Analytics-driven mock draft doesn’t change Eagles strategy very much

Recently, an experiment was performed, and the results were the same as they were the last time said test occurred. After watching Moneyball for what feels like the 700th time, a conversation ensued, and much of the Inside The Iggles staff began filling those holes on the roster and on our imaginary depth charts with those bargain-bin free agents that would make the Philadelphia Eagles a better team overnight.

Well, we all know how Moneyball ended, and despite the fact that Billy Beane has an MLB Executive of the Year Award (2018) and three Sporting News Executive of the Year nods (1999, 2012, 2018) on his shelf for the work he’s done as the Oakland Athletics’ general manager, they’re still looking for that elusive World Series title.

The results of Oakland’s theory, depicted brilliantly by Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill, and its current fingerprint on all sports can be seen, from an NFL perspective, every time the Eagles go for two when kicking the extra point would have been totally satisfactory and every time coach’s elect to attempt fourth-down conversions during in-game situations that would have influenced a punt.

We don’t talk about the analytics engine as often when it comes to the NFL Draft. Who knows? Maybe we should? The first question on everyone’s mind would probably be this. Does it change anything? All mock drafts are created unequally. We know that, but one of the more recent suggests that infusing analytics into the conversation may not create dramatic differences in the results.

Cynthia Frelund’s latest mock sends two defensive studs and a star wideout to the Eagles.

There are times when analytics make sense. There are other instances in which it feels like we need to go back to school and earn another degree to understand them. It’s for that reason that we lean on voices that we trust to assist in these matters. Throw NFL Network’s analytics expert Cynthia Frelund in that category.

Recently, she released an analytics-driven first-round mock. Philly landed two defensive studs and a star wide receiver. Here’s what Frelund said in relation to who was taken and why she believes they make sense.

We begin with the 15th-overall selection. The Eagles take former Georgia star Devonte Wyatt.

"I know we talked a lot about his Georgia teammate, Jordan Davis, at the combine, but Wyatt is a darling of Computer Vision metrics, showing explosive traits in pads. While the Eagles did re-sign Fletcher Cox, it’s a one-year deal for a 30-something DT who has shown regression in recent seasons. Adding to this spot creates the most value should Philly not trade out of this pick or the next."

Several mocks have leaned towards Philly taking a wide receiver. So does Frelund’s. Former Arkansas Razorbacks star Treylon Burks is the selection at 16.

"The Eagles’ receiving corps benefits most from adding a consistent vertical threat. Watching all 11 of Burks’ receiving touchdowns last season, and using Computer Vision to characterize them,  I saw his ability to dominate from the line of scrimmage quite clearly."

Finally, the Eagles take a linebacker in Round 1 for the first time since 1979. Utah’s Devin Lloyd is the choice.

"Linebackers are some of the hardest players to forecast in terms of fit and win share, but Lloyd stands out from the pack, especially with his ability to blitz and cover. The Eagles could definitely win the NFC East, but upgrading the defense is a big key to making that happen."

You can’t make everyone happy, but if this is how things worked out on draft night, you probably won’t hear too many complaints. Some of this looks familiar.

Most have expressed that they’d like to see Philly address the defensive line (though most would probably prefer an EDGE star). No one would disagree with adding a star linebacker, so with all of that being said and when all things are considered, it appears that, when analytics are introduced into the discussion, the stats agree with the general public.