Trade back into the first

[DCOrange]

7 minutes ago, Logic said:

I agree that he will trade up at some point in the draft, but why can't he do it AFTER he has traded down?

I'd like to see him trade down twice, and then use his abundance of middle round picks to trade up to target specific players that he covets.

Example: Trade down twice, obtain an extra 2nd and two extra 3rds. Package 4th-6th round picks with those day two picks to move around strategically and get guys he likes in the 2nd and 3rd round. In the end, he could potentially pick three 2nd round players and a 3rd round player, for instance. Those four players would have a much better chance at making this roster than anyone picked from round five onward.

I know we've only seen Beane trade UP thus far, but it would be nice to see him show that he is adept at trading DOWN, too. It's all about maximizing value. Like I said before, picking in the 20s in a draft that might only have 15-20 1st round rated prospects isn't a great proposition. The difference between pick 22 and pick 35 or 39 or whatever doesn't seem huge to me.

It’s not impossible but I think you’re setting yourself up for disappointment if you think he’ll trade down. 

[whorlnut]

3 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

It’s not impossible but I think you’re setting yourself up for disappointment if you think he’ll trade down. 

There’s almost no chance he trades down. We won’t be able to roster 9 draft picks, as Kirby has mentioned. 

[Reed83HOF]

14 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

That’s not an indicator either. There is nothing that makes a 2nd round receiver better than a 1st. Just because teams had their boards wrong doesn’t mean you should wait. You should just do a better job assembling your board.

I believe Beane said they must get their board right 

[twist_to_open]

This coach and GM is producing some ligit starters from the mid to late rounds so far. I would be good staying where we are and trusting the....you know......process.

[whorlnut]

Just now, twist_to_open said:

This coach and GM is producing some ligit starters from the mid to late rounds so far. I would be good staying where we are and trusting the....you know......process.

That’s fine...in the mid to late rounds. But Beane has shown that he’s willing to move up in the early rounds for players he is targeting. 

[Logic]

3 minutes ago, whorlnut said:

 

This is precisely how elite talent gets passes up on. This is also how a rebuilding team operates. We are beyond our rebuild and ready to win now. 

2019 draft:

Here are some 1st round players taken after pick 20:

Montez Sweat
LJ Collier
Jonathan Abram
Jerry Tillery
N'Keal Harry


Now here are some 2nd round players of note:

Deebo Samuel
DK Metcalf
Dalton Risner
AJ Brown
Juan Thornhill

Tell me you wouldn't rather have the five players taken in round 2 than the five players taken after pick 20 in round 1. 

And JUST accumulating extra picks is how a rebuilding team operates. Moving back, accumulating extra picks, and then packaging those with other late round picks to move around strategically is not.

The Seahawks and Patriots do this type of stuff all the time, and they've both been consistently good for years.

Long story long: I disagree with your contention.

[BringBackOrton]

15 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I don’t think there’s any doubt about that. This team is not adding 9 rookies. They just don’t have the room on the roster. He will do what he does, target guys and go get them.

Ideal draft would be trading up to 14 to get Lamb and then trading up into the second for an edge player.

[Logic]

6 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

It’s not impossible but I think you’re setting yourself up for disappointment if you think he’ll trade down. 

Don't get me wrong: I don't think he'll trade down. I just wish he would.

I'm almost never a "trade down as much as you can!" guy. This year, however, due to the depth of the wide receiver class and the fact that I don't expect any 1st round worthy WRs to be left when the Bills pick, I wish they had multiple 2nd and 3rd round picks. That way, they could get multiple cracks at the next tier of WRs at an area where their value makes more sense.

Again: This is what I would do, not what I think Beane will do.

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, BringBackOrton said:

Ideal draft would be trading up to 14 to get Lamb and then trading up into the second for an edge player.

If this draft started Lamb and Anae we should be thrilled.

[Logic]

4 minutes ago, whorlnut said:

There’s almost no chance he trades down. We won’t be able to roster 9 draft picks, as Kirby has mentioned. 

You're not understanding one basic concept: Trading down out of the first round doesn't mean you keep all the picks you accumulate. 

You can trade down and accumulate some extra 2nd and 3rd round picks, then use the later round picks you have to package WITH those picks to move around the 2nd and 3rd rounds. So you could come out of the second day of the draft with, say, 5 players. Then you'd have almost no late round picks left to use. So in this scenario, I'm arguing that the 5 players taken in rounds 2 and 3 have a BETTER chance of making the roster than just keeping your late round picks.

[whorlnut]

2 minutes ago, Logic said:

2019 draft:

Here are some 1st round players taken after pick 20:

Montez Sweat
LJ Collier
Jonathan Abram
Jerry Tillery
N'Keal Harry


Now here are some 2nd round players of note:

Deebo Samuel
DK Metcalf
Dalton Risner
AJ Brown
Juan Thornhill

Tell me you wouldn't rather have the five players taken in round 2 than the five players taken after pick 20 in round 1. 

And JUST accumulating extra picks is how a rebuilding team operates. Moving back, accumulating extra picks, and then packaging those with other late round picks to move around strategically is not.

The Seahawks and Patriots do this type of stuff all the time, and they've both been consistently good for years.

Long story long: I disagree with your contention.

Short story:  I completely disagree with yours. 
 

We aren’t in the same boat as the Pats or Seahawks. They are perennial winners...we are trying to get there. 
 

Yeah I would love some of the players you mentioned, but I think you’re setting yourself up if you think Beane is gonna sit at 54 and wait...

[Gugny]

1 hour ago, Stank_Nasty said:

100% agree. If the somebody slips that they covet, I don’t care about perceived “value”. We aren’t bargain shopping here. Push all you chips to the middle of the table and put the team over the top. 

 

Yup.  Like I said in another thread, I'm sick of shopping at Dollar General.  It's time to start shopping at Saks.

[whorlnut]

2 minutes ago, Logic said:

You're not understanding one basic concept: Trading down out of the first round doesn't mean you keep all the picks you accumulate. 

You can trade down and accumulate some extra 2nd and 3rd round picks, then use the later round picks you have to package WITH those picks to move around the 2nd and 3rd rounds. So you could come out of the second day of the draft with, say, 5 players. Then you'd have almost no late round picks left to use. So in this scenario, I'm arguing that the 5 players taken in rounds 2 and 3 have a BETTER chance of making the roster than just keeping your late round picks.

I know what you’re saying and I don’t agree. I can almost guarantee you Beane is not gonna trade down or sit tight and watch players he loves keep getting snatched up. It’s not what he does. Have you even bothered watching the last two drafts?

Just now, Gugny said:

 

Yup.  Like I said in another thread, I'm sick of shopping at Dollar General.  It's time to start shopping at Saks.

#dropmic

[Steve O]

22 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Sammy too

 

Still though, that has nothing to do with this draft. What they did previously when trading away a future first has no correlation to what would happen this time. They may get a HOFer or they may get Peterman. 

Actually no. We traded up for Sammy, not back in to the bottom of the first. My point was the value usually isn't there to trade back in to the bottom of the first as it usually costs this year's second, next year's first, plus other assets (in Losman's case this year's fifth.) Agree that we gave up way too much for Sammy, but he was the Bills only first round pick that year.

[fansince88]

1 hour ago, whorlnut said:

I was talking to another poster about this idea last night and I could see this as something Beane might be willing to do. 
 

With the way this team is built and the AFC East finally appearing to be up for grabs, Beane might view this roster being a few players away to win now. Here’s my idea...what if we took the top DE or OT on the board at 22 and trade next year’s first and one of the extra 5ths this year to get back in the bottom of round 1?  At that point, we could take either DE or OT (whichever we didn’t address at 22) or WR (whichever one starts to fall). We would then still have our original picks minus the extra 5th. 
 

Beane can realistically look at this team as being highly competitive next year and having a low first anyways. It’s not like we should be giving up a top half of the draft first rounder.  We could get two guys this year who we can control for 5 years at positions of need. 
 

 

Please tell me your last name is not Beane and the poster you were talking to last night doesnt have the last name McDermott because I think this idea is horrible. 

[njbuff]

I’d rather trade next years 1st rounder for Joey Bosa.

 

?

[whorlnut]

1 minute ago, fansince88 said:

Please tell me your last name is not Beane and the poster you were talking to last night doesnt have the last name McDermott because I think this idea is horrible. 

Thanks for your opinion...

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, Steve O said:

Actually no. We traded up for Sammy, not back in to the bottom of the first. My point was the value usually isn't there to trade back in to the bottom of the first as it usually costs this year's second, next year's first, plus other assets (in Losman's case this year's fifth.) Agree that we gave up way too much for Sammy, but he was the Bills only first round pick that year.

I thought you were talking about trading the following year’s first. 

[Logic]

7 minutes ago, whorlnut said:

I know what you’re saying and I don’t agree. I can almost guarantee you Beane is not gonna trade down or sit tight and watch players he loves keep getting snatched up. It’s not what he does. Have you even bothered watching the last two drafts?

Have you even bothered reading my posts above?

I JUST said that this is what I would do, not what I think Beane will do. It's what I WISH he would do, not what I'm predicting he will do.

Furthermore, Beane has not yet had a draft where he picked in the 20s. I'm arguing that smart teams who routinely pick in the 20s, like the aforementioned Seahawks and Patriots, often use the strategy I'm espousing. It's smart business if you find yourself in a draft where the 1st round prospects only number 15-20 and you pick later than that. Why pick someone you have ranked as a 2nd round prospect at pick 22 when you can trade down into the ACTUAL 2nd round, get more picks, and get better value? 

Besides, you AGAIN still seem to be missing the point when you say "Beane is not gonna trade down or sit tight and watch players he loves keep getting snatched up". The strategy I'm arguing for literally gives Beane MORE ammunition to trade up in the 2nd and 3rd rounds to target specific players. The only difference is he's trading up in the 2nd and 3rd rounds rather than the 1st round because, again, the value maybe makes more sense in those rounds.

Lastly, are you just conveniently ignoring Beane's recent comments that he doesn't believe the Bills are just "a player or two away". He JUST said that. Now you're arguing that he's gonna trade up in the draft to get one impact player? I'd say that your strategy is more out of touch with where the Bills are as a team and with Beane's own recent comments than mine. If you don't believe me, go take a poll of Bills fans and analysts. Would they rather have five players in rounds two and three in this year's draft, or one impact player in round one and then not pick again until the 4th round. I'm pretty confident in what the response would be.




 

Edited February 29, 2020 by Logic

[whorlnut]

1 minute ago, Logic said:

Have you even bothered reading my posts above?

I JUST said that this is what I would do, not what I think Beane will do. It's what I WISH he would do, not what I'm predicting he will do.

Furthermore, Beane has not yet had a draft where he picked in the 20s. I'm arguing that smart teams who routinely pick in the 20s, like the aforementioned Seahawks and Patriots, often use the strategy I'm espousing. It's smart business if you find yourself in a draft where the 1st round prospects only number 15-20 and you pick later than that. Why pick someone you have ranked as a 2nd round prospect at pick 22 when you can trade down into the ACTUAL 2nd round, get more picks, and get better value? 

Besides, you AGAIN still seem to be missing the point when you say "Beane is not gonna trade down or sit tight and watch players he loves keep getting snatched up". The strategy I'm arguing for literally gives Beane MORE ammunition to trade up in the 2nd and 3rd rounds to target specific players. The only difference is he's trading up in the 2nd and 3rd rounds rather than the 1st round because, again, the value maybe makes more sense in those rounds.

Lastly, are you just conveniently ignoring Beane's recent comments that he doesn't believe the Bills are just "a player or two away". He JUST said that. Now you're arguing that he's gonna trade up in the draft to get one impact player? I'd say that your strategy is more out of touch with where the Bills are as a team and with Beane's own recent comments than mine.




 

Do you really believe everything a GM says this time of year?  Haha...wow...

[whatdrought]

1 hour ago, whorlnut said:

I think it’s silly to worry about a future pick when we might be able to take the division this year. I’m not sure why people are worried about that. 
 

And I completely disagree about talent. If someone like Justin Jefferson is there at 29-32, then you try to make the move.

Well, you got me with logic. We should definitely mortgage future assets haphazardly in order to win the division now. Just ask the Rams. 
 

It’s not about this season. It’s about a window of 5 seasons where we’re always competing. The only way to do that is wise use of draft capital to consistently build the team and create depth. But If you prefer to piss away capital to acquire marginally better talent, then by all means, you do you. In fact, you probably have a strong future as Bill O’Brians Executive Assistant. 

[NewEra]

34 minutes ago, whorlnut said:

You guys aren’t listening to what I’m saying...I’m saying there is a chance Beane likes a certain WR better than the rest. He might not be there at 54. All WR are not created equal. Just because there is a lot of talent doesn’t mean the one that fits your needs is a dime a dozen...

Not every post is in direct response to you.  Just saying.

 

we get what you’re saying. We get that Beane likes to trade up and get players he likes.  We are listening.  We think that trading next years first is a stupid idea. Then you said forget trading next years first.  We listened.  We said we still don’t think it’s a good idea.  
 

We get that Beane likes to trade up.  Been there.  Done that

 

 

[Big Gun]

Every year people want the Bills to trade back into the first round, nah.

[Logic]

4 minutes ago, whorlnut said:

Do you really believe everything a GM says this time of year?  Haha...wow...

Right. Because Beane has shown himself to be SUCH a smokescreen user, and not a tell-it-to-you-straight kind of guy. I'm sure you can provide TONS of examples of this.

I think you nailed it. He's just hoodwinking us all, and in reality he's gonna trade away a ton of assets (including future draft picks) and only end up picking three players this year and not have a 1st round pick next year because, hey, WE COULD WIN THE DIVISION!

[whatdrought]

17 minutes ago, whorlnut said:

Short story:  I completely disagree with yours. 
 

We aren’t in the same boat as the Pats or Seahawks. They are perennial winners...we are trying to get there. 
 

Yeah I would love some of the players you mentioned, but I think you’re setting yourself up if you think Beane is gonna sit at 54 and wait...

Those teams are perennial contenders because they don’t sell out for one season of success! They’re always looking 5 years down the road and preparing for what’s coming! You’re saying we’re trying to get to their level while advocating doing the exact opposite of what they have done to get them to that level!

[whorlnut]

Just now, Logic said:

Right. Because Beane has shown himself to be SUCH a smokescreen user, and not a tell-it-to-you-straight kind of guy. I'm sure you can provide TONS of examples of this.

I think you nailed it. He's just hoodwinking us all, and in reality he's gonna trade away a ton of assets (including future draft picks) and only end up picking three players this year and not have a 1st round pick next year because, hey, WE COULD WIN THE DIVISION!

Again...your scenario stinks because it’s unrealistic. He’s never traded down and most likely won’t do it again this year. Have fun being disappointed when he moves up in the early rounds...

[mannc]

1 hour ago, BuffaloRebound said:

Please don’t trade up in the 1st round for a WR in a draft supposedly full of WR talent.  Seems like 2nd round has been the higher hit rate for WR anyway.  Go BPA at 22, and then I’d be fine moving up in the 2nd round for a WR if BPA isn’t a WR at 22.  

If there is one thing we’ve learned, it’s that in a draft like this, no one really knows which of these receivers are going to be stars and which are not.  I don’t buy the idea that the consensus top 3 guys are guaranteed stars.  If I’m the GM, I’m not going to panic and move up in the first, and I’m going to take a swing at at least two of these guys with my first 4 picks.

[whorlnut]

3 minutes ago, mannc said:

If there is one thing we’ve learned, it’s that in a draft like this, no one really knows which of these receivers are going to be stars and which are not.  I don’t buy the idea that the consensus top 3 guys are guaranteed stars.  If I’m the GM, I’m not going to panic and move up in the first, and I’m going to take a swing at at least two of these guys with my first 4 picks.

Exactly. I think it’s silly that some of the posters in this thread think since it’s perceived to be deep, they will all pan out. Right now, three of the hottest names are Jefferson, Claypool, and Mims. However, they probably put themselves out of reach at 54. I highly doubt Beane stays at 54 and watches them get picked if he likes one of them better than Edwards, Shenault, etc.

[Mountain Man]

2 hours ago, mikemac2001 said:

They do this all the time. Why does this seem like such a crazy idea to you?

People trade back into the 1st for the 5th year option on QBs

[Logic]

8 minutes ago, whorlnut said:

Again...your scenario stinks because it’s unrealistic. He’s never traded down and most likely won’t do it again this year. Have fun being disappointed when he moves up in the early rounds...

Talking to you is like talking to a wall. You have clearly not understood or digested a single thing I've said.

Enjoy your thread about your much more "realistic" scenario of the Bills giving up a future 1st round to trade up for a wide receiver in a stacked wide receiver draft, all because "they could win the division".

Edited February 29, 2020 by Logic

[whorlnut]

Just now, Logic said:

Talking to you is like talking to a wall.

Enjoy your thread about your much more "realistic" scenario of the Bills giving up a future 1st round to trade up for a wide receiver in a stacked wide receiver draft, all because "they could win the division".

You say that because I don’t share your “opinion”. How noble of you.  Good grief...

[BringBackOrton]

15 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

Well, you got me with logic. We should definitely mortgage future assets haphazardly in order to win the division now. Just ask the Rams. 
 

It’s not about this season. It’s about a window of 5 seasons where we’re always competing. The only way to do that is wise use of draft capital to consistently build the team and create depth. But If you prefer to piss away capital to acquire marginally better talent, then by all means, you do you. In fact, you probably have a strong future as Bill O’Brians Executive Assistant. 

Everyone thought the Rams were dumb for trading up for Goff year one and got really quiet years two and three.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

OMG hell no.  This draft is deep in edge, DL, and WR.  This is the year to trade out of the first round and get extra second and third round picks.  

[whatdrought]

1 minute ago, BringBackOrton said:

Everyone thought the Rams were dumb for trading up for Goff year one and got really quiet years two and three.

Trading up for a QB is a very different conversation. That being said, Goff is not a great example of a team succeeding in that area. He’s holding them back a lot right now.

 

My reference to the Rams has more to do with their constant trading of draft assets to add guys to be able to “win now” which has resulted in an embarrassing SB loss last year, missing the playoffs this year, and having no cap and no picks to do anything to fix their massive holes throughout their roster. 

[Buffalo Junction]

If all the top players are gone and the only value is at a position we have depth in I’d rather see a trade back to get extra 2nd and 3rd round picks. Say... trading our first to the colts for 34 and 44. 

[BringBackOrton]

Just now, whatdrought said:

Trading up for a QB is a very different conversation. That being said, Goff is not a great example of a team succeeding in that area. He’s holding them back a lot right now.

 

My reference to the Rams has more to do with their constant trading of draft assets to add guys to be able to “win now” which has resulted in an embarrassing SB loss last year, missing the playoffs this year, and having no cap and no picks to do anything to fix their massive holes throughout their roster. 

If losing in the Super Bowl is a failure, why is Kelly in the Hall of Fame?

[Steve O]

 

2 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

OMG hell no.  This draft is deep in edge, DL, and WR.  This is the year to trade out of the first round and get extra second and third round picks.  

If Jordan Love is still available at 22 I can see someone making it worthwhile to move down, if they're willing to give up what the Bills gave up for Losman in the same spot. If only to get ahead of New England. Maybe Green Bay as they prepare for life after Aaron Rodgers. Lions, Panthers, or Colts might also look to give up next year's first and this year's second, but aren't drafting high enough to get Tua or Burrows.

[whatdrought]

3 minutes ago, Buffalo Junction said:

If all the top players are gone and the only value is at a position we have depth in I’d rather see a trade back to get extra 2nd and 3rd round picks. Say... trading our first to the colts for 34 and 44. 

That’s where my brain is at too. Grab Mimms or the like at 34, an Edge like Weaver from Boise at 44 and then use 54 for a corner or something along those lines. 
 

 

2 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

If losing in the Super Bowl is a failure, why is Kelly in the Hall of Fame?

Hang on. I want to be really clear here:
 

Your argument here is that a team is correct to torpedo their future for one year of success where success is defined as a Super Bowl Loss?...

Edited February 29, 2020 by whatdrought

[Ethan in Cleveland]

55 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I don’t think there’s any doubt about that. This team is not adding 9 rookies. They just don’t have the room on the roster. He will do what he does, target guys and go get them.

100% agree they are not adding 9 rookies.  But 5 of those 9 are in rounds 5 and 6.  This is the year to use at least one of those picks on a PK or P.  Also they can trade a couple of the picks for higher round picks next year.  Looking at what Beane has done in the past, I suspect he will trade the 4th and package with a 5th or 6th  to get back into the 3rd round somewhere or move up a few spots in the third round.  I wouldn't do it, but Beane will likely do it.  

[Logic]

8 minutes ago, whorlnut said:

You say that because I don’t share your “opinion”. How noble of you.  Good grief...

No, I say it because you routinely ignored everything I said throughout the thread and repeatedly replied in a way that made it clear you probably weren't even reading what I was typing.

And to be fair, I believe it was YOU who told me my strategy "stinks because it's unrealistic". 

What's good for the goose...