Bears Week 14: Deshaun Watson Makes his Soldier Field Debut

[Bertz]

QBs are worth trading up for. Edge guys probably are worth it too. You just have to hit. There definitely isn't a overall value issue there, IMO. RB, not so much, but at that point we're looking at more an exception than rule issue and he's moved up and down the middle rounds, occassionally with great success!

 

ETA as to Mack specifically, while I think the goal obviously is to spend efficiently in a capped league, I do kind of feel like you can get away with a less than efficient purchase here and there if it adds great win value. I'd rather use every last cap dollar available and get 12 wins than spend 80% of the cap efficiently and get 10 wins (obviously it's not so simplistic, but that would be the gist of my philosophy. So you're allowed like one Mack, as long as the big picture "value" decisions make sense, IMO)

 

That's the key. "Here and there" is prudent, Pace does it at every opportunity.

But not really?

 

Here's some context as far as how I see draft/FA management. Both when he traded up for Trubisky and Floyd he traded down in the same draft to recoup picks. In the Mack trade, while he gave up 2 firsts he got back a couple picks (including a 2nd) so the net pick loss was only net 1 I think.

 

His FA from 2015-2019 mostly considering of targeting "ascending"/younger players rather than "paying for past performance" and generally has meant he's spread dough around. 2020 was a big change in that regards. In managing the FA process he got them back into the comp pick game in about 5 years which is about as realistically as fast as you could have hoped he would considering the draft classes he inherited.

 

These are all things that give me some reason to believe he has a decent high level draft and FA value strategy, despite areas I can highlight that go against it. He tends on the aggressive side with particular targets obviously, but I don't know if I see the Hendry comparison.

 

Off the top of my head, or already brought up in this convo:

 

Trading up for Trubisky

Trading up for Floyd

Trading up for Montgomery

Trading for Foles instead of just signing Dalton

 

These were all places where he basically just lit mid-round picks on fire to get the specific guy he wanted, instead of possibly having to settle for someone comparable (or with Trubisky, probably still his guy). You can make those moves occasionally, but it's essentially an annual tradition for Pace.

 

In FA he's been less reckless, though the Jimmy Graham deal was laughed at league wide and doesn't really look any better in hindsight. I also remember Bill Barnwell railing against the Kyle Fuller deal, though I am not/was not enough of a capologist to understand the details of his complaint.

 

It really is reminiscent of Hendry. You have some downright wonderful moves (Akiem Hicks!) interspersed with numerous unforced errors. Good teams scout well and play the percentages in case they're wrong. Ryan Pace scouts well and makes moves that only pay off if he scouted correctly.

 

And I know I brought up Mack bit I'm not really going to fault Pace for that. Mack was a legit superstar and they were at the right place on the win curve and on Trubisky's rookie contract. It's not the efficiency Olympics, even if that was kind of a woof move in terms of efficiency. But in an ideal world, you don't make the other moves so that you can better afford the Mack deal. To keep the Hendry comparison going, Mack was Pace's Soriano contract. Overpaying Soriano is fine, overpaying Soriano while you're already overpaying Jacque Jones and Jason Marquis is not fine.

[WrigleyField 22]

Well for all the mid round picks he lit on fire, if my analysis is right (again just based on the trade value chart), he "only" gave up the equivalent in value of a 19th overall pick, which includes getting Mack. So for whatever you think of individual moves (and some I also didn't like as well) this annual tradition doesn't seem to exactly be netting them annual overall value losses (though I'd be interested to run it on a more analytically sound model the traditional chart isn't completely without worth). Is he adding value? Well depends on how you value Mack. Certainly not a significant amount I guess (and you'd have to value his earlier departures in trades)

 

Like I said with Graham, as with the rest of the 2020 FA class, that was the big departure for him. Before that they basically paid for the type of profiles you want to. Some work out like Arob. Other less so, like Burton, but the approach has seemed legit in 5 of 6 offseasons. Not sure what the Fuller thing even references. That was a match type situation as I believe they transition tagged him. Packers made an offer, Bears had right of first refusal. Regardless that has turned out great contract as Kyle has been stellar.

 

Could he try to add more excess value in the draft? I guess. But acting like any trade up is bad (basically) is pretty short sided. And if those trades are for positions like QB and EDGE thats exactly where you want to be aggressive as the marginal value of a rookie deal verse replacement FA is largest. It's just that two of the picks were the wrong guy.

[WrigleyField 22]

Same exercise with a likely more analytically designed value chart

(Blog here https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/)

 

They still start at a 10th overall average value. Their trades brought them down to the average trade value of a 21st pick this time. Which is a larger drop. Though due to the different curve of this chart's points, that value (676 points "given up") come out to one 26th overall value pick. So an overall similar story. If, when we run through any trade value model and they all come out and say basically that Pace has given up a later first rounder, net, in all his wheeling and dealing, and that includes netting Mack... it doesn't seem to be an area likely to stress over. Though granted, it is a net loss of 3 picks overall verse expected. Although that includes Mack still and doesn't consider whether he's done above or below average in UDFA.

[jumbo]

I was looking at the Trubisky trade the other day. The 2017 3rd rounder given up was used on Alvin Kamara. The 2018 3rd rounder given up was used on Fred Warner.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Same exercise with a likely more analytically designed value chart

(Blog here https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/)

 

They still start at a 10th overall average value. Their trades brought them down to the average trade value of a 21st pick this time. Which is a larger drop. Though due to the different curve of this chart's points, that value (676 points "given up") come out to one 26th overall value pick. So an overall similar story. If, when we run through any trade value model and they all come out and say basically that Pace has given up a later first rounder, net, in all his wheeling and dealing, and that includes netting Mack... it doesn't seem to be an area likely to stress over. Though granted, it is a net loss of 3 picks overall verse expected. Although that includes Mack still and doesn't consider whether he's done above or below average in UDFA.

 

You're making a lot of sense but I don't want to change my mind.

[WrigleyField 22]

Same exercise with a likely more analytically designed value chart

(Blog here https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/)

 

They still start at a 10th overall average value. Their trades brought them down to the average trade value of a 21st pick this time. Which is a larger drop. Though due to the different curve of this chart's points, that value (676 points "given up") come out to one 26th overall value pick. So an overall similar story. If, when we run through any trade value model and they all come out and say basically that Pace has given up a later first rounder, net, in all his wheeling and dealing, and that includes netting Mack... it doesn't seem to be an area likely to stress over. Though granted, it is a net loss of 3 picks overall verse expected. Although that includes Mack still and doesn't consider whether he's done above or below average in UDFA.

 

You're making a lot of sense but I don't want to change my mind.

I still don't like being down 3 picks whereas a lot of the best franchises average 8+ picks per draft, largely due to comp picks.

 

So you could still say he's down a net 9 picks from where you'd hope to see, even if trade charts have overall supported his net movements.

 

So don't change your mind.

 

Although they've now gotten comp picks the past two years, so maybe there's hope. I suppose that's where I'm at. A little underwhelmed, but if they keep Pace I can squint and act like hes about to hit his draft management peak.