Bears 2015 Draft Discussion

[SKO]

I could see a team like Arizona trading for Cutler if they can't get a veteran FA like Roethlisberger.  The return will be a lot less than what the Bears gave up for him, but dumping Cutler in a trade after this season or next may be the best option for all parties involved.  Especially if they're going to fire Treststink after this season, which would be fine by me.

I also want a top 5 draft pick, based on the research that establishes that value in the first round is at the top or bottom end, but any pick in the middle is basically as valuable as any other.

I also wouldn't mind seeing a coach come in who wanted to play a 3-4.  Now that the defense has been decimated, I'd rather the organization rebuild with a commitment to speed at the LB position and a defense that makes blitzing a lot easier in a division with Rodgers and Stafford chucking the ball. 

Also glad you keep referencing and never citing this study you read. This would seem to indicate otherwise:
The blue line is the 5 year career average value (a useful stat developed by Pro Football Reference that, while not perfect, gives a general idea of how useful a player has been in his career) vs. the green line, or "expected value" if, in theory, the production of players drafted in the first round directly correlated to their draft slot. Basically it's a total crapshoot and tanking (unless done for a clear, concrete goal like acquiring the #1 overall pick to get someone like Andrew Luck, which is still a risky proposition given how few of those there are) doesn't really reward any more than just drafting in the middle of the first round.

I know nothing about football, but I would be extremely surprised if the "expected value" of a (1st round) draft slot was linear. Your graph seems to show that a mid 2nd rounder has negative expected value.

I kind of worded it poorly but here's how the author described the "theoretical value" line:

In a perfect world, you'd have a steady declining value beginning from the first pick and then on to the 32nd overall pick. Each pick is worth less than the one before it for a number of reasons.

This isn't a perfect world -- over the past five years we see some serious dip from the first pick on, with value rising and falling fairly randomly and then surging above where it should be based on averages.

.

All it means is if the draft science was exact you would think that your average #6 overall pick would go on to be a better player than your average #14 overall pick, but in practice basically there's been no real difference in terms of value between those slots. You get roughly the same # of busts and successes, and the successes at #14 are as good as the successes at #6. And that doesn't even take into account the cost of whiffing on a top five pick is greater than, say, #15, although the new CBA has made it much more manageable.

[SKO]

I know nothing about football, but I would be extremely surprised if the "expected value" of a (1st round) draft slot was linear. Your graph seems to show that a mid 2nd rounder has negative expected value.

Regardless of however he calculates "expected value" I think it's safe to say from the actual AVs of the players taken that tanking makes little to no sense as the whole first round is obviously a total crapshoot across the board.

[CubFaninHydePark]

Not the study I was referring to.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-team-can-beat-the-draft/

See fn. 11 in particular.  The success rate for Top 5 picks is 10.5% (bad, I know).  But that's twice as good as the success rate of 5% outside of the Top 10.  I'd rather have a pick that is twice as likely to be successful in years in which a team isn't going to make the playoffs.

If nothing else, the Johnson chart suggests that trading the #1 pick is probably a dominant strategy, given how much teams overvalue it.  If the Bears could somehow end up with it and then get a team to trade for it as if it were worth 100AV+, that would almost certainly be a better outcome than drafting with it, especially in this class.

But at the end of the day, the draft is pretty much a lottery, and no GM can beat it anyways.  So there's that too.

[PenFoe]

Not the study I was referring to.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-team-can-beat-the-draft/

See fn. 11 in particular.  The success rate for Top 5 picks is 10.5% (bad, I know).  But that's twice as good as the success rate of 5% outside of the Top 10.  I'd rather have a pick that is twice as likely to be successful in years in which a team isn't going to make the playoffs.

If nothing else, the Johnson chart suggests that trading the #1 pick is probably a dominant strategy, given how much teams overvalue it.  If the Bears could somehow end up with it and then get a team to trade for it as if it were worth 100AV+, that would almost certainly be a better outcome than drafting with it, especially in this class.

But at the end of the day, the draft is pretty much a lottery, and no GM can beat it anyways.  So there's that too.

Haven't teams been trying to do this for the last few years without any success? 

Pretty sure it's not overvalued at all anymore. 

[CubFaninHydePark]

Not the study I was referring to.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-team-can-beat-the-draft/

See fn. 11 in particular.  The success rate for Top 5 picks is 10.5% (bad, I know).  But that's twice as good as the success rate of 5% outside of the Top 10.  I'd rather have a pick that is twice as likely to be successful in years in which a team isn't going to make the playoffs.

If nothing else, the Johnson chart suggests that trading the #1 pick is probably a dominant strategy, given how much teams overvalue it.  If the Bears could somehow end up with it and then get a team to trade for it as if it were worth 100AV+, that would almost certainly be a better outcome than drafting with it, especially in this class.

But at the end of the day, the draft is pretty much a lottery, and no GM can beat it anyways.  So there's that too.

Haven't teams been trying to do this for the last few years without any success? 

Pretty sure it's not overvalued at all anymore. 

Watkins is good, but I still think the Bills overpaid for him.  The Redskins vastly overpaid for RG3.  Maybe you want 2 - 5 instead?  Which is fine, because that's where the Bears are likely to end up, if they end up in the top 5.

[PenFoe]

Not the study I was referring to.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-team-can-beat-the-draft/

See fn. 11 in particular.  The success rate for Top 5 picks is 10.5% (bad, I know).  But that's twice as good as the success rate of 5% outside of the Top 10.  I'd rather have a pick that is twice as likely to be successful in years in which a team isn't going to make the playoffs.

If nothing else, the Johnson chart suggests that trading the #1 pick is probably a dominant strategy, given how much teams overvalue it.  If the Bears could somehow end up with it and then get a team to trade for it as if it were worth 100AV+, that would almost certainly be a better outcome than drafting with it, especially in this class.

But at the end of the day, the draft is pretty much a lottery, and no GM can beat it anyways.  So there's that too.

Haven't teams been trying to do this for the last few years without any success? 

Pretty sure it's not overvalued at all anymore. 

Watkins is good, but I still think the Bills overpaid for him.  The Redskins vastly overpaid for RG3.  Maybe you want 2 - 5 instead?  Which is fine, because that's where the Bears are likely to end up, if they end up in the top 5.

Too early to speak on Watkins, but it's pretty clear the Redskins overpaid for RG3, but that's because he hasn't been that good for them.  If he was the next great QB? It's a steal. 

The Falcons gave up a shitton for Julio Jones and that's working out just fine.

I don't even know what we're talking about any more.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

Not the study I was referring to.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-team-can-beat-the-draft/

See fn. 11 in particular.  The success rate for Top 5 picks is 10.5% (bad, I know).  But that's twice as good as the success rate of 5% outside of the Top 10.  I'd rather have a pick that is twice as likely to be successful in years in which a team isn't going to make the playoffs.

If nothing else, the Johnson chart suggests that trading the #1 pick is probably a dominant strategy, given how much teams overvalue it. If the Bears could somehow end up with it and then get a team to trade for it as if it were worth 100AV+, that would almost certainly be a better outcome than drafting with it, especially in this class.

But at the end of the day, the draft is pretty much a lottery, and no GM can beat it anyways.  So there's that too.

Haven't teams been trying to do this for the last few years without any success?  

Pretty sure it's not overvalued at all anymore.  

Watkins is good, but I still think the Bills overpaid for him.  The Redskins vastly overpaid for RG3.  Maybe you want 2 - 5 instead?  Which is fine, because that's where the Bears are likely to end up, if they end up in the top 5.

Too early to speak on Watkins, but it's pretty clear the Redskins overpaid for RG3, but that's because he hasn't been that good for them.  If he was the next great QB? It's a steal.  

The Falcons gave up a shitton for Julio Jones and that's working out just fine.

I don't even know what we're talking about any more.

Forget it, Pen.  It's CubFaninHydePark Town

[CubFaninHydePark]

Today is my birthday. I guess my gift is getting to watch what a real QB looks like.

I'd much rather have the BMarsh Axe murderer special, in which everyone but him, Jeffrey, and Forte associated with this franchise dies a grisly death, but....

[Armchair_QB]

[Saul Goodman]

This is fun. I like football. Go Bears.

[Eli]

CFiHP posting about the Bears here on his birthday is probably the saddest thing I've ever seen.

[Bort]

CFiHP posting about the Bears here on his birthday is probably the saddest thing I've ever seen.

You could have saved some keystrokes.

[flannj]

CFiHP posting about the Bears here on his birthday is probably the saddest thing I've ever seen.

I drove to a wake in Orland Park today.
It was for someone that I have known since I was a teenager. Great guy a real character.
He was also the brother of a guy that I have worked with (and stood next to every day) for more than 25 years.

The guy I worked with? It was the second brother he has lost in the last 5 months. His wife tore her ACL while dancing 2 months ago and was still wearing the knee brace when I hugged her at the wake. Oh and get this, I was forced to fire him back in June after he had been with the firm for 32 years.

There was an overturned semi on the 290 / 294 interchange.
Two and a half hours to get there, two hours visiting, and an hour and a half to get back home.

Lots of tears and emotional moments.

I don't really care that much about the Bears or the rest of this shit right now.

And just like CT I might be a little drunk as well.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

Today is my birthday.

Status check...

[InternetApex]

CFiHP posting about the Bears here on his birthday is probably the saddest thing I've ever seen.

I drove to a wake in Orland Park today.
It was for someone that I have known since I was a teenager. Great guy a real character.
He was also the brother of a guy that I have worked with (and stood next to every day) for more than 25 years.

The guy I worked with? It was the second brother he has lost in the last 5 months. His wife tore her ACL while dancing 2 months ago and was still wearing the knee brace when I hugged her at the wake. Oh and get this, I was forced to fire him back in June after he had been with the firm for 32 years.

There was an overturned semi on the 290 / 294 interchange.
Two and a half hours to get there, two hours visiting, and an hour and a half to get back home.

Lots of tears and emotional moments.

I don't really care that much about the Bears or the rest of this shit right now.

And just like CT I might be a little drunk as well.

That's brutal, man. Sorry for all of this.