Draft Capital v Pre Draft Ranking v Landing spot help

[murphysxm]

So, I am pretty on record that once I make my valuations of players, I don't put a ton of stock into landing spot or draft capital. I pay attention to massive swings, but for the most part trust my process. What I need help understanding (not knocking your process, just don't get the variation) is those of you that use Capital and Landing Spot, why is there so much fluctuation on when they are used?

Examples:'
Drake Maye was widely predraft QB3, gets the draft capital, but is dropped in rankings because of landing spot
Penix gets the draft capital, but no bump because of landing spot
JJM is drafted QB4, lands "well" and gets a boost.
Troy Franklin plummets in the draft, but lands in a perceived good spot and is a border line RD 1 WR
Pearsall goes way above his predraft rank, has a very murky path to targets, but in a great offense, gains massive value
AD Mitchell drops in capital, lands pretty solidly and is losing value
Xavier Worthy is now a fantasy god because he went to KC. (yes I am tongue and cheek here)

Maybe because I don't use this strategy, but it just seems such a subjective way to approach post draft rankings to me

[Prison_Mike]

I think it's a fair question, and I think you're right that it's subjective. But the narratives that influence player values are typically widely accepted

In short, we use precedent, context, and logic. The accuracy with which we apply those things is a separate question..

To me, it all comes down to how easily we can envision a path to success (or in the lesser cases, relevance).

There's a direct correlation from draft capital to fantasy success. It's not full proof, nothing is because there are so many intangible factors. But I think it makes sense that we reevaluate our pre-draft rankings based on draft capital.

Then I think the waters get muddied in either direction because we chase outliers, or get scared off by them. We've seen Brock Purdy, a limited player drafted @ 262, propped up by his situation to the heights of NFC champion and dynasty QB10. (That's not meant to discredit Purdy). We've seen DJ Moore, a great prospect, stuck in purgatory for years on end, unable to overcome his poor situation. There's also a thread right now on who the next Puka Nacua might be.

To use your examples:

- Maye was drafted to what most NFL fans view as an offensive wasteland, because it has been exactly that for YEARS. I'm still a believer, but he needs a lot of help. I can understand why that would make dynasty managers balk.

- Penix is a confusing one for all of the obvious reasons. But again this boils down to how we envision a path to success. The thought of Penix not starting a game until he's like 26 is a bit jarring. There's (presumably) no immediate ROI, so fantasy managers might spend 2 years wondering if that pick could have been better spent elsewhere (just like the Falcons might lol)

- JJM: you said it, he landed well. If he's just competent, his offensive system and weapons should mask his limitations

The rest of the WRs you cite, I agree it's perplexing. Not to mention Xavier Legette, a RD1 WR who's falling to nearly the 3rd round of rookie drafts. It feels like there has been a lot more fluctuation this year in particular (maybe I'm just misremembering). That also might have to do with an offensive shift in the NFL. This year set a record with 14 straight offensive picks to start the draft, the WR position has been prioritized, etc. I have to imagine this led to a lot of shuffling within people's rankings

Overall, we're trying to play GM but we're doing so without access to all of the information. So when the NFL tells us "this player is good, this player is worse than you thought," we should probably listen the majority of the time. Value fluctuation based on landing spot is just our own imagination of how things will play out (which is loosely based on reality/historical precedent)

I'm curious why you wouldn't let these factors influence your rankings, murphysxm? Draft capital especially

[murphysxm]

Overall, we're trying to play GM but we're doing so without access to all of the information. So when the NFL tells us "this player is good, this player is worse than you thought," we should probably listen the majority of the time.

I'm curious why you wouldn't let these factors influence your rankings, murphysxm? Draft capital especially

Mostly because draft capital only tells me that one NFL team or GM thinks this player is good. Howie Roseman gets a ton of accolades for his draft prowess and he mostly sticks to his predraft rankings and drafts the players that "drop" because the rest of the NFL doesn't think the players are as good as the consensus thought predraft. At the end of the day I am going to draft the better football player 99 times out of 100.

Legette is a great example, good call.

[moishetreats]

I'll give one reason: some people might not follow college players too deeply and might really start researching rookies after the draft. For them, their baseline is draft capitol, landing spots, etc. rather than a purposefully-determined pre-draft ranking.

[Shcritters]

I'll give one reason: some people might not follow college players too deeply and might really start researching rookies after the draft. For them, their baseline is draft capitol, landing spots, etc. rather than a purposefully-determined pre-draft ranking.

Good insight… that probably explains a large portion of those who use over-use draft capital, but there are others who aren’t influenced as much but weave it in as part of a formula. Interested in their thoughts.

[81-]

Why. Because it is easy and gives you a base line.

Mostly because history shows, the higher you are drafted the more likely you will be good at your job.


I like to let the pro's do my heavy lifting and then as I learn more I'll move them up and down.

They make good guide posts.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

You might need to clarify your draft capital comments, because draft capital is a major factor. For example, if a player I like falls to day 3, you better bet I’m re-evaluating my life decisions

Also you have a typo, I’m sure you meant to type this but JJMC was QB5.

In general, I think I agree with what you’re trying to say. The swings are too great. And if Maye is actually good, being on the Patriots won’t matter one bit.

[mild]

Good insight… that probably explains a large portion of those who use over-use draft capital, but there are others who aren’t influenced as much but weave it in as part of a formula. Interested in their thoughts.

You might need to clarify your draft capital comments, because draft capital is a major factor. For example, if a player I like falls to day 3, you better bet I’m re-evaluating my life decisions

Bingo.

You can't really "overuse" Draft Capital. There's no data point we have (prior to actual NFL games being played) that is anywhere near as predictive as DC.

Let's talk about modeling for WR prospects. The conversation starts and stops with draft capital. Once we know where these guys are drafted, almost every single metric we add to a model adds very little value. There's still value to coming up with a model -- in fact, I have one in here -- but it's best to keep things simple and not overfit a trend that doesn't actually exist moving forward.

Many, many more thoughts from Hayden Winks on predictive modelling vs. draft capital here.

[AZK]

Many, many more thoughts from Hayden Winks on predictive modelling vs. draft capital here.

From the article you posted:
"As always, declaring early is also another very good sign regardless of production. Players get feedback from scouts on if they are good enough to leave, so we should take notice whenever we see a junior in the draft class."

I'm curious if this trend will continue with NIL or not. I think we might be looking at early declare differently a couple years from now. Obviously very early 1st round Juniors are incentivized but what about late 1st/early 2nd.

[DJB]

So, I am pretty on record that once I make my valuations of players, I don't put a ton of stock into landing spot or draft capital. I pay attention to massive swings, but for the most part trust my process. What I need help understanding (not knocking your process, just don't get the variation) is those of you that use Capital and Landing Spot, why is there so much fluctuation on when they are used?

Examples:'
Drake Maye was widely predraft QB3, gets the draft capital, but is dropped in rankings because of landing spot
Penix gets the draft capital, but no bump because of landing spot
JJM is drafted QB4, lands "well" and gets a boost.
Troy Franklin plummets in the draft, but lands in a perceived good spot and is a border line RD 1 WR
Pearsall goes way above his predraft rank, has a very murky path to targets, but in a great offense, gains massive value
AD Mitchell drops in capital, lands pretty solidly and is losing value
Xavier Worthy is now a fantasy god because he went to KC. (yes I am tongue and cheek here)

Maybe because I don't use this strategy, but it just seems such a subjective way to approach post draft rankings to me

I’m the same . I typically keep pretty close to my pre draft rankings unless someone really falls in the draft (Franklin), otherwise I don’t care at all about landing spots. Situations change so quickly in the NFL and taking guys on perceived landing spots and passing on others because of it is what gives you the Bishop Sankeys and David Johnson’s of the world.

Talent doesn’t change but situations do. Draft talent

[tstafford]

Many, many more thoughts from Hayden Winks on predictive modelling vs. draft capital here.

From the article you posted:
"As always, declaring early is also another very good sign regardless of production. Players get feedback from scouts on if they are good enough to leave, so we should take notice whenever we see a junior in the draft class."

I'm curious if this trend will continue with NIL or not. I think we might be looking at early declare differently a couple years from now. Obviously very early 1st round Juniors are incentivized but what about late 1st/early 2nd.

NIL and the portal a major changes. We need to be careful going forward about predicting outcomes based on trends/stats from before those changes and after. This year was the triple whammy with NIL, portal and the tail end of the C19 impact. The combination of all three made this a somewhat depleted draft class. The C19 impact will wash out quickly, NIL/portal we need to watch.

[Cameron Giles]

Good insight… that probably explains a large portion of those who use over-use draft capital, but there are others who aren’t influenced as much but weave it in as part of a formula. Interested in their thoughts.

You might need to clarify your draft capital comments, because draft capital is a major factor. For example, if a player I like falls to day 3, you better bet I’m re-evaluating my life decisions

Bingo.

You can't really "overuse" Draft Capital. There's no data point we have (prior to actual NFL games being played) that is anywhere near as predictive as DC.

Let's talk about modeling for WR prospects. The conversation starts and stops with draft capital. Once we know where these guys are drafted, almost every single metric we add to a model adds very little value. There's still value to coming up with a model -- in fact, I have one in here -- but it's best to keep things simple and not overfit a trend that doesn't actually exist moving forward.

Many, many more thoughts from Hayden Winks on predictive modelling vs. draft capital here.

Draft capital represents all the research and resources NFL teams put into evaluating a prospect. There is nothing we see on Twitter or some hardcore football analytics website that they haven't already seen and more.

At bare minimum, it is very, very significant and at best is the most consistently predictive tool we have available. 80% of Pro Bowl players come from Day 1 and Day 2 of the NFL draft.

If your rankings are not altered by draft capital, then you are doing yourself a huge disservice. Modeling is fun and can find a few edges, but draft capital already is built on analytics to begin with.

That said, I think people should play in whatever way is most enjoyable to them. But, my personal rankings definitely flip when credible sources speak about talent and when we get draft pedigree. It's the closest thing we have to operating with an open book test.

[Jigga94]

I am more likely to move a player down after they fall, than I am to move a player up when they are drafted earlier than expected.

I didn't move Worthy or Pearsall up, but I did move AD down

[Cameron Giles]

Many, many more thoughts from Hayden Winks on predictive modelling vs. draft capital here.

From the article you posted:
"As always, declaring early is also another very good sign regardless of production. Players get feedback from scouts on if they are good enough to leave, so we should take notice whenever we see a junior in the draft class."

I'm curious if this trend will continue with NIL or not. I think we might be looking at early declare differently a couple years from now. Obviously very early 1st round Juniors are incentivized but what about late 1st/early 2nd.

NIL still can't compete with the guaranteed money of the majority of 1st Round + additional sponsors. It's really only the late late 1st where it could be a toss up to bet on yourself. And even then, those players in the back end of the first still get a 5-6M signing bonus, which is more than any NIL valuation. I think there are only 4 players in CFB with an NIL valuation of 2M+.

Early declare juniors are still what you want to see.

[Bronco Billy]

I’ve been pretty outspoken about film study being my priority in my decision making process. I trust my judgment and methodology when evaluating talent. I also firmly believe that talent finds the field regardless of draft capital or situation.

Opinions on this board and of those scouting services that I trust would be secondary in modifying where I value players. There are some here who are outstanding at evaluating players, and when their opinion differs significantly from mine then I’ll try to engage and drill down to see what they’re seeing that I might be missing.

I pay close attention to coaching staff changes and offseason player changes on a team. That can absolutely change a player’s outlook. DAL lost a ton of talent on the O line and replaced it with a couple of rookies. I’m downgrading their running game significantly. PIT made a significant effort at upgrading their O line and hired Arthur Smith at OC. I’m upgrading that running game quite a bit. WAS and NE have coaches that put a premium on the running game - that’s great not only for their RBs but also will help protect their rookie QBs in their learning curve. That’s really important IMO, and those are changes that most probably cross multiple seasons.

Draft capital would be fourth on my list and is not very high in my process. I firmly believe that the value of draft capital declines severely as soon as the pads go on, and coaches who want to keep their jobs are going to put their best players on the field. It only takes one team to like a player - rightly or wrongly - to acquire high draft capital, where the other 31 teams may think he got picked 2 rounds too high. That said, if a player that I like drops significantly in the draft I take an entire second look at the film, because the entire league is seeing something I don’t.

Perception of the current situation means next to nothing to me. It can change very quickly in the NFL. I was always impressed by Terrell Davis locking up the starting RB position his rookie year because of a hit he made on a kick return in preseason, and that struck home with me. Coaches see these guys day in and day out, on the field, in the classroom and off the field. They get all sorts of information on players that we’re just not privy to, and then there are injuries, adds and drops, and the following offseason where surrounding cast and coaching can change a ton.