What draft trade value chart do you use?

[Sun Tzu]

What trade value chart do you think best reflects current GM pick valuations?

How are future picks measured versus current-year picks? Is it a flat formula or more nuanced? I assume you go into the draft with a projection of every team's future record to better estimate the value of their future picks vs yours.

Edit to add: I've been looking at some past trades in which teams moved up into the top 6 to get "their guy", and the amount of future draft capital given up (even for a small move up) in some of these trades seems ridiculous.

 

[Hawkinaz]

I like the Jimmy Johnson chart it can be found using a google search it’s not perfect but gets you in the ballpark. The real values go up and down due to the actual player’s in the draft which changes every year

As far as future values is a draft choice goes down in value one round every year you go in the future so If a team makes a draft trade that includes a 1st rd in 2024 it’s equal to a 2nd pick in 2023 and a 1st rd pick in 2025 is equal to a 2023 3rd pick

 

[Sun Tzu]

I like the Jimmy Johnson chart it can be found using a google search it’s not perfect but gets you in the ballpark. The real values go up and down due to the actual player’s in the draft which changes every year

As far as future values is a draft choice goes down in value one round every year you go in the future so If a team makes a draft trade that includes a 1st rd in 2024 it’s equal to a 2nd pick in 2023 and a 1st rd pick in 2025 is equal to a 2023 3rd pick

I typically look at the JJ chart by default. It seems likely that teams have moved on from it since it was created prior to the current rookie pay scale.

I've read a handful of statistical studies of pick valuation recently. Every one of them comes to the conclusion that teams are overvaluing first-round picks, undervaluing third and fourth-round picks, and severely undervaluing future picks.

 

[bileever]

In Peter King's column today, he notes compares the draft values of the Seahawks' top 4 picks vs. the 49ers top 4 picks:

"Seattle: With the fifth, 20th, 37th and 52nd overall picks, the Seahawks’ top four picks have a value of 3,460 points.

San Francisco: With the 99th, 101st, 102nd and 155th overall picks, the 49ers’ top four picks have a value of 321 points."

 

[AgentDib]

I've read a handful of statistical studies of pick valuation recently. Every one of them comes to the conclusion that teams are overvaluing first-round picks, undervaluing third and fourth-round picks, and severely undervaluing future picks.

The Fitzgerald-Spielberger chart used by OTC is the best one for how picks should be valued. It doesn't match what NFL teams do for two reasons.
1. Trading down and having more picks always wins in this kind of value analysis because it ignores roster limits. NFL teams don't have room for infinite rookies and so most would prefer one really good corner valued at an arbitrary 5 points over two corners valued at 3 points. There's also the bricklayer vs. gladiator consideration towards consolidating talent.
2. NFL GMs have different incentives from us fans that are heavily skewed towards the current year. Three years from now matters to maybe 5 GMs in the league, and a bunch of them don't care about two years from now. Most NFL moves make a lot of sense once you consider that priority 1 of FO's is to keep their jobs, and priority 2 is to improve their football teams.

The Rich Hill trade chart is the best fit for how teams actually value picks. It starts with the basic Jimmy Johnson chart and then adjusts the values to best fit against modern draft day trades. Of course this is just on average, and the actual value of a pick depends on how highly teams view the prospects available at that pick. So #5 in a year where six blue chip prospects are available is much more valuable than #5 in a year with 4 blue chip players.