I almost forgot to post this, but after getting the first pick in my fantasy baseball draft, I thought of this article. The Economist, of all places, described a study being conducted by two B-school profs that seems to support what we all intuitively know: the first pick in the NFL draft isn’t necessarily as great as it could be. The profs used the salaries of vets to map fair market value for different levels of performance and then compared that to intial contract offers and signing bonuses. As you might expect, the top picks are vastly overpaid. The full paper can be found at http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/edo1/massey.pdf.
I haven’t read the whole thing, but it looks like it might be pretty interesting. Most of you are probably familiar with Bill James and his band of merry followers. Mark Cuban and folks like John Hollinger are bringing similar techniques and, more importantly, similar mindsets to basketball. It’ll be interesting to see if it pays out in other sports the same way it has in baseball. I’m still not convinced that player stats are as powerful as they are in baseball though…






April 5th, 2005 at 9:07 am
Unfortunately there aren’t as many stats in either football or basketball. I keep saying that, like hockey (what?!? a hockey reference from josh?!)…yes, like hockey, basketball should keep a +/- ratio, or something similar. I feel like a stat like that would help any number of people, including GMs/players/agents when negotiating contracts and fantasy fans.
Football is much tougher, I feel like they might have maxed out the number of stats there, at least from a useable perspective.
April 5th, 2005 at 9:34 am
I think there isn’t enough public statistical data on schemes… plus, you could do a +/- on football players, too, sorta.
Maybe not…
There must be a way, though, to measure something like how TO makes WR #2 better, for example…
April 5th, 2005 at 12:15 pm
There definitely is quite a bit of info out there, but its whether or not its usable data. Football can’t use a +/- but Basketball could because of its two-way nature (peanut gallery, please refrain from jokes here).
Football is much harder because of the differences in defenses, play calls, etc. On the other hand, if we were just to indulge you for a moment, TO makes his #2s much better than Randy Moss for example. Just look at how Minnesota did without Moss, and in turn traded him, in part, because of that.
Just a thought…