Moving Up In The Draft

[nucci]

15 hours ago, Da webster guy said:

Not sure which draft value chart you're using but the Jimmy Johnson one says we wouldnt need to give up nearly as much as you proposed to get into 3rd spot.

His chart is just a guideline though, it could be off considerably.

Charts don't mean anything...it depends on what one team is willing to pay and another willing to accept

[BuffaloHokie13]

Looking at the 3 trades in the OP, here are the values associated with them:

 

Rams: 15, 43, 45, 76, Future 1, Future 3 - 138.49

Titans: 1, 113, 177 - 105.84

Rams essentially paid a 30% tax to move up.

 

Eagles: 8, 77, 100, Future 1, Future 2 - 118.46

Browns: 2, Future 5th - 94.98

Eagles paid a 25% tax to move up

 

Redskins: 6, 39, Future 1, Future 1 - 135.39

Rams: 2 - 93.83

Redskins paid a 35% tax to move up

 

So if we look at the offer I suggested it would seem we need to drop the extra 3rd, and we get:

Bills: 21, 21, Future 1, Glenn - 110.68 + Glenn

Colts: 3 - 89.55

Bills pay a 24% tax plus Glenn to help their OL

 

That seems to be in line assuming Glenn is healthy. If he doesn't pass the physical we swap him out for a 2019 3rd and our tax goes up to 29%

[corta765]

1 hour ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Looking at the 3 trades in the OP, here are the values associated with them:

 

Rams: 15, 43, 45, 76, Future 1, Future 3 - 138.49

Titans: 1, 113, 177 - 105.84

Rams essentially paid a 30% tax to move up.

 

Eagles: 8, 77, 100, Future 1, Future 2 - 118.46

Browns: 2, Future 5th - 94.98

Eagles paid a 25% tax to move up

 

Redskins: 6, 39, Future 1, Future 1 - 135.39

Rams: 2 - 93.83

Redskins paid a 35% tax to move up

 

So if we look at the offer I suggested it would seem we need to drop the extra 3rd, and we get:

Bills: 21, 21, Future 1, Glenn - 110.68 + Glenn

Colts: 3 - 89.55

Bills pay a 24% tax plus Glenn to help their OL

 

That seems to be in line assuming Glenn is healthy. If he doesn't pass the physical we swap him out for a 2019 3rd and our tax goes up to 29%

 

Good way to quantify this its really easy to understand

[BuffaloHokie13]

7 minutes ago, corta765 said:

Good way to quantify this its really easy to understand

I looked at the Trubisky trade as well, for reference. Chicago paid a 20% tax on that one.

[GunnerBill]

3 hours ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Adjusted Costs for how the future picks are generally valued. None of those trades involved 2 1st round picks in the current year, which makes our situation unique and valuable.

 

This is what everyone is missing in my opinion. Especially when you are talking Colts who have holes everywhere. Two firsts speeds up the rebuild considerably. 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[billsredneck1]

if i were gm, these are the scenarios i would look at....assuming cousins is gone.

 

1. i would trade 21 for foles. vita vea no. 22

 

2. i would trade both firsts and glenn to indy for 3  and take mayfield.

 

3. if for some reason we can't get mayfield (at 3 or 4),with the 2 firsts and a tt/glenn deal.....

i draft vita vea at 21...rudolph at 22, then go bpa the rest of the way and try to also turn tt/glenn into picks or player/picks trade.

 

( i left out a.j. mc carron because i think he will end up as a rfa and be tendered to high to pony up for.)

 

if all else fails, and i can get vita vea and davenport with 21/22, then i can get a mike white in the 2nd. hire a ken dorsey type for qb coach and roll with peterman as the starter. yes, i still believe he could at least be an alex smith.

 

these next 2 months are gonna be crazy.

[GunnerBill]

Trading a first for Foles is such a bad idea. 

[John from Riverside]

9 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

Trading a first for Foles is such a bad idea. 

I agree with this so much....and I actually wanted Foles here when he was a free agent

[BuffaloHokie13]

16 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

Trading a first for Foles is such a bad idea. 

Just because I've been looking at the Trade Chart throughout the day, here is an alternative equivalent to trading pick 21 for Nick Foles when it comes to draft capital.

 

21 = 45.51

22 = 44.08

Total Value of Bills 1st round picks = 89.59

 

#3 overall = 89.55

 

So trading 21 for Nick Foles is like trading #3 overall for Nick Foles and #22.

[Spielman]

20 hours ago, Luxy312 said:

 

Right or wrong, this is where my mindset is.  If this team were simply a QB away from feeling like they're a Superbowl contender, AND they thought one of the 5-6 QB's that we're talking about were significantly better than all the others (let's say "can't miss" kind of better), then a trade happens.  What I'm stuck on right now in that context is all of the apparent positions of need for this team, deferring obviously to whatever happens in free agency.  I think they're weak on 2 OL positions and arguably 3.  Defensive tackle has to be a consideration, along with linebacker and another corner.  Based on the needs and the frequency of early draft picks, I'm not sure I can get there to move up.  I also don't see a QB that separates themselves from the other 4-5.

You're right.  Beane will let the draft come to him.  Sit tight with our picks and get BPA.  There are wayyyy too many holes on this team.  There will be a good QB available at 21.

[Da webster guy]

On 2/13/2018 at 12:58 PM, nucci said:

Charts don't mean anything...it depends on what one team is willing to pay and another willing to accept

Beane said the charts mean a great deal to him.  There are different ones but they use them as a starting point.  He said especially on draft day there can be a dozen teams making offers to you for spot and that's a way you can set standards for offers to save time while you're on the clock.

     But you're partially right in the sense that trading up to get Andrew Luck at #1 would have cost a lot more than trading up to get Myles Garrett at #1 last year.   Kiper says for the top few picks there is no standard because it varies w how special the top handful of guys are.

   I just hope we swing for the home run and go get the guy we want at qb.  Whoever the scouts believe it is....