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. 

[Alphadawg7]

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

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. 

Agree that trade was a disaster, and agree two firsts like that won’t likely happen again soon.  But we are talking a single first or second here for a highly productive and decorated 24 year old LB who can drop back into coverage.  
 

I think Beane could get that value if he wanted.  But like you and I agreed earlier, I don’t think Beane is out calling people shopping him this season either. I’m sure he listens if someone calls him though.  

[NewEra]

19 minutes ago, 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.

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.  

You’re overly negative on me speaking the truth.  He’s a good MLB.  I’ve said that more than enough times.  Teams don’t trade 1st round picks for good MLBs on their 5th year option.  Any examples of this happening?  

[Alphadawg7]

10 minutes ago, NewEra said:

You’re overly negative on me speaking the truth.  He’s a good MLB.  I’ve said that more than enough times.  Teams don’t trade 1st round picks for good MLBs on their 5th year option.  Any examples of this happening?  

Teams don’t trade 2 first round picks for a strong safety who can’t cover either…yet that happened.  
 

No disrespect, but the “historical” argument I always find pointless.  The game is forever evolving, and trade values or importance of roles are changing with that.  And how teams value players they can add in FA or trade will vary with each team and the makeup of that team.  
 

Look at the WRs this year, their values went through the roof off a couple free Agency moves (especially Kirk) that changed the compensation and value charts of WRs immensely across the league.  
 

So I don’t care what’s happened before, facts are facts.  24 year old LB, multiple pro bowls, 5th in league in tackles since entering the league, athletic freak, great in coverage in a passing league, captain of the the number 1 defense in the NFL.  
 

I’m not even saying he isn’t replaceable, I’m just sighting his resume to those on the outside looking in.  And opposing coaches and players gush about him all the time and he is the by far the most cited player opposing teams talk about game planning for each week.  so his reputation and admiration is strong IMHO across the league.
 

He, at his position with his coverage ability, has more value right now than ever before.  Which is exactly why he will almost certainly not be traded ahead of a serous push for the first SB victory in Bills history unless Beane gets an offer he can’t refuse.  

Edited April 20, 2022 by Alphadawg7

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

I knew right when Seattle traded the amount they did for Adams it was laughably bad…. And of course the board clowned on the Jets for trading an all pro safety…. That guy is an overrated jack ass. Jets won that trade by a landslide…. 

 

Seattle has been the worst FO in the NFL for about 6 or 7 years now.

[NewEra]

Just now, Alphadawg7 said:

Teams don’t trade 2 first round picks for a strong safety who can’t cover either…yet that happened.  
 

No disrespect, but the “historical” argument I always find pointless.  The game is forever evolving, and trade values or importance of roles are changing with that.  And how teams value players they can add in FA or trade will vary with each team and the makeup of that team.  
 

Look at the WRs this year, their values went through the roof off a couple free Agency moves (especially Kirk) that changed the compensation and value charts of WRs immensely across the league.  
 

So I don’t care what’s happened before, facts are facts.  24 year old LB, multiple pro bowls, 5th in league in tackles since entering the league, athletic freak, great in coverage in a passing league, captain of the the number 1 defense in the NFL.
I’m not even saying he isn’t replaceable, I’m just sighting his resume to those on the outside looking in.  And opposing coaches and players gush about him all the time and he is the by far the most cited player opposing teams talk about game planning for each week.  so his reputation and admiration is strong IMHO across the league.
 

He, at his position with his coverage ability, has more value right now than ever before.  Which is exactly why he will almost certainly not be traded ahead of a serous push for the first SB victory in Bills history unless Beane gets an offer he can’t refuse.  

facts are facts?  You’re saying that he’s fetch a 1st or 2nd round pick…..based on what facts?  he’s 24 and has been to multiple pro bowls. Denzel perryman beat him out for the pro bowl last season….. what’s he fetching?  The league obviously thinks he’s better than Edmunds….right?  He did make the pro bowl over him and pro bowls are evidently very important.  All the coaches gushed about Denzel perryman too.  Yet there isn’t a coach in the league that would trade a 1st rd pick for him. 
 

positional value makes any team trading a first round pick for him extremely unlikely.  
Yes, seattle made a huge mistake while trading for a guy they thought was the best safety in the league.  1st team all pro.  2x 2nd team all pro.  Edmunds 0x all pro.  But talk about pro bowls as if they measure something other than positional ranking within one conference.  Denzel Perryman > Edmunds according to this rationale. 
 

we’ll just wait and see what edmunds fetches in a trade.  Crickets imo.  
 

 

[Alphadawg7]

21 minutes ago, NewEra said:

facts are facts?  You’re saying that he’s fetch a 1st or 2nd round pick…..based on what facts?  he’s 24 and has been to multiple pro bowls. Denzel perryman beat him out for the pro bowl last season….. what’s he fetching?  The league obviously thinks he’s better than Edmunds….right?  He did make the pro bowl over him and pro bowls are evidently very important.  All the coaches gushed about Denzel perryman too.  Yet there isn’t a coach in the league that would trade a 1st rd pick for him. 
 

positional value makes any team trading a first round pick for him extremely unlikely.  
Yes, seattle made a huge mistake while trading for a guy they thought was the best safety in the league.  1st team all pro.  2x 2nd team all pro.  Edmunds 0x all pro.  But talk about pro bowls as if they measure something other than positional ranking within one conference.  Denzel Perryman > Edmunds according to this rationale. 
 

we’ll just wait and see what edmunds fetches in a trade.  Crickets imo.  
 

 

I didn’t say facts are facts about what he would fetch.  I said facts or facts about his resume.  
 

On his trade value, I have said each time “IMHO”.  
 

And no you won’t wait and see what Edmunds fetches in trade…because he’s not going to be traded without an offer Beane can’t refuse.  
 

He is worth a lot more to us this year in pursuit of a SB trophy than the trade value you previously placed on him which was peanuts.  Nothings impossible, but it’s unlikely he gets traded this year.

[NewEra]

23 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

I didn’t say facts are facts about what he would fetch.  I said facts or facts about his resume.  
 

On his trade value, I have said each time “IMHO”.  
 

And no you won’t wait and see what Edmunds fetches in trade…because he’s not going to be traded without an offer Beane can’t refuse.  
 

He is worth a lot more to us this year in pursuit of a SB trophy than the trade value you previously placed on him which was peanuts.  Nothings impossible, but it’s unlikely he gets traded this year.

Beane won’t be able to refuse a 1st round pick offer….I promise.  Unfortunately, we won’t be getting that offer….so there will be nothing to discuss.  Same goes for a 2nd round offer imo.  I agree that he is worth more to us in 2022 than a 3rd round pick would be…..another reason why he won’t be traded and why we’ll never see him traded.  
 

He can help us win a super bowl and I’m ok keeping him this year for that reason.  He’ll be better in 2022 than any LB that we draft in rd 2 or 3, possibly rd 1.  I just don’t think we should be paying him over 11M a year going forward.  
 

Regarding his Lb greatness….Tackles and pro bowls are your facts….. pro bowls are trivial.  Tackles even more trivial.  Sometimes tackles supports it.  Sometimes it doesn’t.  Edmunds was 35th in total tackles last year.  Kyzir White, Cole Holcomb and Alex singleton had more tackles than Darius Leonard and Fred Warner.  Juwaun Bentley, Tae Crowder, TJ edwards, Kamu grugier hill, Tracey Walker had more tackles than Edmunds.  But let’s use tackles to support the claim that a LB is better than good.  

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2021/defense.htm#defense::tackles_combined

 

And I won’t go into depth regarding his pff coverage rating as I think he’s definitely better than his rating.  It’s just strange that known good coverage LBers Warner, Lavonte David, Demario Davis, Micah Parsons, Leonard, Kendricks, roquon, JOK, Wilson  plus so many others have green ratings over 66 while edmunds is 4th worst @ 34.6.  Why is Edmunds’ rating so low while the others so high?  Scheme….. 💯 scheme. 

 

edmunds best traits are height and length.  If he were 6’0 240 do you think he’d be a plus starter?  Luckily for him, his height and length are a huge part of what makes him a good LB.  no chance we get a 1st rd pick for him because of positional value + the player that he is.  

[Dr. Who]

This is tangential, but Edmunds' measurables also reinforce my belief we aren't taking a short-armed CB @25.

 

[GunnerBill]

33 minutes ago, NewEra said:

 

And I won’t go into depth regarding his pff coverage rating as I think he’s definitely better than his rating.  It’s just strange that known good coverage LBers Warner, Lavonte David, Demario Davis, Micah Parsons, Leonard, Kendricks, roquon, JOK, Wilson  plus so many others have green ratings over 66 while edmunds is 4th worst @ 34.6.  Why is Edmunds’ rating so low while the others so high?  Scheme….. 💯 scheme. 

 

 

78% of the pass plays where he was targeted in coverage were complete. The worst number since his rookie year. His best number came in 2019, his second year as a pro, and I still say he played his best football that year. Yes he still played the wrong gap in the run game some times but I thought coming out of that year he was trending towards elite in terms of pass defense. Don't think he has played as well since then. 

Edited April 20, 2022 by GunnerBill

[NewEra]

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

78% of the pass plays where he was targeted in coverage were complete. The worst number since his rookie year. His best number came in 2019, his second year as a pro, and I still say he played his best football that year. Yes he still played the wrong gap in the run game some times but I thought coming out of that year he was trending towards elite in terms of pass defense. Don't think he has played as well since then. 

💯 

 

thanks for the stats to back it up.  That said, I don’t think he’s close to being the 4th worst coverage Lb in the league.  I brought it up because people are using the terms “great in coverage” multiple times trying to support how valuable he is.  His best trait in coverage his height and length.  I do believe that his physical size can have an affect on whether or not Some QBs throw certain passes….but I think it’s a bit overrated as supported by your stat. 

[glazeduck]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

78% of the pass plays where he was targeted in coverage were complete. The worst number since his rookie year. His best number came in 2019, his second year as a pro, and I still say he played his best football that year. Yes he still played the wrong gap in the run game so far but I thought coming out of that year he was trending towards elite in terms of pass defense. Don't think he has played as well since then. 

The problem with independent defensive player analytics like completions when targeted is that they don't encapsulate the whole picture. Like NewEra said, we actively schemed and funneled targets TO Edmunds. I'd want to know how many of those completed targets yac'd more than, say 3 or 4 yards? How many converted 1st downs? How many resulted in missed tackles? This is what anti-Edmunds people are missing. The degree to which this coaching staff trusts Edmunds to be the QB on the defense, make adjustments at the line, communicate and get everyone on the same page and then to also be the guy they want the ball going to, tells me they think he's the anchor of this defense, and it's been one that's been pretty good the last few years. Oh and by the way he's still young and athletic.

 

To be clear, yes, I'd love to see him be better in coverage, OF COURSE it'd be great to have a Deion Sanders-like shutdown guy at MLB, but to expect a rookie, or frankly most of the NFL to do all of the things that Tremaine does for this defense, is asking for trouble.  

[GunnerBill]

Just now, glazeduck said:

The problem with independent defensive player analytics like completions when targeted is that they don't encapsulate the whole picture. Like NewEra said, we actively schemed and funneled targets TO Edmunds. I'd want to know how many of those completed targets yac'd more than, say 3 or 4 yards? How many converted 1st downs? How many resulted in missed tackles? This is what anti-Edmunds people are missing. The degree to which this coaching staff trusts Edmunds to be the QB on the defense, make adjustments at the line, communicate and get everyone on the same page and then to also be the guy they want the ball going to, tells me they think he's the anchor of this defense, and it's been one that's been pretty good the last few years. Oh and by the way he's still young and athletic.

 

To be clear, yes, I'd love to see him be better in coverage, OF COURSE it'd be great to have a Deion Sanders-like shutdown guy at MLB, but to expect a rookie, or frankly most of the NFL to do all of the things that Tremaine does for this defense, is asking for trouble.  

 

Quite. And I am NOT an anti-Edmunds guy as such. But my eye test tells me the best year he had as a coverage linebacker was 2019 and the numbers just happen to support that. Have teams evolved the way that they attack him? Yes, definitely, that is part of it. But my issue with him is I don't think he is necessarily a better player now than he was in 2019. He is another lightening rod guy who is better than his detractors sometimes suggest but who there are legitimate reasons to criticise. I'm firmly in the let him play on the option and make him earn a new deal next spring camp. I also happen to think that is the way it is trending, thought I don't totally rule out Beane extending him after the draft. 

[glazeduck]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Quite. And I am NOT an anti-Edmunds guy as such. But my eye test tells me the best year he had as a coverage linebacker was 2019 and the numbers just happen to support that. Have teams evolved the way that they attack him? Yes, definitely, that is part of it. But my issue with him is I don't think he is necessarily a better player now than he was in 2019. He is another lightening rod guy who is better than his detractors sometimes suggest but who there are legitimate reasons to criticise. I'm firmly in the let him play on the option and make him earn a new deal next spring camp. I also happen to think that is the way it is trending, thought I don't totally rule out Beane extending him after the draft. 

Yeah I agree on all of this -- wasn't necessarily targeting you, more the larger narrative around him. I think this staff really highly values what he does for this defense, and between all of that, his age, length and athleticism, I don't think there's a better option walking in that door anytime soon. 

 

The numbers are what they are, and yes they're "worse" than previous years, but again, I'd also suggest that the staff is probably more concerned about the implication data of those recs, rather than the recs themselves in a vacuum -- what those look like, I don't know. 

Edited April 20, 2022 by glazeduck

[NewEra]

4 minutes ago, glazeduck said:

Yeah I agree on all of this -- wasn't necessarily targeting you, more the larger narrative around him. I think this staff really highly values what he does for this defense, and between all of that, his age, length and athleticism, I don't think there's a better option walking in that door anytime soon. 

 

The numbers are what they are, and yes they're "worse" than previous years, but again, I'd also suggest that the staff is probably more concerned about the implication data of those recs, rather than the recs themselves in a vacuum -- what those look like, I don't know. 

Agreed. 

 

What do you think his JJ draft pick value would be in a trade?

[glazeduck]

25 minutes ago, NewEra said:

Agreed. 

 

What do you think his JJ draft pick value would be in a trade?

 

I usually bow out of discussions using that chart, because you just cant truly quantify what a player is worth on a static chart like that (not to mention I've been told by more than a couple NFL front office people that they don't even consider it in their trade discussions)... All that said and just for funsies... I'd say high -- like probably multiple valuable picks high. 

 

You have to take the whole picture into the equation: 

• We're right in the middle of our SB window
• As established, I believe this staff thinks highly of everything he does for us
• His youth and athleticism
• His knowledge of the defense (even if you think one of the rookies is a "better" player, they absolutely will have a learning curve that could either create problems OR cause us to call a more simplified defense)
• Free agency isn't exactly flooded with great MLB options, so you're not going to find a 1 for 1 replacement there.
• Then there's also the consideration of not wanting to trade him to a contending or division team, which narrows your trading partners down by at least 1/3 of the league...

So your takeback in an Edmunds trade is going to have to offset ALL of that. Does that exist? Maybe. Is his contract situation a potential reason to move him? I can see the argument. But speaking realistically, I think his value to us, is more than a team out there will want to give on top of a long term contract.

 

If it were me, and I'm absolutely trading Edmunds, I'd be trying to position myself to land Jameson Williams, Breece Hall, an OL upgrade and a CB in the first 2 rounds. Sign a FA to man the spot for a year and a heir to the MLB spot in the 3rd...

Would the Steelers give us their 1, 2 and something else to unite the Edmunds brothers? (1230+ points)

Texans 1 and 2? (1680) Vikings? (1620)

 

Just not a lot of obvious fits out there where you can talk yourself into the other team being interested... (and for the record, I don't think any of these are realistic)

Edited April 20, 2022 by glazeduck

[NewEra]

4 minutes ago, glazeduck said:

 

I usually bow out of discussions using that chart, because you just cant truly quantify what a player is worth on a static chart like that (not to mention I've been told by more than a couple NFL front office people that they don't even consider it in their trade discussions)... All that said and just for funsies... I'd say high -- like probably multiple valuable picks high. 

 

You have to take the whole picture into the equation: 

• We're right in the middle of our SB window
• As established, I believe this staff thinks highly of everything he does for us
• His youth and athleticism
• His knowledge of the defense (even if you think one of the rookies is a "better" player, they absolutely will have a learning curve that could either create problems OR cause us to call a more simplified defense)
• Free agency isn't exactly flooded with great MLB options, so you're not going to find a 1 for 1 replacement there.
• Then there's also the consideration of not wanting to trade him to a contending or division team, which narrows your trading partners down by at least 1/3 of the league...

So your takeback in an Edmunds trade is going to have to offset ALL of that. Does that exist? Maybe. Is his contract situation a potential reason to move him? I can see the argument. But speaking realistically, I think his value to us, is more than a team out there will want to give on top of a long term contract.

 

If it were me, and I'm absolutely trading Edmunds, I'd be trying to position myself to land Jameson Williams, Breece Hall, an OL upgrade and a CB in the first 2 rounds. Sign a FA to man the spot for a year and a heir to the MLB spot in the 3rd...

Would the Steelers give us their 1, 2 and something else to unite the Edmunds brothers? (1230+ points)

Texans 1 and 2? (1680) Vikings? (1620)

 

Just not a lot of obvious fits out there where you can talk yourself into the other team being interested...

I agree with everything up top.  i think he’s worth keeping for anything less than 2nd/high 3rd because he can help us win a SB this year. 
 

I scoff at the thought that any team would give up even just 1 1st rd pick for him.  Why not just take Dean or Bush, pay them a fraction of what edmunds will make and use that money on another impact player.  
 

especially teams like the Steelers and Texans who are strictly building with no chance at SB contention.  Would be a poor use of their most valuable assets:  1st rd picks and 12M+ cap room-  for a mlb.  
 

 

[Rochesterfan]

This issue is so complicated and I don’t think there is a good way to prove any of it short of a trade.

 

Edmunds has a significant number of Pros - as pointed out by @Alphadawg7 and would be a fine addition to many teams.

 

Edmunds also has a number of deficiencies as pointed out by @NewEra and with his current contract it makes it very hard to get any value in a trade.

 

I think the truth lies someplace down the middle - with his current contract and his deficiencies he is worth less as a trade - especially if that trade is being initiated by the Bills.  Probably someplace in the mid 2nd - early 4th depending on what else gets thrown in.

 

The problem becomes who and what would move him. I could see a scenario where the Bills and Giants use a few players and picks to rearrange needs for the year.  Players like Edmunds and/or Poyer to NYG with Bradberry coming back - some adjustment in picks following suit and allowing both teams to fill the holes created.  Balance the money and position to help each team going forward.

 

I just do not see a scenario where we see a trade for true value because the Bills are not giving up their Defensive Leaders this year without already having replacements in place that can handle the role.

 

 

[NewEra]

10 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

This issue is so complicated and I don’t think there is a good way to prove any of it short of a trade.

 

Edmunds has a significant number of Pros - as pointed out by @Alphadawg7 and would be a fine addition to many teams.

 

Edmunds also has a number of deficiencies as pointed out by @NewEra and with his current contract it makes it very hard to get any value in a trade.

 

I think the truth lies someplace down the middle - with his current contract and his deficiencies he is worth less as a trade - especially if that trade is being initiated by the Bills.  Probably someplace in the mid 2nd - early 4th depending on what else gets thrown in.

 

The problem becomes who and what would move him. I could see a scenario where the Bills and Giants use a few players and picks to rearrange needs for the year.  Players like Edmunds and/or Poyer to NYG with Bradberry coming back - some adjustment in picks following suit and allowing both teams to fill the holes created.  Balance the money and position to help each team going forward.

 

I just do not see a scenario where we see a trade for true value because the Bills are not giving up their Defensive Leaders this year without already having replacements in place that can handle the role.

 

 

Great post. 👍🏻 

 

a scenario with the giants def makes the most sense.  Long shot for sure, but maybe we give up edmunds, 25, next years first and mid picks for Bradberry and 7.

[glazeduck]

24 minutes ago, NewEra said:

I agree with everything up top.  i think he’s worth keeping for anything less than 2nd/high 3rd because he can help us win a SB this year. 
 

I scoff at the thought that any team would give up even just 1 1st rd pick for him.  Why not just take Dean or Bush, pay them a fraction of what edmunds will make and use that money on another impact player.  
 

especially teams like the Steelers and Texans who are strictly building with no chance at SB contention.  Would be a poor use of their most valuable assets:  1st rd picks and 12M+ cap room-  for a mlb.  
 

 

You're making my point for me. From the Bills' perspective, unless you come out as a clear winner and offsetting losing the central figure and quarterback of your defense with a larger upgrade it's not worth making that trade. From another team's perspective, you're bringing in a guy who's going to have to learn a new system and almost instantly pay him a bunch of money when you could draft one and have the same "start from ground zero" effect in play.

 

You asked what I thought his trade value was, not what sensible deals would be for him. I happen to think the Bills have his trade value as extremely high. What does a 2nd, 3rd or 4th round pick get you that makes us better now aside from a cheaper salary? I just don't think that kind of thinking wins championships...

[Rochesterfan]

7 minutes ago, NewEra said:

Great post. 👍🏻 

 

a scenario with the giants def makes the most sense.  Long shot for sure, but maybe we give up edmunds, 25, next years first and mid picks for Bradberry and 7.

I could see something like that - my only problem with that is if they move to 7 - I think it is for Stingly or Hamilton and therefore I am not sure Bradberry and Edmonds are the deal.

 

I could really see that play out if Poyer replaced Edmunds in that trade case to give us Bradberry and then draft Hamilton.

 

I don’t see a LB worthy of that high a pick and if they move up for Stingly - I don’t think they want Bradberry in return.

 

It is very difficult scenario to play out.