A visual argument against trading down & for trading up

[mrags]

6 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

I agree with you completely on the need for elite talent.

Where the debate seems to lie is with what is the best strategy to acquire same?

 

As I pointed out to @transplantbillsfan above, the "hit rate" from taking one of the top-3 WR in the 1st round, and taking 1 of the top-2 WR in the 2nd round, are practically identical - 8/14 vs 6/10, 57% vs 60%.  And some of those 2nd round players are arguably elite WR talent - AJ Brown, Deebo Samuel, Tee Higgins, Michael Pittman Jr.

 

If I were guessing which way the frog will jump, my guess is that Beane will trade up slightly and draft a WR in the 1st.

But I don't think it would be closing the door on the potential for elite talent to trade back slightly and get a guy at the top of the 2nd, either.

 

 

 

 

I agree on that. But I still think Odunze and Nabors will be clearly better than most of this class. I’m not sold on MHJ actually. And of course a lot has to do with where guys get drafted, their situations, their teams, their QBs, their coaches. Someone will do a lot better in Buffalo than they would on Vegas for example imo. 

[transplantbillsfan]

⁰

22 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Great that you put so much work into this, but how are you getting to 60% hit rate over the last 5 years if you just draft one of the first 3 WR in the 1st round of the draft?  That's 14 WR in the last 5 years (2019 saw only 2).  By your assessment, that's 8 hits.  8/14 = 57%.  Now that's better than a coin flip, but not too much.

 

I said drafting one of the first 3 WRs. In 2019 Deebo was #3

 

22 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Now let's look at what happens if you just draft one of the first 2 WR in the 2nd round of the draft?  That's 10 WR over the last 5 years.  By your assessment, that's 6 hits, so 6/10 = 60%.  That's actually BETTER than what you would get if you just drafted one of the first 3 WR in the first round!!!!!  So according to your data - we would be just as good or better if we TRADE BACK!  AJ Brown is the best WR in the 2019 draft, with Deebo Samuel a close 2nd.  

 

Interesting perspective, but honest question, do you really think it we keep going back 15-20 years that trend keeps up? We can take the time to do it as long as you acknowledge your flawed premise. Of course I'd do the same.

 

22 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Sorry, but once you start what-if'ing, like "what if Ruggs didn't go to prison?" respectfully, we're entering the realm of fancy.  What if Jerry Jeudy had a decent QB throwing to him instead of Drew Lock, Teddy Bridgewater, and The Ghost of Russell Wilson? 

 

I didn't include Ruggs as a hit, so why does the fact that I brought it up make you so upset?

 

22 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

What if Shenault has better QB than Mayfield, Darnold, and Bryce Young?

 

I actually think listing those QBs works against you

[Beck Water]

39 minutes ago, mrags said:

I agree on that. But I still think Odunze and Nabors will be clearly better than most of this class. I’m not sold on MHJ actually. And of course a lot has to do with where guys get drafted, their situations, their teams, their QBs, their coaches. Someone will do a lot better in Buffalo than they would on Vegas for example imo. 

 

Personally, I can't even pretend to have any kind of meaningful opinion - I just don't watch that much college football.

 

But you're absolutely right that a lot goes into whether or not a guy succeeds beyond his innate talent. 

 

In addition to the factors you mention, there's also the intangibles of, how does this kid react to becoming an overnight millionaire?   

 

It doesn't help that to my observation with HS athletes, really talented athletes tend to get special treatment and the scope of it only gets bigger as they move up into college etc.

 

I think that's one reason why the draft, even the top of the first round where the physical talent is undoubtedly elite, tends to be such a crap shoot.  You can watch their film and measure their vertical leap, but not their heart or how hard they continue to work once paid.

 

 

 

Edited April 19 by Beck Water

[transplantbillsfan]

24 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Unbelievable how you miss the point.

 

You look ONLY at the receivers. Thing is, trades have two sides. You get something. And you give stuff up. And yet not a single word about the whole reason why massive trades consistently make teams worse.

 

Yes, you get, on the average, better players further up.

 

Um, DUH!

 

Nobody argues you tend to get better players further up.

 

Your post is precisely what you get from a person like you. You're not a Bills fan, you're a Josh Allen fan.

 

So it doesn't even occur to you to address the stuff you have to give up, because it just doesn't matter to you. How Josh is directly affected is all that you think about.

 

Point is, it matters to the team what you have to give up.

 

Massey-Thaler and all the other studies say the same thing about this. Simply, trading up and giving up major draft assets like extra ones and twos is a horrible idea unless you are trading up for a potential franchise QB. Trades like this produce overall poor results at a high rate. Every study says the same thing. Every single one.

 

 

 

Guys... can someone find Thurm's sponsor... he's clearly losing it

Edited April 19 by transplantbillsfan

[Beck Water]

17 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

I said drafting one of the first 3 WRs. In 2019 Deebo was #3

 

OK, fair, I misunderstood - but I thought you were arguing for drafting up?  The reason I misunderstood is that it doesn't make sense to me to argue for drafting up, by including a guy we both tag as a success who would be drafted by standing pat or trading BACK.  How and why does that support your argument for trading up?

 

17 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

Interesting perspective, but honest question, do you really think it we keep going back 15-20 years that trend keeps up? We can take the time to do it as long as you acknowledge your flawed premise. Of course I'd do the same.

 

I don't know...my guess is "not" but I think your top-3 success rate would also decrease.  Ultimately, while I appreciate and applaud the work you put in, honest comment I feel choosing "top 3 WR" (when they're drafted at different pick numbers year to year) is a bit problematic.  People, including myself and organizations like PFF, have tried to look at success rates by criteria like "top 10 picks" or "top half of the first" or "first" - some of it is in other threads on this board right now. 

The point is that while drafting, teams can't predict who the top 3 guys at a position will be, they can only make an educated guess about how early they need to draft to get a particular player.

 

The bottom line is that the best success for any position is usually in the top half of the 1st round - something like 50%.  Overall, in the first round, it's 30% and usually not much lower in the top 10 picks of the 2nd round.  The second round as a whole stays pretty high, 20-25%.  Third round something like 15-20%, then it plummets.

Let me rummage a bit and I'll put a link to some of the recent stuff people have posted about WR success by draft round here....

 

17 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

I didn't include Ruggs as a hit, so why does the fact that I brought it up make you so upset?

 

Um, yes, you did include Ruggs as a "hit" when you brought up that the success would be 80% for a trade-up if you just included him - " If Ruggs didn't end up in prison and he continued on his upward trajectory in 2021, that hit rate for a top 3 Wide Receiver in the last 5 drafts goes up to 80%... think about that... 80% hit rate potentially over the last 5 years if you just draft one of the first 3 WRs in the draft???"

 

My point is that if you include one hypothetical to claim a hypothetical marvelous 80% hit rate, you open a can of worms where other hypotheticals can enter the fray.  And um, I'm not sure where you get the notion I'm upset.

 

Not following you on the QB comment, but that's a nit.

.....looping back to link some of the recent posts

https://www.twobillsdrive.com/community/topic/254036-how-to-pick-a-top-wr/#comment-9016893

looked at top receivers for the last 3 seasons and where they were drafted.

39% of them from 1st round, equal split between top and bottom half of the 1st round

25% of them from 2nd round
21% from 3rd round

I'm not looking at "how many receivers were drafted where, and what % succeeded? I'm looking at "successful WR, where did they draft?"

 

Here's one by Rigotz
https://www.twobillsdrive.com/community/topic/254044-1st-vs-2nd-round-wr-hit-rate/#comment-9017898
He goes back 9 years but omits the 22 and 23 draft as too recent for good data...you'll like his conclusion 

11 out of 28 first round picks ended up being plus starters (39%).

6 out of 33 second round picks ended up being plus starters (18%).
[So he would support you, don't trade back]

Here's one where I was looking at the most successful players in each draft, vs draft order

https://www.twobillsdrive.com/community/topic/254021-interesting-wr-scenario-posed-by-a-friend/page/5/#comment-9016980

 

 

Just some different ways of approaching the same problem.  Hope it's of interest.

Edited April 19 by Beck Water
add links as I said I would

[Thurman#1]

2 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

 

 

 

Wow. Intelligent response. So full of substance. What a surprise, a big nothing from you.

 

Edited April 19 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

 

 

1 hour ago, Beck Water said:

 

OK, fair, I misunderstood - but I thought you were arguing for drafting up?  The reason I misunderstood is that it doesn't make sense to me to argue for drafting up, by including a guy we both tag as a success who would be drafted by standing pat or trading BACK.  How and why does that support your argument for trading up?

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, his headline was "A visual argument against trading down & for trading up."

 

And then the post gave absolutely nothing about trading at all, addressing only whether guys drafted higher tend to succeed at higher (though not necessarily high) rates.

 

 

 

Edited April 19 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

1 hour ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Guys... can someone find Thurm's sponsor... he's clearly losing it

 

 

Yup. Two posts in a row from you with zero substance.

 

Par for the course for you, Transie. The facts are inconvenient for you, so just distract.

[Thurman#1]

6 hours ago, mrags said:

I think getting one of the top 3 around 9-11 is doable with pick 28, next years 1st (we now have 2x2nds next year and one of them will be fairly early) and likely a little more ammo. Throw one of them in maybe, or some other picks this year. 
 

or

 

move up to the middle teens for Thomas who Imo should be looked at as part of that top 4 group. 
 

of that’s not an option, I’d rather get someone like Worthy who may not be overall great but at least he’s got legendary speed to build off of. There’s plenty of options. 
 

regardless, 5th and 6th rd picks aren’t making this team most likely. And honestly, anyone in rd 6 you could just as easily find in the undrafted market after the draft. There’s always a mad dash the minute the draft is over. I’m willing to bet Beane signs about 10+ guys within the first 24 hours after the draft is complete. They will be JAGs and guys that will be there for the “90” that come to camp. But in the end they won’t make the team and it won’t matter. 

 

 

We've only got three picks above the fifth round now, before we start trading up. Some fifths and sixth are very likely to make it. Surely, you're right that not all eleven draftees will, but there's no reason to think we'll only keep three drafted rookies.

[transplantbillsfan]

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Wow. Intelligent response. So full of substance. What a surprise, a big nothing from you.

 

 

Mmmhmmmm.... remember this Thurm when talking about QBs having an Elite weapon in almost all of the last 5 Super Bowls... both winners and losers????

 

@Thurman#1"Kupp the year the Rams won. Top ten surely, but not elite. 1161 yards is damn good, 9th in the league among WRs that year, but not elite."

 

Love the way you ran away from that conversation right after me calling you out on Kupp, Evans and Kelce not being Elite.

 

I see that you keep responding to me... maybe I'll read them, but right now... 

Edited April 19 by transplantbillsfan

[SoonerBillsFan]

Beane knows all of this already.  He has what...20 1st round grades on players.

 

 

 

[mrags]

43 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

We've only got three picks above the fifth round now, before we start trading up. Some fifths and sixth are very likely to make it. Surely, you're right that not all eleven draftees will, but there's no reason to think we'll only keep three drafted rookies.

There’s also no reason to think we won’t pick up a dozen undrafted rookies as well as another half dozen or more vets on minimum deals that also might not make the 53. 
 

my point is that the 90 bodies to camp argument is dumb. They can find anyone off the street to come in and be a camp body. They aren’t going to count against the cap, and they aren’t going to make the final roster anyway. Sure, maybe 3 out of the 40 might make it, but that’s nothing special. 
 

we need elite talent in this team, not 4 extra 5th rounders that have a shot in camp but never make the final roster anyway. 

[transplantbillsfan]

3 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

I agree with you completely on the need for elite talent.

Where the debate seems to lie is with what is the best strategy to acquire same?

 

As I pointed out to @transplantbillsfan above, the "hit rate" from taking one of the top-3 WR in the 1st round, and taking 1 of the top-2 WR in the 2nd round, are practically identical - 8/14 vs 6/10, 57% vs 60%.  And some of those 2nd round players are arguably elite WR talent - AJ Brown, Deebo Samuel, Tee Higgins, Michael Pittman Jr.

 

 

I concede you have an interesting theory. Lots of early 2nd rounders are productive NFL players.

 

I just went all the way back to 2010. It really falls back into scrubs. And other than the 4 you mentioned here, while a good number of early 2nd rounders are hits, few to none outside the 4 guys you just mentioned are stars to superstars.

 

Gotta go top 3 WRs for that.

[Pete]

4 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

What a terrible example!

 

At least use the 2011 Julio Jones trade. That's worse case scenario. Also look at the Mahomes and Jameson Williams trade up.

 

Good grief at least be a little more realistic with your examples.

OK Mr GM.  Make it happen.  Beane already said no one on top 10 is calling him, and he hasn’t called.

Ditka traded his whole draft for Ricky- fact.

 

Falcons gave up their 1st round pick, 2nd, and 4th round pick in 2011, and their 1st and 4th round pick in 2012.  No ***** way do I wish to see the Bills give all that up for a WR.

 

Good grief lol

[GunnerBill]

So I just thought I'd add to the debate about the relative strength of this WR class compared to the last five (as per @transplantbillsfan's original comparison). I have my boards to go back to so I know what I thought at the time and not with the benefit of hindsight and here it is:

 

2019: 

0 first round grades

1 borderline 1st/2nd grade (AJ Brown)

4 second round grades

4 third round grades 

Total day 1 & 2 grades: 9

 

2020:

3 first round grades (Jeudy, Lamb, Ruggs)

7 second round grades

8 third round grades

Total day 1 & 2 grades: 18

 

2021:

3 first round grades (Chase, Waddle, Smith)

5 second round grades

4 third round grades 

Total day 1 & 2 grades: 12

 

2022:

4 first round grades (Olave, Williams, Wilson, Burks)

1 borderline 1st/2nd grade (London)

7 second round grades

5 third round grades

Total day 1 & 2 grades: 17

 

2023: 

0 first round grades

2 borderline 1st/2nd grades (Addison, JSN)

4 second round grades

7 third round grades

Total day 1 & 2 grades: 13

 

And for comparison based on my current board....

 

2024:

4 first round grades (Harrison, Nabers, Odunze, Legette)

1 borderline 1st/2nd grade (Thomas)

5 second round grades 

9 third round grades

Total day 1 & 2 grades: 19

 

 

Conclusion: Only 2020 is really comparable to me of the last five classes in terms of both high end talent and depth through the first two days. I also think both classes saw something of a drop off after that. The only two guys who made a significant impact taken after round 3 in 2020 were Gabe Davis (who was a third round grade on my board) and Darnell Mooney (who I hadn't graded). I think it is similar with this class. Sometimes you get a day 3 with lots of interesting toolsy underclassmen who haven't quite put it together or you get really productive guys who are smaller or play for small schools. I don't see much of that in this group. So I think where that leaves you is if any class is going to have a Tee Higgins and Michael Pittman out of round 2 it is this one. But they were the first two picks in round 2. I think that (first 4-5 picks of round 2) is the limit of where the Bills can reasonably expect to be and get a potential difference maker in year 1. If they wait to #60 they could get a guy who contributes this year and maybe even develops further over the next 4 years but their chances at that spot of getting a rookie difference maker.... that feels like you are in total pot luck territory. 

 

[CNYfan]

I had London well ahead of Burks.  That rating surprises me.  

[GunnerBill]

To add yet more context to this.... here is a combined big board by my grading of the WR drafts 2019-2024

 

=1. Marvin Harrison Jnr (2024)

=1. Ja'Marr Chase (2021)

=3. Jerry Jeudy (2020)

=3. Malik Nabers (2024)

5. CeeDee Lamb (2020)

6. Rome Odunze (2024)

=7. Chris Olave (2022)

=7. Jaylen Waddle (2021)

9. DeVonte Smith (2021)

=10. Henry Ruggs (2020)

=10. Jameson Williams (2022)

 

Just now, CNYfan said:

I had London well ahead of Burks.  That rating surprises me.  

 

Yea I was too high on Burks (although I don't think he was at all helped by the team that drafted him and the offense they put him in, he was never a 'conventional' high end receiver he needed to be used creatively and got put into one of the least creative passing offenses in the entire league). I stand my ground 100% on London though. He is a low end #1. Doesn't separate enough to be an elite receiver. 

[dave mcbride]

10 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

The fact that you tried to make a guy who was an All-Pro twice as a punt returner really says everything here.

 

If you're going to make an argument, don't reach. 

 

We need a #1 or #2 WR... not a punt returner.

 

Focus on that

If you don’t remember how good Jermaine Lewis was - in an era when returns mattered — that is surprising, but whatever. (Also, kickoff returner too.) We can agree to disagree. The best ten receivers in that draft, in my opinion, were in rough order as follows:

 

1st: tie - Harrison (first rounder) / TO (3rd rounder)

3rd: Muhammed (second rounder)

4th: tie - Moulds (first rounder / Toomer (second rounder)

6th: tie - Keyshawn (first overall) / Joe Horn (fifth rounder)

8th: Terry Glenn (first rounder)

9th: tie - Bobby Engram (second rounder) / Eddie Kennison (first rounder)

 

Also, the "says everything here" line (re: a very small element of what I'm saying - that Jermaine Lewis was a good player) along with all the GIF snark isn't a great way to argue. You're too dismissive of other posters and you seem to think snarky cutdowns will somehow punctuate for others the correctness of your own views. It likely doesn't for the people you're engaging with.  

Edited April 19 by dave mcbride

[Chaos]

11 hours ago, strive_for_five_guy said:

A written argument for why we should trade up:

 

I nominate this as a post of the year finalist. Clever. Succinct. Brilliant. 

[section122]

8 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

I think that's one reason why the draft, even the top of the first round where the physical talent is undoubtedly elite, tends to be such a crap shoot.  You can watch their film and measure their vertical leap, but not their heart or how hard they continue to work once paid.

 

 

There was a really interesting conversation on Sirius the other day about how the NIL deals are making kids stay in school longer and causing some issues with transferring and competition however the huge benefit for the NFL is teams now get to see how kids react to getting paid.  It's a huge piece that they also had to wonder about but now they have real actionable information.  Does the player still work as hard, does he still put in the effort on training, or does he rest on his laurels and not try as hard.  It used to be making it to the NFL was when you got life changing money.  Now kids are getting it as Freshman and teams get a few years of data.  They mentioned that it helps teams know who has the drive or plays for the love of the game as opposed to just playing for the paycheck.

 

8 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

OK, fair, I misunderstood - but I thought you were arguing for drafting up?  The reason I misunderstood is that it doesn't make sense to me to argue for drafting up, by including a guy we both tag as a success who would be drafted by standing pat or trading BACK.  How and why does that support your argument for trading up?

 

 

I don't know...my guess is "not" but I think your top-3 success rate would also decrease.  Ultimately, while I appreciate and applaud the work you put in, honest comment I feel choosing "top 3 WR" (when they're drafted at different pick numbers year to year) is a bit problematic.  People, including myself and organizations like PFF, have tried to look at success rates by criteria like "top 10 picks" or "top half of the first" or "first" - some of it is in other threads on this board right now. 

The point is that while drafting, teams can't predict who the top 3 guys at a position will be, they can only make an educated guess about how early they need to draft to get a particular player.

 

The bottom line is that the best success for any position is usually in the top half of the 1st round - something like 50%.  Overall, in the first round, it's 30% and usually not much lower in the top 10 picks of the 2nd round.  The second round as a whole stays pretty high, 20-25%.  Third round something like 15-20%, then it plummets.

Let me rummage a bit and I'll put a link to some of the recent stuff people have posted about WR success by draft round here....

 

 

Um, yes, you did include Ruggs as a "hit" when you brought up that the success would be 80% for a trade-up if you just included him - " If Ruggs didn't end up in prison and he continued on his upward trajectory in 2021, that hit rate for a top 3 Wide Receiver in the last 5 drafts goes up to 80%... think about that... 80% hit rate potentially over the last 5 years if you just draft one of the first 3 WRs in the draft???"

 

My point is that if you include one hypothetical to claim a hypothetical marvelous 80% hit rate, you open a can of worms where other hypotheticals can enter the fray.  And um, I'm not sure where you get the notion I'm upset.

 

Not following you on the QB comment, but that's a nit.

.....looping back to link some of the recent posts

https://www.twobillsdrive.com/community/topic/254036-how-to-pick-a-top-wr/#comment-9016893

looked at top receivers for the last 3 seasons and where they were drafted.

39% of them from 1st round, equal split between top and bottom half of the 1st round

25% of them from 2nd round
21% from 3rd round

I'm not looking at "how many receivers were drafted where, and what % succeeded? I'm looking at "successful WR, where did they draft?"

 

Here's one by Rigotz
https://www.twobillsdrive.com/community/topic/254044-1st-vs-2nd-round-wr-hit-rate/#comment-9017898
He goes back 9 years but omits the 22 and 23 draft as too recent for good data...you'll like his conclusion 

11 out of 28 first round picks ended up being plus starters (39%).

6 out of 33 second round picks ended up being plus starters (18%).
[So he would support you, don't trade back]

Here's one where I was looking at the most successful players in each draft, vs draft order

https://www.twobillsdrive.com/community/topic/254021-interesting-wr-scenario-posed-by-a-friend/page/5/#comment-9016980

 

 

Just some different ways of approaching the same problem.  Hope it's of interest.

 

I posted earlier in the thread:

 

Instead of using the whole 2nd round, I used the top 7 wrs in each draft.  I think it is very reasonable that the Bills will get their choice of at least a top 7 wr barring a historical never before seen run on wrs.  The success numbers are actually better than his numbers for trading up. @transplantbillsfan didn't respond to it though I would be interested to hear what he has to say.