Interesting NFL Draft Value chart (pick values)

[TT1]

http://bluejackets.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=722857

In this vid Jarmo Kekalainen (8:05) mentions the chart when he refused a deal, it's kinda interesting to see how little value alot of the late 1st pick's have. For example, if Montreal wanted to trade down from their #26 pick for Buffalo's #31 + #61 Buffalo would be giving up 200 pts of value, valuewise Buffalo's #49 + #61 would be a fair deal.

a few other fair deals (approx.) for Montreal's #26 pick would be:

Nashville's #42 + #72
San Jose's #51 + #53 (SJ overpay's by 60 pts)

have GM's been overpaying for pick's all this time?

EDIT: this is a pretty accurate NHL chart

I found this chart a few years ago. I think it's the most accurate.

Click to read more...

 

[Woodhouse]

Why would anyone care about an NFL trade value chart when there are already more relevant NHL charts out there? Like this, for example:

 

[TT1]

That chart is even more brutal value-wise for trades. My question still stands, have GM's always been overpaying for picks? Cus i can clearly remember alot of 2 midd 2nds for late 1st trades going down.

If we were to go by that chart then the #26 pick would only fetch a midd 2nd + a late 4th

 

[ShadowDuck]

In the NFL, players in the 1st 3 rounds could be expected to day 1 starters, and 4th rounders are expected to compete for starting jobs.

Aka - You can't compare the NFL chart to NHL.

 

[EichHart]

Why would anyone care about an NFL trade value chart when there are already more relevant NHL charts out there? Like this, for example:

According to this chart our 3 2nd rounders this year should be enough to move up to the 7th/8th slot.

 

[TT1]

yea the NFL chart seems more accurate when it comes to pick for pick deals that have been done

 

[DoubleDouble*]

Also, I feel like the NHL draft has moreup and down years. The NFL is more stable.

A 1st overall in 2009 is probably worth a lot more than a 1st overall this year.

 

[Bryzard of Oz]

In the NFL, players in the 1st 3 rounds could be expected to day 1 starters, and 4th rounders are expected to compete for starting jobs.

Aka - You can't compare the NFL chart to NHL.

This.

In the NFL you are drafting men who have been playing at the second highest level in the world for a number of years, not 18 year old boys who haven't fully grown yet. If your picks in round 1 or 2 aren't on the field opening day, you screwed up

 

[Mc5RingsAndABeer]

Why would anyone care about an NFL trade value chart when there are already more relevant NHL charts out there? Like this, for example:

This doesn't really work for the reasons they outlined in their paper:

We note that GP is an imperfect measure of comparison and that not all games played are equivalent; 500 games by a first line forward who scores 30 goals per season is not the same as 500 by a third line checking forward. For example, Ziggy Palffy a forward played 684 games and had 713 points while Kent Manderville, also a forward, played in 646 games but had only 104 points. However GP is the chosen measure since it allows for a comparison of careers across positions

Players near the top of the draft usually contribute a lot more than players taken later (on a per game or overall basis). I think if you squared all of the values it would be a little more accurate with real life.

 

[Woodhouse]

According to this chart our 3 2nd rounders this year should be enough to move up to the 7th/8th slot.

yea the NFL chart seems more accurate when it comes to pick for pick deals that have been done

Buffalo could still trade 31, 39, 49 (1510) for 7 (1500) with the NFL chart, so I don't see the difference, but at least the NHL chart used NHL data, albeit dated. I never said the example was good, just that the NHL chart would've been a better place to start discussion and that my example was among the first returned in a quick search for NHL charts.

What I meant without saying it was that the NFL draft is completely different from the NHL draft in that NFL teams are filling immediate holes and can get starters/contributors in the second and third rounds regularly, so I don't see the relevance of comparing the drafts and their trade value charts, when the NHL drafts younger and likely has different success/bust rates, thus making for different values between the leagues.

 

[Satan]

I thought this was an NHL forum but now I see an NFL chart that's kind of confusing.

 

[calder candidate]

I think this chart is a good guide line but you can't be added the value, No one would trade the 1st overall for 18 7th round pick...

If I'm trading down From 26 (297) for 31(255) +61(175)
So I giving a player that as a better chance of making the NHL for 2 players with a lesser chance... it's Quantity for Quality... So GM aren't always overpaying

so 297pts for 430pts doesn't make sense math wise but value might be closer I would be cosidering that I'm Losing 42pts and 122pts I would probably use a multipling factor for the second pick since it is 2 pick vs. one. Other factors could come in to play, # of pick team, if the team is rebuiling or a contender and how deep the draft is.

297pts for 255pts+175pts =430pts
297 + 42 + (122 X.6)*= 412pts for 255+175= 430pts
*used .6 at ramdom

but this make more sense to me...

 

[Paxon]

I like this chart, because it's based on actual trades rather than a statistical analysis of the value of players associated with draft positions. There's not a great sample size, but I think it gives a more accurate idea of what kinds of pick packages get the deal done when teams have mutual interest in movement:

http://www.broadstreethockey.com/2013/4/25/4262594/nhl-draft-pick-value-trading-up

Schucker's chart is based on a statistical analysis of players drafted between 1988 and 1997, attempting to associate the value of a pick with the value of players selected at that pick, I believe by measuring the amount of games played by those players. That type of analysis may be worthwhile to tell you how you should value draft picks, but it doesn't tell you how GM's do value draft picks. If you're trying to figure what will actually get a trade done, I think using past trades makes more sense. Either way, the last two CBA's have changed the value of draft picks and the scouting world has improved immensely from 1988, so even if you prefer the Shucker methodology, the data is outdated.

 

[calder candidate]

Why would anyone care about an NFL trade value chart when there are already more relevant NHL charts out there? Like this, for example:

This chart is way to linear if your comparing two pick that are close it ok like 34 with 38 it might be ok but value is more expotentiel when your comaping 34 to 171

Also doesn't make sense that 66th is more valueble than 57th there isn't much difference but 66th can't be more valuble...

 

[NikF]

You have to also keep in mind if a team is trading up to select their 8th ranked player on the final list at spot 26 then the chart doesn't recognize the fact that in the team's mind they're essentially trading up to pick the 8th best player in the draft. A chart would be useful in determining what the going rate should roughly be for a certain pick if it were to be traded, however if a team is targeting a specific player that is much higher on their final list then the chart by itself can't portray the value of the pick to that team.

 

[SI90]

I always thought the NFL "value" chart was odd but all the GMs and NFL seem to follow it.

What if there is an incredible deep draft with a 10+ sure fire stars vs a weak draft where there is only a top 1-3 and the rest are a shot in the dark?


My point is that it should depend on the prospect available.

 

[Woodhouse]

I like this chart, because it's based on actual trades rather than a statistical analysis of the value of players associated with draft positions. There's not a great sample size, but I think it gives a more accurate idea of what kinds of pick packages get the deal done when teams have mutual interest in movement:

http://www.broadstreethockey.com/2013/4/25/4262594/nhl-draft-pick-value-trading-up

Schucker's chart is based on a statistical analysis of players drafted between 1988 and 1997, attempting to associate the value of a pick with the value of players selected at that pick, I believe by measuring the amount of games played by those players. That type of analysis may be worthwhile to tell you how you should value draft picks, but it doesn't tell you how GM's do value draft picks. If you're trying to figure what will actually get a trade done, I think using past trades makes more sense. Either way, the last two CBA's have changed the value of draft picks and the scouting world has improved immensely from 1988, so even if you prefer the Shucker methodology, the data is outdated.

Hehe, that's the one I initially thought of, but forgot which outlet it was published on.

 

[Brooklanders*]

This.

In the NFL you are drafting men who have been playing at the second highest level in the world for a number of years, not 18 year old boys who haven't fully grown yet. If your picks in round 1 or 2 aren't on the field opening day, you screwed up

Its not only that the hockey pool is so much bigger than the NFL. The NFL scouts are also much better and more accurate. The testing for the NFL is much more appropriate for the job they do. The combine is actually a very useful tool. The NHL in this category seems useless. They have yet to figured out a fair and consistent way to measure a players ability. You see a lot more NHL busts.

 

[Brooklanders*]

I always thought the NFL "value" chart was odd but all the GMs and NFL seem to follow it.

What if there is an incredible deep draft with a 10+ sure fire stars vs a weak draft where there is only a top 1-3 and the rest are a shot in the dark?

They take that in consideration. The chart is merely a guide its not concrete. The trade for RG3 went off the board as did Sammy Watkins and Julio Jones. Sometimes teams overpay and sometimes they undervalue but the chart is a good measure on your return.

 

[Mathletic]

thanks for the link, I'm surprised they'd show actual discussions. I'm surprised by the amount of teams that want to move up. I always took for granted there were more sellers than buyers at the draft. Could be an odd year though.

 

[Hiishawk]

People should remember that the real value is not in the draft position but in the team's ranking of the player. If a player you rank at 6 is available at 14 and you trade up to pick him at 14, you are actually trading up- in your team's opinion- to the draft-value position of 6.

 

[melinko]

Its not only that the hockey pool is so much bigger than the NFL. The NFL scouts are also much better and more accurate. The testing for the NFL is much more appropriate for the job they do. The combine is actually a very useful tool. The NHL in this category seems useless. They have yet to figured out a fair and consistent way to measure a players ability. You see a lot more NHL busts.

NFL scouts have less busts because they draft players that are 5 years older than NHL scouts.

Imagine how few busts you would have if you were drafting from a pool of all the 23-24 year olds in the NHL. Even Crosby is younger than some NFL draft picks.

 

[Rob Nieds work ethic]

Its not only that the hockey pool is so much bigger than the NFL. The NFL scouts are also much better and more accurate. The testing for the NFL is much more appropriate for the job they do. The combine is actually a very useful tool. The NHL in this category seems useless. They have yet to figured out a fair and consistent way to measure a players ability. You see a lot more NHL busts.

The reason you believe NFL scouts to be better is because NHL scouts draft 18 year-olds and NFL scouts draft 22-23 year-olds.

 

[Paxon]

To add to the above posts, the main reason why the NFL combine is more relevant is because they're testing with fully-developed athletes who've been training like professionals at these big universities. At the NHL combine you're comparing some kids who are highly developed and trained for their age vs. some kids who are far from physically matured and who haven't done much strength training.

Tons of tests aren't any more relevant than the most useful NHL combine tests, though I will say on the whole they're a bit more useful. The 40 yard dash is always pumped up, yet it has little to do with what happens on the football field.

 

[tsujimoto74]

In the NFL, players in the 1st 3 rounds could be expected to day 1 starters, and 4th rounders are expected to compete for starting jobs.

Aka - You can't compare the NFL chart to NHL.

Agreed. Apples to oranges.