Interesting NY Post article…claims Kincaid was Beane’s target days before the draft…

[GunnerBill]

7 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

I think, before potentially diving down a wormhole of misunderstanding in further discussion, I need to ask you what you mean by tactical and what you mean by strategic in this context

 

Because part of the behavior you believe you see - "the team really needs a CB on day 1 of the draft" "I must come out of day 1 with a receiving talent", IF it is what's occurring, sounds like what I would call draft strategy.  How you get there (trade up, stand pat and reach, trade back) sounds like tactics.

 

 

Okay so my definition of strategic is it is a plan to achieve long term goals. So in the context of NFL roster building that means ensuring you as a GM keep the team well stocked with young talent at the premium positions - QB, WR, EDGE, CB, LT. 

 

Tactical in this context is individual moves to get you there so to me that encompasses both the fixation on a year by year basis on certain spots and the moving around the draft board to secure guys at those spots. When you go "we must have a tackle now for this coming year" you can justify trading up in round 2 for Cody Ford; you can justify trading up for "your last first round grade" whether it is Kaiir Elam or Dalton Kincaid; you can justify Boogie Basham because "edge is a need." And when you isolate each of those decisions in turn you can justify them as tactically the right move.

 

But using the draft as a year year shopping list in that way means you are always chasing your own roster construction and step back and look at the results of the Bills drafting in the second half of Beane's reign when I think this has been more pronounced and they are not as strong as the results in the first half.  They aren't disastrous by any meana and nor would I expect them to be because as I say I think the majority of the decisions are in isolation justifiable. But I fear a bit we are in chase our tail mode. One of these years (fingers crossed it isn't this one) Dion Dawkins is going to get to the point where his relative lack of conditioning catches up with him, his feet slow down and he becomes a less reliable LT than he has been. At that point the Bills will have an urgent need at left tackle. And I wonder if miraculously at that stage the last first round grade on their board with a small trade up from mid to late 20s to early 20s will snag them a tackle? 

Edited August 12, 2023 by GunnerBill

[JoPoy88]

8 hours ago, Doc said:

 

He's said the past 3 drafts that every player he's taken was a 1st round talent, sometimes the last one left on their board.  That sounds strategic.

Yes but looking at outside sources (draft analyst sites, etc., who, obviously don’t know everything either) I think they sort of agree with Beane on his “1st round” grades, at least for Elam and Kincaid. Maybe not so much with Rousseau but he seems to be coming along nicely.

 

I do think you’re right about the “last 1st rd grade left” point though. I think Beane’s just throwing an extra justification on there for having to trade up slightly for these guys.

[Richard Noggin]

7 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

I think, before potentially diving down a wormhole of misunderstanding in further discussion, I need to ask you what you mean by tactical and what you mean by strategic in this context

 

Because part of the behavior you believe you see - "the team really needs a CB on day 1 of the draft" "I must come out of day 1 with a receiving talent", IF it is what's occurring, sounds like what I would call draft strategy.  How you get there (trade up, stand pat and reach, trade back) sounds like tactics.

 

 

So I think what you're sharing in the provided example is potentially considered "tactical" in that it's specifically influenced by contemporaneous circumstances for a given draft and a given perceived roster need, and does not adhere to a longer term, macro view of maximizing draft value year after year to consistently add cost-controlled, high-end talent. It's heavily swayed by current perception of circumstances, and therefore subject to more flexible and relative and potentially undisciplined or short-sighted use of assets. 

 

The repeated trade-ups have cost the roster how many day-three picks in Beane's tenure? No one will argue whatever Allen's pick cost. But what about Edmunds, Ford, Knox, Elam, Dawkins (?) et al? (Didn't we trade up for Dion Dawkins? Memory is foggy on that one.) Draft strategy here seems to be to zero-in on specific players each year and spend more to acquire them, if necessary, draft value be damned, which almost no NFL GMs would actually admit to. 

 

Maybe it's just that what seems short-sighted and reactive I call "tactical," and what seems more patient and prudent and value-conscious I call "strategy." Semantics is a fraught endeavor in sports convos. 

[GunnerBill]

5 minutes ago, Richard Noggin said:

 

So I think what you're sharing in the provided example is potentially considered "tactical" in that it's specifically influenced by contemporaneous circumstances for a given draft and a given perceived roster need, and does not adhere to a longer term, macro view of maximizing draft value year after year to consistently add cost-controlled, high-end talent. It's heavily swayed by current perception of circumstances, and therefore subject to more flexible and relative and potentially undisciplined or short-sighted use of assets. 

 

 

This was better than my explanation. It is too early on a Saturday morning for me to sound this smart 😄

[JoPoy88]

16 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Okay so my definition of strategic is it is a plan to achieve long term goals. So in the context of NFL roster building that means ensuring you as a GM keep the team well stocked with young talent at the premium positions - QB, WR, EDGE, CB, LT. 

 

Tactical in this context is individual moves to get you there so to me that encompasses both the fixation on a year by year basis on certain spots and the moving around the draft board to secure guys at those spots. When you go "we must have a tackle now for this coming year" you can justify trading up in round 2 for Cody Ford; you can justify trading up for "your last first round grade" whether it is Kaiir Elam or Dalton Kincaid; you can justify Boogie Basham because "edge is a need." And when you isolate each of those decisions in turn you can justify them as tactically the right move.

 

But using the draft as a year year shopping list in that way means you are always chasing your own roster construction and step back and look at the results of the Bills drafting in the second half of Beane's reign when I think this has been more pronounced and they are not as strong as the results in the first half.  They aren't disastrous by any meana and nor would I expect them to be because as I say I think the majority of the decisions are in isolation justifiable. But I fear a bit we are in chase our tail mode. One of these years (fingers crossed it isn't this one) Dion Dawkins is going to get to the point where his relative lack of conditioning catches up with him, his feet slow down and he becomes a less reliable LT than he has been. At that point the Bills will have an urgent need at left tackle. And I wonder if miraculously at that stage the last first round grade on their board with a small trade up from mid to late 20s to early 20s will snag them a tackle? 

That is a very cool way to define and describe those two terms and full disclosure I’m stealing this and going to use it in arguments with my friends Gunner 👍😀

8 minutes ago, Richard Noggin said:

 

So I think what you're sharing in the provided example is potentially considered "tactical" in that it's specifically influenced by contemporaneous circumstances for a given draft and a given perceived roster need, and does not adhere to a longer term, macro view of maximizing draft value year after year to consistently add cost-controlled, high-end talent. It's heavily swayed by current perception of circumstances, and therefore subject to more flexible and relative and potentially undisciplined or short-sighted use of assets. 

 

The repeated trade-ups have cost the roster how many day-three picks in Beane's tenure? No one will argue whatever Allen's pick cost. But what about Edmunds, Ford, Knox, Elam, Dawkins (?) et al? (Didn't we trade up for Dion Dawkins? Memory is foggy on that one.) Draft strategy here seems to be to zero-in on specific players each year and spend more to acquire them, if necessary, draft value be damned, which almost no NFL GMs would actually admit to. 

 

Maybe it's just that what seems short-sighted and reactive I call "tactical," and what seems more patient and prudent and value-conscious I call "strategy." Semantics is a fraught endeavor in sports convos. 

same applies to this. Excellent post

[Richard Noggin]

15 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

Beane did say they had a first-round grade on one of the receivers who was drafted in the early 20s, before Kincaid. 

 

He didn't say which one (natch) and he didn't give any indication who he would have taken if they were both there.

 

 

I don't think you (or any of us) can know whether the Bills did, in fact, "laser in on a pass catcher" or say "we must have a pass catcher".  And I don't think Beane was flying by the seat of his pants "oh, there's only one pass catcher we want left, and we really need one, let's give up a 4th"

 

On the other hand, obviously roster building does have to factor into it to some degree, or you wind up drafting CB (for example) every year when you have real needs at every position.

 

My guess would be that the Bills have a handful of guys, maybe 10-15, they have graded as first round talents then a smaller set, maybe 6, they have graded as a match between 1st round talent and roster-building needs.  They probably have  1 or 2 they would be willing to use resources to trade up for.  And then I suspect they work scenarios - three draft picks ahead of our slot, how many of those guys are left?  And how high is our grade on the ones that are left?  Are they players we have flagged as "trade up worthy?"

 

Because if it gets to 3 picks ahead of you and you have 2 guys graded as 1st round picks who remain, your choice is 1) trade up 2) stand pat and trade down if you can 3) stand pat and reach

 

That's how I think it happens, not "Oh my goodness, we MUST have a pass catcher, so much that we'll squander resources and trade up to get one".

 

 

14 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

That is how it SHOULD happen. Beane pretty much told us in 2022 he didn't think he could sleep if he didn't come out of day 1 without a corner. He didn't quite say "we had to have one" but it was pretty clear their primary objective in 2022 was to come out of round 1 with a corner. He wasn't quite as explicit in the run up to, or after, this past draft but the way they went about their draft season and the way the draft panned out I very strongly suspect they were dead set on a pass catcher and if there wasn't a pass catcher there for them they though was value (or achievable with a small trade up) they were going to move down. They were not willing to pick a non-pass catcher at their original spot. They had lasered in on it to my eye. I accept that is supposition and I don't know it for certain, but I don't think it is an unreasonable conclusion to come to based on everything that we do know - from visits, to the way the draft played out, to Beane's interviews and to the draft room videos. 

 

Elam doesn't seem to fit as a McD CB draft prospect they should have spent extra assets on, given how zone-heavy (even if it's cover-3 and cover-2 which often function like man post-snap depending on the play calls) they have been. Or, if Elam the prospect was such a good prospect that they felt justified in moving up in the 1st round, why aren't they doing more to adapt to his unique skills and utilize his specific strengths? Why wasn't that part of a premeditated shift towards more press and man coverage? Seems like Benford and Jackson (6th and 7th round picks, respectively) provide plenty of promise in the defensive philosophy the Bills have relied upon since McD's arrival. Is Frazier's departure part of this? Was he hesitant to scheme to Elam's strengths? Or was Elam a bit of a reach to ensure they got the last 1st-round worthy CB prospect in a year when that was a perceived glaring need? 

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, Richard Noggin said:

 

 

Elam doesn't seem to fit as a McD CB draft prospect they should have spent extra assets on, given how zone-heavy (even if it's cover-3 and cover-2 which often function like man post-snap depending on the play calls) they have been. Or, if Elam the prospect was such a good prospect that they felt justified in moving up in the 1st round, why aren't they doing more to adapt to his unique skills and utilize his specific strengths? Why wasn't that part of a premeditated shift towards more press and man coverage? Seems like Benford and Jackson (6th and 7th round picks, respectively) provide plenty of promise in the defensive philosophy the Bills have relied upon since McD's arrival. Is Frazier's departure part of this? Was he hesitant to scheme to Elam's strengths? Or was Elam a bit of a reach to ensure they got the last 1st-round worthy CB prospect in a year when that was a perceived glaring need? 

 

See my point on Elam in the trad candidates thread but I agree. They knew what they were drafting - Beane said as much right after the pick - and yet they are reluctant to put him on the field because he isn't something other than the thing they drafted. Bizarre. Either they made a poor decision OR they need to get him on the field and tweak the defense to accentuate what he can do and not what he can't.

[Richard Noggin]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

See my point on Elam in the trad candidates thread but I agree. They knew what they were drafting - Beane said as much right after the pick - and yet they are reluctant to put him on the field because he isn't something other than the thing they drafted. Bizarre. Either they made a poor decision OR they need to get him on the field and tweak the defense to accentuate what he can do and not what he can't.

 

Doesn't this particular discussion of "fit" echo what happened with AJ Epenesa in a way? While he fell deep into the 2nd round and his perceived value was sticking out, his best or at least most common NFL projections were as a 2-gapping 3-4 DE; a Pittsburgh Steeler type of guy. Long and strong and edge-setting. So the Bills draft this stout Iowa bull and immediately ask him to become a fundamentally different athlete. Instead of leaning into his well-documented strengths, they seemingly decided that his "very poor" speed RAS and "okay" agility RAS could be made less mediocre by asking him to lose another 10-20 pounds (he had already shed at least 5-10 lbs for the combine), thus for sure eroding his one "great" RAS, which was his size.  

 

Longview draft "strategy" (to reference our other ongoing discussion) supports picking AJ Epenesa when he falls to you in the back half of the 2nd round. But then tactically the coaches need to have an actionable plan to utilize said player's strengths, or else that perceived draft value is rendered moot, and Beane could have maybe identified a better fit. 

[Buffalo716]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Okay so my definition of strategic is it is a plan to achieve long term goals. So in the context of NFL roster building that means ensuring you as a GM keep the team well stocked with young talent at the premium positions - QB, WR, EDGE, CB, LT. 

 

Tactical in this context is individual moves to get you there so to me that encompasses both the fixation on a year by year basis on certain spots and the moving around the draft board to secure guys at those spots. When you go "we must have a tackle now for this coming year" you can justify trading up in round 2 for Cody Ford; you can justify trading up for "your last first round grade" whether it is Kaiir Elam or Dalton Kincaid; you can justify Boogie Basham because "edge is a need." And when you isolate each of those decisions in turn you can justify them as tactically the right move.

 

But using the draft as a year year shopping list in that way means you are always chasing your own roster construction and step back and look at the results of the Bills drafting in the second half of Beane's reign when I think this has been more pronounced and they are not as strong as the results in the first half.  They aren't disastrous by any meana and nor would I expect them to be because as I say I think the majority of the decisions are in isolation justifiable. But I fear a bit we are in chase our tail mode. One of these years (fingers crossed it isn't this one) Dion Dawkins is going to get to the point where his relative lack of conditioning catches up with him, his feet slow down and he becomes a less reliable LT than he has been. At that point the Bills will have an urgent need at left tackle. And I wonder if miraculously at that stage the last first round grade on their board with a small trade up from mid to late 20s to early 20s will snag them a tackle? 

Did you really just put Dalton Kincaid in the same group as boogie basham though? Or is it your analogy of talking yourself into moving up for a guy

 

I thought Dalton Kincaid was a top 15 player in the draft... Rare TE traits, made for the modern day

Edited August 12, 2023 by Buffalo716

[Doc Brown]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

But I fear a bit we are in chase our tail mode. One of these years (fingers crossed it isn't this one) Dion Dawkins is going to get to the point where his relative lack of conditioning catches up with him, his feet slow down and he becomes a less reliable LT than he has been. At that point the Bills will have an urgent need at left tackle. And I wonder if miraculously at that stage the last first round grade on their board with a small trade up from mid to late 20s to early 20s will snag them a tackle? 

Well, if a tackle were to fall in the first round it would be dumb not to give up a 4th round pick to jump Dallas to get him  

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Buffalo716 said:

Did you really just put Dalton Kincaid in the same group as boogie basham though? Or is it your analogy of talking yourself into moving up for a guy

 

I thought Dalton Kincaid was a top 15 player in the draft... Rare TE traits, made for the modern day

 

Yes my analogy is exactly that. I have said multiple times on Kincaid I am not displeased with the outcome. What I am making is a wider strategic process point. You can have the wrong process and get the right outcome. You can have perfect process and still miss. But I do feel like Beane as the Bills have got into true contender mode has become a bit short term tactical in his draft process. Sometimes he has still got really good players as a result. But long term personally I'd prefer them to be a bit more strategic. Because there will always be a guy every year when you are drafting where the Bills do who in isolation you can justify to yourself jumping up for.

[whorlnut]

6 hours ago, Richard Noggin said:

 

 

Elam doesn't seem to fit as a McD CB draft prospect they should have spent extra assets on, given how zone-heavy (even if it's cover-3 and cover-2 which often function like man post-snap depending on the play calls) they have been. Or, if Elam the prospect was such a good prospect that they felt justified in moving up in the 1st round, why aren't they doing more to adapt to his unique skills and utilize his specific strengths? Why wasn't that part of a premeditated shift towards more press and man coverage? Seems like Benford and Jackson (6th and 7th round picks, respectively) provide plenty of promise in the defensive philosophy the Bills have relied upon since McD's arrival. Is Frazier's departure part of this? Was he hesitant to scheme to Elam's strengths? Or was Elam a bit of a reach to ensure they got the last 1st-round worthy CB prospect in a year when that was a perceived glaring need? 

I wasn’t a fan of the Elam pick. I felt they took him because they felt they needed one. Still do. The fact that he doesn’t fit their scheme and late rounders are getting more burn makes it even more puzzling and frustrating. Last years draft was also pretty well stocked with day 2 corners and a few day 3 guys that made immediate impacts. Guys like Cam Taylor Britt and Tariq woolen come to mind. I hope Elam figured it out but at this point there seems to be obvious deficiencies that are keeping him out as the CB2. 

[Doc]

7 hours ago, Richard Noggin said:

Man, I was still only on the BBMB back in 2005 when "retatta" was a message board thing here. So I am completely missing the actual reference beyond knowing there was some obviously humorous TBD thread 18 years ago when I was exclusively frequenting the "official" Bills message board when that existed. 

 

Anyone care to summarize for us BBMB refugees (or for the many youngins)?

 

IIRC, there was a thread on recipes.  Someone posted that recipe as a legit one (I think it involved ramen noodles and pickle juice if memory serves me) and they all laughed him off the board basically.

 

6 hours ago, JoPoy88 said:

Yes but looking at outside sources (draft analyst sites, etc., who, obviously don’t know everything either) I think they sort of agree with Beane on his “1st round” grades, at least for Elam and Kincaid. Maybe not so much with Rousseau but he seems to be coming along nicely.

 

I do think you’re right about the “last 1st rd grade left” point though. I think Beane’s just throwing an extra justification on there for having to trade up slightly for these guys.

 

6 hours ago, Richard Noggin said:

 

So I think what you're sharing in the provided example is potentially considered "tactical" in that it's specifically influenced by contemporaneous circumstances for a given draft and a given perceived roster need, and does not adhere to a longer term, macro view of maximizing draft value year after year to consistently add cost-controlled, high-end talent. It's heavily swayed by current perception of circumstances, and therefore subject to more flexible and relative and potentially undisciplined or short-sighted use of assets. 

 

The repeated trade-ups have cost the roster how many day-three picks in Beane's tenure? No one will argue whatever Allen's pick cost. But what about Edmunds, Ford, Knox, Elam, Dawkins (?) et al? (Didn't we trade up for Dion Dawkins? Memory is foggy on that one.) Draft strategy here seems to be to zero-in on specific players each year and spend more to acquire them, if necessary, draft value be damned, which almost no NFL GMs would actually admit to. 

 

Maybe it's just that what seems short-sighted and reactive I call "tactical," and what seems more patient and prudent and value-conscious I call "strategy." Semantics is a fraught endeavor in sports convos. 

 

I'd rather he trade up to get a 1st round grade than miss out and keep that late draft pick.   The issue is hitting on the pick.  If they become what their evaluations believed (like Josh), there's no problem and you've done the best thing: filled a need with a talented player.

[Mr. WEO]

NYP:  "The Guy the Bills Traded Up to Get in the First Round Was the Guy They Were Targeting Before the Draft!!"

 

(breathlessly reported)

[Beck Water]

8 hours ago, Richard Noggin said:

 

Man, I was still only on the BBMB back in 2005 when "retatta" was a message board thing here. So I am completely missing the actual reference beyond knowing there was some obviously humorous TBD thread 18 years ago when I was exclusively frequenting the "official" Bills message board when that existed. 

 

Anyone care to summarize for us BBMB refugees (or for the many youngins)?

 

I am not worthy.  I was not posting then, but I was here. 

 

I had a good google search for the original thread and could not find it.

 

Basically, it was a post where someone extolled a fritatta recipe featuring pickle juice, and was arguing with a professional chef ( @Chef Jim, who is still around sometimes) about his recipe.  It evolved from people calling it a "short bus fritatta" to a "###### fritatta" to a "retatta"