If a team’s roster is solidified and picks late then why not move up in a draft?

[mjt328]

It always depends on the circumstance.  

You never want to make the decision on moving up or down, before seeing how the board is falling and what players are available.

 

Unlike some of our previous GMs, Brandon Beane always sets himself up for maximum flexibility when entering the Draft.

He could go up.  He could go down.  He could stay put.  He could take (almost) any position on the roster.

 

[Alphadawg7]

18 hours ago, Tipster19 said:

Instead of just staying where you’re slotted or even trading back to accumulate more pick(s), I would think that a team would be more afforded to take that shot to move up in a draft to be in better position to take a player that is projected to be a difference maker. The window for a team to sustain great success is usually opened for just a few years, especially due to the salary cap. Rosters are turned to some degree from year to year and then the contracts start to mount and catch up to a successful team, forcing them to make bigger changes. 

 

One reason would be a lot of times when a team is "set" on their roster, they are also up against the cap if the roster is that good.  Every year you will have FA's on your team you may not be able to always keep because of that, so being sure to bring in young cheaper talent can be essential to keep the roster consistently strong.  

 

Its what teams like the Steelers and Ravens have always been very good about doing and why they are consistently contenders for long periods of time.  

 

That being said, moving up is also definitely an option in these cases too, just saying having more draft assets still also has value to teams in those positions.  

Edited April 14, 2021 by Alphadawg7

[The Jokeman]

14 hours ago, Tipster19 said:

Instead of just staying where you’re slotted or even trading back to accumulate more pick(s), I would think that a team would be more afforded to take that shot to move up in a draft to be in better position to take a player that is projected to be a difference maker. The window for a team to sustain great success is usually opened for just a few years, especially due to the salary cap. Rosters are turned to some degree from year to year and then the contracts start to mount and catch up to a successful team, forcing them to make bigger changes. 

I'd think most GMs, coaches etc. want job security and the only way you get that in the NFL is prolonged success. So you have to continual build your roster/depth etc. The issue is most rookies, no matter where they're drafted, take time to adjust to the NFL the thought is the earlier you're drafted is the more ready or better you'll be. In reality it's not it's more if that player can adjust to the NFL and/or his coaches can use their skill set to get the best of their abilities and even dependent on the team around them. That's why you get guys like Gabe Davis taken in the 4th round can out produce a guy like Henry Ruggs taken in the 1st round by the Raiders. So the reason you keep extra picks is as you never know when may unearth the next great one, see Tom Brady as a 6th Round pick. 

[mjt328]

2 hours ago, CorkScrewHill said:

The Ricky Williams trade shows why that is not a good strategy. The NFL Draft is a crap shoot to some extent. The 5th round guy ends up being a solid player and the first round player ends up being a bust. I would have been happy back on draft day for the Bills to move up for Ed Oliver. Let's say they gave up their second and 4th last year to move up[ to take a legitimate tackle Isaiah Wilson or even a WR Tee Higgins. The first one obviously is a bust and the second is not better than who we got in the 4th Gabe Davis.  As someone else mentioned .. depth is huge as people get hurt and the salary cap ramifications of having a few cheaper guys on rookie contracts helps as well.

 

And then you have trade-ups, such as the Chiefs move for Patrick Mahomes.

 

If they really wanted a QB, they could have stayed-put (or even traded back) and landed a prospect like Deshone Kizer, Davis Webb or Nathan Peterman.  Why would you waste valuable picks, when the draft is just a crap-shoot?

 

It's easy to only point out the 1st Rounders who bust, the late rounders who surprise, and the times the pro scouts get it wrong.  But by and large, the NFL scouts do an excellent job of identifying which talent has the best chance of succeeding.  I saw a statistic recently that 60-70% of NFL starters were selected within the Top 3 Rounds (Top 100 players).

 

 

 

 

[CorkScrewHill]

1 hour ago, mjt328 said:

 

And then you have trade-ups, such as the Chiefs move for Patrick Mahomes.

 

If they really wanted a QB, they could have stayed-put (or even traded back) and landed a prospect like Deshone Kizer, Davis Webb or Nathan Peterman.  Why would you waste valuable picks, when the draft is just a crap-shoot?

 

It's easy to only point out the 1st Rounders who bust, the late rounders who surprise, and the times the pro scouts get it wrong.  But by and large, the NFL scouts do an excellent job of identifying which talent has the best chance of succeeding.  I saw a statistic recently that 60-70% of NFL starters were selected within the Top 3 Rounds (Top 100 players).

 

 

 

 

Sorry you are correct .. I should have been clearer ... it can work out, but it often does not. We have successfully traded up (aka Josh) and I do think QBs are in particular a position where you have to take chances because if you don't have a QB it is VERY hard to win in the NFL. The Falcons traded up for Julio and that worked out pretty well also. I personally am just a believer in more darts equates to more opportunities to hit the mark .. and Ido get that trading away higher picks to own the later rounds there can be problematic as well.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

Beane is a guy that burns picks for a player he covets. My guess is he lets the draft come to him in the first round and takes Harris or Etienne if they fall to 30. Then he trades up in the second round for a pass rusher giving up a 4th. He then gives up a 2nd next year to move from late third to late 2nd and takes the NT of the future. 

[Tipster19]

3 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Beane is a guy that burns picks for a player he covets. My guess is he lets the draft come to him in the first round and takes Harris or Etienne if they fall to 30. Then he trades up in the second round for a pass rusher giving up a 4th. He then gives up a 2nd next year to move from late third to late 2nd and takes the NT of the future. 

 

Staying at 30 and moving up in the 2nd rd makes a whole lotta sense! That’s a fresh take, I like it!

[Buffalo_Stampede]

Unless it's a QB, moving up by trading a lot of draft capital isn't a smart move. Also draft picks can be cheap starters or depth. It helps when you're tight in cap space. You hit on half your draft then you can have 3 really good starters for cheap. 

[machine gun kelly]

So the Bills pick 30th which is worth 600 pts., on one of the more used value charts for GM’s.  The Steelers pick 24th.  Are the Steelers willing trade partners as you would assume they want O Line talent give they lost three this off season.  Their 24th pick is worth 740 pts. So we need if they are willing to find 140 points.  Our third is worth 128 pts.  Ok we need to find another 12 pts. to get in the ballpark.  Our 5th is worth 21.8 pts, so that’s too much for a fair trade so we go down to our 6th round, but that’s only worth 6.8 pts. and the 7th is probably less than 2 pts.  To move up 6 slots, at a minimum we exchange slots, give away our second 6th and 7th, and they give us their 7th.

 

basically you can google and get trade value charts, open up say one ESPN the draft order, keep going back to the chart, figure out the estimations, and then make a statement, my .... pick is worth these pts. and my trade partner needs these picks I have and maybe has to give back x spot(s).

 

Saying trade up for Pitts or anyone else so not picking on anyone who said that is not considering the pts system what GM’s look at, and I haven’t even went into value of next years spots as that is even more complicated.

 

This is why I’m not a GM as my head was spinning even writing this at 5:30 am.  If you guys want to talk exchanges and can look up vale’s and our draft positioning, and I know a lot of guys here are good at it, I’d love those ideas.  They have to make sense though.  assuming it’s an Edge rusher we wanted, is this one guy worth the picks and values they are giving away for or are you just playing Madden.

 

As many of you know when not in appointments I enjoy MTC in the afternoons, and those guys have conditioned me to have my ammunition ready before I make a statement to them as these are the questions they ask to their callers.  It’s a great show and keeps listeners grounded to how GM’s think before the draft.  This take is not directed towards anyone specifically, just a general comment regarding we should do this for that, etc.

[Chandler#81]

4 hours ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Beane is a guy that burns picks for a player he covets. My guess is he lets the draft come to him in the first round and takes Harris or Etienne if they fall to 30. Then he trades up in the second round for a pass rusher giving up a 4th. He then gives up a 2nd next year to move from late third to late 2nd and takes the NT of the future. 

Nose Tackle? 

Hey, Sport, we haven’t run a 3-4 in many years. Trading up for a position that doesn’t exist? Perfect!🤦‍♂️

 

Keep ‘em coming!🤣

[Ethan in Cleveland]

30 minutes ago, Chandler#81 said:

Nose Tackle? 

Hey, Sport, we haven’t run a 3-4 in many years. Trading up for a position that doesn’t exist? Perfect!🤦‍♂️

 

Keep ‘em coming!🤣

NT and 1 tech DT are the same type of player

[BigBuff423]

For this team, in this Draft year for several reasons, I agree with trading up - just not in the 1st Round. Bills stay at 30 and can take BPA which could be a CB, DE/Edge, or a RB. But then, I would sell all remaining picks to get 2 or 3 players in the second and third round. That would make 3 or 4 players and that's probably about it that make the roster and contribute. In no particular order: CB, RB, DE, TE....that's it. 

 

Bills just signed Milano, Mongo and D. Williams to multi-year extensions. If the Bills were to trade for a TE, then I could see that pick morph into a WR to help cascade the aging group as most likely Sanders and Beasley are out next year. But with a big WR in Hodgins who didn't even get a chance to play last year and will most likely at least see some opportunities, it's hard to know if he's in the long-term plans or not due to last year's injury. 

 

All that said, Bills have good depth at most positions with a mix of vet and young players except for the ones noted above. 

[machine gun kelly]

I almost always agree with Chand, but Ethan you’re right a 1 technique DT like Star looks and acts like a NT.  I don’t know if we do that as a trade up, but I’ll agree the two positions listed are very similar.

[colin]

we have a window right now to win it all, and our roster is deep so we don't want to draft players who can't make the team, nor do we want to draft guys who upgrade our backups (possible exception at OL and DL).

 

i think beane makes moves up and or down to get the guys he wants who can make an impact this season (RB, TE, CB, DL) and drafts "value" freak athletes w high ceilings after that.

 

if we walk away w a TE and RB who by the end of the season are no worse than 2nd on the team at their positions, and a 1 tech who can play with no real drop off from star, then this draft is a massive success and having those guys last year might have put us over the top.

 

obv some kind of sick pass rusher would be awesome, but i just don't think it's in the cards.

[JESSEFEFFER]

On 4/13/2021 at 6:40 PM, Tipster19 said:

Instead of just staying where you’re slotted or even trading back to accumulate more pick(s), I would think that a team would be more afforded to take that shot to move up in a draft to be in better position to take a player that is projected to be a difference maker. The window for a team to sustain great success is usually opened for just a few years, especially due to the salary cap. Rosters are turned to some degree from year to year and then the contracts start to mount and catch up to a successful team, forcing them to make bigger changes. 

I would take the same circumstances and say that the Bills have their difference makers and are in the midst of extending them into second contracts.  Now is the time to flood the roster with younger, cheaper talent on their rookie deals.  I think this draft is more about its effect on the 2022 and 2023 team than the 2021 team.  Just because Beane has not used this draft move in previous years, there may a shift in focus from trading up for blue chip talent to trading down at the top of the draft and trading up from the bottom of the draft to get more of their picks from the top 100 or 150 to refortify the roster every year.  This may become part of their envisioned process to sustain success.

[YattaOkasan]

8 hours ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Beane is a guy that burns picks for a player he covets. My guess is he lets the draft come to him in the first round and takes Harris or Etienne if they fall to 30. Then he trades up in the second round for a pass rusher giving up a 4th. He then gives up a 2nd next year to move from late third to late 2nd and takes the NT of the future. 

Uggh on a RB in the first and giving up a 4th this year is not possible if we dont move back to get one first. 

 

I dont think we need to take 1 tech in the 2nd.  I see a lot of them falling to our pick in round 5 (Marvin Wilson, Taderrel Slaton, Bobby Brown III). 

 

Your proposal does not address concerns at the following more important positions:

• CB2 next year (only Tre and Dane Jackson under contract for next year). 
• WR next year (Diggs, Will davis continue to grow?, 1 year older Beasley is all we have) 
• iOL next year (Feliciano is ok, Ford is hope, Morse has injury concerns, Boettger is okish) 
• S this year (Johnson behind Poyer and Hyde inspires no confidence for me) 

 

Are you concerned about the relative positional value of RB and 1 tech for where you take them (in the first 2 rounds)?  Are you not concerned about these other positions cause I dont think you fill them if you burn the draft capital?  

Edited April 15, 2021 by YattaOkasan

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 4/13/2021 at 5:40 PM, Tipster19 said:

Instead of just staying where you’re slotted or even trading back to accumulate more pick(s), I would think that a team would be more afforded to take that shot to move up in a draft to be in better position to take a player that is projected to be a difference maker. The window for a team to sustain great success is usually opened for just a few years, especially due to the salary cap. Rosters are turned to some degree from year to year and then the contracts start to mount and catch up to a successful team, forcing them to make bigger changes. 

 

It may make sense in the later rounds

For a team in the stage the Bills are at, we really need our draft picks from the first 3 rounds to hit to sustain success. 

 

Since there's at best, a 50% hit rate, moving up in the 1st three rounds means sacrificing current or future picks that are needed to sustain success.

[Eastport bills]

It really depends on how far up and at what cost. If it cost a 3rd and a 4th and another pick in that range next year to get into the high teens and pick off a player they had slotted in the top 12, it would be worth it in my view. 

[The Jokeman]

2 hours ago, BigBuff423 said:

For this team, in this Draft year for several reasons, I agree with trading up - just not in the 1st Round. Bills stay at 30 and can take BPA which could be a CB, DE/Edge, or a RB. But then, I would sell all remaining picks to get 2 or 3 players in the second and third round. That would make 3 or 4 players and that's probably about it that make the roster and contribute. In no particular order: CB, RB, DE, TE....that's it. 

 

Bills just signed Milano, Mongo and D. Williams to multi-year extensions. If the Bills were to trade for a TE, then I could see that pick morph into a WR to help cascade the aging group as most likely Sanders and Beasley are out next year. But with a big WR in Hodgins who didn't even get a chance to play last year and will most likely at least see some opportunities, it's hard to know if he's in the long-term plans or not due to last year's injury. 

 

All that said, Bills have good depth at most positions with a mix of vet and young players except for the ones noted above. 

If you look at the structure of some of the contracts like Mongo's for instance it's essentially a one year deal, guys like him Addison/Hughes/Sanders are all likely gone after this season meanwhile Josh is going to get a whole lot more money that he has now and count a lot more against the cap and we need those lower picks to help replace some of the aforementioned.  While we could trade up and go all in for this season I don't see Beane doing that. 

[Ethan in Cleveland]

29 minutes ago, YattaOkasan said:

Uggh on a RB in the first and giving up a 4th this year is not possible if we dont move back to get one first. 

 

I dont think we need to take 1 tech in the 2nd.  I see a lot of them falling to our pick in round 5 (Marvin Wilson, Taderrel Slaton, Bobby Brown III). 

 

Your proposal does not address concerns at the following more important positions:

• CB2 next year (only Tre and Dane Jackson under contract for next year). 
• WR next year (Diggs, Will davis continue to grow?, 1 year older Beasley is all we have) 
• iOL next year (Feliciano is ok, Ford is hope, Morse has injury concerns, Boettger is okish) 
• S this year (Johnson behind Poyer and Hyde inspires no confidence for me) 

 

Are you concerned about the relative positional value of RB and 1 tech for where you take them (in the first 2 rounds)?  Are you not concerned about these other positions cause I dont think you fill them if you burn the draft capital?  

Good assessment 

1. I'm higher on Wallace than many on this board. Don't see CB2 as a glaring need

2. Star will be gone and H.Phillips isn't that good. They need a true 1-tech to play next to Oliver

3. I would have no issue if they added a WR. I posted several times I would have kept Brown for his speed.  I am in SB win now mode so a RB adds more playmaker ability than another rookie WR in my mind for 2021

4. 100% agree they need to add a true center this year or next. Centers can start and play well as a rookie. Interior linemen or TE in the middle rounds this year would be fine. But I can see a scenario that they draft at 32 next year and take a center then