws and if Chicago had a WR with hands they win that game. Their corps logged 10 drops... a couple in the endzone. I dunno. I will have to defer to our Harvard educated front office to make that decision. lol... had you said that to begin with, then I'd have gotten more sleep last nite... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Tour, for your sleeping aid, just keep repeating: Pahk your cah in Hahvahd Yahd Again. Pahk your cah in Hahvahd Yahd. Better than Sominex. Funny story....I did once Pahk my cah in Hahvah Yahd. Me and three friends were going to sleep in it overnight. But we got run out of there by the cops. Had to go find a parking garage. The car I had held all of us: 1967 Buick Electra 225 convertible. (I was 22 at the time). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.