Do NFL Draft Analytics Make Sense?

There are times when analytics may be useful for a draft strategy, but that doesn't mean they are hard rules to follow.

Photo by Stephen Dawson on Unsplash

We are a week removed from the NFL draft but I wanted to look at one topic related to it, that being analytics and how useful it is when it comes to a draft strategy.

We've heard the arguments from those who are big on analytics -- about how it's better to trade down than trade up, on how you have to take the quarterback and that's the only position to trade up for, and that draft picks must be thought of as lottery tickets because nobody can predict whether a drafted player will succeed.

I find these arguments to be useful but they aren't what I would call hard rules. That's because there is more to the draft process than understanding the odds with a particular move.

Consider the analytics on when to go for it on fourth down. The analytics do say that teams should go it for on fourth down more often than they do. What analytics can't tell you, though, is when you go for it on fourth down, what type of play you should run. That's not just whether to run or pass the ball, but whether you should run up the middle or to the edge, or whether you should do play action or a bubble screen.

How does this apply to the draft? While analytics can tell you that you have better odds if you have more draft capital, analytics cannot tell you whether or not a player fits your scheme. Analytics may say it's better to trade up than down but it may not account for how a team ranks players on a draft board. Analytics can tell you trading up for a QB is the best time to trade up, but it cannot tell you how good a particular QB prospect may be going into the draft.

When I look at analytics, I consider not just what the odds say about a particular move but what the team may consider in its team-building process.

For example, if a team doesn't have a quarterback that it can build around, that team needs to determine what it is looking for in a QB other than "a guy who wins football games." Teams need to look at factors such as how they run the offense, the strengths they want the QB to have, how those strengths complement other players and how well the QB processes information.

If there's a draft class in which the team sees a QB that brings the elements the team wants in a QB, that team should go get the QB. However, if the team doesn't see a QB that has those elements, it should direct resources to building the team as if it had the QB in place. That way, when the time comes when the teams finds the QB it can build around, the team is in a better position to help the QB succeed.

Then there's the lottery ticket comparison used for draft picks. While it's true there's no way to guarantee a drafted player will succeed, you can get some ideas about whether or not a player may succeed by, for example, looking at game film. With a lottery ticket, all you have are numbers on a piece of paper or something to scratch off. In both cases, you don't have anything you can study to improve your chances of finding the winning ticket.

Of course, watching game film doesn't ensure that a drafted player will work out. What it does is give you something you can examine to better understand the player and his talents. Does he look like a player who can adapt to any scheme or is he scheme dependent? Does the player have athletic ability but need development, or does he have a lot of development but is lacking in terms of physical traits? There are other things to consider, too.

The point is, if all you do is look at analytics to make your decisions, you may be missing other elements than come into play. Therefore, when it comes to analytics, the thing to keep in mind is when analytics are most useful and when they may be not be as useful.

For example, let's say I'm a general manager who has taken over a team that has one great pass rusher and one good-but-not-great wide receiver, but has an average-at-best quarterback, offensive tackles and cornerbacks. I enter the upcoming draft with the second overall pick and eight total picks, one in each round except the fifth, in which I have two picks. How am I going to build this team into a contender?

In this example, if I see a quarterback I love, of course I should take him with the second overall pick. But what do I do from there? It's easy to say I should just trade down after getting my QB, but what happens when I see an offensive tackle in the second round and can't pass him up? In that case, I'm going to say "forget analytics" and take the offensive tackle.

Now, when I come to the third round, I find the top players on my board either don't play premium positions (QB, pass rusher, OT, WR, CB) or, if they play those positions, they are better viewed as day three picks in my eyes. Here, the analytics argument for trading down gains traction. By moving down in the third, I can get additional picks on day three and utilize the "more lottery tickets" approach in the rounds in which it can be more difficult to find players who may contribute.

Let's take another example. Suppose I'm a general manager for a team that has the quarterback it can build around. The team also has a quality wide receiver, cornerback and offensive tackles. However, the team has no top pass rusher. I enter the draft with the 24th overall pick and 11 total picks, with two in the third, two in the fourth and three in the fifth.

In this case, if I see a pass rusher who I really like, I'm more likely to take a chance on moving up. If I have to give up a third, a fourth and a fifth, along with the 24th overall pick, to get that pass rusher, I still have seven picks left in the later round. Furthermore, I can always trade down in later rounds, even if it means trading out of a particular round, to pick up additional picks later in the draft.

To sum up, I will certainly use analytics to help with my draft strategy but that doesn't mean I'll use analytics as a hard rule. Sometimes it's better to go with the analytics approach, but other times, it's worth taking a chance.

But here are some points to consider about whether or not teams should trade up or down.

* The more draft capital a team has going in, the more it may make sense to trade up. However, the less draft capital a team has going, the more it may make sense to trade down.

* Trading down makes more sense when you have multiple roster holes to fill, particularly at the premium positions. However, you shouldn't trade down if you need a quarterback and one is there who you love. Once you get four of the five premium positions addressed and know you have those players to build around, you can think more about trading up if you are looking for that final premium position.

* It makes more sense to trade up for the premium positions -- and while analytics may favor the quarterback above others, it may make sense to trade up one of the other four premium positions, particularly if you minimize what you give up in a trade. For non-premium positions such as interior offensive line, safety, linebacker, tight end and running back, it doesn't make sense to trade up and you are better off trading down if you have those positions at the top of your board.

* Trading up may make more sense in the first and second rounds, in which you have better odds of finding starters, but trading down may make more sense in the later rounds, in which it may be more difficult to find quality contributors.

* If you're going to trade away future draft capital, you should do whatever you can to ensure you don't give up too many future picks. Furthermore, it's for the best to only do this for a quarterback, unless you know you will have a lot of draft capital in next year's draft and can afford to part ways with a future pick.

OK, so this will likely be the last thing I'll have to say about the NFL draft for a while. And with the NFL offseason entering what's usually the quiet part of the year, I may have more to say on other topics.

For those who have been around mostly for the NFL stuff, know that I do talk about more than the NFL. For those who have wanted to read up on things other than the NFL, thanks for being patient.