Probability Analysis of the Burns and DJ decision

[Sir Purr]

Just now, mrcompletely11 said:

https://espnswfl.com/listicle/the-dolphins-basically-turned-the-trey-lance-picks-into-tyreek-hill-jaylen-waddle-and-bradley-chubb/

 

it cuts both ways, and again you are way overvaluing Brian Burns

You guys want to trade players for picks, not trade picks for players. Which do you want?

[Sgt Schultz]

3 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

there is no true way to accurately grade these types of things, its almost completely arbitrary with a lot of moving parts and factors. 

That's the problem with reducing everything to numbers.  With some exceptions, there are almost always factors in the situation being examined that are nearly completely random or arbitrary.  Even the formulas that try to inject randomness or account for arbitrary decisions somewhere in the chain generally fail to reflect the reality.

As the normal disclaimer goes, "all other things being equal."  Yet, those addicted to data and numbers seem to forget that disclaimer, along with the fact that all other things are rarely equal.

[mrcompletely11]

4 minutes ago, Sir Purr said:

https://www.panthers.com/team/players-roster/brian-burns/

• His 25.5 sacks are the most by all players that entered the league since 2019, while his 26 tackles for loss are tied for fourth among those players.

Thats not right at all.   And its another *stat.  Nick Bosa has more

[mrcompletely11]

2 minutes ago, Sgt Schultz said:

That's the problem with reducing everything to numbers.  With some exceptions, there are almost always factors in the situation being examined that are nearly completely random or arbitrary.  Even the formulas that try to inject randomness or account for arbitrary decisions somewhere in the chain generally fail to reflect the reality.

As the normal disclaimer goes, "all other things being equal."  Yet, those addicted to data and numbers seem to forget that disclaimer, along with the fact that all other things are rarely equal.

The OP still hasnt come back to acknowledge that moore has never made the pro bowl so it completely implodes his argument

[Sir Purr]

2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Thats not right at all.   And its another *stat.  Nick Bosa has more

This was 2019-2021 

 

[mrcompletely11]

8 minutes ago, Sir Purr said:

This was 2019-2021 

 

I dont give a poo its not correct now. 

 

https://www.statmuse.com/nfl/ask/most-sacks-in-nfl-since-2019

 

Looking at these stats and damn it doesnt look like it would be tough to replace burns at all

 

Actually scrolling through these stats along with the tfl and assuming they are correct Burns looks rather pedestrian.  He is not top 10 in any category that I am seeing

Edited November 10, 2022 by mrcompletely11

[Sir Purr]

5 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

 

Looking at these stats and damn it doesnt look like it would be tough to replace burns at all

Yeah, players like him grow on trees.  

[mrcompletely11]

4 minutes ago, Sir Purr said:

Yeah, players like him grow on trees.  

lot of players drafted in rounds 2 and 3 on that list

 

damn maxx crosby in the 4rth has put up comparable numbers

Edited November 10, 2022 by mrcompletely11

[Evil Hurney]

19 hours ago, stbugs said:

Yep. It’s incomplete because Burns’ contract is the equivalent of signing Reddick and Corbett. Also, why include DJ? Oh, I know because it makes not trading Burns look better. Burns = 3 picks plus huge cap savings. DJ = 1 pick plus tons of dead cap.

According to the numbers, 2 1sts and 1 2nd means you basically get a pro bowler for 5 years plus two really good FAs with some upside that maybe we get 2 pro bowlers and 2 good FAs.

Burns should have been traded. DJ should not.

No malice was intended by combining the two deals. The deals often get talked about in concert and it's a more compact discussion. I probably should have looked at them separately.

[Evil Hurney]

19 hours ago, mrcompletely11 said:

So is evil hurney not even going to address Moore isn’t a pro bowler?

I said he was Pro Bowl caliber. If you are intending to replace his production the WR would need to be Pro Bowl caliber. 

If you can find a better way to quantify his value and the probability of finding someone with similar value in the draft (or FA) I'm all ears.

[theinstrumental]

42 minutes ago, Sir Purr said:

You guys want to trade players for picks, not trade picks for players. Which do you want?

People want to make smart decisions to maximize the value of our assets. “You guys just want to blow it up” is reductive. Nobody wants to trade Moore. The Burns proposal would’ve been a win for us, though.

[mrcompletely11]

Just now, Evil Hurney said:

I said he was Pro Bowl caliber. If you are intending to replace his production the WR would need to be Pro Bowl caliber. 

If you can find a better way to quantify his value and the probability of finding someone with similar value in the draft (or FA) I'm all ears.

by saying he is "pro bowl caliber" and then applying the "Pro bowl" data later in your op is totaling contradicting.   DJ moore is not a pro bowler so in your analysis/model is totally broken at that point.  You are trying to assign a made up value and then apply it later to the picks.  How do you know those picks will not turn into "pro bowl caliber" players?  Also the pro bowl is a pretty garbage way to look at productivity.  Its basically a popularity contest. 

[Evil Hurney]

2 hours ago, Tr3ach said:

His math is right but incomplete.  Scoring anyone below probowl as a 0 for example, that would score DJ Moore as a 0 as well btw.  Also you have to include a weight for salary.

This first part of this was addressed. Look at page 2.

Salary or more accurately cap space is an interesting dimension brought up by many. I just don't know how to value it. In a money ball sense you are paying for production (over replacement) not just warm bodies, but what are the chances that level of production even exists in FA. If they did why would anyone trade for a DJ or Burns?

Players that have that much projected productivity don't tend to hit FA. Instead you are paying for band-aids and projects which will likely cost more in the long run (see our recent QB history).

[Evil Hurney]

10 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

by saying he is "pro bowl caliber" and then applying the "Pro bowl" data later in your op is totaling contradicting.   DJ moore is not a pro bowler so in your analysis/model is totally broken at that point.  You are trying to assign a made up value and then apply it later to the picks.  How do you know those picks will not turn into "pro bowl caliber" players?  Also the pro bowl is a pretty garbage way to look at productivity.  Its basically a popularity contest. 

I understand what you are saying. I do.

The OP is trying to figure out the probability of drafting players with comparable production and profit.

Without doing A LOT of leg work the Pro Bowl data is the best surrogate I found for binning drafted players into groups. If you want to tick things up or down a few percentage points to account for "not actually making a Pro Bowl", go for it. But as I already mentioned WRs make the Pro Bowl far less often than the 44% I already used.

Edited November 10, 2022 by Evil Hurney