thebandit27 Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 Please allow me to posit a theory here: What if, and it's an enormous IF, the BILLS *were* actually trying to trade up before the Draft, but not for a player but rather for the purpose of acquiring more picks the day OF the Draft because it will inherently hold more value than possibly what they give up?? Follow me for a second, let's assume the BILLS were to trade with say, Jax from 9th to 3rd for their 1st (obviously), their 2nd (41) and SJ? The reason **may not be to Draft Watkins or Mack or whomever, but instead on the DAY of the Draft the BILLS would then be in position to acquire more picks in a trade DOWN scenario than they are now because assuming Clowney goes 1st and say, for sh*ts and giggles, Robinson goes 2nd to St. Louis, with the Browns picking 4th and Oakland picking 5th, the BILLS would be in a really good position to trade with someone who really wants to move UP while the BILLS want to trade DOWN and therefore a team like the 49ers or Rams who have a boatload of picks to give, could exchange their 1st round picks and give a couple of other picks to Buffalo, like two 2nds and a 3rd, which give the BILLS more flexibility because if the BILLS stay put at 9 and the following are gone: Clowney, Robinson, Manziel (Jags), Mack (Browns), Watkins (Oakland), Matthews (Atlanta), Evans (Tampa Bay), and Bortles (Minnesota), it leaves little currency as true trade bait. The "elite" players are gone and the difference between talent from 9th to 16th is relatively minor therefore, making a team's desire to trade UP and Buffalo's ability to trade DOWN more difficult...and, if there are no trade partners at say, 3rd overall - which almost certainly there would be, you still get the 3rd best player in the Draft, ala Watkins....just a conspiracy theory, since this damn Draft is dragging out like Susan Lucci's days on All My Children You get points for creativity, and double points for the Susan Lucci reference. Well played.
BigBuff423 Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 (edited) You get points for creativity, and double points for the Susan Lucci reference. Well played. Hahahaha!! Thanks...it's Friday man, what can I say...the brain is already going batsh*t crazy!! Edited May 2, 2014 by BigBuff423
YoloinOhio Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 Please allow me to posit a theory here: What if, and it's an enormous IF, the BILLS *were* actually trying to trade up before the Draft, but not for a player but rather for the purpose of acquiring more picks the day OF the Draft because it will inherently hold more value than possibly what they give up?? Follow me for a second, let's assume the BILLS were to trade with say, Jax from 9th to 3rd for their 1st (obviously), their 2nd (41) and SJ? The reason **may not be to Draft Watkins or Mack or whomever, but instead on the DAY of the Draft the BILLS would then be in position to acquire more picks in a trade DOWN scenario than they are now because assuming Clowney goes 1st and say, for sh*ts and giggles, Robinson goes 2nd to St. Louis, with the Browns picking 4th and Oakland picking 5th, the BILLS would be in a really good position to trade with someone who really wants to move UP while the BILLS want to trade DOWN and therefore a team like the 49ers or Rams who have a boatload of picks to give, could exchange their 1st round picks and give a couple of other picks to Buffalo, like two 2nds and a 3rd, which give the BILLS more flexibility because if the BILLS stay put at 9 and the following are gone: Clowney, Robinson, Manziel (Jags), Mack (Browns), Watkins (Oakland), Matthews (Atlanta), Evans (Tampa Bay), and Bortles (Minnesota), it leaves little currency as true trade bait. The "elite" players are gone and the difference between talent from 9th to 16th is relatively minor therefore, making a team's desire to trade UP and Buffalo's ability to trade DOWN more difficult...and, if there are no trade partners at say, 3rd overall - which almost certainly there would be, you still get the 3rd best player in the Draft, ala Watkins....just a conspiracy theory, since this damn Draft is dragging out like Susan Lucci's days on All My Children I didn't read all of this, but I looked up Lucci and she went 18 years without a Daytime Emmy then - Bam! Bills win the SB in 2018.
BigBuff423 Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 I didn't read all of this, but I looked up Lucci and she went 18 years without a Daytime Emmy then - Bam! Bills win the SB in 2018. Hahaha! Awesome!! Listen, if there was ANY correlation whatsoever to Lucci getting a Daytime Emmy and the BILLS winning a Super Bowl...I would sell my kidneys and pay for whatever decadent sexual act was necessary to hire the professional to grease the wheels of the person who makes that decision for Lucci every-freakin' year to make the Lombardi icon stays IN Buffalo!! ....however, I might also have to take up a collection to accomplish that feat...
maryland-bills-fan Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 Ebron at #9 is like Flowers and Maybin rolled into one. A guy who just can't do it. Please allow me to posit a theory here: What if, and it's an enormous IF, the BILLS *were* actually trying to trade up before the Draft, but not for a player but rather for the purpose of acquiring more picks the day OF the Draft because it will inherently hold more value than possibly what they give up?? Follow me for a second, let's assume the BILLS were to trade with say, Jax from 9th to 3rd for their 1st (obviously), their 2nd (41) and SJ? The reason **may not be to Draft Watkins or Mack or whomever, but instead on the DAY of the Draft the BILLS would then be in position to acquire more picks in a trade DOWN scenario than they are now because assuming Clowney goes 1st and say, for sh*ts and giggles, Robinson goes 2nd to St. Louis, with the Browns picking 4th and Oakland picking 5th, the BILLS would be in a really good position to trade with someone who really wants to move UP while the BILLS want to trade DOWN and therefore a team like the 49ers or Rams who have a boatload of picks to give, could exchange their 1st round picks and give a couple of other picks to Buffalo, like two 2nds and a 3rd, which give the BILLS more flexibility because if the BILLS stay put at 9 and the following are gone: Clowney, Robinson, Manziel (Jags), Mack (Browns), Watkins (Oakland), Matthews (Atlanta), Evans (Tampa Bay), and Bortles (Minnesota), it leaves little currency as true trade bait. The "elite" players are gone and the difference between talent from 9th to 16th is relatively minor therefore, making a team's desire to trade UP and Buffalo's ability to trade DOWN more difficult...and, if there are no trade partners at say, 3rd overall - which almost certainly there would be, you still get the 3rd best player in the Draft, ala Watkins....just a conspiracy theory, since this damn Draft is dragging out like Susan Lucci's days on All My Children Do you want a contract selling ice to Eskimos? Do you sell used cars or real estate?
BigBuff423 Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 Ebron at #9 is like Flowers and Maybin rolled into one. A guy who just can't do it. Do you want a contract selling ice to Eskimos? Do you sell used cars or real estate? To your point about Ebron, for the most part, I fully agree....at least for Buffalo. To your questions: listen Nancy, I admitted it was just a wild theory and this Draft dragging it's ass is driving me nuts, but given all the other wild and hair-brained theories out there, this is at least creative and original instead of the: "We trade CJ and SJ to the Texans for the 1st overall pick and Draft Johnny Football....then trade all the rest of our picks this year and next for Watkins and BOOM! Playooooooffffs!"....
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 My theory is there are fewer trades than many people think. The Extra 2 weeks of hype has everyone over-analyzing everything. It is important to remember that this draft is viewed as the deepest in many years. So.. ask yourself, to move down, you need a dance partner who wants to move up-right! A lot of teams are talking about standing pat, and would like to move down, but can't.
thebandit27 Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 Just so we're all on the same page regarding what it costs to trade up: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/05/02/charts-provide-nothing-more-than-a-rough-estimate-of-trade-value/ http://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/ http://www.footballperspective.com/draft-value-chart/ As some folks (including myself) have said: it may not take as much to move up as the "value chart" would say.
NoSaint Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 (edited) Either way the sky is not falling. If you trade up and get an elite player -great. If you stay put and get 2 good players -great. If you trade back and get 3 starters -great. There are a lot of ways to build a roster. I have full confidence that the Bills are prepared and will do what they think is in the best interest of their football team. i think thats the thing to remember - sometimes that means going and getting your guy, and sometimes that means falling back to where theres better value for your needs and adding a pick. theres no one way to do it, but if you completely take the bold, risky, choices off the table no matter what, i dont know that you succeed - just like if you only trade up all the time i dont think you do. if our guys are good they will swing some good selections here - im not sure missing on any single pick or two can possibly be as crippling as some have portrayed in their arguments either. i also think the term "deep draft" is slightly overstated. if at 41 we are really getting 33 talent... well, thats nice, but im not sure its something im going to completely commit to a philosophy over regardless of who is available to go up and get. if at 4 we are getting once in 3-4 years talent, theres something to be said about that too, depending on the price and what you think of the player. Edited May 2, 2014 by NoSaint
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 Just so we're all on the same page regarding what it costs to trade up: http://profootballta...of-trade-value/ http://harvardsports...fl-draft-picks/ http://www.footballp...ft-value-chart/ As some folks (including myself) have said: it may not take as much to move up as the "value chart" would say. Thanks for the Harvard chart. Interesting when looking at trades from last year. Are some teams still using the old chart, and getting taken by those who aren't? For example, last years Bills-Rams deal adds up to 1635 Rams, 1640 Bills, pretty even. Using the Harvard chart, the Bills committed highway robbery, getting 567 to the Rams 439! In the Miami-Oakland deal for number 3, it was very different. Old chart: Miami 2200 Oakland 1680; New chart Oakand 442 Miami 401!
NoSaint Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 Thanks for the Harvard chart. Interesting when looking at trades from last year. Are some teams still using the old chart, and getting taken by those who aren't? For example, last years Bills-Rams deal adds up to 1635 Rams, 1640 Bills, pretty even. Using the Harvard chart, the Bills committed highway robbery, getting 567 to the Rams 439! In the Miami-Oakland deal for number 3, it was very different. Old chart: Miami 2200 Oakland 1680; New chart Oakand 442 Miami 401! id imagine every team has their own valuations, and they change those year to year. you might even see some bubbles in the valuation if a team has major need for a position thats expected to be higher than normal value at some range of picks. its definitely fluid and not a HARD RULE to get the numbers even.
Luka Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 If we aren't trading down then we should be drafting at #9.
YoloinOhio Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 I would not be shocked if Watkins goes to the Jags at 3: Ian Rapoport @RapSheet 30s #Jaguars GM David Caldwell said on WR Justin Blackmon, he’d be “relatively surprised" if he was playing in 2014. Not promising.
Kipers Hair Posted May 2, 2014 Author Posted May 2, 2014 Genuinely...I hope this happens. Bills need an OT and a big target - trading up to get neither seems wrong. A starting RT and TE and this is a playoff team. Made a couple of calls yesterday and there is a feel that the Browns are sending signals they want out of the spot and were using the Bills as leverage to get more (picks). Would rather get back to 15 or so and get more picks. I like Watkins, but he does not put us over the top the way a Matthews and Jenkins or Amaro might...
BigBuff423 Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 (edited) Genuinely...I hope this happens. Bills need an OT and a big target - trading up to get neither seems wrong. A starting RT and TE and this is a playoff team. Made a couple of calls yesterday and there is a feel that the Browns are sending signals they want out of the spot and were using the Bills as leverage to get more (picks). Would rather get back to 15 or so and get more picks. I like Watkins, but he does not put us over the top the way a Matthews and Jenkins or Amaro might... ASJ and Amaro will not be what they're projected to be in the NFL, unless they go to a team similar to the Saints...put either one of them in Buffalo and you have an average TE...put them with the Lions, Saints, or Colts and they will be very good...but Division, QB, and yes, even weather all have a role in how these new hybrid TE-WR Rookies fare in their first year or two...I'll take Evans and Niklas with a 3rd rount RT over Matthews and Amaro, every day of the week and 2x on Sunday... Edit: just re-read that it sounded conceited, I apologize, been a long week, I just feel strongly about the whole TE in the 1st situation..and the Draft set back two additional weeks is only make me more ornery...where's jw when you need him? Edited May 2, 2014 by BigBuff423
gobillsinytown Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 I'm not questioning the truthfulness of the people who have heard these rumors, or their sources. I'm sure they're correct. The only thing I might add to it is that this could change 10 times between now and draft day. And several times on draft day before it's the Bills turn to pick.
BuffaloATL Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 What I can tell you is that the Bills are talking to multiple teams, and are more actively trying to make deals to better the ball club via draft day moves than they have in some of the more recent years. You saw the beginnings of this last year with the trade-down. Expect the Bills to make some moves.
Pete Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 What I can tell you is that the Bills are talking to multiple teams, and are more actively trying to make deals to better the ball club via draft day moves than they have in some of the more recent years. You saw the beginnings of this last year with the trade-down. Expect the Bills to make some moves. I agree. Whalley is one savvy gm who loves to make moves. The Bills were conservative on draft day before Whalley. I welcome the action
thewildrabbit Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 Genuinely...I hope this happens. Bills need an OT and a big target - trading up to get neither seems wrong. A starting RT and TE and this is a playoff team. Made a couple of calls yesterday and there is a feel that the Browns are sending signals they want out of the spot and were using the Bills as leverage to get more (picks). Would rather get back to 15 or so and get more picks. I like Watkins, but he does not put us over the top the way a Matthews and Jenkins or Amaro might... Exactly, Its good to read someone else is thinking the same way. The only difference is I'd want an OG in the 2nd or 3rd, as a starter or good depth. I look at depth for that O line as a huge concern. Do other areas of the team have players right off the waiver wire as backups? A 100 million dollar DE, and OG's from K-mart.
Kelly the Dog Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 What I can tell you is that the Bills are talking to multiple teams, and are more actively trying to make deals to better the ball club via draft day moves than they have in some of the more recent years. You saw the beginnings of this last year with the trade-down. Expect the Bills to make some moves. Makes sense. Buddy Nix loved his own draft picks and didn't really like to trade. Last year was the first year that Whaley had the controls and the trade they did make worked out great for them, regardless of what you think about EJ. They got their man they wanted and then with the extra pick they got Kiko. So it probably made Whaley, as well as the people around them, even more confident in their abilities as talent evaluators. Throw in guys like Nickell Robey, who they started calling in round five saying they were interested in him and then convinced him to sign as an UDFA who made a serious impact, and these guys think they know what they are doing. They had a strong first draft. The trade Whaley made for Jerry Hughes was highway robbery. And just because they were successful with a trade down last year doesn't necessarily mean they are better off doing that. To them, I would imagine, it doesn't mean they know how to trade down, it means they know how to evaluate players, which would be the same in up or down trades. Not saying that I believe Whaley and his team are great. They had one good year and need to prove it again and again. I just think that they have a lot of confidence in themselves right now to make good trades, and it's more likely than not I think that they do it again at some point in this draft.
Recommended Posts