OCinBuffalo Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 First, other threads are for discussing which player at what pick. This thread is about moving around the board to gain the right value for the Bills. There's been a premise floating around this board that I think is as accurate as it is troublesome: The Bills have too many draft picks this year(10), therefore, we may end up drafting people that don't make the team: waste our capital. -- tl;dr: To avoid waste, trade down with the Skins(Rd 1) then back up with ARZ or SF(Rd 3). We shed all our 4-7 rd picks for their high 3rd and either: (ARZ) keep our 6th, or (SF) get their 6th and keep our last 7th. We can stay put and get SF 3rd by shedding 4-7. This squares with the new value chart, and gives us 4 picks in top 3 rounds. Tanking teams might make bad trade up deals to us this year, to ensure they suck = get their QB next year + 1 sure bet player this year. Full explanations below. -- We've been through this before in 2014: 4th Round CB Ross Cockrell. He was cut, then immediately started for the Steelers for next 3 years and by all accounts is a quality player. We did not miss on the pick. We mismanaged the team. Period. Since this debacle we've had street FA/castoff CBs on the field, every season. We unsolved the problem. Some fans have sat stupefied wondering why our O line, their answer to all problems, doesn't prevent teams from torching us for multiple TD leads, or coming back on us by scoring 3 TDs, in a single quarter...from the bench. The rest of that argument is for another thread, but, there can be no doubt: we wasted draft capital. How to avoid repetition of that error? First understand that, despite ignorant/wishful claims to the contrary(ahem, RG3 trade fan bois: ), responsible teams still use the value chart when they make trades. Teams probably do not use the old Jimmy Johnson chart. In fact, significant analysis has been done to prove 2 things: that teams still use a chart, but, that it's been slightly altered(the guy explains his work in links on this page). Also, remember that compensatory picks CAN be traded now, which means the value chart had to be altered regardless. Also, also, there seems to be some unknown modifier pts that are added if a team trades back into the first round(presumptively because of the 5th year option). This means that trades back into the first cost more than the value chart says they should, and this works out to ~an extra 5th/6th. Ultimately, the first thing is to do is accept the fact that each draft pick has a pre-assigned value. Next, we can total up the value for the entire Bills draft: 675 (new chart), 2,262 (old chart). Consider, for context: Going Full Mike Ditka(search: Ditka Draft), leaves us short (1000-675=) -325 in the new, and - 738 in the old, in trying to trade up to #1 overall. For the rest of the post I'm just gonna use the new chart. 325 = #2 pick in the 24-25 range(#56-57 overall). It's generally accepted that the value of a next year's pick is one round down, so, #1 next year = #2 this year. We'd have to trade our whole draft this year, and next year's #1, #2, #3 and #4(675 + 193.5(387/2) + 74.5(149/2) + 32(64/2) + 13(26/2) = 988) to trade up to this year's #1 overall. Yes, it's not 1000, and yes we could add the #5 to get it to 994, etc...stop. I'm merely laying out how the chart/math works. There are exceptions, like with the Raiders in 2013. Oakland needed bodies badly, and had to trade down. But, everybody knew that, so the Raiders got fleeced by the Dolphins: #3, for only #12 and #42. Upside: the Dophins squandered their pick on Dion Jordan. They ended up stealing: nothing. The value chart doesn't compensate for the Raiders...being the Raiders. Moving on to a realistic value analysis: How about the value of our entire 4-7? = 75 = SF's 3rd round pick #3(67th overall). If we were to make that deal, we'd have a 1, 2, and 2 3s. This would go along way towards fixing our problem. Drafting 4 players in the top 3 Rds ensures no waste, and our FO hits on picks. What if we traded out of the #9 pick? Let's say to #15 (after all it's the Redskins, of RG3 trade "fame"). That's 72 pts = their #3 and #5. Our 4-7 is now worth 86 = KC's #2(29, 61 overall). Now we have a #1, two #2s, and two #3s. KC won't do that. They don't need the bodies. A more likely trade? Our whole 4-7, minus our #6(or we get theirs), for ARZ's #3. They need lots of players + new head coach. That gives us a 1, 2, two 3s and a 6. Going back the SF trade above, who also needs bodies, same deal, but we get their #6, and keep our last 7. 4 players in the top 3 rounds + one 6(+ perhaps a 7) vs. 3, then 7 in the bottom 4. Obviously better. Better chance of making the team. 0 waste. This, or something like this, seems reasonable. Perhaps that's what we'll see. I hope so. Also, many Dophins fans say they are tanking for (best QB in 2020). It may be counterintuitive, but, the best approach to tanking may be to trade up with us in round 1, for a long term, sure thing, giving away picks they don't want on their team-->might win too many games this year. Likely tank candidates: MIA, CIN, DEN. Shadow Tankers(teams that will swear to God they are trying to win, but aren't): PIT, NYG, BAL, GB. The draft will probably tell us a lot about who is tanking. And once again, look at the value chart. There's a HUGE difference in value between #1 overall and #3, which means if you're gonna tank, you better mean it. No last minute heroics that get you to 4-12. Tanking means we get even more room to maneuver, because these teams will do bad deals: they want to lose. Anyhow, I'm there's lot of scenarios that you guys can find. 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloButt Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 I'll respond after someone else summarizes this in one sentence! Thanks!!? 4 5 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted April 7, 2019 Author Share Posted April 7, 2019 1 minute ago, BuffaloButt said: I'll respond after someone else summarizes this in one sentence! Thanks!!? Um See the tl;dr? Do I need to explain it for you? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloButt Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 I'm just kidding! I appreciate the thorough analysis!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 4 minutes ago, BuffaloButt said: I'll respond after someone else summarizes this in one sentence! Thanks!!? He wants to trade up responsibly using the updated draft chart because later round picks are usually a waste. I think. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussie Joe Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 Just have a normal draft... maybe use that extra 4th and 5th to make a minor trade up if you can... If the extra picks don’t make the team then so be it. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 2 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: He wants to trade up responsibly using the updated draft chart because later round picks are usually a waste. I think. So, no different than any of the other 20 threads about the Draft? 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted April 7, 2019 Author Share Posted April 7, 2019 3 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said: Just have a normal draft... maybe use that extra 4th and 5th to make a minor trade up if you can... If the extra picks don’t make the team then so be it. Yeah, you can say that now. Then after cuts in September? We'll see if you're around to tell everybody here it's all NBD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 I am wondering if it would not be smart to take these latter round picks and trade them for higher round picks in the next draft. The thing is.......we have been doing ok with latter round picks....... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted April 7, 2019 Author Share Posted April 7, 2019 8 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: He wants to trade up responsibly using the updated draft chart because later round picks are usually a waste. I think. Wrong. I actually want to trade down first, then trade up later. It's all in the tl;dr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussie Joe Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 3 minutes ago, OCinBuffalo said: Yeah, you can say that now. Then after cuts in September? We'll see if you're around to tell everybody here it's all NBD. I’ll be here... not that I’ll have to do any explaining because I doubt this scenario will be happening.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted April 7, 2019 Author Share Posted April 7, 2019 1 minute ago, John from Riverside said: I am wondering if it would not be smart to take these latter round picks and trade them for higher round picks in the next draft. The thing is.......we have been doing ok with latter round picks....... There is always the Patriot approach: you start with the assumption that 5-7th picks are lottery tickets only. So, you offer a higher pick for a player, and a 7th. You keep the same number of lottery tickets, but, you get a proven role player. Doubly so if they guy is in his last year of his contract. The team thinks they are getting over, when actually, you are ensuring that you only rent a player for a year, then don't re-sign him, and viola: more compensatory pick value to add to your bottom line. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSHMEAB Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 21 minutes ago, OCinBuffalo said: We've been through this before in 2014: 4th Round CB Ross Cockrell. He was cut, then immediately started for the Steelers for next 3 years and by all accounts is a quality player. We did not miss on the pick. We mismanaged the team. Period. Since this debacle we've had street FA/castoff CBs on the field, every season. We unsolved the problem. Some fans have sat stupefied wondering why our O line, their answer to all problems, doesn't prevent teams from torching us for multiple TD leads, or coming back on us by scoring 3 TDs, in a single quarter...from the bench. The rest of that argument is for another thread, but, there can be no doubt: we wasted draft capital. So in a nutshell; Cutting Russ Cockrell was a fatal blow to the Bills franchise and corner has been a huge weakness since 2014. Gotcha. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dopey Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 Beane says plug holes in FA and build through the draft. I'm all for using the 10 picks, maybe trading an extra 4th or 5th to move up. A couple of picks might end up on the practice squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 16 minutes ago, Chandler#81 said: So, no different than any of the other 20 threads about the Draft? Um, he used functional paragraphs with spacing. That’s a major improvement 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussie Joe Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 I can see Day 3 picks at S, LB, RB making the final team and perhaps even turning into valuable contributors a year or two down the track... A couple of others picks may find their way to the PS... maybe a couple get cut.. Pegula is supposedly paying top dollar for these scouts so lets see them continue to unearth a few more Day 3 diamonds in the rough... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted April 7, 2019 Author Share Posted April 7, 2019 1 minute ago, LSHMEAB said: So in a nutshell; Cutting Russ Cockrell was a fatal blow to the Bills franchise and corner has been a huge weakness since 2014. Gotcha. We play in Tom Brady's division. The ONLY teams that have beaten Brady 2 or more times in the playoffs: teams who have the BEST secondaries in the NLF = Jets and Ravens. Why is this so hard to comprehend? We play nickel on 60+% of our snaps. Why is that so hard to comprehend? Nickel means 3-4 CBs on the field, at the same time. Again, comprehension, please. "We have a great CB named (insert the 1 decent guy we have had for the last 10 years of Patriots winning the division) on the team, why do you say we need another one?" Oh, I don't know, perhaps because Brady throws at the other 2 guys who aren't being covered by the other CBs on the team, most of the time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moulds_80 Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 But if we trade our 6th round pick lovely Warren will have made the trip for nothing!? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSHMEAB Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 (edited) 14 minutes ago, OCinBuffalo said: We play in Tom Brady's division. The ONLY teams that have beaten Brady 2 or more times in the playoffs Unless you don't consider the SuperBowl the playoffs, the Giants also beat Tom Brady twice. They did so by generating pressure with the front four, which is the key to stopping that Pats machine. Corner has GENERALLY been a strength for the Bills over the last decade. Pass rush. Meh. That's where they really need to improve. The only way to stop the franchise QB's is to consistently get in their grill without blitzing. Edited April 7, 2019 by LSHMEAB 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 6 minutes ago, OCinBuffalo said: We play in Tom Brady's division. The ONLY teams that have beaten Brady 2 or more times in the playoffs: teams who have the BEST secondaries in the NLF = Jets and Ravens. Why is this so hard to comprehend? We play nickel on 60+% of our snaps. Why is that so hard to comprehend? Nickel means 3-4 CBs on the field, at the same time. Again, comprehension, please. "We have a great CB named (insert the 1 decent guy we have had for the last 10 years of Patriots winning the division) on the team, why do you say we need another one?" Oh, I don't know, perhaps because Brady throws at the other 2 guys who aren't being covered by the other CBs on the team, most of the time? No love for the Broncos? Do the Giants count? Getting pressure with rushing only four also seems important. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts