Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

DRAFT ANALYSIS: CBs - potential availability by round

KB_fan

By KB_fan,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

KB_fan Proficient

KB_fan

Posted
  • Author
Posted
59 minutes ago, SpclKen said:

Question, on the average pick position did you account for positional scarcity? For example, a big board may have 35 O line in the top 100 prospects, but positional history says that there are only 20 picks on average for oline in the first 100 picks.

I am thinking that in early rounds CBs are valued higher because of the passing nature of the NFL right now. So they should scale higher much like RBs should scale lower in rounds 1 and 2 because of the decreased value of the position by teams despite having top talent in this class.

Did that make any sense whatsoever?.

I understand your question.  It's a really good one. I've been wondering the same thing about relative position value. 

I'm totally new to this draft analysis... so, I didn't make any adjustments, I'm just reporting and averaging the picks generated by the computer simulation at fanspeak, but I've hoped that using 6 different boards at least averages out some of the biases.  I've assumed that different analysts / boards have somewhat differing values for different positions.

I'm assuming these computer algorithms that produce mock drafts are all pretty much driven by an assessment of team needs and then by relative player ranking.  I've not been able to get a good sense of whether there are different relative position values or how far the computer will reach for a player to fill the highest priority need. 

An example suggests there ARE relative position values in these simulations, and also that positional scarcity is NOT accounted for: 

As I was just writing in another thread, in a huge % of the mocks I've done at fanspeak, I keep seeing Hunter Henry falling to us in round 2.  I have trouble believing that will happen in real life because the TE class is so incredibly shallow.  If a team needs/wants a TE, there aren't that many to choose from.  That scarcity in my mind would increase his value over what might be the "normal" value for a TE in round 1, but I doubt the computers fully account for that.  TE seems to be a devalued position in round 1 and 2, as does RB... but it could be that few if any analysts identified TE or RB as any team's 1st priority need.

Having done all these mock drafts and analyses for the first time ever, I'll be interested to watch the draft a lot more closely this year and try to see which, if any, of the analysts / draft boards came anywhere close to reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bartin Collaborator

Bartin

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, KB_fan said:

Sure, I can do that, though maybe not every position.  Personally I'm most interested in DE, DT, CB, and WR - all positions which have some good depth. 

After that I'll see if I have time for Oline (or perhaps just OT specifically), Safeties & RBs. 

Doubt I'll get to QBs or LBs.  TEs interest me, but there aren't too many good ones, maybe only 3 - 4 that seem worth looking at...

I think for now I'll keep posting in the NFL draft forum, but before the draft, I'll make a thread here compiling all the tables I've been able to do.

Yeah, I was really just referring to the ones that you do end up doing. I don't expect you to do all the positions by any means, but for the ones you do end up doing having them all in the same place would be nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpclKen Apprentice

SpclKen

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, KB_fan said:

I understand your question.  It's a really good one. I've been wondering the same thing about relative position value. 

I'm totally new to this draft analysis... so, I didn't make any adjustments, I'm just reporting and averaging the picks generated by the computer simulation at fanspeak, but I've hoped that using 6 different boards at least averages out some of the biases.  I've assumed that different analysts / boards have somewhat differing values for different positions.

I'm assuming these computer algorithms that produce mock drafts are all pretty much driven by an assessment of team needs and then by relative player ranking.  I've not been able to get a good sense of whether there are different relative position values or how far the computer will reach for a player to fill the highest priority need. 

An example suggests there ARE relative position values in these simulations, and also that positional scarcity is NOT accounted for: 

As I was just writing in another thread, in a huge % of the mocks I've done at fanspeak, I keep seeing Hunter Henry falling to us in round 2.  I have trouble believing that will happen in real life because the TE class is so incredibly shallow.  If a team needs/wants a TE, there aren't that many to choose from.  That scarcity in my mind would increase his value over what might be the "normal" value for a TE in round 1, but I doubt the computers fully account for that.  TE seems to be a devalued position in round 1 and 2, as does RB... but it could be that few if any analysts identified TE or RB as any team's 1st priority need.

Having done all these mock drafts and analyses for the first time ever, I'll be interested to watch the draft a lot more closely this year and try to see which, if any, of the analysts / draft boards came anywhere close to reality.

That makes complete sense. I think if you are just getting into draft analytics there is a HUGE world out there. I have tiptoed in, but I am much less data savy in my day job than you are. I just end up reading actuarial reports and making business decisions off of them instead of actually creating them. Kudos to the work you do because it is really valuable. I do know that FanSpeak also takes into account the users and where they select players. I see someone like Ronald Blair start off with a really low ranking, and people will always select him in their drafts and the subsequent weeks he starts to rise in value even though the underlying ranking on him have not changed.

If you are interested in getting into the numbers on evaluated prospects there are a few places that develop GREAT content about the draft process, most of it is based on athletic markers, age valuation, market-share of college athletes transitioning to the NFL to help the evaluation process. Zach Whitman and Josh Norris are two I would start with. John Norris did a great podcast last year called "Process the Process" where he really got deep into the different forms of draft evaluation. Zach Whitman runs an interesting website called Three Sigma Athlete that does a lot with a formula developed by Nike that utilizes a athletic composite algorithm to evaluate prospects. A couple teams use a form of this including the Seahawks. Check Hunter Henry out he has some interesting data sets. http://3sigmaathlete.com/faq/

MockDraftable also does some interesting visuals to look at player comparisons and can shed some great light on how a on field player like Hunter Henry has such great tape, but is projected to fall. He wont meet the baseline athletic testing of a Round 1 or2  athlete.

http://www.mockdraftable.com/player/6342/

Anyways, I always enjoy your analysis, so keep up the good work. Solid content and I appreciate it.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KB_fan Proficient

KB_fan

Posted
  • Author
Posted
5 minutes ago, stirs said:

Positions that get overdrafted always have to do with the pass.

Makes sense.  But, it seems this year is regarded as a weak WR class (though there may be some late depth).  And the mocks seem to be reflecting that weakness.  WRs are staying on the board a long time and falling in almost every round.  Could be too that not many teams are considered extremely WR-needy, though I have trouble believing that since there were so few WRs on the free agent market.  But of course a lot of teams loaded up on good WRs in 2014...

I've just started to some mock drafts where I'm recording when the WRs are picked for my next position analysis.  I'm struck by how few WRs are getting picked in the early rounds.  Unlike the CBs where about 13 of the top 20 CBs were picked "early" (about 8 - 10 picks on average ahead of their consensus ranking), the WRs seem to be getting picked "late" - falling below their rankings, especially in the middle rounds.  About 15 of the top 20 ranked WRs are getting picked below their rankings - the average is 15 picks lower! 

I'm just beginning the analysis on WRs though... my perspective could change as I look at more mocks on a wider variety of boards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...