Dave Gettleman Vs. The Nerds

The following is a guest post by @sunset_shazz.

New York Giants General Manager Dave Gettleman is a true football man (#TrueFootballMan). He has no time for nerds who sit behind their keyboards. Though some may be concerned about drafting a running back second overall, he is not. From his recent presser after picking Saquon Barkley:

I think a lot of that’s nonsense. I think it’s someone who had this idea and got into the analytics of it and did all these running backs and went through their – whatever. Hey, Jonathan Stewart is in his 10th year and he’s hardly lost anything.

Gettleman appears to believe that the case against using a top 10 pick on a running back rests on perceived longevity. He is misapprehended.

Ben Baldwin, an economist (and Seahawks fan) who makes his living sitting behind his keyboard, summarized the case against using a premium pick on a running back in an excellent post at Field Gulls – do read the whole thing. I’m going to expand on two subsets of his argument: that rookie first round running back contracts are bad values, and bad risks.

The objective of the first round of the NFL draft is to sign an above-average player at a below-average contract for 4 years, with an embedded team option in year 5. Article 7 of the 2011 Collective Bargaining Agreement specifies a rookie wage scale that varies based on the draft pick used to select the player. Importantly, after the 2011 CBA was implemented, the player’s position doesn’t matter: a player picked 2nd overall is paid the same money over 4 years, whether he is a quarterback, running back or long-snapper. Moreover, the market has reached an equilibrium where first round contracts are fully guaranteed. A quick survey of contracts at overthecap.com shows that position value for post-rookie contracts varies significantly in today’s NFL. As a result, the “rookie contract discount” varies dramatically by position. For example, a QB drafted with the 2nd overall pick in 2018 would be the 25th highest paid QB in the league (by average annual compensation) and would have the 15th highest guaranteed money. An RB selected 2nd overall would immediately become the 4th highest paid player at his position, with the highest guaranteed money – all before taking a single professional snap.

The chart above shows selected positions, with their leaguewide positional salary rank plotted against overall draft number (all data courtesy overthecap.com). Running back is the clear outlier – a top 10 pick is automatically among the highest paid RBs in the league.

Here is the same plot for guaranteed money (the rookie contract is compared to the veterans’ amount guaranteed on their current contracts):

Though the 2011 CBA’s wage scale typically serves as a price ceiling for rookies, with running backs drafted in the first round, it serves as a de facto price floor. In terms of guaranteed money, the three highest RB contracts in the league are Barkley (2018, drafted 2nd overall), Leonard Fournette (2017, 4th) and Ezekiel Elliott (2016, 4th). Here are the top 10 picks in this year’s draft, with their annual compensation and total guarantee compared to their league peers by position group (players in top 10 highlighted in red):

The New York Giants have thus expended the #2 draft pick (a considerable use of capital) for the privilege of paying Barkley the #4 annual salary and #1 guarantee at his position. They are paying (through the nose) not just once, but twice!

But perhaps Gettleman is merely acting upon justified conviction. If Barkley is a generational player, surely he’s worth it?

As Ben Baldwin notes in his piece, 1st round running backs have a high bust rate relative to other positions. Data scientist Dr. Sean J. Taylor sent me the following plot, exploring this idea further:

This plot evaluates the set of running backs drafted (or undrafted) between 2009 and 2014. The x-axis represents draft position. The y-axis is the player’s Wins Above Replacement (nflWAR) over the ensuing 4 years. NflWAR is a statistic developed by Yurko, Ventura and Horowitz of Carnegie Mellon University which uses multinomial logistic regression to isolate the contribution of individual players to NFL wins. NflWAR represents a novel effort to advance beyond Approximate Value (AV), and deserves wider recognition.

I draw 3 conclusions from the scatterplot above:

1.     Taking a running back early is risky (bottom left quadrant);

2.     It is possible to find success at running back in later rounds;

3.     Running backs don’t really matter very much (note the Y-axis scale – over 4 years, you get at best 1.5 extra wins from a running back, and typically 0.25 extra win; quarterbacks are approximately 4x more important).

The risk of a bust is even more acute with highly drafted running backs, because the financial commitment to the player is so much higher, relative to other players at the same position. A bust at QB taken at 2nd overall saddles you with the salary of a bottom quartile starter. A bust at RB at the same pick saddles you with a top 4 salary.

But there is no good alternative to taking such a risk, right? Don’t you need to take risks at RB in order to win championships? Ezekiel Elliott, Leonard Fournette and Todd Gurley (taken 4th, 7th and 10th overall, respectively) are commonly cited as evidence of risks that have paid off.

One recurrent theme here at MoK is the application of insights from behavioral science to football. Our past posts have relied heavily on the work of Gary Becker, Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, William F. Sharpe, Kahneman and Tversky again and Joseph Henrich. Today’s post is dedicated to 1990 Nobel Laureate Harry Markowitz who demonstrated that a portfolio of individually risky assets can collectively carry less risk than any of its underlying constituents, even when adjusted for its prospective return.

View fullsize

The above chart shows the three commonly cited high pick successes, and the RB-by-committee groups of the two Super Bowl teams. The “Draft Capital” column dispenses with the archaic Jimmy Johnson scale, instead using Dr. Michael Lopez’s blended draft curve which improves on prior efforts by not only paying attention to expected/modal outcomes, but also giving weight to the probability of drafting a superstar (i.e. the right tail of the distribution). PHI and NE expended between 1/4 and 1/7 the draft resources for their running backs as JAX, DAL and LAR. Though PHI and NE paid relatively high 2017 cap numbers, they locked up minimal resources over the long term (i.e. they could cut bait in 2018). The “gty” column shows guarantees over the entire contracts of those players (Sproles’ and Blount’s initial guarantees for PHI, Gillislee’s, Burkhead’s and White’s for NE).

The advantage of the portfolio approach is: you can be wrong, and still have success. Donnel Pumphrey is not good at football and Darren Sproles was lost for the season. Gillislee, Burkhead and White did not cover themselves in glory in 2017. The portfolio approach diversifies you against injury, suspension or disappointing play. Yet, each portfolio achieved similar yards/attempt and total yards as the 3 high draft picks, for less overall guarantee / draft capital. As a team, NE and PHI ranked 1st and 8th in offensive DVOA, respectively (the Eagles won the Super Bowl). Also, note that NE’s total 2017 expenditure, while high, was less than Le’Veon Bell’s cap number. JAX additionally paid $6MM in 2017 for Chris Ivory, who offered minimal return for this expenditure. As Harry Markowitz showed, the portfolio approach offers something vanishingly rare in economics: a free lunch. A properly constructed portfolio lowers risk, without sacrificing expected return. (Though running backs are risky, they are independently risky. Idiosyncratic risk is diversifiable.)

In summary, Dave Gettleman in his press conference constructed a straw man. The case for positional value does not rest on running back longevity. Instead the TL;DR argument is as follows:

• Using a high draft pick on a running back is a bad bet. At best, you expend draft capital in order to pay a guaranteed contract at a market equivalent price for a good player. At worst, you overpay twice: in draft capital and guaranteed salary for a bad player.
• Drafting a running back is risky.
• By assembling a portfolio of RBs, one can achieve similar performance to drafting a star, while diversifying risk, and saving draft / guarantee capital to deploy elsewhere.
• Your mother was right about eggs and baskets.

The above argument relies upon the prior work of a number of individuals who sit behind keyboards, all of whom have advanced degrees in a quantitative field such as economics, and none of whom have played a snap of professional football. Gettleman, a #TrueFootballMan, will confidently dismiss this argument, regardless of its merit, due to its provenance. Eagles fans should pray he never gets fired, and lives forever.

On Lane Johnson, EJ Manuel, and More

The Eagles stayed in their fourth overall spot on Thursday night and selected the offensive tackle from Oklahoma, Lane Johnson. Needless to say, I'm a big fan of the pick. ​As I've discussed on multiple occasions, the offensive line was a huge question mark given age, injuries, and general uncertainty on the right side. With one move, the Eagles have turned the line into a strength. If Johnson can start on the right side immediately, it moves Todd Herremans back to an easier position at guard and eliminates Danny Watkins from our collective memory. Johnson also injects youth and versatility onto the line. He has the potential to take over at left tackle from Jason Peters down the line.

One of the things that came across in Chip Kelly's press conference ​was that Johnson is still raw, but the Eagles have confidence in a player of his athletic ability. Check out how he scored in the combine versus other tackles via his Mockdraftable profile at right. Johnson is elite across the board, with the biggest detriment coming with his skinny frame of only 303 lbs. Fun fact, though, the Eagles apparently measured his wrists and ankles to determine that he can add up to another 20 lbs without problem (#SportScience). As Jimmy Kempski writes, the Eagles now have one of the most athletically gifted offensive lines in the NFL. Kelly must love that. Read more on Johnson from Tommy Lawlor.

Another intriguing aspect of the first round was drama surrounding quarterback. EJ Manuel was a surprise as the first QB selected, way up at #16 overall. Manuel himself suggested that the Eagles were ​one of just a few teams heavily interested. I'm not surprised by that, since he would be perfect for Kelly's offense. But it seems that the Bills, anxious to beat other teams, jumped on Manuel before anyone else had a shot. I wonder if the Eagles were prepared to go back into the bottom of the first round to get Manuel. They certainly could have hoped that Geno Smith and Ryan Nassib would have drawn more attention early. At this point I doubt that Smith would remain a target for the Eagles at 35, although you never say never.

​What I'm really looking for next on the Eagles draft board is some defense. While the team will (and should) certainly be open to tight ends with potential, the other side of the ball is what needs the most help. The Eagles have eight remaining picks, and could gather some more if they trade down at all. I tend to think at least six of those will be used to aid the defensive transition. Another safety, perhaps, like Johnathan Cyprien, or a big body like Jesse Williams or John Jenkins could be in order in the second round.

Photo from Getty.​

Oh, Danny Boy

There are plenty of reasons to be unhappy with the Danny Watkins pick in 2011. There's his age, for starters. Guard isn't exactly a premium position, especially in Howard Mudd's scheme. Plus, there was his poor play last year after being called "NFL ready" by basically everyone.

But now we have to worry about something more: that Watkins's football intelligence just isn't close to being starter-quality yet. Sheil Kapadia, who continues to kill it over at Birds 24/7, wrote a revealing piece about Watkins yesterday:

When Danny Watkins saw a notice last week at the Novacare Complex for a mandatory rookie event, his first instinct was to tell his teammate, Jason Kelce.

But then, Watkins remembered: He's not a rookie anymore.

Alright, alright. Mocking him for forgetting that he's not a rookie anymore would be juvenile. But take that in context of the rest of the story. Here's Jason Kelce on Watkins's progress:

"Now, having a full offseason under his belt, finally learning to think about things in different ways than he's used to, he can now watch film on his own and tell what's going on. 'I screwed up there. I should be doing this.' That's huge. Really, if you're at the level where you should be mentally, you should know immediately after a play, I just screwed that up. Last year, he wasn't at that level, whereas now, he's slowly able to recognize, 'I should have did that better that last play.' "

Wait, I'm supposed to comfortable with a guy who's "slowly" able figure out that he might have done something wrong on the previous play? It's one thing to mess up, to miss a block or blow an assignment. Everybody makes mistakes. But it's mind-boggling to me that someone would consistently not even realize that they made a mistake at all.

It's not a good sign that Watkins only now is learning how to watch film. That (a) was something the Eagles should have known before they drafted him and (b) something renowned line coach Howard Mudd ought to be able to teach. Unless... Well, yeah, we've been there already.

At the end of the day, your former first round pick shouldn't be talking about your former sixth round pick like there are light years separating the two:

"Looking back at where me and him started last year, he's so far ahead with his football IQ, and I'm trying to learn from him. I think he's going to do awesome this year. I'm excited for him."

Photo from Getty.

Arguing for, um, Jerry Jones

Jimmy Kempski:

They’re a team with no shortage of star power (or at least perceived star power) at the top: Ware, Romo, Witten, Austin, Ratliff, Smith, Lee and if you want to throw in Bryant and Carr too, then OK, I suppose I’ll allow it.

Beyond the stars, there’s mediocrity up and down the starting lineup and typically no depth to speak of whatsoever. This has not been a winning formula, and probably never will be.

The Cowboys’ decision to trade up and utilize their top 2 picks on one player (albeit potentially a great one), especially at a position that didn’t need as much help as other areas, reflects that same pattern.

Jimmy’s point about the Cowboys is well taken, and I can’t find fault with his encyclopedic knowledge of Dallas’s woes up and down their lineup. Still, I actually think trading up for Morris Claiborne is a justifiable, and in fact, possibly great move for Jerry Jones.

My main disagreement is that the Cowboys’ greater need at multiple positions shouldn’t disqualify them from grabbing a player at the top of their draft board. I like the Eagles decision to move up for Fletcher Cox, but they undoubtedly have positions in worse straits as well (e.g. safety and linebacker). Drafting a player that you feel strongly can become a Pro Bowler should come ahead of almost all considerations of need. Sure, more picks are better, but taking one of the consensus top six players in the draft this year probably balances out whomever you could have gotten at pick 45.

Building a roster is a long term game. You can’t solve (or ignore) all your problems in one draft or offseason. Dallas may fail at that in the long term, but in itself, picking Claiborne isn’t a poor decision.

Quarterback Draft Inflation: From Kafka to Foles

I have a theory about the Eagles third round selection of quarterback Nick Foles. Despite the relatively early pick, it has nothing to do with replacing Michael Vick or even Mike Kafka. It’s about the NFL draft and the dramatic quarterback inflation that has occurred in the last two years.

Let’s take a quick journey back to 2010. Sam Bradford went first to the Rams and Denver jumped up to 25 overall to get Tim Tebow. The next quarterbacks off the board were Jimmy Clausen (#48), Colt McCoy (#85), and the Eagles’ Kafka (#122). That order of quarterbacks coming off the board — two in the opening round, another one in each of the following — is right in line with what had been going on ever since the draft was whittled down to seven rounds in 1994.

But that pattern, largely consistent for the previous 15 years, was thrown out the window over the last two. In 2011, four quarterbacks were drafted in the first round, and six in the top 40 picks. That rivaled two of the biggest quarterback-heavy drafts in recent memory, 1999 and 2004, despite talent that few considered equal. Then this most recent draft saw another four quarterbacks taken in the first, something that’s never happened in two straight years. Overall, the 2012 draft was slightly behind the 2011 pace, but it was still far ahead of nearly any prior draft.

Here, see for yourself, in table and graphical forms:

What does this mean about Foles? It means that the Eagles likely drafted a worse quarterback in an earlier round than they ever would have before. For example, the team selected Kafka in the fourth round of 2010, presumably to be a long term backup they could groom. He was the fifth quarterback drafted overall.

Foles, taken a round and a half before Kafka, was only the seventh-best quarterback according to draft order. Perhaps this year’s crop of quarterbacks, and Foles in particular, is better than the group teams had to choose from in 2010 — and nearly every prior year. But my impression is that most experts considered this, pre-draft, to be at best an average class after the two stars.

Two years may be too soon to confirm a trend, but the evidence is there. Quarterbacks have never been more highly valued in the NFL. Desperate teams without a franchise signal-caller give big contracts to former backups and trade for anyone with promise. It only makes sense that such a frenzied demand would trickle down to the draft. As that happens, quarterbacks with starting potential rise from the second and third rounds into the top 30 picks, and those who might have been considered late round projects jump up to take their place.

Suddenly, this starts to look less like a fluke and more like a serious shift in how quarterback prospects are valued. We would be wise to view the Foles pick with that in mind.

Photo from Getty.

What We Learned from the Fletcher Cox Selection

I can’t remember the last time the Eagles picked somebody in the first round that both draftniks and fans loved. Look at Bleeding Green Nation’s fan poll on the pick: Cox’s approval rating sits at 94 percent. A year ago, Danny Watkins eked out majority approval by a margin of just 21 votes out of about 1,600.

The fact that Cox is popular doesn’t, on it’s own, make the selection a good one. But it fits in so many ways. Let’s break down what we learned last night:

1. The Eagles have become remarkably clumsy at deploying smokescreens for their first round pick. Was anyone other than a few reactionary mock drafters buying a Dontari Poe selection? The way the Eagles led him on a pointless parade past reporters a few weeks back on raised major red flags. What Reid said last night about Kansas City and Poe confirmed that they never had any real interest.

2. Scheme matters. On a related note, it is important to keep in mind the scheme prospects look most suited for. There were plenty of DT options in the middle of the first round, but the Eagles made sure to grab the one who fit best with Jm Washburn’s penetrating style.

3. Despite the trades, the first eight picks played out almost exactly as planned. The elite eight ended up being a game of musical chairs (propelled by more reasonable contracts), but that didn’t matter much to the Eagles. Other than Mark Barron, who reportedly was never a NovaCare target, all the players you expected to go early did. That allowed the Eagles to sit back and wait for either Luke Kuechly or Fletcher Cox to drop. Note: I would wager that had the Panthers taken Cox instead, we would probably be having the same conversations we’re having now, except it would be Kuechly coming to Philly today.

4. Don’t draft an immediate starter. The Cox selection continues a general trend in which the Eagles rarely draft anyone with the expectation that they will start right away. The defensive line is aging and Cox can step right in a contribute, without having to be a starter until year two, when the writing is on the wall for Cullen Jenkins.

5. Valuing the second round picks more? Andy Reid talked about having a limit on what they were willing to pay for a trade up. He said they didn’t want to give up a second round pick, as Dallas did, to jump up into the top 10. I wonder if this is actually a change in policy dating back to the disastrous trade up for Jerome McDougle in 2003. Since then, the most the team has paid in a trade was a third round pick to move up for Brandon Graham. That hasn’t been a resounding success either. The fourth and sixth round picks the Eagles gave up this time amounted to an exceedingly reasonable price. (The draft value chart says the difference between pick 12 and pick 15 is properly a late third round selection.)

What to watch for tonight: If the Eagles make all three of their next selections, I would guess they’re looking to come away with a linebacker, defensive end, and some sort of offensive weapon at either wide receiver or tight end. But given their recent history, a trade back to accrue more picks (and starting linebackers) is likely in the cards.

Photo from Getty.

Eagles Jump Up In 1st Round, Snatch Fletcher Cox

“A Frightening-Looking Man”

“Just Bug-Eye”

“Just seeing him run amazed me.”

My 2012 Eagles Draft Predictions

Last year at this time I made eight predictions about what the Eagles would do in the draft. Some of them were more conservative than others, and I missed on one of my biggest guesses — saying that the team wouldn’t draft at their assigned first round spot. Still, I managed to get six of eight correct, and predicted the general thrust of the draft rather well (linebacker and offensive line, not defensive line).

So I’m back again for another round of likely folly. Here are my predictions for what we will see over the next few days.

1. Carpet-bombing the defense: early and often. Big picture: all the talented young players are on offense. You can quibble with this if you want, since there’s no reason to give up already on guys like Brandon Graham or Nate Allen. Still, the defense needs more playmakers going forward, and the only way to do that is to spend at least three out of the Eagles first four picks on defensive players. I expect the team to come out of the draft with as many as half their picks going toward the front seven.

2. No rookie running back, no safety. Unless the Eagles fall in love with one prospect, I just don’t see much benefit in adding another young running back or safety. Both positions have a single open back up job and that spot really needs to be filled with a veteran whose only responsibility is to fill in this year if something goes wrong. Instead, watch out for an Ellis Hobbs-type trade for a marginalized veteran player.

3. One offensive lineman, maximum. Last year the Eagles snatched up three interior linemen to build out Howard Mudd’s new blocking scheme. If not for Jason Peters’s injury, I’m not sure they would have bothered drafting even one this year, but a long term project at tackle now makes sense.

4. Chad Hall 2.0. Andy Reid loves the multidimensional ability that Hall brings to the offense so much that he’s willing to overlook his complete lack of NFL-caliber skills. I think the Eagles will draft someone like Florida’s Chris Rainey to return kicks and serve as a speedier x-factor on offense. Best case scenario, the team also gets its long-term replacement for Jason Avant with this guy.

5. Choir boys. Howie Roseman made some comments to reporters recently in which he seemed to flirt with the idea of taking more character risks. His actions over the last two drafts say otherwise. I expect the Eagles’ fascination with captains, seniors, and consistent, big-school performers to continue (e.g. no Vontaze Burfict).

6. Michael Vick is still safe. With few good quarterback options in this draft and the whole organization focused on getting Vick back on track in 2012, there’s no good case to reach for a quarterback of the future. Trent Edwards is tremendously uninspiring, but his competition is likely to be either a late round flier (Russell Wilson, Kellen Moore) or a veteran to be pursued later.

7. Surprise neglect of cornerback early on. With Asante Samuel gone, there’s plenty of room to go after Dre Kirkpartrick or another cover guy in the first round. But of the Eagles defensive spots, cornerback still has the most options. The team is heavily committed to Nnamdi Asomugha over the next few years and Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie is a likely candidate for a contract extension. Curtis Marsh is the wildcard. He made no impact in 2011, but was always considered a project with all the skills. Todd Bowles may not need another youngster.

8. At least ten rookies. Last year one of my failed predictions was that the Eagles wouldn’t use all of their picks. But of course, they love drafting players and will probably end up trading back to add picks at least once.

I’m not making a prediction for the first round, although I already laid out what I think the Eagles are thinking (Peter King shoutout). Fletcher Cox is the potential trade-up candidate, Luke Kuechly the likely front-runner if they stay at 15 overall. Barring that I’m less sure, although a versatile pass rusher like Melvin Ingram makes the most sense of the remaining players.

Photo from Getty.