NFL Draft Pick value chart. (1 Viewer)

[Andy Dufresne]

Link

Thus begins my personal jihad to stamp out the overused phrase "The best thing for Team X to do is trade down." Well no kidding. You mean it's better for a rotten team to have more top picks than less?

The reason it doesn't happen very much is because it's VERY expensive to trade up.

Just look at what it would cost Arizona to move up to #1- 1300 points!

That means they would have to give something roughly like a 1st, two 2nds, and a 3rd, for just 4 spots. For a rebuilding team, what's the liklihood of that happening?

So before we start assuming the Raiders are going to trade out of the #1 spot, consider what it would cost the team moving up to acquire that pick. Then calculate if the guy you think they're going to take is worth the cost.

Just one man's opinion.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Link

Thus begins my personal jihad to stamp out the overused phrase "The best thing for Team X to do is trade down." Well no kidding. You mean it's better for a rotten team to have more top picks than less?

The reason it doesn't happen very much is because it's VERY expensive to trade up.

Just look at what it would cost Arizona to move up to #1- 1300 points!

That means they would have to give something roughly like a 1st, two 2nds, and a 3rd, for just 4 spots. For a rebuilding team, what's the liklihood of that happening?

So before we start assuming the Raiders are going to trade out of the #1 spot, consider what it would cost the team moving up to acquire that pick. Then calculate if the guy you think they're going to take is worth the cost.

Just one man's opinion.

To back up what Andy's saying, look at the graph in my Dynasty Calculator article and how fast the values go down (pay no attention to the small hiccup around 80 - a.k.a. as the "Tom Brady blip").

 

[ILUVBEER99]

I think the pick value chart is ridiculous since each year is different depending on the players in the draft.

It may be useful for later picks, but for the early ones it makes no sense. Some years there is a big difference between the #1 pick and #4 pick, other years the #4 pick might actually be more valuable if no player stands out since the #4 pick will most likely cost less to sign.

If NFL front offices are actually using this thing as a concrete value chart i'd be shocked.

 

[Despyzer]

If Oakland wanted to move down badly enough, they would flush that chart down the toilet. The real reason they won't be able to trade down is that there aren't many guys that are worth moving up for and paying that extra salary.

 

[T Man]

Link

Thus begins my personal jihad to stamp out the overused phrase "The best thing for Team X to do is trade down." Well no kidding. You mean it's better for a rotten team to have more top picks than less?

The reason it doesn't happen very much is because it's VERY expensive to trade up.

Just look at what it would cost Arizona to move up to #1- 1300 points!

That means they would have to give something roughly like a 1st, two 2nds, and a 3rd, for just 4 spots. For a rebuilding team, what's the liklihood of that happening?

So before we start assuming the Raiders are going to trade out of the #1 spot, consider what it would cost the team moving up to acquire that pick. Then calculate if the guy you think they're going to take is worth the cost.

Just one man's opinion.

I agree. The chart shows that any trade up to number 1 is far too expensive. Too many teams seem beholden to the chart; and, that will continue.

GMs don't want to part with the #1 UNLESS they get at a minimum the picks back that reflect the difference in points. However, a team like the Raiders may be better suited trading the number 1 to go down a few spots and pick up only a 2nd or 3rd rounder. For example, the number 3 overall plus a second or third round pick may be better then the #1, but the chart says no so it won't happen. No GM wants to be raked over the coals for selling the draft pick too cheaply, so it never happens.

 

[GroveDiesel]

I think the pick value chart is ridiculous since each year is different depending on the players in the draft.It may be useful for later picks, but for the early ones it makes no sense. Some years there is a big difference between the #1 pick and #4 pick, other years the #4 pick might actually be more valuable if no player stands out since the #4 pick will most likely cost less to sign.If NFL front offices are actually using this thing as a concrete value chart i'd be shocked.

I agree. I don't understand why this same stupid chart is brought up all the time. There is no single chart. That chart is merely an example and may even be one that somebody in the NFL used at one time. But the bottom line is that every single team is going to have a different chart every single season. Everyone is going to value players differently and thus draft positions differently. In years where the draft is deep, top picks aren't as valuable. In years when the draft is thin, the top picks are more valuable. That chart has virtually no value in discussing this year's draft.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

I think the pick value chart is ridiculous since each year is different depending on the players in the draft.It may be useful for later picks, but for the early ones it makes no sense. Some years there is a big difference between the #1 pick and #4 pick, other years the #4 pick might actually be more valuable if no player stands out since the #4 pick will most likely cost less to sign.If NFL front offices are actually using this thing as a concrete value chart i'd be shocked.

I agree. I don't understand why this same stupid chart is brought up all the time. There is no single chart. That chart is merely an example and may even be one that somebody in the NFL used at one time. But the bottom line is that every single team is going to have a different chart every single season. Everyone is going to value players differently and thus draft positions differently. In years where the draft is deep, top picks aren't as valuable. In years when the draft is thin, the top picks are more valuable. That chart has virtually no value in discussing this year's draft.

The chart has value in that it reflects an average value per draft spot when it was created (hence the "Brady Blip" at the back end). Just like there are draft pick calculators for redraft leagues that give values for a pick, in some years Pick 3 is worth far more than Pick 4 (as many would have said last July). Over time, these differences average out, so if you can find the years where the tiers exist between player values you can possibly exploit them using the average value draft pick charts if you are a good GM.

 

[dparker713]

The charts are stupid. The picks are only worth what someone will pay for them and what someone is willing to part with them for. The biggest problem I see is that the charts do not account for the cap consequences of having a top 5 or top 10 pick.

 

[cstu]

If Oakland wanted to move down badly enough, they would flush that chart down the toilet. The real reason they won't be able to trade down is that there aren't many guys that are worth moving up for and paying that extra salary.

I hate the draft chart and it hurts the team with the top picks because they think they're getting ripped off if they don't follow it. Take the Texans last year for example - they could have had D'Brick and at the very least a 2nd from the Jets instead of Mario. It would have made sense on the basis of the guaranteed money alone ($26.5M for Mario and $18M for D'Brickashaw).

 

[noneother]

i think the table needs adjustment.. what are the values based?

i would much rather have, in the nfl anyway, picks 17, 18, and 20...than number one..