[OC] Evaluating Draft Picks By Selection History - Part 2
After the controversial trade-down yesterday, I'd like to crunch the numbers on the history of selections the Vikings and Lions will be taking to see which side is better.
For the full explanation on how my analysis is conducted, please refer to Part 1 here.
Here is the history for picks 12-14:
Picks 32-34:
Picks 45-47:
Picks 65-67:
Summary:
My thoughts - it's still a bad trade. Picks in the upper teens will result in elite players far more often than any of the other ones, and I think there were a couple guys on the board. It's also concerning that the history of picks 32-34 is quite bad, and the average outcome is a middling starter. My initial study concluded that 3rd rounders weren't as valuable as I had originally thought, so netting a high 3rd doesn't do much for me. Even at picks 65-67, the odds are that you'll land a rotational player.
Your thoughts?
For the full explanation on how my analysis is conducted, please refer to Part 1 here.
Here is the history for picks 12-14:
Picks 32-34:
Picks 45-47:
Picks 65-67:
Summary:
My thoughts - it's still a bad trade. Picks in the upper teens will result in elite players far more often than any of the other ones, and I think there were a couple guys on the board. It's also concerning that the history of picks 32-34 is quite bad, and the average outcome is a middling starter. My initial study concluded that 3rd rounders weren't as valuable as I had originally thought, so netting a high 3rd doesn't do much for me. Even at picks 65-67, the odds are that you'll land a rotational player.
Your thoughts?