Once again, "To all the trade up/down" people

[OCinBuffalo]

...because it appeared to produce the desired effect. See here: Last year's "trade up/down" thread

 

However, recent posts have shown that I need to bring this back up again. I can only imagine what will happen when the various "stories" come out.

 

Again, for reasons passing understanding, we are having to endure misguided posts telling us that we could have traded down(up). Perhaps this thread will put an end to...for another year... "But...but...but why didn't we trade down(up)?" The first part of that answer is: it takes 2 sides to make a trade. The second part is: teams now value picks more, than only a very few players. The third part is: teams now value top 10 draft picks 5x more than they used to.

This is directly due to the fact that over the last 20 years, the amount of NFL starter-ready talent has shrunk, while the # of teams has increased.(More kids spending less time in college, I remain unsure as to whether there is less talent overall) This is also how you explain the rise in the # of UDFAs coming in and out-competing #3-7 draft picks. Increasingly, top 10-20 picks are as close to the only sure thing there is. It remains to be seen how the new rookie contract agreement will effect this. But, for now, few teams want to trade these picks without a ridiculous price tag: see draft chart. And few teams want to pay it, just for the privilege of over-paying for one guy, when they could have had 3.

New Draft Chart Please reply if you don't understand what this is/how it works. I will be more than happy to explain it to you. Perhaps understanding this chart properly will help posters who struggle with these concepts. IF you have a "creative" idea and doesn't even come close to following this chart, do yourself a favor(unless you want to get hazed, or are ieatcrayonz) and don't bother. And, no, just because you can do it in Madden, doesn't mean it can happen IRL.

[Zulu Cthulhu]

Great stuff. But you won't convince many. I was shouted down pre-draft last year by many who think the draft value chart is just some media conspiracy, or only 2 teams out of 32 use it, or nfl teams don't use math, etc...

 

Also thanks for the link as well.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Zulu Cthulhu

[John from Riverside]

I just think trading up would be ridiculous......we need starters and we have NO depth.....this season as shown that.

 

I think we should just make a play for a few key offensive free agents and go entire defensive draft......we NEED it.

[OCinBuffalo]

I just think trading up would be ridiculous......we need starters and we have NO depth.....this season as shown that.

 

I think we should just make a play for a few key offensive free agents and go entire defensive draft......we NEED it.

Trading up is ridiculous. Period. Even the SB winner will have huge holes to fill due to lost FAs. Unless they really only need one more player, it's stupid. And, we've all seen what injuries do to teams.

 

Trading down is not feasible. Period. Nobody wants to pay what is required to trade up into the top 15...only to get Mark Sanchez as a their QB. Ask the Jets how that "genius" move worked out. Honestly, ask yourself, what is Sanchez really worth today? More than a 3rd? Not really. Not when you are just as likely to get a better player with that 3rd. Blaming WRs for Sanchez? Who wouldn't like to have a talent like Santonio Holmes on this team, tomorrow? Are ya silly? Can you imagine Fitz with an elite rout-runner like that?

 

And, ask Bill Belechik how his "genius" trade down strategy has worked the last 5 years. What? They have around 3 guys left on the team and the worst defense in the league? That's what happens when you "stockpile" crappy picks, and pass on guys like Clay Matthews. Your "stockpile" really is a "shitpile", and if you can't convince people to take 2-3 off your pile for one of their good picks...well you end up right where the Pats are on D, right now.

 

These are myths that simply need to be dispelled permanently, and I am doing my level best.

Edited January 5, 2012 by OCinBuffalo

[OCinBuffalo]

Great stuff. But you won't convince many. I was shouted down pre-draft last year by many who think the draft value chart is just some media conspiracy, or only 2 teams out of 32 use it, or nfl teams don't use math, etc...

 

Also thanks for the link as well.

Then I will haze many. It's nothing new to me. You should have seen PPP during the Surge debate. I am no stranger to being right, because I base my positions on reason, data and fact, and taking on a ton of posters who are flat out wrong, because they base theirs on emotion, wishful thinking and delusion .

 

 

[BuffaloBillsSD]

So what you are saying is that the 10, 40 and a FA WR will not get the 2nd overall pick?

[BuffaloWings]

I just think trading up would be ridiculous......we need starters and we have NO depth.....this season as shown that.

 

I think we should just make a play for a few key offensive free agents and go entire defensive draft......we NEED it.

This....1,000,000%.

[flmike]

So what you are saying is that the 10, 40 and a FA WR will not get the 2nd overall pick?

 

No, it won't. Especially with the head job WR whose hands turn to stone at the worst times that you are thinking of.

[I hate the Bills !]

I'd trade up to get Andrew Luck in a minute!

[JPS]

My only posts on this subject have the draft chart in mind. Belichick's later 1st round picks have the same value as 10. Why would he do it? The last time he did it produced Jerrod Mayo. Of course it probabaly will not happen. The question is: should the Bills be interested.

 

Trading up will never happen. Rothlisburger was right there and the Bills did nothing. Pat Willis....same thing. The Bills value their young, cheap talent too much to trade two future holes in the roster for 1 stud.

[1billsfan]

...because it appeared to produce the desired effect. See here: Last year's "trade up/down" thread

 

However, recent posts have shown that I need to bring this back up again. I can only imagine what will happen when the various "stories" come out.

 

Again, for reasons passing understanding, we are having to endure misguided posts telling us that we could have traded down(up). Perhaps this thread will put an end to...for another year... "But...but...but why didn't we trade down(up)?" The first part of that answer is: it takes 2 sides to make a trade. The second part is: teams now value picks more, than only a very few players. The third part is: teams now value top 10 draft picks 5x more than they used to.

This is directly due to the fact that over the last 20 years, the amount of NFL starter-ready talent has shrunk, while the # of teams has increased.(More kids spending less time in college, I remain unsure as to whether there is less talent overall) This is also how you explain the rise in the # of UDFAs coming in and out-competing #3-7 draft picks. Increasingly, top 10-20 picks are as close to the only sure thing there is. It remains to be seen how the new rookie contract agreement will effect this. But, for now, few teams want to trade these picks without a ridiculous price tag: see draft chart. And few teams want to pay it, just for the privilege of over-paying for one guy, when they could have had 3.

New Draft Chart Please reply if you don't understand what this is/how it works. I will be more than happy to explain it to you. Perhaps understanding this chart properly will help posters who struggle with these concepts. IF you have a "creative" idea and doesn't even come close to following this chart, do yourself a favor(unless you want to get hazed, or are ieatcrayonz) and don't bother. And, no, just because you can do it in Madden, doesn't mean it can happen IRL.

 

 

I don't see what's so "ridiculous" about giving the Rams three first rounders and possibly a second rounder for RG III or Luck. The Bills "Superbowl Era" officially began on the biggest trade ever made in the NFL where they gave up two firsts a second and a starting RB for a LB.

 

This is the place where fans can dream about that kind of a blockbuster trade again. And this is a realistic trade even put to that trade chart. If teams do value top 10-20 first round picks then the Rams would most certainly, and in all probability, be willing to deal that pick.

 

 

http://www.profootballhof.com/history/decades/1980s/eric_dickerson.aspx

[dpberr]

I think things worked out ok by just drafting where we were last year.

 

I don't like the idea of giving away the farm to move up. It's one player at the consequence of losing the opportunity to draft 2-3 good, possibly great players. The teams that make the playoffs have a "B" team that is just a shade less in talent than the A team. You need solid rotations and that requires depth.

[papazoid]

think of a first round draft pick as an unproven $5 mil/yr cap slot.

 

if you traded a future #1 to move up, you still have the $5 mil/yr cap slot to use on a proven free agent. so, to me, you haven't lost a thing. in fact, there is less risk with the free agent.

 

 

therefore, if Indy was stupid enough to swap this years first round picks and accept two additional future first round picks as compensation.....i would make that trade in a heartbeat to get Andrew Luck.

 

besides, if "value" is a ratio of salary paid/talent, i would argue that 2nd round picks are the best value.

 

but like any trade involving future draft picks, you have to be able to evaluate talent and "hit" on your pick(s). as a generalization, i would rather trade up to get a player i'm convinced will be good, versus dropping down, collecting additional picks, picking the best available player and hoping they pan out.

[Mr. WEO]

I just think trading up would be ridiculous......we need starters and we have NO depth.....this season as shown that.

 

I think we should just make a play for a few key offensive free agents and go entire defensive draft......we NEED it.

 

Wait, then why are there a bunch of threads discussing how great the 2011 draft was and how many future starters it brought us. Now we have "NO" depth?

 

 

Trading down is not feasible. Period. Nobody wants to pay what is required to trade up into the top 15...only to get Mark Sanchez as a their QB. Ask the Jets how that "genius" move worked out. Honestly, ask yourself, what is Sanchez really worth today? More than a 3rd? Not really. Not when you are just as likely to get a better player with that 3rd. Blaming WRs for Sanchez? Who wouldn't like to have a talent like Santonio Holmes on this team, tomorrow? Are ya silly? Can you imagine Fitz with an elite rout-runner like that?

 

 

Well, it is now a lot cheaper to pick in the top five (let alone the top 15) than in the past. And although Sanchez is struggling now (as is the rest of that team), his team wnet to consecutive AFCC games immediately after his pick and he has already more playoff wins than any Jets QB in history. Current struggles notwithstanding, the "genius move" had worked out well at least initially. As for Cleveland, their trade with the Jets has not worked out nearly as well. They picked a starting center and 2 mediocre WRs. No question the Jets got the better that deal.

 

Having said that, I don't think the FO has the brain power (or the desire, luckily) to pull off an advantageous deal for the Bills.

 

As for having the desired effect, I linked to your link and saw that your last such thread generated page after page of posters disagreeing with you. And now thy are back. Go figure.

 

Then I will haze many. It's nothing new to me. You should have seen PPP during the Surge debate. I am no stranger to being right, because I base my positions on reason, data and fact, and taking on a ton of posters who are flat out wrong, because they base theirs on emotion, wishful thinking and delusion .

 

See above.

 

I don't see what's so "ridiculous" about giving the Rams three first rounders and possibly a second rounder for RG III or Luck. The Bills "Superbowl Era" officially began on the biggest trade ever made in the NFL where they gave up two firsts a second and a starting RB for a LB.

 

This is the place where fans can dream about that kind of a blockbuster trade again. And this is a realistic trade even put to that trade chart. If teams do value top 10-20 first round picks then the Rams would most certainly, and in all probability, be willing to deal that pick.

 

 

http://www.profootballhof.com/history/decades/1980s/eric_dickerson.aspx

 

Actually, the biggest trade in NFL history is what ended the Bills SB era.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Mr. WEO

[1billsfan]

Actually, the biggest trade in NFL history is what ended the Bills SB era.

 

You're right!

[auburnbillsbacker]

My only posts on this subject have the draft chart in mind. Belichick's later 1st round picks have the same value as 10. Why would he do it? The last time he did it produced Jerrod Mayo. Of course it probabaly will not happen. The question is: should the Bills be interested.

 

Trading up will never happen. Rothlisburger was right there and the Bills did nothing. Pat Willis....same thing. The Bills value their young, cheap talent too much to trade two future holes in the roster for 1 stud.

 

The bills loved Big Ben and did try to trade up to get him. They contacted the Texans who drafted 10th but they were unwilling to move down because they really liked the cb Robinson. They called the Jaguars to attempt to move up to the # 9, but they asked for too much (we all know now it would have been worth it). This was due to the fact that the browns gave up an early #2 to move up 1 spot to get Winslow. They Jaguars used the pick to select Reggie Williams who would have been available later had they traded down.

 

As for trading up and down, the bills should be making more of an effort. The Eagles and Patriots trade every year, and have accumulated a lot of talent because of it. The Jets often trade up. That is how they got Revis for example. Good GMs make moves to help their teams.

[SageAgainstTheMachine]

I just think trading up would be ridiculous......we need starters and we have NO depth.....this season as shown that.

 

I think we should just make a play for a few key offensive free agents and go entire defensive draft......we NEED it.

 

Agreed. Fitz was disappointing down the stretch w/o most of his receivers, but the fact is that the offense went from 17 ppg in 2010 to 23 ppg in 2011.

 

The defense went from 26 ppg allowed in 2010 to 27 ppg allowed in 2011.

[1billsfan]

Agreed. Fitz was disappointing down the stretch w/o most of his receivers, but the fact is that the offense went from 17 ppg in 2010 to 23 ppg in 2011.

 

The defense went from 26 ppg allowed in 2010 to 27 ppg allowed in 2011.

 

 

The Carolina Panthers went from 12 ppg in 2010 to 25 ppg in 2011.

 

That's going from last in the league to 5th.

Edited January 5, 2012 by 1billsfan

[1B4IDie]

Wait, teams don't trade up in the NFL draft or the Bills don't trade up?

You may want to ask the Cleveland Browns, Washington Redskins, and New England Patriots if they think teams Do Not trade up in the NFL draft.

If anything trading up is more likely because of the rookie payscale being reset. No one wanted a top 3 pick including the teams that had them because of the price tag, prior to 2011. Now the $$$ are easy to handle.

 

That being said the ridiculous posts on this board with hair brained trade up/trade down scenarios are sad.

99.9% of these posts are not based anywhere in reality. 99.9% of them can be completely ignored.

100% of those posts will not be effected by this thread.

 

Increasingly, top 10-20 picks are as close to the only sure thing there is.

 

Don't get me started on how wrong you are about the "top 10-20 picks are as close to the only sure thing there is" That couldn't be further from the truth it is so wrong and so misguided it's incomprehensible that someone wouldn't feel embarrassed writing it down.

 

If anything the talent level is flat. There isn't a big difference between the "#15" prospect and the "#115" prospect. Look at last year with Mason Foster, Sam Acho, and Chris Neil all of which the Bills could have picked well after the top 20 all contributed in their rookie year and that's just off the top of my head, and there weren't many doubters that Mason Foster, for example, was a "sure thing."

 

Most everyone thought Mason Foster could play in the NFL. He went in teh 3rd round because it is just easier to find guys like Mason Foster because there is SO MUCH TALENT in the draft.

 

The Top 20 is reserved for physical freaks of nature that you can't find later in the draft.

 

Sam Acho is a sure thing to contribute in the NFL imo, but you can't find a 6'1" CB that can take it to the house anytime he is on the field like Patrick Peterson. The Top 20 isn't about being a "sure thing" its about game changing talent that you can't find anywhere else.

 

That's why you don't take a "sure thing" Inside Linebacker in the Top20 or a "sure thing" Right Guard in the Top20 (unless you're stupid) you can find "sure thing" ILB or "sure thing" Guards in rounds 3-7.

 

Blaine Gabbert, Jake Locker, and Christian Ponder are anything but "sure thihngs" LOTs like Tyron Smith are anything but "sure things." you just can't find many human beings like Tyron Smith in the world. Someone that huge with that quickness just doesn't exist that often. He is not a "sure thing" He is a physical freak of nature that you have to take a shot on, because if they do pan out; Then you have yourself a game changer. Someone that can take Ls and help them turn to Ws. A guy that might be able to shutdown all World Pass rushers on the Giants, Eagles, and Redskins is worth the risk for the Cowboys, but far from a "sure thing".

Edited January 5, 2012 by Why So Serious?

[The Big Cat]

The Carolina Panthers went from 12 ppg in 2010 to 25 ppg in 2011.

 

That's going from last in the league to 5th.

 

Andrew Luck will lead no such NFL transformation, and he's by far the best QB in this year's draft.