This is the year to trade down and pick up multiple Day 2 picks

[Chaos]

On 3/6/2020 at 2:21 AM, Estro said:

If there's one minor complaint I have with the Bills under the Beane/McDermott era its their propensity to always want to trade up in Rounds 2 & 3. Now they have hit on their fair share of players, but trading up in the draft, as a whole, has proven to be a losing strategy longterm.

 

This year I'm getting the sense the Bills are going to make the smart move and look to sell the #22 pick. Beane, in an interview, gave a hypothetical, but he kind of tipped his hand and admitted the strength of this draft is in rounds 2 and 3......and I think the Bills would love to be in a position position to pick 4 maybe even 5 players in Rounds 2 & 3 of the NFL draft.  How?

 

Glad you asked......

 

Trade pick #22 to a QB needy team looking to leapfrog the Patriots at pick #23.  There are quite a few teams this could apply to, but for the sake of this scenario let's use the Colts who have picks #34 & #75 (which happens to be an almost exact match on the trade value chart)

 

Now the Bills are sitting with picks #34, #54, #75 & #86 and #100 (via a trade up with our 4th and both 5ths, because you know they can't go a whole draft without getting an itch for a trade up)

 

Under this scenario you could have a 2nd day as follows:

#34 - Yetur Gross Matos (DE)

#54 - Clyde Edwards-Helaire (RB)

#75 - Damon Arnette (CB)

#86 - Bryan Edwards (WR)

#100 - KJ Hill (slot WR)

Chiefs have more or less traded out of the draft all together in recent years. Long term that seems to have been a super bowl winning strategy.  The trading down thing is more myth than reality. 

[Shaw66]

10 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

Most years I would agree this is the case. I'm generally against trading up. The difference this year is that there are three agreed upon elite WR prospects, and a ton of 2nd/3rd tier WR depth. Any one of Jeudy, Lamb, or Ruggs would be a top 10 pick any other draft year. But there aren't that many WR needy teams in the top 10, and a couple teams will convince themselves they can wait for later WR talent based on the depth of the class. So it is likely that 1 or 2 of those WRs will fall out of the top 10. Which means we could trade up for an elite WR prospect without selling the farm. That is a very unique position to be in and I hope we don't squander it.

I think you and I agree in general terms - the top talent is generally at the top of the draft.  That's when you average all the talent year over year.   But as you point out, in any given year, what positions you find in that top level vary.   I don't study the draft much at all, so I have no reason to doubt that you are correct about your assessment of wide receiver talent.   Assuming that's true, then we're talking about the one situation where Beane says he will trade up - when the guy on the top of his board is standing out - that is, when Beane would take him if he had that pick and might even have taken him earlier, AND when the guy plays a position of need, then he'll consider trading up.  

 

So I agree, this could be a trade-up situation for Beane.   Remember, however, that Beane also has said he uses free agency to plug holes, and his objective is to go into the draft with no positions of need, so he can just take BPA every round.   So, something we already knew, Beane will be looking at free agent receivers first.   If he gets one, then the trade up for a receiver goes away.   And the thing that frustrates me sometimes is that if he plugs a hole with a journeyman, he won't trade up even if the guy he could get by trading up looks to be better than the free agent he signed.   Once the hole is plugged, even with a good but lesser player, Beane isn't so interested in going up.  

 

The other thing that is obviously true and sometimes frustrating watching Beane is that he's patient.   He and McD really buy into the notion that this is a long-term building project, and Beane seems willing to stick by his principles and keep collecting talent, the thinking being that the opportunities for an elite player will come along over time and he doesn't have to reach for them.   So trading down and building talent on the roster this year is, I think, an attractive alternative for him instead of a reach for an elite talent.   It has to be the right opportunity.    You've described the kind of situation that is the right opportunity - a draft where a couple of top ten talents at the right position might fall to the second ten.   In Beane's view, that's not a reach - that's just taking advantage of an opportunity that happened to present itself.    That's exactly how he talks about the deal for Edmunds - special talent, position of need, falling to a range where Beane could afford give up draft capital to get him.  

 

It will be interesting to see.  Free agency first.  

 

 

[CaptnCoke11]

I’m all for packaging the later round picks and moving up into round 3.  I don’t want give up 22.   I’d rather use the later picks to move up

Edited March 7, 2020 by CaptnCoke11

[Shaw66]

4 hours ago, Clemfield2622 said:

I don't think I know more than anybody. I just watch 32 teams try and field competitive teams, and a lot of them suck at it. Why do some suck? Because they think they know what makes a player great , when in reality it's a crap shoot.

 

I'm just not a fan of trade ups. You're giving up lottery tickets for a shot at a guy YOU think is great. But GM's and scouts are wrong every single day.

 

How many of those QB's traded up for worked out, and how many busted?  I understand QB is the most important position in sports, but while GM's have an incredible amount of knowledge and do incredible work to get it right, get it wrong all the time.

 

That's all I'm trying to say. 

I agree with Albany.  The draft isn't a crapshoot.   It isn't a science, that's for sure, but a crapshoot implies that all you can do is throw darts while blindfolded.    It's the same as buy stocks in the stock market.  That' not a science, either, but it isn't a crapshoot.   

 

In both cases, no one gets it right all the time, but some people clearly have better yields than others.   Everyone misses some opportunities, and everyone picks a bust here or there, but the best have a higher percentage of guys who work out and a lower percentage of busts.   

 

In the first round and second round, it isn't so important that you get the guy left on the board who turns out to be the very best pro.   That's nice if you do it, but what's more important is to get a good pro.  If you get a good pro, you've helped your team.  So, in the first couple of rounds the objective really is to avoid the bust.   You really hurt your team by missing in those rounds.   I think good GMs are good at identifying which players are going to make it - they have a high yield in those rounds.   Beane's drafted Allen, Edmunds,  Oliver and Ford, so he looks pretty good in that category.

 

In later rounds, the task is to identify players who, despite their flaws, have a good shot at making it.   Finding the Milanos.   I don't know how you do that, but some organizations are better at it than others.   The McDermott's system helps out Beane in that category, because McDermott puts a very high premium on competitiveness, brains and being a team player.   Those are characteristics that a GM can identify - he can know whether a guy is team player, and he can know how hard a guy works.  If a player has those characteristics, he has a good shot at making a McDermott team.   

 

No one's perfect - it's a difficult process, an imperfect science, but Beane seems to be a position to be a relatively high-yield guy.  

[AlCowlingsTaxiService]

Might have been a solid plan last season. I’d like to think we are looking less at quantity of picks and more of overall quality. Why put yourself in the position of having to cut mid round picks because you have no room on the roster. 

[Reed83HOF]

11 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

Not really. Trading down increases your chance of getting a starting level talent. If you want elite talent you're far more likely to hit that in the 1st round.

 

https://www.betlabssports.com/blog/picks-perform-best-nfl-draft/

 

 

So from 1st to 2nd round, Pro Bowlers drop from a 39.3% chance to a 16.7% chance. For all pros it's 16.1% to 4.8%. And it only gets worse from there.

 

And obviously the higher the pick, the likelier your odds of getting an elite player. In a draft like this one with three tier 1A prospects at WR it makes a lot of sense to trade up to maximize our chance of getting an elite player at a position of need.

 

We don't need more depth. We need game changers.

 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

On 3/6/2020 at 5:10 AM, Joe in Winslow said:

WR not important to you I take it?

 

 

....of course it is...so would you stay pat at #22 and go WR, or trade up to again, go WR, or attempt to trade down to perhaps #27, if you could pick up an extra 2nd (may have to add a day 3 pick) for still WR value?.......can't say how #27 would be used because I don't get to see college ball.....

[Clemfield2622]

32 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I agree with Albany.  The draft isn't a crapshoot.   It isn't a science, that's for sure, but a crapshoot implies that all you can do is throw darts while blindfolded.    It's the same as buy stocks in the stock market.  That' not a science, either, but it isn't a crapshoot.   

 

In both cases, no one gets it right all the time, but some people clearly have better yields than others.   Everyone misses some opportunities, and everyone picks a bust here or there, but the best have a higher percentage of guys who work out and a lower percentage of busts.   

 

In the first round and second round, it isn't so important that you get the guy left on the board who turns out to be the very best pro.   That's nice if you do it, but what's more important is to get a good pro.  If you get a good pro, you've helped your team.  So, in the first couple of rounds the objective really is to avoid the bust.   You really hurt your team by missing in those rounds.   I think good GMs are good at identifying which players are going to make it - they have a high yield in those rounds.   Beane's drafted Allen, Edmunds,  Oliver and Ford, so he looks pretty good in that category.

 

In later rounds, the task is to identify players who, despite their flaws, have a good shot at making it.   Finding the Milanos.   I don't know how you do that, but some organizations are better at it than others.   The McDermott's system helps out Beane in that category, because McDermott puts a very high premium on competitiveness, brains and being a team player.   Those are characteristics that a GM can identify - he can know whether a guy is team player, and he can know how hard a guy works.  If a player has those characteristics, he has a good shot at making a McDermott team.   

 

No one's perfect - it's a difficult process, an imperfect science, but Beane seems to be a position to be a relatively high-yield guy.  

I won't argue with your evaluation of Beane. He has hit on a high number (not all) of his picks, including some gems late. (though Milano was before he got here, but I know what you're saying)

 

Thus why I would like him to make MORE picks, not less. I understand 9 rookies likely would not make this roster, but 4th, 5th, 6th rounders make teams and contribute. I just think it is smart strategy to try and hoard as many 2nd and 3rds as humanly possible. 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 minute ago, Clemfield2622 said:

I won't argue with your evaluation of Beane. He has hit on a high number (not all) of his picks, including some gems late. (though Milano was before he got here, but I know what you're saying)

 

Thus why I would like him to make MORE picks, not less. I understand 9 rookies likely would not make this roster, but 4th, 5th, 6th rounders make teams and contribute. I just think it is smart strategy to try and hoard as many 2nd and 3rds as humanly possible. 

 

 

...draft and/or FA will forever be a crap shoot...BUT......McBeane has a staff of 17+, principally comprised of former NFL VP's of Player Personnel or Directors of Pro Player Personnel types, exec level talent....ALL on Pegula's nickel....I'd bet with McBeane included, that payroll approaches $5 mil......these guys know their craft at least as well as the Polian Era if not better.....I'd call the "rubes in between" "F Troop" but it would downgrade Sgt O'Rourke and his gang..........

[Reed83HOF]

 

[HappyDays]

9 hours ago, Ethan in Portland said:

You forgot to add the odds for the extras picks acquired. That’s the whole point of trading down.  Instead of pinning hopes on three guys in rounds 1-3, you ma be able to draft 5 in rounds 1-3.

 

I'm not sure getting 5 picks in the top 3 rounds would be possible no matter how many times you traded down. We could probably get two 2nd round picks, if we're okay not having a 1st round pick at all. But the chance of getting a pro bowl player out of two 2nd round picks is still only 30.6% based on that chart. To get an all pro out of two 2nd round picks it's a 9.4% chance. So you are still better off using the one 1st round pick if your goal is to find an elite player.

 

Also that chart isn't accounting for a team's position in the round. Obviously the probability for the top half of a given round is higher than the bottom half. We're talking about a scenario where we trade into the top 15, for a position that is likely to see an elite player fall further than they should. In that specific scenario we are much more likely to get an elite player than if we draft a few players at the bottom of rounds 2 and 3.

 

You act like every pick is a total crap shoot but it's not. Yes there are good players found in the later rounds every year, but on the whole the NFL scouting community does a good job identifying the higher probability prospects. Or else we wouldn't see such a large discrepancy between rounds in the chart I posted.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

 

I'm not sure getting 5 picks in the top 3 rounds would be possible no matter how many times you traded down. We could probably get two 2nd round picks, if we're okay not having a 1st round pick at all. But the chance of getting a pro bowl player out of two 2nd round picks is still only 30.6% based on that chart. To get an all pro out of two 2nd round picks it's a 9.4% chance. So you are still better off using the one 1st round pick if your goal is to find an elite player.

 

Also that chart isn't accounting for a team's position in the round. Obviously the probability for the top half of a given round is higher than the bottom half. We're talking about a scenario where we trade into the top 15, for a position that is likely to see an elite player fall further than they should. In that specific scenario we are much more likely to get an elite player than if we draft a few players at the bottom of rounds 2 and 3.

 

You act like every pick is a total crap shoot but it's not. Yes there are good players found in the later rounds every year, but on the whole the NFL scouting community does a good job identifying the higher probability prospects. Or else we wouldn't see such a large discrepancy between rounds in the chart I posted.

It at best an educated guess. And history would say no GM or team is better than any others. I agree if you look on the aggregate that a top 15 consensus pick has a better chance of succeeding than a 16-45 guy. But I suspect once you get in the way 20s the teams differ wildly in their assessments of players.

This year is deep at DL and WR. A smart move is to make multiple selections at these two positions and hope a couple of them succeed.

If you want a superstar, get them in free agency or better yet by trade. You know what you are getting based on track record.

[In Summary]

Stay put. Consider bringing 9 picks into camp so you (The Bills) can evaluate them in YOUR system and on YOUR field through camp and preseason.  Then cut a couple guys knowing you kept the best 6 or 7 of nine. Better than the arrogant belief that if you cut your picks down to 6, you do so knowing (believing) you're such a superior evaluator of talent  (and players who have never played a snap in the NFL) that all 6 make the team. For all Brandon's composure,  he gets a little giddy in the springtime and falls in love with certain prospects. 

 

This year I wouldn't trade down in the 1st since some high end talent is definitely needed.  If you must trade up, then only surrender the extra 5th and/or 6th.

[Mr. WEO]

On 3/6/2020 at 8:04 AM, Bob in STL said:

Beane sets his board by player skill ratings first, and then need.  If he can move up to get a player that satisfies both criteria he will look to do it.   
 

He gets extra picks with shrewd moves to unload players that don’t fit.  

 

 

Other than when a QB is the top need, every GM will say the same thing.

[ColoradoBills]

I don't see Beane having a pre-draft strategy of moving up or down in the 1st round.

As it gets close to his pick (say after MIA at 18) he may move up 2 or 3 spots depending on his board. 

 

As to trading back I just don't think Beane needs to consider it unless something really unique happens with another team wanting

a Bills pick.

[mjt328]

One of the traits that separates great GMs from the average/bad ones, is the ability to maximize draft position and find value.

That means both moving up AND down.

 

Through the NFL's history, fans seem to remember the times their team moved up in the draft and it didn't work out.  For instance, the Bills with JP Losman or Sammy Watkins.  Or the Saints with Ricky Williams.  Or the Redskins with Robert Griffin III.  But there is no evidence that "smart teams move down" as many like to insist.  The Chiefs just won the Super Bowl on the back of Patrick Mahomes, who they moved up for.  The Patriots are infamous for moving all over the board to get the players they want.  In my opinion, Bill Belichick is only average at hitting on picks.  But he's well above average at trading around to obtain value.  

 

Moving down is smart if you can get a player of equal value at the pick you drop to.  But if you anticipate a drop in value before you are on the clock, then it can be valuable to make a trade up the board.  Listening to Brandon Beane speak, I believe he understands this.

 

It's hard to say whether a trade-down is smart at #22, without knowing what our needs are and who is available to us.  As I mentioned in another thread, if we go into the draft just needing a WR, then it will probably be smart to move-down.  Because the receivers likely available in the 40s, won't be much different than those in the 20s.  But if we still need an edge rusher and someone like Epenesa or Chaisson is there, moving down may not be the prudent decision.  

 

[Don Otreply]

Yes it would be a good year to do that,  if your team needed to fill a lot of holes, iirc Beane said a while back that he does not want to draft guys that are going to make the team, we have nine picks, and four will likely be used to trade up at some point during the draft, so I’m looking at five guys from the draft, plus what we get in FA, hoping for two really good wideouts,  amongst the other positions of need, jmo. We shall see, 
 

Go Bills!!!

[auburnbillsbacker]

Doesn't it depend on who is available at 22?  

[Shaw66]

4 hours ago, Clemfield2622 said:

I won't argue with your evaluation of Beane. He has hit on a high number (not all) of his picks, including some gems late. (though Milano was before he got here, but I know what you're saying)

 

Thus why I would like him to make MORE picks, not less. I understand 9 rookies likely would not make this roster, but 4th, 5th, 6th rounders make teams and contribute. I just think it is smart strategy to try and hoard as many 2nd and 3rds as humanly possible. 

Right about Milano, but you got the point.   And if Vosean Joseph recovers, he will be like an extra late-round pick.  

 

Absolutely about 2nd and third round.    But as I was discussing with Hapless, Beane has to weigh that against the possibility of getting a great talent at a position of need, like wideout.    If the wideout he wants is at 15, Beane is thinking about going up and ditching your strategy. 

 

It's question like this that Beane puts himself to in his draft preparation.   He says he tries to imagine all kinds of circumstances where a guy he like he could get by moving up.   And he contemplates other scenarios where no one he really likes is at 22, and he tries to think through what he'd do.  I thought it was cool that in NONE of the scenarios he'd run where he did deals and got Allen did he then imagine that Edmunds would be available.   

[Bob in STL]

4 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Other than when a QB is the top need, every GM will say the same thing.

Doubt it.  Look at Buddy Nix, Doug  Whaley. 
 

Many many say it, only a few actually do it.