The Case for Trading Back [Discussion]

[Thurman#1]

11 hours ago, mrags said:

I’m also for trading back if the guys you’re looking for are already gone. That’s Thomas, Mitchell, Franklin, JPJ. Honestly those are the only guys I would take at 28. Regardless whether we have a need or really don’t this year. Those guy would be future #1s at their positions on this team moving forward. I haven’t looked at many positions outside of WR, S, DT and a little at C for us in this draft. I think these are the 4 needs we have. I don’t think any DT is worth rd 1 except maybe Sweat just because I think he’ll be the best DL  in the draft, but I also don’t think you need to take him at 28. So if the 3 WRs and the one C that are actually worth a first rd grade are fine, I’d absolutely trade back for an extra 3rd or 4th and hopefully nab Sweat in the early to mid 2nd. Using the other 2nd with maybe a trade up for WR. Which Franklin SHOULD be available round there. But I get that WR is such a need that if he’s your guy and you take him at 28 I’m perfectly fine with it. 

 

 

I'm with you most of the way. 

 

But I'd add Latu and Verse as guys to take at 28 or maybe even make a small tradeup. This team doesn't have much in the way of a pass rush right now.

 

If they're gone, as they likely will be, I'm also OK with trading back, hopefully getting maybe a 3rd and still having a shot at one of the Xaviers or even Troy Franklin if his fall in the mocks is real (which I'm not really convinced of) in the 40s.

 

 

8 hours ago, Pine Barrens Mafia said:

Didn't say that, but you'd have to be a fool to believe this team's a Superbowl contender 

 

 

Nah, not at all.

 

You have to be a fool to rule us out.

 

We've taken a step back but it could very easily be a small one we can make up as young guys develop during the year. Or not. Anytime we have a healthy Josh Allen we're at least a potential contender.

 

 

Edited March 24 by Thurman#1

[Bookie Man]

would be nice to score a 3rd round pick.

[Thurman#1]

 

10 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Beane could do anything but he's shown he's prone to trading up, not down. 

 

The Bills aren't going to keep 11 rookies, for sure, so unloading some picks is essential.  Trading back compounds the problem. 

 

I expect another trade up, like last season, to get a solid starter they really like.  Not ahuge move - they don't have the capital for that - but two three or four spots.  

 

 

It absolutely would not "compound the problem." Hell, having lots of late picks is not a problem. It's an opportunity.

 

And not an opportunity that will have been a problem even if we draft twelve and lose two to five at cut-down. 

 

Even if we flat-out assume Beane does not need eleven, much less twelve draft picks, it's still an opportunity. You can use those picks to trade up strategically in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th rounds as the board becomes clear and you know who's available as your picks approach. 

 

That would likely be the route they would go if they do trade back.

 

But even if they did keep all eleven or twelve picks and have to let three or four or even five go around cut-down, it's still an opportunity. Maybe the last guy you pick in the 7th, or your 3rd 6th round pick, turns out to be a Brady, a Jason Kelce, a Latavius Murray, an Adalius Thomas, an Antonio Brown with a better head, or even without a better head and you make a great trade for him in his fourth year, a Shannon Sharpe, a Mailata, an Edelman or a Donald Driver, a Marques Colston, an Adam Timmerman or even a Gary Anderson to kick for you. All those were 6ths or 7ths. 

 

And you don't know which will be a huge surprise till you get them into camp. Many late picks means a better chance of finding a guy like that, even if several others get picked up by other teams.

 

 

 

Edited March 24 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

5 hours ago, BarleyNY said:

Agree. Picking up an extra top 100 pick for sliding down from 28 into the second round would be very welcome, but you have to see who you’re giving up at 28 first. 

 

 

Indeed. I saw a talking head nicely say the other day, "It depends who you're trading away from."

 

If Latu is still there at #28, IMO you don't trade away from him.

 

9 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I think Beane's ideas of who he wants in the first round regularly surprise us.  Both position and identity are surprises. 

 

 

Yup. Consistently.

 

Edited March 24 by Thurman#1

[78thealltimegreat]

I’d probably do it for an early 2 and a 4 as if they keep all their picks and don’t trade they will pretty much run day 3 of the draft 

[BuffaloBillsGospel2014]

13 hours ago, Gugny said:

WR1 is absolutely a dire need. 
 

WR2 has been a dire need for years and ignored. 
 

Now Diggs is approaching WR2 status and the WR room is still lacking a true WR1. 
 

I like Beane … but his refusal to address the WR position has been painfully consistent. 
 

 

 

Diggs was 6th in the league in receptions, 13th in the league in yards and tied for 4th in the league in TD, I don't think it's time to panick just yet. He needs some help for sure but with Kincaid, Samuel, Cook, Knox, Shakir and hopefully a 1st round rookie it appears Diggs will finally get some much needed help.

[Thurman#1]

4 hours ago, BuffaloBillsGospel2014 said:

 

Diggs was 6th in the league in receptions, 13th in the league in yards and tied for 4th in the league in TD, I don't think it's time to panick just yet. He needs some help for sure but with Kincaid, Samuel, Cook, Knox, Shakir and hopefully a 1st round rookie it appears Diggs will finally get some much needed help.

 

 

While I agree with your thrust, Diggs tied for 8th in TDs, not 4th. And he was 7th in the league in receptions, not 6th.

 

When 7 guys got more TDs than you did, you are either 8th or tied for 8th. Not 4th.

 

I understand what you're doing there. But it's not just misleading but invalid.

 

By that logic, you could say that Quinton Morris was tied for 11th in receiving touchdowns in the league, and that linebacker Terrel Bernard was tied for 12th with his total of zero behind only 11 other totals. Not 11 other players. 11 other totals.

 

That is not how rankings work. If 200 guys got more TDs than  you, than you are 201st. 

 

If you're desperate, you could say that Quinton Morris had the 11th highest total number of touchdowns. But even that is wildly misleading. The way to say it is that he was tied for 159th in TDs with his total of one TD. More specifically you could say that he's in a 90-way tie for 159th in receiving TDs.

 

 

Edited March 24 by Thurman#1

[CaptnCoke11]

I hate this trade back discussion without knowing what players are there they are trading away from etc.  just makes no sense without knowing that. 

[Negan]

They're not trading back, more likely to trade up in the first round.

 

Beane values the 5th year option more than most and has said this countless times.

 

Be ready Bills fans.

[Shaw66]

10 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

It absolutely would not "compound the problem." Hell, having lots of late picks is not a problem. It's an opportunity.

 

And not an opportunity that will have been a problem even if we draft twelve and lose two to five at cut-down. 

 

Even if we flat-out assume Beane does not need eleven, much less twelve draft picks, it's still an opportunity. You can use those picks to trade up strategically in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th rounds as the board becomes clear and you know who's available as your picks approach. 

 

That would likely be the route they would go if they do trade back.

 

But even if they did keep all eleven or twelve picks and have to let three or four or even five go around cut-down, it's still an opportunity. Maybe the last guy you pick in the 7th, or your 3rd 6th round pick, turns out to be a Brady, a Jason Kelce, a Latavius Murray, an Adalius Thomas, an Antonio Brown with a better head, or even without a better head and you make a great trade for him in his fourth year, a Shannon Sharpe, a Mailata, an Edelman or a Donald Driver, a Marques Colston, an Adam Timmerman or even a Gary Anderson to kick for you. All those were 6ths or 7ths. 

 

And you don't know which will be a huge surprise till you get them into camp. Many late picks means a better chance of finding a guy like that, even if several others get picked up by other teams.

 

 

 

If I knew a lot of statistics I could prove this is incorrect.  All I know is t odds of getting a star with a late first round puck are better than with three later round picks combined.   You named 10 great players taken in the 6th and 7th.  That's 10 out of more than 1200 (64 picks, 20 years) or 1 out of 120.  Chances of getting a great player are much better late in the first round.  By you logic I'd trade my first and second every year.  That's why the trade value chart is skewed heavily to the early picks.  

 

And it definitely compounds the problem.  If you have a solid roster, it's better to come to camp with a few good rookies than a lot of promising guys, because you won't keep all those promising guys.  Bad roster, sure, give me a boatload of fourth rounders to keep, because I can use them somewhere.  Good roster, no. 

Edited March 24 by Shaw66

[Sweats]

I could honestly see i us trading back, grabbing a D guy somewhere in Rd 2 and then picking up a WR that no one has ever heard of........true story.

[BuffaloBillsGospel2014]

4 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

While I agree with your thrust, Diggs tied for 8th in TDs, not 4th. And he was 7th in the league in receptions, not 6th.

 

When 7 guys got more TDs than you did, you are either 8th or tied for 8th. Not 4th.

 

I understand what you're doing there. But it's not just misleading but invalid.

 

By that logic, you could say that Quinton Morris was tied for 11th in receiving touchdowns in the league, and that linebacker Terrel Bernard was tied for 12th with his total of zero behind only 11 other totals. Not 11 other players. 11 other totals.

 

That is not how rankings work. If 200 guys got more TDs than  you, than you are 201st. 

 

If you're desperate, you could say that Quinton Morris had the 11th highest total number of touchdowns. But even that is wildly misleading. The way to say it is that he was tied for 159th in TDs with his total of one TD. More specifically you could say that he's in a 90-way tie for 159th in receiving TDs.

 

 

 

I don't believe it's invalid but to each their own. Regardless of the rankings he was top 10 in all accept yards. 

Edited March 24 by BuffaloBillsGospel2014

[machine gun kelly]

23 hours ago, Gugny said:

WR1 is absolutely a dire need. 
 

WR2 has been a dire need for years and ignored. 
 

Now Diggs is approaching WR2 status and the WR room is still lacking a true WR1. 
 

I like Beane … but his refusal to address the WR position has been painfully consistent. 
 

 

Gugs, as always right on point.  To trade down would be a mistake.  Rather trading up and converting 11 picks to 7-8 is more my interests.  Absolutely, we need two WR’s.  One in a traded up 1st round, and another in the mid rounds.  Everyone knows we need D Line, amd Safeties.  Lastly a later O Line for depth on the interior.

[Rigotz]

23 hours ago, Gugny said:

WR1 is absolutely a dire need. 
 

WR2 has been a dire need for years and ignored. 
 

Now Diggs is approaching WR2 status and the WR room is still lacking a true WR1. 
 

I like Beane … but his refusal to address the WR position has been painfully consistent. 
 

 

His refusal to address the WR position?

Did Diggs not lead the league in receiving yards like every year since Beane traded a first and more for him? He only fell off at the end of last year.

 

Did Gabe not just get WR1/WR2 money in Free Agency?

 

Did Beane not trade up last year to take a pass catcher in the first round? Didn’t he take a pass catching RB in round 2 of last year?

 

What world are you guys living in? The draft hasn’t even happened yet and you are criticizing the GM for not replacing NEW holes on the team… somehow saying this has always been a problem.

[Gugny]

22 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

His refusal to address the WR position?

Did Diggs not lead the league in receiving yards like every year since Beane traded a first and more for him? He only fell off at the end of last year.

 

Did Gabe not just get WR1/WR2 money in Free Agency?

 

Did Beane not trade up last year to take a pass catcher in the first round? Didn’t he take a pass catching RB in round 2 of last year?

 

What world are you guys living in? The draft hasn’t even happened yet and you are criticizing the GM for not replacing NEW holes on the team… somehow saying this has always been a problem.

Clearly, getting Diggs was fantastic. 
 

Bit since then?  Nothing. 
 

Riding the wave with Gabe Davis for too long and drafting Shakir (who I LOVE - but he’s a slot guy) was not a great strategy. 

[Pete]

On 3/23/2024 at 11:18 AM, Pine Barrens Mafia said:

No needs on the roster? That's a rosy outlook. TE is set. WR is severely undermanned. RB is ok, QB is above average, OL IS THIN. DL isn't great, LB is ok, CB is good but lacks depth, safety is a tire fire.

TE is set.  TE is loaded

RB is ok.  RB is solid.  Cook average 4.7 YPC, Ty is great.  Latavious is easily upgraded.

WR is severely undermanned-hyoerbole.  Diggs-Samuel-Shakir-Hollins-   we need 1 more- is that what you consider severely undermanned?  Don't you think we can do better than Sherfield, Hardy, and Gabe?

OL is thin-Very solid.  returning 4 starters, and chose  Conor over Mitch.  Anderson, Van Demark, and Doyle are good backups.   We need 2 more, and we have 11 picks

LB is ok-LMAO Bernard and Milano are ok?  Your most delusional observatIon yet.  Dorian Williams is our next great LB

CB is good-that we can agree on,  Rasul, Benford, Taron, and Elam is very nice.

S is a tire fire-more hyperbole Mr Sunshine.  Rapp was our best S last season.  Edwards has great range, has won multiple SB, and is Poyer like.  Cam Lewis is more valuable than most know.

 

every team in the NFL is a work in progress right now.  No rosters are complete yet.  We have 11 draft picks, and lots of FA time left.  Floyd and Poona signed in May.  Buffalo is a desired team to play for right now, life is fantastic

Edited March 24 by Pete

[noacls]

3 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

If I knew a lot of statistics I could prove this is incorrect.  All I know is t odds of getting a star with a late first round puck are better than with three later round picks combined.   You named 10 great players taken in the 6th and 7th.  That's 10 out of more than 1200 (64 picks, 20 years) or 1 out of 120.  Chances of getting a great player are much better late in the first round.  By you logic I'd trade my first and second every year.  That's why the trade value chart is skewed heavily to the early picks.  

 

And it definitely compounds the problem.  If you have a solid roster, it's better to come to camp with a few good rookies than a lot of promising guys, because you won't keep all those promising guys.  Bad roster, sure, give me a boatload of fourth rounders to keep, because I can use them somewhere.  Good roster, no. 

Christian Benford, Matt Milano, Jordan Poyer, Dane Jackson, Micah Hyde. That is just on the Bills off the top of my head las year. All those players were drafted in the 5th or later. More kicks at the can, more opportunity to find a guy

[Shaw66]

55 minutes ago, noacls said:

Christian Benford, Matt Milano, Jordan Poyer, Dane Jackson, Micah Hyde. That is just on the Bills off the top of my head las year. All those players were drafted in the 5th or later. More kicks at the can, more opportunity to find a guy

First, the Bills didn't draft Poyer and Hyde.  

 

More to the point, I'm not saying you can't find useful players, even good ones, in the later rounds.   I'm saying if you have a good roster, and the Bills do, there's a limit to how many of those rookies you can keep.    The Bills are very unlikely to keep several late round picks from this draft.  When they go to your practice squad, they get poached.

 

A first round pick is a high percentage opportunity to get long-term talent on the team.

Edited March 24 by Shaw66

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

If Brian Thomas makes it to the high teens or low twenties I'd be inclined to move up for him as he's exactly what this offense needs. Otherwise, The Mitchells, Leggetts and Worthys you can trade backfrom 28 and pick up  a third top 100 pick.

[Billl]

23 hours ago, Nephilim17 said:

If, for example, they love Legette, and they're confident they can get him (and KC won't) by trading back a handful of spots, OK.

But I wouldn't get cute if they really like a guy and he's available at 28. If they don't really like a guy, sure.

Given that Kansas City has jumped them the past two years and come away with Trent McDuffie and Rashee Rice, I’m not sure that trading back behind the Chiefs this year is a great strategy.