swap 1sts with washington?

[playman]

just looked at some mocks and most of them have okung go to the skins at 4. most agree that hes the best, some say only, LT in the draft.

 

now my question. what would we have to give up to swap with washington?

 

if its a 3rd id go for it. 2nd im not so sure about.

[Pygskin36]

just looked at some mocks and most of them have okung go to the skins at 4. most agree that hes the best, some say only, LT in the draft.

 

now my question. what would we have to give up to swap with washington?

 

if its a 3rd id go for it. 2nd im not so sure about.

[/quo

I do not see them giving up draft picks... They'll get a good player at 9... I'd see them move down possibly, but not up.

[DanInUticaTampa]

it would cost more than a 3rd to jump up to the 4th overall pick.

[Numark]

A 4th and a whitner

[BillsfaninSixburgh]

In addition to giving up picks they can't afford to give up, the contract needed to sign No 4 will be a lot higher than No 9. I agree that they are more likely to trade down than trade up.

[Thurman#1]

A 4th and a whitner

 

 

 

In your happiest dreams.

[Thurman#1]

just looked at some mocks and most of them have okung go to the skins at 4. most agree that hes the best, some say only, LT in the draft.

 

now my question. what would we have to give up to swap with washington?

 

if its a 3rd id go for it. 2nd im not so sure about.

 

 

 

Here's the chart. Bookmark it.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft06/news/story?id=2410670

 

You can also google "draft pick value chart." This just isn't that difficult.

 

As you can see, we'd have to give up a 2nd AND a 4th or a 5th.

[sharper802]

just looked at some mocks and most of them have okung go to the skins at 4. most agree that hes the best, some say only, LT in the draft.

 

now my question. what would we have to give up to swap with washington?

 

if its a 3rd id go for it. 2nd im not so sure about.

And repeat the same mistakes Levy made? Trade down not up. Get more picks not fewer. Pay less signing bonus money and use that money in FA this year or next(if there is a next year)

[scoring is not hardy]

Here's the chart. Bookmark it.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft06/news/story?id=2410670

 

You can also google "draft pick value chart." This just isn't that difficult.

 

As you can see, we'd have to give up a 2nd AND a 4th or a 5th.

That chart is irrelevant due to the huge money at the top of the draft, ask the jets.

[SuperKillerRobots]

That chart is irrelevant due to the huge money at the top of the draft, ask the jets.

 

That may be so, but I don't see the Skins passing on a the best LT in the draft (when they need one desperately) for our #9 and 3rd rounder. Even if Washington did that, I don't think that it would be worth it to us to give up a top 100 pick. That's a potential starter in a year or two we'd sacrifice, which is a lot for a team with this many needs.

[BillnutinHouston]

When you trade up, you put a lot of chips on ONE GUY being really good (and staying healthy), because you've given up other players to get him.

 

In the Bills' situation, if anything, you trade DOWN. Your best course of action is not to pursue ONE dominant player, you need SEVERAL good ones. You get your hands on several by adding picks, not giving them away. Plus the strength of your organization (we hope) is now Buddy Nix - get more picks in that man's hands!!!!

[scoring is not hardy]

That may be so, but I don't see the Skins passing on a the best LT in the draft (when they need one desperately) for our #9 and 3rd rounder. Even if Washington did that, I don't think that it would be worth it to us to give up a top 100 pick. That's a potential starter in a year or two we'd sacrifice, which is a lot for a team with this many needs.

I agree. I want more picks not less.

[Beerball]

That chart is irrelevant due to the huge money at the top of the draft, ask the jets.

Fill me in on what your jets point is.

[scoring is not hardy]

Fill me in on what your jets point is.

The Jets moved up from 21 to 5 by trading first round picks and giving up their second rounder and Kenyon Coleman, Brett Ratliff and Abram Elam- all scrubs. Based on the chart the 5th pick is worth 1700 points. The picks the jets gave up were worth 853.

[Beerball]

The Jets moved up from 21 to 5 by trading first round picks and giving up their second rounder and Kenyon Coleman, Brett Ratliff and Abram Elam- all scrubs. Based on the chart the 5th pick is worth 1700 points. The picks the jets gave up were worth 853.

Thanks. Thought you were indicating that the jets regretted moving up.

 

 

Personally don't think we can move up. We aren't a player or two away, we need more picks not less. Think we're on the same page there.

[Bufcomments]

When you trade up, you put a lot of chips on ONE GUY being really good (and staying healthy), because you've given up other players to get him.

 

In the Bills' situation, if anything, you trade DOWN. Your best course of action is not to pursue ONE dominant player, you need SEVERAL good ones. You get your hands on several by adding picks, not giving them away. Plus the strength of your organization (we hope) is now Buddy Nix - get more picks in that man's hands!!!!

What you said....

 

Look at the Pats, they do it almost every year.

[Rob's House]

I do not see them giving up draft picks... They'll get a good player at 9... I'd see them move down possibly, but not up.

 

They traded up to get Cialis last year.

[Orton's Arm]

And repeat the same mistakes Levy made? Trade down not up. Get more picks not fewer. Pay less signing bonus money and use that money in FA this year or next(if there is a next year)

Levy's mistake was that he chose the wrong players. Partly that was because he preferred to reach for "need" at the positions he thought he had to fill, instead of taking better players at positions he (incorrectly) believed he'd adequately addressed. The other problem was his short-sightedness: he wanted players who could contribute right away. Linebackers. Strong safeties. Running backs. Guys like that. Forget about using early picks on quarterbacks or offensive linemen, because they take too long to develop!

 

If a guy like Clausen is a franchise quarterback, and if trading up with Washington is the only way to get him, then you trade up. A franchise quarterback is easily worth the draft day pick price it would take to get him. Quarterback is the most important position on the field, and is also the hardest to fill. Getting that problem solved would make so many other things that much easier!

[Orton's Arm]

When you trade up, you put a lot of chips on ONE GUY being really good (and staying healthy), because you've given up other players to get him.

 

In the Bills' situation, if anything, you trade DOWN. Your best course of action is not to pursue ONE dominant player, you need SEVERAL good ones. You get your hands on several by adding picks, not giving them away. Plus the strength of your organization (we hope) is now Buddy Nix - get more picks in that man's hands!!!!

This team has very few dominant players, and almost none at key positions. There are no dominant players on offense. On defense, you could maybe argue Byrd because of his ball-hawking skills, possibly McGee, and maybe one or two other guys. But very few. We need to fix that problem.

 

If you were to add a dominant quarterback--a Matt Ryan--to the offense, and complement him with a dominant LT and a dominant #1 WR, the Bills would have an offense! A real offense.

 

On defense, the Bills need a dominant guy at NT, another at RDE, and a dominant guy at rushing OLB.

 

The way I look at it, we're six dominant players from having a very good football team. If the Bills can get one dominant player in this year's draft--at the hardest-to-fill position--and can then follow that up by getting two dominant players in next year's draft, we'll be halfway to where we need to be!