Jump to content


The Obvious Reason for Creating a Smokescreen Tradeup Scenario


  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#1 patfitz

patfitz

    UDFA

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 85 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 01:40 AM

The more intriguing question may be, why would the Bills intentionally create. or even fail to deny, thereby perpetuating a false rumor for possibly trading up in the draft, especially if they were not seriously inclined to do so? Answer= if by doing so you could entice a team to otherwise trade out or more likely trade up, to allow the Billls to draft someone they really coveted to fall to where they are, than they succeeded. Seriously think about it. The Bills are not going to move up, that is about as likely as winning the Mega Millions despite what some may salivate at thinking the Bills are going for it all there is jsut one guaranteed superstar, etc.. I could just imagine the next Bills owner, say Donald trump, calling in the current regime and his first comment is "you traded our future for what... you're FIRED. Now get out of here!" He may even sue them for lack of due diligence. Note he sued a former Miss America contestant for claiming the contest is rigged. It was shocking to imagine it wasn't but he eventually prevailed.  No it's not going to happen that is career suicide. Yet the smoke screen doesn't cost them anything and, potentially, it may cause another team ahead of them to potentially consider trading down and more likely a team drafting below the Bills, to up the ante, to trade up,which could potentially disrupt who is picked in what order down the line. At the 9th position you have nothing to loose to try. And as a bonus, "The Donald" might be impressed with this creativity and may even keep you around until the next round. It only can help when Sammy, "don't call me the candyman", Watkins is singing (ie. tweating) someone is going to move up to get me...keep it going Sammy, after all Doung Whaley says this is what the predraft "slipslide" is all about.

Edited by patfitz, 30 April 2014 - 04:11 AM.


#2 r00tabaga

r00tabaga

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 651 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 06:06 AM

They don't draft with the thought of what the next owner thinks.  The smokescreen is to distract who they really want at 9 so that other teams don't move up to 7 or 8 and steal.

#3 The Wiz

The Wiz

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,135 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 06:09 AM

A.  Formatting goes a long way.

B.  These reports/tweets/etc. happen every year pre-draft.  I understand the concept and who knows?  Maybe what we did last year to get the Rams to move up was a way of keeping Tavon Austin from going to the Jets (since they reportedly wanted him, which also could have been a smokescreen).

C.  If they do trade up and give away next years first the only players worth doing it for are Clowney and Watkins because they will have an immediate impact and are elite talent.  Giving away futures for making the team much better now is ok in my book.  

I don't want them to spend the farm on them but if it takes this years 1st,2nd and net years 1st for the #1 overall I could live with that.  I can see Watkins around the 6th pick being available which would cost us probably 1st,2nd and maybe a 5th this year.

Edited by The Wiz, 30 April 2014 - 06:12 AM.


#4 Mark80

Mark80

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 772 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 06:25 AM

They have basically said they could trade up, they could trade down, or they could stay put.  In a nutshell, they basically haven't said anything at all.  And you know what?  I believe them.  If there is a player available that they want to trade up for and they think the asking price to do so is right, they'll do it.  If they are sitting at 9 and like someone there without having any offers that are too good to pass up, they'll draft there.  If they are sitting on the clock and someone sees their player has fallen and they must trade up for him (Donald?  Barr?  Evans?   Ebron?), well maybe they'll offer a great package and we trade down.

I believe any scenario is equally as likely to happen at this point and I'm ok with all of them.

#5 CountryCletus

CountryCletus

    Pro Bowl

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,308 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 06:30 AM

Most logically anything that comes out predraft is BS.... I swear teams out stuff out there to cover up what is unintentionally leaked out...

#6 Kirby Jackson

Kirby Jackson

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,982 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 06:59 AM

I am not trying to pee in anyone's Cheerios but this isn't a smokescreen. The Bills are trying to trade up. They may not be able to get there for a satisfactory price but this isn't some elaborate plan to manipulate the draft board. A lot of this info is coming from the teams that the Bills have talked to about going up. If I had to guess I would say that they do trade up.

Edited by Kirby Jackson, 30 April 2014 - 07:00 AM.


#7 mrags

mrags

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,218 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 07:08 AM

View PostKirby Jackson, on 30 April 2014 - 06:59 AM, said:

I am not trying to pee in anyone's Cheerios but this isn't a smokescreen. The Bills are trying to trade up. They may not be able to get there for a satisfactory price but this isn't some elaborate plan to manipulate the draft board. A lot of this info is coming from the teams that the Bills have talked to about going up. If I had to guess I would say that they do trade up.
thanks Kirby. Even though I dread the thought of moving up because I don't think any of the players they would move up are worth it. I appreciate you chiming in.

#8 75Bills

75Bills

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 233 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 07:09 AM

View PostKirby Jackson, on 30 April 2014 - 06:59 AM, said:

I am not trying to pee in anyone's Cheerios but this isn't a smokescreen. The Bills are trying to trade up. They may not be able to get there for a satisfactory price but this isn't some elaborate plan to manipulate the draft board. A lot of this info is coming from the teams that the Bills have talked to about going up. If I had to guess I would say that they do trade up.
I agree with this. Why is it so hard for people to believe they may want to trade up. Wouldn't Watkins look good in the open field? How about Khalil Mack as the SAM linebacker?

#9 Wayne Cubed

Wayne Cubed

    TBD's Local Shell Fish

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,502 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 07:10 AM

View PostKirby Jackson, on 30 April 2014 - 06:59 AM, said:

I am not trying to pee in anyone's Cheerios but this isn't a smokescreen. The Bills are trying to trade up. They may not be able to get there for a satisfactory price but this isn't some elaborate plan to manipulate the draft board. A lot of this info is coming from the teams that the Bills have talked to about going up. If I had to guess I would say that they do trade up.

I agree and think they do want to move up, and I think it could happen fairly cheap. I don't think it'll be the #1 spot.

Also notice how the Bills own John Murphy is now accepting of the fact that they may move up, when he previous thought it was idiotic:

John Murphy@JohnMurphyShow  13h
Clowney? Watkins? Evans? Manziel? Who's worth trading up for if you're the #Bills? How much would you give up? Phone in your thoughts 7pm

#10 BobChalmers

BobChalmers

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,617 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 07:11 AM

View PostKirby Jackson, on 30 April 2014 - 06:59 AM, said:

I am not trying to pee in anyone's Cheerios but this isn't a smokescreen. The Bills are trying to trade up. They may not be able to get there for a satisfactory price but this isn't some elaborate plan to manipulate the draft board. A lot of this info is coming from the teams that the Bills have talked to about going up. If I had to guess I would say that they do trade up.

Really important point - thank you.

#11 Webster Guy

Webster Guy

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,144 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 07:18 AM

View PostThe Wiz, on 30 April 2014 - 06:09 AM, said:

A.  Formatting goes a long way.

B.  These reports/tweets/etc. happen every year pre-draft.  I understand the concept and who knows?  Maybe what we did last year to get the Rams to move up was a way of keeping Tavon Austin from going to the Jets (since they reportedly wanted him, which also could have been a smokescreen).

C.  If they do trade up and give away next years first the only players worth doing it for are Clowney and Watkins because they will have an immediate impact and are elite talent.  Giving away futures for making the team much better now is ok in my book.  

I don't want them to spend the farm on them but if it takes this years 1st,2nd and net years 1st for the #1 overall I could live with that.  I can see Watkins around the 6th pick being available which would cost us probably 1st,2nd and maybe a 5th this year.

That whole "preventing the Jets from getting Tavon Austin" thing is total lunacy.    It implies that we knew the Jets draft board and which first round players would be better than others.  

As it turns out they chose the D rookie of the year Sheldon Richardson who is already the best interior lineman in the game.   I WISH. they took Austin.

#12 Johnny Hammersticks

Johnny Hammersticks

    You want a beer? How about some ether?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,520 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 07:24 AM

To the OP, respectfully, paragraphs are a good thing.  With regard to trading up, I sincerely believe that Buffalo is exploring all possibilities including moving both directions in the 1st round.  Why would they not explore all possibilities. Frankly, I would be disappointed with a GM picking at 9 who didn't call all of the teams in the top 5 to explore a trade.  Similarly, that GM should field and consider all offers from teams picking behind them.  It's nice to explore your options.

#13 WickedGame

WickedGame

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 199 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 07:29 AM

I believe the bills are simply gauging the market. In a deep draft class, many teams may want to trade down and stockpile picks. That means it's a buyer's market if you want to move up. The Bills are broadcasting their intent so every team 1-8 will want their business. We're getting those eight to compete against each other.

This also helps the Bills gauge the market value of the 9th pick in case they want to slide back. By knowing what the opening demands are for 1-8, you know what you can ask from a team below us looking to move up.



#14 75Bills

75Bills

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 233 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 07:48 AM

View PostWickedGame, on 30 April 2014 - 07:29 AM, said:

I believe the bills are simply gauging the market. In a deep draft class, many teams may want to trade down and stockpile picks. That means it's a buyer's market if you want to move up. The Bills are broadcasting their intent so every team 1-8 will want their business. We're getting those eight to compete against each other.

This also helps the Bills gauge the market value of the 9th pick in case they want to slide back. By knowing what the opening demands are for 1-8, you know what you can ask from a team below us looking to move up.
The dynamic of whether it would require our second or third pick to move up to 4 or 5 is likely the question at this point.

#15 Wayne Cubed

Wayne Cubed

    TBD's Local Shell Fish

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,502 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 08:00 AM

View PostWickedGame, on 30 April 2014 - 07:29 AM, said:

I believe the bills are simply gauging the market. In a deep draft class, many teams may want to trade down and stockpile picks. That means it's a buyer's market if you want to move up. The Bills are broadcasting their intent so every team 1-8 will want their business. We're getting those eight to compete against each other.

This also helps the Bills gauge the market value of the 9th pick in case they want to slide back. By knowing what the opening demands are for 1-8, you know what you can ask from a team below us looking to move up.

This is accurate as well, it certainly is a buyers market because this class is so deep. Add to that there isn't a consensus #1 rated overall QB and the cost of moving up goes down again. If a team that needs a QB (Houston, Cleveland, Jax, Oakland and maybe Minnesota) feels they can get their QB later and get more picks, it drives that price of moving up down.

#16 aristocrat

aristocrat

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,294 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 08:12 AM

I don't think its a smokescreen but rather just opening dialogues with different teams.  Seeing what's on the other teams minds and if at the draft something happens its easier to call up and say hey lets get this deal done.

#17 hondo in seattle

hondo in seattle

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,914 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 08:13 AM

I used to be an army officer and was taught the Honor Code, "An officer does not lie, cheat or steal; nor tolerate those who do."

But the Honor Code had a limited application in war.  Every combat mission was laid out in a standard Five Paragraph Operations Order.  One of the sub-paragraphs of a 5 paragraph op order was "Deception Plan."   It was important to encourage the enemy to think we were doing something different than we actually were.

I wonder how many NFL GMs intentionally put together a Deception Plan and how extensive and organized it may be.  We heard last year that Nix supposedly made an effort to label Glenn as a guard.  Do NFL GMs get together with their staffs each spring to put together their annual deception plan?   Does that deception plan influence who they talk to at the combine?  Who they fly in for visits?  What Pro Days they attend?   Do GMs call other GMs asking about trading up, when really they want to trade down?

#18 Johnny Hammersticks

Johnny Hammersticks

    You want a beer? How about some ether?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,520 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 08:19 AM

View Posthondo in seattle, on 30 April 2014 - 08:13 AM, said:

I used to be an army officer and was taught the Honor Code, "An officer does not lie, cheat or steal; nor tolerate those who do."

But the Honor Code had a limited application in war.  Every combat mission was laid out in a standard Five Paragraph Operations Order.  One of the sub-paragraphs of a 5 paragraph op order was "Deception Plan."   It was important to encourage the enemy to think we were doing something different than we actually were.

I wonder how many NFL GMs intentionally put together a Deception Plan and how extensive and organized it may be.  We heard last year that Nix supposedly made an effort to label Glenn as a guard.  Do NFL GMs get together with their staffs each spring to put together their annual deception plan?   Does that deception plan influence who they talk to at the combine?  Who they fly in for visits?  What Pro Days they attend?   Do GMs call other GMs asking about trading up, when really they want to trade down?

To your point about teams having a "deception plan," I am convinced that this is the case.  I'd say some GM's use these strategies more than others.  Hey, Whaley learned from one of the best at BSing.

#19 CodeMonkey

CodeMonkey

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,623 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 10:21 AM

View Postr00tabaga, on 30 April 2014 - 06:06 AM, said:

The smokescreen is to distract who they really want at 9 so that other teams don't move up to 7 or 8 and steal.
I actually find it hard to believe that any GM listens to what the media is saying they have "on good authority" about what the other GMs are going to do.
And feeling this way I'm sure they know that all the other GMs feel the same way so there is no point to creating a "smokescreen".
It is all best guess stuff from the media who has to write something for people on fan boards to discuss and to collect a paycheck until there is something real to write about.

Just ask yourself, if you were a team drafting at 10 or 11, would you base your decision to move up and leapfrog the Bills on something you read in the media?

Edited by CodeMonkey, 30 April 2014 - 10:21 AM.


#20 Kirby Jackson

Kirby Jackson

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,982 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 10:32 AM

View PostCodeMonkey, on 30 April 2014 - 10:21 AM, said:

I actually find it hard to believe that any GM listens to what the media is saying they have "on good authority" about what the other GMs are going to do.
And feeling this way I'm sure they know that all the other GMs feel the same way so there is no point to creating a "smokescreen".
It is all best guess stuff from the media who has to write something for people on fan boards to discuss and to collect a paycheck until there is something real to write about.

Just ask yourself, if you were a team drafting at 10 or 11, would you base your decision to move up and leapfrog the Bills on something you read in the media?
No, but you have to remember who is leaking this info. If the Bills are trying to get to 5 for example the Raiders are the ones passing this information along. They are hoping to drive up the value of the pick.