Patriots use a different Draft Value Chart

[KChiefs1]

https://www.patspulpit.com/2018/4/21...hart-rich-hill

“I’d say [the draft chart] has been modified now to a certain degree because of the ability to trade compensatory picks,” Belichick said. “In the past those picks really, I wouldn’t say don’t have any value, but they didn’t have much value because you couldn’t do anything with them other than pick a player at that spot. Now that those picks are tradeable, that changes things a little bit because they are capital to move up, move back, or you could move into those spots or trade them for other players...I’d say the draft chart has been modified a little bit based on the change in that.”

There’s an entire round’s worth of picks that are compensatory every year and so the rule change greatly increased the liquidity of the draft pick trading market. Previously, teams would have to sit and wait through a dozen compensatory picks at the end of the fifth round before being able to pounce at the top of the sixth round. Now teams don’t have to wait and that’s smoothed out the trade value of all the picks.

A limitation of draft value charts, Belichick adds, is that there isn’t a single chart that everyone uses. When there is a divergence in pick value among teams- if two parties value a pick differently- then they are less likely to strike a deal. Belichick does note that the divergence has disappeared in “the majority of the trades” in recent years.

Well, last year we tried to fix that limitation by creating a draft value chart that maps to how teams actually value picks. For the record, this answers an entirely different question than how teams should value picks- Chase Stuart has already answered that question and shows how team overvalue early picks and undervalue late picks. We’re simply showing what teams are actually spending on draft picks.

[Lzen]

Interesting

[Rain Man]

I think the classic trade chart is kind of messed up. I think it puts too much value on the top 5 to 10 picks. I'd trade those picks every time if I was a GM, unless there was truly a can't miss quarterback in there.

[JD10367]

The whole value chart is a stupid idea. Every pick's value depends on a) that team's need and b) what has transpired before that pick. This was a weak draft for O-line. O-line guys went higher and earlier than anticipated. The Pats need O-line. So they took a tweener at #23 who might have been a bit of a head-scratcher to many, but he fits their scheme well because they prefer smaller tackles they can also utilize at guard. That's a pick that most other teams would've found had lesser value. Same thing with Sony Michel at #31. The Pats lost Dion Lewis and they place a high value on small shifty guys who can both run and catch in the flat. Even though they have some decent backs on the roster, they needed a guy to fill that role. Again, for most other teams, it's a reach; for the Pats, it's more of a need (even though they could really use D-line help and corner help).

Same thing goes for Buffalo moving up for a quarterback. Yes, they gave up a lot. They've also had jack shit QB retreads for decades. That was a move they NEEDED to make, regardless of cost.

In round 2 there are still quite a few corners, running backs, and wide receivers available. This draft wasn't considered deep for backs and receivers but, since so few went in round 1, those guys in round 2 are now good value picks. The Browns start with two picks at the top of this next round. Those picks probably look like they have a lot more value now than they did before last night.

[Dayze]

their values seem a bit deflated compared to other draft value charts I've seen.

[Dayze]

I think that value chart is like Kelly Blue Book; it's not end all be all, it's just a rough starting point for negotiations.

[tmax63]

I don't have the time to do it but it would be interesting to see where the main differences between the two charts are.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by JD10367

The whole value chart is a stupid idea. Every pick's value depends on a) that team's need and b) what has transpired before that pick. This was a weak draft for O-line. O-line guys went higher and earlier than anticipated. The Pats need O-line. So they took a tweener at #23 who might have been a bit of a head-scratcher to many, but he fits their scheme well because they prefer smaller tackles they can also utilize at guard. That's a pick that most other teams would've found had lesser value. Same thing with Sony Michel at #31. The Pats lost Dion Lewis and they place a high value on small shifty guys who can both run and catch in the flat. Even though they have some decent backs on the roster, they needed a guy to fill that role. Again, for most other teams, it's a reach; for the Pats, it's more of a need (even though they could really use D-line help and corner help).

Same thing goes for Buffalo moving up for a quarterback. Yes, they gave up a lot. They've also had jack shit QB retreads for decades. That was a move they NEEDED to make, regardless of cost.

In round 2 there are still quite a few corners, running backs, and wide receivers available. This draft wasn't considered deep for backs and receivers but, since so few went in round 1, those guys in round 2 are now good value picks. The Browns start with two picks at the top of this next round. Those picks probably look like they have a lot more value now than they did before last night.

I'm not a GM (and there's probably a reason for that), but I agree with you. Draft what you need and if it's beneficial to your overall scheme, by all means, take some other team to the cleaners.

[tmax63]

Did a quick comparison of values of the Chiefs trade 54+78 for 46+100.

Pats chart NFL chart
Gave:
103.56+58.54=162.1 360+200=560
Got:
127.71+36.06=163.77 440+100=520

Makes me wonder if the Pats chart is getting more use. Within 1% on their values versus 7% on the old chart.

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by JD10367

In round 2 there are still quite a few corners, running backs, and wide receivers available. This draft wasn't considered deep for backs and receivers but, since so few went in round 1, those guys in round 2 are now good value picks. The Browns start with two picks at the top of this next round. Those picks probably look like they have a lot more value now than they did before last night.

I would disagree and I think years from now we'll see a lot of good HB's that came out of this draft. I'm no Dorsey fan but he got a steal in Chubb. He's got a monster 1-2 combo now with Chubb and Hyde...

[Flying High D]

Didn’t do so good on the 2nd trade.

Gave:
49.08 + 22.09 = 71.17
Got:
62.54
For a difference of 8.63 in Baltimore favor

[KChiefs1]

Belichick has been trading down all draft.

Has anyone reviewed their trades by both charts? I wonder if they do have an advantage by using their chart?

[RippedmyFlesh]

The biggest difference I see off the bat is this chart to move up to 1 you trade 2 and 18 on older charts this one for example http://walterfootball.com/draftchart.php you trade 2 and 50 to get 1.

[Chris Meck]

everything to do with the Patriots revolves around the fact that they lucked into Tom ****ing Brady in the 6th round. Bill Hoodie is a good coach; and probably his best quality is adaptability. I like that he just takes the best guy on the board when he picks and then figures out what to do with them later. It's an organization NOT built on stars OTHER than Brady. However, I don't think most coaches can just flip the script that easily and we'll have to see (maybe) if he's such a genius without Tom Terrific.

[Flying High D]

Be cool if Bill got an on field DUI.