columbuscrowd
Junior Varsity
Joined: July 7th, 2007, 11:56 am Posts: 194

Article on NFL Draft Pick Value and analysis of 2009 trades
http://adamjt13.blogspot.com/search?upd ... results=10
Quote: A review of the 2009 NFL draft trades Three weeks ago, I posted a list of almost every trade from 1992 to 2008 that involved NFL draft picks but not active players. Using that list and a mathematical formula, a fan who posts as Mr. Bighead on the KFFL message boards created a draft pick value chart that indicates the historical value of each draft pick. The value of the No. 1 pick was fixed at 3,000 points, the same value it has in the commonly used value chart. Not surprisingly, though, the chart based on actual trades from 1992 to 2008 is much different from the commonly used chart. In general, higher picks are worth more in the historical chart than in the commonly used chart, and the higher the pick, the greater the difference between the charts.
I tested the historical value chart against certain benchmark trades in the list of trades that I posted, and I found that the chart is quite accurate, at least through five rounds or so. Late in the draft, teams are less likely to have picks that will balance out a trade, so they generally just make twoforone trades out of the picks they have left and don't worry as much about point values.
In this post, I'll take a look at the trades made during the 2009 NFL draft and see whether teams that traded down got more value or less value than expected, based on trades made from 1992 to 2008.
Here are all of this year's trades that involved only draft picks 
2009 DRAFT
17 = 19, 191 19 = 21, 195 23 = 26, 162 26, 162 = 41, 73, 83 37 = next 1st 40 = 47, 124, 199 43, 111 = next 1st 49 = 68, 105 51 = 75, 110 56 = 61, 165 64, 132 = 79, 84 65 = 76, 115, 228 73 = 232, next 2nd 85 = 91, 164 89 = next 2nd 91 = 137, 213, next 3rd 117 = 120, 229 123, 198 = 137, 141 141 = 156, 210 150 = 158, 221 164 = 222, next 5th 174 = 235, next 5th 202 = 216, next 6th 222 = next 6th 237 = next 7th
Now let's take a look at each trade and the historical values of the picks involved 
17 = 19, 191
The historical value of the 17th pick is 1,419 points. The 19th is worth 1,319, and the 191st is worth 16, for a total of 1,335. Cleveland took 84 points less than the expected value to trade down with Tampa Bay (roughly the value of the 118th or 119th pick).
19 = 21, 195
Again, Cleveland took less than the expected value to trade down, this time with Philadelphia. The 19th pick has a historical value of 1,319 points, the 21st pick is worth 1,229, and the 19th is worth 15, for a total of 1,244 points. Based on those values, Cleveland got 75 fewer points than expected.
23 = 26, 162
This time, it was New England that took less value than expected when it traded down to Baltimore's spot. The 23rd pick's historical value is 1,147 points, compared to a combined 1,068 points for the picks it received (1,037 for the 26th and 31 for the 162nd).
26, 162 = 41, 73, 83
New England traded down again, this time getting higherthanexpected value from Green Bay. For two picks with a combined value of 1,068 points, New England got three picks with a combined value of 1,111 points (646, 263 and 202, respectively).
40 = 47, 124, 199
Oakland traded down with New England, getting a little less value than expected (665 points, compared to 540, 74 and 14 for a total of 628).
49 = 68, 105
This was another trade down for less than expected, with Chicago sending one pick with a historical value of 510 points to Seattle for two picks worth 416 (300 and 116, respectively).
51 = 75, 110
In 2001, Buffalo had the 51st pick and traded down with Denver, dropping seven spots to No. 58 and adding the 110th pick. This year, Dallas had the same original pick (No. 51) but had to drop 24 spots to get the same additional pick (No. 110). Historically, this was 481 points for 352 points (249 plus 103).
56 = 61, 165
Miami traded down with Indianapolis and got lessthanexpected value, but not by much. The 56th pick has a historical value of 418 points, compared to 392 for the 61st (363) and 165th (29).
64, 132 = 79, 84
Pittsburgh got slightly better than the expected value for trading down with Denver. Pittsburgh gave up a combined 396 points (335 plus 61) and received 421 (224 plus 197).
65 = 76, 115, 228
Detroit traded the first pick of the draft's second day to the New York Jets for higherthanexpected value. The 65th pick has a historical value of 326 points, compared to a combined 341 for the three picks the Jets sent to Detroit (243, 91 and 7, respectively).
85 = 91, 164
The trade was about as equal as can be, considering that teams usually don't have two picks that add up to the precise value of the one pick for which they want to trade. In this case, Philadelphia traded No. 85, which is valued at 192 points, to the New York Giants for Nos. 91 (165) and 164 (30), which are worth a combined 195 points.
117 = 120, 229
This was another relatively equal trade, with Dallas trading 87 points to Tampa Bay for 88 points (81 plus 7).
123, 198 = 137, 141
Baltimore traded down with New England, getting 15 points more than expected. The 123rd pick is worth 75 and the 198th is worth 14 (89 total), compared to 54 points and 50 points (104 total) for the picks Baltimore received.
141 = 156, 210
Baltimore traded down again, this time getting relatively equal value from Denver. The 141st pick is worth 50 points, compared to a combined 46 points for the 156th (35) and 210th (11) picks.
150 = 158, 221
In another trade for almost equal values, Washington sent 40 points to Minnesota for a combined 43 points (34 plus 9).
37 = next 1st 43, 111 = next 1st
Based on trades from 1992 to 2008, a firstround pick in the next draft is worth 635 points, on average (equal to the value of the 41st or 42nd pick in the current draft). Seattle gave Denver a pick (No. 37) worth 729 points, and San Francisco gave Carolina two picks worth a combined 709 (608 plus 101). Both times, this year's picks yielded less value than expected.
73 = 232, next 2nd 89 = next 2nd
On average, a secondround pick in the next draft is worth 223 points (approximately the 79th pick). New England made both of these trades, getting less than expected from Jacksonville in the first trade (263 points for 223 plus 7) but more than expected from Tennessee in the second trade (178 for 223).
91 = 137, 213, next 3rd
A thirdround pick in the next draft has an average value of 91 points, which is equal to the 115th pick. Philadelphia traded down with Seattle, giving up 165 points and getting back 155 (54 plus 10 plus 91) for a relatively equal trade.
164 = 222, next 5th 174 = 235, next 5th
Both of these were relatively equal trades. A fifthround pick in the next draft is worth an average of 19 points, which is the value of picks No. 183185. Philadelphia had the 164th pick (30 points) and traded down with New Orleans, getting 27 points in return (8 plus 19). Detroit traded down from No. 174 (24 points), getting 25 points (6 plus 19) back from Denver.
202 = 216, next 6th 222 = next 6th
Historically, a sixthround pick in the next draft has had an average value of eight points, which is the value of picks Nos. 222227. Philadelphia traded No. 222 to Indianapolis in a trade for equal values. Carolina got a little more than expected by trading No. 202 to Oakland, giving up a pick worth 13 points and getting 18 points in return (10 plus eight).
237 = next 7th
This was the first known draftday trade since at least 1992 that involved a seventhround pick in the following draft and did not involve an active player. Miami sent Kansas City the fifthtolast pick that could be traded (compensatory picks can't be traded) in exchange for a seventhround pick next year. Unless Kansas City surprises almost everyone, Miami at least will get a higher seventhround pick next year than it gave up this year.
2009 draft trends
Here's a look at all 25 trades, with the historical point values traded by each team. The points traded by the team trading down are on the left side, the points dealt by the team trading up are on the right. A > symbol indicates that the team trading down lost value, a < symbol indicates that the team trading down gained value, a ~ symbol indicates that the trade was relatively equal, and a = symbol indicates a trade that was exactly equal.
1,419 > 1,335 1,319 > 1,244 1,147 > 1,068 1,068 < 1,111 729 > 635 709 > 635 665 > 628 510 > 416 481 > 352 418 > 392 (Trade down from pick No. 56)
396 < 421 (Trade down from pick No. 64) 326 < 341 263 > 230 192 ~ 195 178 < 223 (Trade down from pick No. 89)
165 ~ 155 (Trade down from pick No. 91) 87 ~ 88 89 < 104 50 ~ 46 40 ~ 43 30 ~ 27 24 ~ 25 13 < 18 8 = 8 6 > (next 7th)
From this chart, it's apparent that teams didn't value picks in the first two rounds nearly as much as usual. Nine of the first 10 trades down went for less than the historical value of the pick(s) involved. Through 10 trades, the average value lost was 7.7 percent. Starting with the last pick of the second round, picks started trading for higher or equal value than on average from 1992 to 2008. Of the final 15 trades, the team trading down got higherthannormal value in return five times and equal or relatively equal value eight times. Only twice did a trade down yield less than would be expected. The average value gained in the final 15 trades, starting with the last pick of the second round, was 5.9 percent. These numbers confirm the reports that many teams believed that the 2009 draft was weak at the top but deep in talent. [/quote]
