Rockinon Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 You are correct, we didn't have a trading partner the past 10 seasons to trade down with. Or are you? This may be the case some of the time, but I would suspect it wasn't the case everytime. The closest thing we've had to a top 5 pick is this seasons. I believe the 8th pick is the next closest. Some team will consider trading with Buffalo should they decide to trade down (which is what I believe they should do this season). It's simply a matter of want or desire for the 3rd pick overall. There will be a more than willing partner this season I am sure. The problem with this logic is that the team who wants to trade up is the one that will be seeking a partner to trade with, not the other way around. A team that is interested in trading down can only hope that another team is foolish enough to consider it and if they are(not freakin' likely) great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Redskins are at 10. As I said above, they don't have the value even if they traded us their entire draft this year. The only way it works is something like their 1,2,3 and 3 next, or 1,2 and 2 next, etc. = insane. Short of that, they have to start handing over players. What's Haynesworth's value at this point? a 3? maybe a low 2? I'm not saying that he won't be back to all-pro level wherever he ends up....I am talking about value on draft day. Who else do they have? It's just not feasible short of a mega-trade that includes us getting Haynesworth and/or McNabb. Value draft day includes players. a 10, 3d and Haynesworth might be worth considering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muggins Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Value draft day includes players. a 10, 3d and Haynesworth might be worth considering. Why would we ever get Haynesworth when he's already been unhappy in a 3-4 in DC and we're supposedly interested in running the 3-4? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Why would we ever get Haynesworth when he's already been unhappy in a 3-4 in DC and we're supposedly interested in running the 3-4? get real..look at the 2010 season. We don't have a clue what we want to run. Get the players and use them as you need. Who give a crap is the player is "happy". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muggins Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 get real..look at the 2010 season. We don't have a clue what we want to run. Get the players and use them as you need. Who give a crap is the player is "happy". That really worked out well for DC, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyT Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 This thread is "Maddening" (see what I did there?) but fun to read Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Not only does a trade down scenario require two willing parties but the terms have to be acceptable. Another issue for the bills is that they need impact players as much as they need depth These types of players are not always there deep into round 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spartacus Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 Not only does a trade down scenario require two willing parties but the terms have to be acceptable. Another issue for the bills is that they need impact players as much as they need depth These types of players are not always there deep into round 1 Bills have not done a stellar job of finding impact playmakers with their top 10 picks either not missing out on much if they trade down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts