If a team’s roster is solidified and picks late then why not move up in a draft?

[mjt328]

It always depends on the circumstance.  

You never want to make the decision on moving up or down, before seeing how the board is falling and what players are available.

 

Unlike some of our previous GMs, Brandon Beane always sets himself up for maximum flexibility when entering the Draft.

He could go up.  He could go down.  He could stay put.  He could take (almost) any position on the roster.

 

[Alphadawg7]

18 hours ago, Tipster19 said:

Instead of just staying where you’re slotted or even trading back to accumulate more pick(s), I would think that a team would be more afforded to take that shot to move up in a draft to be in better position to take a player that is projected to be a difference maker. The window for a team to sustain great success is usually opened for just a few years, especially due to the salary cap. Rosters are turned to some degree from year to year and then the contracts start to mount and catch up to a successful team, forcing them to make bigger changes. 

 

One reason would be a lot of times when a team is "set" on their roster, they are also up against the cap if the roster is that good.  Every year you will have FA's on your team you may not be able to always keep because of that, so being sure to bring in young cheaper talent can be essential to keep the roster consistently strong.  

 

Its what teams like the Steelers and Ravens have always been very good about doing and why they are consistently contenders for long periods of time.  

 

That being said, moving up is also definitely an option in these cases too, just saying having more draft assets still also has value to teams in those positions.  

Edited April 14, 2021 by Alphadawg7

[The Jokeman]

14 hours ago, Tipster19 said:

Instead of just staying where you’re slotted or even trading back to accumulate more pick(s), I would think that a team would be more afforded to take that shot to move up in a draft to be in better position to take a player that is projected to be a difference maker. The window for a team to sustain great success is usually opened for just a few years, especially due to the salary cap. Rosters are turned to some degree from year to year and then the contracts start to mount and catch up to a successful team, forcing them to make bigger changes. 

I'd think most GMs, coaches etc. want job security and the only way you get that in the NFL is prolonged success. So you have to continual build your roster/depth etc. The issue is most rookies, no matter where they're drafted, take time to adjust to the NFL the thought is the earlier you're drafted is the more ready or better you'll be. In reality it's not it's more if that player can adjust to the NFL and/or his coaches can use their skill set to get the best of their abilities and even dependent on the team around them. That's why you get guys like Gabe Davis taken in the 4th round can out produce a guy like Henry Ruggs taken in the 1st round by the Raiders. So the reason you keep extra picks is as you never know when may unearth the next great one, see Tom Brady as a 6th Round pick. 

[mjt328]

2 hours ago, CorkScrewHill said:

The Ricky Williams trade shows why that is not a good strategy. The NFL Draft is a crap shoot to some extent. The 5th round guy ends up being a solid player and the first round player ends up being a bust. I would have been happy back on draft day for the Bills to move up for Ed Oliver. Let's say they gave up their second and 4th last year to move up[ to take a legitimate tackle Isaiah Wilson or even a WR Tee Higgins. The first one obviously is a bust and the second is not better than who we got in the 4th Gabe Davis.  As someone else mentioned .. depth is huge as people get hurt and the salary cap ramifications of having a few cheaper guys on rookie contracts helps as well.

 

And then you have trade-ups, such as the Chiefs move for Patrick Mahomes.

 

If they really wanted a QB, they could have stayed-put (or even traded back) and landed a prospect like Deshone Kizer, Davis Webb or Nathan Peterman.  Why would you waste valuable picks, when the draft is just a crap-shoot?

 

It's easy to only point out the 1st Rounders who bust, the late rounders who surprise, and the times the pro scouts get it wrong.  But by and large, the NFL scouts do an excellent job of identifying which talent has the best chance of succeeding.  I saw a statistic recently that 60-70% of NFL starters were selected within the Top 3 Rounds (Top 100 players).

 

 

 

 

[CorkScrewHill]

1 hour ago, mjt328 said:

 

And then you have trade-ups, such as the Chiefs move for Patrick Mahomes.

 

If they really wanted a QB, they could have stayed-put (or even traded back) and landed a prospect like Deshone Kizer, Davis Webb or Nathan Peterman.  Why would you waste valuable picks, when the draft is just a crap-shoot?

 

It's easy to only point out the 1st Rounders who bust, the late rounders who surprise, and the times the pro scouts get it wrong.  But by and large, the NFL scouts do an excellent job of identifying which talent has the best chance of succeeding.  I saw a statistic recently that 60-70% of NFL starters were selected within the Top 3 Rounds (Top 100 players).

 

 

 

 

Sorry you are correct .. I should have been clearer ... it can work out, but it often does not. We have successfully traded up (aka Josh) and I do think QBs are in particular a position where you have to take chances because if you don't have a QB it is VERY hard to win in the NFL. The Falcons traded up for Julio and that worked out pretty well also. I personally am just a believer in more darts equates to more opportunities to hit the mark .. and Ido get that trading away higher picks to own the later rounds there can be problematic as well.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

Beane is a guy that burns picks for a player he covets. My guess is he lets the draft come to him in the first round and takes Harris or Etienne if they fall to 30. Then he trades up in the second round for a pass rusher giving up a 4th. He then gives up a 2nd next year to move from late third to late 2nd and takes the NT of the future. 

[Tipster19]

3 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Beane is a guy that burns picks for a player he covets. My guess is he lets the draft come to him in the first round and takes Harris or Etienne if they fall to 30. Then he trades up in the second round for a pass rusher giving up a 4th. He then gives up a 2nd next year to move from late third to late 2nd and takes the NT of the future. 

 

Staying at 30 and moving up in the 2nd rd makes a whole lotta sense! That’s a fresh take, I like it!

[Buffalo_Stampede]

Unless it's a QB, moving up by trading a lot of draft capital isn't a smart move. Also draft picks can be cheap starters or depth. It helps when you're tight in cap space. You hit on half your draft then you can have 3 really good starters for cheap. 

[machine gun kelly]

So the Bills pick 30th which is worth 600 pts., on one of the more used value charts for GM’s.  The Steelers pick 24th.  Are the Steelers willing trade partners as you would assume they want O Line talent give they lost three this off season.  Their 24th pick is worth 740 pts. So we need if they are willing to find 140 points.  Our third is worth 128 pts.  Ok we need to find another 12 pts. to get in the ballpark.  Our 5th is worth 21.8 pts, so that’s too much for a fair trade so we go down to our 6th round, but that’s only worth 6.8 pts. and the 7th is probably less than 2 pts.  To move up 6 slots, at a minimum we exchange slots, give away our second 6th and 7th, and they give us their 7th.

 

basically you can google and get trade value charts, open up say one ESPN the draft order, keep going back to the chart, figure out the estimations, and then make a statement, my .... pick is worth these pts. and my trade partner needs these picks I have and maybe has to give back x spot(s).

 

Saying trade up for Pitts or anyone else so not picking on anyone who said that is not considering the pts system what GM’s look at, and I haven’t even went into value of next years spots as that is even more complicated.

 

This is why I’m not a GM as my head was spinning even writing this at 5:30 am.  If you guys want to talk exchanges and can look up vale’s and our draft positioning, and I know a lot of guys here are good at it, I’d love those ideas.  They have to make sense though.  assuming it’s an Edge rusher we wanted, is this one guy worth the picks and values they are giving away for or are you just playing Madden.

 

As many of you know when not in appointments I enjoy MTC in the afternoons, and those guys have conditioned me to have my ammunition ready before I make a statement to them as these are the questions they ask to their callers.  It’s a great show and keeps listeners grounded to how GM’s think before the draft.  This take is not directed towards anyone specifically, just a general comment regarding we should do this for that, etc.

[Chandler#81]

4 hours ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Beane is a guy that burns picks for a player he covets. My guess is he lets the draft come to him in the first round and takes Harris or Etienne if they fall to 30. Then he trades up in the second round for a pass rusher giving up a 4th. He then gives up a 2nd next year to move from late third to late 2nd and takes the NT of the future. 

Nose Tackle? 

Hey, Sport, we haven’t run a 3-4 in many years. Trading up for a position that doesn’t exist? Perfect!🤦‍♂️

 

Keep ‘em coming!🤣

[Ethan in Cleveland]

30 minutes ago, Chandler#81 said:

Nose Tackle? 

Hey, Sport, we haven’t run a 3-4 in many years. Trading up for a position that doesn’t exist? Perfect!🤦‍♂️

 

Keep ‘em coming!🤣

NT and 1 tech DT are the same type of player

[BigBuff423]

For this team, in this Draft year for several reasons, I agree with trading up - just not in the 1st Round. Bills stay at 30 and can take BPA which could be a CB, DE/Edge, or a RB. But then, I would sell all remaining picks to get 2 or 3 players in the second and third round. That would make 3 or 4 players and that's probably about it that make the roster and contribute. In no particular order: CB, RB, DE, TE....that's it. 

 

Bills just signed Milano, Mongo and D. Williams to multi-year extensions. If the Bills were to trade for a TE, then I could see that pick morph into a WR to help cascade the aging group as most likely Sanders and Beasley are out next year. But with a big WR in Hodgins who didn't even get a chance to play last year and will most likely at least see some opportunities, it's hard to know if he's in the long-term plans or not due to last year's injury. 

 

All that said, Bills have good depth at most positions with a mix of vet and young players except for the ones noted above. 

[machine gun kelly]

I almost always agree with Chand, but Ethan you’re right a 1 technique DT like Star looks and acts like a NT.  I don’t know if we do that as a trade up, but I’ll agree the two positions listed are very similar.

[colin]

we have a window right now to win it all, and our roster is deep so we don't want to draft players who can't make the team, nor do we want to draft guys who upgrade our backups (possible exception at OL and DL).

 

i think beane makes moves up and or down to get the guys he wants who can make an impact this season (RB, TE, CB, DL) and drafts "value" freak athletes w high ceilings after that.

 

if we walk away w a TE and RB who by the end of the season are no worse than 2nd on the team at their positions, and a 1 tech who can play with no real drop off from star, then this draft is a massive success and having those guys last year might have put us over the top.

 

obv some kind of sick pass rusher would be awesome, but i just don't think it's in the cards.

[JESSEFEFFER]

On 4/13/2021 at 6:40 PM, Tipster19 said:

Instead of just staying where you’re slotted or even trading back to accumulate more pick(s), I would think that a team would be more afforded to take that shot to move up in a draft to be in better position to take a player that is projected to be a difference maker. The window for a team to sustain great success is usually opened for just a few years, especially due to the salary cap. Rosters are turned to some degree from year to year and then the contracts start to mount and catch up to a successful team, forcing them to make bigger changes. 

I would take the same circumstances and say that the Bills have their difference makers and are in the midst of extending them into second contracts.  Now is the time to flood the roster with younger, cheaper talent on their rookie deals.  I think this draft is more about its effect on the 2022 and 2023 team than the 2021 team.  Just because Beane has not used this draft move in previous years, there may a shift in focus from trading up for blue chip talent to trading down at the top of the draft and trading up from the bottom of the draft to get more of their picks from the top 100 or 150 to refortify the roster every year.  This may become part of their envisioned process to sustain success.

[YattaOkasan]

8 hours ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Beane is a guy that burns picks for a player he covets. My guess is he lets the draft come to him in the first round and takes Harris or Etienne if they fall to 30. Then he trades up in the second round for a pass rusher giving up a 4th. He then gives up a 2nd next year to move from late third to late 2nd and takes the NT of the future. 

Uggh on a RB in the first and giving up a 4th this year is not possible if we dont move back to get one first. 

 

I dont think we need to take 1 tech in the 2nd.  I see a lot of them falling to our pick in round 5 (Marvin Wilson, Taderrel Slaton, Bobby Brown III). 

 

Your proposal does not address concerns at the following more important positions:

• CB2 next year (only Tre and Dane Jackson under contract for next year). 
• WR next year (Diggs, Will davis continue to grow?, 1 year older Beasley is all we have) 
• iOL next year (Feliciano is ok, Ford is hope, Morse has injury concerns, Boettger is okish) 
• S this year (Johnson behind Poyer and Hyde inspires no confidence for me) 

 

Are you concerned about the relative positional value of RB and 1 tech for where you take them (in the first 2 rounds)?  Are you not concerned about these other positions cause I dont think you fill them if you burn the draft capital?  

Edited April 15, 2021 by YattaOkasan

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 4/13/2021 at 5:40 PM, Tipster19 said:

Instead of just staying where you’re slotted or even trading back to accumulate more pick(s), I would think that a team would be more afforded to take that shot to move up in a draft to be in better position to take a player that is projected to be a difference maker. The window for a team to sustain great success is usually opened for just a few years, especially due to the salary cap. Rosters are turned to some degree from year to year and then the contracts start to mount and catch up to a successful team, forcing them to make bigger changes. 

 

It may make sense in the later rounds

For a team in the stage the Bills are at, we really need our draft picks from the first 3 rounds to hit to sustain success. 

 

Since there's at best, a 50% hit rate, moving up in the 1st three rounds means sacrificing current or future picks that are needed to sustain success.

[Eastport bills]

It really depends on how far up and at what cost. If it cost a 3rd and a 4th and another pick in that range next year to get into the high teens and pick off a player they had slotted in the top 12, it would be worth it in my view. 

[The Jokeman]

2 hours ago, BigBuff423 said:

For this team, in this Draft year for several reasons, I agree with trading up - just not in the 1st Round. Bills stay at 30 and can take BPA which could be a CB, DE/Edge, or a RB. But then, I would sell all remaining picks to get 2 or 3 players in the second and third round. That would make 3 or 4 players and that's probably about it that make the roster and contribute. In no particular order: CB, RB, DE, TE....that's it. 

 

Bills just signed Milano, Mongo and D. Williams to multi-year extensions. If the Bills were to trade for a TE, then I could see that pick morph into a WR to help cascade the aging group as most likely Sanders and Beasley are out next year. But with a big WR in Hodgins who didn't even get a chance to play last year and will most likely at least see some opportunities, it's hard to know if he's in the long-term plans or not due to last year's injury. 

 

All that said, Bills have good depth at most positions with a mix of vet and young players except for the ones noted above. 

If you look at the structure of some of the contracts like Mongo's for instance it's essentially a one year deal, guys like him Addison/Hughes/Sanders are all likely gone after this season meanwhile Josh is going to get a whole lot more money that he has now and count a lot more against the cap and we need those lower picks to help replace some of the aforementioned.  While we could trade up and go all in for this season I don't see Beane doing that. 

[Ethan in Cleveland]

29 minutes ago, YattaOkasan said:

Uggh on a RB in the first and giving up a 4th this year is not possible if we dont move back to get one first. 

 

I dont think we need to take 1 tech in the 2nd.  I see a lot of them falling to our pick in round 5 (Marvin Wilson, Taderrel Slaton, Bobby Brown III). 

 

Your proposal does not address concerns at the following more important positions:

• CB2 next year (only Tre and Dane Jackson under contract for next year). 
• WR next year (Diggs, Will davis continue to grow?, 1 year older Beasley is all we have) 
• iOL next year (Feliciano is ok, Ford is hope, Morse has injury concerns, Boettger is okish) 
• S this year (Johnson behind Poyer and Hyde inspires no confidence for me) 

 

Are you concerned about the relative positional value of RB and 1 tech for where you take them (in the first 2 rounds)?  Are you not concerned about these other positions cause I dont think you fill them if you burn the draft capital?  

Good assessment 

1. I'm higher on Wallace than many on this board. Don't see CB2 as a glaring need

2. Star will be gone and H.Phillips isn't that good. They need a true 1-tech to play next to Oliver

3. I would have no issue if they added a WR. I posted several times I would have kept Brown for his speed.  I am in SB win now mode so a RB adds more playmaker ability than another rookie WR in my mind for 2021

4. 100% agree they need to add a true center this year or next. Centers can start and play well as a rookie. Interior linemen or TE in the middle rounds this year would be fine. But I can see a scenario that they draft at 32 next year and take a center then

[YattaOkasan]

17 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Good assessment 

1. I'm higher on Wallace than many on this board. Don't see CB2 as a glaring need

2. Star will be gone and H.Phillips isn't that good. They need a true 1-tech to play next to Oliver

3. I would have no issue if they added a WR. I posted several times I would have kept Brown for his speed.  I am in SB win now mode so a RB adds more playmaker ability than another rookie WR in my mind for 2021

4. 100% agree they need to add a true center this year or next. Centers can start and play well as a rookie. Interior linemen or TE in the middle rounds this year would be fine. But I can see a scenario that they draft at 32 next year and take a center then

Thanks for the reply.  Just two things for your thinking. 

 

Wallace isnt under contract for next year so I am ok with taking CB2 a little later but I think we need something besides Dane Jackson in the pipeline.  Probably best way to state my position is we NEED something for next year and we it would be NICE to upgrade this year (but dont have to).

 

Agree on Phillips; I'm not sure if Star will be gone (dead cap is big but still 4 mil cap savings).  I still think we can get a really good player later in the draft.  I assume the 1 Tech youre targeting in round 2 is Tyler Shelvin?  I would rather move up a bit in round 3 and take him if we had to.  

[Bobby Hooks]

Because we have lots of high end talent that is going to account for most of our cap. Allen’s contract is going to be a big deal. 

 

We’re going to need to hit on a lot of picks for some of our good talent to not all be on big money deals. It’s what you have to do when you have your franchise guy. 

 

It may not seem like a big deal right now, but it will in two or three years down the road when a bunch of our guys will want a raise and we’re already paying Allen the mega bucks.

 

Luckily Beane seems to understand that and won’t allow us to get into a terrible cap situation. But it’ll make for some very boring free agency’s down the line. 

 

The draft is a crapshoot no no matter where you’re picking. It would probably Najee more sense to trade down in the draft and have a better shot getting a few guys that might hit. 

Edited April 15, 2021 by Bobby Hooks

[Thurman#1]

On 4/14/2021 at 7:40 AM, Tipster19 said:

Instead of just staying where you’re slotted or even trading back to accumulate more pick(s), I would think that a team would be more afforded to take that shot to move up in a draft to be in better position to take a player that is projected to be a difference maker. The window for a team to sustain great success is usually opened for just a few years, especially due to the salary cap. Rosters are turned to some degree from year to year and then the contracts start to mount and catch up to a successful team, forcing them to make bigger changes. 

 

 

The whole "our window is only open for a few years and therefore we have the freedom to trade up" idea is a perfect self-fulfilling prophecy. 

 

Trading up will indeed have a hand in shortening your window.

 

Once you have a QB like Josh Allen your window can potentially be open for the length of his career.

 

The way to better succeed in the draft is to increase or at the very least maintain the number of chances you have. 

 

This has been studied in academic studies and that without exception they find that if you want to increase your chance of draft success you don't give up major draft major draft assets in trade-ups. In fact, you maximize the number of your picks. Massey and Thaler is the first and most important study showing this, but there have been many and they all show the same thing. You don't do this ... with one exception, which is that it makes sense to do it if you're trading up for a franchise QB.

 

People must get tired of hearing this argument. It's boring. It's annoying. Same as kids get tired of hearing "don't cross without looking both ways," or "don't take candy from strangers." But no matter how bored your kids get, no matter how many times they've heard it, no matter how well they know that you think that, you still need to keep telling your kids this. 

 

It's boring but it will save your life. Or in this case maximize your chances at the draft, which is the major lifeline of the best franchises. 

[JaCrispy]

Rarely do you ever get value when trading up...sure it’s fun, but it doesn’t usually work out...

[Thurman#1]

On 4/15/2021 at 1:55 AM, mjt328 said:

 

And then you have trade-ups, such as the Chiefs move for Patrick Mahomes.

 

If they really wanted a QB, they could have stayed-put (or even traded back) and landed a prospect like Deshone Kizer, Davis Webb or Nathan Peterman.  Why would you waste valuable picks, when the draft is just a crap-shoot?

 

It's easy to only point out the 1st Rounders who bust, the late rounders who surprise, and the times the pro scouts get it wrong.  But by and large, the NFL scouts do an excellent job of identifying which talent has the best chance of succeeding.  I saw a statistic recently that 60-70% of NFL starters were selected within the Top 3 Rounds (Top 100 players).

 

 

 

They don't do an excellent job of identifying talent that will succeed. They do a pretty decent job.

 

If they did an excellent job, a lot more than 60 - 70% of NFL starters would be selected within the top 3 rounds. And it's not that GMs are dumb. It's just that attaining success in the NFL happens in a wildly complex system with variables that approach being infinite. It's not as easily predictable as people make it out to be. Even if you look at just the top ten picks in each year, you'll find many guys who don't produce anywhere near the value you would expect from someone drafted that early.

 

As for the Mahomes trade, QBs are the exception to the don't use big capital to trade up rule. They're so important to team success and you're so unlikely to succeed without one that taking a huge risk to get one is a reasonable gamble. The same can't be said about other positions.

 

Again, take a look at Massey-Thaler. One study is called "Overconfidence vs. Market Efficiency in the National Football League," and another is called "The Loser's Curse: Decision Making and Market Efficiency in the National Football League Draft." 

 

"Top draft picks are significantly overvalued in a manner that is inconsistent with rational expectations and efficient markets, and consistent with psychological research," is the key quote from their abstract. The point is that you can find occasional cases of teams succeeding by taking this road, but you also find that at much higher rates, you find teams consistently failing. And no, it's not confirmation bias that it seems to fail most times. It really does. The academic studies that look at the data find that that really is how the probabilities work.

Edited April 15, 2021 by Thurman#1

[Nextmanup]

Never move up!  

 

Why would you want to do that? 

 

You have to remember, no one knows who the good players are, the great ones or the busts.

 

It's not as simple as the guy being rated highly. 

 

NFL teams get it wrong all the time and more often than not.

 

More picks are always better.

 

*Unless you are making your move for a franchise QB near the top of the draft and need a franchise QB.

 

Otherwise, always a bad strategy.

 

 

 

 

[HardyBoy]

On 4/13/2021 at 8:49 PM, Augie said:

 

Exactly! 

 

Remember, guys like Milano and Diggs were 5th round picks, as was an all-time favorite Kyle Williams. Jason Peters was undrafted! Tom Brady....ok, sorry for bringing that up...

 

The draft is a crapshoot where the cheap talent comes from. We seem to draft better than most, take advantage of our strength. Trust Beane to know his board and get it right! 

 

That does not mean we can’t trade up, just that we should trust our GM. 

 

So I hear what you're saying, and especially in this draft there is a very good chance players are misscouted and legit talent drops a lot more than usual.

 

That said, and let's say ceilings are all equal...say something like 50% of first round draft picks bust. Then let's say 5% of 5th or lower draft picks become starters, that's a 95% bust rate (let's exclude kickers and punters and such).

 

Even if my numbers are off a bit, the point is, it takes a lot more late round picks to equal the value of a first round pick in terms of odds. Low in the first round, the cost in salary in my mind, where that player is real close to not being in the top 51 anyway would take a ton of later round picks to make me want to take the gamble.

 

Also, you gotta think a lot of those players will need to develop, so even if you say something crazy like 50% of people taken in late rounds develop into a starter year 4 if you let them sit on your bench. You simply don't have enough roster spots to make it work.

 

All that said, the answer really lies in between there, and includes factors such as specific position, upcoming years positional draft depths, free agent classes, salary value ranges by position, scheme both immediate and where you see the league evolvong, etc. 

[Augie]

16 minutes ago, HardyBoy said:

 

So I hear what you're saying, and especially in this draft there is a very good chance players are misscouted and legit talent drops a lot more than usual.

 

That said, and let's say ceilings are all equal...say something like 50% of first round draft picks bust. Then let's say 5% of 5th or lower draft picks become starters, that's a 95% bust rate (let's exclude kickers and punters and such).

 

Even if my numbers are off a bit, the point is, it takes a lot more late round picks to equal the value of a first round pick in terms of odds. Low in the first round, the cost in salary in my mind, where that player is real close to not being in the top 51 anyway would take a ton of later round picks to make me want to take the gamble.

 

Also, you gotta think a lot of those players will need to develop, so even if you say something crazy like 50% of people taken in late rounds develop into a starter year 4 if you let them sit on your bench. You simply don't have enough roster spots to make it work.

 

All that said, the answer really lies in between there, and includes factors such as specific position, upcoming years positional draft depths, free agent classes, salary value ranges by position, scheme both immediate and where you see the league evolvong, etc. 

 

Of course, and that’s why I say trust the FO. Know the board, and move up if it really makes sense. Try to find cheap talent when you can, as well. That’s also really important. Do NOT undervalue those guys picked later in the draft, or even the UDFA’s. 

 

I understand the argument that a good team only has so many spots where a guy can make a team, so why draft what you must later cut. Well, Beane has a knack for getting something back for those guys, so that also comes into consideration. 

 

The thread title is about “why not move up?”  I’m just saying the exact situation will dictate what the best plan of action is. 

 

 

.

Edited April 15, 2021 by Augie

[Mojo44]

This is an interesting discussion. I just have one question regarding the topic. Who is that one player who will move the needle so far up that would be worth using up most of our draft capital for? Essentially the question becomes who is that one player who will put us in the Super Bowl? I don’t see it. Pitts is clearly special but I don’t think he is that guy. I believe we need a CB but we can wait until pick 30 and get a good one. I may be wrong but I don’t see a defensive player worth trading up for. Staying put or trading down I can see. Thoughts?

[HardyBoy]

30 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

Of course, and that’s why I say trust the FO. Know the board, and move up if it really makes sense. Try to find cheap talent when you can, as well. That’s also really important. Do NOT undervalue those guys picked later in the draft, or even the UDFA’s. 

 

I understand the argument that a good team only has so many spots where a guy can make a team, so why draft what you must later cut. Well, Beane has a knack for getting something back for those guys, so that also comes into consideration. 

 

The thread title is about “why not move up?”  I’m just saying the exact situation will dictate what the best plan of action is. 

 

 

.

 

Totally hear ya. Was planning on ending that with agree that Beane is a total wizard and has all that stuff built out for sure, and the model will continue getting better each year with more info.

 

Ha, my phone was on the verge of running out of battery and I was about to lose everything I wrote if I tried to add another sentence (made it with literally 30 seconds to spare).

[DasNootz]

Talent falls every year.  With a franchise QB, take BPA.  It gives you the best opportunity for long term success as you’re not emptying the cupboards. 

[BillsfaninSB]

It doesn’t seem like the Bills have the assets to move up much and the trading partners will probably only number 2 or 3.   They will sense the urgency and will want the Bills to overpay.

 

I would stay put.  At least 15 offensive players will be picked before the Bills selection.  Bills are like picking 15 overall for defensive help. 

[Victory Formation]

On 4/13/2021 at 6:40 PM, Tipster19 said:

Instead of just staying where you’re slotted or even trading back to accumulate more pick(s), I would think that a team would be more afforded to take that shot to move up in a draft to be in better position to take a player that is projected to be a difference maker. The window for a team to sustain great success is usually opened for just a few years, especially due to the salary cap. Rosters are turned to some degree from year to year and then the contracts start to mount and catch up to a successful team, forcing them to make bigger changes. 

I agree to a degree. I think it costs way to much to move up in the 1st or 2nd round, but if we were to move up in the 3rd, 4th or 5th it makes a whole lot more sense. Our defense needs an injection of youth, preferably at DL and in the secondary. A star corner, a star DE, a true NT is much needed. I could see an argument to go down however. If we are sitting at 30 and we feel lukewarm about all the prospects available, it makes sense to go down and acquire picks for 2021 and beyond. If you have 10-15 players with the same grade, why wouldn’t you go down?

[bobobonators]

On 4/13/2021 at 7:26 PM, Logic said:

Because teams have to plan beyond this year. 

Smart front offices draft for the future, not just the present.

As Josh Allen and other young Bills get signed to big contracts, it will become more and more important for the Bills to rely on a pipeline of cheap labor.

Less picks = less cheap labor and less swings at players that can help the team.

It’s definitely a balance IMO. We were one game away from the Super Bowl last year. Our window has officially opened. We are in win now mode in my opinion. We certainly want to continue building for the future, but that has to be balanced vs winning now. And based on what we did last year id say winning now takes slight priority. If there is a player in the late teens we really want, we should pull the trigger. 

On 4/13/2021 at 7:26 PM, Logic said:

Because teams have to plan beyond this year. 

Smart front offices draft for the future, not just the present.

As Josh Allen and other young Bills get signed to big contracts, it will become more and more important for the Bills to rely on a pipeline of cheap labor.

Less picks = less cheap labor and less swings at players that can help the team.

It’s definitely a balance IMO. We were one game away from the Super Bowl last year. Our window has officially opened. We are in win now mode in my opinion. We certainly want to continue building for the future, but that has to be balanced vs winning now. And based on what we did last year id say winning now takes slight priority. If there is a player in the late teens we really want, we should pull the trigger. 

On 4/13/2021 at 7:26 PM, Logic said:

Because teams have to plan beyond this year. 

Smart front offices draft for the future, not just the present.

As Josh Allen and other young Bills get signed to big contracts, it will become more and more important for the Bills to rely on a pipeline of cheap labor.

Less picks = less cheap labor and less swings at players that can help the team.

It’s definitely a balance IMO. We were one game away from the Super Bowl last year. Our window has officially opened. We are in win now mode in my opinion. We certainly want to continue building for the future, but that has to be balanced vs winning now. And based on what we did last year id say winning now takes slight priority. If there is a player in the late teens we really want, we should pull the trigger. 

On 4/13/2021 at 7:26 PM, Logic said:

Because teams have to plan beyond this year. 

Smart front offices draft for the future, not just the present.

As Josh Allen and other young Bills get signed to big contracts, it will become more and more important for the Bills to rely on a pipeline of cheap labor.

Less picks = less cheap labor and less swings at players that can help the team.

It’s definitely a balance IMO. We were one game away from the Super Bowl last year. Our window has officially opened. We are in win now mode in my opinion. We certainly want to continue building for the future, but that has to be balanced vs winning now. And based on what we did last year id say winning now takes slight priority. If there is a player in the late teens we really want, we should pull the trigger. 

On 4/13/2021 at 7:26 PM, Logic said:

Because teams have to plan beyond this year. 

Smart front offices draft for the future, not just the present.

As Josh Allen and other young Bills get signed to big contracts, it will become more and more important for the Bills to rely on a pipeline of cheap labor.

Less picks = less cheap labor and less swings at players that can help the team.

It’s definitely a balance IMO. We were one game away from the Super Bowl last year. Our window has officially opened. We are in win now mode in my opinion. We certainly want to continue building for the future, but that has to be balanced vs winning now. And based on what we did last year id say winning now takes slight priority. If there is a player in the late teens we really want, we should pull the trigger. 

On 4/13/2021 at 7:26 PM, Logic said:

Because teams have to plan beyond this year. 

Smart front offices draft for the future, not just the present.

As Josh Allen and other young Bills get signed to big contracts, it will become more and more important for the Bills to rely on a pipeline of cheap labor.

Less picks = less cheap labor and less swings at players that can help the team.

It’s definitely a balance IMO. We were one game away from the Super Bowl last year. Our window has officially opened. We are in win now mode in my opinion. We certainly want to continue building for the future, but that has to be balanced vs winning now. And based on what we did last year id say winning now takes slight priority. If there is a player in the late teens we really want, we should pull the trigger. 

On 4/13/2021 at 7:26 PM, Logic said:

Because teams have to plan beyond this year. 

Smart front offices draft for the future, not just the present.

As Josh Allen and other young Bills get signed to big contracts, it will become more and more important for the Bills to rely on a pipeline of cheap labor.

Less picks = less cheap labor and less swings at players that can help the team.

It’s definitely a balance IMO. We were one game away from the Super Bowl last year. Our window has officially opened. We are in win now mode in my opinion. We certainly want to continue building for the future, but that has to be balanced vs winning now. And based on what we did last year id say winning now takes slight priority. If there is a player in the late teens we really want, we should pull the trigger. 

On 4/13/2021 at 7:26 PM, Logic said:

Because teams have to plan beyond this year. 

Smart front offices draft for the future, not just the present.

As Josh Allen and other young Bills get signed to big contracts, it will become more and more important for the Bills to rely on a pipeline of cheap labor.

Less picks = less cheap labor and less swings at players that can help the team.

It’s definitely a balance IMO. We were one game away from the Super Bowl last year. Our window has officially opened. We are in win now mode in my opinion. We certainly want to continue building for the future, but that has to be balanced vs winning now. And based on what we did last year id say winning now takes slight priority. If there is a player in the late teens we really want, we should pull the trigger. 

On 4/13/2021 at 7:26 PM, Logic said:

Because teams have to plan beyond this year. 

Smart front offices draft for the future, not just the present.

As Josh Allen and other young Bills get signed to big contracts, it will become more and more important for the Bills to rely on a pipeline of cheap labor.

Less picks = less cheap labor and less swings at players that can help the team.

It’s definitely a balance IMO. We were one game away from the Super Bowl last year. Our window has officially opened. We are in win now mode in my opinion. We certainly want to continue building for the future, but that has to be balanced vs winning now. And based on what we did last year id say winning now takes slight priority. If there is a player in the late teens we really want, we should pull the trigger. 

On 4/13/2021 at 7:26 PM, Logic said:

Because teams have to plan beyond this year. 

Smart front offices draft for the future, not just the present.

As Josh Allen and other young Bills get signed to big contracts, it will become more and more important for the Bills to rely on a pipeline of cheap labor.

Less picks = less cheap labor and less swings at players that can help the team.

It’s definitely a balance IMO. We were one game away from the Super Bowl last year. Our window has officially opened. We are in win now mode in my opinion. We certainly want to continue building for the future, but that has to be balanced vs winning now. And based on what we did last year id say winning now takes slight priority. If there is a player in the late teens we really want, we should pull the trigger. 

On 4/13/2021 at 7:26 PM, Logic said:

Because teams have to plan beyond this year. 

Smart front offices draft for the future, not just the present.

As Josh Allen and other young Bills get signed to big contracts, it will become more and more important for the Bills to rely on a pipeline of cheap labor.

Less picks = less cheap labor and less swings at players that can help the team.

It’s definitely a balance IMO. We were one game away from the Super Bowl last year. Our window has officially opened. We are in win now mode in my opinion. We certainly want to continue building for the future, but that has to be balanced vs winning now. And based on what we did last year id say winning now takes slight priority. If there is a player in the late teens we really want, we should pull the trigger. 

[TBBills Fan]

On 4/13/2021 at 8:43 PM, Southern_Bills said:

I would say a team with a solid roster can go either way, luckily you usually have a smart front office to even be in that position. 

 

Therefore I would assume all options are open until we actually make a pick.

agree

[TheFunPolice]

The thing is, you want to continue to build depth. 

 

The Bills with the addition of Pitts, for example, but no other 2021 or 2022 picks of note are not better than the Bills with a playmaker at 30 and a full slate of picks this year and next. 

 

Tre White was a late 1st round pick. I wouldn't hate moving up a FEW spots to the mid-20's if there is a guy the Bills love, because it wouldn't cost a 1st to do it. 

[somnus00]

The thead title starts, "If a teams roster is solidified..."

 

I don't think this roster is completely solidified. We have holes, and we need depth at a lot of positions. I can easily see us drafting 2021 starters at CB2, Nickel, and Guard. We also need depth at Safety, WR, and DT.

 

I'm liking this roster, but we can definitely upgrade at several spots. I don't want to trade up. If anything, I'm a trade down guy.

[TheFunPolice]

If a team had 2 2nd rounders in 2021 I might trade down to draft 3 times in the 2nd round, ours plus the other team's 2. That's still just 1 more pick than we would have had but 3 in the top 64.

 

Prime lineman territory there. 

[hjnick]

On 4/13/2021 at 5:40 PM, Tipster19 said:

Instead of just staying where you’re slotted or even trading back to accumulate more pick(s), I would think that a team would be more afforded to take that shot to move up in a draft to be in better position to take a player that is projected to be a difference maker. The window for a team to sustain great success is usually opened for just a few years, especially due to the salary cap. Rosters are turned to some degree from year to year and then the contracts start to mount and catch up to a successful team, forcing them to make bigger changes. 

I think the biggest problem that we would face doing that would be how much of the future draft wise would we have to give up to get that 1 player... Now, if it's someone like Pitts, then I could make a case for that because that dude is a living mismatch and would fix our TE position and make our offense deadlier...  NOW if you are going to do that, we would probably have to trade into the top 5-6 to do that... so that would take major draft capital to do that.  He is the one exception. Anyone else, no, I don't think it's worth it UNLESS the capital to move up comes from this draft (or late round 2022 picks).

 

The #30 pick is quite valuable.  Whoever is drafted at this pick is cheap relative to the other 1st rounders AND you still get the 5th year option on the player.  In your scenario, I would rather trade DOWN.  Amass more draft capital, and extra 3rd or 4th this year, AND/OR get draft capital for next year(2nd or 3rd round pick).  

 

Like someone else said, the evaluations will be all over the place this year w/o the combine, so why not transition capital into a draft (2022) where we can evaluate more properly and have a better chance to actually hit on the pick.

[Shaw66]

On 4/13/2021 at 8:26 PM, Logic said:

Because teams have to plan beyond this year. 

Smart front offices draft for the future, not just the present.

As Josh Allen and other young Bills get signed to big contracts, it will become more and more important for the Bills to rely on a pipeline of cheap labor.

Less picks = less cheap labor and less swings at players that can help the team.

This is so true.   The strength of the team is not the five most talented players on the roster; it's the guys from six to 35.   

 

There are a lot of moving parts to a team, and a quarter to a third of them move on each year.   This year the Bills were unusual and are bringing almost the entire team back.   But they have some free agents who will move in and take some spots, and they want rookies to move in and take spots, too.   That's how they improve, and that's how they keep the roster young.   

 

Moving up is for the team that doesn't have stars.   The Bills have stars and sure, they'd like a couple more, but they need three or four talented rookies making the squad more than they need one star rookie.  If Beane were trading what he has, I'd bet he'd trade his first pick so he could have one more in each of the second and third, instead of trading a first and a second to move up for a better player.  In other words, at this point, he'd like four quality rookies over one potential star rookie and one other.