Reed83HOF Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 (edited) Edited April 25, 2019 by Reed83HOF 1 1 1
whatdrought Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 It's all well and good, except that any pre-conceived idea of draft value charts is gone as soon as the draft opens. 2
billieve420 Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 Giants would be the ideal partner if they are interested in moving up.
Chuck Wagon Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 2 minutes ago, billieve420 said: Giants would be the ideal partner if they are interested in moving up. I've wondered about the Giants. They haven't been mentioned ever as a team willing to move down, though rumors about them have been all over the board. If they are going to take a QB, don't think the value is right taking it at 6 but don't expect he'd be there at 17, might they consider a move down (Jacksonville / Detroit surely aren't taking QB, though it opens it up for a team to move in front of them) in return for another day 2 pick. That could potentially let them get the QB they want while also getting a "bonus" pick. 1
billieve420 Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 4 minutes ago, Chuck Wagon said: I've wondered about the Giants. They haven't been mentioned ever as a team willing to move down, though rumors about them have been all over the board. If they are going to take a QB, don't think the value is right taking it at 6 but don't expect he'd be there at 17, might they consider a move down (Jacksonville / Detroit surely aren't taking QB, though it opens it up for a team to move in front of them) in return for another day 2 pick. That could potentially let them get the QB they want while also getting a "bonus" pick. If Murray doesn't go #1 to AZ and the top D-line talent get gobbled up. Maybe they move back some for one of the other guys like sweat, burns, etc.. or they take a QB there and go d-line at 17.
glazeduck Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 8 minutes ago, whatdrought said: It's all well and good, except that any pre-conceived idea of draft value charts is gone as soon as the draft opens. Exactly this. The trade charts are purely a fan thing at this point. Each team has their own valuation of their picks/slots based on who's making the decisions (looking at you Washington), who's available, what kind of leverage they have (teams automatically pay more for trading up for a QB), what their needs are (in terms of players, positions and current and future picks). Sometimes the charts can get close, sometime's they're not even close. I immediately tune out anyone using those charts as any sort of tangible "evidence" for anything.
nedboy7 Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 14 minutes ago, whatdrought said: It's all well and good, except that any pre-conceived idea of draft value charts is gone as soon as the draft opens. So why do they exist? For no reason? This is like saying stats mean nothing because they don’t paint the whole picture. It’s a guide. Then people deviate. But it’s a good starting point. 1
NewEra Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 11 minutes ago, Chuck Wagon said: I've wondered about the Giants. They haven't been mentioned ever as a team willing to move down, though rumors about them have been all over the board. If they are going to take a QB, don't think the value is right taking it at 6 but don't expect he'd be there at 17, might they consider a move down (Jacksonville / Detroit surely aren't taking QB, though it opens it up for a team to move in front of them) in return for another day 2 pick. That could potentially let them get the QB they want while also getting a "bonus" pick. Yeah, the giants are the team we should be looking at imo. If we can give up a 3rd, it’s a no brainer imo. We’d be guaranteed one of the 5 elite players in this draft (as long as Kyler Murray is drafted 1-5). If we cant trade up with the gmen, trade down (if the elite 5 are gone)
JoshAllenHasBigHands Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 1 minute ago, nedboy7 said: So why do they exist? For no reason? This is like saying stats mean nothing because they don’t paint the whole picture. It’s a guide. Then people deviate. But it’s a good starting point. They exist to contextualize a process fans do not, and cannot, begin to understand.
nedboy7 Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 1 minute ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said: They exist to contextualize a process fans do not, and cannot, begin to understand. Then I guess we shouldn’t discuss any trade up or down possibilities.
whatdrought Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 5 minutes ago, nedboy7 said: So why do they exist? For no reason? This is like saying stats mean nothing because they don’t paint the whole picture. It’s a guide. Then people deviate. But it’s a good starting point. That was my point. It’s a guide, but it’s a loose guide. All it takes is one GM whose got his mind made up and it kinda goes out the window. 2 minutes ago, nedboy7 said: Then I guess we shouldn’t discuss any trade up or down possibilities. I think the problem with trade charts is that we’re putting objective values on subjective properties. So we can suppose, but at the end of the day, teams are gonna do what they want. My guess is that the actual decision makers who say yes or no to these trades, likely don’t care too much about the charts. They have mental charts.
The Bills Blog Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 Bills should move down for more 2s/3s, then move back up for more 2s/3s. Maximize 2s and 3s this year and don't even pick in rounds 4 through 7. 1
glazeduck Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 (edited) 12 minutes ago, nedboy7 said: Then I guess we shouldn’t discuss any trade up or down possibilities. No one said you can't discuss trade possibilities. The point is that these trades are not a math problem, and NFL GMs don't treat them as such. Just because there's a few charts that were made in the 80s that say that certain picks equal "fair" value to other picks in a trade, doesn't mean the other team is even remotely interested in making that trade. So sure, speculate all you want that we could trade up or trade down and what it might take to do so, but the problem comes when those charts begin to set expectations of what is and isn't fair value when trades happen in real life. It's one thing to say "If the value is right, I'd love to see us trade up for Quinnen Williams" -- it's an entirely different thing to say "Quinnen Williams fell to 5, the draft chart says we only have to give up our 3 and 4 for him, DO IT" -- and then be pissed when we don't because in reality Tampa is demanding our 3 and next year's 1. See the difference? Edited April 25, 2019 by glazeduck
JoshAllenHasBigHands Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 23 minutes ago, nedboy7 said: Then I guess we shouldn’t discuss any trade up or down possibilities. 12 minutes ago, glazeduck said: No one said you can't discuss trade possibilities. The point is that these trades are not a math problem, and NFL GMs don't treat them as such. Just because there's a few charts that were made in the 80s that say that certain picks equal "fair" value to other picks in a trade, doesn't mean the other team is even remotely interested in making that trade. So sure, speculate all you want that we could trade up or trade down and what it might take to do so, but the problem comes when those charts begin to set expectations of what is and isn't fair value when trades happen in real life. It's one thing to say "If the value is right, I'd love to see us trade up for Quinnen Williams" -- it's an entirely different thing to say "Quinnen Williams fell to 5, the draft chart says we only have to give up our 3 and 4 for him, DO IT" -- and then be pissed when we don't because in reality Tampa is demanding our 3 and next year's 1. See the difference? Fire response, Glazeduck. I don't mind the chart. It is a lot of fun to imagine. But it isn't gospel, and passing judgment on a GM based on the chart is absolute garbage. The true value is what the market dictates. Period. That 5th pick is worth different amounts in different years, depending on the talent available and league needs. I suspect picks will be worth less, this year, because there isn't a ton of QB needs across the NFL like there usually is. Teams won't be willing to give up as much to move up for a DT, like they would for a QB.
glazeduck Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 6 minutes ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said: Fire response, Glazeduck. I don't mind the chart. It is a lot of fun to imagine. But it isn't gospel, and passing judgment on a GM based on the chart is absolute garbage. The true value is what the market dictates. Period. That 5th pick is worth different amounts in different years, depending on the talent available and league needs. I suspect picks will be worth less, this year, because there isn't a ton of QB needs across the NFL like there usually is. Teams won't be willing to give up as much to move up for a DT, like they would for a QB. No question it's fun to imagine, and as others have said, it can be a halfway decent guide to trying to quantify the unquantifiable. And I wasn't trying to be a dick or a knowitall in my response, just trying to educate those who try to present it as (or genuinely might think be) gospel. I've had the good fortune to get to know a few GMs and top personnel people over the last few years and they don't even use those as a guide anymore.
Recommended Posts