The Harvard Draft Value Chart

[GREENBEAN]

I read an article last week about the different draft value charts that teams use during the draft.  It talked about how the Jimmy Johnson chart undervalues mid to late rd picks and makes trades into the early 1st rd much more unrealistic than they should be. Ex: the late 7th rd picks being worth 1 point.

 The article suggested the Harvard chart may actually be closer to how teams value each pick due to the analytics involved in its creation.  This would really change how many of us look at all of the trades being tossed around these days. Applying it to the potential trade the Jets may pull together this year could give us an entirely different idea of what we should be looking for.  I am going to copy a break down of the Harvard draft value chart below. Pretty interesting stuff. The Harvard Trade Value Chart

The Harvard Trade Value Chart

A big part of the draft are trades. But when trading picks, teams have to find a way to put a value to those picks. To do this, teams use trade value charts. The most widely known of these charts is the "Jimmy Johnson Draft Value Chart" and that version is commonly accepted as the "official" draft value chart.

When Johnson joined the Cowboys in 1989, he took older draft value charts and modified them to his liking, and the end result is the chart we all know. The main criticism of the chart's point value system is that it wasn't created using any real form of statistical analysis, but was based on the available data at the time and research that Johnson and others had gathered previously.

A chart that is much more statistically rigorous in its approach to valuing draft picks is the Harvard Sports Analysis Chart, which was developed by Harvard economics student Kevin Meers and uses a metric called "Career Approximate Value" to value a draft pick. In late 2011, Meers wrote about the specifics of his chart:

Here's what the Harvard Chart looks like:

Round 1		Round 2		Round 3		Round 4		Round 5		Round 6		Round 7
1	494.6	33	175.2	65	128.0	97	97.8	129	75.6	161	58.0	193	43.5
2	435.7	34	173.3	66	126.9	98	97.1	130	75.0	162	57.5	194	43.1
3	401.3	35	171.4	67	125.8	99	96.3	131	74.4	163	57.1	195	42.6
4	376.9	36	169.5	68	124.7	100	95.5	132	73.8	164	56.6	196	42.2
5	357.9	37	167.7	69	123.6	101	94.7	133	73.2	165	56.1	197	41.8
6	342.4	38	165.9	70	122.5	102	94.0	134	72.6	166	55.6	198	41.4
7	329.4	39	164.1	71	121.5	103	93.2	135	72.0	167	55.1	199	41.0
8	318.0	40	162.4	72	120.4	104	92.5	136	71.5	168	54.6	200	40.6
9	308.0	41	160.8	73	119.4	105	91.7	137	70.9	169	54.2	201	40.2
10	299.1	42	159.1	74	118.4	106	91.0	138	70.3	170	53.7	202	39.8
11	291.0	43	157.5	75	117.4	107	90.3	139	69.7	171	53.2	203	39.4
12	283.6	44	155.9	76	116.4	108	89.5	140	69.2	172	52.7	204	39.0
13	276.8	45	154.3	77	115.4	109	88.8	141	68.6	173	52.3	205	38.6
14	270.5	46	152.8	78	114.4	110	88.1	142	68.0	174	51.8	206	38.2
15	264.7	47	151.3	79	113.5	111	87.4	143	67.5	175	51.4	207	37.8
16	259.2	48	149.8	80	112.5	112	86.7	144	66.9	176	50.9	208	37.4
17	254.0	49	148.4	81	111.6	113	86.0	145	66.4	177	50.4	209	37.0
18	249.2	50	147.0	82	110.7	114	85.3	146	65.8	178	50.0	210	36.6
19	244.6	51	145.6	83	109.7	115	84.6	147	65.3	179	49.5	211	36.3
20	240.2	52	144.2	84	108.8	116	84.0	148	64.8	180	49.1	212	35.9
21	236.1	53	142.8	85	107.9	117	83.3	149	64.2	181	48.6	213	35.5
22	232.1	54	141.5	86	107.1	118	82.6	150	63.7	182	48.2	214	35.1
23	228.4	55	140.2	87	106.2	119	82.0	151	63.2	183	47.8	215	34.7
24	224.7	56	138.9	88	105.3	120	81.3	152	62.6	184	47.3	216	34.3
25	221.3	57	137.6	89	104.4	121	80.7	153	62.1	185	46.9	217	33.9
26	218.0	58	136.3	90	103.6	122	80.0	154	61.6	186	46.5	218	33.5
27	214.7	59	135.1	91	102.7	123	79.4	155	61.1	187	46.0	219	33.1
28	211.7	60	133.9	92	101.9	124	78.7	156	60.6	188	45.6	220	32.7
29	208.7	61	132.7	93	101.1	125	78.1	157	60.0	189	45.2	221	32.3
30	205.8	62	131.4	94	100.3	126	77.5	158	59.5	190	44.7	222	31.9
31	203.0	63	130.3	95	99.4	127	76.9	159	59.0	191	44.3	223	31.5
32	200.3	64	129.1	96	98.6	128	76.2	160	58.5	192	43.9	224	31.1

 

Note that this chart shows a linear decline from pick 215 on down, which is different from the original Harvard Chart, which has a distinct and unexplained bump at 215.

After the 2013 draft, the Cowboys were roundly and loudly criticized for giving up value in trading down from the 18th spot for the 31st and 74th pick. (18 = 31 + 74)

The Johnson Chart did indeed suggest that the Cowboys gave up points (900 = 600 + 220) whereas the Harvard Chart (249.2 = 203 + 118.4) indicated that the Cowboys had come out ahead in that trade, a point Stephen Jones stressed in the post-draft press conference:

 

In this day and age, there is no one single "correct" chart, but the odds are that the different charts being used by NFL teams are a lot closer to the Harvard Chart than to the Johnson Chart.

[GreenFish]

These charts are all just guidelines. People use them as some sacred thing. The Cowboys chart values top 3 picks at some really high level. This is true when there’s possibly an elite QB or two available. That’s not always the case. This year’s draft doesn’t have the prospects at the top to justify the value of the first three picks in the Cowboys chart.

This chart seems a bit light in value though. Teams definitely seems to almost always give up more than what this chart suggest. Which probably why teams that trade back tend to come out ahead.

My takeaway from this chart is that it shows why teams should always look to trade down unless they are trying to get a QB. Every statistical study suggest seems to always suggest the teams that trades down come out ahead. Just trade down and accumulate day 2 picks would be my approach. Pick a guy in the first round a bunch of guys in round 2 and 3. 

[Bowles Movement]

Based on this chart we got ass raped by Indy last year.

[GREENBEAN]

1 minute ago, Bowles Movement said:

Based on this chart we got ass raped by Indy last year.

based on the Johnson chart we got ass raped last year. 

I'd do it again for what it's worth though.  Love a good ass raping when a Sam Darnold comes out of it. 

[GREENBEAN]

17 minutes ago, GreenFish said:

These charts are all just guidelines. People use them as some sacred thing. The Cowboys chart values top 3 picks at some really high level. This is true when there’s possibly an elite QB or two available. That’s not always the case. This year’s draft doesn’t have the prospects at the top to justify the value of the first three picks in the Cowboys chart.

This chart seems a bit light in value though. Teams definitely seems to almost always give up more than what this chart suggest. Which probably why teams that trade back tend to come out ahead.

My takeaway from this chart is that it shows why teams should always look to trade down unless they are trying to get a QB. Every statistical study suggest seems to always suggest the teams that trades down come out ahead. Just trade down and accumulate day 2 picks would be my approach. Pick a guy in the first round a bunch of guys in round 2 and 3. 

I agree with the thought that it seems light. Where it gets interesting is how they came to those values though. Something about how each player's actual career ended up. Just leaving the value of a pick based on its position alone is not the whole story. Seems many of the players picked in the mid and later rounds had positive careers too. Imagine that? 

I like that it uses actual data to come to its value conclusions. It's difficult to get my mind from 3000 pts to 494.6 and it would be hard for me to adopt this entirely if I were in the position, but math is math and facts are facts. I've learned many times in my life how drastically different my "feelings" or opinions were from the actual facts. It's tough but i would bet that using this type of a data based mindset nets better results than the other value chart. 

It does seem to be that the teams who trade up in blockbuster trades get the short end of the stick more than not though doesn't it?  Let's hope the Darnold trade doesn't end up that way. The Colts results are immediately looking quite positive in that one.  

[Ohio State NY Jets fan]

36 minutes ago, Bowles Movement said:

Based on this chart we got ass raped by Indy last year.

Yup, starting to think, Sam would have fell to 6 last year the way teams are talking this year, Mac got hosed last year and will again this year

hope I am wrong and there are a few big trade ups but mocks with Haskins to Bengals or Redskins in the teens makes me wonder

[Jetster]

You have to do what you have to do to get your QB. The history of the 2nd round hasn't been kind to the NY Jets. 

QB that turns into your franchise leader for a couple of 2nd round picks is well worth the price. 

Personally, I don't think GMs TRADE UP during the draft enough. Macc should have traded up for Kamara if he wanted him that bad. Find a way to get the players you target. 

[GreenFish]

58 minutes ago, GREENBEAN said:

based on the Johnson chart we got ass raped last year. 

I'd do it again for what it's worth though.  Love a good ass raping when a Sam Darnold comes out of it. 

Agree. I would do the Darnold trade 10 times out of 10. Trading up for a potential FQB seems to be the only reason to move up in the draft. 

This was a good find. It’s probably closer to what teams should be getting when making draft trades. The Cowboy chart probably reflects what teams are willing to pay. 

[GREENBEAN]

You have to do what you have to do to get your QB. The history of the 2nd round hasn't been kind to the NY Jets. 
QB that turns into your franchise leader for a couple of 2nd round picks is well worth the price. 
Personally, I don't think GMs TRADE UP during the draft enough. Macc should have traded up for Kamara if he wanted him that bad. Find a way to get the players you target. 

Agreed. I think the trade macc made last year was masterful. Getting it done prior to the draft and without an additional 1st in the mix was great.

We got our QB with as much true potential to be Upper echelon as we’ve had since the 60’s. We’ve had a few good ones but never with the potential Sam has. You make that move every time.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[Jimmy 2 Times]

The cost for Sam was pretty low when compared to other recent draft trades for quarterbacks.

[GREENBEAN]

Yup, starting to think, Sam would have fell to 6 last year the way teams are talking this year, Mac got hosed last year and will again this year
hope I am wrong and there are a few big trade ups but mocks with Haskins to Bengals or Redskins in the teens makes me wonder

I was only referring to value chart points. Truth is I think the trade we made was awesome. Getting up to 3 in a such a strong QB classfor 3 2nd rdrs was as good as we could have gotten.

In most cases we would have had to give up another 1st. That wound have been the # 3 pick this year. Even in hindsight it’s a great trade. It all just depends on darnold development of course. I believe he will be the man we’ve all been waiting for since becoming jets fans or since Namath for the really old heads.

This year is a different class and we may not get as much but should still trade back. So much talent in this draft in the 2nd and 3rd.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[dbatesman]

1 hour ago, GREENBEAN said:

based on the Johnson chart we got ass raped last year. 

I'd do it again for what it's worth though.  Love a good ass raping when a Sam Darnold comes out of it. 

 

51 minutes ago, Jetster said:

You have to do what you have to do to get your QB. The history of the 2nd round hasn't been kind to the NY Jets. 

QB that turns into your franchise leader for a couple of 2nd round picks is well worth the price. 

Personally, I don't think GMs TRADE UP during the draft enough. Macc should have traded up for Kamara if he wanted him that bad. Find a way to get the players you target. 

 

41 minutes ago, GreenFish said:

Agree. I would do the Darnold trade 10 times out of 10. Trading up for a potential FQB seems to be the only reason to move up in the draft. 

This was a good find. It’s probably closer to what teams should be getting when making draft trades. The Cowboy chart probably reflects what teams are willing to pay. 

 

33 minutes ago, Jimmy 2 Times said:

The cost for Sam was pretty low when compared to other recent draft trades for quarterbacks.

Just a reminder that the only reason we had to trade anything to get Darnold is that Maccagnan passed on two (2) franchise quarterbacks to take a safety. Thanks everyone

[GREENBEAN]

Just a reminder that the only reason we had to trade anything to get Darnold is that Maccagnan passed on two (2) franchise quarterbacks to take a safety. Thanks everyone

That didn’t take long.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[nico002]

Lmao if We hadn’t traded up pre draft the price to get Darnold would have been astronomical. We wouldn’t have a 1st this year that’s for sure.

[T0mShane]

58 minutes ago, dbatesman said:

Just a reminder that the only reason we had to trade anything to get Darnold is that Maccagnan passed on two (2) franchise quarterbacks to take a safety. Thanks everyone

Yes, but the safety is a leader of men so

[RoadFan]

Charts...sharts... 

The value of draft picks is subjective to each individual team based on how they grade the players, and their own current situation.   I don't have a Harvard education, but I see it as the player value determines the value of the pick.  Not the other way around... 

 

 

[Dcat]

55 minutes ago, GREENBEAN said:

That didn’t take long.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

It should NEVER be forgotten.

Mac sucks and anyone who thinks his lucking into Darnold is a sign of change is sorely mistaken.  I dread his draft day decisions.

[section314]

2 hours ago, Jetster said:

You have to do what you have to do to get your QB. The history of the 2nd round hasn't been kind to the NY Jets. 

QB that turns into your franchise leader for a couple of 2nd round picks is well worth the price. 

Personally, I don't think GMs TRADE UP during the draft enough. Macc should have traded up for Kamara if he wanted him that bad. Find a way to get the players you target. 

Sometimes the answer is so simple. Great post.

[JoJoTownsell1]

Draft charts are just a guide. The value obviously changes, especially at the top of the draft, depending on the quality of the players available.

[chirorob]

3 hours ago, Bowles Movement said:

Based on this chart we got ass raped by Indy last year.

Charts are subjective.

Value for a QB is much higher than value for a defensive tackle.   If Darnold works out for the next 15 years, does anyone care we gave up an extra second rounder?

[jetsfaneh]

Getting Darnold and still having our first round pick this year is pretty sweet.

Most QB first round trade ups seem to always include next years first rounder.

These charts seem to be pretty insignificant these days. Each draft is it's own animal.

Hell, some drafts teams draft a kicker in the 2nd round. Still can't get over that!

[Augustiniak]

I think mccagnan would love to trade back with the giants as long as he gets a 2nd round pick and another pick.  What was done last year is not a given and not subject to inflation.  Bottom line is, the jets need more picks.  

[nycdan]

This chart flattened the values way too much.  Trading from 6 to 3 only costs the top pick in the 6th round?  Moving down from 3 to 10 should only net a low 3rd rounder? 

Harvard admissions office failed with this kid.  Maybe he was on the 'crew' team?

 

[Lupz27]

6 hours ago, GREENBEAN said:

I read an article last week about the different draft value charts that teams use during the draft.  It talked about how the Jimmy Johnson chart undervalues mid to late rd picks and makes trades into the early 1st rd much more unrealistic than they should be. Ex: the late 7th rd picks being worth 1 point.

 The article suggested the Harvard chart may actually be closer to how teams value each pick due to the analytics involved in its creation.  This would really change how many of us look at all of the trades being tossed around these days. Applying it to the potential trade the Jets may pull together this year could give us an entirely different idea of what we should be looking for.  I am going to copy a break down of the Harvard draft value chart below. Pretty interesting stuff. The Harvard Trade Value Chart

The Harvard Trade Value Chart

A big part of the draft are trades. But when trading picks, teams have to find a way to put a value to those picks. To do this, teams use trade value charts. The most widely known of these charts is the "Jimmy Johnson Draft Value Chart" and that version is commonly accepted as the "official" draft value chart.

When Johnson joined the Cowboys in 1989, he took older draft value charts and modified them to his liking, and the end result is the chart we all know. The main criticism of the chart's point value system is that it wasn't created using any real form of statistical analysis, but was based on the available data at the time and research that Johnson and others had gathered previously.

A chart that is much more statistically rigorous in its approach to valuing draft picks is the Harvard Sports Analysis Chart, which was developed by Harvard economics student Kevin Meers and uses a metric called "Career Approximate Value" to value a draft pick. In late 2011, Meers wrote about the specifics of his chart:

Here's what the Harvard Chart looks like:

Round 1		Round 2		Round 3		Round 4		Round 5		Round 6		Round 7
1	494.6	33	175.2	65	128.0	97	97.8	129	75.6	161	58.0	193	43.5
2	435.7	34	173.3	66	126.9	98	97.1	130	75.0	162	57.5	194	43.1
3	401.3	35	171.4	67	125.8	99	96.3	131	74.4	163	57.1	195	42.6
4	376.9	36	169.5	68	124.7	100	95.5	132	73.8	164	56.6	196	42.2
5	357.9	37	167.7	69	123.6	101	94.7	133	73.2	165	56.1	197	41.8
6	342.4	38	165.9	70	122.5	102	94.0	134	72.6	166	55.6	198	41.4
7	329.4	39	164.1	71	121.5	103	93.2	135	72.0	167	55.1	199	41.0
8	318.0	40	162.4	72	120.4	104	92.5	136	71.5	168	54.6	200	40.6
9	308.0	41	160.8	73	119.4	105	91.7	137	70.9	169	54.2	201	40.2
10	299.1	42	159.1	74	118.4	106	91.0	138	70.3	170	53.7	202	39.8
11	291.0	43	157.5	75	117.4	107	90.3	139	69.7	171	53.2	203	39.4
12	283.6	44	155.9	76	116.4	108	89.5	140	69.2	172	52.7	204	39.0
13	276.8	45	154.3	77	115.4	109	88.8	141	68.6	173	52.3	205	38.6
14	270.5	46	152.8	78	114.4	110	88.1	142	68.0	174	51.8	206	38.2
15	264.7	47	151.3	79	113.5	111	87.4	143	67.5	175	51.4	207	37.8
16	259.2	48	149.8	80	112.5	112	86.7	144	66.9	176	50.9	208	37.4
17	254.0	49	148.4	81	111.6	113	86.0	145	66.4	177	50.4	209	37.0
18	249.2	50	147.0	82	110.7	114	85.3	146	65.8	178	50.0	210	36.6
19	244.6	51	145.6	83	109.7	115	84.6	147	65.3	179	49.5	211	36.3
20	240.2	52	144.2	84	108.8	116	84.0	148	64.8	180	49.1	212	35.9
21	236.1	53	142.8	85	107.9	117	83.3	149	64.2	181	48.6	213	35.5
22	232.1	54	141.5	86	107.1	118	82.6	150	63.7	182	48.2	214	35.1
23	228.4	55	140.2	87	106.2	119	82.0	151	63.2	183	47.8	215	34.7
24	224.7	56	138.9	88	105.3	120	81.3	152	62.6	184	47.3	216	34.3
25	221.3	57	137.6	89	104.4	121	80.7	153	62.1	185	46.9	217	33.9
26	218.0	58	136.3	90	103.6	122	80.0	154	61.6	186	46.5	218	33.5
27	214.7	59	135.1	91	102.7	123	79.4	155	61.1	187	46.0	219	33.1
28	211.7	60	133.9	92	101.9	124	78.7	156	60.6	188	45.6	220	32.7
29	208.7	61	132.7	93	101.1	125	78.1	157	60.0	189	45.2	221	32.3
30	205.8	62	131.4	94	100.3	126	77.5	158	59.5	190	44.7	222	31.9
31	203.0	63	130.3	95	99.4	127	76.9	159	59.0	191	44.3	223	31.5
32	200.3	64	129.1	96	98.6	128	76.2	160	58.5	192	43.9	224	31.1

 

Note that this chart shows a linear decline from pick 215 on down, which is different from the original Harvard Chart, which has a distinct and unexplained bump at 215.

After the 2013 draft, the Cowboys were roundly and loudly criticized for giving up value in trading down from the 18th spot for the 31st and 74th pick. (18 = 31 + 74)

The Johnson Chart did indeed suggest that the Cowboys gave up points (900 = 600 + 220) whereas the Harvard Chart (249.2 = 203 + 118.4) indicated that the Cowboys had come out ahead in that trade, a point Stephen Jones stressed in the post-draft press conference:

 

In this day and age, there is no one single "correct" chart, but the odds are that the different charts being used by NFL teams are a lot closer to the Harvard Chart than to the Johnson Chart.

So if I read this chart correctly there is no way the Jets use this because they gave the Colts 2 extra 2nd rounders then necessary 

[Beerfish]

This was obviously put together by some kid who only got into Harvard because his mother sent in rowing regatta photos of him and made a large donation to the sports science library.

[themeangreenkillingmachine]

What the hell does Harvard know about football?

BTW there is no such thing as a trade value chart.

the value of a pick is decided upon based on the agreement of the 2 sides. 

[Peace Frog]

That’s a lot of f*cking numbers. 

 

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

9 minutes ago, themeangreenkillingmachine said:

What the hell does Harvard know about football?

BTW there is no such thing as a trade value chart.

the value of a pick is decided upon based on the agreement of the 2 sides. 

#draftlibs

[Peace Frog]

12 minutes ago, themeangreenkillingmachine said:

What the hell does Harvard know about football?

 

Do you know how much money Ryan Fitzpatrick has made playing poor to mediocre football?

[themeangreenkillingmachine]

27 minutes ago, Peace Frog said:

Do you know how much money Ryan Fitzpatrick has made playing poor to mediocre football?

exactly my point. he is the best player to have come out of Harvard

[Peace Frog]

5 minutes ago, themeangreenkillingmachine said:

exactly my point. he is the best player to have come out of Harvard

Apologies didn’t read the thread. Was just making a lame joke. 

[GREENBEAN]

18 hours ago, Dcat said:

It should NEVER be forgotten.

Mac sucks and anyone who thinks his lucking into Darnold is a sign of change is sorely mistaken.  I dread his draft day decisions.

lol 

how could anyone on JN forget?  There's barely the chance of a single conversation here without the reminder. 

[GREENBEAN]

16 hours ago, Lupz27 said:

So if I read this chart correctly there is no way the Jets use this because they gave the Colts 2 extra 2nd rounders then necessary 

The Jets may have been using it, but the Colts sure weren't.   

I found it interesting that there was another chart that seemed legit. I read last year about another one but it was ridiculous and looked fan made so I just thught the Johnson chart was it. I always thought the back end of the Johnson chart was odd. 1 pt for any pick when the 1st is worth 3000 does not compute to me. Anyhoo... there's simply too much space between the beginning of FA and the draft huh?  I look forward to seeing how this goes already. 

 

[GREENBEAN]

11 hours ago, Peace Frog said:

That’s a lot of f*cking numbers. 

 

haha Try looking at it on the phone app.  It's madness. 

[bitonti]

 

 

1

On 4/20/2019 at 8:09 AM, dbatesman said:

Just a reminder that the only reason we had to trade anything to get Darnold is that Maccagnan passed on two (2) franchise quarterbacks to take a safety. Thanks everyone

I'm still reeling from Idzik's pick of Jace Amaro to give Weaponz to Geno Smith, with Jimmy G still on the board. It wasn't the worst moment in Jets draft history but That idzik draft broke me as a human and may have been the moment I gave up all hope on this franchise doing the right thing.