dave mcbride Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 34th pick for the 48th, 79th, and Oakland's third rounder next year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 A high second round this year is worth at least a swap of 2nds, plus a first next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Oakland needs to sweeten that offer. But I am all ears and all for trading down. Potential suitors must recognize that it is practically a first round pick we are offering Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Rob Johnson Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 (edited) 34th pick for the 48th, 79th, and Oakland's third rounder next year? they have pick #81, not 79, and yes I'd do it. Also, with the added 3rd next year it's way over the value on the value chart, that I realize is not always relevant. Edited April 29, 2011 by Ghost of Rob Johnson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I pass on that offer. If they throw in a 4th as well, then maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I'd take 48, 79, and a 2nd next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddog69 Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I like the idea of a trade down with Oakland so they can get Kaepernick, but in addition to their 2 and 3 this year, I would want their 2 next year instead of their 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playman Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 A high second round this year is worth at least a swap of 2nds, plus a first next year. this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I was under the impression that you were supposed to devalue a pick from the next year by 1 round. So the value of next years third would be the same as a fourth this year. I'd just as soon have their 3rd and 4th this year. That would give us a mid second, 2 thirds, and 3 fourths this year. I like that much better. I think you can definitely pick up a solid OLB, ILB, ROT, and TE with that, and still have a couple picks to add depth with. I'd rather have the pick this year. That way if we don't like our options come pick time we can re-trade it for something next year. Also gives us the option of getting really creative and packaging some/all of our fourth round picks to get back into the third round again this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I like the idea of a trade down with Oakland so they can get Kaepernick, but in addition to their 2 and 3 this year, I would want their 2 next year instead of their 3 sold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted April 29, 2011 Author Share Posted April 29, 2011 They may have this chance! Let's see what happens at #33. The thing is that a good ILB may well be available at 48 because it's a somewhat devalued position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 34th pick for the 48th, 79th, and Oakland's third rounder next year? Not a chance in the world I would take that deal. I would take Kaepernick for the Bills first. #34 is too high of a pick to trade for low picks like that and give up the chance to get an elite, first round level talent on a team with so many holes and weaknesses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I was under the impression that you were supposed to devalue a pick from the next year by 1 round. So the value of next years third would be the same as a fourth this year. I'd just as soon have their 3rd and 4th this year. That would give us a mid second, 2 thirds, and 3 fourths this year. I like that much better. I think you can definitely pick up a solid OLB, ILB, ROT, and TE with that, and still have a couple picks to add depth with. I'd rather have the pick this year. That way if we don't like our options come pick time we can re-trade it for something next year. Also gives us the option of getting really creative and packaging some/all of our fourth round picks to get back into the third round again this year. i always thought it was the opposite, next years pick would be valued higher this year because you don't know where that pick will be and because you are giving the one team a chance to get someone this year by delaying your pick til next year. This years 1st rounder isn't the same value as next years second Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thoner7 Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Its Crazy Davis and the Raiders. Asking price should start at a 1st rounder next year and a 3rd this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB2004 Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 (edited) 34th pick for the 48th, 79th, and Oakland's third rounder next year? Yes I would do this trade if it was available but change next years 3rd rounder to a 2nd rounder. But obviously, if we have a player that we want at 34 then draft the guy we want. Edited April 29, 2011 by BB2004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ennjay Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Its Crazy Davis and the Raiders. . . which is why I wonder why they'd take Kaepernick ahead of Mallett. Mallett may be the second coming of Jeff George (Big Arm but not much else) and Crazy Al fell in love with George when nobody else would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 i always thought it was the opposite, next years pick would be valued higher this year because you don't know where that pick will be and because you are giving the one team a chance to get someone this year by delaying your pick til next year. This years 1st rounder isn't the same value as next years second :lol: I have no idea. Bottom line is I wouldn't be opposed to a trade if I felt they got a decent value for the pick. I think there's quite a few good options at 34 and 1-2 would likely still be there by the Raiders 2nd round pick. And since I'm not sold on a QB in this draft, I don't mind the Bills moving down and getting more players to fill some holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRH Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 And exactly why would we trade with the Raiders? Ralph has done that twice in his life and gotten fleeced both times (Daryle Lamonica for Tom Flores and an injured Art Powell; a third-round choice for Billy Joe Hobert). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 And exactly why would we trade with the Raiders? Ralph has done that twice in his life and gotten fleeced both times (Daryle Lamonica for Tom Flores and an injured Art Powell; a third-round choice for Billy Joe Hobert). That's like saying the Bills shouldn't have taken Bruce Smith first overall because the last time they took a defensive end first overall, Walt Patulski, it didn't work out. A history of trading with a team twice in the previous 50 years is totally irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 NO I think we should just take Kaepernick ourselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts