Draft's Rated Using Trade Value's - We Did Ok - Best And Worst

[Steve]

The draft value chart comes from the Jimmy Johnson draft value chart. IT was supposedly developed by his minions at his orders to be able to figure out how much a draft picks was worth to make sure he was getting a good deal or not. The chart was developed from a chart that included every single trade that had involved draft picks. More recently, there are several more recent versions of the chart that propose to be more accurate, since back in the day, teams tended to overvalue the high end of the chart.

If you think that for any given chart, the values are OK, then this would work.

The issue the CBS rankings. The method is you have to KNOW what the true value of a player is. That assumes that CBS actually knows. Pick a list, any list, what makes CBS better than any other list. If I make a list, how is that not the "real" value.

One of the things that is part of that list is any inherent scouting biases. If they are bullshit, and most of those are, then the chart is created using them as the ideal characteristics a player should be held to. The truth is far more complicated.

The other problem I have with is just the idea of value. The idea of value means there is some objective method of valuing things. The addition of Tillery and Adderley are not necessarily going to be good picks in that sense. I love the picks, they are great picks. They are great picks because of what they mean to the Chargers. KC offensive line was way too good against our interior DL, so we had to add a more physical presence to push the interior. Adderley is a great scheme fit to replace a horrible scheme fit with Addae. Put the same players on another team, and the fit isn't necessarily going to be as good. Adderley might be to another the same defensive scheme, but even that doesn't capture it, because they didn't have Addae playing FS last season.

As FoutsFan points out, the chart only reflects the average value. Only after we know how good these players actually are can you judge the value.

[blueman]

I guess what matters is how they play.

[Screeme]

? These are the draft trade values that all the teams use to trade up and down in the draft so no they are not insane. It is a published chart they have used forever.

I think he means who is setting the value is the players. Who is grading Tillery at 600, and why is this the trusted be all of sources?

[FoutsFan]

I think he means who is setting the value is the players. Who is grading Tillery at 600, and why is this the trusted be all of sources?

Exactly! The people assigning value to the players could be (and working for CBS most likely are) escaped mental patients. Why would I care or trust what they value the picks/players at. Look even TT mocked these value charts and he has demonstrated a little more knowledge than the draft pundits. Most of these idiots create these values to show their bitterness at teams showing the mock drafts to be junk at the end of the day.

[charger1993]

Exactly! The people assigning value to the players could be (and working for CBS most likely are) escaped mental patients. Why would I care or trust what they value the picks/players at. Look even TT mocked these value charts and he has demonstrated a little more knowledge than the draft pundits. Most of these idiots create these values to show their bitterness at teams showing the mock drafts to be junk at the end of the day.

I hear what you're saying. But you have to have a way to evaluate the players value wise. Just like how picks are valued some years the number 1 over pick will be worth 1600 points, and your pick at 20 might only be worth 600. So if u want that 1st pick u got to come off that 20th pick and give them the value of 1000 in some other way, rather its other picks "most likely" or players or a combination of both. Just how it goes to make things run

[wu-dai clan]

As our roster builds, we are getting more and more refined, in terms of skillsets that fit our roster.

Our identity is getting clearer, if you will.

Value is in large part determined by scheme fit and impact.

[EnglishBolt]

I thought the Bills had a really nice draft, it'll be interesting to see what they can do next year as a neutral.

[Topcat]

Not too hard to do in Ms Excel. Here are all of our picks btw. 'Proj' is the projected value, 'actual' - actual value. Value is net value gained

Rnd.	Pick #	NFL team	Player	Pos.	College	Conf.	Proj	actual	value
1	28	Chargers	Jerry Tillery	DT	Notre Dame	Ind. (FBS)	600	660	-60
2	60	Chargers	Nasir Adderley	S	Delaware	CAA	550	300	250
3	91	Chargers	Trey Pipkins	OT	Sioux Falls	NSIC	4.2	136	-131.8
4	130	Chargers	Drue Tranquill	LB	Notre Dame	Ind. (FBS)	43	42	1
5	166	Chargers	Easton Stick	QB	North Dakota State	MVFC		25	-25
6	200	Chargers	Emeke Egbule	LB	Houston	The American		11.4	-11.4
7	242	Chargers	Cortez Broughton	DT	Cincinnati	The American		0	0

Good work, CD! Pipkins was a bit early, but could have well been taken in round 4, so his score I suppose "hurts" our total...I think he has a lot of upside...

[Gwynning_Spirit]

The issue the CBS rankings. The method is you have to KNOW what the true value of a player is. That assumes that CBS actually knows. Pick a list, any list, what makes CBS better than any other list. If I make a list, how is that not the "real" value.

I'm quoting Steve here for his line, but this is open to anyone...
Does anybody grade the big boards after the fact to see how they fared?
It seemed like there was a lot of group think among them about certain players, and apparently team scouts/GMs disagreed.

I use the mocks and sites like Walter Football to get a better idea about a lot of small school players, but I don't think these guys' ability to forecast is reliable... that dude did get Pipkins right though, and a whole lot of others barely listed him.


And one problem with the JJohnson point value chart now might be that the contract terms between pick 32 and 33 are way different. It seems to me like 10 points doesn't really account for that.

Of course, TT said his last 1st round talent level player was taken with his pick at 28 anyway. I wonder how many of the previous 27 picks Chargers Evaluators felt were actually first round talents?

[Cdn Bolt]

The issue the CBS rankings. The method is you have to KNOW what the true value of a player is. That assumes that CBS actually knows. Pick a list, any list, what makes CBS better than any other list. If I make a list, how is that not the "real" value.

One of the things that is part of that list is any inherent scouting biases. If they are bullshit, and most of those are, then the chart is created using them as the ideal characteristics a player should be held to. The truth is far more complicated.

The other problem I have with is just the idea of value. The idea of value means there is some objective method of valuing things. The addition of Tillery and Adderley are not necessarily going to be good picks in that sense. I love the picks, they are great picks. They are great picks because of what they mean to the Chargers.

Yes. The CBS rankings seem pretty good for the top 2 rnds but you still had teams taking players in rnd 2 w lower rnd grades who could be decent - the team scouts are likely better evaluators than CBS. After that too it was wide open. Many later picks weren't ranked at all by CBS but team scouts obviously felt different. Similar every year.

I agree this is a purely objective numerical look. We got great grades from the analysts for most of our picks due to filling a need too.

[BoltBacker]

Any chart that has Redskins, Jaguars and Bills at the top speaks for itself. Maybe the Redskins ignore scouts and just use the CBS rankings to pick players.

[Formula 21]

Picky, picky, picky. Just accept the analysis for what it is.