TSW Mock Draft 2.0 Poll - Who should the Bills take at 25?

[TBBills]

6 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

That isn't in dispute. But your point was that New Era's maths was wrong. If it was it wasn't by much. Without giving up current players the cheapest you could both move up in round 1 and pick up an additional pick in round 2 (so that is 3 picks in the first two rounds and a move up in round 1) is at a cost of this year's 3rd, next year's 2nd and next year's 3rd. The idea you can do it cobbling together day 3 picks is what I was disputing. 

It is wrong though... Bills have 8 picks, they have plenty to pick a guy in the first and even 2 in the second without giving up any next year. They could also pick a 3rd time in the second without giving up any first or second round picks next year.

 

Don't worry Beane will show you how it's done, just like he did with FA when the Bills didn't have enough money to sign anyone 😉 

Edited April 20, 2022 by TBBills

[No_Matter_What]

9 minutes ago, TBBills said:

Trying to win a Super Bowl is the only thing that matters.

 

Thank God Beane is the GM b.c if some people had their wish we would have a million draft picks lots of cap space and no players to help win championships.

What does this have to do with Gunner's response? He reacted on you saying that NewEra's cost analysis was wrong. He gave you long and thoughtful response. And instead of explaining where NewEra and Gunner were wrong you changed the topic.

Edited April 20, 2022 by No_Matter_What

[TBBills]

3 minutes ago, No_Matter_What said:

What does this have to do with Gunner's response? He reacted on you saying that NewEra's cost analysis was wrong. He gave you long and thoughtful response. And instead of explaining where NewEra and Gunner were wrong you changed the topic.

I am not wrong, they just don't know ow what they are talking about which is why I didn't bother to respond to what he wrote.

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, TBBills said:

It is wrong though... 

 

you might be able to do it without giving up your 2023 first, but only if you give up your 2023 second and third. Alternatively you could give up your 2023 first and keep your 2023 2nd and 3rd. It's swings and roundabouts but his point was to do it you give up significant future capital. Personally I wouldn't do that in a weak draft at the top end. This is a decent draft rounds 2-4. So I get wanting additional picks, but the way to do that is trade down in round 1 (it's a weaker round 1) if the Bills really care about having 4 picks in the top 75 or 80. 

Just now, TBBills said:

I am not wrong, they just don't know ow what they are talking about which is why I didn't bother to respond to what he wrote.

 

You are. You can't achieve a trade up in round 1 and 1 let alone 2 additional picks in round 2 by packaging together later picks. 

[TBBills]

13 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

you might be able to do it without giving up your 2023 first, but only if you give up your 2023 second and third. Alternatively you could give up your 2023 first and keep your 2023 2nd and 3rd. It's swings and roundabouts but his point was to do it you give up significant future capital. Personally I wouldn't do that in a weak draft at the top end. This is a decent draft rounds 2-4. So I get wanting additional picks, but the way to do that is trade down in round 1 (it's a weaker round 1) if the Bills really care about having 4 picks in the top 75 or 80. 

 

You are. You can't achieve a trade up in round 1 and 1 let alone 2 additional picks in round 2 by packaging together later picks. 

You can actually and it wouldn't cost any first or second round picks next year. 

 

Man the draft can't come soon enough. 

 

I do know one thing, I can guarantee he won't be trading back which is what some nut jobs want.

 

No point in keeping this argument up since I won't change my mind when I know I am right. Why would I agree with something that just isn't true all b.c a couple people want it to be.

 

 

Let me know when you pull the "draft chart" out and prove me wrong.

Edited April 20, 2022 by TBBills

[GunnerBill]

6 minutes ago, TBBills said:

You can actually and it wouldn't cost any first or second round picks next year. 

 

Man the draft can't come soon enough. 

 

I do know one thing, I can guarantee he won't be trading back which is what some nut jobs want.

 

No point in keeping this argument up since I won't change my mind when I know I am right. Why would I agree with something that just isn't true all b.c a couple people want it to be.

 

Okay - explain how. I have explained why the draft value chart doesn't support it. Let's hear the argument as to why that is wrong?

[GunnerBill]

16 minutes ago, TBBills said:

 

Let me know when you pull the "draft chart" out and prove me wrong.

 

I've given you the values by the draft chart. If there are examples of where it has happened contrary to draft chart value let's hear them. Even in the 2013 draft, which was considered similarly weak in terms of elite prospects in round 1 and so the cost of trade ups was lower than in other years, teams moving up multiple spots in the back half of round 1 were giving up their 3rd round pick to do so. 

 

So If the Bills do that, how do they they get from round 4 this year back into round 2, without giving up next year picks or starting level players? 

 

EDIT: I've looked at the Rich Hill model too btw, that some teams allegedly now prefer to the Jimmy Johnson chart. Same outcome. To go up 5 spots to the Steelers at #20 the value is our third round pick. Then clubbing our 4th, 5th, two 6ths and 7th together gets us only halfway to the last pick of round 2. 

 

You are going to need to come up with some examples that prove the value charts are wrong. 

Edited April 20, 2022 by GunnerBill

[NewEra]

2 hours ago, TBBills said:

Don't know why you think next years first would be needed...  your cost analysis is wrong.

No, it’s not.  If you’re going to trade up in round 1, it’s going to cost us 25 + 57, if not much more.  At that point, we have 1 pick in the first 2 rounds.  And you want to add 3 more.  
 

https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp

Do math

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, TBBills said:

It is wrong though... Bills have 8 picks, they have plenty to pick a guy in the first and even 2 in the second without giving up any next year.

 

So they could pick at #25, pick at #57 and then add all their other picks together..... that would still leave them 24 points short of the cost of pick #64 by the JJ chart..... but it would get them to pick #64 by the Rich Hill chart and leave them with one 6th and one 7th still to play with. Denver might well take that deal for #64 in a vacuum but they already have two 3rds and two 4ths so not like they are desperate for picks in the mid rounds. 

 

What they can't do is trade up in the 1st, and then still get two picks in round 2 without giving up either a starting level player or draft capital from day 1 and day 2 of next year's draft. 

[Rochesterfan]

2 hours ago, TBBills said:

It is wrong though... Bills have 8 picks, they have plenty to pick a guy in the first and even 2 in the second without giving up any next year. They could also pick a 3rd time in the second without giving up any first or second round picks next year.

 

Don't worry Beane will show you how it's done, just like he did with FA when the Bills didn't have enough money to sign anyone 😉 

 

Sal talked about this with Beane and I think you are going to disappointed.  The Bills need to bring 90 guys to camp - they are mid 60’s right now - 8 picks get you to low 70’s.  What Beane talked with Sal last year was how important the late round picks are right now and why he traded back to get more.  
 

With the Bills roster - you are not going to get many high level UDFAs (they have choices where to go) and so if there are guys you want - you need to draft them - even if it means risking losing a guy or 2.

 

My guess is you see more picks rather than fewer.  The anticipation should be to get about 6 - 8 UDFAs at most - so that means you should have around 80 after the draft. We are 6-8 players short of that and I expect they will have a few UFAs that they will look at after the draft, but it would not surprise me at all to see him want to make a few moves backwards to get extra picks this year to help the numbers.

 

What I do not see is them getting rid of late round picks for more high picks early.  They need players at this point to fill out the training camp roster and they want young PS talented players to help them grow.

 

 

[Dr. Who]

1 hour ago, NewEra said:

No, it’s not.  If you’re going to trade up in round 1, it’s going to cost us 25 + 57, if not much more.  At that point, we have 1 pick in the first 2 rounds.  And you want to add 3 more.  
 

https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp

Do math

 

11 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

So they could pick at #25, pick at #57 and then add all their other picks together..... that would still leave them 24 points short of the cost of pick #64 by the JJ chart..... but it would get them to pick #64 by the Rich Hill chart and leave them with one 6th and one 7th still to play with. Denver might well take that deal for #64 in a vacuum but they already have two 3rds and two 4ths so not like they are desperate for picks in the mid rounds. 

 

What they can't do is trade up in the 1st, and then still get two picks in round 2 without giving up either a starting level player or draft capital from day 1 and day 2 of next year's draft. 

Fellas, it's invincible ignorance . . . 

[SoCal Deek]

I’m typically way more interested in the draft. I have to admit that may be somewhat because last year was a real head scratcher for me with Beane going DL in the first two rounds. This year, in no particular order, it’s got to be CB, WR, OL, RB, and LB. Outliers will be a S and a P. It doesn’t really matter to me which round we’ll see which position. When you’re drafting down as far as the Bills have earned by winning it all becomes a word salad of guys I’ve never even heard of.

[Alphadawg7]

9 hours ago, NewEra said:

@Alphadawg7 looking at the draft pick value chart in the mock draft thread, how many points do you think Edmunds is worth this offseason?

Edmunds would fetch at least a 2nd round pick, maybe a first.  His reputation and respect across the league is much higher than on TSW.  Tyrod Taylor was traded for the first pick of the 3rd round when people here said we wouldn’t get a 6th or 7th for him.

 

So I don’t think the internal TSW negativity translates to the GMs who would evaluate his value.  He has the 5th most tackles in the NFL since entering the league and made 2 pro bowls in 4 years.  He is an athletic freak who can also drop back in coverage.  
 

He is more valuable than people think here in this board in a trade.  

[NewEra]

11 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

 

Fellas, it's invincible ignorance . . . 

You ain’t lying 

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Edmunds would fetch at least a 2nd round pick, maybe a first.  His reputation and respect across the league is much higher than on TSW.  Tyrod Taylor was traded for the first pick of the 3rd round when people here said we wouldn’t get a 6th or 7th for him.

 

So I don’t think the internal TSW negativity translates to the GMs who would evaluate his value.  He has the 5th most tackles in the NFL since entering the league and made 2 pro bowls in 4 years.  He is an athletic freak who can also drop back in coverage.  
 

He is more valuable than people think here in this board in a trade.  

 

 I'm not sure ANY off the ball linebacker generates a 1st round pick in a trade. I think a 2nd is possible and then it would depend who called who. If team X called the Bills about Edmunds a 2nd would do it, and we might even get a future 6th or something too. If we called team X about their 2nd rounder I think we'd have to offer Edmunds and a 4th or a 5th.  

Edited April 20, 2022 by GunnerBill

[NewEra]

2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Edmunds would fetch at least a 2nd round pick, maybe a first.  His reputation and respect across the league is much higher than on TSW.  Tyrod Taylor was traded for the first pick of the 3rd round when people here said we wouldn’t get a 6th or 7th for him.

 

So I don’t think the internal TSW negativity translates to the GMs who would evaluate his value.  He has the 5th most tackles in the NFL since entering the league and made 2 pro bowls in 4 years.  He is an athletic freak who can also drop back in coverage.  
 

He is more valuable than people think here in this board in a trade.  

A first?  Oh man.  
 

Tyrod Taylor was a QB.  Edmunds is a MLB.
 

Marshawn Lynch was traded for a 3rd and a 4th.   

[Alphadawg7]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

I think if you wanted a second you'd have to give Edmunds and a day 3 pick. I'm not sure ANY off the ball linebacker generates a 1st round pick in a trade. I think a 2nd is possible and then it would depend who called who. If team X called the Bills about Edmunds a 2nd would do it, and we might even get a future 6th or something too. If we called team X about their 2nd rounder I think we'd have to offer Edmunds and a 4th or a 5th.  

I think he gets at least a second straight up personally and still could get a first potentially.  He is on his rookie deal, we don’t have to sweeten the pot for someone to take him so we can get a second IMHO.  
 

Across the league he is considered one of the best young LBs in the NFL by many of his peers.  Again, 5th in tackles since entering the league and that includes playing a huge part of a season hurt in 2020.  
 

And honestly, zero percent chance we trade him for anything less. He’s worth more to us this year than that, and Beane IMHO will rather have him for our SB push and risk losing him for nothing rather than trade him for less than a 2nd rounder.

2 minutes ago, NewEra said:

A first?  Oh man.  
 

Tyrod Taylor was a QB.  Edmunds is a MLB.
 

Marshawn Lynch was traded for a 3rd and a 4th.   

Marshawn Lynch was NOT the same player in Buffalo that he became in Seattle.  He also was one ill-timed fart from a league suspension with his off field issues that included a hit and run on an old lady.  It was almost a miracle we got that much for him given his character questions off the field at that point.  
 

And yeah, I think it’s possible he gets a first or second.  You’re overly negative on him, the league, coaches, and fellow players are not.  

[GunnerBill]

Just now, Alphadawg7 said:

I think he gets at least a second straight up personally and still could get a first potentially.  He is on his rookie deal, we don’t have to sweeten the pot for someone to take him so we can get a second IMHO.  
 

Across the league he is considered one of the best young LBs in the NFL by many of his peers.  Again, 5th in tackles since entering the league and that includes playing a huge part of a season hurt in 2020.  
 

And honestly, zero percent chance we trade him for anything less. He’s worth more to us this year than that, and Beane IMHO will rather have him for our SB push and risk losing him for nothing rather than trade him for less than a 2nd rounder.

 

Has an off the ball linebacker EVER fetched a first in a trade? And he is not on his rookie deal, he is on the option, so he is a one year rental. That also limits value. 

 

I agree the Bills are not going to be shopping him to try and secure an extra pick, so the more likely scenario would be a team calls us about him and the Bills are willing to do it for a 2 and a future day 3 pick. I don't see that as particularly likely either tbh... I think he will be a Bill in 2022 but play on the option. That is what I am leaning towards as the most likely outcome. Then they will take a decision about a long term deal after the season, or let him hit FA and potentially bank a 3rd/4th round comp pick. 

[Alphadawg7]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Has an off the ball linebacker EVER fetched a first in a trade? And he is not on his rookie deal, he is on the option, so he is a one year rental. That also limits value. 

 

I agree the Bills are not going to be shopping him to try and secure an extra pick, so the more likely scenario would be a team calls us about him and the Bills are willing to do it for a 2 and a future day 3 pick. I don't see that as particularly likely either tbh... I think he will be a Bill in 2022 but play on the option. That is what I am leaning towards as the most likely outcome. Then they will take a decision about a long term deal after the season, or let him hit FA and potentially bank a 3rd/4th round comp pick. 

I agree about what will happen, he’s gonna play this season in Buffalo and they will make decisions about him next off season.  Always could tag him too. 

 

I’m not wrapped up in historical value, the game is always evolving.  Edmunds is just such a rare athletic talent to go with high production and multiple pro bowls while still only being 24.  It’s a passing league, and not only that but there are lots of dangerous TEs out there too these days.  Having a rangey LB who can cover has never been more important, and his value as an off the ball defender has never been higher IMHO.  

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, Alphadawg7 said:

I agree about what will happen, he’s gonna play this season in Buffalo and they will make decisions about him next off season.  Always could tag him too. 

 

I’m not wrapped up in historical value, the game is always evolving.  Edmunds is just such a rare athletic talent to go with high production and multiple pro bowls while still only being 24.  It’s a passing league, and not only that but there are lots of dangerous TEs out there too these days.  Having a rangey LB who can cover has never been more important, and his value as an off the ball defender has never been higher IMHO.  

 

I remain skeptical. It isn't an Edmunds point so much as it is a linebacker point. I'd baulk at 1st round trade value for Darius Leonard. I know Seattle traded two 1s for a safety but that has been a disaster to the extent that I don't expect you see anyone do that again any time soon.