How much it will actually cost to get to #2

[T-Bomb]

Next years first is off the table for me, that's where I draw the line.

[Brianmoorman4jesus]

I mean this and I’m not just saying it

 

I will be more mad if we don’t trade up, then anything that it would cost to move up. I don’t care what it costs and I truly mean it. If I wake up tomorrow and we move up to 2, I will never waste a single second worrying about what it cost us to get there. If draft day rolls around and we sit at 12 watching the best QBs come off the board again while we nest on our picks...I will be fuming to think of what 2017 was. If we don’t move up, why the !@#$ did we trade Watkins, Darius and Darby? We probably could have beat the Jags. If we aren’t moving up, why did we do what we did? At this point, we are in to deep. Pay the Giants : “what they want” to move up. End of story. 30 years of waiting is more expensive then a few picks. Go Bills!

[ColoradoBills]

6 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

The Bears gave up #3 (89.55), #67(12.99), #111(4.92), and a future 3rd (4.81) for a total of 112.27

The 49ers gave up #2 (93.83)

 

That's ~120% value, which is well within reason for the team moving up in a trade in the top 3.

The old chart (#3=2200)+(#67=225)+(#111=72)+ (Future 3rd=62) = 2559.

Pick #2 = 2600.  A difference of 1.6%.

Just saying.

 

If the Bill's move up for their 2 1st's and a 2nd I will love the new chart.

[BuffaloHokie13]

7 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

The old chart (#3=2200)+(#67=225)+(#111=72)+ (Future 3rd=62) = 2559.

Pick #2 = 2600.  A difference of 1.6%.

Just saying.

 

If the Bill's move up for their 2 1st's and a 2nd I will love the new chart.

And the team moving up is providing less value than the team moving down, which makes absolutely no sense.

 

I'd recommend checking more than one trade with both charts. You'll see that the new one makes significantly more sense 99% of the time. Here are 6 examples of recent trades where the team moving up doesn't even meet, or barely meets, the value of the higher pick per JJ's chart.

 

Browns (#12 - 1200) trade with Texans(#25 & Future 1st - 1140).

Bills (#10 - 1300) trade with Chiefs (#27, #91, Future 1st - 1236).

Seahawks (700) to Falcons (720) pick, pretty darned close. #26 to #31

Tenn (#15 & #76 - 1260) and Cleveland (#8 & #176 - 1421)

Bears (#11 & #106 - 1332) and Bucs (#9 - 1350).

 

Rams: #15, #43, #45, #76, Future 1, Future 3 - 2670

Titans: #1, #113, #177 - 3088.6

 

Eagles: #8, #77, #100, Future 1, Future 2 - 2159

Browns: #2, Future 5 - 2621

Edited March 21, 2018 by BuffaloHokie13

[SouthNYfan]

8 minutes ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

I mean this and I’m not just saying it

 

I will be more mad if we don’t trade up, then anything that it would cost to move up. I don’t care what it costs and I truly mean it. If I wake up tomorrow and we move up to 2, I will never waste a single second worrying about what it cost us to get there. If draft day rolls around and we sit at 12 watching the best QBs come off the board again while we nest on our picks...I will be fuming to think of what 2017 was. If we don’t move up, why the !@#$ did we trade Watkins, Darius and Darby? We probably could have beat the Jags. If we aren’t moving up, why did we do what we did? At this point, we are in to deep. Pay the Giants : “what they want” to move up. End of story. 30 years of waiting is more expensive then a few picks. Go Bills!

 

Right.

I would rather "go big and bust" than sit on our hands.

 

I would rather take a shot, and have the guy be bad, and bottom out, than not take a shot and have him be great elsewhere while we sit at 8-8, in QB purgatory.

 

Now, if we moved up, took a guy, and he sucks, but the Jets too the winner at #3? 

I'd be mad at the scouting department, not at the trade up.

[White Linen]

It'll probably take at least 4

[ColoradoBills]

Just now, BuffaloHokie13 said:

And the team moving up is providing less value than the team moving down, which makes absolutely no sense.

 

SF knew CHI was picking a QB.  They got all those picks and the guy they wanted in the first place.

 

No problem Hokie, I'm just saying teams are probably using their own data for trades.

If moves like the Jet's trade and other keep adding data to the new chart it will have to change every year.

We will all see soon what is going to happen.

 

 

[BuffaloHokie13]

2 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

SF knew CHI was picking a QB.  They got all those picks and the guy they wanted in the first place.

 

No problem Hokie, I'm just saying teams are probably using their own data for trades.

If moves like the Jet's trade and other keep adding data to the new chart it will have to change every year.

We will all see soon what is going to happen.

 

 

Definitely going to change a bit every year based on what happens as well as who's available! A #1 pick for Andrew Luck is worth a lot more than a #1 pick for Myles Garrett.

[Nihilarian]

44 minutes ago, 1billsfan said:

 

You only do that if your team is built already. The Bills are just starting the rebuild.

 

Go on fan speak and do a 3 round draft with all their picks. Then do one with only picking Josh Rosen and the #96 pick.

 

Then ask yourself if you're ok with that trade, while also knowing you don't have the 2019 first round pick.

1

Like someone else pointed out that this draft is very deep at certain positions and not so deep at others.  The QB's grade from Darnold at 7.0, Rosen 6.1, Allen and Mayfield 6.0. Jackson 5.9. Even Mason Rudolph grades at 5.6.

 

Why would anyone trade the farm for anyone other than Darnold when the next three guys are graded about the same.  IF Darnold is sitting there at #2 then go for it and if not wait to see if any drop.

 

This draft is filled with RB's, OG, OC, DT, LB. the positions in short supply are pass rusher, WR, CB, LT. BADOBILZ listed these in another thread. 

[formerlyofCtown]

no one will give that

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Definitely going to change a bit every year based on what happens as well as who's available! A #1 pick for Andrew Luck is worth a lot more than a #1 pick for Myles Garrett.

Or Eric Fisher...the Dion Jordan trade compared to the RG3 trade is a good example.

 

Some years you get Anthony Davis at 1 and sometimes you get Anthony Bennett. Not all drafts are the same for sure.

[billsfan89]

Throw all draft value charts out the window. For one trading up for QB's is always something you have to pay a premium for. Two while I think that the draft value chart is a useful tool as a baseline trade ups are always relative to who is bidding for the pick. If the Bills want pick 2 I think at a minimum it is going to cost the team 12, 22, 53, a mid round pick, and next years 1st. 

[ColoradoBills]

1 minute ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Definitely going to change a bit every year based on what happens as well as who's available! A #1 pick for Andrew Luck is worth a lot more than a #1 pick for Myles Garrett.

 

That's my point exactly.  You can also say if 2 years ago (for the sake of argument) you were trading for a future CLE #1 pick it sure would be

valued different compared to a #1 NE pick.

 

Lot's of variables in statistics.  None of these charts add for that.

Great discussion.

[BuffaloRebound]

If the Giants want something comparable to what the Jets paid, they should've made a trade with the Jets.  I'm not giving up more than 12, 22, 53, and 65.  If Darnold is available at 2, then maybe I throw in something else.  

[P51]

Some quick numbers I did earlier in a different thread, biggest sticking point IMO is the value assigned to future picks.

 

Incarceratedbob Bills proposed trade to Giants is “as is”.

 

As is...

J. Johnson trade chart: Giants 2600 pts, Bills 2615 pts, plus a 2019 2nd round as a sweetner (265 points estimate, as 1st pick in 3rd round value) roughly 2880 pts total. Personally I think given the Jets trade (34% increase/23rd pick in draftvalue) it will take a little more to seal the deal. 11% increase? Ideal for Buffalo, but unlikely IMO from the Giants. 280 pts is 63rd/64th pick value. Could hold still and see if the Giants bite. 

 

Probably need to be more like this...

J. Johnson trade value chart: Giants 2600 pts, Bills #12, #22, #53, #56, #65 (pts) and 2019 2nd round pick (265 estimate again) is 3220 pts total and an 24% increase... Still might not be enough, 620 pts is the 30th pick, still 140 pts off the Jets trade value which is about the value of the 90th pick. This is where I would hold firm, regardless. 

Equivalent of #2 for 2-1sts, 2-nds and a 2-3rds.

Add pick 96 (116pts) and its still only a 28% increase in value, about the 24th pick in the draft. 

Thats pick #2 for the equivalent of 2-1sts, 2-2nds and 3-3rds. 

 

As is...

Rich Hill trade chart: Giants 717.17 pts, Bills 861.43 pts (2019 2nd rounder estimate value 2018 65th pick (rd3/pick1) 77.95pts), 144.26 pt difference (roughly the 41st pick (rd2/pick 9)) and an 20% increase.

 

Probably need to be more like this.... 

R. Hill trade chart: Giants 717.17 pts, Bills #12, #22, #53, #56, and 2019 2nd round (estimate value 77.95pts) for a total of 881.75 pts, 164.58 pts increase, 23% increase or the 36th pick (rd2/pick 4) value. This is where I would hold firm, regardless. 

Equivalent of #2 for 2-1sts, 2-nds and a 3rd.

Add pick 65 (77.95pts) and the value meets the Jets trade value (+34%) roughly the 23rd pick in the draft. 

Thats pick #2 for the equivalent of 2-1sts, 2-2nds and 2-3rds. 

 

Hopefully they (Giants) use the R. Hill trade chart and value the 2019 2nd round pick similarly to me... Either way, I dont see the Giants not countering higher at least the 56th pick in addition. 

[stinky finger]

2 hours ago, Chuck Wagon said:

12 / 22 / 53 / 56 / 65 / 2019 2nd / 2020 2nd

 

for

 

2 / 101 / 2019 4th / 2020 4th

 

That's my best offer.  That's an unprecedented haul.  If the Giants turn that down, you gave it your best shot.

 

Nope

[TigerJ]

Draft charts may have some value, but there are lots of other factors.  On factor is the situation of the team that wants to move up.  If that team feels like it's one critical player away from making a serious playoff run, it may be that a high draft pick is worth far more than a team that is several players away.  Another factor is the mind set of the team with the higher draft pick.  There is reason to believe that the Giants really are inclined to keep that second overall pick because from the owner on down they are adamant about betting a high impact player.  They have to know they have a far worse chance of getting that high impact player at #12,  Ergo, the price goes up because you have to make it worth it to them to give up something they want.  Thirdly, other trades can affect the market.  Specifically, the Jets paid a premium over what the chart indicates was fair value to get to #3.  If Indianapolis got a premium, the Giants are not going to be inclined to accept anything less than a healthy premium.  Put all that together, and my guess is it would be considerably more expensive for the Bills to move up to #2 than some hope and expect.

[Thurman#1]

2 hours ago, HappyDays said:

I've seen people throw around predictions for how much we have to give up to get to #2. I think everyone is lowballing the actual amount, so I calculated what we should expect based on what the Jets gave up to go from 6 to 3.

 

I'm using this chart:

 

https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp?RequestTeam=Buf

 

And I give 2019 picks the value of the 16th pick 1 round earlier in 2018 (i.e. a 2019 1st is equal to the 16th pick in this year's 2nd round).

 

So the Jets usually would have needed 2200 points to get to pick 3. Using this chart what they actually gave up was 2730 points. That's a 24% increase in value.

 

Let's assume the Giants want the same premium, because why wouldn't they? They normally would ask for 2600 points. A 24% increase puts that at 3220 so that's what we need to get to #2.

 

Here's what gets us to 3220: both 1sts this year, both 2nds this year, pick 96 in the 3rd, and next year's 1st.

 

If that's what they asked for, would you take it?

 

 

Yup, I would.

 

Might be more as there may be a sort of an auction between several teams. 

[Kirby Jackson]

5 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Yup, I would.

 

Might be more as there may be a sort of an auction between several teams. 

Who else can offer anything like that?

 

I was thinking about putting this is a new thread but can anyone design a trade for another team to get to 2 that beats that offer using the Rich Hill hill chart? Who else can pay the 146.51 points that the Bills would give with 12, 22, 53, 65 and a 2nd next year?

Edited March 21, 2018 by Kirby Jackson

[KRT88]

2 hours ago, aristocrat said:

Been saying it in a a few different threads and people have said I was crazy. 

I said 12, 22, 53, 65 and a next years second and one guy here said BB would lose the fan base if he did that. 

 

Heck that seems cheap now.

 

I'd do just about whatever.  I'd try to not deal next years 1st as it will likely be a decent pick.  Adding two years worth of 2nd's is reasonable if you give mean some lower round stuff back. 

 

12, 22, 53, 65, 2019 & 2020 2nd's for #2, plus a 5th and 2019 4th. I want to raft the QB. right or wrong, I'm standing behind the decision to take a shot!