Coach Tuesday Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Here is my thinking (and I'm sorry if there are other threads that touch on this, but I wasn't sure where to put it). (Michael Scott: "That's what she said.") Fairley and Bowers will go 1-2. Sorry, but we should just accept it. That leaves us sitting pretty at #3, because there are three skill position players who will be coveted bigtime by at least one team each: Peterson, Gabbert, and Green. You'd think Cinncinati and Cleveland will want Green, Tennessee, San Francisco and Washington will want Gabbert, and Houston will want Peterson. And, critically, because of the rookie salary cap that is sure to be in place, TRADE UPS WILL HAPPEN. It is no longer a penalty to draft in the top 5. What this means is that we control the draft. Draft trades most often happen for coveted skill position players. The three most sought-after skill position players should all be on the board when we pick, and there is no clear-cut standout defensive front-seven player who we would naturally select at the 3 spot. This means we likely will have the unique, invaluable opportunity to trade down and acquire additional picks. WE MUST DO THIS. Buddy, don't race to the podium this year - there will be offers, please utilize the process to obtain more picks. This team has too many holes and this draft is too darn important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Here is my thinking (and I'm sorry if there are other threads that touch on this, but I wasn't sure where to put it). (Michael Scott: "That's what she said.") Fairley and Bowers will go 1-2. Sorry, but we should just accept it. That leaves us sitting pretty at #3, because there are three skill position players who will be coveted bigtime by at least one team each: Peterson, Gabbert, and Green. You'd think Cinncinati and Cleveland will want Green, Tennessee, San Francisco and Washington will want Gabbert, and Houston will want Peterson. And, critically, because of the rookie salary cap that is sure to be in place, TRADE UPS WILL HAPPEN. It is no longer a penalty to draft in the top 5. What this means is that we control the draft. Draft trades most often happen for coveted skill position players. The three most sought-after skill position players should all be on the board when we pick, and there is no clear-cut standout defensive front-seven player who we would naturally select at the 3 spot. This means we likely will have the unique, invaluable opportunity to trade down and acquire additional picks. WE MUST DO THIS. Buddy, don't race to the podium this year - there will be offers, please utilize the process to obtain more picks. This team has too many holes and this draft is too darn important. Newton is the wild card...I still think he can have the "benefit from big National Championship Game/previous top prospect not declaring Vince Young/JaMarcus Russell" bump to the #1 spot. If not, you're right...looks like things are going to get interesting during the draft with the new rookie cap. On a side note I am kind of hoping the lockout drags on to the draft because then positional needs are pretty much out the window and people will be scrambling for the tops guys on their board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guffalo Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Would there be any value trying to project next years worst team? Try to trade our second rounder this year to the team most likely to cave in next year (cleveland/Cincinnatti)for their 1st next year? In this way we could possibly secure the Luck pick when he comes out. It's a crapshoot, but look at the *Pats, they have been stockpiling in this fashion to secure 2 in the first 3 round this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted January 7, 2011 Author Share Posted January 7, 2011 Would there be any value trying to project next years worst team? Try to trade our second rounder this year to the team most likely to cave in next year (cleveland/Cincinnatti)for their 1st next year? In this way we could possibly secure the Luck pick when he comes out. It's a crapshoot, but look at the *Pats, they have been stockpiling in this fashion to secure 2 in the first 3 round this year. What if it turns out that it's US? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRT88 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Here is my thinking (and I'm sorry if there are other threads that touch on this, but I wasn't sure where to put it). (Michael Scott: "That's what she said.") Fairley and Bowers will go 1-2. Sorry, but we should just accept it. That leaves us sitting pretty at #3, because there are three skill position players who will be coveted bigtime by at least one team each: Peterson, Gabbert, and Green. You'd think Cinncinati and Cleveland will want Green, Tennessee, San Francisco and Washington will want Gabbert, and Houston will want Peterson. And, critically, because of the rookie salary cap that is sure to be in place, TRADE UPS WILL HAPPEN. It is no longer a penalty to draft in the top 5. What this means is that we control the draft. Draft trades most often happen for coveted skill position players. The three most sought-after skill position players should all be on the board when we pick, and there is no clear-cut standout defensive front-seven player who we would naturally select at the 3 spot. This means we likely will have the unique, invaluable opportunity to trade down and acquire additional picks. WE MUST DO THIS. Buddy, don't race to the podium this year - there will be offers, please utilize the process to obtain more picks. This team has too many holes and this draft is too darn important. I've been saying this for a week and been heavily critized because no one will trade up. The Bills may now be a gret position to draft a QB because they can move and not reach for one. Also, they may be alble to collect a few draft picks and grab an OL because most of the strong OL are rated 10-25, and if we could pull a Denver from last year and back down twice or more, we could gain some ammunition in having multple second and third round draft choices. I just hope the Bills brass works the draft board. It can be done as Denver showed last year and it teams fall in love with guys. Use that information to benefit the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted January 7, 2011 Author Share Posted January 7, 2011 I've been saying this for a week and been heavily critized because no one will trade up. The reluctance of teams to trade up typically was because of the astronomical price of top 5 contracts. Hopefully the slotting/cap system will eliminate that factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 What if it turns out that it's US? then we keep our #1 overall pick and have someone else's #1. carolina traded their #1 pick in last years draft the year before to pick everette brown in the 2nd...this is an option i would like the bills to try out. we could trade down several times and pick up at least two 2nd's and then use one of those extra picks to flip into another 1st next year. we then still have a 1st and two 2nds this year and two 1sts next year. this is what the pats do every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Rob Johnson Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 The reluctance of teams to trade up typically was because of the astronomical price of top 5 contracts. Hopefully the slotting/cap system will eliminate that factor. The only thing that could hurt that in this particular draft is the uncertainty of there being a season. Why sacrifice a 2nd round pick for a player at a certain position when you could have 2 full drafts to fill that need before games are played again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted January 7, 2011 Author Share Posted January 7, 2011 then we keep our #1 overall pick and have someone else's #1. carolina traded their #1 pick in last years draft the year before to pick everette brown in the 2nd...this is an option i would like the bills to try out. we could trade down several times and pick up at least two 2nd's and then use one of those extra picks to flip into another 1st next year. we then still have a 1st and two 2nds this year and two 1sts next year. this is what the pats do every year. I really like that option. It also would give us the ability next year to package 2 #1s to trade up to get Luck, in the event the team with the first overall pick already has a QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloATL Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Would there be any value trying to project next years worst team? Try to trade our second rounder this year to the team most likely to cave in next year (cleveland/Cincinnatti)for their 1st next year? In this way we could possibly secure the Luck pick when he comes out. It's a crapshoot, but look at the *Pats, they have been stockpiling in this fashion to secure 2 in the first 3 round this year. I love this idea, but I don't have the confidence in our front office to pull this off or even think this way. But it would indeed be great. There might not be any takers thouhg, knowing that Luck will be there next year, unless a team like Cinci is delusional and thinks they can win now and will want this year's second rounder to get that "last piece" in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 I love this idea, but I don't have the confidence in our front office to pull this off or even think this way. But it would indeed be great. There might not be any takers thouhg, knowing that Luck will be there next year, unless a team like Cinci is delusional and thinks they can win now and will want this year's second rounder to get that "last piece" in place. if a team is really thinking about being the #1 pick the following year then they will be unemployed the following year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloATL Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 if a team is really thinking about being the #1 pick the following year then they will be unemployed the following year. Sure. But if you're a GM trying to build a team and has said (ala Buddy) that the rebuilding is a process, I wouldn't think you'll be likley to ditch the follwing year's RD 1 pick (which will likey be a high pick if you're a bad team, wehich means you'll have a shot at Luck) for a player in this year's draft, unless you know the player you're taking is going to make a huge difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Sure. But if you're a GM trying to build a team and has said (ala Buddy) that the rebuilding is a process, I wouldn't think you'll be likley to ditch the follwing year's RD 1 pick (which will likey be a high pick if you're a bad team, wehich means you'll have a shot at Luck) for a player in this year's draft, unless you know the player you're taking is going to make a huge difference. which is why carolina traded their #1 for everette brown in the 2nd....i'm not saying at every pick in the 2nd there is a team willing to dish next year's 1st but i do know that it seems to happen almost every year and that the bills should try to pull off the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cage Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) Here is my thinking (and I'm sorry if there are other threads that touch on this, but I wasn't sure where to put it). (Michael Scott: "That's what she said.") Fairley and Bowers will go 1-2. Sorry, but we should just accept it. That leaves us sitting pretty at #3, because there are three skill position players who will be coveted bigtime by at least one team each: Peterson, Gabbert, and Green. You'd think Cinncinati and Cleveland will want Green, Tennessee, San Francisco and Washington will want Gabbert, and Houston will want Peterson. And, critically, because of the rookie salary cap that is sure to be in place, TRADE UPS WILL HAPPEN. It is no longer a penalty to draft in the top 5. What this means is that we control the draft. Draft trades most often happen for coveted skill position players. The three most sought-after skill position players should all be on the board when we pick, and there is no clear-cut standout defensive front-seven player who we would naturally select at the 3 spot. This means we likely will have the unique, invaluable opportunity to trade down and acquire additional picks. WE MUST DO THIS. Buddy, don't race to the podium this year - there will be offers, please utilize the process to obtain more picks. This team has too many holes and this draft is too darn important. I like this reasoning!! Our best draft move this decade was in 2001, moving back 3 spots, drafting Nate Clements and then turning the "free" 2nd round pick into Travis Henry Edited January 7, 2011 by cage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bflojohn Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 The question for up and coming teams is whether they believe in the process of trades on draft day. Buddy Nix has stated he wants picks, and as such, I don't believe the Bills are serious about manipulating the draft via trades. They are "stand alone" in their approach in April, believing more in their board than in the "futures" market of picks. This can be good or bad, because competing with the Patriots, who have turned this into an art form (draft day trades), you must literally turn each pick into a homerun or run the risk of falling further behind (if that's possible!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyT Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Where is it written in stone that Fairley and Bowers will go 1-2, yet suddenly there is doubt cast on our pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayzer32 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) Why don't we just take Gabbert number 3 and be done in our 15 year search for a franchise QB? What if Andrew's Luck runs out next year? Could you imagine if he suffers a career ending injury in college before getting paid? Now that would be the Bills luck, having the #1 pick in the draft and then watching Luck have his career ended in a bowl game. Sorry for the negativity, but I'm a Buffalo sports fan Edited January 7, 2011 by Rayzer32 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickelCity Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) Why don't we just take Gabbert number 3 and be done in our 15 year search for a franchise QB? hypehypehypehype (I know none of us actually know how prospects will pan out until they play, but I cannot stand gabbert as a prospect) Edited January 7, 2011 by NickelCity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Where is it written in stone that Fairley and Bowers will go 1-2, yet suddenly there is doubt cast on our pick? I could easily see Carolina taking Bowers or Green and Denver taking Peterson #2 (Bailey is probably gone). Nothing is set in stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts