The “Draft Capital” is over rated

[Kirby Jackson]

7 minutes ago, dollars 2 donuts said:

 

 

oooohhhhh we could go up to 4 with 21 and 22!

 

OK, serious, given this chart (and I know it varies) I would consider 21 and 22, our first round 2 pick, and something next year to get to number 2, if the Giants are willing, which they may not be.

Yep, me too. You always pay some premium as the team moving up. I think our 2 1’s and Glenn or a 2nd next year will get us into the top 5. If Denver signs Cousins (and releases all of these vets) they are a decent target. 

[dollars 2 donuts]

9 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Yep, me too. You always pay some premium as the team moving up. I think our 2 1’s and Glenn or a 2nd next year will get us into the top 5. If Denver signs Cousins (and releases all of these vets) they are a decent target. 

 

Indeed, Kirby, and if they really, really think the guy at 2 (likely Rosen) is the shizznit they are potentially done at the QB position for 10 years.

 

I am not willing to do that for any other position.  The closest being a 3 down dominating LB that is the QB of your D.  

 

... man...Khalil was right there.  

[JohnC]

13 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I gave you a reasonable counter argument and showed you the 4 best in the NFL did not come from picks higher than ours, and one only in first round.  You then made a snarky comment back to me, in which I responded accordingly.  

 

So, sorry bud, you got your reasonable argument and decided to go the opposite direction with your reply and I responded back to you with the same tone of response you gave me.  Practice what you preach bud and I will show the same respect back.

Yes, you gave good examples of lower drafted qbs outperforming higher ranked players. But if you want more favorable odds that your qb is going to be successful it is going to be with the higher picked qb. Ask the Rams or Eagles if they regret moving up to draft Goff and Wentz? Are the top three qb prospects more likely to be better than next three or four ranked qbs? No one can say for sure but my preference would be to get one of the higher rated prospects. 

 

No doubt there is a judgment and balancing act as to how much you want to trade picks at the expense of addressing other needs. That's where good scouting comes into play which allows you to make a good judgment on value. It's certainly not an easy call. But for me in this year's draft I would rather be aggressive like the Rams and Eagles were and get one of the top three qbs.

 

 

[Gordio]

13 hours ago, The Jokeman said:

I've always been in belief you build a roster and the QB is the end piece. We made the playoffs last year with a QB who threw 14 TD passes. I think Rosen can be another Goff/Wentz and gladly trade up for him and fill holes on defense in free agency.

 

I don't agree with this at all.  The Bills have been trying to do this for the past 20 years & it has gotten us nowhere.  Get the QB, then build the team around him, not the other way around.

[OldTimer1960]

4 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

The OP does realize that there aren’t really any rounds but instead just one long list of draft picks, right? The first pick of the second round is really just the 33rd pick of the entire draft. There isn’t a built in drop off in talent from the end of one round to the beginning of the next.

That is absolutely my point.  For example, the Bills' 3rd round pick is 96 overall (or close to that), that isn't as valuable as pick 67 which is also in the same round.

3 hours ago, corta765 said:

Draft Capital is not overrated. Statistically you hit on around 33% of your picks and the goal is always to have more picks especially in the first 3 rounds to increase your chance of hitting more. The Patriots and Ravens are brilliant with having a ton of picks and if you look at how many good starters they get later in the draft its pretty stark of how much the draft is just a gamble and you want more chances.

 

In regards to the Bills selecting at 21 and 22 remember we just drafted Tre White at 27, Aaron Rodgers was drafted 24th, and Johnny Manziel was drafted 10th when Derek Carr/Teddy Bridgewater were drafted 32nd and 36th. Simply put you really don't know and need to hope you have your homework done while getting a little lucky also.

I didn't say that the picks are not valuable, only that there seems to be a prevailing perceptions that they are so flush with valuable picks that they can accomplish anything that they want in the draft.  My only point was that they don't have the buying power that it seems some people think. 

For comparison, Cleveland has crazy draft capital with picks 1, 4, 33, 35, 64.

 

 

[John from Riverside]

6 hours ago, joesixpack said:

 

That doesn't work at QB.

 

I didnt realize that we were talking about just qb...I thought the OP was talking about having high picks was not a good thing.

 

QB is a different situation entirely...its the one position that you trade up for

[Alphadawg7]

3 hours ago, JohnC said:

Yes, you gave good examples of lower drafted qbs outperforming higher ranked players. But if you want more favorable odds that your qb is going to be successful it is going to be with the higher picked qb. Ask the Rams or Eagles if they regret moving up to draft Goff and Wentz? Are the top three qb prospects more likely to be better than next three or four ranked qbs? No one can say for sure but my preference would be to get one of the higher rated prospects. 

 

No doubt there is a judgment and balancing act as to how much you want to trade picks at the expense of addressing other needs. That's where good scouting comes into play which allows you to make a good judgment on value. It's certainly not an easy call. But for me in this year's draft I would rather be aggressive like the Rams and Eagles were and get one of the top three qbs.

 

 

 

I dont disagree with anything you said.  However, the OP was that having a lot of draft assets is "over rated" and all that matters is top 10 picks.  And that is categorically not true now or over the history of the NFL at every position in the NFL.  

 

No one is going to argue that a top 10 pick isnt more valuable than the 21st pick, it obviously gives you a better shot at higher graded prospects.  But this isnt a debate about is a top 10 pick more valuable than any pick lower than that.  It was debate on whether having a lot of draft assets is over rated.  And by no means having a lot of coveted picks over 3 rounds of the draft over rated.  Teams build through the draft and those picks are all highly coveted for a reason by teams and GM's.  Even the general fan completely disregards picks in the 4th through 7th rounds most often, yet GM's and teams know that even those picks have value and a good scouting team can find great players, role players, ST players, quality backups, etc in all those rounds.  

 

Again, totally agree with you, and based on your post I think its safe to say we are on the same page.  All my comments were at the notion that having draft assets are over rated.  I would not be upset if the Bills made a big trade to get a guy they covet, I only started commenting to dispel the inaccurate statement that the only thing that matters is high picks, anything else is "over rated".  

[BuffaloBillsGospel]

8 hours ago, OldTimer1960 said:

I did not mean to imply that I was some super scout.  I do think that Rosen, Darnold and Mayfield are good, maybe very good prospects, but IF the Bills were to trade up high enough to get one of them, it will leave very little left to address other needs.

 

i know that no prospect is perfect, but I would be leery of trading 2 1sts and a 2nd (maybe more) for any of them.  With Rosen you have to worry if he really wants to play, Darnold had a ton of turnovers this year and Mayfield's height might be a problem in the NFL.  Sure, I'd be happy to have any of the 3, but at how high of a price?

 

i am hoping that they can make a small move up to get someone like Jackson or Rudolph and still have 2 1st and at least one 2nd left.  

I agree with the theme of your post.  If they don't trade a lot to move up for a QB, I think they can get some good players -or- they can trade a lot and hopefully get a QB but little other help.  My main argument is that they likely can't do both.

 

No draft is going to fill every position, there is FA, trades and undrafted rookie free agents. If our scouting department doesn't suck like the last one we had under Whaley then logic says go for the big fish and the rest will fall into place. I hate giving up any picks to move up either, I highly doubt in this deep class that a QB will be there for us. Some are thinking Rudolph or Jackson will just fall, there are many needy teams and then you have dark horse teams like Pittsburgh, SD , New Orleans who have older QB's and they'll need to address the situation soon also. Right now I'd say there's no great need than QB imo. Hell I could even see the Patriots moving up this year and drafting Brady's heir apparent once again.

[OldTimer1960]

56 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I dont disagree with anything you said.  However, the OP was that having a lot of draft assets is "over rated" and all that matters is top 10 picks.  And that is categorically not true now or over the history of the NFL at every position in the NFL.  

 

No one is going to argue that a top 10 pick isnt more valuable than the 21st pick, it obviously gives you a better shot at higher graded prospects.  But this isnt a debate about is a top 10 pick more valuable than any pick lower than that.  It was debate on whether having a lot of draft assets is over rated.  And by no means having a lot of coveted picks over 3 rounds of the draft over rated.  Teams build through the draft and those picks are all highly coveted for a reason by teams and GM's.  Even the general fan completely disregards picks in the 4th through 7th rounds most often, yet GM's and teams know that even those picks have value and a good scouting team can find great players, role players, ST players, quality backups, etc in all those rounds.  

 

Again, totally agree with you, and based on your post I think its safe to say we are on the same page.  All my comments were at the notion that having draft assets are over rated.  I would not be upset if the Bills made a big trade to get a guy they covet, I only started commenting to dispel the inaccurate statement that the only thing that matters is high picks, anything else is "over rated".  

That isn't quite what I was saying.  I am not saying that only top 10 picks are valuable.  I was saying that the picks that the Bills do have, though nice, is not a treasure trove of untold riches.  In other words, I am very glad that they have the extra picks, they can be useful and I hope they get good value out of them either in trade up or in using them all.

I was just highlighting that the Bills picks are 21,22, 53, 56 and 96 (or close to that).  That isn't nearly as valuable as picks 1, 2, 32, 33, and 65 - all of which are in the same round as the Bills' picks. 

[sleeby]

Several posts here about how many great QBs have not been top 10 picks.  That's true but two things - those percentages are scewed by the likes of Brady being counted many times due to his SB appearances or whatnot. 

Also, the inverse should be considered - how many top 10 QBs in the last 20 years have gone on to play in a championship game OR win x number of playoff games or whatever makes good filters.  Read as - how many have NOT gone on to do much of anything.  Most I would assume.

 

Trading both first and a second to move up exposes the bills to far greater risk than keeping what we have or making smaller trades to move up slightly.  Going all in on a top 3 QB and seeing it fail is, to me, a ton worse than getting a QB with one of our first round (say Rudolph) and a bunchnof other studs too.  If Rudolph (whomever) is a bust we are just developing and waiting another year for another chance at FA or draft.

Edited February 9, 2018 by sleeby

[John from Riverside]

13 minutes ago, OldTimer1960 said:

That isn't quite what I was saying.  I am not saying that only top 10 picks are valuable.  I was saying that the picks that the Bills do have, though nice, is not a treasure trove of untold riches.  In other words, I am very glad that they have the extra picks, they can be useful and I hope they get good value out of them either in trade up or in using them all.

I was just highlighting that the Bills picks are 21,22, 53, 56 and 96 (or close to that).  That isn't nearly as valuable as picks 1, 2, 32, 33, and 65 - all of which are in the same round as the Bills' picks. 

Let me give you a scenario of where it is a treasure trove

 

- Lets say that God shines down on us and blesses us with a QB that everyone loves and can carry this team and strike fear in the hearts of defensive coordinators......that qb....sooner or later....is gonna cost us a mint and a significant portion of our salary cap to keep....so there are like 50 something other positions we have to fill on the team and they need to be NFL caliber if we want to actually play in a super bowl.

 

How do we get them?

 

We get them by hitting on all of our early round picks because now those guys have to become competant starters because there will be NO money or cap to get other blue chip players to fill those positions.

 

You have to draft well......or else you are just previous versions of the saints with a awesome qb and nobody around him.

[OldTimer1960]

1 hour ago, John from Hemet said:

Let me give you a scenario of where it is a treasure trove

 

- Lets say that God shines down on us and blesses us with a QB that everyone loves and can carry this team and strike fear in the hearts of defensive coordinators......that qb....sooner or later....is gonna cost us a mint and a significant portion of our salary cap to keep....so there are like 50 something other positions we have to fill on the team and they need to be NFL caliber if we want to actually play in a super bowl.

 

How do we get them?

 

We get them by hitting on all of our early round picks because now those guys have to become competant starters because there will be NO money or cap to get other blue chip players to fill those positions.

 

You have to draft well......or else you are just previous versions of the saints with a awesome qb and nobody around him.

We are in total alignment.  I was just feeling that there is this prevailing opinion (at least some) that the picks the Bills have are more valuable than they really are.  I'll admit that my sense of that was formed mostly listening to WGR and a different Rochester sports talk show where the hosts and callers talk as if the Bills have an endless supply of extra picks that can be traded to move up AND to address several other needs. 

[dave mcbride]

21 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Again...the top 4 QBs in the NFL contain one first round player who was taken 24th (Rogers), followed by Brees in the 2nd, Wilson in the 3rd, and Brady in the 6th.  All this nonsense about how you can only find a great QB in the top is silly considering the 4 best were taken after both our picks this year.

 

PS:  Montana taken 82nd pick in 3rd round.  Kurt Warner undrafted.  I mean I could go on and on about how misguided this thread is...and this extends past just QB's.

 

 

I am right, thanks for acknowledging that.  

I think Roethlisberger is probably better than Wilson, and I'd argue Rivers (criminally underrated) is too. I think Wilson is terrific, of course. 

7 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Yep, me too. You always pay some premium as the team moving up. I think our 2 1’s and Glenn or a 2nd next year will get us into the top 5. If Denver signs Cousins (and releases all of these vets) they are a decent target. 

To move into the top 3, I think they need to trade 21, 22, one of the second rounders, and a second rounder next year. Glenn won't be appealing given the contract and the injury status. If they believe that the qb they're getting is a franchise player, you do this in a NY minute. 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

9 hours ago, Chuck Wagon said:

"Who needs draft picks, give me one guaranteed guy"

 

- Mike Ditka

 

 

Outside of a handful of blue chip prospects at the very top of the draft, typically guys who go in the early teens aren't that far off from talent that goes in the 3rd round.

 

...agree....and throw in the "Vikes for Herschel deal" or Boy Danny Snyder's king's ransom for RG II 1/8..........this gang plays it close to the vest with so many holes to fill and being committed to building through the draft IMO.....still guessing that Rudolph is their QB choice at 21.......not sure what the benefit would be moving down from 22.......leave that to the chart masters.....also think they spend FA dollars wisely versus investing big bucks in ONE player...............

[LABILLBACKER]

21 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

HOF players are drafted in all rounds and even signed as UDFA.  This notion great prospects aren't available at 21 and 22 or in the 2nd round is nuts.  Teams COVET those picks.  So unless you think the brightest minds in all of football now and history are all wrong in the fact that great players are found regularly with those picks, then this post is misguided. 

 

Look at the general consensus on the 4 best QB's in the NFL today...none taken earlier than 24th pick and only 1 in the first round.  Rogers, Brees (2nd round), Wilson (3rd round), Brady (6th round).  So, sorry but your post is waaaaay off.

100% verified true. Fun fact. Which team this year had the most UDFA's?  Your SB Patriots !

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

21 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

HOF players are drafted in all rounds and even signed as UDFA.  This notion great prospects aren't available at 21 and 22 or in the 2nd round is nuts.  Teams COVET those picks.  So unless you think the brightest minds in all of football now and history are all wrong in the fact that great players are found regularly with those picks, then this post is misguided. 

 

Look at the general consensus on the 4 best QB's in the NFL today...none taken earlier than 24th pick and only 1 in the first round.  Rogers, Brees (2nd round), Wilson (3rd round), Brady (6th round).  So, sorry but your post is waaaaay off.

 

...damn good assessment Dawg......has always been a crapshoot and will forever be a crapshoot versus exact science.....having draft capital itself is non sequitur.........WHO is utilizing the capital is THE utmost key.......draft number one for Beane and his gang is a HUGE test IMO......they're committed to building through the draft.............stay tuned.........

[OldTimer1960]

I never said that having extra draft picks is a bad thing.  I also know very well that really good players have been found in every round of the draft and as UDFAs.  What I have been saying is that the Bills are not as rich in picks as some seem to think.

 

 

[hondo in seattle]

On 2/8/2018 at 6:37 PM, Kirby Jackson said:

Draft capital is pretty simple. It takes an interested party but everyone pretty much uses the same chart. That’s why it doesn’t vary a lot. Here is the chart that teams are using recently:

 

 

We have the 6th most draft capital according to one evaluation of the draft value chart.

 

(See BN)

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

4 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said:

 

We have the 6th most draft capital according to one evaluation of the draft value chart.

 

(See BN)

 

....and when is the last time this club has been in THAT position?......MAJOR capital and MAJOR holes to fill.....and you don't think this gang will be conservative with that draft capital or FA dollars versus "riverboat gamblers"?......strictly my opinion, but I don't see it while many others have offered their RESPECTED opinions to the contrary......gonna be interesting shortly....

[mjt328]

Listen.  It's never going to be "ideal" to trade TONS of draft picks to select one player.

But the Bills are in a great position to do it.

 

First of all, this draft is loaded with QB talent.  That means that instead of being forced to trade up to the #1 or #2 spot, the Bills (depending on who they like) may only need to trade up into the Top 10.  That seriously limits what we may need to part with.

 

Second, the Bills have 4 picks in the first 2 rounds.  Although they aren't really high picks, that is enough for us to do some damage.  Maybe we trade away the majority of picks this year, but then have everything we need in next year's draft.  Maybe we do the opposite.  Either way, having that extra ammo makes things easier for us.