FanPost

The Real ($) Value of Trading Down


We all love to do trade-downs for the Giants when we do mock drafts. And we're often skeptical when draft machines like PFN's or PFF's allow us to accumulate so much draft capital in a single trade-down. But then we see actual trade-downs like the ones that happened yesterday to move 9 places in the draft (Miami-SF) and 6 places in the draft (Philly-Miami) that involve giving up future first-round picks and I have to say, well, PFN and PFF may not be far off from the truth.

Draft trades are often evaluated by one of the many trade value charts that are out there. There is a new book out by Brad Spielberger of PFF and Jason Fitzgerald of Over the Cap called "The Drafting Stage." I haven't read it, but they have created a new approach to evaluating draft value and posted their table online.

Their approach is interesting. Basically, they took the drafts from 2011-2015, and then looked at the salary each player got in his second contract after the 5-year rookie contract had ended. In other words, after the league has seen you for 5 years, how much are they willing to pay you after that? They use that salary information to create a point chart like all the other trade value charts out there. But their results are VERY different from most other charts. Here is their chart:

https://overthecap.com/draft-trade-value-chart/

The punch line: Trade-downs usually give MUCH more value to the team that trades down than to the team that trades up, ridiculously more. So e.g. the #3 pick is 2443 points and the #12 pick is 1741 points, so Miami should have expected to get 2443-1741 = 402 points in draft capital by trading down with SF. 402 points is the #168 pick (low 5th round). Obviously they got a ton more draft capital than that. Fitzgerald estimates from his chart that Miami effectively gained the equivalent of the #11 pick by making this trade:

https://overthecap.com/dolphins-eagles-and-49ers-make-a-big-trade/

What does this mean for the Giants? Say we trade down with Tampa Bay to the bottom of round 1. The chart says we should get 1785 - 1244 = 541 points of draft capital for that. That is a low 4th round pick. But you know that if we were to make such a trade we would probably get an extra 2nd and probably an extra pick or two on top of that (e.g., I just did a trade in PFF that gave #11 to Buffalo for #30, 61, 93, 161).

Without having read the book, I gather that the reason that trading draft picks favors the team trading down so much is the inherent uncertainty in any draft pick. Let's assume Lawrence and Wilson go #1 and #2, so SF has its pick of Lance, Fields, Jones. They get one shot. Which of those three will be most successful? Will any of them outright fail? (Think e.g. the Trubisky-Mahomes-Watson draft pick dance in 2017.) If you luck out with one who becomes a megastar, you win, and you win big, as KC did (by trading DOWN). But statistically, you lose often enough that it is a huge gamble of resources (as it was for the Bears, who traded UP).

So this is even more, and more dramatic, evidence for the idea that the draft is a crapshoot and teams should try to get as many bites at the apple as possible. Trade down, Giants!

FanPosts are written by community members. This is simply a way for community members to express opinions too long to be contained in a comment.