Unveiling the secret of teams that lose despite securing the best prospects through behavioral economics.
- Causes and psychological biases behind the ‘Winner’s Curse’ in the NFL Draft
- Actual value of draft picks and the ‘value-for-money zone’ revealed by data
- The winning “Value-Based Drafting (VBD)” strategy and its practical implementation
The NFL Draft held every spring looks like a glamorous show, but behind it lies a vast market dominated by human irrationality. Especially in the fierce competition to secure high-ranking prospects, the ‘Winner’s Curse’ is a dangerous trap that can shake a team’s future to its core. Why do smart general managers fall into such an obvious trap? Let’s examine the cause through behavioral economics.
The Beginning of Irrational Choices: Expensive ‘Preferences’
Nobel laureate Gary Becker said people sometimes endure economic losses to satisfy their ‘preferences’ or ‘biases.’ In the NFL Draft market, this appears as a blind preference for a certain ‘archetype’ of player.
Teams get intoxicated by the scent of ‘certainty’ from quarterbacks from prestigious universities in the media spotlight or players who showed amazing athleticism at the combine. They execute trade ups by giving up multiple future picks. This is closer to ‘consumption’ for immediate satisfaction than a cold-blooded investment. Such consumption is reinforced by several cognitive biases.
- Halo Effect: The illusion that a specific strength (e.g., speed) implies excellence in other skills (e.g., game understanding).
- Availability Heuristic: Overestimating success probability by easily recalling legendary first overall picks like Peyton Manning while forgetting numerous failures.
- Confirmation Bias: Once fixated on a player, only seeking out strengths and ignoring information pointing out weaknesses.
A fierce battle of values and biases behind the glamorous stage
Winner’s Curse: The Tragedy of the Most Optimistic
The NFL Draft is like a high-risk auction under incomplete information. In such an environment, the ‘Winner’s Curse’ inevitably appears. The core of this theory is that the auction winner is often the person who most overestimated the item’s value—that is, the most irrationally optimistic.
The moment a team cheers for winning the competition and securing the top prospect, it has already fallen under the ‘curse’ of paying more than the player’s true value.
The curse may begin the moment you win the auction.
This curse is further reinforced by general managers’ overconfidence and the ‘Jimmy Johnson Trade Value Chart’, which institutionalized irrational past practices. Since this chart is based on ‘how much teams have paid before’ rather than actual player value, it perpetuates irrationality.
Advertisement
The real danger of the Winner’s Curse is opportunity cost. By giving up multiple picks to get one promising quarterback, teams lose other potential starters they could have drafted, weakening roster depth and possibly leading to a long-term dark period.
Hidden Draft Value Revealed by Data
Removing emotions and looking at data clarifies market inefficiencies. The player’s actual performance (Approximate Value, AV) curve declines more gradually than expected as draft position falls, while rookie salaries drop sharply with draft order.
Here lies the opportunity for salary arbitrage—creating high value at low cost. This ‘sweet spot’ is from the late 1st round through rounds 3 to 4, known as the ‘value zone.’
Table 1: Draft Pick Value vs. Performance ROI Analysis
| Draft Range | Average ROI Index² | Key Characteristics |
|---|---|---|
| 1-5 | 105 | Highest expectations and cost, lowest ROI |
| 6-10 | 132 | Still high cost, slight ROI improvement |
| 11-20 | 166 | Value starts to improve relative to cost |
| 21-32 | 221 | Start of ‘value zone,’ high ROI |
| 33-64 (2nd round) | 298 | One of the best ‘sweet spots,’ very high ROI |
| 65-100 (3rd round) | 381 | Highest ROI, best value zone |
The results are shocking. The top 5 picks’ ROI (105) is less than one-third of the 3rd round’s (381). This is clear evidence that the market systematically overvalues top picks and undervalues mid-round picks.
Strategies That Separate Winners and Losers
How teams leverage this market inefficiency determines their fate.
Value Creators: The Power of Trading Down
- New England Patriots: Dominating the NFL for 20 years, the Patriots consistently sold top picks to trade down, acquiring multiple picks in the ‘value zone’ to continuously inject cheap, talented youth. This is like portfolio theory—diversifying investments rather than betting on a single ‘big hit.’ Patriots fans often complained on draft day about moving down, but by season’s end, the choice proved right.
- Baltimore Ravens: Following the philosophy of “right player, right price,” they stockpiled mid-round picks to maintain a strong roster.
Value Destroyers: The Trap of Trading Up
- Chicago Bears (2017): Used 3 valuable picks to move up just one spot to draft quarterback Mitchell Trubisky—a classic Winner’s Curse case.
- Washington Commanders (2012): Paid a huge price including three future first-round picks for Robert Griffin III, leading to a long-term dark period.
Table 2: Draft Strategy Comparison (5-Year Period)
| Franchise Archetype | Total Drafted Players | ‘Successful’ Players¹ | Cumulative Win-Loss |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trade Down Teams (e.g., Patriots) | 52 | 18 | 65-15 |
| Trade Up Teams (e.g., Rams²) | 38 | 11 | 43-37 |
The data is clear. The ‘boring’ strategy of buying more lottery tickets yields more wins long-term than the ‘sexy’ strategy chasing a single star.
Advertisement
Value-Based Drafting (VBD) Implementation Guide
How can you avoid the Winner’s Curse and create value? The ‘Value-Based Drafting (VBD)’ model offers the answer. VBD aims not to pick the ‘best player’ but the ‘best value relative to salary.’
- Embrace probabilistic thinking. There is no ‘sure thing.’ Accept that drafting is a probability game and focus on maximizing the expected value of the entire draft portfolio, not individual players.
- Aggressively sell top picks. Sell top 10 picks at a premium to teams suffering from the Winner’s Curse, and acquire multiple lottery tickets in the ‘value zone.’
- Develop proprietary data models. Build a cold, objective evaluation system focused solely on predicting NFL success, filtering out media hype and halo effects.
- Focus on key positions. Not all positions have equal value. Prioritize draft assets on positions with the greatest impact on winning and highest free agent market cost (QB, offensive tackle, pass rusher, cornerback).
- Adopt a portfolio approach. The more players you draft, the higher your chances of success. Diversification effectively offsets the risk of a few prospects failing.
Conclusion
The NFL Draft is an inefficient market shaped by human cognitive biases. This inefficiency will persist as long as general managers remain overconfident and fans hold high expectations. We must remember three key points:
- The Winner’s Curse is real: Top picks are often overvalued beyond their true worth.
- True value lies in the middle: Picks in rounds 2-3 offer the highest return on investment.
- Value-Based Drafting is the key to winning: Managing draft assets based on data, not emotion, drives long-term success.
If you were a general manager, would you sacrifice the future for a superstar prospect cheered by fans, or risk criticism to invest in more possibilities? Next draft season, instead of focusing on who goes first overall, why not watch which teams quietly build value?