Trade back into the first

[Kirby Jackson]

3 minutes ago, Just Joshin' said:

If Ruggs fell to 22 do you trade back?  Epenesa?

If Ruggs fell to 22 you SPRINT to the podium

[Nester]

Trade into the early 2nd if anything keeping 22 and 54! Go do magic BB

[whorlnut]

11 minutes ago, formerlyofCtown said:

We have enough draft capital to trade back in without giving up next years first.

Fair enough...

[HappyDays]

16 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Then I guess we disagree on that. This year I’d love one of those 3. I’m not moving up to a spot that will require next year’s first to do it. 

 

I just don't know what you're worried about missing next year. Yes if Josh Allen gets injured that trade would turn out to be awful. Is that your only concern? Or are you also worried about losing a bottom of the 1st round player?

 

There aren't usually any blue chippers in the 1st round outside of the top 10. There might only be 20 players with 1st round draft grades in a given year. So if you're telling me I can trade 2 players with high 2nd round grades for a player with a 1st round grade who also happens to fill a massive need, I'm taking that deal every time.

 

I actually think it's crazy that any of these 3 receivers will end up outside of the top 10 but teams aren't that smart so it will probably happen. I'm hoping other teams have that mindset of "this draft has plenty of WRs so instead of taking an incredible WR prospect like Ceedee Lamb at #10 I'll take an offensive tackle and settle for Michael Pittman in the 2nd." I can guarantee you right now the team that takes one of those top 3 receivers in the top 10 will end up happier than the team that drafts Tristan Wirfs. I would bet serious money that the 3rd WR taken in this draft will end up contributing to his team's success more than the 1st O-lineman taken.

 

Also I just generally trust this regime's ability to find contributing players in the 2nd and lower rounds. We already have an extra 1st round pick in Edmunds. We'll be alright without one next year.

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, HappyDays said:

 

I just don't know what you're worried about missing next year. Yes if Josh Allen gets injured that trade would turn out to be awful. Is that your only concern? Or are you also worried about losing a bottom of the 1st round player?

 

There aren't usually any blue chippers in the 1st round outside of the top 10. There might only be 20 players with 1st round draft grades in a given year. So if you're telling me I can trade 2 players with high 2nd round grades for a player with a 1st round grade who also happens to fill a massive need, I'm taking that deal every time.

 

I actually think it's crazy that any of these 3 receivers will end up outside of the top 10 but teams aren't that smart so it will probably happen. I'm hoping other teams have that mindset of "this draft has plenty of WRs so instead of taking an incredible WR prospect like Ceedee Lamb at #10 I'll take an offensive tackle and settle for Michael Pittman in the 2nd." I can guarantee you right now the team that takes one of those top 3 receivers in the top 10 will end up happier than the team that drafts Tristan Wirfs. I would bet serious money that the 3rd WR taken in this draft will end up contributing to his team's success more than the 1st O-lineman taken.

 

Also I just generally trust this regime's ability to find contributing players in the 2nd and lower rounds. We already have an extra 1st round pick in Edmunds. We'll be alright without one next year.

I never like the idea of trading an unknown for an unknown (QB excluded). If I knew that the Bills 2021 pick would be 25, cool. Things happen though. If I’m trading next year’s 1st is only do it for a proven star. I’d do it for OBJ for example. I’m not trading 22 and a 2021 1st that could be anywhere for a prospect regardless of how much I like him. I loved Sammy coming out. I had no issue with the move for him at the time. It turns out I was wrong. The idea of trading pick number 22 & ? for a ? doesn’t work for me. 

[HappyDays]

21 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I never like the idea of trading an unknown for an unknown (QB excluded)

 

I mean that's the draft. Everything is relatively unknown, you're just trying to maximize your chances to get elite players. I don't know for sure if Jeudy, Lamb, and Ruggs will be elite but I'll be really surprised if any of them outright bust. Jeudy is the one that somewhat concerns me, kind of reminds me of Amari Cooper actually with the concentration drops. But there's always risks involved no matter what you do. Trading down always sounds great but what if you miss on both players that you trade down for?

 

21 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I loved Sammy coming out. I had no issue with the move for him at the time. It turns out I was wrong.

 

And I would agree Sammy is the cautionary tale but if that's the worst case scenario it's not a huge deal. The players we missed out on in the range of our original pick in 2015 are not worth kicking ourselves over. Look at any draft in the 18-30 range, there aren't a lot of standouts. So in your worst case scenario we end up with a player who is still a high end #2, and we miss out on drafting a low probability lottery ticket. That's the downside of what I'm proposing. The upside is we get a generational #1 WR that helps our young QB develop and makes our offense difficult to stop.

 

Or even the absolute worst case scenario where Allen gets injured and we lose out on a draft pick that would have been in the top 10. Then the following year Allen will be back and we would still have the true #1 WR on our team for years to come. I mean that's still a very unlikely scenario but even if it happens I think you're overselling the long term impact. I'm not asking for us to be the Rams. It's just one 1st round pick. Teams miss on those all the time without trading for anything.

Edited February 29, 2020 by HappyDays

[formerlyofCtown]

16 minutes ago, whorlnut said:

Fair enough...

For the record I would not be opposed to trading back in.

[whorlnut]

My biggest argument in this is do you really believe the Steelers are missing their first rounder this year?  They got Minkah Fitzpatrick which has seemed to set their defense up for years to come. My point is if Beane identifies a guy that is falling and he thinks he’s a difference maker I couldn’t be shocked at all to see him make a move. Would it be a package of this years picks?  Maybe. Next year’s?  Who knows. I just don’t think he’s afraid at all believing in his board and going with his gut. 

[Kirby Jackson]

20 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I mean that's the draft. Everything is relatively unknown, you're just trying to maximize your chances to get elite players. I don't know for sure if Jeudy, Lamb, and Ruggs will be elite but I'll be really surprised if any of them outright bust. Jeudy is the one that somewhat concerns me, kind of reminds me of Amari Cooper actually with the concentration drops. But there's always risks involved no matter what you do. Trading down always sounds great but what if you miss on both players that you trade down for?

 

 

And I would agree Sammy is the cautionary tale but if that's the worst case scenario it's not a huge deal. The players we missed out on in the range of our original pick in 2015 are not worth kicking ourselves over. Look at any draft in the 18-30 range, there aren't a lot of standouts. So in your worst case scenario we end up with a player who is still a high end #2, and we miss out on drafting a low probability lottery ticket. That's the downside of what I'm proposing. The upside is we get a generational #1 WR that helps our young QB develop and makes our offense difficult to stop.

 

Or even the absolute worst case scenario where Allen gets injured and we lose out on a draft pick that would have been in the top 10. Then the following year Allen will be back and we would still have the true #1 WR on our team for years to come. I mean that's still a very unlikely scenario but even if it happens I think you're overselling the long term impact. I'm not asking for us to be the Rams. It's just one 1st round pick. Teams miss on those all the time without trading for anything.

The worst case scenario is that Allen gets hurt and our tough schedule proves too much. We bottom out and have a top 5 pick that we’ve traded away. If the cost is a 2021 1st I’m out.
 

I’d rather have Jefferson + my 2021 pick than only Jeudy/Ruggs/Lamb. I HATE the idea of a future 1st for a prospect. 
 

EDIT: Just to clarify if you could add protections like in the NBA I’d be fine with it. A top 15 protected 1st or whatever. There is just too much uncertainty and parody in the NFL for me to trade an asset that I have no idea what it is.

Edited February 29, 2020 by Kirby Jackson

[BringBackOrton]

15 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

The worst case scenario is that Allen gets hurt and our tough schedule proves too much. We bottom out and have a top 5 pick that we’ve traded away. If the cost is a 2021 1st I’m out.
 

I’d rather have Jefferson + my 2021 pick than only Jeudy/Ruggs/Lamb. I HATE the idea of a future 1st for a prospect. 
 

EDIT: Just to clarify if you could add protections like in the NBA I’d be fine with it. A top 15 protected 1st or whatever. There is just too much uncertainty and parody in the NFL for me to trade an asset that I have no idea what it is.

You're right. There is uncertainty and parity in the NFL, and every year, 27 teams suit up without a top 5 first round pick that year.

 

You are falling into the "omg cap space" argument for draft picks.  There are always more draft picks bro.  Always.  You lose one on a bust QB and you still get one next year. You lose one on a trade up for a WR and you still get one next year.

 

The only uncertainty is if there's going to be a first round talent, BPA, at a position of need next year where'd you be picking. But bird in the hand and all that. 

Edited February 29, 2020 by BringBackOrton

[Kirby Jackson]

15 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

You're right. There is uncertainty and parity in the NFL, and every year, 27 teams suit up without a top 5 first round pick that year.

 

You are falling into the "omg cap space" argument for draft picks.  There are always more draft picks bro.  Always.  You lose one on a bust QB and you still get one next year. You lose one on a trade up for a WR and you still get one next year.

 

The only uncertainty is if there's going to be a first round talent, BPA, at a position of need next year where'd you be picking. But bird in the hand and all that. 

I guess it probably sounds like I’m talking out of both sides of my mouth. I’m not, at all, opposed to trading up. I just would do so with this year’s picks and players. I’d use 2021 picks after the 1st. To me, that’s just a gamble that I’d never take. 

[HappyDays]

31 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

The worst case scenario is that Allen gets hurt and our tough schedule proves too much. We bottom out and have a top 5 pick that we’ve traded away. If the cost is a 2021 1st I’m out.

 

I don't see how we draft in the top 5 next year regardless of what happens. In 2014 our starting QBs were EJ Manuel and Kyle Orton and we ended up with the 19th pick. And either way that risk just doesn't factor into my decision making at all. I know that Lamb, Ruggs, or Jeudy will immediately fill our biggest need. I know that Beane has admitted he needs to find a receiver that Allen can trust on every down. If we don't get that player this year it will still be our biggest need next year so in that case we're probably drafting a WR in the 1st next year anyways. It's a wash. I'd rather just grab that player this year when I know they're obtainable.

[BringBackOrton]

4 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I guess it probably sounds like I’m talking out of both sides of my mouth. I’m not, at all, opposed to trading up. I just would do so with this year’s picks and players. I’d use 2021 picks after the 1st. To me, that’s just a gamble that I’d never take. 

Trading next year's first is always a gamble.  It's not ideal.  There's better deals.  But the Falcons wouldn't have gotten Julio without gambling.

[whorlnut]

3 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I don't see how we draft in the top 5 next year regardless of what happens. In 2014 our starting QBs were EJ Manuel and Kyle Orton and we ended up with the 19th pick. And either way that risk just doesn't factor into my decision making at all. I know that Lamb, Ruggs, or Jeudy will immediately fill our biggest need. I know that Beane has admitted he needs to find a receiver that Allen can trust on every down. If we don't get that player this year it will still be our biggest need next year so in that case we're probably drafting a WR in the 1st next year anyways. It's a wash. I'd rather just grab that player this year when I know they're obtainable.

Exactly. In my scenario, all we would be doing is using next year’s first rounder a year early. You’re right. It would essentially wash out. 
 

That said, it’s all hypothetical and was meant to create a discussion, but it obviously got a little too heated. We have to see what plays out. 

[HappyDays]

9 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I guess it probably sounds like I’m talking out of both sides of my mouth. I’m not, at all, opposed to trading up. I just would do so with this year’s picks and players. I’d use 2021 picks after the 1st. To me, that’s just a gamble that I’d never take. 

 

I think there is a decent chance we could get one of those receivers without giving up a 1st but it depends. If one of them is still there at 14 our 2nd should get it done. That's obviously the preferred scenario. Teams may decide they can wait on a WR so the depth of the class works in our favor.

[whorlnut]

By the way...I found it...Baltimore was at 52 in 2018 and traded that pick, 125 and the following year’s 2nd to get pick 32 and Lamar Jackson. Would that make everyone feel better?

 

They also took Hayden Hurst at 25, so the draft slot positioning is eerily similar...

Edited February 29, 2020 by whorlnut

[mikemac2001]

4 hours ago, Mountain Man said:

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

 

Or the saints did it for a 2 years back DE it happens all the time, vikes did it for a safety 

 

teams have traded a future 1st for a current year first the value is not that far off.
 

I’m not saying to do it but the comment I was responding to was acting like this never happens 

 

 

[whorlnut]

5 minutes ago, mikemac2001 said:

 

Or the saints did it for a 2 years back DE it happens all the time, vikes did it for a safety 

 

teams have traded a future 1st for a current year first the value is not that far off.
 

I’m not saying to do it but the comment I was responding to was acting like this never happens 

 

 

Skins did it last year to go up and get Sweat. Giants came up to get a corner. And the Falcons moved back into the bottom to get Kaleb McGary. Teams do it all the time when they feel they need to make a move for a guy that starts falling...

Edited February 29, 2020 by whorlnut

[GunnerBill]

6 hours ago, whorlnut said:

Ok guys...I’ll try to make everyone feel “better”. Forget about the first next year. Let’s trade a combo of picks this year to get back into 1. I’m not about to sit at 54 (if I’m Beane) and hope a guy that I love falls. He’s shown the propensity to move up when someone is sticking out, so I think all the chips are on the table THIS year...

 

I can can imagine the trade up. Just not back into the 1st. I can see them jumping up within round 2. 

9 minutes ago, mikemac2001 said:

 

Or the saints did it for a 2 years back DE it happens all the time, vikes did it for a safety 

 

teams have traded a future 1st for a current year first the value is not that far off.
 

I’m not saying to do it but the comment I was responding to was acting like this never happens 

 

 

 

The Saints were not trading back into the 1st. They were trading up within the first. They gave their 2018 first and their future first (2019) plus a 5th rounder to get Green Bay's first round pick and take Davenport. 

[Sherlock Holmes]

So many known guys I'd rather target... McCaffrey, Bosa Bros, Watt Bros, Kupp.

[OldTimer1960]

7 hours 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. 
 

 

Next year’s 1st and a 5th this year won’t be enough get you back into the end of round 1.

[whorlnut]

5 minutes ago, OldTimer1960 said:

Next year’s 1st and a 5th this year won’t be enough get you back into the end of round 1.

Ok...can we get past that?  It’s been beaten like a rental mule throughout this thread. Haha

[Bill from NYC]

6 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I never like the idea of next year’s first. Things change quickly in the NFL. God forbid an injury to Josh and you might be dealing a top 5 pick a year from now for a swing at a WR that you may be able to get 20 picks after. I’m okay moving up for one of the top 3 WRs if the cost is right (2nd and a late pick). I’m not for trading next year’s 1st.

KJ, at 22, I wouldn't necessarily be loath to trading out of round 1, IF the Bills feel as if all of the top WRs are gone. However, the deal would HAVE to include a 2021 first round pick, hopefully from a not so great team.

You see, this is where great leadership enters in, something we as fans crave and are not really used to having.

This draft appears to be a great one. My wish is for a great receiver. Let's hope!

GO BILLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Kirby Jackson]

4 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

KJ, at 22, I wouldn't necessarily be loath to trading out of round 1, IF the Bills feel as if all of the top WRs are gone. However, the deal would HAVE to include a 2021 first round pick, hopefully from a not so great team.

You see, this is where great leadership enters in, something we as fans crave and are not really used to having.

This draft appears to be a great one. My wish is for a great receiver. Let's hope!

GO BILLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I’m in the same boat as you Bill. The Bills NEED some guys that win because they’re better. They need some guys that keep D coordinators up at night. There are a few in this draft and some that will come out of nowhere and be great. If the Bills add “the” guy instead of “a” guy they have a chance to win it all. 

[Mr. WEO]

3 hours ago, BringBackOrton said:

We can try. There’s certainly a reasonable fear that guy won’t make it to 22. There’s also a reasonable fear we could trade up for the wrong guy. Or stand pat and take the wrong guy.

 

It’s the draft. That’s how it goes.

If he’s gone at 22 he won’t be there at 30

[BringBackOrton]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

If he’s gone at 22 he won’t be there at 30

Oh I was talking about moving up.  Trading back into the first is a mistake unless there's a first round talent at a position of need that we didn't already take at 22.

[DE Bills Fan]

10 hours ago, Logic said:

I'd honestly rather see them trade DOWN in the 1st round, possibly even out of the 1st round altogether.

It seems like the Seahawks -- and other teams that routinely pick in the 20s -- do this a lot. Trade down a few times, even out of the 1st round completely, and accumulate extra 2nd and 3rd round picks. 

The thing is, oftentimes in the draft there are only 15-20 prospects that teams grade as legitimate 1st round value. If that's the case, there's not much difference between having pick 22 and pick 35, other than the fifth year option on contracts.

If the Bills could trade down twice and accumulate an extra 2nd and a couple 3rd round picks, I'd rather do that.

Two 2nds
Three 3rds

They could then use their later round picks and the above mentioned picks to move around and select players they target in the 2nd through 4th rounds. That, to me, is where the value of this draft lies.

 

NO! We need quality, not quantity and we need them at the skill positions. Hopefully the Bills will address them in Free Agency and the draft! GO BILLS!!!

9 hours ago, NoSaint said:

We have a lot of depth. We need a few superstars.

AGREED!!!!!!!

[Reed83HOF]

 

[Locomark]

10 hours 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.  

I agree with not trading up unless it is Ruggs or Lamb and it isnt going up too far. I am not OK with BPA if its not an area of need. I don't want some guard or MLB or S just because he is BPA. This year should be BPA in a position of need! 

Edited March 1, 2020 by Locomark

[Formerly Allan in MD]

10 hours 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 you're going to trade up this year it shouldn't be for a WR; it should be for an OT or edge rusher.  Of course none of this matters at this point since free agency controls the direction of the cart.

[JaCrispy]

11 hours 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. 

I would agree except for 1 thing...the draft is always a crapshoot...I wouldn’t want to mortgage the future on those low odds...

[BarleyNY]

5 hours ago, whorlnut said:

Ok...can we get past that?  It’s been beaten like a rental mule throughout this thread. Haha

Ok. So are we now at a point where we’re talking about a reasonable trade up to the tail end of the first round if a quality player at a position of need falls there?  I doubt you’ll get much pushback for that. 

[Cripple Creek]

13 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

Trade next year's 1st to get back into "the bottom" of the 1st this year? 

 

"hear me out"....nah

 

 

Why not? Next year's first will be at the bottom of the round too, right?

[Augie]

6 hours ago, whorlnut said:

Ok...can we get past that?  It’s been beaten like a rental mule throughout this thread. Haha

 

I’m just praying I don’t come back in my next life as a rented mule......that’s what I’m taking out of this! 

[Mountain Man]

9 hours ago, mikemac2001 said:

 

Or the saints did it for a 2 years back DE 

 

 

No they didn't. They traded from late in the 1st to mid 1st. They were already in the 1st round. 

[yungmack]

On 2/29/2020 at 12:07 PM, Just Joshin' said:

If Ruggs fell to 22 do you trade back?  Epenesa?

In the extremely unlikely possibility that Ruggs falls to 22, you take him. Epenesa? Depends who's picking after you.

[Shaw66]

23 hours ago, whorlnut said:

Skins did it last year to go up and get Sweat. Giants came up to get a corner. And the Falcons moved back into the bottom to get Kaleb McGary. Teams do it all the time when they feel they need to make a move for a guy that starts falling...

I agree, teams do it.   And it's also true Beane does it.   We've seen plenty of dealing of picks to get a guy they want.    

 

Although I disagreed about the original post, as I think about it, it's maybe more likely than people think.   Beane has been very clear about what he does.   When their pick is approaching, starting with maybe being 15 picks away, they're watching particular guys.   When a guy who is the top pick left on their board is sitting there 10 or 15 picks away, they start looking for a possible trade partner, to move up five or six or eight picks to grab the guy if he gets that far.   That's what they did to get Edmunds and they did it to get Ford.    Beane has said that he will do that when (1) the guy is at the top of his board and in their opinion is a great value , whoever gets him and (2) it's a position of need.   He's not going up like that for anyone but a position of need.   

 

However, he seems to want always to have a full complement of picks in the draft.   He wants at least 7 picks, and he wants one a round.   In the past two years, I don't think we've seen him trade future picks if it would leave him in the hole.   He'd trade one of two third rounders, or something like that.   So I don't see Beane being quick to trade a 2021 first round pick to move up.    

 

Beane doesn't have a lot of positions of need.   I know, they need a receiver, and they'll get some help, but going into the season with last season's receivers isn't a disaster.   He wants an offensive lineman, but he isn't id deep trouble if he doesn't get one.   Edge rusher is maybe he only big position of need.   But if that's Beane's target, Beane will take him with his own pick instead of trying to trade back into the first round.   He just doesn't any particular position like he did last season at DT and offensive line, or the year before at QB or MLB.   Those were really important positions to fill just to get competitive.    

 

I like that Beane is an active thinker about this stuff, and that he isn't afraid to pull the trigger.   He develops supreme confidence in their evaluation of the players, and when he sees what his system tells him is great value, he goes after the guy.   Allen, Edmunds, Ford all are in Buffalo because Beane was willing to deal.  

[mikemac2001]

17 hours ago, Mountain Man said:

No they didn't. They traded from late in the 1st to mid 1st. They were already in the 1st round. 

Ya that’s already been corrected but still doesn’t change the op saying trade next years first for one this year and I was replying to a comment on how mr weo acted like that never happens and it has 

 

Saints trade was worse then what the op was suggesting 

[2ForMacAdoo]

On 2/29/2020 at 3:09 PM, thebandit27 said:

If Ruggs is there at 22 you try to beat his 40 time to the podium 

You sir, win the prize for best post of the day. Could not have said it any better. He is my dream pick, the guy who would give us our Tyreek Hill that gives DCs nightmares preparing for.

[Manther]

On 2/29/2020 at 10:32 AM, mikemac2001 said:

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

It would either cost our 2nd and something or a first next year and something 

That’s true.  And, to agree with your original thought I would prefer next years first vs this years second.

 

That scenario would get us a DE, WR and another player at either CB, LB or OLine.

 

I read the OPs thoughts with an open mind and this is a potential option with the first two rounds of this draft stacked with positions we need with lots of potential and strong grades.  Grades at positions that should be valued as important building blocks and McBean value as well.

 

Moving back into the 2nd could accomplish a similar return.