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

[PDaDdy]

...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.

 

 

BUT BUT BUT .....how can we discuss getting top 5 players that we won't trade up for and will never fall to us? Eh...em...RG3 or either of the top 2 WRs in this draft!!...LOL

[dogbyte]

It is a lot easier drafting 11th, 9th, 3rd and now 10th, to get good players than when you are drafting in the high twenties and 30. Many teams passed on Clay Mathews, not just NE. They do it, to acquire depth and it is a lot harder for players to make that team. Unlike the Bills, if a player can not make it, he is gone, not kept around like McCargo and Maybin. Remember, it is wins and loses that count, not passing yards. Darius should be good , he was the 3rd pick, Spiller the ninth. Let not add Sheppard and Williams yet, they have done nothing much. Soldier has been outstanding for them, he has played LT, LG, RG and TE and done a great job when they had many injuries to that OLINE.

Edited January 5, 2012 by dogbyte

[Mr. WEO]

Edelman is garbage. Mesko is a punter. Solder's not that good.

 

That takes the list down to six, two of whom are DB's starting for the worst pass defense in the NFL's history.

 

That leaves the two tight ends and the two linebackers.

 

Of the two linebackers, Brandon Spikes (with a whopping 14 starts in two years) has amassed 68 tackles, 1 INT and 0 sacks.

 

By my count, you listed nine starters. I assume you did this to demonstrate drafting "success," but if you actually put some thought into it, Mayo, Gronkowski and Hernadez appear to be the exception to the rule.

 

So they have three hits in three years.

 

How does those hits measure against Byrd, Levitre, Wood, Dareus, Sheppard, Williams and Spiller?

 

Yes, I listed 9 starters--you got that right away. That is the goal of most drafts---especially for teams with so many needs such as ours. By your "count" (and with little info) you've whittled it down to 3 "hits".

 

Edelman is "garbage"? Actually, he's a decent ST player and is able to fill in as DBRB/WR. Last year he had 21 punt returns at 15.3 per--We called Roscoe the "best in the league" when he had numbers like that.

 

Solder is a solid starter at RT since Volmer went out

. Played in all 16, started 13 of them. He would have been a day one starter on our O-line, easy. And he's not soft.

 

Mesko has the 3rd highest net avg in the NFL.

 

Worst pass defense in the NFL??--wrong again. That dubious distinction goes to SB favorites Green Bay, (you know, Charles Woodson, etc.). Patrick Chung has 21 starts in the past 2 seasons. He was injured for part of this year. Mcourty has 30 starts already. This is a defense that gives up 6 fewer points per game than the Bills. Points per game are what matters and the Bills are 30th in the league giving them up.

 

Throw in BJGE(undrafted)--1000 yard rusher last year with 13 TDs, 11 more TDs this year (more than FJ and CJ combined)..

 

Spikes has 14 starts. Correct. How many current Bills LBs have more than that with the Bills?

 

Levitre was a solid draftee. Byrd also. Wood is probably a really good center, but his lower extremities are made of popsicle sticks and rubber bands. He's only completed 1 full season. 33 starts in 3 years.

 

 

Shappard, Williams, Spiller are "hits"? You're joking right? All three are backups spelling injured starters at their current positions. They have 23 starts combined amongst the three of them.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Mr. WEO

[The AntiFin]

The second part is: teams now value picks more, than only a very few players.

Really? I guess the Falcons missed your memo.

[The Tomcat]

The Patriots* have the best record in the AFC. When's the last time they missed the playoffs? They seem to know what they are doing.

 

The rookie pay scale will make teams less hesitant to trade up since the financial risk is more limited than in the past.

 

 

 

The Patriots do NOT hit on their draft picks either. They have more then most so the busts don't stick out as much. I'm not sure if ANYONE knows what their doing when it comes to the draft.

 

There is no secret formula to follow.

[spartacus]

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.

 

first you need a good GM

[dave mcbride]

The Pats' basic philosophy, which has been reported on elsewhere, is that after the blue chippers go, it's essentially a crapshoot when it comes to projecting the rest. Hence two picks at, say, #52 and #73 are more valuable than pick #41 unless a guy they really want is there. They *expect* that at least half of the post-first 40 picks will fail, so their philosophy is to acquire additional picks and operate under the assumption that a second fourth rounder is better than a UDFA. You know what? Contra the opinion of the original poster, they're right. (Jimmy Johnson did the same to great success as well, and Belichick/Pioli have cited him.) Because of their draft hauls, the Pats typically have good enough depth to withstand injuries, and while their defense was indeed bad this year, they did face a ton of teams playing catchup against their unstoppable offense. The result? Since 2003, they are 114-30 in the regular season (including one 11-5 season in which Brady missed the entire season). They are 27-5 the past two seasons. Basically, I wouldn't sneer at their draft approach if I were a Bills fan, and I certainly would consider trade-downs in order to maximize the number of draftees given the Bills' sorry draft record since the trade-down option ended following Donohoe's departure.

[K-9]

The Pats' basic philosophy, which has been reported on elsewhere, is that after the blue chippers go, it's essentially a crapshoot when it comes to projecting the rest. Hence two picks at, say, #52 and #73 are more valuable than pick #41 unless a guy they really want is there. They *expect* that at least half of the post-first 40 picks will fail, so their philosophy is to acquire additional picks and operate under the assumption that a second fourth rounder is better than a UDFA. You know what? Contra the opinion of the original poster, they're right. (Jimmy Johnson did the same to great success as well, and Belichick/Pioli have cited him.) Because of their draft hauls, the Pats typically have good enough depth to withstand injuries, and while their defense was indeed bad this year, they did face a ton of teams playing catchup against their unstoppable offense. The result? Since 2003, they are 114-30 in the regular season (including one 11-5 season in which Brady missed the entire season). They are 27-5 the past two seasons. Basically, I wouldn't sneer at their draft approach if I were a Bills fan, and I certainly would consider trade-downs in order to maximize the number of draftees given the Bills' sorry draft record since the trade-down option ended following Donohoe's departure.

 

Nice insight.

 

Us Bills fans should really just keep from pointing fingers at other teams' draft success.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Astrobot]

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

And it will only cost us six 2nd rounders!

[dave mcbride]

And it will only cost us six 2nd rounders!

I'm James Hardy, and I'm worth millions!

[Pete]

Trade down and draft Sanu-then draft all defense with the next 6 picks

Edited January 6, 2012 by Pete

[OCinBuffalo]

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.

 

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

You are exactly right when you say "Sanchez WENT to AFCC..."

 

Yes, went, just like the trainers, the bus driver, and and the cheerleaders. They all went too. They didn't do the winning the games to get there, but they all went. Sanchez sucks, it's been 3 years, we can easily say he wasn't worth the draft picks, and no amount of marketing spin changes that. Do I need to haul out my Cowboys vs Jets "which ESPN over-hyped clown QB can lose the game first" thread from the first game of the season? I was right then and I am right now. Sanchez and Romo are products of being on teams with good O lines, period. Neither is a SB winning QB. They may be Trent Dilfer, "along for the ride" QBs, and win one, but they won't be in the top 3 reasons why they win.

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.

 

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".

You really want to cite the success of the Browns, Patriots...and the F'ing Redskins in the draft, as a reason why the Bills should.....this is retarded.

 

As I said above, the talent in rounds 3-7 is becoming almost indistinguishable. That is NOT the case for the the top 20. Don't be absurd. Yeah, drafting Dareus is the same as drafting Troup.

The Patriots* have the best record in the AFC. When's the last time they missed the playoffs? They seem to know what they are doing.

 

The rookie pay scale will make teams less hesitant to trade up since the financial risk is more limited than in the past.

Google the Pats drafting history for the last 5 years. The Pats have seen fit to either trade away their ability to pick solid guys on D, in favor of assclowns, and to boot, have invested in old FA LBs, thereby keeping any picks that might have made it...off the field. Know what they are doing?

 

Hey look, it takes time to build up a great defense, and, therefore, it also takes time to destroy it. That's what they Pats have been doing the last 5 years: destroying their Defense with horrible drafts/FA. Or are you going to tell me Adalius Thomas(ask WEO how that worked out), Junior Seau, and Albert Haynesworth is also "knowing what they are doing"?

Draft picks are WAY overvalued, IMO. This is borne out by your chart. If the Bills had traded their #1 pick each of the last 10 years for a solid starter, which they would easily have been able to do given the perceived value of these picks, they would be infinitely better off. You may say that this is because the Bills can't draft, but I suspect that if you look at most teams in the NFL you would find that they would've been better off on average. Maybe not a top 5 pick, but if you can convert anything there after into a starting caliber player, then it's a no brainer, IMO. That goes for any pick in any round. To me the point of the draft is to convert your picks into solid players. If you can trade for one with a track record then why mess around with a rookie?

Ask Dan Snyder how his 10-year, "trade draft picks for 'proven' free agents" plan worked out. :lol: Now, they are in year 2 of trying to copy the failed, Bill Belechick trade down plan. You are telling us to emulate the biggest idiot owner in the league. Why?

Once again, "to all the you gotta have a partner people" did you notice that the value chart changes from time to time? It's because the innovators are changing it all the time. You can stay with the pack or you can run in front of the pack. The Bills with only a few years excepted have always liked to run with the pack and they have finished more often than not well into the bottom half of the pack instead of leading it.

Yeah, Dan Synder was a real "innovator". I have an "innovative" idea, how about you buy me 4 season tickets next year, and pay for my flights back to the game? Hey, it's both new and different, right, so why isn't it innovative?

 

Just because something is new, doesn't mean it will work. Just because you can change something, doesn't mean you should. Just because somebody says they will bring you hope, doesn't mean they know WTF they are doing. Seems like a good theme for 2012, doesn't it? I wonder how many people who bought Chevy Volts wish they hadn't "lead the pack" today.

It is a lot easier drafting 11th, 9th, 3rd and now 10th, to get good players than when you are drafting in the high twenties and 30. Many teams passed on Clay Mathews, not just NE. They do it, to acquire depth and it is a lot harder for players to make that team. Unlike the Bills, if a player can not make it, he is gone, not kept around like McCargo and Maybin. Remember, it is wins and loses that count, not passing yards. Darius should be good , he was the 3rd pick, Spiller the ninth. Let not add Sheppard and Williams yet, they have done nothing much. Soldier has been outstanding for them, he has played LT, LG, RG and TE and done a great job when they had many injuries to that OLINE.

We don't talk in terms of 1 draft class here to define a trend. Somewhere in this thread somebody posted the Pats last 5 years. That's a trend. Clearly the trend of trading down has failed miserably. One decent O lineman doesn't make up for 5 years of losing elite D players and not replacing them, or replacing them with old FAs.

Yes, I listed 9 starters--you got that right away. That is the goal of most drafts---especially for teams with so many needs such as ours. By your "count" (and with little info) you've whittled it down to 3 "hits".

 

Edelman is "garbage"? Actually, he's a decent ST player and is able to fill in as DBRB/WR. Last year he had 21 punt returns at 15.3 per--We called Roscoe the "best in the league" when he had numbers like that.

 

Solder is a solid starter at RT since Volmer went out

. Played in all 16, started 13 of them. He would have been a day one starter on our O-line, easy. And he's not soft.

 

Mesko has the 3rd highest net avg in the NFL.

 

Worst pass defense in the NFL??--wrong again. That dubious distinction goes to SB favorites Green Bay, (you know, Charles Woodson, etc.). Patrick Chung has 21 starts in the past 2 seasons. He was injured for part of this year. Mcourty has 30 starts already. This is a defense that gives up 6 fewer points per game than the Bills. Points per game are what matters and the Bills are 30th in the league giving them up.

 

Throw in BJGE(undrafted)--1000 yard rusher last year with 13 TDs, 11 more TDs this year (more than FJ and CJ combined)..

 

Spikes has 14 starts. Correct. How many current Bills LBs have more than that with the Bills?

 

Levitre was a solid draftee. Byrd also. Wood is probably a really good center, but his lower extremities are made of popsicle sticks and rubber bands. He's only completed 1 full season. 33 starts in 3 years.

 

 

Shappard, Williams, Spiller are "hits"? You're joking right? All three are backups spelling injured starters at their current positions. They have 23 starts combined amongst the three of them.

Any objective observer can see what has happened to the Pats Defense...and why.

Really? I guess the Falcons missed your memo.

I said all but a very few players, not, all players. For every example you can point out, I can bring 5. How about we start with: Ricky Williams and the New Orleans Saints?

The Pats' basic philosophy, which has been reported on elsewhere, is that after the blue chippers go, it's essentially a crapshoot when it comes to projecting the rest. Hence two picks at, say, #52 and #73 are more valuable than pick #41 unless a guy they really want is there. They *expect* that at least half of the post-first 40 picks will fail, so their philosophy is to acquire additional picks and operate under the assumption that a second fourth rounder is better than a UDFA. You know what? Contra the opinion of the original poster, they're right. (Jimmy Johnson did the same to great success as well, and Belichick/Pioli have cited him.) Because of their draft hauls, the Pats typically have good enough depth to withstand injuries, and while their defense was indeed bad this year, they did face a ton of teams playing catchup against their unstoppable offense. The result? Since 2003, they are 114-30 in the regular season (including one 11-5 season in which Brady missed the entire season). They are 27-5 the past two seasons. Basically, I wouldn't sneer at their draft approach if I were a Bills fan, and I certainly would consider trade-downs in order to maximize the number of draftees given the Bills' sorry draft record since the trade-down option ended following Donohoe's departure.

You have missed the point completely.

 

This isn't only about "this year". This is about what has happened over the last 5 years. Hmm 5 years ago...when the Pats had the 6th best D in the league, including #5 against the run. To, now, when you know that they are going to get run on next week regardless of everything, with the only way they win being: if their offense can score enough to force the other team to throw too.

 

This is about how you go from that great SB winning defense, to a defense that if it was on any other team, would keep it out of the playoffs. 5 years of poor drafting, based on a poor strategy, that for some reason has been raised to the level of mythical greatness by the misguided.

 

The Pats have seen fit to destroy their elite defense, 1-2 players at a time, over the course of 5 years....by relying on a draft/FA strategy that clearly FAILS. This is the correct conclusion based on the facts. It's far past time we make sure the conclusions suit the facts, all of them, and not the other way around.

[1B4IDie]

 

 

You really want to cite the success of the Browns, Patriots...and the F'ing Redskins in the draft, as a reason why the Bills should.....this is retarded.

 

As I said above, the talent in rounds 3-7 is becoming almost indistinguishable. That is NOT the case for the the top 20. Don't be absurd. Yeah, drafting Dareus is the same as drafting Troup.

 

 

 

I think you bit off too much to chew in your responses because clearly didn't read and understand my response.

 

I'm not saying the Bills should do anything.

 

I'm saying the Redskins & Patroits moved down multiple times in 2011, and The Browns moved down as well.

 

Trading up and trading down does happen in the NFL. Where it seems that you're saying it doesn't happen.

 

I have no idea what you mean by comparing Troup to Dareus and what that has to do with me saying that the Top 20 is for physical freaks of nature that you can't find later in the draft like Marcell Dareus that can 360 dunk a ball at 300+ pounds.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Why So Serious?

[Mr. WEO]

You are exactly right when you say "Sanchez WENT to AFCC..."

 

Yes, went, just like the trainers, the bus driver, and and the cheerleaders. They all went too. They didn't do the winning the games to get there, but they all went. Sanchez sucks, it's been 3 years, we can easily say he wasn't worth the draft picks, and no amount of marketing spin changes that. Do I need to haul out my Cowboys vs Jets "which ESPN over-hyped clown QB can lose the game first" thread from the first game of the season? I was right then and I am right now. Sanchez and Romo are products of being on teams with good O lines, period. Neither is a SB winning QB. They may be Trent Dilfer, "along for the ride" QBs, and win one, but they won't be in the top 3 reasons why they win.

 

Romo passed for over 4000 yards and had 31 Tds v. 10 ints and was one of only 4 Qbs with a rating of over 100. And that was his o-line, huh? As for Snachez, he was part of the success of those two AFCC game bound teams. They were not playing in those games before that.

 

 

 

 

Google the Pats drafting history for the last 5 years. The Pats have seen fit to either trade away their ability to pick solid guys on D, in favor of assclowns, and to boot, have invested in old FA LBs, thereby keeping any picks that might have made it...off the field. Know what they are doing? .

 

We don't talk in terms of 1 draft class here to define a trend. Somewhere in this thread somebody posted the Pats last 5 years. That's a trend. Clearly the trend of trading down has failed miserably. One decent O lineman doesn't make up for 5 years of losing elite D players and not replacing them, or replacing them with old FAs.

 

Few teams replace their best players (in history) with the same. The Bills haven't done it after 15 years. But the Pats did draft repacements on D. Mayo, Chung and McCourty are pretty solid. Why would you call them ass clowns?

 

 

This is about how you go from that great SB winning defense, to a defense that if it was on any other team, would keep it out of the playoffs. 5 years of poor drafting, based on a poor strategy, that for some reason has been raised to the level of mythical greatness by the misguided.

 

Actually, that defense essentially IS on other teams--they are the PAckers and the Saints. They are favorites to meet in the NFCC game. Their defenses are no better.

 

 

The Pats have seen fit to destroy their elite defense, 1-2 players at a time, over the course of 5 years....by relying on a draft/FA strategy that clearly FAILS. This is the correct conclusion based on the facts. It's far past time we make sure the conclusions suit the facts, all of them, and not the other way around.

 

 

 

 

 

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

Try harder aquainting yourself with the facts.

 

 

Then I will haze many. 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 .

 

How's all that working out? By the looks of the responses, not too good.

 

Haze on...

[OCinBuffalo]

Romo passed for over 4000 yards and had 31 Tds v. 10 ints and was one of only 4 Qbs with a rating of over 100. And that was his o-line, huh? As for Snachez, he was part of the success of those two AFCC game bound teams. They were not playing in those games before that.

And ain't in the playoffs, directly due to both sucking horribly in a games they had to win. Yeah, it was Romo's O line that got him those stats, but since when do stats = big game wins? Before you talk about hurt hands, remind me when Romo has EVER showed up in a big game? Cause off the top of my head, I can't remember a single one. In fact, how many times has he directly contributed to the losing the big game? "Tony Romo, 2 yards over the line of scrimmage, throwing the pass!"....because WEO says his hurt hand made him do it. You can sum up that game = "Dallas, forced to punt". Such a loser. Yeah, those stats = his O line.

 

Sanchez is the exact same. Look I am sorry to burst your ESPN-indoctrinated bubble, but these guys aren't even close to "playoff winning QBs". Neither is worth half of the coverage they get. They literally the "pet rocks" of the NFL. Lot's of marketing and accessories, but in the end, all you get is a rock in a box. The rest of their teams weren't able to carry them this time, and when it came time for both of them to pick up their team, they both FAILed.

 

This is undeniable. Both sucked in the first "who sucks more?" big game of the season, and both sucked in the last big game of the season. Those are the facts you keep denying.

Few teams replace their best players (in history) with the same. The Bills haven't done it after 15 years. But the Pats did draft repacements on D. Mayo, Chung and McCourty are pretty solid. Why would you call them ass clowns?

Yeah, teams called the Pittsburgh Steelers, or the Baltimore Ravens, don't exist in WEO land do they? Are you saying that the Pats have no fault in what has happened to their defense and that their "stockpile" draft strategy hasn't bit them in the ass over the last 5 years? Just come out and say it, you'll feel much better: you haven't been right about this, not even close.

Actually, that defense essentially IS on other teams--they are the PAckers and the Saints. They are favorites to meet in the NFCC game. Their defenses are no better.

We'll see. Playoffs is a whole different bird as you know. Who knows? Maybe the Pats will suddenly be able to stop the run and cover more than 1 good WR?

Try harder aquainting yourself with the facts.

Try harder to not ignore all the ones that don't fit what you've been selling here the last 5 years. The reality of the Pats drafts for the last 5 years is what it is. But, when you try to refute that with a single draft pick, in one year? Well, you are supposed to know better.

How's all that working out? By the looks of the responses, not too good.

 

Haze on...

Based on the above? I'm doing just fine. Actually, based on my expectations, I'm ahead of the game.

 

Next.

Edited January 6, 2012 by OCinBuffalo

[JPS]

The Pats' basic philosophy, which has been reported on elsewhere, is that after the blue chippers go, it's essentially a crapshoot when it comes to projecting the rest. Hence two picks at, say, #52 and #73 are more valuable than pick #41 unless a guy they really want is there. They *expect* that at least half of the post-first 40 picks will fail, so their philosophy is to acquire additional picks and operate under the assumption that a second fourth rounder is better than a UDFA. You know what? Contra the opinion of the original poster, they're right. (Jimmy Johnson did the same to great success as well, and Belichick/Pioli have cited him.) Because of their draft hauls, the Pats typically have good enough depth to withstand injuries, and while their defense was indeed bad this year, they did face a ton of teams playing catchup against their unstoppable offense. The result? Since 2003, they are 114-30 in the regular season (including one 11-5 season in which Brady missed the entire season). They are 27-5 the past two seasons. Basically, I wouldn't sneer at their draft approach if I were a Bills fan, and I certainly would consider trade-downs in order to maximize the number of draftees given the Bills' sorry draft record since the trade-down option ended following Donohoe's departure.

Great post.

[OCinBuffalo]

I think you bit off too much to chew in your responses because clearly didn't read and understand my response.

 

I'm not saying the Bills should do anything.

 

I'm saying the Redskins & Patroits moved down multiple times in 2011, and The Browns moved down as well.

 

Trading up and trading down does happen in the NFL. Where it seems that you're saying it doesn't happen.

 

I have no idea what you mean by comparing Troup to Dareus and what that has to do with me saying that the Top 20 is for physical freaks of nature that you can't find later in the draft like Marcell Dareus that can 360 dunk a ball at 300+ pounds.

And all 3 have awful draft performances over the last 5 years, which is why I am saying, "who gives a F?". The fact that demonstrable idiots do things that are demonstrably idiotic doesn't mean we should. I don't care about other teams, I care about this one.

 

This stupid, "we could have traded down because some reporter from another team who is either getting played by their FO, or willingly going along with it so they can keep getting access to info, wrote a story that says the Bills didn't take their trade up/down offer" scam that the less intelligent posters here invariably fall for is far past getting tiresome. Meanwhile, because Ralph and the Bills have class, we never hear their side of it, and instead, we have to listen the BS here for 5 months.

 

 

You are the one who said "the talent has flattened out" and I got the impression you meant the entire draft, cause you didn't specify. I said, yeah, in rounds 3-7, not the top 20. What are you telling me?

[Mr. WEO]

And ain't in the playoffs, directly due to both sucking horribly in a games they had to win. Yeah, it was Romo's O line that got him those stats, but since when do stats = big game wins? Before you talk about hurt hands, remind me when Romo has EVER showed up in a big game? Cause off the top of my head, I can't remember a single one. In fact, how many times has he directly contributed to the losing the big game? "Tony Romo, 2 yards over the line of scrimmage, throwing the pass!"....because WEO says his hurt hand made him do it. You can sum up that game = "Dallas, forced to punt". Such a loser. Yeah, those stats = his O line.

 

Sanchez is the exact same. Look I am sorry to burst your ESPN-indoctrinated bubble, but these guys aren't even close to "playoff winning QBs". Neither is worth half of the coverage they get. They literally the "pet rocks" of the NFL. Lot's of marketing and accessories, but in the end, all you get is a rock in a box. The rest of their teams weren't able to carry them this time, and when it came time for both of them to pick up their team, they both FAILed.

 

This is undeniable. Both sucked in the first "who sucks more?" big game of the season, and both sucked in the last big game of the season. Those are the facts you keep denying.

 

Yeah, teams called the Pittsburgh Steelers, or the Baltimore Ravens, don't exist in WEO land do they? Are you saying that the Pats have no fault in what has happened to their defense and that their "stockpile" draft strategy hasn't bit them in the ass over the last 5 years? Just come out and say it, you'll feel much better: you haven't been right about this, not even close.

 

We'll see. Playoffs is a whole different bird as you know. Who knows? Maybe the Pats will suddenly be able to stop the run and cover more than 1 good WR?

 

Try harder to not ignore all the ones that don't fit what you've been selling here the last 5 years. The reality of the Pats drafts for the last 5 years is what it is. But, when you try to refute that with a single draft pick, in one year? Well, you are supposed to know better.

Based on the above? I'm doing just fine. Actually, based on my expectations, I'm ahead of the game.

 

Next.

 

You are misrepresenting my position on the pats--I don't think they have created a great or very good defense. But they have the same defense as the two best teams in the NFL--GB and NO. None of those teams seems to be suffering for giving up so many passing and rushing yards. The pats win the AFCE almost every year and went nearly undefeated 4 years ago. And you say that BB and co are "idiots" for getting those results?

 

 

Try harder to not ignore all the ones that don't fit what you've been selling here the last 5 years. The reality of the Pats drafts for the last 5 years is what it is. But, when you try to refute that with a single draft pick, in one year? Well, you are supposed to know better.

 

I'm not sure what this paragraph is referring to. 5 years? Single draft pick?

 

I'm sure you truly believe you are "ahead of the game"--that's what makes this thread so entertaining.

 

What's next!

[Thoner7]

Didnt Buddy admit they got over a dozen calls for both our 1st and 2nd round picks last year? Seems like they had many opportunities to trade out of the pick. The year before they had the card turned in too fast to hear any offers.

 

I have heard that trades are discussed with litterally every pick in the first and rounds. Obviously teams dont like the compensation enough to pull the trigger, but to act like its sooooooooooo hard to find a partner is a bit silly.

[Scraps]

In 2006 the Bills stood pat and chose Donte Whitner. Cleveland traded with Baltimore. Cleveland traded down and picking Kamerion Wimbley. Baltimore traded up and picked Haloti Ngata. Only one of those teams made a wise choice.