Jerry Jabber

Awesome! It's fills a huge need.

I think Cash said it best. "I only sort of agree with this. Gilmore was a good, not great pick - solid starter who seemed like he could be elite but never really was. And I definitely think letting him walk for the money involved was the right move. But if we step back and look at it as a whole, we spent the #10 pick in the draft and got 5 years of good-not-great CB play, and now have nothing to show for it - not even a comp pick. Is that good team building? For a team with a franchise QB tying up lots of cap $, maybe. For a team in the 6-10 to 9-7 range, I personally don't think so."

It was a mistake to use a first round pick on Gilmore to begin with.

Over this 17 year drought, it seems two important things are missing: Building a good solid foundation on both sides of the ball (Offense- A solid O-line and a good QB; Defense: a good front seven); and building the team to win the division. Do the Bills currently have a solid foundation on offense? No. So far, Taylor has proven to be an above average backup, but below average starter. The O-line does a great job at run blocking, but the right side of the line is weak at pass protection. On defense, do they have a solid foundation in place? No. While KW, Dareus and Hughes are three very good players, Lawson and Ragland are unknown. Alexander was good in Rex's scheme, but how will he do in a 4/3? Alexander and Humber are both special teams players, which is a plus, but overall, the LB corps could use an upgrade. Are the current Bills built to win the division? No. We've seen over the years playing against Brady, it doesn't matter how good our secondary is, if the Bills are unable to get constant pressure on Brady and he has time in the pocket, eventually someone gets open for Brady to make a play, especially in a zone defense. The Broncos showed in the AFC Championship game two years ago the blueprint on how to beat Brady and that's constant pressure on him. Brady has always had a good O-line in front of him and that is something the Bills need, along with an elite caliber QB. So back to the topic, it would make more sense for the Bills to use high round draft picks foundational type players first, until they have those key players in place.

Great post and I agree 100%

"Come on man...Winfield and Clements were 15 and 12 years ago. It has literally nothing to do with this team. Not same owners, not same FO, not same philosophy, not same coaches, not same roster. I mean it has ZERO to do with anything we just did." If you're referring to trading back in the draft to gain more picks, I applaud the move and it's a move I felt the team should have made even before the draft. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/193251-should-the-bills-move-back-in-the-draft-to-stockpile-picks/ But I'm referring to using a first rounder on DB's and apparently nothing has changed over the years. "I mean Nate Clements became the highest paid defensive player in NFL history at that time when he left here, and he wasn't worth it. In fact, he never came close to living up to that value of that contract. That is why we didn't pay him, not because he is a DB, but because he was grossly over paid and not worth the contract. Same with Gilmore...he got a contract that out weighed his performance." That's part of my argument, DB's command big money after their rookie deals, so that's another reason why it's not a smart move to use a high pick on one. DB's and RB's should be taken in the lower rounds as those guys command more money after their rookie deals and have a shorter playing career. I thought using a first rounder on Gilmore was potentially a waste as he most likely would leave for big money, which in fact he did. You can get good DB's in the lower rounds (3-7), why waste a first on a guy that's most likely going to be around for a short time? Guys like Wood and Dareus have been around for a while now and they were first round picks. I'd rather see first round picks used on positions such as QB, DE, OT, LB, WR (just as long as he's not a small speed guy like Parrish, Price etc...). DB's are overvalued in the NFL. "Like when Byrd got over paid and was an awful signing by the Saints." Byrd was replaced by a fourth rounder [searcy], so it didn't require a first or second rounder to replace him. First round picks should not be as expendable as the Bills have made them out to be. You can't build a solid foundation when you're constantly going through your top draft picks every four to five years, it's a waste and it's gotten the Bills nowhere except an average of 6-10 over the past 17 years.

I thought using a first rounder on Gilmore was potentially a waste as he most likely would leave for big money, which in fact he did. You can get good DB's in the lower rounds (3-7), why waste a first on a guy that's most likely going to be around for a short time? Guys like Wood and Dareus have been around for a while now and they were first round picks. I'd rather see first round picks used on positions such as QB, DE, OT, LB, WR (just as long as he's not a small speed guy like Parrish, Price etc...). DB's are overvalued in the NFL.

That is a good point. We all know not every pick is going to pan out, but teams have to be able to build around players. When you're constantly replacing first round draft picks every four to five years because you're either drafting DB's and RB's, you're creating more holes on your team instead of making your team better.

It's possible the Bills go 1-5 or 0-6 in the division. The Jets beat the Bills twice last season. As long as Brady remains healthy, they'll beat the Bills twice. Miami got better last season, so they're no push over either.

IMO, the Bills wasted too many first round draft picks on CB’s over the years as they are very rarely resigned (Winfield, Clements, Gilmore). If a first round CB does well in his rookie contract, his next one is usually too high for the Bills to keep him, so the way I look at it, it’s a wasted pick as that CB will be only on the team for five years, vice taking a player that has more of an opportunity to stay on the team longer than his rookie deal. First round picks should be used on players that are impact players as well as being on your team for 8-10 years (or more), so it would make more sense to draft a CB in the lower rounds. Constantly replacing DB's every four to five years is a terrible move. I highly doubt T. White will be resigned after his rookie deal ends, so the Bills will have to go through this again in four to five years. When will they ever learn?

The Bills have a very tough schedule this year. I wouldn't be surprised to see them go between 4-12 and 6-10, so if that happens, the Bills will be in better position to make a move.

I'm glad the Bills went this route. If the Bills are unable to make it to the Top 5 or even Top 3 of the draft by having a terrible record, then they would need extra picks to be able to move up in the draft. While they most likely won't be able to draft the first QB in the 2018 draft, they should be able to get the second or third depending on their trade partner. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/193251-should-the-bills-move-back-in-the-draft-to-stockpile-picks/

I disagree and Sal C. from WGR550 would disagree as well. I was listening to the WGR morning show this morning and Sal C. feels the Bills are going to use both first round picks to move up in next year's draft to select a QB. Even when asked if that is exactly what the Bills plan on doing next year (moving up to select a QB in 2018), McDermott said the Bills have done their homework in regards to next year's draft class. I do agree with you that the Bills are making deals to acquire more picks to fill in holes and rework the roster, which is a smart move. McDermott is also trying to win in 2017, so he's preparing to use multiple picks next year on a QB.

+1

My point exactly! A first round pick should be used on a player that a team can build around and that has the potential to be on your team for 10+ years, vice four or five. Constantly recycling first round draft picks every four to five years has gotten the Bills nowhere except draft in the same spots (on average between 8-13).

Good DB's can be found in the lower rounds. McGee was a fourth rounder and one of the best kick returners in franchise history, Greer was an UDFA, Cockrell was a fourth rounder and should have been kept on the team. DB's have about the same shelf life as a RB before they lose their speed or get too banged up.

I'd rather have a player that's going to be on the team long term, especially when a first round pick is used. Good first round DB's cost too much to resign after their rookie deals (see Winfield, Clements, Gilmore).

He'll be gone in five years. The Bills will never learn, how many first round picks have been used on DB's over the years and weren't resigned after their rookie deal?!

If you go to my opening comments on this thread, you will see I posed that same question about stock piling picks to move up in next years draft. Smart move IMO.

For those saying it's a bad trade, you're acting like the Bills are supposed to get a dozen extra picks for the trade down. Each spot in the draft has a point value and teams have to be able to come close to that point value to make a deal. You can't have a deal where one team has a point value of 1300 and they expect to get 5000 points in return. Get real people!

Great move!

Bills get an extra third round pick this year and an extra first round pick next year...glad I play Madden

+1

Hey Matter2003, the Bears traded with the 49ers and gained three extra picks...they must be using Madden too...

Looks like the Bills are playing Madden... Ian Rapoport‏Verified account @RapSheet 50m50 minutes ago One team plotting a potential move up: The #Falcons, who pick No. 31. One team plotting a potential move down: The #Bills, who pick No. 10. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/193545-bills-looking-to-move-down-rapoport/ #BillsFanatics @BillsFanaticsBF 20m20 minutes ago More #Bills reportedly have found a trade down partner.