BarleyNY Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/19261281/how-lure-low-cost-qb-caused-bears-chiefs-texans-trade-2017-nfl-draft The whole article is certainly worth reading and there is more on the Bills trade, but here's an excerpt: "The Chiefs sent the 27th and 91st overall picks in this year's draft to the Bills, but crucially, they were forced to throw in their 2018 first-round pick to seal the deal. That's an enormous haul for Buffalo. Given the Chiefs have consistently been a playoff contender under Andy Reid, let's be conservative and treat that future first-rounder like it's equivalent to the 24th selection in the draft. By the traditional Jimmy Johnson chart, the Chiefs sent 1,556 points of draft capital to the Bills, which is somewhere between the sixth and seventh picks. By Chase Stuart's draft value chart, though, the 33.9 points Kansas City sent to Buffalo are closer to the value of the first overall pick (34.6 points)." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zevo Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 No no no...it was an absolutely terrible trade and the bills are clueless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Billieve Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 yeah, that's definitely how i feel about it, but for most people most of the time a pick next year doesn't have the same value as a pick this year. to be honest though, i almost rather have a pick next year than this. give mcd a chance to work with what we have, install his system and then we have extra capital to fill in any malcontents that need to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 I agree with this, recall reading in the past a pick for the following season is downgraded by one round so would be the equivalent of a 2nd rounder. However in this case, think it was very strategic by the Bills to give them the flexibility to move up to almost anywhere in the draft. So if Taylor bombs we'd have many more loses than wins, likely by somewhere mid season or later they'd bench him and maybe give Jones a good look. By the end of the season we could easily have a top ten pick again IF Taylor bombs. Combine a top 10 with a second 1st rounder, likely could move up to a top 2 or higher pick if throw in a 2nd or 3rd rounder too. If Taylor does well and feel we're OK at QB could get 2 players, maybe trade one to move up a few spots. So I think in the case of Buffalo flexibility for next season's draft is a good thing and am happy with the position they are in. yeah, that's definitely how i feel about it, but for most people most of the time a pick next year doesn't have the same value as a pick this year. to be honest though, i almost rather have a pick next year than this. give mcd a chance to work with what we have, install his system and then we have extra capital to fill in any malcontents that need to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffismagic Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 Mahomes needs work. His target date as a starter might be 2018 or even 2019, which eliminates a huge chunk of the surplus value he offers as a rookie quarterback, given that he could spend a couple of years on the bench behind Smith. He's about as high-risk of a quarterback as anyone has taken in this draft in years, although the Texas Tech product also obviously offers enormous upside. Drafting him incurs the opportunity cost of not upgrading with a wide receiver or a cornerback for a team that could be very close to competing for a Super Bowl right now. http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/19261281/how-lure-low-cost-qb-caused-bears-chiefs-texans-trade-2017-nfl-draft So the data says don't draft a QB because Kansas City could have got another WR for Alex Smith? The whole analysis is flawed. The goal is to win the Superbowl. Andy Reid decided to put his chips all in because he understands the goal of the game and any great coach. He decided that Mahomes could be the QB to win the big one and Alex could only go so far. Now for other teams winning a Superbowl might not be the goal but just winning enough games to keep their job. That's why you want people at the top of your organization who are confident and have the right goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted April 30, 2017 Author Share Posted April 30, 2017 Mahomes needs work. His target date as a starter might be 2018 or even 2019, which eliminates a huge chunk of the surplus value he offers as a rookie quarterback, given that he could spend a couple of years on the bench behind Smith. He's about as high-risk of a quarterback as anyone has taken in this draft in years, although the Texas Tech product also obviously offers enormous upside. Drafting him incurs the opportunity cost of not upgrading with a wide receiver or a cornerback for a team that could be very close to competing for a Super Bowl right now.[/size] http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/19261281/how-lure-low-cost-qb-caused-bears-chiefs-texans-trade-2017-nfl-draft So the data says don't draft a QB because Kansas City could have got another WR for Alex Smith? The whole analysis is flawed. The goal is to win the Superbowl. Andy Reid decided to put his chips all in because he understands the goal of the game and any great coach. He decided that Mahomes could be the QB to win the big one and Alex could only go so far. Now for other teams winning a Superbowl might not be the goal but just winning enough games to keep their job. That's why you want people at the top of your organization who are confident and have the right goal. Or Reid is overpaying on a trade and reaching on a QB prospect because he's being pressured by ownership to get over the hump and really compete for a SB. Such pressure can cause individuals to take riskier chances than they otherwise would. In this kind of scenario a GM or HC takes a big gamble on a QB prospect with a high ceiling, but a relatively low chance of success. But it still gives them a chance to keep their job and that's better than the alternative which is building the roster and taking more reasonable risks with slightly lower chances of a payoff. What does it matter to that HM or HC if he gives up future picks? If it doesn't work, then he's out anyway and someone else has to deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 30, 2017 Share Posted April 30, 2017 The "a pick next year is worth a round lower in this draft" thing doesn't hold water. No one would trade the 27th pick in the 2nd round for a 1st next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffismagic Posted April 30, 2017 Share Posted April 30, 2017 Or Reid is overpaying on a trade and reaching on a QB prospect because he's being pressured by ownership to get over the hump and really compete for a SB. Such pressure can cause individuals to take riskier chances than they otherwise would. In this kind of scenario a GM or HC takes a big gamble on a QB prospect with a high ceiling, but a relatively low chance of success. But it still gives them a chance to keep their job and that's better than the alternative which is building the roster and taking more reasonable risks with slightly lower chances of a payoff. What does it matter to that HM or HC if he gives up future picks? If it doesn't work, then he's out anyway and someone else has to deal with it. I have no idea. But Andy Reid seems to have the trust of the ownership and they are empowering him. It wasn't just Reid. Dorsey mentioned multiple teams were all trying to get up and Chiefs had the best offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted April 30, 2017 Share Posted April 30, 2017 (edited) Mahomes needs work. His target date as a starter might be 2018 or even 2019, which eliminates a huge chunk of the surplus value he offers as a rookie quarterback, given that he could spend a couple of years on the bench behind Smith. He's about as high-risk of a quarterback as anyone has taken in this draft in years, although the Texas Tech product also obviously offers enormous upside. Drafting him incurs the opportunity cost of not upgrading with a wide receiver or a cornerback for a team that could be very close to competing for a Super Bowl right now. http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/19261281/how-lure-low-cost-qb-caused-bears-chiefs-texans-trade-2017-nfl-draft So the data says don't draft a QB because Kansas City could have got another WR for Alex Smith? The whole analysis is flawed. The goal is to win the Superbowl. Andy Reid decided to put his chips all in because he understands the goal of the game and any great coach. He decided that Mahomes could be the QB to win the big one and Alex could only go so far. Now for other teams winning a Superbowl might not be the goal but just winning enough games to keep their job. That's why you want people at the top of your organization who are confident and have the right goal. I think that's right, and I think that's also why we'll see Mahomes take over at QB by midseason unless he looks really, really rough in preseason. Let's just say it's a trade that made sense for both teams based on where they are in the competition cycle. It's been pretty well proven that KC has a playoff caliber roster (and still has some key players in prime/cost-controlled years), but that they are not likely to reach the promised land with Alex Smith. And the Bills? Well, that promised land is one that Tyrod Taylor will never see either. In fact, if Mahomes does take over, couldn't you see Alex Smith as Bills QB in 2018? In other words, are we where the Chiefs were in 2013, waiting for the skilled game manager who can at least get us into the playoffs? Edited April 30, 2017 by The Frankish Reich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 30, 2017 Share Posted April 30, 2017 (edited) I have no idea. But Andy Reid seems to have the trust of the ownership and they are empowering him. It wasn't just Reid. Dorsey mentioned multiple teams were all trying to get up and Chiefs had the best offer. Good to hear that they took the best offer. I was wondering if McD gave Reid a better deal because they're buds. I think that's right, and I think that's also why we'll see Mahomes take over at QB by midseason unless he looks really, really rough in preseason. Let's just say it's a trade that made sense for both teams based on where they are in the competition cycle. It's been pretty well proven that KC has a playoff caliber roster (and still has some key players in prime/cost-controlled years), but that they are not likely to reach the promised land with Alex Smith. And the Bills? Well, that promised land is one that Tyrod Taylor will never see either. In fact, if Mahomes does take over, couldn't you see Alex Smith as Bills QB in 2018? In other words, are we where the Chiefs were in 2013, waiting for the skilled game manager who can at least get us into the playoffs? The only ways Mahomes takes over at mid-season are if Alex Smith is injured or playing horribly/the team has a really bad record. Other than that, they don't turn to a raw developmental rookie that quickly. Edited April 30, 2017 by Doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted April 30, 2017 Author Share Posted April 30, 2017 I have no idea. But Andy Reid seems to have the trust of the ownership and they are empowering him. It wasn't just Reid. Dorsey mentioned multiple teams were all trying to get up and Chiefs had the best offer. I think that trust is waivering. He's heading into his 5th season and is 1-3 in playoff games. He needs to get over the hump. I'm not sure what other offers there were, but it's telling that 3 QB needy teams with new people in charge traded out of 2, 10 and 12 where these QBs were taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted April 30, 2017 Share Posted April 30, 2017 Good to hear that they took the best offer. I was wondering if McD gave Reid a better deal because they're buds. The only ways Mahomes takes over at mid-season are if Alex Smith is injured or playing horribly/the team has a really bad record. Other than that, they don't turn to a raw developmental rookie that quickly. It didn't take much of an injury to Smith for Harbaugh to make a definitive change to Kaepernick ... Mahomes will get his shot at some point. Whether he grabs it like Kaep or Dak is up to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 30, 2017 Share Posted April 30, 2017 It didn't take much of an injury to Smith for Harbaugh to make a definitive change to Kaepernick ... Mahomes will get his shot at some point. Whether he grabs it like Kaep or Dak is up to him. Kaep wasn't a rookie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted April 30, 2017 Share Posted April 30, 2017 The "a pick next year is worth a round lower in this draft" thing doesn't hold water. No one would trade the 27th pick in the 2nd round for a 1st next year. The San Diego Chargers traded 2nd round picks for next year's 1st's several times in the early 2000's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts