SKOL Searching: The cost of trading up
SKOL Searching: The cost of trading up
Paul Hodowanic writes about a stat that correlates to QB success and draft trades
By Paul Hodowanic
@PaulHodowanic on Twitter
Welcome back to SKOL Searching! It appears I’ve tricked Matthew Coller into letting me do another one of these. We’ll see how long the ruse can last.
On a serious note: Thank you for all the well wishes last week. I received tons of positive feedback and I’m very appreciative to be able to do this every week.
With the Senior Bowl behind us and the NFL Combine now in sight, let’s jump into this week’s column…
More indicators for potential QB success
In last week’s column, we looked at an analysis done by Pro Football Focus’ Kevin Cole that broke down the correlation between mobility and success in the NFL. Cole, in a series of tweets, has since dug even deeper on the topic, trying to find out what college stats are the biggest potential indicators for NFL success.
What he found were four play subsets that successful quarterbacks produced the most Expected Points Added. Those were: under pressure, scrambles, avoiding sacks, and designed runs. Quarterbacks that did those things well in college were more likely to be successful.
Cole also looked at the opposite end of the spectrum and found four EPA play subsets that failed quarterbacks often excelled in during college. Those were with a clean pocket, on early downs, during play-action, sacks and INT.
It follows with the growing trend that quarterbacks need to “get you a bucket” — that producing when all conditions are ideal in college isn’t the best indicator for NFL success.
The findings are interesting as a quarterback’s performance while in a clean pocket is widely considered a more stable and predictive indicator in the NFL than while under pressure stats. But as Cole points out, under pressure passing in college is likely more similar to what a quarterback will face every week in the NFL against better competition.
The red dots represent successful QBs, blue are unsuccessful. Other than Justin Herbert, every single successful quarterback was in the top right quadrant, meaning they performed above expectation on scrambles and runs and when they were pressured. Mahomes, Allen, Murray, Jackson, Watson, Prescott. All of them were proficient in these two statistics.
So where do last year’s quarterbacks and this year’s prospects stack up?
As this graph shows, Cincinnati’s Desmond Ridder and Ole Miss’ Matt Corral are the only two quarterback prospects who fit into the upper right quadrant. Liberty’s Malik Willis, North Carolina’s Sam Howell, and Pitt’s Kenny Pickett performed above average when scrambling and rushing but underperformed under pressure. Trevor Lawrence and Justin Fields also underperformed under pressure and both struggled in their first years.
As we get deeper and deeper into the draft season and quarterbacks inevitably rise up the board, it will be fascinating to look back on this data. Drafting just from the upper right quadrant doesn’t assure success. Just look at some of those names. Cody Kessler, DeShone Kizer, Paxton Lynch. But of the 17 quarterbacks in that quadrant, over 50 percent were successful. That’s about as good of odds as you can ask for when drafting a quarterback.
And if you pick a quarterback outside that quadrant, history isn’t on your side.
The cost of trading up
As it happens every year, we are already seeing quarterbacks rising up mock drafts and big boards. Many of the quarterbacks in this “weak QB draft” were impressive at the Senior Bowl. Malik Willis, Kenny Pickett, Sam Howell, and Desmond Ridder all had standout moments.
And while draft analysts aren’t routinely ranking these QBs high on big boards, history tells us one, if not several, of these quarterbacks will be drafted in the top-10. That puts the Vikings and their No. 12 pick in a precarious position if they do decide to pursue a quarterback in this draft.
I know the latest reports from Adam Schefter suggest Kevin O’Connell may want to keep Kirk Cousins, but I’m not fully buying into it. If you’re O’Connell or Kwesi Adofo-Mensah, there’s no reason to say you actively want to trade Cousins. Why lose leverage?
So what would it take to move up in the draft? Well, let’s take a look at recent QB draft trades and what it has cost.
Trey Lance - 2021
San Francisco receives: No. 3 pick
Miami receives: No. 12 pick, 2021 third-round pick, 2022 first-round pick, 2023 first-round pick,
Justin Fields - 2021
Chicago receives: No. 11 pick
New York receives: No. 20 pick, 2021 fifth-round pick, 2022 first-round pick, 2022 fourth-round pick
Sam Darnold - 2018
New York receives: No. 3 pick
Indianapolis receives: No. 6 pick, two second-round picks, 2019 second-round pick in 2019
Josh Rosen - 2018
Arizona receives: No. 15 pick
Las Vegas receives: No. 10 pick, a third-round pick, a fifth-round pick
Josh Allen - 2018
Buffalo receives: No. 7 pick, a seventh-round pick
Tampa Bay receives: No. 12 pick, two 2018 second-round picks
Of all these trades, the Josh Allen trade seems like the most realistic for the Vikings to replicate. While the quarterbacks are bound to rise, the No. 7 pick will likely be good enough to get either the first or second quarterback off the board.
And acquiring the No. 7 pick, currently owned by the Giants, would allow the Vikings to pass two quarterback-needy teams: the Denver Broncos and the Washington Commanders.
It also makes sense for the trade partner. The Giants currently have the No. 5 and No. 7 pick and seem to be committed to Daniel Jones, at least for now. Their new general manager Joe Schoen (apparently Rick Spielman 2.0) recently said they want to have “as many at-bats” as they can get in the draft, a sign they are willing to move down and continue to accumulate draft assets.
So could the Vikings get a deal done sending the No. 12, No. 46, and a 2023 second-round pick?
By the Jimmy Johnson valuation model, the Vikings would actually be overpaying for the No. 7 pick in that scenario. But as we’ve seen in recent years, the value of draft picks, especially when a quarterback is a likely pick, has skyrocketed. It wouldn’t surprise me if the Vikings needed to give up more than this to get a trade done.
A Consensus Big Board!
At this point in the draft cycle, it is hard to put much weight in any one mock draft or big board. Many analysts haven’t finished reviewing film and gathering intel on players. And still three weeks from the combine and even longer until pro days, expect tons of movement.
But what I think is valuable at this stage is a look at a consensus big board, which will soften some of the variance and give us a clearer picture of the NFL Draft landscape at this point. The Athletic’s Arif Hasan puts together a consensus board every year, but that won’t be out until much closer to the draft. So I did some digging and found Matt Philbin, who runs a free Substack centered around the NFL Draft and the Bears. He has compiled an early consensus big board, featuring rankings from ESPN, PFF, The Athletic, and Bleacher Report.
Take a look:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15pm1uvtVAgQe5BUdiUrz0g-agNbkPe9LtrN342kEOhM/edit#gid=0
Just a few names that could move around from this list. Cincinnati cornerback Ahmad Gardner (11), Utah linebacker Devin Lloyd (19), interior offensive lineman Kenyon Green (25), and Georgia EDGE Travon Walker (27). Each of these prospects had some incredible variance in their rankings and are likely to move, one way or another, on the draft boards.
Also, here’s how the consensus board ranks quarterbacks.
Kenny Pickett (28th overall)
Desmond Ridder (29)
Matt Corral (35)
Sam Howell (41)
Malik Willis (48)
Non-QB Senior Bowl risers
Finally! He stopped talking about quarterbacks! I know, I know, I’m a little bit quarterback obsessed at the moment. But can you blame me? No matter what you think of Kirk Cousins, the prospect of something new is always exciting. But I promise (maybe) not to overdo it on the QB talk. So let’s look at some of the biggest NON-QB risers from the Senior Bowl.
Here’s PFF’s list.
EDGE Jermaine Johnson, Florida State
DT Travis Jones, Connecticut
LB Brian Asamoah, Oklahoma
DT Devonte Wyatt, Georgia
S Jalen Pitre, Baylor
EDGE Deangelo Malone, Western Kentucky
WR Christian Watson, North Dakota State
OT Abraham Lucas, Washington State
RB Jerome Ford, Cincinnati
Lots of defensive players there. The Vikings were in the bottom-third of most defensive metrics and need help at all three levels of the defense. We don’t yet know if Adofo-Mensah and O’Connell favor certain positions, colleges, or play styles, so it’s hard to slot any of these with the Vikings. And with a potential scheme change under new defensive coordinator Ed Donatell and free agency still to come, it’s hard to forecast specific prospects as of yet.
Let’s Draft Sim!
I followed through on our earlier discussion, trading up with the Giants, sending them the No. 12, No. 44 pick and 2023 second-round pick.
With the selection, I had my choice of quarterbacks and I opted for Matt Corral. Like last week, I’m splitting hairs with my quarterback rankings, but I decided to go with Corral because of how he stacked up in the metrics Kevin Cole outlined. There are legitimate concerns about him running an RPO-heavy offense at Ole Miss and how he will translate to a pro-style system, but I’ll let O’Connell handle that.
From there, I was largely picking the best player available and it continually lined up with the Vikings’ needs. With so many questions in the secondary, it makes sense to take another swing there. Same with EDGE as Danielle Hunter’s future remains undecided.
Check out our new deal from SotaStick: 15% off with the code PurpleInsider:
Interesting article Paul! Explained so a 68 yr old could grasp the charts. If you keep this up we might forget about Sam and the other guy ..... Mark Caller?? Something like that. Ha Ha!
Good discussion and analysis. It is fun thinking about trading and going for a new QB. When do you think we’ll know what the Vikings will do with Cousins? And what will be the first sign that they will stick with Cousins?