Boatdrinks Posted March 13, 2017 Posted March 13, 2017 That doesn't show causation either. Oakland has started to turn it around recently due to some shrewd drafting. Atlanta has also drafted well recently, comp picks or not. The main thrust of the argument is that you build a consistent, winning team through the draft. Prioritize draft picks over FAs. So if signing FAs costs you more high-level comp picks, than maybe you should rethink your strategy. There is some argument that winning teams tend to prop up the value of their future FAs, but at the same time alot of those teams have drafted and groomed replacements with more long-term planning than the Bills have ever shown under Whaley. They don't hit on all their picks, but they have enough to build that kind of roster depth and let the cream rise to the top. I agree that the way to build a team is through good drafting, while filling in holes with smart FA additions. The Bills have not shown the ability to draft well for some time now. Their FA additions have been good. It seems they are pretty good at evaluating pro personnel, but relatively poor at scouting college talent . No team hits on all their picks, but the percentage needs to be pretty high to excel at that strategy , which is the proven best way to build a winning team.
harmonkillebrew Posted March 13, 2017 Posted March 13, 2017 I agree that the way to build a team is through good drafting, while filling in holes with smart FA additions. The Bills have not shown the ability to draft well for some time now. Their FA additions have been good. It seems they are pretty good at evaluating pro personnel, but relatively poor at scouting college talent . No team hits on all their picks, but the percentage needs to be pretty high to excel at that strategy , which is the proven best way to build a winning team. So, given the particular strengths of our management team, FA is a better strategy than draft? ok. But I think a few of us are implying that this is itself the problem and that what we really need is a new management team. We'll see how it goes this year. I'm critical of Whaley, but hopefully with a better HC he'll make wiser decisions.
Thurman#1 Posted March 13, 2017 Posted March 13, 2017 That's cool and it's solid info to track, but I think the fact that we had 20+ roster spots to fill and only 6 draft picks makes it damn near impossible not to sign players. And it is ridiculous to think that we can sift through released players, post June 1 cuts, and UDFA's to fill our roster out along with trying to hold onto hopes of having any form of a competitive. I think these people going on and on so dramatically about this are clueless as to the current state of affairs. If it's so impossible, how come the best teams do it all the time? They have years where they lose a lot of guys. More, the point is less that we might not be able to do it this year than that we don't do it many years at all. As I pointed out, looking at all of Whaley's drafts, he's gotten comp picks in one of the four. That's wasteful. It shows they simply aren't caring about it.
Boatdrinks Posted March 13, 2017 Posted March 13, 2017 So, given the particular strengths of our management team, FA is a better strategy than draft? ok. But I think a few of us are implying that this is itself the problem and that what we really need is a new management team. We'll see how it goes this year. I'm critical of Whaley, but hopefully with a better HC he'll make wiser decisions. Well, that's exactly what I was implying in my post. The best proven strategy is through the draft. The Bills FO has a poor track record of drafting. That = should have shown Whaley the door and hired a new GM then a new HC to go with him.
harmonkillebrew Posted March 13, 2017 Posted March 13, 2017 Where did I say that I was showing causation? I asked to be shown it. Then I pointed out that the Oakland Raiders and Atlanta Falcons, both good teams, have had 0 comp picks in the past 4 years, Causation v. correlation is tricky. So if you're going to demand causation you should be ready to show it for your counter argument. Easy to poke holes. Give me some regression analysis! We'll see about Oak and Atl, in terms of staying power. But when most people talk about their success it really centers on good drafting (Mack, Cooper, Carr) and coaching (Quinn), not their success in FA. I think one of the biggest pitfalls of FA is that guys you sign are either big money for 2-4 years, or small money for 1 or 2. There's no continuity. Drafted guys are bargains (esp with the new rookie salary structure) and around for 4-6 years. Actually, now that I say it, I think the relatively new rookie salary structure is probably one reason smart teams have prioritized the draft over the past 5 years, since it went into effect. Well, that's exactly what I was implying in my post. The best proven strategy is through the draft. The Bills FO has a poor track record of drafting. That = should have shown Whaley the door and hired a new GM then a new HC to go with him. we're in agreement then. Here's to trading down!
Thurman#1 Posted March 13, 2017 Posted March 13, 2017 (edited) See I am definitely with Sal on this. What the Browns have done can only be terrific once they have the results on the football field. Having picks and cap space are only a means to an end. The end is good football players that help you win on Sundays. Well, fine. But in that case you pretty much can't ever talk about the future. Using that thought, the Bills should never be discussed as heading in the right or wrong direction. It doesn't make sense that you can't think about whether good teams might get bad if they proceed in the wrong direction or that bad teams might get good if they're being smart ... even if they aren't showing it yet with wins. The Browns are using smart methods of proceeding and building. That's more than a lot of teams do. Including us. Does it guarantee success? No. But it's the way to go. Use smart methods and do it consistently. That's what the Browns are doing right now, they're not guaranteeing success, but they're maximizing their chances. Cleveland's plan might work, who knows? But they are going to have to use that capital and draft better than they did last year (and in all the years before) in order to make it work. What you need to prove to me is causation. I would submit that the reason a lot of the good teams currently are on that list is that they are good, have lots of good players and so frequently have more FAs coming up than they can keep (you can't pay everbody). I'd be interested to go back in each case to their last run of let's say 3 consecutive non playoff years. Because my opinion is that the comp pick system fails to help the poor teams and in effect helps the rich stay richer. Did any of those teams when in the process of getting good have huge number of comp picks? I don't know the answer but my guess would be no. My aim here is not to defend the Bills, I have already said in this thread that prioritising the signing of swing guards and full backs in the first wave of free agency makes little sense to me especially when you think ahead to possible comp pick time (though the article Estro himself linked suggests it is more than a pure numbers game). My point is purely there are a lot of causation assumptions around who the system helps and should help and the system is so complex it needs a more thorough investigation before conclusions can be drawn. The investigations have been done. Thaler and Massey are the most famous study, but all the studies back them up ... GMs have so much information that while it's possible to draft stupidly, you can't draft much much smarter than the other guys over the long term. So what you do - the way you maximize your chances in the draft - is to acquire picks wherever you can. You trade back for more picks, you make player trades for more picks and you use the comp picks system the way the smart teams do. Getting more chances is what improves your draft results. And when you say that the comp picks system makes the rich richer, that's pretty much my thrust. More to the point, it makes the smart richer. The same teams that are trading back are also working the comp picks system. Not looking at all those teams, though you're welcome to do so, but you asked for a look at successful teams if you went back and looked at their last three seasons in a row out of the playoffs, and I thought I'd take a look at the Steelers. The Steelers in 1998 - 2000 went 7-9, 8-8 and 9-7. Three years out of the playoffs, during which they still kept working their system. And they recovered. They had two poor years very recently. They keep working the system. And they recover. Good teams, smart teams, work the system to get draft picks. It maximizes your chances. In 1998 they had a 3rd (Hines Ward), a 6th and a 7th, in 1999 a 3rd and a 5th, in 2000 a 5th and a 6th. It's not that teams with fewer wins get fewer picks, it just isn't. The 49ers have been collecting comp picks like crazy the last few years, including their bad years. Because they work at it. Over the last four years, that's a 3rd, three 4ths, a 5th and two 6ths: a total of 7 and consistency, at least one each year. the difference is that they have Tom Brady. Because of this they can trade guys like Chandler Jones and Jamie Collins and still win. The Bills cannot trade guys like Gilmore if they want to try to make the playoffs, which was the goal. They need every good player they have under contract in order to make that realistic. The Pats can mess around with every position and still win the SB. Because. Brady. Brady is a comp pick. Their entire success story is literally based on comp picks. They've been amassing them as an organization, even before they won like clockwork. And that's not true that the Pats can mess around at every position because they have Brady. Their lineup is pretty damn good. Year after year they plug in guys who turn out to be good. Why? Because they're drafting more guys and developing them well. Sure, having Brady is a massive help. But they're still showing a really talented roster year after year. Edited March 13, 2017 by Thurman#1
wilcoam Posted March 13, 2017 Posted March 13, 2017 I didn't know Brady was a comp pick, wow... I keep saying it, Jones and Seymour were comp picks last year Seymour could be the starting nickel CB this year and or the starting outside CB or if not he;s moving up the depth chart These picks can be very useful the following year.... And no I think the draft is the way to go And accumulating draft picks by trading down and getting them thrown in trades The draft gives you a low guaranteed salary for 4-5 years That's small market team economic heaven.... Then when you have cap money FA compliments what you've drafted by plugging a starting position plus adding depth players jc
H2o Posted March 14, 2017 Posted March 14, 2017 If it's so impossible, how come the best teams do it all the time? They have years where they lose a lot of guys. More, the point is less that we might not be able to do it this year than that we don't do it many years at all. As I pointed out, looking at all of Whaley's drafts, he's gotten comp picks in one of the four. That's wasteful. It shows they simply aren't caring about it. Again, this year is not a feasible one to have this discussion with so many open roster spots. We just had 2 last year. Show me another team with as many open roster spots as us. If you can then also show me how they are focused on getting comp picks versus filling out their roster with the players they want. There is no FO staying away from signing players saying to themselves, "I'd really like to sign that guy, but it may cost us a comp pick next year so I don't think so." It's completely retarded. Like I said, all of you message board GM's got this sh*t figured out. Carry on. You just may make the short list for the Skins or something as long as you can keep out of the local rehab facility.
wilcoam Posted March 14, 2017 Posted March 14, 2017 I disagree H20, Rex created numerous open roster spots by releasing players not suited for his unique 3-4 D Now Sean is doing it for the secondary So our Bills created even more such spots by releasing players Again, I'm jot against losing comp picks if its for dymanamic FA singings But if its to cover released players its their own mis-management Ask yourself is signing a backup DE for $750K and backup S for 1mK worth losing a 2018 3rd and 4th round draft pick at $580K a year for 4 jc
H2o Posted March 14, 2017 Posted March 14, 2017 I disagree H20, Rex created numerous open roster spots by releasing players not suited for his unique 3-4 D Now Sean is doing it for the secondary So our Bills created even more such spots by releasing players Again, I'm jot against losing comp picks if its for dymanamic FA singings But if its to cover released players its their own mis-management Ask yourself is signing a backup DE for $750K and backup S for 1mK worth losing a 2018 3rd and 4th round draft pick at $580K a year for 4 jc I understand your point, I do, but this year is a bad year to use as a measuring stick. Would an extra 3rd or 4th round pick be nice to have? Of course, but we had so much roster space due to FA's even before the players being released that it is hard to work around in a manner that benefits the team this year. They are not tanking, they are building and basically from the ground up with the Secondary. The scheme changes have done us no favors in that regard either. You have to let a new coach go after the guys he wants. You can't c*ck block him for the sake of a comp pick. I think McD is heavily involved in the personnel moves, as he should be. They will build how they see fit and with the interest of putting the best team on the field they can.
wilcoam Posted March 14, 2017 Posted March 14, 2017 (edited) Actually, no offense, but I would absolutely c**ck block Sean if signing a career backup like Poyer and whatever #6 WR we picked up this week results in negating a 2018 3rd round pick, for its DW job to educate Sean how that works, so as not to lose valuable draft compensation Its not just getting draft picks, its getting young prospects at a very low set salary for 4 years, which is paramount to a small market team like the Bills being able to build a 53 man roster in comparison to all the big market teams with much larger budgets However, I agree if it was for a 7th, big deal, which is why I'm not critical of our Bills/DW of not getting comp picks last year, we never really lost any prominent FA's, but this year we lost 2 big one's, including a mega FA, this is the year above all years to get compensated regardless of how many FA's we did or didn't have jc Edited March 14, 2017 by wilcoam
BillsCelticsAngelsBama Posted March 14, 2017 Posted March 14, 2017 In the few days that you've been on this forum, I've seen you use this exact response at least 4 times. It adds absolutely nothing to any discussion But it does show that personally attacking a poster to defend this pathetic franchise is the argument of choice for the masses. Any comments/criticisms of this team is met by the weak minded with the brilliant comeback of :We're doomed" This is meant to cut off debate and pretend that we should "Move along there's nothing to see here"
wilcoam Posted March 14, 2017 Posted March 14, 2017 Again I disagree, the thread has morphed into a great discussion about the importance of building this team through the draft, which is the natural evolution of the thread once one realizes how future comp picks can help this franchise jc
CountryCletus Posted March 14, 2017 Posted March 14, 2017 This isn't true Valuable contribution.... but if you don't know what you are talking about, don't add it here
NastyNateSoldiers Posted March 14, 2017 Posted March 14, 2017 When you have 22 players with contacts expiring, you won't expect to be receiving comp picks in 2017. You still have to field a team in 2017.Theres a huge misconception of this so called free agent list. There's easily 10 players on this list that were brought in to fill for injured players during the season.
mead107 Posted March 14, 2017 Posted March 14, 2017 Call it what you want but, it may be the way it has to be done
xsoldier54 Posted March 14, 2017 Posted March 14, 2017 Please stop this BS thread. It is absolutely assinine to not sign free agents so that you might get more comp picks not this year, but the following year. It's flat out insane. Are you people for real or just really that stupid?
harmonkillebrew Posted March 14, 2017 Posted March 14, 2017 I disagree H20, Rex created numerous open roster spots by releasing players not suited for his unique 3-4 D Now Sean is doing it for the secondary So our Bills created even more such spots by releasing players Again, I'm jot against losing comp picks if its for dymanamic FA singings But if its to cover released players its their own mis-management Ask yourself is signing a backup DE for $750K and backup S for 1mK worth losing a 2018 3rd and 4th round draft pick at $580K a year for 4 jc I don't know if McD is releasing guy b/c of his scheme, more like they are old/ineffective and we have salary cap issues. Robey-Coleman was a bit of a question mark, but I think his cap # and maybe scheme had the most to do with it. With Rex, it was so obvious he was going to bring in his guys, and most enfuriating, we spent the entire draft (5 picks) to add his kind of players, when it was obvious he was on the hot seat. Now we're stuck with some ill fits - Ragland, Shaq - and less draft picks b/c we went all in on Rex. Hopefully those guys can play multiple schemes but it just wasn't very smart. Biggest issue with draft over FA, as you said, is those FAs stick around for like 1 or two years. Draft picks can be here for 4-5, and then you get benefits for re-signing your own.
nucci Posted March 14, 2017 Posted March 14, 2017 Please stop this BS thread. It is absolutely assinine to not sign free agents so that you might get more comp picks not this year, but the following year. It's flat out insane. Are you people for real or just really that stupid? I'm going with this choice
wilcoam Posted March 14, 2017 Posted March 14, 2017 I agree 100% HarmonK, great post On the Bills board during this very time during the off season I kept saying the entire draft and FA were focused on Rex swapping out 2014 4-3 players for 2015 3-4 players, moving even further away from our former #2 overall D, but folks kept telling me, relax, Rex and DW knew that they were doing, especially when it comes to the D Well they didn't....The fans were wrong.... And I fully understand our Bills need to fill a 53 person roster most of which are not starting players and or depth I'm not saying don't sign some FA's However its both short term and long term stupidity to keep signing high priced FA's for 1-2 seasons When instead you can have free draft picks that get you players with much lower salaries for 4 years Its common sense jc
Recommended Posts