JESSEFEFFER Posted May 8 Author Posted May 8 5 minutes ago, JohnNord said: It’s pretty amazing how NFL teams are keep so much information under wraps. Their entire production team has access to the team’s board as well as knowledge of their the draft plans which didn’t happen Think of all the combine interviews and 30 visits for players they did not draft. For every Beane comment about liking Coleman's 40 time because it meant they would have a shot at getting him at their draft spot, there are 100s more about other combine players. 2 Quote
Richard Noggin Posted May 9 Posted May 9 10 hours ago, The Jokeman said: I have reservations, I mean Corey Moore lead the NCAA in sacks when we drafted him and like Solomon he was undersized and busted. It doesn't mean Solovan will but there is a reason he fell in the draft and pretty sure it wasn't based on production/attitude or off the field issues.... Corey Moore was 2 inches shorter, even, about 20 lbs lighter, and definitely didn't have NEARLY the length of Solomon (who might not be TALL, but he is long af). Corey Moore was a bad NFL projection. Javon Solomon, imho, is not. A team will need to play with a lead to really employ him in his first couple years as a pass rush specialist, but I have a sense he can excel in that defined role. 1 2 Quote
JohnNord Posted May 9 Posted May 9 2 hours ago, JESSEFEFFER said: Think of all the combine interviews and 30 visits for players they did not draft. For every Beane comment about liking Coleman's 40 time because it meant they would have a shot at getting him at their draft spot, there are 100s more about other combine players. 100%. That’s why I’m surprised how tight-lipped the entire Bills production staff are. I’m guessing there’s a team of about 10 or so (maybe more) who have access to the raw footage and know what the true story was on draft day and at the combine. With all this war room/combine footage, it kind of makes you wonder if it sees the light of day years later. Quote
White Linen Posted May 9 Posted May 9 "If you run 4.3, but you're not smart, you'll never play 4.3". Great line by Beane. 3 Quote
GASabresIUFan Posted May 9 Posted May 9 (edited) 8 hours ago, White Linen said: "If you run 4.3, but you're not smart, you'll never play 4.3". Great line by Beane. Raw speed isn't everything even in the NFL. The thought is that speed translates to more explosive plays, but that isn’t always the case. Here are 4 Bills, recent past and present, with their combine time and their career yards/catch 1. 4.54 - 16.7 2. 4.43 - 15.8 3. 4.46 - 12.3 4. 4.31 - 10.7 Any guesses? 1. Gabe Davis 2. Shakir 3. Diggs 4. Samuel Clearly there is more to it than just raw speed or Samuel would have the most yards per catch. QB play, position, usage within the offense etc... plays into the numbers. Samuel has been stuck as a slot receiver on mostly mediocre to bad teams. Maybe he finally gets a shot as a boundary receiver. Davis made the most of his catches, but sadly he only caught 55% of his targets over the last 4 years. Shakir's ability to make big plays from the slot is very encouraging going forward. Edited May 9 by GASabresIUFan 1 Quote
Cash Posted May 9 Posted May 9 (edited) On 5/8/2024 at 10:14 AM, Back2Buff said: Exactly, it was even on the trade value chart, which means the Bills shouldn't have done it. It should have taken a massive overpay to make the trade. There was an analytics guy idiot after the trade that said the net points the Bills got in this trade, was the 4th worst ever. These draft trades very rarely end up equal. FTFY - see below On 5/8/2024 at 10:47 AM, HappyDays said: I don't think Coleman was "our guy" but he was definitely one of a cluster of guys that we had graded as high 2nd rounders. For all the talk of the WR class there were only four that were seen as consensus 1st rounders. I always thought trading back into the 2nd and recouping a 3rd in the process, then taking the best WR available, was the best possible outcome. If there's anything to take away from this Embedded video it's that GMs including Beane don't have a strict vertical board they're following where they're just ticking off names one after the other and taking the absolute BPA when it's their turn. They are grouping guys into tiers and taking someone from their Best Available Tier (BAT?) who also fills a need. I've always thought the mainstream idea of "BPA" was ridiculous. The idea appears to be that 1.) all players are ranked in a straight line by draft grade, 2.) all players have different draft grades, and 3.) teams either do or ought to draft the top guy on the list no matter what. Feeding into that, I've seen scouting sites that try to give guys numerical grades with 2 decimals, like a 6.43 vs a 6.42. I'm sorry, but just because you went to the hundreths place doesn't mean you have any idea which of those guys is the better prospect. It makes a lot more sense to me to group players by tier, with more macro grading. The Bills definitely have a "first round grade", and I'm sure they have an internal definition of what that means. (Maybe different definitions by position?) So guys who are in the same vicinity of talent get grouped together. Within that tier you might have some level of ranking - maybe one of the guys looks like a tremendous culture fit, so you'd rather have him, that sort of thing. But to think that the board is a straight ranking from #1 to #255, AND that there's an appreciable difference between #55 and #56? Nutso IMO. On 5/8/2024 at 12:39 PM, Back2Buff said: Yeah, this guy Seth Walder is dumb. He's a stupid man! Here's an analogy of what happened: Let's say the Bills were holding a James Cook rookie card that's worth $10. The Chiefs call up and offer $10.50 for the card, and the Bills accept. Seth then jumps in and decries, "THE BILLS ONLY GOT AN EXTRA FIFTY CENTS!!! GREAT BARGAIN FOR THE CHIEFS!" Basically he's saying the Chiefs overpayed by an extra 6th round pick over what a fair price would've been, and that's somehow very cheap. Whereas most normal human beings would think paying LESS than a fair price would be cheap. The only way that what Seth Walder is saying would make sense is if 99% of trade-ups were significant overpays on the trade chart. But modern charts like the Rich Hill chart use actual (recent) trades to calibrate pick values, so it would only work on the old Jimmy Johnson chart or something like that. And teams haven't used that chart for years, so it's irrelevant. In truth, I think Walder is stupid enough to somehow equate the price over asking (an extra 6th-round pick equivalent) with the total price. It's also possible that he's a disingenous weasel who knows how misleading the above tweets are, but tweeted them anyway. But I find it's good to take people at face value until they prove otherwise, and I also tend to stick by Hanlon's Razor - "never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by stupidity". Edited May 9 by Cash 2 3 Quote
947 Posted May 9 Posted May 9 I have no doubt that Beane had intel on the Chiefs & knew they were moving up for Worthy. If the thought of Worthy playing for KC frightened Beane in the slightest, or he wanted Worthy for the Bills at all- he wouldn't have taken their offer. People act like Beane got taken advantage of, when in reality, he knew exactly what he was doing. He probably laughed to himself while he clicked "accept". 1 Quote
Billy Claude Posted May 9 Posted May 9 (edited) On 5/8/2024 at 12:39 PM, Back2Buff said: It seems highly doubtful that the KC/Buff trade was one of the 10 cheapest first round trade ups in 20 years. I went back three years and the KC trade-up was the 7th cheapest (out of 19) so in about the 30th percentile. Here is the data in case anyone wants to dive in. Only trades involving only draft picks were assessed. All points totals are based on the 2024 Rich Hill trade chart and picks in a future year are evaluated at the highest point value for the next round for 2024 year, i.e., a third round pick in 2025 is given the same point value as the first pick of the 4th round of the 2024 draft. The same was done if a third round pick in the 2024 draft was obtained in the 2023 draft (independent of where the pick actually occurred). The +/- is the points gained by the team trading down. Teams trading down and obtaining less value than the trading up team are in boldface. 2024 MIN (gets 10, 203 => 374 pts), NYJ (gets 11, 129, 157 => 387) +13 MIN (17=>296), JAX (23, 167, RD 3, RD 4=>304) +8 DET (24, RD 7 => 238), DAL (29, 73 => 267) + 29 KC (28, 133, 248 => 227), BUF (32. 95. 221 => 227) +0 CAR (32, 200 => 189), BUF (33, 141 => 194) +5 2023 TEX (3, 105 => 546), ARI (12, 33, RD1, RD3 => 741) +195 (the large value indicates that I am most likely overvaluing future year picks) ARI (6, 81 => 501), DET (12. 34. 168 => 531) +30 PHI (9 => 387), CHI (10, RD 4 => 385) -2 PIT (14 => 325), NE (17, 120 => 319) -6 NYG (24 => 237), JAX (25, 160, 240 => 242) +5 BUF (25 => 230), JAX (27, 130 => 234) +4 2022 NO (11 => 368), WAS (16, 98, 120 =>365 ) -3 DET (12, 46 => 475), MIN (32. 34, 66 => 435 ) -40 NO (16, 18, 194 => 589), PHI (18, 101, RD 1, RD 2 => 581) -8 PHI (13 => 336), TEX (15, 124, 162, 166 => 355) +19 KC (21 => 261), NE (29, 94, 121 => 266) +5 BUF (23 => 245), BAL (25, 130 -> 248) +3 NYJ (26, 101 => 257), TEN (35, 69, 163 => 251) -6 JAC (27 => 216), TB (33, 106, 180 => 220) +4 You can see two outliers, the 2022 Lions tradeup with the Vikings in which Minnesota lost 40 points and the Texan tradeup with Arizona where Arizona gained 195 points. The latter may have been because I was valuing future picks too highly. In any case, it appears that the Bills Chief trade is still in the main portion of the distribution. Edited May 10 by Billy Claude 1 1 Quote
benderbender Posted May 10 Posted May 10 On 5/8/2024 at 10:50 AM, HappyDays said: There's a difference in being coy about your future plans and lying about past results. Beane shoots straight when he talks about what he's done and why he's done it. Like I said there's no reason to lie about wanting Bishop. It doesn't make him look any better or worse in the moment, it only sets him up to look better or worse depending on how the player turns out. FWIW I like Beane. We agree he's very good at his job. As long as he's representing my favorite colored laundry, he's fine with me. Must be his NC accent that puts me on guard. Sounds like every Mid-Atlantic politician I've heard since moving to enemy territory. 1 1 Quote
GASabresIUFan Posted May 10 Posted May 10 21 hours ago, Billy Claude said: KC (28, 133, 248 => 227), BUF (32. 95. 221 => 227) +0 While certainly not a "bad" trade, it does look like the Bills didn't get any compensation for moving down. IMHO the team trading up should give more value than they receive just like Buffalo did in their 2022 and 2023 trade-ups and Carolina paid Buffalo on the second trade down in 2024. For Example KC (28, 144, 248 = 223 pts), Buf (32, 95, 221 = 227) +4 Quote
Billy Claude Posted May 10 Posted May 10 30 minutes ago, GASabresIUFan said: While certainly not a "bad" trade, it does look like the Bills didn't get any compensation for moving down. IMHO the team trading up should give more value than they receive just like Buffalo did in their 2022 and 2023 trade-ups and Carolina paid Buffalo on the second trade down in 2024. For Example KC (28, 144, 248 = 223 pts), Buf (32, 95, 221 = 227) +4 It looks like the team trading up pays more points than they get about 2/3 of the time. This makes sense since a team will only trade up if there is a particular player that they want and so has more incentive to make the trade than the team trading down. Based on that it is slightly bad but certainly not one of the worse 8n 20 years as claimed by Walder. Quote
JESSEFEFFER Posted May 10 Author Posted May 10 13 minutes ago, Billy Claude said: It looks like the team trading up pays more points than they get about 2/3 of the time. This makes sense since a team will only trade up if there is a particular player that they want and so has more incentive to make the trade than the team trading down. Based on that it is slightly bad but certainly not one of the worse 8n 20 years as claimed by Walder. This may be true but we all suspect Beane was really, really upset that he didn't get a 3rd round comp pick so let's consider the value in making it right when done wrong. 1 Quote
Billy Claude Posted May 10 Posted May 10 5 minutes ago, JESSEFEFFER said: This may be true but we all suspect Beane was really, really upset that he didn't get a 3rd round comp pick so let's consider the value in making it right when done wrong. Yes, definitely agree. In this case the Bills wanted to move down as much as the Chiefs wanted to move up so the net of zero points made sense. Quote
PonyBoy Posted May 10 Posted May 10 22 hours ago, Billy Claude said: It seems highly doubtful that the KC/Buff trade was one of the 10 cheapest first round trade ups in 20 years. I went back three years and the KC trade-up was the 7th cheapest (out of 19) so in about the 30th percentile. Here is the data in case anyone wants to dive in. Only trades involving only draft picks were assessed. All points totals are based on the 2024 Rich Hill trade chart and picks in a future year are evaluated at the highest point value for the next round for 2024 year, i.e., a third round pick in 2025 is given the same point value as the first pick of the 4th round of the 2024 draft. The same was done if a third round pick in the 2024 draft was obtained in the 2023 draft (independent of where the pick actually occurred). The +/- is the points gained by the team trading down. Teams trading down and obtaining less value than the trading up team are in boldface. 2024 MIN (gets 10, 203 => 374 pts), NYJ (gets 11, 129, 157 => 387) +13 MIN (17=>296), JAX (23, 167, RD 3, RD 4=>304) +8 DET (24, RD 7 => 238), DAL (29, 73 => 267) + 29 KC (28, 133, 248 => 227), BUF (32. 95. 221 => 227) +0 CAR (32, 200 => 189), BUF (33, 141 => 194) +5 2023 TEX (3, 105 => 546), ARI (12, 33, RD1, RD3 => 741) +195 (the large value indicates that I am most likely overvaluing future year picks) ARI (6, 81 => 501), DET (12. 34. 168 => 531) +30 PHI (9 => 387), CHI (10, RD 4 => 385) -2 PIT (14 => 325), NE (17, 120 => 319) -6 NYG (24 => 237), JAX (25, 160, 240 => 242) +5 BUF (25 => 230), JAX (27, 130 => 234) +4 2022 NO (11 => 368), WAS (16, 98, 120 =>365 ) -3 DET (12, 46 => 475), MIN (32. 34, 66 => 435 ) -40 NO (16, 18, 194 => 589), PHI (18, 101, RD 1, RD 2 => 581) -8 PHI (13 => 336), TEX (15, 124, 162, 166 => 355) +19 KC (21 => 261), NE (29, 94, 121 => 266) +5 BUF (23 => 245), BAL (25, 130 -> 248) +3 NYJ (26, 101 => 257), TEN (35, 69, 163 => 251) -6 JAC (27 => 216), TB (33, 106, 180 => 220) +4 You can see two outliers, the 2022 Lions tradeup with the Vikings in which Minnesota lost 40 points and the Texan tradeup with Arizona where Arizona gained 195 points. The latter may have been because I was valuing future picks too highly. In any case, it appears that the Bills Chief trade is still in the main portion of the distribution. Incredible post! I can't really understand it, but unbelievable research by you. All kinds of Bills and football fans on this board. That's why I think it's the best in the NFL. 1 1 1 Quote
GunnerBill Posted May 11 Posted May 11 On 5/10/2024 at 12:57 AM, Billy Claude said: It seems highly doubtful that the KC/Buff trade was one of the 10 cheapest first round trade ups in 20 years. I went back three years and the KC trade-up was the 7th cheapest (out of 19) so in about the 30th percentile. Here is the data in case anyone wants to dive in. Only trades involving only draft picks were assessed. All points totals are based on the 2024 Rich Hill trade chart and picks in a future year are evaluated at the highest point value for the next round for 2024 year, i.e., a third round pick in 2025 is given the same point value as the first pick of the 4th round of the 2024 draft. The same was done if a third round pick in the 2024 draft was obtained in the 2023 draft (independent of where the pick actually occurred). The +/- is the points gained by the team trading down. Teams trading down and obtaining less value than the trading up team are in boldface. 2024 MIN (gets 10, 203 => 374 pts), NYJ (gets 11, 129, 157 => 387) +13 MIN (17=>296), JAX (23, 167, RD 3, RD 4=>304) +8 DET (24, RD 7 => 238), DAL (29, 73 => 267) + 29 KC (28, 133, 248 => 227), BUF (32. 95. 221 => 227) +0 CAR (32, 200 => 189), BUF (33, 141 => 194) +5 2023 TEX (3, 105 => 546), ARI (12, 33, RD1, RD3 => 741) +195 (the large value indicates that I am most likely overvaluing future year picks) ARI (6, 81 => 501), DET (12. 34. 168 => 531) +30 PHI (9 => 387), CHI (10, RD 4 => 385) -2 PIT (14 => 325), NE (17, 120 => 319) -6 NYG (24 => 237), JAX (25, 160, 240 => 242) +5 BUF (25 => 230), JAX (27, 130 => 234) +4 2022 NO (11 => 368), WAS (16, 98, 120 =>365 ) -3 DET (12, 46 => 475), MIN (32. 34, 66 => 435 ) -40 NO (16, 18, 194 => 589), PHI (18, 101, RD 1, RD 2 => 581) -8 PHI (13 => 336), TEX (15, 124, 162, 166 => 355) +19 KC (21 => 261), NE (29, 94, 121 => 266) +5 BUF (23 => 245), BAL (25, 130 -> 248) +3 NYJ (26, 101 => 257), TEN (35, 69, 163 => 251) -6 JAC (27 => 216), TB (33, 106, 180 => 220) +4 You can see two outliers, the 2022 Lions tradeup with the Vikings in which Minnesota lost 40 points and the Texan tradeup with Arizona where Arizona gained 195 points. The latter may have been because I was valuing future picks too highly. In any case, it appears that the Bills Chief trade is still in the main portion of the distribution. I think the standard practice on later year picks is #16 in the round after (i.e. right in the middle) but that is a very rough guide because in reality teams look at who they are trading with and try and guesstimate is this a team with a likely top 10 pick. Or a team with a likely bottom 10 pick etc. Quote
Bill from NYC Posted May 11 Posted May 11 (edited) On 5/8/2024 at 8:37 AM, Aussie Joe said: Take a chill pill mate … I have said nothing of the sort … He can't. By now he is probably waving his pom poms, wearing an unusual outfit. On 5/9/2024 at 7:57 PM, Billy Claude said: It seems highly doubtful that the KC/Buff trade was one of the 10 cheapest first round trade ups in 20 years. I went back three years and the KC trade-up was the 7th cheapest (out of 19) so in about the 30th percentile. Here is the data in case anyone wants to dive in. Only trades involving only draft picks were assessed. All points totals are based on the 2024 Rich Hill trade chart and picks in a future year are evaluated at the highest point value for the next round for 2024 year, i.e., a third round pick in 2025 is given the same point value as the first pick of the 4th round of the 2024 draft. The same was done if a third round pick in the 2024 draft was obtained in the 2023 draft (independent of where the pick actually occurred). The +/- is the points gained by the team trading down. Teams trading down and obtaining less value than the trading up team are in boldface. 2024 MIN (gets 10, 203 => 374 pts), NYJ (gets 11, 129, 157 => 387) +13 MIN (17=>296), JAX (23, 167, RD 3, RD 4=>304) +8 DET (24, RD 7 => 238), DAL (29, 73 => 267) + 29 KC (28, 133, 248 => 227), BUF (32. 95. 221 => 227) +0 CAR (32, 200 => 189), BUF (33, 141 => 194) +5 2023 TEX (3, 105 => 546), ARI (12, 33, RD1, RD3 => 741) +195 (the large value indicates that I am most likely overvaluing future year picks) ARI (6, 81 => 501), DET (12. 34. 168 => 531) +30 PHI (9 => 387), CHI (10, RD 4 => 385) -2 PIT (14 => 325), NE (17, 120 => 319) -6 NYG (24 => 237), JAX (25, 160, 240 => 242) +5 BUF (25 => 230), JAX (27, 130 => 234) +4 2022 NO (11 => 368), WAS (16, 98, 120 =>365 ) -3 DET (12, 46 => 475), MIN (32. 34, 66 => 435 ) -40 NO (16, 18, 194 => 589), PHI (18, 101, RD 1, RD 2 => 581) -8 PHI (13 => 336), TEX (15, 124, 162, 166 => 355) +19 KC (21 => 261), NE (29, 94, 121 => 266) +5 BUF (23 => 245), BAL (25, 130 -> 248) +3 NYJ (26, 101 => 257), TEN (35, 69, 163 => 251) -6 JAC (27 => 216), TB (33, 106, 180 => 220) +4 You can see two outliers, the 2022 Lions tradeup with the Vikings in which Minnesota lost 40 points and the Texan tradeup with Arizona where Arizona gained 195 points. The latter may have been because I was valuing future picks too highly. In any case, it appears that the Bills Chief trade is still in the main portion of the distribution. What would the equation be on McDermott's trade of the #10 pick (Mahomes) to KC? Edited May 11 by Bill from NYC 1 Quote
SoonerBillsFan Posted May 11 Posted May 11 On 5/8/2024 at 7:27 PM, Richard Noggin said: Corey Moore was 2 inches shorter, even, about 20 lbs lighter, and definitely didn't have NEARLY the length of Solomon (who might not be TALL, but he is long af). Corey Moore was a bad NFL projection. Javon Solomon, imho, is not. A team will need to play with a lead to really employ him in his first couple years as a pass rush specialist, but I have a sense he can excel in that defined role. He is a guy year 2-3 could really break out. And he can still be an impact now like you said. Quote
BobbyC81 Posted May 12 Posted May 12 On 5/7/2024 at 7:32 PM, Aussie Joe said: However …some say that Beane makes the Draft calls … I think Beane and MCDermott have collaborated and agreed the picks in advance and Beane is not taking a player that McD hasn’t ticked the box on … at least not until late Day 3… They have to work together. It would make no sense for the GM to draft guys the coach doesn’t like and/or that don’t the system well. Otherwise you have a Marronne /Whaley situation with the coach yelling out in front of everyone “Get me a freakin’ Quarterback!” Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.