Jump to content


Photo

First Round Draft Strategy


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 IgotBILLStopay

IgotBILLStopay

    UDFA

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 96 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 12:23 PM

Long Suffering Bills Fan waiting for dawn to break. Long time lurker. First time poster.

 

Obviously there are a number of draft threads. Besides echoing some of the others' thoughts, I thought I had something different to share - so creating separate thread. Mods - If this belongs elsewhere - please feel free to move. I have tried to also differentiate between beliefs and preferences - so I try to say what are facts, what are personal opinions based on facts and pure personal preference.

 

Overall Draft Assessment

 

Our Draft Strategy begins with an assessment of the players available in the draft.

 

1. I believe this is a draft with a clear consensus number 1 (Garrett) and then kinda levels off for numbers 2-20. For these picks, everyone has their own preferences. I have never seen so much variation in mock picks starting with pick number 2. It is in these types of drafts that having a well thought out but flexible draft strategy can help. 

 

2. The draft appears to be loaded at CB and, to an extent, WRs.

 

3. I have always believed that in the first round you go for the Best Player Available (BPA) unless the talent level differences are not huge enough when drafting for need is relevant. Our 5 areas of need are - CB, WR, Safety, LB and OT. We actually are set up nicely since CB and WR are this draft's strengths.

 

 

Coming to Draft Strategy, there are three possibilities - 

 

Move Up, Stay Pat, Move Down

 

In a flat draft like this one, moving up is never a great option unless a player fills a glaring hole on the roster and is a perfect fit. That said, chances are several other teams are thinking the same - so it is possible one can move up a little cheaper than years past (this hurts us if we try to move down as well - more on that later). I cannot imagine any scenario where we move up for a non-QB in a plateau-d draft. So the only possibility for moving up is if we feel there is a cannot miss QB. Personally, the whole point of retaining Tyrod is that we have the option to go for a QB if things dont work out with him. Yes, he is not the best pocket passer - but he brings somethings to the table (evasive ability, running, long ball etc.) that make him intriguing enough to see what he can do this year. Picking a QB with #1 also undermines Tyrod before he gets even one game with this coach. Additionally, next year's draft appears to be loaded in QBs - so moving up does not appear to be a great strategy.

 

Obviously given the flat draft and the numerous possibilities in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, it is hard to stay pat. However, given others are thinking the same thing - the chances of our getting value by trading down are also less. Standing Pat or Trading Down are also a function of how picks 1-9 play out. The no-brainers at #10, IMHO, are Hooker, Adams & Lattimore. I cant choose between the top three WRs (Wallace, Davis, Ross) and having Zay Jones and JuJu as later round possibilities indicates a lack of value in picking a WR at 10. Also given the investment in Clay, I do not want to waste a #10 on OJ Howard. Similarly - it is not clear to me that between Foster, Cunningham and Redick (and, even Peppers), there is value in going with a LB at #10. In my draft simulations, the only way we get the no-brainers to fall to 10 are if at least two QBs and Fournette go in the top 9. It also becomes more likely we get a no-brainer if a team like the Titans go with a WR at #5.  Other draft picks can play out differently - but we need a mini QB run in the top 9 to get what we want at 10. Additionally, a mini QB run also makes it likely a team like the Browns with an acute QB need wants to trade with us for the #10 to get one of the remaining QBs. Strangely enough the other scenario that makes a trade down more valuable (in the sense people are willing to pay more for trading with us) is no QB gets selectd in the top 9. Picking the best QB available at #10 is too attractive for many teams to apss up and we actually get great value by trading down. [so Bills Fans - pray for one of 2 scenarios - big QB run or  no QB taken. Just one QB taken in the top 9 is the worst case scenario since it means we dont get the no brainers and people dont want to trade with us].

 

So if one of the no brainers is available at 10, we demand a heftier price for a trade down (at least an extra second and fourth) and if we dont get that, we draft our no-brainer. Between the no-brainers, IMHO Hooker > Adams > Lattimore.

 

If none of the no-brainers are available, I feel we should trade down even if the price people are willing to pay less. Here is where I think we can maximize returns by doing multiple trade downs - maybe get two thirds by moving from 10 to 17 or so in twio  steps).

 

Picks if we trade down - 

 

Clearly it is is function of availability - but one of the top 3 WRs, OJ Howard (TE), one of the LBs (Foster, Cunningham, Redick) or Peppers (hybrid) all offer value at 17 and beyond.

 

[My apologies to the Mahomes fan club - clearly I dont belong in that since I am hoping some other team wants him / Kizer / Watson / Trubisky so desperately that they value our pick enough to give us a 2nd rounder].


Edited by IgotBILLStopay, 21 April 2017 - 09:05 AM.


#2 IgotBILLStopay

IgotBILLStopay

    UDFA

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 96 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 09:02 AM

Foster's positive test is not great news for Bills Fans unless he falls to us in the second round (which is not going to happen). He is now not likely to be picked 2-9, which means having Hooker / Adams / Lattimore at #10 less likely.



#3 IgotBILLStopay

IgotBILLStopay

    UDFA

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 96 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 02:48 PM

If we are not drafting a QB, it is strategically stupid to be linked to any of them before Draft Day. MOst trade-ups in the first round happen to select a QB  (our beloved Bills are the exception with Watkins and Manuel :))

 

http://www.buffaloru...news-mock-draft

 

http://www.newyorkup..._10_report.html

 

http://www.nfl.com/n...-mitch-trubisky

 

Now we give incentives for teams to trade up with teams just ahead of us. If we are serious about trading down, we should keep our interest in any quarterback secret and instead have the focus on the QB needs of the Saints and Browns (who draft after us). 



#4 1WATKINS4

1WATKINS4

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 107 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 04:12 PM

Trade down with Cleveland, then trade down again with Tampa or Denver.

Would love the Bills to come away with a later 1st rd pick, two 2nd rd picks and two 3rd rd picks.

#5 Beef Jerky

Beef Jerky

    Jerky Beef

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,981 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 04:17 PM

Trade down with Cleveland, then trade down again with Tampa or Denver.
Would love the Bills to come away with a later 1st rd pick, two 2nd rd picks and two 3rd rd picks.


Why would Cleveland trade with the Bills?

#6 Dalton

Dalton

    UDFA

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 59 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 04:28 PM

Trade down with Cleveland, then trade down again with Tampa or Denver.

Would love the Bills to come away with a later 1st rd pick, two 2nd rd picks and two 3rd rd picks.

Wow - this sounds really easy........The Bills always mess it up since it has not been done.



#7 YoloinOhio

YoloinOhio

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,011 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 04:47 PM

Really well thought out analysis. You shouldn't have lurked so long!

#8 1WATKINS4

1WATKINS4

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 107 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 07:31 PM

Why would Cleveland trade with the Bills?


To take a QB, a WR to replace Pryor, maybe they think the Saints want their guy, maybe theyvthink the Saints will trade back for a team that wants a guy the Browns want.... many reasons.

#9 Ittakestime

Ittakestime

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 161 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 07:48 PM

 

3. I have always believed that in the first round you go for the Best Player Available (BPA) unless the talent level differences are not huge enough when drafting for need is relevant. Our 5 areas of need are - CB, WR, Safety, LB and OT. We actually are set up nicely since CB and WR are this draft's strengths.

 

This right here is what have got the Bills in a lot of trouble in the past.  BPA is not the way you draft a team.  You need to weigh all factors:

 

Holes on team, how impactful those holes are, depth at position in draft class, ability of other players to put the draft pick in position to succeed.

 

Too many time Bills just take the best player there (Watkins, Lawson, Spiller, etc.).  Watkins didn't have a QB to get him the ball and that draft class was loaded.  Spiller wasn't going to get the ball with the amount of depth at position.  Lawson was not a position of need and the D line was strong already.

 

This year I would not draft a WR, CB or Safety in round 1.  I personally would go with Reddick.  LB is not deep, we have a huge need and he can step on the field right away and make a huge impact.



#10 IgotBILLStopay

IgotBILLStopay

    UDFA

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 96 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 07:49 PM

Really well thought out analysis. You shouldn't have lurked so long!

Thanks. You are too kind.



#11 LABILLBACKER

LABILLBACKER

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 342 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 11:36 PM

A. Pray Adams falls or
B. Trade down
Plan C...Williams or Davis

#12 natedawg3535

natedawg3535

    Probation

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 22 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 12:15 AM

out of all the teams in the league , only the dolphins and the patriots have as few picks as us in the first 4 rounds but the patriots basically have cooks as there 1st rounder so that leaves just the dolphins (sad but true) ......and as it turns out this might be the best draft in years to find solid players deeper in the draft......we NEED to trade down ......and No we cant take a QB in the 1st 4 rounds because A-we are somewhat committed to T-Mobile and B-it will give us 1 less chance than we allready have.......as far as a project/upsiade guy in the later Rnds , I am all for that but this franchise needs to get with the times and learn that draft capital is the way to go and that means even trading back for picks next year too.Having draft picks and a lot of them gives you so much flexablilty.



#13 IgotBILLStopay

IgotBILLStopay

    UDFA

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 96 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 10:06 AM

 

This right here is what have got the Bills in a lot of trouble in the past.  BPA is not the way you draft a team.  You need to weigh all factors:

 

Holes on team, how impactful those holes are, depth at position in draft class, ability of other players to put the draft pick in position to succeed.

 

Too many time Bills just take the best player there (Watkins, Lawson, Spiller, etc.).  Watkins didn't have a QB to get him the ball and that draft class was loaded.  Spiller wasn't going to get the ball with the amount of depth at position.  Lawson was not a position of need and the D line was strong already.

 

This year I would not draft a WR, CB or Safety in round 1.  I personally would go with Reddick.  LB is not deep, we have a huge need and he can step on the field right away and make a huge impact.

Ittakestime: I am not suggesting the other factors are not important. In fact, you will notice that I am suggesting drafting for need in going after WRs/CBs/LBs.  In fact I add " unless the talent level differences are not huge enough when drafting for need is relevant" to my BPA statement. I believe you and I are saying the same things. My point is simply that - One has to evaluate need vs. value. With the abundance of WR depth in the draft, there may not be value to picking a WR at 10 despite it being an acute area of need.



#14 Kirby Jackson

Kirby Jackson

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,572 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 10:16 AM

Nice thoughts!! You need to contribute more around here.

#15 Manther

Manther

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,117 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 10:45 AM

Foster's positive test is not great news for Bills Fans unless he falls to us in the second round (which is not going to happen). He is now not likely to be picked 2-9, which means having Hooker / Adams / Lattimore at #10 less likely.

Agreed!

Really well thought out analysis. You shouldn't have lurked so long!

Agreed

A. Pray Adams falls or
B. Trade down
Plan C...Williams or Davis

I like them. The order is fine, but, I would be fine with a slightly different order. Not sure which way still I would order them.

Plan D... take the QB they like IF they have them highly graded.

#16 Dr. Who

Dr. Who

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 727 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 10:49 AM

If we are not drafting a QB, it is strategically stupid to be linked to any of them before Draft Day. MOst trade-ups in the first round happen to select a QB  (our beloved Bills are the exception with Watkins and Manuel :))

 

http://www.buffaloru...news-mock-draft

 

http://www.newyorkup..._10_report.html

 

http://www.nfl.com/n...-mitch-trubisky

 

Now we give incentives for teams to trade up with teams just ahead of us. If we are serious about trading down, we should keep our interest in any quarterback secret and instead have the focus on the QB needs of the Saints and Browns (who draft after us). 

This has been my thought as well, though it seems the logic is not about picking up extra picks but having a coveted player fall to us.



#17 Bangarang

Bangarang

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,821 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 10:56 AM

Draft a future hall of famer

/strategy

#18 Beef Jerky

Beef Jerky

    Jerky Beef

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,981 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 03:56 PM

To take a QB, a WR to replace Pryor, maybe they think the Saints want their guy, maybe theyvthink the Saints will trade back for a team that wants a guy the Browns want.... many reasons.


Cleveland thinks the Bills want a QB they want...

#19 PolishDave

PolishDave

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,832 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 09:33 PM

Long Suffering Bills Fan waiting for dawn to break. Long time lurker. First time poster.

 

Obviously there are a number of draft threads. Besides echoing some of the others' thoughts, I thought I had something different to share - so creating separate thread. Mods - If this belongs elsewhere - please feel free to move. I have tried to also differentiate between beliefs and preferences - so I try to say what are facts, what are personal opinions based on facts and pure personal preference.

 

Overall Draft Assessment

 

Our Draft Strategy begins with an assessment of the players available in the draft.

 

1. I believe this is a draft with a clear consensus number 1 (Garrett) and then kinda levels off for numbers 2-20. For these picks, everyone has their own preferences. I have never seen so much variation in mock picks starting with pick number 2. It is in these types of drafts that having a well thought out but flexible draft strategy can help. 

 

2. The draft appears to be loaded at CB and, to an extent, WRs.

 

3. I have always believed that in the first round you go for the Best Player Available (BPA) unless the talent level differences are not huge enough when drafting for need is relevant. Our 5 areas of need are - CB, WR, Safety, LB and OT. We actually are set up nicely since CB and WR are this draft's strengths.

 

 

Coming to Draft Strategy, there are three possibilities - 

 

Move Up, Stay Pat, Move Down

 

In a flat draft like this one, moving up is never a great option unless a player fills a glaring hole on the roster and is a perfect fit. That said, chances are several other teams are thinking the same - so it is possible one can move up a little cheaper than years past (this hurts us if we try to move down as well - more on that later). I cannot imagine any scenario where we move up for a non-QB in a plateau-d draft. So the only possibility for moving up is if we feel there is a cannot miss QB. Personally, the whole point of retaining Tyrod is that we have the option to go for a QB if things dont work out with him. Yes, he is not the best pocket passer - but he brings somethings to the table (evasive ability, running, long ball etc.) that make him intriguing enough to see what he can do this year. Picking a QB with #1 also undermines Tyrod before he gets even one game with this coach. Additionally, next year's draft appears to be loaded in QBs - so moving up does not appear to be a great strategy.

 

Obviously given the flat draft and the numerous possibilities in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, it is hard to stay pat. However, given others are thinking the same thing - the chances of our getting value by trading down are also less. Standing Pat or Trading Down are also a function of how picks 1-9 play out. The no-brainers at #10, IMHO, are Hooker, Adams & Lattimore. I cant choose between the top three WRs (Wallace, Davis, Ross) and having Zay Jones and JuJu as later round possibilities indicates a lack of value in picking a WR at 10. Also given the investment in Clay, I do not want to waste a #10 on OJ Howard. Similarly - it is not clear to me that between Foster, Cunningham and Redick (and, even Peppers), there is value in going with a LB at #10. In my draft simulations, the only way we get the no-brainers to fall to 10 are if at least two QBs and Fournette go in the top 9. It also becomes more likely we get a no-brainer if a team like the Titans go with a WR at #5.  Other draft picks can play out differently - but we need a mini QB run in the top 9 to get what we want at 10. Additionally, a mini QB run also makes it likely a team like the Browns with an acute QB need wants to trade with us for the #10 to get one of the remaining QBs. Strangely enough the other scenario that makes a trade down more valuable (in the sense people are willing to pay more for trading with us) is no QB gets selectd in the top 9. Picking the best QB available at #10 is too attractive for many teams to apss up and we actually get great value by trading down. [so Bills Fans - pray for one of 2 scenarios - big QB run or  no QB taken. Just one QB taken in the top 9 is the worst case scenario since it means we dont get the no brainers and people dont want to trade with us].

 

So if one of the no brainers is available at 10, we demand a heftier price for a trade down (at least an extra second and fourth) and if we dont get that, we draft our no-brainer. Between the no-brainers, IMHO Hooker > Adams > Lattimore.

 

If none of the no-brainers are available, I feel we should trade down even if the price people are willing to pay less. Here is where I think we can maximize returns by doing multiple trade downs - maybe get two thirds by moving from 10 to 17 or so in twio  steps).

 

Picks if we trade down - 

 

Clearly it is is function of availability - but one of the top 3 WRs, OJ Howard (TE), one of the LBs (Foster, Cunningham, Redick) or Peppers (hybrid) all offer value at 17 and beyond.

 

[My apologies to the Mahomes fan club - clearly I dont belong in that since I am hoping some other team wants him / Kizer / Watson / Trubisky so desperately that they value our pick enough to give us a 2nd rounder].

 

 

Great, well thought out post.

 

You should post more often!   :thumbsup:

Cheers!   :beer:



#20 Watkins_deep

Watkins_deep

    Practice Squad

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 142 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 09:48 PM

The talent and value is rds 2-5. TRADE DOWN. TWICE...