Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Reed83HOF

Beane quotes on trading in the draft, board setup and he actually talked about WR busts in RD1

Recommended Posts

This is not to be a predictive thread, but again to collate Beane's thoughts on trading within the draft, basic board set up. 

 

On Trading in the Draft:

 

Beane went on to talk about the price that the team would have to pay in order to acquire a top selection.

“That comes with a hefty price to be able to do that from 21 and 22, where we’re at,” Beane said. “We’re not saying we would do that. To go up there, we’d have to really feel good about that.”

 

https://billswire.usatoday.com/2018/01/23/2018-nfl-draft-buffalo-bills-trade-up-hefty-price/

 

"Let's first talk about going down," Beane said. "If you're sitting at a position and you've got one guy sitting on the board when you're getting close to being on the clock and you really like him and value how he fits where you are, first round, second round. If you trade down now you're basically saying… you may as well trade down another round because if you trade four or five spots back the odds of that one guy being down there are not very good.

 

"If you have five to seven guys and somebody wants you to move back five to six spots, although it's close, you still have a shot to get one of those guys you like. It really goes back to following your board."

 

"Let's just say you were at pick 25 and you have a guy in the top tier of your draft board. You think he's top 10 (talent)," Beane said. "If you have a guy in the top tier by himself and you think he's a rare impact player at his position, that might be the time to make a move up."

 

"You have to consider what the cost would be," said Beane. "First, is there a team willing to do it? And then what is the cost? Is the cost too much where it jeopardizes the rest of your draft or potentially future drafts?"

 

"We didn't expect Tremaine (Edmunds) to fall that far," said Beane. "He was a guy sticking out up there and at a position of need too. I know I say draft best player available and I truly mean that, but if there's a guy who is best player available and at a position of need, the board is doubly telling you what you should do. So when he was falling we were calling the Packers at 14, the Raiders at 15." 

 

Adding this comment on Edmunds from another interview:  “He was sticking out on our board, and it’s a need,” explained Beane. “If a guy is sticking out on our board, and it’s really not a need, you might not do it. But with the hole we had there, and where he was on our board, it was a no-brainer. Even if we could have got to 14, we would have done it.” 

https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2018/5/7/17325406/2018-nfl-draft-brandon-beane-possible-to-land-linebacker-tremaine-edmunds-josh-allen-trade-up

 

Whether a GM is faced with a potential move up or down the board, the critical thing to determine is weighing what's left on the board against what's being offered. And that isn't always easy.

 

"There are so many variables," said Beane. "Maybe we've got 15 players with first-round grades and you're at nine. Well then it probably wouldn't be smart to go to 25. There's almost no chance of any of them being there. So that's what you have to factor in, but what if guys that aren't on our board in the first round because of medical or some other reason go in round one? Maybe some of our first-round grade guys go later than we thought.

 

"The bottom line is as long we've done our due diligence with our board it will tell us when it's time to make a move up or down."

 

https://www.buffalobills.com/news/trading-up-or-trading-back-how-nfl-gms-decide-to-make-draft-day-trades

 

"To me, you draft the best player available. If the so-called premium positions are gone, or if you don't have a guy that is up there at a premium position, you shouldn't take him just because its a non. You should 100-percent of the time take the best player on your board. But, you're considering that where you value him on the board, whether it's a high-first round, mid-first round, or low-first round."

 

At the 12:48 mark of the video:

"There's been a lot of 1st round receiver busts, but you gotta do your due diligence and obviously that's a warning sign for you, but if you still feel at the end of the day they fit what you do and their talent is worthy of that, then you just select them. 

 

https://www.wkbw.com/sports/bills/joe-b-5-takeaways-from-buffalo-bills-gm-brandon-beane-at-the-2019-nfl-owners-meetings

 

 

  • Like (+1) 4
  • Awesome! (+1) 2
  • Thanks! (+1) 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think receivers being busts is a lot different than other positions.  It is the most dependent position in football.  People talk about what a mistake Sammy was with OBJ and Evans.  If those guys were on the Bills back then, they won’t be the same player.  
 

this regime has a lot to prove on recognizing receiver talent.  But more than anything, it is depend on Allen taking the next step as a passer and an offense that will allow him to do it.

  • Like (+1) 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

I think receivers being busts is a lot different than other positions.  It is the most dependent position in football.  People talk about what a mistake Sammy was with OBJ and Evans.  If those guys were on the Bills back then, they won’t be the same player.  
 

this regime has a lot to prove on recognizing receiver talent.  But more than anything, it is depend on Allen taking the next step as a passer and an offense that will allow him to do it.

 

You can't look at it in a vacuum either - Watkins was the consensus top WR in the draft & we certainly had a ton of holes on the team. Most importantly though, it was a forced to move to up in the draft to help our slow-eyed QB. If we stayed put, TB most likely would have taken Sammy and Evans would have been ours - with EJ & Tyrod he wouldn't have fared much better IMO. If we took Sammy at our pick and didn't trade up - this would be a non-issue. He was a highly rated prospect that plays a premium position.

 

Landry ran a 4.77 and had a ton of question marks (was good his first year with Brian Hartline, Mike Wallace & Charles Clay), Adams had tons of question marks as well (wasn't good until his 3rd year) - which is why they were pushed into Zay Jones (never good)  territory in that draft. You should look up Michael Thomas's scouting report as well (was obviously good with Brees, Barndin Cooks, Coby Fleener, Mark Ingram & the brilliant Sean Peyton). 

 

When you look at those three players - the Draft wastebin is littered with plenty of failures who had those same question marks. 

  • Like (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly believe that if we get a big-bodied WR who can go up and get the ball, as well as have the ability to beat a DB from time to time down the field, it will open up everything else for Brown/Beasley/Knox, and Josh will throw for 35 TD's next year. It will open up the field and coverages that much more. Now Josh will still have to read that defense correctly and make an accurate throw, but it should help in all facets of spreading out a defense and giving him options. 

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, H2o said:

I honestly believe that if we get a big-bodied WR who can go up and get the ball, as well as have the ability to beat a DB from time to time down the field, it will open up everything else for Brown/Beasley/Knox, and Josh will throw for 35 TD's next year. It will open up the field and coverages that much more. Now Josh will still have to read that defense correctly and make an accurate throw, but it should help in all facets of spreading out a defense and giving him options. 

The best way I heard to view your receiving corps is like a basketball team.  We have a couple of good guards (Brown and Beasley) but we lack a center and power forward.

 

In a perfect world, we get a pass rusher and 2 receivers.  I’m a big fan of Claypool and Pittman and they should be there in the 2nd.  We badly need some size. 

  • Like (+1) 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for collating this overview OP; this thread will def need to be bumped up going into draft night, imho. 

  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember when Whaley said he "was in charge of setting up the board"?  I always imagined he set up a blank whiteboard in the front of the room, placed the dry-erase markers & an eraser on the ledge, then said "OK Russ, it's all set up". 

  • Sad 1
  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Buffalo86 said:

Remember when Whaley said he "was in charge of setting up the board"?  I always imagined he set up a blank whiteboard in the front of the room, placed the dry-erase markers & an eraser on the ledge, then said "OK Russ, it's all set up". 

Not to sidetrack this but look at that 2014 roster.  It was arguably the best team in the last 20 years.  Whaley isn’t close to as bad as he is made out to be here. 

  • Like (+1) 11
  • Skeptical 1
  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, C.Biscuit97 said:

The best way I heard to view your receiving corps is like a basketball team.  We have a couple of good guards (Brown and Beasley) but we lack a center and power forward.

 

In a perfect world, we get a pass rusher and 2 receivers.  I’m a big fan of Claypool and Pittman and they should be there in the 2nd.  We badly need some size. 

Excellent analogy my friend. If you look at Lamar Jackson's numbers from this season 138 of his 265 completions were to guys 6'4" or better. That's over 50% of his completions. Josh had one guy that big, but he had like 18 drops this past year. We need to get the young man some big targets with a large catch radius. 

 

I am all about the Bills drafting Chase Claypool and I do like Pittman as well. Another guy who could be of some help, likely able to be had on day 3, is a guy Bandit mentioned in another thread named Omar Bayless from Arkansas St. He's 6'3", 207lbs, and seems to be everything you look for in a big, possession type of WR who will occasionally beat a guy deep and is a definite Red Zone threat. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, H2o said:

I honestly believe that if we get a big-bodied WR who can go up and get the ball, as well as have the ability to beat a DB from time to time down the field, it will open up everything else for Brown/Beasley/Knox, and Josh will throw for 35 TD's next year. It will open up the field and coverages that much more. Now Josh will still have to read that defense correctly and make an accurate throw, but it should help in all facets of spreading out a defense and giving him options. 

 

If that big-bodied WR is Shenault, sounds good.  If it's Tee Higgins, not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, H2o said:

I honestly believe that if we get a big-bodied WR who can go up and get the ball, as well as have the ability to beat a DB from time to time down the field, it will open up everything else for Brown/Beasley/Knox, and Josh will throw for 35 TD's next year. It will open up the field and coverages that much more. Now Josh will still have to read that defense correctly and make an accurate throw, but it should help in all facets of spreading out a defense and giving him options. 

I more concerned about guys who can quickly get separation for DBs and those who can stop, adjust for a ball and accelerate quickly once they start again. Players around 5'11 to 6'2 ish will fit in well. We just can't go after a slot only guy who is 5'9".

 

A TE who can catch & one who can stay healthy (preferably this is 1 player) could add plenty of size for us in the EZ as well. I feel like at times we get too locked into size and forget about the rest of the picture

  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Not to sidetrack this but look at that 2014 roster.  It was arguably the best team in the last 20 years.  Whaley isn’t close to as bad as he is made out to be here. 

 

I agree with you, but only on the part about not sidetracking this thread.

  • Haha (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Not to sidetrack this but look at that 2014 roster.  It was arguably the best team in the last 20 years.  Whaley isn’t close to as bad as he is made out to be here. 

It wasn't a "team" & EJ sucked :thumbdown:

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

I think receivers being busts is a lot different than other positions.  It is the most dependent position in football.  People talk about what a mistake Sammy was with OBJ and Evans.  If those guys were on the Bills back then, they won’t be the same player.  
 

this regime has a lot to prove on recognizing receiver talent.  But more than anything, it is depend on Allen taking the next step as a passer and an offense that will allow him to do it.

Some QBs and WRs develop an embryonic relationship that grows into something that is difficult to explain.  WRs know where they need to go and what they need to do.  The QB knows what the WR is gonna do.  In order for Josh to be that special QB for the Bills, he needs a couple of WRs with that special relationship to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Buffalo86 said:

 

If that big-bodied WR is Shenault, sounds good.  If it's Tee Higgins, not so much.

Eh, I wouldn't mind Shenault or Higgins really, but I'm hoping we go somewhere else with our 1st Round pick. Then I hope we address WR on day 2 with one pick and then another on day 3. 

  • Like (+1) 4
  • Thanks! (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, H2o said:

Excellent analogy my friend. If you look at Lamar Jackson's numbers from this season 138 of his 265 completions were to guys 6'4" or better. That's over 50% of his completions. Josh had one guy that big, but he had like 18 drops this past year. We need to get the young man some big targets with a large catch radius. 

 

I am all about the Bills drafting Chase Claypool and I do like Pittman as well. Another guy who could be of some help, likely able to be had on day 3, is a guy Bandit mentioned in another thread named Omar Bayless from Arkansas St. He's 6'3", 207lbs, and seems to be everything you look for in a big, possession type of WR who will occasionally beat a guy deep and is a definite Red Zone threat. 

I always want big guys for qbs who aren’t the most accurate.  Brown andcBeasley were awesome this year but because of their size, they can get take away.  
 

so hopefully next year when Allen throws into double coverage, it will be to a Claypool or Pittman instead of DiMarco. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

I more concerned about guys who can quickly get separation for DBs and those who can stop, adjust for a ball and accelerate quickly once they start again. Players around 5'11 to 6'2 ish will fit in well. We just can't go after a slot only guy who is 5'9".

 

A TE who can catch & one who can stay healthy (preferably this is 1 player) could add plenty of size for us in the EZ as well. I feel like at times we get too locked into size and forget about the rest of the picture

I'd be fine with Ruggs, Jeudy, or Lamb, but I don't expect us to trade up and I expect all 3 to be off of the board at #22. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Reed83HOF said:

It wasn't a "team" & EJ sucked :thumbdown:

EJ played 4 games and was 2-2.  They ended Peyton’s td streak and beat Aaron Rodgers without any offensive td.  They would have beaten last year’s team but I digress. 

  • Skeptical 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

 

You can't look at it in a vacuum either - Watkins was the consensus top WR in the draft & we certainly had a ton of holes on the team. Most importantly though, it was a forced to move to up in the draft to help our slow-eyed QB. If we stayed put, TB most likely would have taken Sammy and Evans would have been ours - with EJ & Tyrod he wouldn't have fared much better IMO. If we took Sammy at our pick and didn't trade up - this would be a non-issue. He was a highly rated prospect that plays a premium position.

 

Landry ran a 4.77 and had a ton of question marks (was good his first year with Brian Hartline, Mike Wallace & Charles Clay), Adams had tons of question marks as well (wasn't good until his 3rd year) - which is why they were pushed into Zay Jones (never good)  territory in that draft. You should look up Michael Thomas's scouting report as well (was obviously good with Brees, Barndin Cooks, Coby Fleener, Mark Ingram & the brilliant Sean Peyton). 

 

When you look at those three players - the Draft wastebin is littered with plenty of failures who had those same question marks. 


Sammy was the highest rated WR in the draft and was thought of an explosive WR.  He clearly never lived up to his potential, but #4 for Sammy wasn’t crazy.

 

What was crazy was the fact that the Bills traded up for a WR.  Many in the media saw this as a foolish move, not because it was trading up for Sammy, but because it’s generally stupid to give up 2 #1’s for a WR when you don’t have an established QB.  
 

Many in the media laughed at Whaley, and deservedly so.  Some Bills fans TO THIS DAY will try to defend the move and the pick and claim that Sammy was a bust.  But this trade was terrible and set the team back.  
 

I hope Beane doesn’t give up the farm to draft a WR in the top 5.  Something tells me he’s way smarter than Doug

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, H2o said:

I'd be fine with Ruggs, Jeudy, or Lamb, but I don't expect us to trade up and I expect all 3 to be off of the board at #22. 

I wasn't crusading for anyone LOL - was honestly just saying size isn't the end all be all and those 2 traits were 2 of our bigger weaknesses (aside from drops) last year :)

 

If we stay at #22, it lines up well with the CB talent expected to be there and I just can't see us taking one there.

 

They key for a RD2 WR (or any of them actually), will be the basic size of 5"11 + and good speed; they would have to be really good route runners, able to create separation quickly, adjust for balls and get going again. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Buffalo86 said:

 

If that big-bodied WR is Shenault, sounds good.  If it's Tee Higgins, not so much.

Im all set on Clemson products myself

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Reed83HOF

 

Do you have any quotes where Beane rhymes off the premium positions? I recall him saying it at one point. I know it included pass rusher, QB and tackle. 

 

(I still think we go pass rusher round 1 and move up in round 2 for a WR)

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

I wasn't crusading for anyone LOL - was honestly just saying size isn't the end all be all and those 2 traits were 2 of our bigger weaknesses (aside from drops) last year :)

 

If we stay at #22, it lines up well with the CB talent expected to be there and I just can't see us taking one there.

 

They key for a RD2 WR (or any of them actually), will be the basic size of 5"11 + and good speed; they would have to be really good route runners, able to create separation quickly, adjust for balls and get going again. 

 

I could see a CB in Rd. 1 if Bean thinks the guy is a CB1 talent.  Having two CB1 talents on a team is a necessity.  It would depend on whether the DE's he wants are gone or not.  I think we go WR in Rd. 2 and 3.  

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DJB said:

@Reed83HOF

 

Do you have any quotes where Beane rhymes off the premium positions? I recall him saying it at one point. I know it included pass rusher, QB and tackle. 

 

(I still think we go pass rusher round 1 and move up in round 2 for a WR)

IIRC, it is the same as BADOL's list - QB, Pass Rusher, LT, WR, CB 

  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Phil The Thrill said:


Sammy was the highest rated WR in the draft and was thought of an explosive WR.  He clearly never lived up to his potential, but #4 for Sammy wasn’t crazy.

 

What was crazy was the fact that the Bills traded up for a WR.  Many in the media saw this as a foolish move, not because it was trading up for Sammy, but because it’s generally stupid to give up 2 #1’s for a WR when you don’t have an established QB.  
 

Many in the media laughed at Whaley, and deservedly so.  Some Bills fans TO THIS DAY will try to defend the move and the pick and claim that Sammy was a bust.  But this trade was terrible and set the team back.  
 

I hope Beane doesn’t give up the farm to draft a WR in the top 5.  Something tells me he’s way smarter than Doug

We traded for Jordan Matthews and Kelvin Benjamin.  We also traded up for Zay Jones instead of staying put and taking JuJu or Kupp (Beane wasn’t here yet).  
 

they have been bad at the receiver position.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...