The best move for the Bills in the draft is to trade down.

[Pete]

Trading down is always a good move. Sometimes teams are desperate for a player, and will overpay. I am a fan of the Pats system- trading down, and stockpiling draft picks next year

[3rdand12]

As long as they answer the damned phone I am fine.

[Kirby Jackson]

As long as they answer the damned phone I am fine.

If Russ Brandon answers the phone TBD will explode!!!

[3rdand12]

If Russ Brandon answers the phone TBD will explode!!!

LOL. I always get scared when he fist pumps in the war room !

[dpberr]

I found this article interesting in answering the question I had - is trading down generally a good idea?

 

http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2013/04/noteworthy_examples_of_trading.html

 

I don't trust a lot about the Bills these days but I do trust their current crop of scouts. I'd stay put at 19 and pick a player.

[BarleyNY]

19 is a good place to land a quality LB or OL. Some team would really have to make it worth my while to drop from there. It'd have to be something like a first next year and a second this year for me to pull the trigger. As mentioned already, 8 picks is plenty. I'm not dropping a handful of spots for a 5th.

[John from Riverside]

19 is a good place to land a quality LB or OL. Some team would really have to make it worth my while to drop from there. It'd have to be something like a first next year and a second this year for me to pull the trigger. As mentioned already, 8 picks is plenty. I'm not dropping a handful of spots for a 5th.

Did anyone say 5th?

[boyst]

Id think we have better odds at trading a 2nd or 3rd to fall back in this draft. There is deep talent

[BuffaloHokie13]

The most likely trade down scenario is where Treadwell is still there in my opinion. Do the Vikings at 23 feel that the risk that Houston takes him at #22 is such that it is worth the 3rd it would cost to trade up to Buffalo's spot at 19? And you would expect that they would try the Redskins and the Jets as partners before us.

 

Alternatively a run on a position.... we talked on here last week about a possible run on corners in the teens.... if Ramsey, Hargreaves, Apple and Alexander are off the board is a team willing to come up for Jackson? Pittsburgh really like him and Apple from what I hear.... if one is gone and with the Bengals and Washington waiting in the wings as possible corner seekers at 21 and 24 maybe the Steelers jump up?

Not to be a total homer, but I'm hearing Pittsburgh really likes Kendall Fuller

 

Would Denver do it if Paxton Lynch is there and they really want to beat the Jests to it?

This is along the lines of what I think would need to happen to trigger a trade

[Nanker]

Let's trade with NewEngland***. We can take both their 2nds and next year's First.

[Dragonborn10]

They have 8 picks already. This is not the year to trade down for more picks in 2016. In fact in the middle rounds it may be wise to move up to get the PK from FSU.

If they do trade down, I would want a 2017 pick in exchange. You can get more value that way. Drop out of the first round this year, pick up a second round pick this year and another second and change from next year. Say go from 19 to 35-38. Basically will get the same type of player - a good starting caliber LB or S. And the team you are trading with will be a top 10 team meaning they may be bad again this year.

[Hardcore Bills Fan]

The Bills have plenty of cap for a 19th pick, stop with this nonsense.

Why when this team is looking good people want to sabotage the team.

[ExWNYer]

agreed with all, but no one's gonna trade up to 19.

 

Huh?? It happens all the time. In the 2015 draft alone, two teams moved up near where the Bills are this year:

 

San Diego from 17 to 15 & Denver from 28 to 23.

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000481429/article/2015-nfl-draft-trade-tracker-details-of-all-the-moves

[Pete]

 

Huh?? It happens all the time. In the 2015 draft alone, two teams moved up near where the Bills are this year:

 

San Diego from 17 to 15 & Denver from 28 to 23.

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000481429/article/2015-nfl-draft-trade-tracker-details-of-all-the-moves

Exactamundo. Most every draft I hear the Bills got an offer but stood pat

And 8 and 8- who is available at 19? Someone always slips. There is a great chance a very talented player slides to 19

[metzelaars_lives]

Is this thread title 2015? 2014, 2013? It always comes out.

Yup.

[Clemson Bills Fan]

Honestly with this draft, even though there is good depth in the front 7, I feel like 19 is a very good spot to (hopefully) guarantee a day one starter either at DL or LB. The guys that can fall to us like Darron Lee, Sheldon Rankins (even though im not sure how he would fit in our system), Noah Spence, Shaq.. I would be happy with any of these guys at 19, and I dont know how much longer they would last after that.

 

If we were to trade though, I would definitely agree with John from Hemet when he said that Vernon Butler would be his target.

[Bad Things]

You can't say that it would be our best move at this point.

We have no idea how everything is going to play out just yet.

[Thurman#1]

I agree with this.....IF they can find a trade partner.

 

The player I am targeting in the first is Vernon Butler......I think if we can slide down a ways and pick up another late 2nd round pick......

 

 

I'd love for this to happen, but I don't think we get a 2nd even though the draft chart says it's reasonable.

 

When's the last time somebody as far back as #19 traded back and got another first round pick and a 2nd as well? Ten years? More?

 

Trading back would be good, but we're more likely to pick up a third and another lower-round pick, IMHO.

Ha ha, pretty much I guess.

 

I will give 2 real examples. The Rams were better off trading down in the RGIII draft and the Dolphins were better off trading up for Dion Jordan (even though the player didn't work out). Make the best value move using the trade chart as a guide.

 

 

 

 

Gotta disagree. Massey and Thaler's study really really clearly points out what happens when you trade up and what happens when you trade back. And what happens is that when you trade up, you lower your chances of getting a good outcome. When you trade back, you raise your chances. And we're not talking about a percentage point or two either.

 

Trading back is good. Trading up is generally a GM thinking he's smarter than the rest of them. And the studies of GM efficiency show there aren't really GMs who pick better than others in the draft. What there are is GMs who accumulate extra picks and therefore get better results 'cause they got more tilts at the apple.

 

 

 

 

"Remember when we said the NFL draft does a good job of sorting prospects? We know this because there’s a strong relationship between the performance of a player and where he was picked in the draft.⁵

"Fluctuations happen all the time around the red line, which represents a smoothed average value for each pick slot based on the typical NFL performance of players drafted there. Players routinely play better — and worse — than these long-term averages. But teams can’t regularly predict which prospects will outperform or underperform relative to where they were drafted.

"If teams showed any consistency in their ability to out-draft the market, it would show up in these deviations. But, as Chase Stuart of FootballPerspective.com has also found, there’s practically no correlation⁶between a team’s picking performance from one draft to the next."

 

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-team-can-beat-the-draft/

 

 

 

Another great but depressing article about this: http://grantland.com/the-triangle/bill-belichick-nfl-draft-new-england-patriots/

 

 

 

You don't eliminate your chances by trading up. You can get a guy who's worth the two or three guys you lose out on instead. But the odds are rather heavily against it, as the Massey and Thaler and the Chase Stuart data show.

Edited April 1, 2016 by Thurman#1

[NastyNateSoldiers]

I can see a bunch of teams moving up for Paxton Lynch.

 

1st rd teams

Chiefs #27, Cards #28 or #31 Broncos - Swap 1st add 2nd and 4th.

 

2nd Rd teams Cleve #32, Dall #34, SD #35, 49ERS # 37, Bears #41.

These teams will have to give up There 2016 2nd & 3rd and a 1st in 2017.

 

Now I would jump all over anyone of these offers especially The 2nd rd teams so we can get a extra 1st for next season. I love this yrs draft because of the starters depth well into the 5th rd. DW and crew can put on a clinic with these extra pks . With needs at Dline, Lber, Safety and Wr this yrs best value at those positions are in the 2nd/4th rds.

 

With the late first or early 2nd the Bills can find players like Noah Spence, Robert Knemdiche or Chris Jones. These are guys with high 1st rd grades that because of character concerns can be available. Other players we can get

 

Ryan Kelly C Alabama

Karl Joseph FS West Virginia

Deon Jones LB LSU

Andrew Billings DT Baylor.

 

With all this being said I hope we can find a partner to swing a deal.

[Kirby Jackson]

 

 

I'd love for this to happen, but I don't think we get a 2nd even though the draft chart says it's reasonable.

 

When's the last time somebody as far back as #19 traded back and got another first round pick and a 2nd as well? Ten years? More?

 

Trading back would be good, but we're more likely to pick up a third and another lower-round pick, IMHO.

 

 

 

 

 

Gotta disagree. Massey and Thaler's study really really clearly points out what happens when you trade up and what happens when you trade back. And what happens is that when you trade up, you lower your chances of getting a good outcome. When you trade back, you raise your chances. And we're not talking about a percentage point or two either.

 

Trading back is good. Trading up is generally a GM thinking he's smarter than the rest of them. And the studies of GM efficiency show there aren't really GMs who pick better than others in the draft. What there are is GMs who accumulate extra picks and therefore get better results 'cause they got more tilts at the apple.

 

 

 

"Remember when we said the NFL draft does a good job of sorting prospects? We know this because theres a strong relationship between the performance of a player and where he was picked in the draft.⁵

"Fluctuations happen all the time around the red line, which represents a smoothed average value for each pick slot based on the typical NFL performance of players drafted there. Players routinely play better and worse than these long-term averages. But teams cant regularly predict which prospects will outperform or underperform relative to where they were drafted.

"If teams showed any consistency in their ability to out-draft the market, it would show up in these deviations. But, as Chase Stuart of FootballPerspective.com has also found, theres practically no correlation⁶between a teams picking performance from one draft to the next."

 

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-team-can-beat-the-draft/

 

 

 

Another great but depressing article about this: http://grantland.com/the-triangle/bill-belichick-nfl-draft-new-england-patriots/

 

 

 

You don't eliminate your chances by trading up. You can get a guy who's worth the two or three guys you lose out on instead. But the odds are rather heavily against it, as the Massey and Thaler and the Chase Stuart data show.

This missed my point though (at least I didn't see it). You make the value play. The cost is what determines if it was the right decision.The Dolphins went from 12 to 3 and it cost them 1 of their 2 second round picks. The Redskins went from 6 to 2 and it cost them 2 additional first round picks and a second.

 

If the Dolphins took Ziggy Ansah instead of Dion Jordan it would have been a fantastic move. The player they chose made it a bad move. The decision to move up based on the value was a good one.