Never Trade Up -- Here's Why

[John from Riverside]

1 minute ago, K-9 said:

When it comes to getting a player you’ve identified as a blue chip, can’t miss, franchise-turning-around, perennial All Pro? Yeah, it’s that simple. 

There is no such thing as a "cant miss"

[Doc Brown]

10 hours ago, cage said:

I further looked at QBs in just the top 5 in the same period.  The HIT rate "rises" to 38%,... certainly uninspiring.  With at least 4 QBs projected in the top 15 pics, we should expect that at least 2 of them will be BUSTs.

Not using your criteria, but more of a subjective analysis the hit rate is about 25% for top 5 picks.

 

Alex Smith - so so, Vince Young - BUST, Jamarcus Russell - all time BUST, Matthew Stafford - hit, Mark Sanchez - BUST, Sam Bradford - so so, Cam Newton - hit, Andrew Luck - hit, RG3 - BUST, Blake Bortles - so so, Jaemis Winston- so so, Marcus Mariota - so so 

 

3 hits, 5 so so's, 4 busts

 

Even though this year's draft class is probably rated the strongest since 2004, I don't envy McDermott or Beane at this point.

 

[cage]

14 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

The problem with all this is we have basically tried everything BUT selling out for a QB

 

Lets try it

 

The one thing we didn't try is picking Mahomes or Watson last year

[K-9]

3 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

There is no such thing as a "cant miss"

That’s really not the point though, is it? Having the conviction about the prospect comes first, being wrong and second guessed comes later.

[SouthNYfan]

24 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

Thanks.  Blackjack and Hold'em are definitely 2 different games.  LOL

I noticed how you said your "okay with THEM betting the farm, the car, and the rent check", and that is what I'm talking about.

It's their lives and careers on the line.

The 2 games of chance is really a good analogy.

Is Beane a Hold'em player or a Blackjack player?  Definitely 2 different kinds of gamblers.

 

Haha

Yeah I know they are two different games, I just felt the "River" hold em worked better for the flow of my post

I do think the draft is more hold'em than blackjack though, but either way, I think if I were Beane or MCD I would be popping Xanax like Skittles right now

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

8 minutes ago, K-9 said:

That’s really not the point though, is it? Having the conviction about the prospect comes first, being wrong and second guessed comes later.

Its also about risk aversion as some are conservative to the point of wilting on the vine.

[John from Riverside]

11 minutes ago, K-9 said:

That’s really not the point though, is it? Having the conviction about the prospect comes first, being wrong and second guessed comes later.

I just want them to have conviction and then support it

[K-9]

1 minute ago, horned dogs said:

Its also about risk aversion as some are conservative to the point of wilting on the vine.

The draft is nothing if not about taking risks. That should be self evident given the sheer amount of picks that don’t pan out as hoped. No guts, no glory as the saying goes. 

[Lurker]

5 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

 

4 minutes ago, K-9 said:

The draft is nothing if not about taking risks. That should be self evident given the sheer amount of picks that don’t pan out as hoped. No guts, no glory as the saying goes. 

 

....No Aaron Rogers, either.

 

http://www.espn.com/blog/buffalo-bills/post/_/id/24186/bills-gamble-on-j-p-losman-in-2004-backfired-badly

 

Edited March 3, 2018 by Lurker

[3rdand12]

20 minutes ago, K-9 said:

That’s really not the point though, is it? Having the conviction about the prospect comes first, being wrong and second guessed comes later.

one of my issues  has remained for years, in regard to the Bills specifically.

Can they even Develop a QB ?
Let hope part of The Process is focused on that feature.
 I have spoken my opinion about drafting QBs in regard to trading up aggressively. They damn well better all feel it is for The Man

[Fadingpain]

10 hours ago, cage said:

With all the talk of trading up I thought I would take a look at how well teams pick at the top half of the draft.  I looked at just the top 15 pics over a decade 2005-2015 (11 years).  I graded each pick as HIT / SO-SO / BUST.  I defined HIT as someone who had their 5th year option picked up, was re-signed by team drafting them or signed a big FA contract once their rookie deal was up.  For those still on their rookie contract they had to be full-time starters from year 1 and made the Pro-bowl.  That's what you'd expect from a top 15 pick.

 

Here are the results by position:

 

Position	Hit	So-so	Bust
QB	26%	32%	42%
RB	31%	38%	31%
WR	39%	17%	44%
OL	38%	38%	24%
DL	43%	26%	31%
LB	57%	17%	26%
DB	33%	38%	29%
Offense	34%	32%	34%
Defense	44%	27%	29%
Total	39%	29%	32%

 

Other than at LB the drafting success of the entire league scouting system for the top 15 picks of the draft is less than a coin flip.  These should be the most sure-fire perennial Pro Bowlers.  If the league's collective wisdom can't be above 50% with these pics, why would you ever trade up?  Much less, for a QB, which is the worst performing position.

 

I further looked at QBs in just the top 5 in the same period.  The HIT rate "rises" to 38%,... certainly uninspiring.  With at least 4 QBs projected in the top 15 pics, we should expect that at least 2 of them will be BUSTs.

 

 

 

You have shown more reasoning here than Doug Whaley did when he was actually the GM of the Bills.

 

It's not about quality of pick, it's about number of picks.  Increase your odds of hitting.

 

The good teams understand this and trade down all the time.

 

 

[cage]

2 minutes ago, Fadingpain said:

You have shown more reasoning here than Doug Whaley did when he was actually the GM of the Bills.

 

It's not about quality of pick, it's about number of picks.  Increase your odds of hitting.

 

The good teams understand this and trade down all the time.

 

 

 

Lets be a bit careful about that.  The Browns have shown thats not wonder-strategy necessarily either.  In two successive seasons they traded out of Carson Wentz and Deshaun Watson... yikes!  I think its good to trade down at times, trade up a few to get someone or stand pat and make your picks.  My preference would be not to trade up 10+ slots and overpay.

 

[ColoradoBills]

11 minutes ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

Haha

Yeah I know they are two different games, I just felt the "River" hold em worked better for the flow of my post

I do think the draft is more hold'em than blackjack though, but either way, I think if I were Beane or MCD I would be popping Xanax like Skittles right now

 

This QB situation has got to be nerve racking for them.

One thing that makes me personally feel better is they both seem very methodical in their decision making.

I would imagine they are just having to wait to see what happens in the FA QB outcome whether they are a big part of it or not.

 

Where these FA's sign in relation to draft pick order will be key to their draft decisions.

Cousins could sign with the Donkeys and the Jets could sign Keenum, who knows.  That would be great for the Bills.

Then again Cousins could sign with Minny and Keenum could go to Arizona.  Bad for the Bills.

 

I know the Eagles want to keep Foles, but man I wish he would get traded to one of the QB needy teams.

[Logic]

Thank you for the work to put this together. Well done.

Here's the thing for me: I KNOW the hit rate in the top half of the draft is low. But if you're part of that minority percentage that DOES hit on a pick -- particularly at QB -- it can change your franchise.

On one side of the coin, you have Washington, who traded a bunch to move up for RGIII, and it was a swing and a miss. But on the OTHER side of that coin is Philadelphia. THEY traded up for a quarterback and struck gold.

Is a move up risky? Yes. Is there a reasonably likelihood that the player you move up for busts? Yes. Is it necessary to take risks and swing the bat every now and then if you want to hit a home run? Yes.

In the case of attempting to obtain a franchise quarterback, I accept the risk. 

Edited March 3, 2018 by Logic

[Hapless Bills Fan]

4 hours ago, KD in CA said:

It's not trading up that's the problem.  It's trading up for players like JP Losman, John McCargo and Sammy Watkins.

 

Don't forget my personal favorite, WR TJ Graham

1 hour ago, Logic said:

On one side of the coin, you have Washington, who traded a bunch to move up for RGIII, and it was a swing and a miss.

 

The sad thing about RGIII is, he had a great rookie season - very hard to call him a miss.

He and Sam Bradford fall into another category of Draftee QB Hell, the "guy looked good until injury"

[Augie]

It looks like if you trade up four times you have a QB.  

[QCity]

1 hour ago, Fadingpain said:

 

 

It's not about quality of pick, it's about number of picks.  Increase your odds of hitting.

 

The good teams understand this and trade down all the time.

 

 

 

Absolutely. But the good teams already have their QB. That's why we consider them the good teams.

[White Linen]

5 hours ago, Lurker said:

 

Not really.   The group-think of draft ratings, buzz, media and fan pressure generally push QBs up each year, causing teams to irrationally say 'It will be worth it this time."   

 

The QBs go where they're slotted and the teams that trade up are the ones who go out of order...

 

The QB's do not go in order of BPA, which was my point.