New Draft Strategy

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Many Teams like to acquire as many picks as possible which is good if a major overhaul is needed but in reality how many great players are there going to be in the latter rounds (yes I know we have hit on many late rounders but all that shows s how many misses we had early). How many times have you gone through draft boards and as you're going through the early rounds and thought man I want this guy and this guy and this guy and you realize you only have one pick per round.

 

What I would do is trade back in the first to get more 1st or second round picks and then trade up my 4+5 for another second and 6+7s (we always seem to get comp picks) for another 4rth. In General This would give us 6 total picks where the majority of great to probowl players are and where many first round talents slide back because teams are reaching for them in the first. I wouldn't trade up in the first because it costs too much unless there was a can't miss player. I now you need trade partners but NE seems to manage it every so we can too. Also I would trade fading stars for additional picks like we did with Evans. The rest of the roster would be filled with UDFAs who are just about as good as 5,6,7th rounders.

 

A team that was made up mostly 1,2,3,4 rounders would be incredibly hard to beat.

 

So this year we trade our first for one in the late teens early 20's and get a second, 2 4rths for a 2, 2 5ths for third and 6 & 2 7s for 4rth.

 

 

1. Stephen Hill Georgia Tech 6'5" 200 WR

2. Coby Fleener Stanford 6'6" 247 TE

2. Lavonte David Nebraska 6'1" 233 OLB

2. Josh Robinson Central Florida 5'10" 199 CB

3. Jared Crick Nebraska 6'4" 279 DE

3. Mitchell Schwartz California 6'5" 318 LT

4. B.J. Coleman Chattanooga 6'3" 220 QB

[deep2evans]

would love that draft.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

would love that draft.

me too

[atlbillsfan1975]

Many Teams like to acquire as many picks as possible which is good if a major overhaul is needed but in reality how many great players are there going to be in the latter rounds (yes I know we have hit on many late rounders but all that shows s how many misses we had early). How many times have you gone through draft boards and as you're going through the early rounds and thought man I want this guy and this guy and this guy and you realize you only have one pick per round.

 

What I would do is trade back in the first to get more 1st or second round picks and then trade up my 4+5 for another second and 6+7s (we always seem to get comp picks) for another 4rth. In General This would give us 6 total picks where the majority of great to probowl players are and where many first round talents slide back because teams are reaching for them in the first. I wouldn't trade up in the first because it costs too much unless there was a can't miss player. I now you need trade partners but NE seems to manage it every so we can too. Also I would trade fading stars for additional picks like we did with Evans. The rest of the roster would be filled with UDFAs who are just about as good as 5,6,7th rounders.

 

A team that was made up mostly 1,2,3,4 rounders would be incredibly hard to beat.

 

So this year we trade our first for one in the late teens early 20's and get a second, 2 4rths for a 2, 2 5ths for third and 6 & 2 7s for 4rth.

 

 

1. Stephen Hill Georgia Tech 6'5" 200 WR

2. Coby Fleener Stanford 6'6" 247 TE

2. Lavonte David Nebraska 6'1" 233 OLB

2. Josh Robinson Central Florida 5'10" 199 CB

3. Jared Crick Nebraska 6'4" 279 DE

3. Mitchell Schwartz California 6'5" 318 LT

4. B.J. Coleman Chattanooga 6'3" 220 QB

Bill Belicheck?

 

But you also dont address the tackle until your sixth pick?

No thanks on that idea

Edited April 14, 2012 by atlbillsfan1975

[FleaMoulds80]

I personally would dislike this draft. First, you're willing to take a WR that's extremely RAW with our number 1 pick? Someone who won't contribute for at least 2 or 3 years? Wasted pick number 1. Number 2...Fleener? This guy is rated number 1 TE in this year's class because this is a VERY weak TE class. Thirdly, I still don't understand people's obsession with Lavonte David. An undersized Will LB that struggles to disengage blockers and stop the run. We have plenty of that, which is why we struggle against the run. So where's the players that can contribute from day one? With the spending spree off Anderson and Mario, we're trying to win now. The way I see it, we need players that can step onto the field, day one and these guys arent it.

 

Give me a sure fire pick at number 1 that can start from day one. Luke Kuechly, Michael Floyd, or even David DeCastro.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Bill Belicheck?

 

But you also dont address the tackle until your sixth pick?

No thanks on that idea

Neither will Nix.

 

So you want to give up all these great players cuz of no early LT?

[Buffalo Barbarian]

I personally would dislike this draft. First, you're willing to take a WR that's extremely RAW with our number 1 pick? Someone who won't contribute for at least 2 or 3 years? Wasted pick number 1. Number 2...Fleener? This guy is rated number 1 TE in this year's class because this is a VERY weak TE class. Thirdly, I still don't understand people's obsession with Lavonte David. An undersized Will LB that struggles to disengage blockers and stop the run. We have plenty of that, which is why we struggle against the run. So where's the players that can contribute from day one? With the spending spree off Anderson and Mario, we're trying to win now. The way I see it, we need players that can step onto the field, day one and these guys arent it.

 

Give me a sure fire pick at number 1 that can start from day one. Luke Kuechly, Michael Floyd, or even David DeCastro.

That's what first round picks are for reaching for that extreme talent There are no sure fire picks, Kuechly is overrated, Floyd has been pushed up the boards and guards can had anywhere.

 

David rocks and will be a great LB in our system, Fleener will be the next Ed McCaffrey but bigger and faster.

Edited April 15, 2012 by Buffalo Barbarian

[swnybillsfan]

i love the concept of getting more quality picks there. the choices are debateable depending on personal preference, but i do really like the theory behind it. a team could definately get a nice talent infusion with this plan.

[NeverOutNick]

Would be an awesome strategy if we could pull it off and I love your first 4 picks! I'd rather have Russell Wilson as our QB though.

[SelmonSmith6378]

How about Donta Hightower instead of Hill? And Kirk Cousins instead of Fleener?

[Captain Hindsight]

I stopped reading when you said you'd trade back like every team wants our pick. Casserly was saying the other day that there isn't a big difference between player 7 and 20. So why exactly would someone trade up and give us a pick to get a comparable player? Besides your own wish that they will?

[swnybillsfan]

I stopped reading when you said you'd trade back like every team wants our pick. Casserly was saying the other day that there isn't a big difference between player 7 and 20. So why exactly would someone trade up and give us a pick to get a comparable player? Besides your own wish that they will?

i think that this is just another fun "what if" scenerio that is designed to pass what seems like a frickin' eternity 'til the draft.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

How about Donta Hightower instead of Hill? And Kirk Cousins instead of Fleener?

Thought about Highttower but he doesn't fit our fast flow LB philosophy. Fleener is better than cousins and Coleman has more Talent than him and has a chance to be a starter whereas Cousins will probably be a career backup albeit a good one, like Fitz should be for us in few years.

 

I stopped reading when you said you'd trade back like every team wants our pick. Casserly was saying the other day that there isn't a big difference between player 7 and 20. So why exactly would someone trade up and give us a pick to get a comparable player? Besides your own wish that they will?

Lost me on that last part.

 

There is always some team that is desperate for a need and may want a guy like Richardson, Kuechly or Floyd maybe even Coples.

[Captain Hindsight]

Thought about Highttower but he doesn't fit our fast flow LB philosophy. Fleener is better than cousins and Coleman has more Talent than him and has a chance to be a starter whereas Cousins will probably be a career backup albeit a good one, like Fitz should be for us in few years.

 

 

Lost me on that last part.

 

There is always some team that is desperate for a need and may want a guy like Richardson, Kuechly or Floyd maybe even Coples.

Just cause you won't a team to trade with you doesn't mean it will happen. And if those guys are good, we aren't deep enough to pas on a good player. Win now and stockpile the best talent

[NewEra]

I philosophy is good. I'd be all for it, but I'd rather select different players. Hill as our 1st pick is meh IMO.

I'd go;

1- Glenn, Martin or Adams.

2- Rueben Randle

2- Lavonte David

2- Josh Robinson

3- Dwayne Allen

3- Marvin Mcnutt or Juror Criner

4- Potter, datko, Marcus forston, cam Johnson, mike Brewster or for all you fan boys, Russell Wilson.

 

1334449786[/url]' post='2436973']

Just cause you won't a team to trade with you doesn't mean it will happen. And if those guys are good, we aren't deep enough to pas on a good player. Win now and stockpile the best talent

 

I'm pretty sure he knows that. He's bored and wants to have some fun.

[Optometric Insight]

Your draft plan makes sense. With the way that Nix drafted players last year, there could be a possiblity that we hit on all of the picks; when we sign some UDFAs, we could hit jackpot with some of them also making this one of the best off seasons in history (maybe).

[Buffalo Barbarian]

I philosophy is good. I'd be all for it, but I'd rather select different players. Hill as our 1st pick is meh IMO.

I'd go;

1- Glenn, Martin or Adams.

2- Rueben Randle

2- Lavonte David

2- Josh Robinson

3- Dwayne Allen

3- Marvin Mcnutt or Juror Criner

4- Potter, datko, Marcus forston, cam Johnson, mike Brewster or for all you fan boys, Russell Wilson.

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure he knows that. He's bored and wants to have some fun.

Like Glenn but is getting all kinds of mixed reviews where some think he is an allpro LT and others act like he is a goon and has to be guard, so no sure on him. Martin is falling like a rock and Martin is too inconsistent.

 

The other picks are good but I wouldn't pick another tackle if I picked one in the first would go with Russell in your scenario.

[Pete]

I think the strength of this draft is the second round and I concur- load up on as many second round picks as possible. We could address our 3 biggest needs with an additional second pick in round 2

[Nostradamus]

Many Teams like to acquire as many picks as possible which is good if a major overhaul is needed but in reality how many great players are there going to be in the latter rounds (yes I know we have hit on many late rounders but all that shows s how many misses we had early). How many times have you gone through draft boards and as you're going through the early rounds and thought man I want this guy and this guy and this guy and you realize you only have one pick per round.

 

What I would do is trade back in the first to get more 1st or second round picks and then trade up my 4+5 for another second and 6+7s (we always seem to get comp picks) for another 4rth. In General This would give us 6 total picks where the majority of great to probowl players are and where many first round talents slide back because teams are reaching for them in the first. I wouldn't trade up in the first because it costs too much unless there was a can't miss player. I now you need trade partners but NE seems to manage it every so we can too. Also I would trade fading stars for additional picks like we did with Evans. The rest of the roster would be filled with UDFAs who are just about as good as 5,6,7th rounders.

 

A team that was made up mostly 1,2,3,4 rounders would be incredibly hard to beat.

 

So this year we trade our first for one in the late teens early 20's and get a second, 2 4rths for a 2, 2 5ths for third and 6 & 2 7s for 4rth.

 

 

1. Stephen Hill Georgia Tech 6'5" 200 WR

2. Coby Fleener Stanford 6'6" 247 TE

2. Lavonte David Nebraska 6'1" 233 OLB

2. Josh Robinson Central Florida 5'10" 199 CB

3. Jared Crick Nebraska 6'4" 279 DE

3. Mitchell Schwartz California 6'5" 318 LT

4. B.J. Coleman Chattanooga 6'3" 220 QB

 

Very forward thinking. There is not a lot of high end top end talent outside of the first 6 or so. The strength of this draft is the depth in the first 4 rounds. These moves would allow the Bills to play to the strength of the draft, instead of having the draft play them. However, with that philosophy, I don't like the Hill and Schwartz picks. There is just too much depth in the receiver class to take a flyer on a workout warrior like Hill. Also, trading back into the early 20's should still allow the Bills a shot at one of the first round tackle talents, like Glenn or Reiff. Early 20's would be a good spot for one of them, or even Jonathan Martin if they are gone. I'd feel much better with one of those guys than Schwartz. Then, in the third or possibly second round, they could grab a receiver like Jeffrey, Sanu, Randle, or Quick, in that order of preference.

That would stockpile the Bills with good players, almost all whom I'd expect to be productive sooner rather than later, while still maximizing their chances of solidifying what I think is their weakest position right now, left tackle.

[Kelly the Dog]

No chance that you can trade two fourths for a second or trade two fifths for a third. It's not even close.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Your draft plan makes sense. With the way that Nix drafted players last year, there could be a possiblity that we hit on all of the picks; when we sign some UDFAs, we could hit jackpot with some of them also making this one of the best off seasons in history (maybe).

Hopefully, 3 2nd and 2 3rds would go a long way towards putting us over the top.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Many Teams like to acquire as many picks as possible which is good if a major overhaul is needed but in reality how many great players are there going to be in the latter rounds (yes I know we have hit on many late rounders but all that shows s how many misses we had early). How many times have you gone through draft boards and as you're going through the early rounds and thought man I want this guy and this guy and this guy and you realize you only have one pick per round.

 

What I would do is trade back in the first to get more 1st or second round picks and then trade up my 4+5 for another second and 6+7s (we always seem to get comp picks) for another 4rth. In General This would give us 6 total picks where the majority of great to probowl players are and where many first round talents slide back because teams are reaching for them in the first. I wouldn't trade up in the first because it costs too much unless there was a can't miss player. I now you need trade partners but NE seems to manage it every so we can too. Also I would trade fading stars for additional picks like we did with Evans. The rest of the roster would be filled with UDFAs who are just about as good as 5,6,7th rounders.

 

A team that was made up mostly 1,2,3,4 rounders would be incredibly hard to beat.

 

So this year we trade our first for one in the late teens early 20's and get a second, 2 4rths for a 2, 2 5ths for third and 6 & 2 7s for 4rth.

 

 

1. Stephen Hill Georgia Tech 6'5" 200 WR

2. Coby Fleener Stanford 6'6" 247 TE

2. Lavonte David Nebraska 6'1" 233 OLB

2. Josh Robinson Central Florida 5'10" 199 CB

3. Jared Crick Nebraska 6'4" 279 DE

3. Mitchell Schwartz California 6'5" 318 LT

4. B.J. Coleman Chattanooga 6'3" 220 QB

 

Very forward thinking. There is not a lot of high end top end talent outside of the first 6 or so. The strength of this draft is the depth in the first 4 rounds. These moves would allow the Bills to play to the strength of the draft, instead of having the draft play them. However, with that philosophy, I don't like the Hill and Schwartz picks. There is just too much depth in the receiver class to take a flyer on a workout warrior like Hill. Also, trading back into the early 20's should still allow the Bills a shot at one of the first round tackle talents, like Glenn or Reiff. Early 20's would be a good spot for one of them, or even Jonathan Martin if they are gone. I'd feel much better with one of those guys than Schwartz. Then, in the third or possibly second round, they could grab a receiver like Jeffrey, Sanu, Randle, or Quick, in that order of preference.

That would stockpile the Bills with good players, almost all whom I'd expect to be productive sooner rather than later, while still maximizing their chances of solidifying what I think is their weakest position right now, left tackle.

 

All good choices as well but not a fan of the first round LTs in the first so that's why I picked one latter. I think Jeffrey stinks, Sanu I've never seen, Randle and Quick look good but really feel that Hill is the Homerun Receiver in this draft and hopefully keeps the stream of Georgia Tech super WRs going with Megatron and Damaris Thompson and now Hill.

[OldTimer1960]

I don't see where two 4ths would net a 2nd, even a late 2nd. Two 4th round picks might get you into the latter third of round 3, but hey if you can get it - great!

[Buffalo Barbarian]

I don't see where two 4ths would net a 2nd, even a late 2nd. Two 4th round picks might get you into the latter third of round 3, but hey if you can get it - great!

some rebuilding team would.

[Kelly the Dog]

some rebuilding team would.

Has there ever been such a trade in the history of the NFL? According to the draft chart if the Bills had two picks in the third round, their own and the equivalent of the extra fourth rounder they have but now in the third, they could only acquire a lower level 2nd rounder. Thats two picks in the third, including one of them at the top ten. You think they can get a 2nd for 2 fourths? According to the chart, the two Bills fourth round picks packaged together would get them the fourth last pick of the third round. I know, the draft chart is not the end all. But it's pretty close (and this isn't the old version it's the updated one). I would bet no one has ever traded two fourths for a second.

[Orton's Arm]

some rebuilding team would.

I like the fact that you're giving serious thought to draft strategy. Yours has been one of the better threads I've seen, and a good starting point for shaking people loose from established patterns of thought.

 

One way your original post could be improved upon is to take into account the data found in an NFL draft value chart. The numbers in this chart are not set in stone. In this year's draft, for example, the first two picks have extreme value, because they're associated with players thought to be franchise QBs. There's a big drop-off in value from 2nd overall to 3rd overall. Other drafts will not necessarily be like that.

 

But while the draft chart isn't always going to be perfect, it's a good starting point. Also, there's normally more year-to-year variation in the value of the first few picks of a given draft than there is in its main body. Trades between teams--especially for picks in the second or third round--tend to have roughly balanced point values. If, for instance, a GM wants the 16th pick of the 2nd round (420 points) he knows he's probably going to have to give up about 420 points' worth of his own picks. The 16th pick of the 3rd round is worth only 190 points, which makes it somewhat expensive to trade up.

Edited April 15, 2012 by Edwards' Arm

[Billshank Redemption]

yea OP you need to learn what the trade value chart is 2 4ths doesn't even let us sniff a second http://drafttek.com/tradechart.html

[Matt in KC]

I like the thought of getting as many 2nd-3rd round picks as possuble if you can't get the top talent at the begining if the first round. I'd rather have more 2nd round picks than first rounders, and additional 2-3rd rounders for more late round picks.

 

I agree this depends on how mature your roster is. A SB team might well want fewer higher-skilled draftees, while a team finishign last in the division needs as many bodies as possible to clean house and get new blood on the team.

 

One other note: you can't trade compensatory picks like our late 7th rounder.

Edited April 15, 2012 by Matt in KC

[FleaMoulds80]

That's what first round picks are for reaching for that extreme talent There are no sure fire picks, Kuechly is overrated, Floyd has been pushed up the boards and guards can had anywhere.

 

David rocks and will be a great LB in our system, Fleener will be the next Ed McCaffrey but bigger and faster.

 

How is Kuechly overrated? From what I've read he's big enough, athletic enough and he's instinctive. Mayock knows more than anyone in here and I'll take his word over yours.

 

David rocks? Great analysis but based off what? Not impressed.

 

Fleener will be the next Ed McCaffrey? WHy because they're both white receivers that catch the ball?

 

Decastro may be just a guard but if you can solidify the inside with Levitre, Wood, and someone who's been compared to the likes of Hutchinson, then you take him.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

How is Kuechly overrated? From what I've read he's big enough, athletic enough and he's instinctive. Mayock knows more than anyone in here and I'll take his word over yours.

 

David rocks? Great analysis but based off what? Not impressed.

 

Fleener will be the next Ed McCaffrey? WHy because they're both white receivers that catch the ball?

 

Decastro may be just a guard but if you can solidify the inside with Levitre, Wood, and someone who's been compared to the likes of Hutchinson, then you take him.

Yeah comparing white players to each other makes no sense at all, you know there more genetic similarities than skin color. David rocks cuz I saw him play and all he did was make plays all over the field the same with Kuechly but his tackles came 5 yds down the field. Decastro doesn't help us win championships Megatron lite does.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

I like the thought of getting as many 2nd-3rd round picks as possuble if you can't get the top talent at the begining if the first round. I'd rather have more 2nd round picks than first rounders, and additional 2-3rd rounders for more late round picks.

 

I agree this depends on how mature your roster is. A SB team might well want fewer higher-skilled draftees, while a team finishign last in the division needs as many bodies as possible to clean house and get new blood on the team.

 

One other note: you can't trade compensatory picks like our late 7th rounder.

no comp picks, that ruins everything

[roccitybillsfan]

Many Teams like to acquire as many picks as possible which is good if a major overhaul is needed but in reality how many great players are there going to be in the latter rounds (yes I know we have hit on many late rounders but all that shows s how many misses we had early). How many times have you gone through draft boards and as you're going through the early rounds and thought man I want this guy and this guy and this guy and you realize you only have one pick per round.

 

What I would do is trade back in the first to get more 1st or second round picks and then trade up my 4+5 for another second and 6+7s (we always seem to get comp picks) for another 4rth. In General This would give us 6 total picks where the majority of great to probowl players are and where many first round talents slide back because teams are reaching for them in the first. I wouldn't trade up in the first because it costs too much unless there was a can't miss player. I now you need trade partners but NE seems to manage it every so we can too. Also I would trade fading stars for additional picks like we did with Evans. The rest of the roster would be filled with UDFAs who are just about as good as 5,6,7th rounders.

 

A team that was made up mostly 1,2,3,4 rounders would be incredibly hard to beat.

 

So this year we trade our first for one in the late teens early 20's and get a second, 2 4rths for a 2, 2 5ths for third and 6 & 2 7s for 4rth.

 

 

1. Stephen Hill Georgia Tech 6'5" 200 WR

2. Coby Fleener Stanford 6'6" 247 TE

2. Lavonte David Nebraska 6'1" 233 OLB

2. Josh Robinson Central Florida 5'10" 199 CB

3. Jared Crick Nebraska 6'4" 279 DE

3. Mitchell Schwartz California 6'5" 318 LT

4. B.J. Coleman Chattanooga 6'3" 220 QB

 

 

Sounds like Madden to me....rock on dude! But holla back when you have a realistic scenario.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

yea OP you need to learn what the trade value chart is 2 4ths doesn't even let us sniff a second http://drafttek.com/tradechart.html

Silence! I kill you!

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfResyFrqlM

[roccitybillsfan]

I like the fact that you're giving serious thought to draft strategy. Yours has been one of the better threads I've seen, and a good starting point for shaking people loose from established patterns of thought.

 

One way your original post could be improved upon is to take into account the data found in an NFL draft value chart. The numbers in this chart are not set in stone. In this year's draft, for example, the first two picks have extreme value, because they're associated with players thought to be franchise QBs. There's a big drop-off in value from 2nd overall to 3rd overall. Other drafts will not necessarily be like that.

 

But while the draft chart isn't always going to be perfect, it's a good starting point. Also, there's normally more year-to-year variation in the value of the first few picks of a given draft than there is in its main body. Trades between teams--especially for picks in the second or third round--tend to have roughly balanced point values. If, for instance, a GM wants the 16th pick of the 2nd round (420 points) he knows he's probably going to have to give up about 420 points' worth of his own picks. The 16th pick of the 3rd round is worth only 190 points, which makes it somewhat expensive to trade up.

 

 

I like the fact that you gave constructive criticism on the OP instead of just bashing it like most of us do on here. Kudos for that EA!

[Buffalo Barbarian]

I like the fact that you're giving serious thought to draft strategy. Yours has been one of the better threads I've seen, and a good starting point for shaking people loose from established patterns of thought.

 

One way your original post could be improved upon is to take into account the data found in an NFL draft value chart. The numbers in this chart are not set in stone. In this year's draft, for example, the first two picks have extreme value, because they're associated with players thought to be franchise QBs. There's a big drop-off in value from 2nd overall to 3rd overall. Other drafts will not necessarily be like that.

 

But while the draft chart isn't always going to be perfect, it's a good starting point. Also, there's normally more year-to-year variation in the value of the first few picks of a given draft than there is in its main body. Trades between teams--especially for picks in the second or third round--tend to have roughly balanced point values. If, for instance, a GM wants the 16th pick of the 2nd round (420 points) he knows he's probably going to have to give up about 420 points' worth of his own picks. The 16th pick of the 3rd round is worth only 190 points, which makes it somewhat expensive to trade up.

I know its not the most realistic plan but acquiring more second and third rounders would be the way to go. Bellicheat gets two 1sts every year we should do the same or 3 2nds.