DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum The Browns got better when they learned to behave, economically speaking

That Super Bowl is already out of your mind, right? This article in The Wall Street Journal will help you look forward to next year's big game, perhaps featuring the Cleveland Browns, who are among the NFL's leading adherents to behavioral economics.

The Browns' turnaround to post a 7-8-1 record this year after going 0-16 in 2017 was orchestrated, in part, "by a small team of analytics wonks in the front office, led by chief strategy officer Paul DePodesta, who was Billy Beane's assistant general manager at baseball's Oakland A's during the early 2000s," writes Jon Hartley, an economics writer who previously worked in the analytics department of the Dallas Cowboys, for a piece on The Journal's op-ed page.

He notes that they based their strategy on an academic paper published in 2013 by Wharton's Cade Massey and Nobel laureate Richard Thaler: "The Loser's Curse: Decision Making and Market Efficiency in the National Football League Draft."

From the article:

The paper argues that NFL coaches display a high degree of "present bias" — in layman's terms, impatience. A simple example of such bias: When behavioral economists run experiments asking questions like "Would you rather receive $100 today or $120 one month from today?" they find most people choose the immediate $100, irrationally passing up a quick 20% return. But when both options are far in the future — "Would you rather receive $100 in 12 months or $120 in 13 months?"— subjects are far likelier to wait the extra month.

Messrs. Massey and Thaler found that almost all NFL teams overconfidently believed they had a realistic chance to build a Super Bowl team immediately — to the point that during the draft teams anxiously traded up into higher rounds or agreed to forgo high-value picks in future years. In doing so they gave up enormous amounts of draft value, to the usually unwitting benefit of their trading counterparts.

The study found that, on average, a team wanting a second-round pick in a given year's draft would be willing to give up a first-round pick in the next year's draft — a very high long-term price. What's more, the ultimate performance of first-round picks didn't justify how much teams were willing to give up to get them.

A smart NFL front office "could exploit other teams' impatience by systematically trading higher-round picks for more lower-round ones and the current year's picks for higher-value ones in future years," Hartley writes. The Browns met with Thaler, took the ideas to heart and eventually used high-value picks they'd stockpiled by selecting quarterback Baker Mayfield at first overall and cornerback Denzel Ward at fourth overall.

We still have to wait to see if the approach leads to a new golden age for the Browns in the future.

As far as the past is concerned, Cleveland earns a spot (perhaps surprisingly) in this piece from analytics-minded columnist David Leonhardt of The New York Times, headlined, "The Luckiest Sports Fans, Ranked."

It identifies the best two-decade runs that any pro sports fans have had since World War II, based on both statistical and subjective factors. (The ranking only counts titles in the NFL, NBA, NHL or Major League Baseball.)

Cleveland is there, at No. 11 — for a period from 1948 to 1967.

The city's teams won five titles in 40 team seasons, or 13%, and two franchises won a title.

As Leonhardt writes, "The most frustrated sports city of the late 20th century was Cleveland. The Browns sometimes lost in spectacularly painful fashion. The Indians and Cavaliers were usually just bad. Old-time Clevelanders, however, knew a happier sports scene. The Indians won a title in 1948 (still their most recent), while the Browns were to the 1950s what the Patriots have been to recent years: They appeared in seven title games during one eight-year stretch and won three. The Browns won again in 1964, which would turn out to be the city's last major title until LeBron James' Cavaliers won one 52 years later."

Topping the list is Boston, from 2001-2018, with 11 titles in 71 team seasons, and all four franchises winning titles. This piece ran before the Patriots took yet another championship.

https://www.crainscleveland.com/scott-su..._source=twitter

This is awesome. And interesting.

So... could this possibly mean Depodesta lied when he said he didn't think Wentz would be a top 20 QB? And the plan all along was to exploit a team's impatience while other teams thought they were taking advantage of our incompetence? Brilliant!

And some said analytics didn't work....

Could not possibly disagree with this more. The bust rate on guys past pick 10 is colossal. Time and time again it has been proven that trading down is not going to help you long term. Of all teams the freaking Browns know this. Yet there is still some allure of "having all these picks". Just misguided, plain and simple, the only team able to make this work happens to have the best QB and Coach in the history of the game. You HAVE to have stars in the league, no getting around it and trading away high picks for "future" scores is almost always a mistake.

LOL........the use of the word "exploit" is hysterical. The Browns high-water mark after "exploiting" Philly is a 7-win season while the team they "exploited" has won multiple playoff games and a Super Bowl.

I would love to have seen the Browns exploited into winning a Super Bowl last year.

What you quoted and what you wrote don't seem to match, but I think I know what you're saying. If we finish 7-8-1 or worse this year, you may be right.

I'm not trying to fight, but there's a reason why exploit was in quotations.

Corey Coleman
Shon Coleman
Cody Kessler
Derrick Kindred
Spencer Drango
Ricardo Louis
Jordan Payton
Jabrill Peppers
Deshone Kizer (Since traded for Damarious Randall)
Denzel Ward
Chad Thomas

No, "exploited" is probably not the term that comes to mind looking at the players list, but one or two more "keepers" on that list and the conversation would sway. Imagine if we were able to draft "real players" during that stretch?

Having a plan has no value without execution.

Agree. There may have been a plan the past 15-20 years, but it never came to fruition until the past few years. We are on the up and up. It may not work, but I'm confident we are in a good place.

I don't think Depodesta lied per se. I think he was a result of two things. (1) The Browns were in draft pick accumulation mode after a complete tear down, and (2) Hue Jackson didn't want him (the evidence is abundant here).

The plan was clearly about accumulating draft picks as a result of teams not valuing future first round picks enough (as mentioned in the article)-- maybe as a result of the win now mode owners have prescribed to coaches/FO personnel. Maybe as a result of teams being narrow-minded and stuck on the "how it's always been done" approach. I'll suggest it's probably a little bit of both. And this isn't anything new from the article. It's been a brought up many times before as the NFL is slowly but surely moving in this direction, but teams don't take advantage of it enough. And once teams do, the value will be lost and teams will have to find new ways to find/exploit unrecognized value by everyone else. But right now, the draft value given up long term in the form of future 1st and 2nd round picks is what the article suggests. Moves like the ones alluded to in the article allowed us to get Denzel Ward, Nick Chubb, Pepper, & Calloway in the draft; send off picks for Landry & Taylor (ugh); allowed to move up a few spots to take Njoku, a player we liked and didn't want to lose out on. We don't have any of those players without that approach.

But we also don't have Wentz or Watson who we passed on for more 1st/2nd/3rd round picks and would continue to be a losing team, so people need to wrestle with that aspect. People can decide in the end what was better... Having one of those guys (and not having those extra picks for added players and flexibility) or having Mayfield ( or any other preferred QB as we had the #1 pick since continuing to be a losing team was a byproduct of trades), Ward, Chubb, Peppers, Njoku, etc., etc., etc.

Yeah, well, you can't put the cart in front of the horse. Plan comes first, execution (or in our case, lack thereof) comes second. I didn't hate the plan then, and even looking at that list, I don't hate it now.

Actually having a real QB is the biggest factor though. If we just finished a 5-10-1 season and could see little upside in TT, we'd all still be pretty stung about not drafting Wentz.

We've shown time and again there is absolutely nothing wrong with the picks themselves. It's all in how they're used. Theories about trading up or down notwithstanding, you still have to make the right selection. Doesn't matter how many picks you have or how high (or low) you draft, if you have little to no ability to evaluate talent, your team will suck. Conversely, if you have very few picks at the bottom of the rounds, and a stellar scouting department with leadership willing to lean on their expertise, you will likely build a successful team. It is the correct evaluation of potential talent that gives draft picks any value at all, no matter where they fall during the draft. Just ask the GOAT picked in the 6th round.

Haha... no, It was jokes about Depodesta.


Based on the system they used that rated Mayfield one of the best QBs in the past 20 years is the same system that rated Wentz outside the top 20. I believe this was the driving force in passing on Wentz. And I believe this was the driving force in drafting Mayfield, who was the lowest bust rate of all the quarterbacks in the draft. I still like Wentz, I wanted Wentz, but Wentz isn't the QB that won the Eagles to the Super Bowl. Did we luck out, or is Wentz not a top 20 QB?

That may be the case, but I don't think the Mayfield choice goes 100% to the system. Dorsey apparently liked Mayfield all the way to when Moses wore short pants. I think it was one of those situations where analytics and traditional scouting were happily aligned. I don't see that as something that happens 100% moving forward, however. We'll see.

I'm just glad the Browns stayed away from voices re: junk grabbing and flag planting as legitimate reasons to pass on him.

Take it a step further. Even making the right pick is no guarantee. Once you have the pick, how well does the team develop him? How many Browns were cut or lost due to improper development, misuse in a system, or overall dissatisfaction? For example, Kizer may not have been a great pick, but who knows? The way he was developed was atrocious. How about Baker's development pre & post Hue/Haley? And so on and so forth.

Agree completely.

Though they did do that without Wentz. We definitely should have picked a better team to "exploit."

You can even make a great pick, with all the talent in the world, treat him well, develop him, give him every chance to succeed, and it may not work out. That player may go on to another team with great coaching and an established system and thrive. Or, he could end up out of the league.

Right Josh?

Maybe it's just one big crap shoot.

Though I would rather have Dorsey & Co.making our picks right now over anyone else we've had in the past 20 years.

We had 13 picks in the 2016 draft. In 2015 we started the draft with 10 picks and traded that into 12 draft picks. So no, this isn't some great, new thing. It's been going on for a while now. It's just this time we have someone in charge who knew how to take advantage of it.

I guess if you call a continuation of kicking the can down the road a plan, they had one.

No, starting the 2018 draft with 11 picks wasn't anything new.

It's also hilarious when comparing the two teams at the time of the deal as if they were in the same situation, organizationally. But people like to resort to tunnel vision.

What a JOKE ...

Getting rid of Sashi and hiring King John is why we’re GOING TO BE SUCCESFUL FOR YEARS TO COME ...

U guys will sink to ANY LEVEL to boost up your HERO ...

LUCKILY for all of us KIZER STUNK so bad we didn’t win a game in 17 ... connecting the dots is not your strong suit ... not even close ...

Sashi STUNK AT TALENT AQUISITION ... NO ONE passes on 3 franchise QB’s and survives ... NO ONE ...

There’s a reason he’s not getting a sniff from NFL clubs ... a few GM jobs opened up this year .. WITCH ONES DID YOUR HERO INTERVIEW FOR .... ..

The fact your going to the Wall Street Journal to justify what your HERO the MORON did says it all .. i know i’ve NEVER ONCE used the WSJ as a reference for anything to do with football .. but its all u got ...

Agree wholeheartedly.

Yep, Dorsey was 100% responsible for the Mayfield pick. Thank God the decision was left in his hands.

We've actually been taken advantage of it for a few years now.

Yet looking at the percentages, the payoff hasn't been good until now. Like I said earlier, a plan doesn't help without it being executed well. Finally Dorsey knew how to execute. And also as I said, if you call kicking the can down the road year after year a plan, they had one.

Glad someone else recognized the "hideous" agenda that is nothing new for a certain poster.

Sorry. I just read "agenda" and couldn't help but recall ( and laugh) at the last time that you referred to an agenda regarding myself and others....

The title, of the new movie, "Sashi died so we could live".

Coming to a theater near you.

In fact, skimming through the entire thread, it's worth a look again. Thanks for the trip down memory lane!

https://www.dawgtalkers.net/ubbthreads.php/topics/1526945/1

Are the potential health (injury) risks factored into a QB choice? (I"m sure they are of course)

If so, Then I think it's safe to say that Wentz isn't in the top 20.... Just saying, he can't finish a season.

Like I said, your agenda is easy to recognize. You can't let crap go and post things to start--and continue--trouble.

Oh. Whoops. You're right. I totally forgot Dorsey drafted Garrett, Peppers, and Njoku in the first round. Carry on with your non-agenda speak. I'll step aside...

"Dorsey Died So We Could Live!"

Yeah, he was fired because he was so good!

Appearantly one of the 3 members of SASHI’S CULT forgot about the following awesome picks:

- C. Coleman
- S. Coleman
- C. Nassib - he’s awesome when the QB runs into him ... ...
- C. Kessler ...
- R. Louis
- J. Payton
- S. Drango
- T. Caldwell
- S. Wright

And how can u not love the fact that him and his analytics decided to take 4 WR’S in the WORST WR CLASS IN 4 DECADES ... BRILLIANT!!

Then in year two it GOT ALOT BETTER ... ...

- D. Kizer
- H. Wilson
- R. Johnson
- C. Brantley
- Z. Gonzalez
- M. Dayes

AWESOME ...

And lets not forgot those two INCREDIBLY GIFTED QB ROOMS ,,,

- RG3, McCown and Kessler ...

- D. Kizer. Kessler and Hogan ...

How the heck did we only manage to win 1 game with that STAR STUDDED ROOM ...

I’m STUNNED and CAN’T FIGURE OUT HOW teams aren’t beating down Sashi’s door ..

I know ... maybe Sashi’s CULT on here will one day buy a team and they can hire him ... ...

Most do Vers ... they just choose to be SMARTER than us and IGNORE IT!!!

It’s not real hard to figure out ... Sashi got himself fired cause he never found an nfl caliber QB to line up under center other than McCown and i think he lasted 2 total games ...

Sashi was GREAT at tearing the team down and getting cap space ..... HORRIBLE AT RE-BUILDING IT ... look at those draft picks and the fact we had ZERO QB’S over two years ...

End of the day ... it was once again the THIEFS FAULT ...

The WSJ for football ... :

That just amuses the hell out of me and my simple mind ... the WSJ as a source for football knowledge ... OH VEY!!!!

I don't consider Wentz or Watson to be FQBs just yet...but I'm curious as to who is the 3rd guy?

I think it would be great fun for the anti-Sashi agenda-ites to compare the drafts their laughing about from Sashi to the drafts of our GM at his previous stop.

Right coach at the right time!