Another way to go. Trade way down and stack up #1 picks in 2024

[Chaos]

Seems like a consensu opinion that the 2023 draft class is weak.  One possibility is trading way down and adding some #1 picks in 2024, and recieving back some late picks in the 2023 draft.  In this case we add the lions 2024#1 and the vikings 2024 #1 to go with the Bills 2024 #1.   This will make the 2024 draft more fun to discuss. Some of the players draft below would have an actual chance to make the 53 in 2023. 

Edited March 29, 2023 by Chaos

[FireChans]

3 minutes ago, Chaos said:

Seems like a consensu opinion that the 2023 draft class is week.  One possibility is trading way down and adding some #1 picks in 2024, and recieving back some late picks in the 2023 draft.  In this case we add the lions 2024#1 and the vikings 2024 #1 to go with the Bills 2024 #1.   This will make the 2024 draft more fun to discuss. Some of the players draft below would have an actual chance to make the 53 in 2023. 

Teams always love to trade away #1 picks for more picks in a weak draft.

[Chaos]

2 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Teams always love to trade away #1 picks for more picks in a weak draft.

I don't make the mock draft rules. PFF does. 

[Mark Vader]

7 minutes ago, Chaos said:

Seems like a consensu opinion that the 2023 draft class is week.  One possibility is trading way down and adding some #1 picks in 2024, and recieving back some late picks in the 2023 draft.  In this case we add the lions 2024#1 and the vikings 2024 #1 to go with the Bills 2024 #1.   This will make the 2024 draft more fun to discuss. Some of the players draft below would have an actual chance to make the 53 in 2023. 

I'm fine with trading down this year. Maybe not as far as this chart indicates.

 

Getting more draft picks, no matter how late they would be, sounds better than signing a ton of UDFA's at the end.

[Victory Formation]

I like the idea of trading #27 for a 2nd and a 3rd, but it really depends on who is available. If Bijan, Njigba, Addison, Hyatt, Flowers, Broderick Jones or Paris are there, no way on God’s green Earth would I trade down. But in the right situation, trading down for Avila, Dawand or Charbonnet is not a bad idea at all. It all depends.

[Mike in Horseheads]

5 minutes ago, Victory Formation said:

I like the idea of trading #27 for a 2nd and a 3rd, but it really depends on who is available. If Bijan, Njigba, Addison, Hyatt, Flowers, Broderick Jones or Paris are there, no way on God’s green Earth would I trade down. But in the right situation, trading down for Avila, Dawand or Charbonnet is not a bad idea at all. It all depends.

Also depends on how far down those 2nd and 3rds are

[Roundybout]

How far down are we talking? If it's down to the 30s, that's fine. Otherwise I don't want us to miss out on a good offensive line prospect that might have fallen. 

[DCofNC]

All depends on who falls, but if the right value is there, trade back.  I could honestly see the Bills going the other way and going up to land a guy.   It SHOULD be a cheap year to move based on the reports of lack of talent at premium positions, so if we see a situation like we saw when Lamb and Jefferson fell, I’d be fine going up 10 spots to land a difference maker.

[mrags]

30 minutes ago, Chaos said:

Seems like a consensu opinion that the 2023 draft class is weak.  One possibility is trading way down and adding some #1 picks in 2024, and recieving back some late picks in the 2023 draft.  In this case we add the lions 2024#1 and the vikings 2024 #1 to go with the Bills 2024 #1.   This will make the 2024 draft more fun to discuss. Some of the players draft below would have an actual chance to make the 53 in 2023. 

I take your paying their subscription price to be able to keep these mocks going? It’s only like $6 for the month until the draft. I just have such a hard time giving anyone money when there’s so many free ones around. PFFs format I do like and believe they have a real good take on where guys will go. But it’s not 100%. Way too many times I’ve done them and see the Steelers pick up Robinson in the first, or some other time picking up a guy they absolutely would not. I can’t see in a million years any chance the Steelers pick up another RB though. Not with Harris on their roster. 

[4merper4mer]

It’s all so absurd but I have to admit Juice Scruggs is a cool name.

[Dopey]

16 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

It’s all so absurd but I have to admit Juice Scruggs is a cool name.

I like LB Bumper Pool. 

[Solomon Grundy]

1 hour ago, Victory Formation said:

I like the idea of trading #27 for a 2nd and a 3rd, but it really depends on who is available. If Bijan, Njigba, Addison, Hyatt, Flowers, Broderick Jones or Paris are there, no way on God’s green Earth would I trade down. But in the right situation, trading down for Avila, Dawand or Charbonnet is not a bad idea at all. It all depends.

Gotta add Darnell Walker's name to the list. He neutralized the draft's best pass rusher by himself and limited sacks on his QB

[Marlton Bills]

7 hours ago, Victory Formation said:

I like the idea of trading #27 for a 2nd and a 3rd, but it really depends on who is available. If Bijan, Njigba, Addison, Hyatt, Flowers, Broderick Jones or Paris are there, no way on God’s green Earth would I trade down. But in the right situation, trading down for Avila, Dawand or Charbonnet is not a bad idea at all. It all depends.

Those are the only reasons someone might trade up!

[Doc Brown]

Four most realistic scenarios and what I think is the most likely in order.

1.) We get lucky and a first round prospect is available to us at 27 at a premium position of need.

2.)Beane trades up a few spots to get the last guy he has graded as a first round prospect.

3.)  We reach for a 2nd round prospect at 27 because we can't find a trade partner to trade back into the 2nd.

4.)  We trade our first round pick for some other team's second along with multiple day two and three picks (a 3rd and a 5th for example)

[TheBeaneBandit]

9 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Four most realistic scenarios and what I think is the most likely in order.

1.) We get lucky and a first round prospect is available to us at 27 at a premium position of need.

2.)Beane trades up a few spots to get the last guy he has graded as a first round prospect.

3.)  We reach for a 2nd round prospect at 27 because we can't find a trade partner to trade back into the 2nd.

4.)  We trade our first round pick for some other team's second along with multiple day two and three picks (a 3rd and a 5th for example)

I think #2 is most likely ala the Elam pick. This time from a run on receivers.

[Simon Says]

You must have too much time on your hands .

We don't have to accept the premise that this is a "weak draft", Beane has to work smart; add rookie contributors and development players ,and optimize value on cheap rookie deals.

I see you picked multiple Edge,WR and CB  but not MLB,a critical need. 

This draft has tackles and tight ends that could help the Bills but you ignore them.

Even a day 3 RB could make the roster as a special teamer  for example.

You  like to play with draft simulators but don't seem to care about improving the roster. Fail...

[Thurman#1]

9 hours ago, Chaos said:

I don't make the mock draft rules. PFF does. 

 

 

Yeah, the rules you are following there are indeed rules for mock drafts. Not real ones.

 

And add #1 picks? Plural? When we have the #26 pick or very close in each round? Please.

 

The mock engines are fun, but they make it easier to trade than it generally actually is, because it's more fun that way for the customers, internet draft fans.

 

There are several draft charts, but all of them give roughly the same message on the theoretical trades here. The draft engine is giving you unrealistically high values. And why not? They want people to feel like a genius and like they want to come back.

 

#27  680 points

#59  310  points

#91  136  points

#130  42 points

#137  37.5 points

#205  7.8 points

 

That's 1213.3 points, a value about halfway between the 11th and 12th pick. 

 

Teams that trade up generally have to give a bit of a premium, 20% or so, but there are plenty of times when a GM doesn't get that good an offer.

 

If it were really as easy as you make it look here, teams would do it all the time, especially stable GMs along the lines of a Belichick. It isn't that easy. Belichick did pull it off a few times, but found people learned from watching and didn't want to do it anymore, particularly when the Pats picks came so late in the round. As ours do.

 

Edited March 29, 2023 by Thurman#1

[Big Turk]

Way too much Madden playing to think this would happen in real life.

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

Four most realistic scenarios and what I think is the most likely in order.

1.) We get lucky and a first round prospect is available to us at 27 at a premium position of need.

2.)Beane trades up a few spots to get the last guy he has graded as a first round prospect.

3.)  We reach for a 2nd round prospect at 27 because we can't find a trade partner to trade back into the 2nd.

4.)  We trade our first round pick for some other team's second along with multiple day two and three picks (a 3rd and a 5th for example)

 

Yea they are the four scenarios.... not sure I agree with your order. I think:

 

1) Beane stands pat and takes a 2nd round guy at #27

Rationale: I think anyone outside the top 15 is likely doing this. I don't think there is going to be a mad rush to trade up into the late 1st from teams because of the general weakness of the class and because I think all 4 QBs (most likely trade up targets) are gone by this point.

 

2) Beane trades up to the early 20s for his last remaining 1st round grade 

Rationale: He did it last year and if ever there was a year to not be worried about giving up assets later in a draft it is this year. 

 

3) We trade back out of the first

Rationale: I don't think there is going to be a mad rush to come up for the reason I explained earlier but let's say the Raiders want to get aggressive (McDaniels needs to show real progress year 2 especially after voluntarily giving up a good QB) and the Bills were willing to take a bit less than the trade value chart says - say the Raiders 3rd round comp pick and one of their early 5ths I could imagine a deal being done. 

 

4) A 1st round talent slides to us at #27

Rationale: I only have 12 first round grades. If you include all 4 QBs that gets you to 15. That is a lot of sliding someone needs to do. It would only be an off-field or injury reason and the Bills under this regime have been very risk averse in those circumstances on draft day. 

 

Edited March 29, 2023 by GunnerBill

[newcam2012]

9 hours ago, FireChans said:

Teams always love to trade away #1 picks for more picks in a weak draft.

Depends on teams boards and where good value appears. Teams always look to trade forward and back. 

 

The issue of it being a weak draft is really not in play. It's about perceived value, needs of the team, and a desire to get their player especially if trading up or back makes sense. 

8 hours ago, DCofNC said:

All depends on who falls, but if the right value is there, trade back.  I could honestly see the Bills going the other way and going up to land a guy.   It SHOULD be a cheap year to move based on the reports of lack of talent at premium positions, so if we see a situation like we saw when Lamb and Jefferson fell, I’d be fine going up 10 spots to land a difference maker.

The move up still won't be cheap or cheaper. The value system is in place and I don't think teams moving down will give other teams discounts based on a supposed weak draft. 

[filthymcnasty08]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea they are the four scenarios.... not sure I agree with your order. I think:

 

1) Beane stands pat and takes a 2nd round guy at #27

Rationale: I think anyone outside the top 15 is likely doing this. I don't think there is going to be a mad rush to trade up into the late 1st from teams because of the general weakness of the class and because I think all 4 QBs (most likely trade up targets) are gone by this point.

 

 

4) A 1st round talent slides to us at #27

Rationale: I only have 12 first round grades. If you include all 4 QBs that gets you to 15. That is a lot of sliding someone needs to do. It would only be an off-field or injury reason and the Bills under this regime have been very risk averse in those circumstances on draft day. 

 

Typical 1st round grades that slide to 27:  MLB, IOL, S, RB     Looks good for #4!

[Chaos]

5 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

I don't think there is going to be a mad rush to trade up into the late 1st from teams because of the general weakness of the class

I think the trade down scenerio is most likely for a pass catcher. One of Kincaid, Mayer, Flowers, Hyatt, Downs is left at 27.  Other teams seem to value those positions more than the Bills have in recent years.  Not sure it creates a mad rush. But teams like Texans (33) Cardinals(34) Colts (35) may want to move ahead of the Bengals and Chiefs. 

[BritBill]

8 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

It’s all so absurd but I have to admit Juice Scruggs is a cool name.

 

The best thing about any draft is some of the players' names. I'm yet to trawl through this year's top 100 prospects but be sure I'll dazzle you with my own personal favourites very soon. 

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

HOLLYWOOD TAKES OVER NFL DRAFT!

*
Teams may exercise the '5 year option'.  All picks are relinquished for 5 consecutive years; in the sixth year the entire draft class goes to said team.  If two or more teams pursue this option, random draw to award the winner.  Teams can use this option only once every X  years.  Still working out the frequency.

*
Details need to be worked out.  Also need to run it past Belichick to see how it can be exploited.

[Thurman#1]

35 minutes ago, newcam2012 said:

Depends on teams boards and where good value appears. Teams always look to trade forward and back. 

 

The issue of it being a weak draft is really not in play. It's about perceived value, needs of the team, and a desire to get their player especially if trading up or back makes sense. 

The move up still won't be cheap or cheaper. The value system is in place and I don't think teams moving down will give other teams discounts based on a supposed weak draft. 

 

 

You're missing the point here.

 

Weak drafts don't make teams that want to trade up say, "Well, we really like this guy and his value here, so it's a weak year, so we'll only offer 10%."

 

Weak drafts make teams say "Jesus, that's all that's left?

 

Yes, teams always look to trade forward and back. But the weakness or strength of a draft will always affect the number of players you want to trade up or down for and the price you willing to pay. The grades teams use aren't year-adjusted. 

 

Not every team has every guy graded the same, obviously. But the reason it's a weak draft is because in a strong year you might have - for example - 23 players with first round grades and 34 players with 2nd round grades, while in a weak year you might have, as Bill does, 12 players with first round grades. Now, not every team would say 12. Almost surely there are some differences. Some teams might say 10. Others 15. But it's highly unlikely anyone has, say 23 this year. 

 

So at 27 this year you're not going to give the same thing you'd have given last year at 27 when you'd have been getting a guy graded maybe 6.9 or 7.0, where your highest graded guy this year at the same spot is graded by your scouts as a 6.7.

 

When your turn comes, there will be probably no players with grades about 7.0, for instance. Last year there might have been eight guys left that your team grades above 6.8. This year, zero. Your highest graded player is less talented, your scouts say, than the guy they could have traded for last year at #27. Are you going to give the same amount for a less talented player? Not if you're a smart capitalist.

 

If you're lucky, you'll have a really different grade on somebody than the others all do. But if you do, it might be because you're wrong.

[Fan in Chicago]

9 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

It’s all so absurd but I have to admit Juice Scruggs is a cool name.

Maybe the Jets will draft him and pair him in the defensive backfield with Sauce

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

 

3) We trade back out of the first

Rationale: I don't think there is going to be a mad rush to come up for the reason I explained earlier but let's say the Raiders want to get aggressive (McDaniels needs to show real progress year 2 especially after voluntarily giving up a good QB) and the Bills were willing to take a bit less than the trade value chart says - say the Raiders 3rd round comp pick and one of their early 5ths I could imagine a deal being done. 

 

 

Trade our #27 for the Raiders Rd 3 and Rd 5?

Sounds like a very bad deal for the Bills. Especially if its a bad draft, the value of the picks in return are particularly terrible. 

Edited March 29, 2023 by Fan in Chicago

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, filthymcnasty08 said:

Typical 1st round grades that slide to 27:  MLB, IOL, S, RB     Looks good for #4!

 

I don't have a 1st round grade on any MLB or IOL in this class. I have Bryan Branch who is a hybrid S/CB and Bijan Robinson. Not sure either makes #27

35 minutes ago, Fan in Chicago said:

 

Trade our #27 for the Raiders Rd 3 and Rd 5?

Sounds like a very bad deal for the Bills. Especially if its a bad draft, the value of the picks in return are particularly terrible. 

 

No, sorry for their 2nd - #38 plus their comp 3rd #100 and say #141. Value wise according to the chart that is about 35 points light on what the Bills should get. 

[BillsFanThru-N-Thru]

Of Course everything depends on how the draft board falls.  In the mock scenario I ran Anthony Richardson falls to 27 and the Bills trade with the Saints for their 29 and 40 picks.  Then in the 2nd round Joey Porter Jr is still on the board and Detroit trades their 48 and 55 to get him for the 40 we got from NO and a 2025 Rd 5 pick.  Finally I traded our 28 in Rd 3, 28 in Rd 6, and 2024 Rd 4 for Atlanta's 12th in Rd 3

 

29: R1 P29 OT Paris Johnson Jr. - Ohio State

48: R2 P17 LB Drew Sanders - Arkansas

55: R2 P24 C John Michael Schmitz - Minnesota

59: R2 P28 DL Mazi Smith - Michigan

75: R3 P12 WR Cedric Tillman - Tennessee

130: R4 P28 EDGE Mike Morris - Michigan

137: R5 P2 TE Zack Kuntz - Old Dominion

 

TRADES

Trade Partner: New Orleans Saints

Sent:      Round 1 Pick 27

Received:  Round 1 Pick 29, Round 2 Pick 9

 

Trade Partner: Detroit Lions

Sent:      Round 2 Pick 9, 2025 Round 5 Pick

Received:  Round 2 Pick 17, Round 2 Pick 24

 

Trade Partner: Atlanta Falcons

Sent:      Round 3 Pick 28, Round 6 Pick 28, 2024 Round 4 Pick

Received: Round 3 Pick 12

[newcam2012]

47 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

You're missing the point here.

 

Weak drafts don't make teams that want to trade up say, "Well, we really like this guy and his value here, so it's a weak year, so we'll only offer 10%."

 

Weak drafts make teams say "Jesus, that's all that's left?

 

Yes, teams always look to trade forward and back. But the weakness or strength of a draft will always affect the number of players you want to trade up or down for and the price you willing to pay. The grades teams use aren't year-adjusted. 

 

Not every team has every guy graded the same, obviously. But the reason it's a weak draft is because in a strong year you might have - for example - 23 players with first round grades and 34 players with 2nd round grades, while in a weak year you might have, as Bill does, 12 players with first round grades. Now, not every team would say 12. Almost surely there are some differences. Some teams might say 10. Others 15. But it's highly unlikely anyone has, say 23 this year. 

 

So at 27 this year you're not going to give the same thing you'd have given last year at 27 when you'd have been getting a guy graded maybe 6.9 or 7.0, where your highest graded guy this year at the same spot is graded by your scouts as a 6.7.

 

When your turn comes, there will be probably no players with grades about 7.0, for instance. Last year there might have been eight guys left that your team grades above 6.8. This year, zero. Your highest graded player is less talented, your scouts say, than the guy they could have traded for last year at #27. Are you going to give the same amount for a less talented player? Not if you're a smart capitalist.

 

If you're lucky, you'll have a really different grade on somebody than the others all do. But if you do, it might be because you're wrong.

Not sure how I missed the point. 

 

I don't disagree with what you've posted. However, it's really not pertinent to my premise.

 

My premise was that teams won't get trades ups on the cheap because it's a weak draft. Another poster suggested that. 

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

3 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Four most realistic scenarios and what I think is the most likely in order.

1.) We get lucky and a first round prospect is available to us at 27 at a premium position of need.

2.)Beane trades up a few spots to get the last guy he has graded as a first round prospect.

3.)  We reach for a 2nd round prospect at 27 because we can't find a trade partner to trade back into the 2nd.

4.)  We trade our first round pick for some other team's second along with multiple day two and three picks (a 3rd and a 5th for example)

 

You have nicely covered all of the possible options that exists.

 

The 5th one which you rarely see is "team doesn't get their pick in in time" and picks at 28 instead of 27.

[ExWNYer]

21 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't have a 1st round grade on any MLB or IOL in this class. I have Bryan Branch who is a hybrid S/CB and Bijan Robinson. Not sure either makes #27

 

No, sorry for their 2nd - #38 plus their comp 3rd #100 and say #141. Value wise according to the chart that is about 35 points light on what the Bills should get. 

 

Maybe McDaniels can throw in a 'Bildo' to even things out. He's probably collected one or two during the Brady games at the stadium.

[MrEpsYtown]

I think, the way this year's draft is shaping up, your only hope of a trade-down is if one of those QBs is there. Outside of the top 15 picks, everybody is really 2nd/3rd round pick value. No one is trading 2024 first to go and get some mid-level player. 

[BillsShredder83]

3 hours ago, TheBeaneBandit said:

I think #2 is most likely ala the Elam pick. This time from a run on receivers.

yeah i see 2 & 3 being most likely unfortunately

[nosejob]

Trade Ed to his hometown Houston for picks 65 and 161 and 201.

If Robinson somehow is there at 27 trade with Saints for 29 and 71.

 

Then...I put my trust in McBeane.

 

Picks  29       

           40       

           59       

           65

           71        

           130

           137

           161

           201

           205

Plenty of ammo for Beane to do his wizardry....plus an extra 10.7

Edited March 29, 2023 by nosejob

[Thurman#1]

1 hour ago, newcam2012 said:

Not sure how I missed the point. 

 

I don't disagree with what you've posted. However, it's really not pertinent to my premise.

 

My premise was that teams won't get trades ups on the cheap because it's a weak draft. Another poster suggested that. 

 

 

I believe you missed the point when you said, "The issue of it being a weak draft is really not in play. It's about perceived value, needs of the team, and a desire to get their player especially if trading up or back makes sense." 

 

It being a weak draft is absolutely in play, without the slightest question. Yeah, it's the three factors you cited, but in weak drafts there will precisely be fewer players with perceived value and lower desires to get guys with less talent.

 

Yes, your three factors  matter, but there are certainly other factors, certainly including the weak draft.

 

If that's your premise, it's unclear what you mean. If you mean "on the cheap" compared to the traditional draft pick chart, I think you're wrong. Players at any given pick are likely to be less better than the guys available to you at your original pick than in strong years. There aren't as likely to be as many teams as usual offering trade-ups at the value they'd give in ordinary years. So if teams aren't willing to accept trade-downs with a bit lower rewards than usual, I expect we won't see many trades.

 

If you mean "on the cheap" meaning compared to the differential of scouting scores between the players, I'd expect things to look much like normal, but with teams that want trade-downs saying, "Hey, look at the draft pick charts, you're not offering enough," and the teams that want trade-ups saying, "Hey, we want the guy, but not that much. He's not worth a #27 in most years."

 

59 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:

I think, the way this year's draft is shaping up, your only hope of a trade-down is if one of those QBs is there. Outside of the top 15 picks, everybody is really 2nd/3rd round pick value. No one is trading 2024 first to go and get some mid-level player. 

 

 

I can see someone trading up for Bijan, absolutely, depending how far he falls. 

 

IMO, we'll see trade-ups and trade-downs, but perhaps fewer and for less of return for the team trading down. 

 

Some teams are desperate and think they're smarter than everyone else. It's the idea behind Massey-Thaler. We'll see a few, I think. 

 

Edited March 29, 2023 by Thurman#1

[Aussie Joe]

10 minutes ago, nosejob said:

Trade Ed to his hometown Houston for picks 40 and 115 and 201.

If Robinson somehow is there at 27 trade with Saints for 29 and 71.

 

Then...I put my trust in McBeane.

 

Picks  29       

           40       

           59       

           71        

           91

           115

           130

           137

           203

           205

Plenty of ammo for Beane to do his wizardry....plus an extra 10.7

Wow… that is some haul for Ed… there I was thinking you might get a bottom third/ early fourth for a guy on his 5th year option that you gotta pay $10 m

[nosejob]

35 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:

Wow… that is some haul for Ed… there I was thinking you might get a bottom third/ early fourth for a guy on his 5th year option that you gotta pay $10 m

They have 2 3rds and 11 picks overall, plus they can stretch out a 2 or 3 yr. deal if they wanted to. I don't really have a problem keeping him because like Tremaine, he's probably gonna have his best year yet but get over paid by some team next year.

 

EDIT: I screwed up my original trade with Houston. Went back and changed it.

Edited March 29, 2023 by nosejob

[Aussie Joe]

Just now, nosejob said:

They have 2 3rds and 11 picks overall, plus they can stretch out a 2 or 3 yr. deal if they wanted to. I don't really have a problem keeping him because like Tremaine, he's probably gonna have his best year yet but get over paid by some team next year.

I think you have over valued his worth regardless oh how many picks they have..

[Simon Says]

12 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

It’s all so absurd but I have to admit Juice Scruggs is a cool name.

He is a bluegrass banjo player

[nosejob]

36 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:

Wow… that is some haul for Ed… there I was thinking you might get a bottom third/ early fourth for a guy on his 5th year option that you gotta pay $10 m

 

21 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:

I think you have over valued his worth regardless oh how many picks they have..

I screwed up. It should have been Ed for 65 161 201

Edited March 29, 2023 by nosejob