San-O Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 There is a possibility the Bills will draft down in round one.... Looking at a NFL Trade Value Chart http://www.eastcoastsportsnews.com/NFLDraftChart.html Here is what I see..... If the Bills trade down to the 11th, 12th or 13th pick they would need a first and a 4th rd pick to compensate.... If the Bills trade down to the 14th or 15th pick they would need a one pick plus a 3rd round pick If the Bills trade down to the 16 or 17th pick they would need a one pick plus a 3rd and 4th pick If the Bills trade down to the 18, 19 and 20 pick they would need the teams first and 2nd round pick... I do not see the Bills trading any lower than the 20th pick... Knowing this, who is the team most likely to trade up for the Bills pick? There's some NFL mandate the prohibits the Bills from trading down, only /\ UP. Have the Bills ever traded down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefenseWinzChampionshipz Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 (edited) no one, because trade downs dont often happen (especially outside of the top few picks) so the Bills will be selecting at 10 overall Cleveland did it recently not once but twice in the same round. 1st one was with the Jets andJets got Sanchez and I forget the next team and Patriots always do it. Only cuz they can though. Edited March 23, 2012 by DefenseWinzChampionshipz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKidd Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 (edited) There is a possibility the Bills will draft down in round one.... Looking at a NFL Trade Value Chart http://www.eastcoastsportsnews.com/NFLDraftChart.html Here is what I see..... If the Bills trade down to the 11th, 12th or 13th pick they would need a first and a 4th rd pick to compensate.... If the Bills trade down to the 14th or 15th pick they would need a one pick plus a 3rd round pick If the Bills trade down to the 16 or 17th pick they would need a one pick plus a 3rd and 4th pick If the Bills trade down to the 18, 19 and 20 pick they would need the teams first and 2nd round pick... I do not see the Bills trading any lower than the 20th pick... Knowing this, who is the team most likely to trade up for the Bills pick? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I would only trade down if I could get this scenario: I would contact the agent for Pitt Steeler free agent reciever Mike Wallace. I would see if he would sign a contract that the Bills could afford. If he doesn't want crazy money and could be signed, I would look for a trading partner. If there was any way to trade down to the bottom of the first round and gain another 2nd round pick I would do it. Then I would give up that low 1st round choice as the compensation for signing restricted free agent Wallace. The key would be if Wallace would sign a reasonable contract that the Bills could afford. You would have Wallace and two 2nd round picks. Besides, Wallace is probably better than any reciever in the draft that would still be there at number 10. Edited March 23, 2012 by TheKidd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I would only trade down if I could get this scenario: I would contact the agent for Pitt Steeler free agent reciever Mike Wallace. I would see if he could be sign a doable contract that the Bills could afford. If he doesn't want crazy money and could be signed, I would look for a trading partner. If there was any way to trade down to the bottom of the first round and gain another 2nd round pick I would do it. Then I would give up that low 1st round choice as the compensation for signing restricted free agent Wallace. The key would be if Wallace would sign a reasonable contract that the Bills could afford. You would have Wallace and two 2nd round picks. Besides, Wallace is probably better than any reciever in the draft that would still be there at number 10. The 49ers tried to get Mike Wallcae. He wants more money than Larry Fitzgerald... he can go himself! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyBacker Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 There probley won't be to many teams knocking down our door to pick at number 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 There probley won't be to many teams knocking down our door to pick at number 10 That's the fun part. "There is no one worthy of drafting at #10, let's trade down!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 chart is old and means nothing now... Yeah? What has replaced it? Which GM said that? Once in a while I see this stated here and elsewhere, but I never see who said it, why, when, where, and what it's being replaced with as the standard tool for evaluating drafts. Instead, this random statement seems to exist only so that unrealistic Madden-like trade up/down scenarios can escape being held to a standard, and therefore escape being ridiculed. Without the draft chart....the "we could have traded up/down" clowns get to posit whatever ridiculous trade they want, claim it was there, based on some random tweet/rumor, and then we get to hear how they are smart, and the FO is dumb, and we missed out on a trade we should have made, because we didn't submit to their "genius". It'd be awfully convenient for these people if the draft chart was old and meant nothing. But without any support for this, all this sounds like is people trying to get out of having to defend their Madden-based, dopey trade scenarios. I refuse to believe that there is no objective tool for being able to quickly evaluate a trade, during the draft itself. 15 minutes and 3-4 teams calling with offers...is not the time to be winging it. I also refuse to believe that all trades are evaluated subjectively, "cause the GM can just do it". None of that makes any sense whatsoever. Now given that....what do you know about the Draft Chart going away? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 That's the fun part. "There is no one worthy of drafting at #10, let's trade down!" I just thought of this after reading your post...even if Richardson fell and Cincy called wanted our pick, how does our choice get any better? The tackles after Kalil still have warts and issues, the Jets would grab Floyd and we would be left with who? The DE talent we didn't want at 10? Just have to take the BPA (as you explained the other day) at 10... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkep32 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 i dont think it will happen but this is what i predicted if a trade happens for us to move down. Tear it apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARMchairgm Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Yeah? What has replaced it? Which GM said that? redskins just gave up about 3 first round picks to move up 3 spots with a rookie wage scale in place picks have more value Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I would only trade down if I could get this scenario: I would contact the agent for Pitt Steeler free agent reciever Mike Wallace. I would see if he would sign a contract that the Bills could afford. If he doesn't want crazy money and could be signed, I would look for a trading partner. If there was any way to trade down to the bottom of the first round and gain another 2nd round pick I would do it. Then I would give up that low 1st round choice as the compensation for signing restricted free agent Wallace. The key would be if Wallace would sign a reasonable contract that the Bills could afford. You would have Wallace and two 2nd round picks. Besides, Wallace is probably better than any reciever in the draft that would still be there at number 10. He's asking for more money than Larry Fitzgerald, which is why the Niners dropped trying to get him. Yeah? What has replaced it? Which GM said that? Once in a while I see this stated here and elsewhere, but I never see who said it, why, when, where, and what it's being replaced with as the standard tool for evaluating drafts. Instead, this random statement seems to exist only so that unrealistic Madden-like trade up/down scenarios can escape being held to a standard, and therefore escape being ridiculed. Without the draft chart....the "we could have traded up/down" clowns get to posit whatever ridiculous trade they want, claim it was there, based on some random tweet/rumor, and then we get to hear how they are smart, and the FO is dumb, and we missed out on a trade we should have made, because we didn't submit to their "genius". It'd be awfully convenient for these people if the draft chart was old and meant nothing. But without any support for this, all this sounds like is people trying to get out of having to defend their Madden-based, dopey trade scenarios. I refuse to believe that there is no objective tool for being able to quickly evaluate a trade, during the draft itself. 15 minutes and 3-4 teams calling with offers...is not the time to be winging it. I also refuse to believe that all trades are evaluated subjectively, "cause the GM can just do it". None of that makes any sense whatsoever. Now given that....what do you know about the Draft Chart going away? Watch NFL Network at any given time for more than 5 minutes and you can hear it from Casserly or Lombardi. That chart meant less and less for years and it is completely worthless now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 redskins just gave up about 3 first round picks to move up 3 spots with a rookie wage scale in place picks have more value I ask for objectivity, and evidence of what GM no longer uses draft charts to evaluate draft trades, especially during their 15 minutes on the clock.... ....and you give us....the F'ing Redskins. Thanks for making my point for me. And, then you proceed to do it again. If picks have more value...why is a draft chart...less useful...to the point of being meaningless? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 I ask for objectivity, and evidence of what GM no longer uses draft charts to evaluate draft trades, especially during their 15 minutes on the clock.... ....and you give us....the F'ing Redskins. Thanks for making my point for me. And, then you proceed to do it again. If picks have more value...why is a draft chart...less useful...to the point of being meaningless? Your arguments lack substance and any discernible logic. The poster stated that your use of the draft value chart was incorrect, because you were attempting to calculate our pick at 10 and assign its value to other team's picks in the same and later rounds. They were correct in that teams no longer say "well you have pick x and that's worth 10000 points, so we have to give you approximately 10k points to make a trade. Having been refuted, you then changed your argument and began saying the value chart is a jumping off point and that we could ask for more. That's not what you said originally and it's a weak way to try to not admit your statement was inaccurate. I could respect if you said "well if anything, the chart being gone helps us", but you didn't you tried to show how your original incorrect statement was even more valid. Just concede the point and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 (edited) Watch NFL Network at any given time for more than 5 minutes and you can hear it from Casserly or Lombardi. That chart meant less and less for years and it is completely worthless now. It would help if I could get that without getting ripped off for it. I refuse to sign up for what amounts to ESPN Better. There's no way that some objective, prepared tool doesn't exist for GMs to rapidly evaluate draft day trades. If for no other reason than to cut through the crap and stay on the critical decision points. Every NFL team, except the Redskins, plans and prepares for 12 hours a day, for months, in the off-season. Coaches spend hours and hours just making sure they get 5 minutes of practice right. But, only on draft day, we are supposed to believe that everybody just wings it? No way in hell. Whatever they use may not be in the exact form of this chart, but, there's no way in hell they just do it based on whatever comes to mind....unless it's the Redskins. Nobody in the war room is going to remember every player on the board and how a trade might affect who they get where. There has to be some sort of pre-planned thingamabob, or excel spreadsheet, or even a real software program, that assists with this. Your arguments lack substance and any discernible logic. I have....the Redskins....which is the real world application of your theory here.....and is therefore, hysterical. Why do I need to go through a logical proof....when all I need say is "The Redskins"? I bet you think the pattern of their behavior over the last 10 years....should be ignored....because you think RG3 is a good player. And you want to talk in terms of logic? How about statistics? As in: what % of the Redskins moves....just at the QB position...over the last 10 years...have worked, or weren't horribly conceived and executed? Logic? The poster stated that your use of the draft value chart was incorrect, because you were attempting to calculate our pick at 10 and assign its value to other team's picks in the same and later rounds. They were correct in that teams no longer say "well you have pick x and that's worth 10000 points, so we have to give you approximately 10k points to make a trade. Having been refuted..... 1. You have now confused me with another poster. 2. Nothing I have said here has been refuted by anyone, and that status will not change, because it is indeed based on unassailable logic, and given your skills on display here, even if it wasn't, it's doubtful you could do anything with it. 3. Time for you to go back and re-read the thread. Reading comprehension is important. Edited March 23, 2012 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 It would help if I could get that without getting ripped off for it. I refuse to sign up for what amounts to ESPN Better. There's no way that some objective, prepared tool doesn't exist for GMs to rapidly evaluate draft day trades. If for no other reason than to cut through the crap and stay on the critical decision points. Every NFL team, except the Redskins, plans and prepares for 12 hours a day, for months, in the off-season. Coaches spend hours and hours just making sure they get 5 minutes of practice right. But, only on draft day, we are supposed to believe that everybody just wings it? No way in hell. Whatever they use may not be in the exact form of this chart, but, there's no way in hell they just do it based on whatever comes to mind....unless it's the Redskins. Nobody in the war room is going to remember every player on the board and how a trade might affect who they get where. There has to be some sort of pre-planned thingamabob, or excel spreadsheet, or even a real software program, that assists with this. I have....the Redskins....which is the real world application of your theory here.....and is therefore, hysterical. Why do I need to go through a logical proof....when all I need say is "The Redskins"? I bet you think the pattern of their behavior over the last 10 years....should be ignored....because you think RG3 is a good player. And you want to talk in terms of logic? How about statistics? As in: what % of the Redskins moves....just at the QB position...over the last 10 years...have worked, or weren't horribly conceived and executed? Logic? 1. You have now confused me with another poster. 2. Nothing I have said here has been refuted by anyone, and that status will not change, because it is indeed based on unassailable logic, and given your skills on display here, even if it wasn't, it's doubtful you could do anything with it. 3. Time for you to go back and re-read the thread. Reading comprehension is important. Well... s(*t! You mean to tell me I worked up a head of steam over nothing? How unlike me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts