Working the Draft: Value Picks vs Over-Drafted Reaches

Originally posted by HearstFan:
Round 2 - There was key talent at the top of the round, but a big drop off in top names in the second half of the round.

Not according to NFL.com. They say that the talent in the botton half of rd 2 was almost as strong as the top of rd 2. This draft was widely considered to be weak at the top but have some good depth in rd2-4.

Originally posted by HearstFan:

Round 2 - There was key talent at the top of the round, but a big drop off in top names in the second half of the round. This likely meant that no one above the 9ers wanted to make a reasonable trade for the 9ers to move up, and once those players were gone, no one wanted the 9ers spot so they could move back. So the 9ers took Tartt - the guy they needed ranked highest on their board. In other words, not only was there no trade back available, but when the 9ers had to select, there obviously wasn't anyone on their board they wanted more and ranked higher.

Wrong, Baalke specifically said that he had a good offer to trade back in rd 2 and almost took it, but was afraid he might miss out on Tartt and so he refused the trade back offer.

Originally posted by HearstFan:
If you look at the 2nd round, is there anyone below Tartt you would argue is better than Tartt - MAYBE the ILB Perryman, MAYBE one of the fast small receivers. So taking Tarty is not necessarily a reach. Its not like there was a plethora of obvious talent below the 9ers pick in the 2nd.

Nobody knows who will turn out to be great, so you want to get the best value for your picks and spend your draft capital wisely. The art of the draft is not only knowing WHO to select, but also WHEN to select them so that you get best value for your picks. (Just like buying a house, even though you like the house, you still try to negotiate the best price).

edit

Originally posted by natrone06:

Originally posted by HearstFan:
. . . . . . . . To that end, you could almost take TB's picks as an indictment of the talent he saw at other positions, more so than a belief in the players that fell to the 9ers in this draft.

This is just wild speculation based on little to no actual evidence. You know the picks but filling in everything in-between is just make believe.

True

The overall consensus of mock drafts has little or no evaluative value in my estimation.

Grading the drafts before the players have taken the field remains a precarious endeavor at best.

Although I will concede that discussing the draft in all of its aspects does have an high degree of entertainment value, and gives the NFL a solid public presence during the off season.

The draft and related discourse should be fun.

Relax and enjoy it.

Originally posted by zonkers:
While it's awesome to see drafts where you trade all over the place and take a nice player everywhere you pick, those are hard to come by because most of the other GMs are trying to do the same thing. I wouldn't put too much stock in whether a player is over-drafted or not. What'll really count is how their NFL career turns out. Then, their original draft position will label them as a disappointment, total failure, or spectacular failure.

I posted this in another thread, but 2 and 3 are interesting points: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82857c66/article/bill-walshs-nfl-draft-philosophies-six-lessons-from-the-master


Objectively, it does look like some picks were reaches. But I think when GMs say "BPA," it's a simple answer to a very thorough draft strategy. It's a nice way to say that they followed their plan, whatever it was. These guys get paid big money to run real-life fantasy drafts, so I'd at least expect them to be armed with overall grades, position rankings, expected value to other teams, and a goal of what to get.

Here's a stab at the plan they used:
In hindsight, it looks like Baalke wanted three good defensive prospects in Day 1 and 2, which is what he got. I have a feeling that Kendricks was definitely on the list for round 2, but with Tartt not far behind.
Round 4 looked solely dedicated to adding three diamonds they liked on offense. Each has the tools of a starter, but has something to work on (Bell - learn TE, Davis - conditioning, Smelter - health).
I'm not sure why Pinion was a 5th round pick, but Baalke had some reason, good or bad. It looks like he already spent the first six on potential starters. Might have been prime time for ST in round 5.
Then, the last two picks were used to beef up the OL.

Im not going to compare BW to Trent Baalke and I think this is what Baalke is trying to do. I'm sure every GM does this but some just get blinded by the exotic picks and end up picking a player that doesn't fit the system.

"2) "This is a bad draft." This statement drove Walsh nuts, as he felt it was a huge copout by scouts. I talk to certain people every year before the draft, and every year they lament the weakness of that year's draft class, as if I don't remember those exact words the year before. Walsh would remind everyone in the room that the draft only needed enough depth for his team to acquire 12 good players. Satisfying every team was not his concern. All he cared about was finding talent for his own team. Therefore, the depth of talent in each draft was not irrelevant."

It's not the matter of pick being a reach its more about drafting a player that fits the team. A lot of people will say " why didn't TB draft this guy or that guy? " people are quick to forget that the player has to fit what the team is trying to build.

Well NONE of us were in meeting rooms leading up to the draft. From how they drafted I would assume the defensive minded coach put out this criteria to Baalke.

We need two types of players to help our defense. With offenses speeding up, we need players that can play all three downs. We cannot have subsitutions galore in the upcoming days of no huddle offenses. For DL, we need a replacement for cowboy, someone who can eat up two blockers so the ILB o OLB can make the play, someone who can set the edge as a 3-4 DE and slide in to play DT on dime passing downs, (which the niners are in 50 percent of the time.

We need to have a hybrid safety Linebacker, aka Urlacher, Urlacher flourished under Long's tenure.[3] Urlacher not only received more playing time, but also played a more versatile role on both offense and defense. Long converted Urlacher into a "Lobo-Back",[6] a cross between a linebacker and free safety, I think Tartt is that Lob Linebacker someone who can play the ILB role and cover folks, and lower the boom.

I truly think these conversations happened, and that is why the Niners drafted these players in rounds 1 and 2. And for people who think draftniks know the most, Arik Armstead was the Niners pick in over 50 percent of the mock draft. So essentially Ballke gained by gaining a 4th rounder and a 5th next year by trading down and getting the player over 50% of mock draft experts thought they would pick anyways.

I also think the Eli Harold pick was brilliant, this was a deep draft at 3-4 OLB. The niners need to put pressure on the QB to help the DB's, this was my favorite pick of the draft.

I also think that in a few years the draft folks will talk about round 4, and the importance, and talk about how the Niners got 3 players who are now starters in round 4, a RB, TE and WR Dare to dream....

Originally posted by Vito_Corleone:
Baalke selected ~six "reaches" based on consensus opinion of value (per mock drafts), and only one "steal".

I like Baalke, but Baalke feels that he knows who is good and doesn't give a rat's ass what the consensus is. However if you can get a guy in rd 6-7 (eg. Pinion), why draft him in rd 5? Most of these six "reaches" likely would have been available a little later and he could have waited a little to draft them

My Hope = Baalke is so good that he KNOWS who is going to be good and didn't want to risk losing them by trading back.

My Fear = Baalke is arrogant and falls in "love" with his favorite "sons" and blindly "reaches" for them higher than they deserved to go

This draft will be a litmus test. It will be interesting to see how it works out. If Baalke is right and these "reaches" turn out to be really good players, we can rest easy knowing he's a darn good drafter. If they don't turn out great, we know Baalke isn't very good because he is arrogant and drafts players higher than needed and doesn't get good value for his picks.

"Reaches" and round projected to be picked: (per popular mock draft projections)
Rd 1. Armstead: many slotted him to the 49ers, but others (like Bill Polian) thought he was a reach. (so borderline reach)
Rd 2. Tartt: was projected in rd 3-4
Rd 4. Bell: projected in rd 5
Rd 4. Smelter: projected rd 5-7
Rd 5. Pinion: projected UDFA
Rd 6. Silberman: projected UDFA

"Steals": Rd 3. Eli Harold: projected rd 2

Pundits draft positions are often wrong when compared to NFL GM's. Lat year there were half a dozen players projected to go earlier in the draft that didn't even get selected in the 7th round including Shane Skov who was a projected 3rd rounder and ended up as a UDFA on our practice squad. These draft projections are good for a reference point but should not be considered "the book" on players values.

Often times the ability to trade back coincides with other factors including luck, fallback position and can you find a trading partner. Just because you want to move back doesn't mean anyone is willing to pay to move up. The Cowboys traded back from 18 to 31 with us so we could draft Eric Reid and got a 3rd rd pick. Should we have traded back to say 30 for a 3rd rd pick? No way. The Cowboys would not have taken the deal if there was a better offer available. Sometimes there is and sometimes there isn't - luck.

1st pick Armstead. We might have been able to trade back further and still get him. The problem was there was no fallback position. The next highest rated DE's were not projected to go before the back end of round 2 (though 1 went earler) so if your guy gets taken there is a big drop off to the next available player at that position and we have no idea what offers (if any ) were available. With the loss of RayMac and Justin Smith's possible retirement DE was my #1 priority in the draft. I will give Baalke a pass on this potential reach.

2nd pick Tartt. There was a good posibiltiy we could trade back and get Tartt. Some projected him 2nd half rd 2 others early rd 3. Problem was there once again was a big drop off to the next level at SS. These talent gaps drive a draft. Teams move up to get players before the gap or stay put and take players. When there is a glut of players at a position in a draft range you can move back and know if you don't get the 1 you targeted there are others almost as good still on the board but when there are gaps it makes moving back very difficult. Teams are looking to move up to take gap players earlier before the drop off in talent. I give Baalke another pass.

3rd rd Harold. By all accounts a draft "steal"

4th rd Bell. Projected late 4th - 5th rd pick, taken back half of the 4th rd. The biggest upside of any TE still on the board and most of the remaining TE's might not have been able to beat out Celek and Carrier for the #3 TE position. I can't blame Baalke for not trading back.

4th rd Davis. Projected as a 4th - 5th rd pick and was drafted right in the range of projections. Solid pick.

4th rd Smelter: Smelter is a player who may have been a 2nd to early 3rd rd pick had he been healthy. There is no realistic projection on how far back the injury makes you slide. Maybe he's around in rd 6 and maybe he's gone. To get a WR with great potential at the back end of rd 4 I can't complain with value wise.

5th rd Pinion. This one I saw as a big reach. Nobody had him listed as the #1 punter and none had been drafted. We probably could have gotten him in the 6th rd and probably even the 7th rd. With Andy lee on the roster as your fallback position and your worse case scenario is Lee is on the team for another season it would have been well worth the gamble to move back to at least the middle of the 6th rd.

6th and 7th rds. I love Baalke trading away a 7th for a 6th rounder next year. I wish he had traded away the other 3 picks for 2016 picks as well because none of the 3 players excites me though Busta might have a shot to make the team. There may have been no takers to trade the other 3 picks and I didn't see much in talent still on the board that looked like it had a great shot to make the team.

The real key to this draft is can these guys play. If they are good players then it was a great draft and if they are not then it sucks. The 1st 4 rds I really can't argue with where the players we selected were taken. 5th rd was WTF and the 6th-7th rds are a crap shoot anyway with a team that has our talent level.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
all the previous prognostications, mock drafts, player profiles, all of that is essentially meaningless.

bookmarked for next season!

Originally posted by buck:
The overall consensus of mock drafts has little or no evaluative value in my estimation.

Grading the drafts before the players have taken the field remains a precarious endeavor at best.

Although I will concede that discussing the draft in all of its aspects does have an high degree of entertainment value, and gives the NFL a solid public presence during the off season.

The draft and related discourse should be fun.

Relax and enjoy it.

Exactly!

It is all about the interest and fun for me.. not about "being right" and patting self on back while strutting around a forum.

Once the draft comes and goes.. it is then we realize again that we don't have the resources to accurately lock in a prospect's value so rigidly.

Originally posted by Mr.Mcgibblets:
Exactly!

It is all about the interest and fun for me.. not about "being right" and patting self on back while strutting around a forum.

Once the draft comes and goes.. it is then we realize again that we don't have the resources to accurately lock in a prospect's value so rigidly.

The speculations about the 2016 draft have already begun.

The players taken in the 2015 draft have not played a single down of NFL football and the talking heads are off to the next draft.

http://btn.com/2015/05/07/hackenberg-cook-highlight-nine-big-ten-stars-in-espn-2016-nfl-mock-draft/

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/college_sports/college_football/article/Corey-Robinson-son-of-David-Robinson-predicted-6250770.php

Enjoy, but do not take these projections by the talking heads seriously.

If the media guys and the general consensus has such a great pulse on who is good, why aren't they GM's like Baalke in the NFL? Every year I get mad at baalke because he didn't take the player I wanted, and every year i remember who am I to question the professional. Its the equivalent of us trying to give guitar advice to Jimi Hendrix.

Its ok to be annoyed for a day, but seriously I dont understand how fans can stay mad at a guy who has overstocked this roster with talent over the years. Outside of 2012 he has added atleast a couple contributors every year.

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by natrone06:
You do understand draft projections and "consensus" are meaningless and not supported by any real evidence. 32 different GMs with 32 different opinions on players in which none of us are privy to.

This. All these draft ratings, profiles and projections are entertaining but lol at anyone who takes them to heart. Youre talking about someones subjective opinions of a player without thought to fit on a particular scheme or even full access to all the data that GM's are privy to.

The Cards took a guy in the 4th round that was widely thought to go undrafted, the Patriots took a long smapper right after the 49ers took Pinion, once the draft starts, all the previous prognostications, mock drafts, player profiles, all of that is essentially meaningless.

End thread, really. Drafting is not a science, people. It is nearer an art. Even the best fail and fail again. Look back at Bill Walsh's drafts. Every thread about Baalke always includes posters gloating about Jenkins. So when we discuss Bill Walsh, a master drafter, do they throw in Todd Shell's name triumphantly, before demanding that he should have been sacked?" Or James Owens. Who? Bill Walsh's first pick was not a huge success.

And that is drafting. You will get Willis. You will get Jenkins. But then you pick up Frank Gore in the 3rd or Aaron Lynch in the 5th.

Neither was Reggie McGrew