The biggest trades of NFL draft picks took place weeks in advance, when Los Angeles and Philadelphia traded up with Tennessee and Cleveland, respectively, to acquire the top two spots. Then, on draft night, five more trades of picks were finalized. We can’t grade whether a team won or lost a trade until we see how those players turn out in the NFL, but we can analyze whether the trade made sense and whether a team under- or overpaid for the right to acquire that player. For that, I created a draft value chart to measure the expected marginal value provided, on average, by a draft pick based on the production of players historically drafted from around that draft spot. Let’s start with the splashiest move not involving a Twitter account of the night.Cleveland gives up: eighth pick overall, sixth-round pick (No. 176 overall)Tennessee gives up: 15th pick overall, third-round pick (No. 76 overall), second-round pick in 2017The Browns traded down and eventually selected Baylor wide receiver Corey Coleman; if he was Cleveland’s target all along, this was an excellent move — Coleman was at little risk of going before the 15th overall pick. Tennessee moved up to take offensive tackle Jack Conklin after the Baltimore Ravens began the run on offensive linemen at No. 6, with Ronnie Stanley. Cleveland extracted significant value in this move, perhaps because of a mental accounting effect, as the Titans may have viewed the picks involved as found money after the Rams trade.Based on my marginal value chart, the Browns win the trade … even without considering the second-round pick in 2017! The 76th pick is a valuable one — more valuable than the difference between the eighth and 15th picks. If we value the 2017 second-round pick as equivalent to the 48th pick in this year’s draft, the Browns received a whopping 148 cents on the dollar for this trade. (The 48th pick is likely a worse pick than Tennessee’s 2017 second-rounder will be, but we’re eyeballing a markdown for having to wait a year.)The Jimmy Johnson chart is used by many teams as a framework for constructing trades even though its values are not reflective of how players from each round perform. In general, it overvalues higher selections. In this case, it would have the Browns receiving only 89 cents on the dollar before considering the 2017 second-round pick. However, even on that chart, this trade is a home run for Cleveland. Consider that if the Titans had traded the 85th pick in this draft rather than the second-rounder in 2017, the old Jimmy Johnson chart would still give a slight edge in this trade to the Browns. The Browns may have benefited from the Titans’ panic that the Giants wanted to take Conklin 10th overall.Chicago gives up: 11th pick overall, fourth-round pick (No. 106 overall)Tampa Bay gives up: ninth pick overallThis was a small price for Chicago to pay to move up two spots to select Georgia linebacker Leonard Floyd; the trade may be a little harder to understand from the Buccaneers’ perspective. My chart has this as a nice deal for Tampa Bay — the team picked up 117 cents on the dollar. The Jimmy Johnson calculator has this trade as nearly dead even (it has Tampa Bay losing the deal by a tiny margin), which suggests that teams really do use that chart as a framework for trade discussions. Sometimes, teams need to overpay to acquire the players they want: The Giants were heavily linked to Conklin and Floyd at 10th overall and then saw teams trade up (and overpay) to No. 8 and No. 9 to take those two players. Giving up a high fourth-round pick is not insignificant, but the draft was light on pure edge rushers, so the trade makes sense if Chicago viewed Floyd as a great prospect (and far ahead of, say, Clemson’s Shaq Lawson) and pass rusher as a big need position.The only reason this struck me as a bit odd was that Tampa Bay traded down two spots to take a corner, Vernon Hargreaves, but watched the Giants draft cornerback Eli Apple in between! There’s no way of knowing how the Bucs valued Hargreaves relative to Apple, but presumably Tampa Bay got the man it wanted considering that Hargreaves had a higher grade by most analysts and was born in Tampa. Still, the Bucs could have lost Hargreaves to New York, so Tampa Bay likely viewed a free early fourth-rounder as worth the risk.Washington gives up: 21st overall pickHouston gives up: 22nd overall pick, sixth-round pick in 2017Using a trade chart to analyze this trade doesn’t make sense because it’s best understood as a matter of risk allocation. Houston, which was known to be after a wideout, traded up one pick to draft Notre Dame wide receiver Will Fuller. In addition, many mock drafts had the Vikings and Bengals selecting wide receivers with the 23rd and 24th picks, respectively. With Cleveland grabbing Coleman at No. 15, one fewer receiver was available for Cincinnati and Minnesota. And if either the Bengals or Vikings (or another team later in the draft) had Fuller as the top wide receiver left on their board, it would have made sense for either team to pay a small price to leap Houston by trading with Washington.The Texans presumably had Fuller and perhaps Coleman a tier above wide receivers Josh Doctson of TCU and Laquon Treadwell of Ole Miss even though most mock drafts had Fuller as the fourth player in that group. Houston’s giving up next year’s sixth-round pick is hardly a significant price for eliminating the risk of missing out on the man they were targeting, but it only makes sense if Fuller truly is a better prospect (or fit for the Houston offense) than Doctson or Treadwell. Putting aside value, we can safely say that Houston really wanted Fuller, which could mean good things for his fantasy football value this season.For Washington, which drafted Doctson at No. 22, the only knock on this trade is that it probably could have gotten more by trading with, say, Minnesota and picking Doctson or Treadwell. We can’t know for sure, but Washington likely was going to take Doctson over Fuller anyway, so the team simply picked up a 2017 sixth-rounder selection for free.Seattle gives up: 26th overall pickDenver gives up: 31st overall pick; third-round pick (No. 94 overall)On my chart, this was a great trade for Seattle — the Seahawks picked up 132 cents on the dollar. Seattle moved down five spots to pick up a third-rounder and selected Texas A&M offensive lineman Germain Ifedi 31st overall. Seattle was heavily linked to him ahead of the draft, so this worked out beautifully for the team. Picking up a third-round pick, even a late one, is still very valuable: Remember, that is the same round where Seattle drafted Russell Wilson in 2012 and Tyler Lockett in 2015.The Broncos moved up to take Memphis quarterback Paxton Lynch. The trade was pretty even on the traditional chart, with the Seahawks picking up “only” 103 cents on the dollar. But even if Denver paid a premium based on my chart, that is often the cost of doing business when a team wants to trade up. Lynch was a possible top-15 pick in this draft, and given that he was the top quarterback prospect remaining in the draft, he likely would not have made it to No. 31 (Lynch would have made a lot of sense for Arizona at No. 29, and the Cowboys acknowledged a desire to trade up in front of Denver for Lynch). The Broncos didn’t get Lynch for cheap, but this was a much more reasonable trade than the franchise-altering ransoms paid by Los Angeles and Philadelphia for the top two quarterbacks.Kansas City gives up: 28th overall pickSan Francisco gives up: second-round pick (No. 37 overall), fourth-round pick (No. 105 overall), sixth-round pick (No. 178 overall)The 49ers traded up for Stanford guard Joshua Garnett but paid a serious price. Kansas City received 136 cents on the dollar according to my chart and 96 cents according to the traditional chart. San Francisco gave up an early fourth-round pick to move up just nine spots … for a guard! It’s one thing for the Broncos to trade a pick at the back end of the third round to move up five spots for a quarterback; to pay essentially the same price for Garnett is much harder to defend.Whereas Lynch was viewed as a potential first-rounder by many teams, the market for Garnett appeared to be much softer. Trading up for the last player in a tier at a position of significant value makes sense, but this trade by the 49ers is much tougher to justify. Valuable players are still available at No. 105; consider that since 2010, Kirk Cousins, Everson Griffen, Jordan Cameron, Devonta Freeman, Alterraun Verner and Perry Riley were all selected between pick 100 and 110. On the other side, a fourth-rounder is a valuable commodity — it’s the sweet spot of getting a solid prospect on a cheap contract for four years — so kudos to the Chiefs for pulling off a nice trade in exchange for waiting nine selections.
Indian cricket teamRobert Cianflone/Getty ImagesSpeaking on the role of MS Dhoni, Yuvraj said that the seasoned campaigner has a lot to offer to the Indian team as he is in form and his inputs to captain Virat Kohli in pressure moments will be invaluable.”Yeah, definitely. He’s been such an experienced captain. There will be these situations where he will be discussing with Virat how to get the best out of the situations,” Yuvraj assessed.. Yuvraj Singh, who stole the show back in the 2011 World Cup, believes India have a great chance to repeat the feat this year in England. He also identified England and Australia as the other teams to watch out for and picked India and England as the two finalists. He also said that the conditions and regulations are very different which have made a score of 300+ competitive as compared to 260-270 which allowed teams to win games earlier.”It’s a different ball game now. (Now) five fielders (are) in (the circle); those days there were four. Scores of 260, 270, 280 were competitive scores. These days the competitive scores have become 300-plus. Because of that one fielder. I feel we still have that unit where they can chase anything. And India has been playing really well in the last 2-3 years,” Yuvraj was as quoted by Hindustan Times.Australia have a good bowling attackThe southpaw believed with the return of David Warner and Steve Smith, Australia have a strong unit, more so because of their rounded and strong bowling attack.”I feel India and England have a very good chance of making it to the final. Australia, yes, since (David) Warner and Steve (Smith) came back; they also have a very good bowling attack. These three teams are pretty much likely to be in the last four,” Yuvraj further added. Yuvraj Singh.Reuters.He, himself, was India’s X-factor back in 2011 and now the batsman believes India are well-served as far as match-winners are concerned. He earmarked Hardik Pandya to be the man who could be the difference on the day.”I think the X-factor in this World Cup is going to be Hardik (Pandya). He’s currently on form and batting well. And is someone who’s very helpful with the ball. In those conditions, if we play two fast bowlers and two spinners, you have Hardik as your third seamer. It gives the right balance to the team,” Yuvraj said.
Suicide rates have increased in nearly every state over the past two decades, and half of the states have seen suicide rates go up more than 30 percent.Suicide is a major public health issue, accounting for nearly 45,000 deaths in 2016 alone. That is why the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta decided to take a comprehensive look at suicides from 1999 to 2016.“Suicide in this country really is a problem that is impacted by so many factors. It’s not just a mental health concern,” says Deborah Stone, a behavioral scientist at the CDC and the lead author of the new study. “There are many different circumstances and factors that contribute to suicide. And so that’s one of the things that this study really shows us. It points to the need for a comprehensive approach to prevention.”She and her colleagues collected data on suicides from every state. In addition, to better understand the circumstances surrounding suicide, they turned to more detailed information collected by 27 states on suicides that occurred in 2015.The rise in suicide rates was highest in the central, northern region of the U.S., with North Dakota, for example, seeing a 57.6 percent increase since 1999. Nevada was the only state that saw no increase, and Delaware saw the smallest increase which was 5.9 percent.The findings were published in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.Guns were the most common method used for suicide, accounting for almost half of the people who died.Often, the suicide seemed to happen without warning: 54 percent of the people who killed themselves didn’t have a previously known mental health issue. “Instead, these folks were suffering from other issues, such as relationship problems, substance misuse, physical health problems, job or financial problems, and recent crises or things that were coming up in their lives that they were anticipating,” says Stone.Researchers and advocacy groups who work to prevent suicide say the report shows that much more needs to be done to tackle this growing problem.“None of this is surprising information, which is not to trivialize its importance. I think it captures a lot of trends that we’ve been becoming more and more aware of over recent years,” says psychologist Michael Anestis at the University of Southern Mississippi, who researches suicide and is the author of Guns and Suicide: An American Epidemic.He thinks the general public commonly pictures someone who had been getting treatment for a long period before killing themselves, like fashion designer Kate Spade, who died this week, but that’s often not the case.That means any public health effort to reduce suicides can’t solely focus on those who have reached out for help. It has to be paired with measures that would make suicidal people less likely to die even if they never went to see a doctor.The CDC report cites several different approaches, such as working to stabilize housing and teaching coping and problem-solving skills early in life.The report also cites the need to reduce “access to lethal means” but without explicitly discussing firearms or controversial issues such as gun control legislation. Asked whether that was a deliberate omission, because of the political climate surrounding gun control, Stone said that suicide rates have been increasing across all methods.“So it’s not just about firearms, it’s also about other methods of suicide such as hanging, suffocation, poisoning and the like,” she said. “We are concerned with all aspects of suicide prevention, including access to lethal means, and so we do include that in a comprehensive approach to suicide prevention.”But Anestis believes that it’s important to not beat around the bush when it comes to guns and to talk about the importance of things like setting waiting periods for purchase, and storing guns locked and unloaded.“American suicide is predominantly a firearm issue. Anytime we want to resolve something that involves firearms, we’ve need to talk about firearms explicitly,” he says. “The conversation about firearms and suicide doesn’t have to be a debate about the Second Amendment. It could be a debate about where can we find some common ground that doesn’t simply involve only talking about people with mental illnesses, because as this paper shows, that’s not going to get the job done.”Research shows that the decision to attempt suicide is often made quickly, in an impulsive way, says Robert Gebbia, the head of the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention.“You may be thinking about it over time, but that moment when you actually make an attempt is a very short window,” he explains. “If you could make it harder to make that attempt by not having access to the means, often what happens is the feelings will pass, it gives people time for someone to intervene and get them help, so that is a really important preventative step that can be done. And there’s good research to support that.”Suicide researchers already know a lot of the information in this new report, says Gebbia, “but the public doesn’t. And so a report like this really draws attention to the fact that we need to do a whole lot more to prevent suicide, to save lives.”He points out, for example, that the nation currently has no federally funded suicide prevention program for adults. “There are some for youth, but they’re very, very tiny,” says Gebbia. “We can’t expect a major public health problem like this to be addressed unless we see the investment.”The CDC said that people can learn about warning signs of suicide to help people at risk. One resource is the website: www.BeThe1to.com. To reach the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, call 1-800-273-TALK (8255). Copyright 2018 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/. Share