49ers are the trade target

[JohnC]

15 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

It’s possible. Teams fall in love with their guys, supposedly the Jets really like Allen. Last year Whaley was in love with Watson.

 

I actually think Baker and Lamar go higher than projected for that reason. It is kind of like Mahomes. It only takes one team to love them. While they may have some polarizing traits you don’t need a consensus of all 32 teams. You need one that sees through it. It’s the same reason that I think Rudolph drops. He doesn’t do anything special. That’s a big investment for a guy that could be “solid.”

In the next draft there are a lot of plausible qb scenarios that can be embraced. For me, if the Bills don't come out of this year's draft with a high end qb prospect I will really be disappointed/discouraged to the extent that I could go by the wayside. If this isn't the year to make a serious effort to secure a franchise qb then when is it? 

 

I don't care what qb the Bills draft it simply needs to be done. Getting a qb is not a magic elixir that is going to immediately  make the Bills a serious team. As it currently stands I consider this team a very hollowed out team. Without a doubt a major infusion of talent still needs to be added to make this team competitive. However, until an authentic franchise is taking the snaps little else matters. That is my unyielding position!

[jrober38]

1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:

The problem is that they are going to either commit to Jimmy G or let him walk. They won’t have the luxury of sitting on him. They gave up an early #2 for him. They will either have to tag him, sign him to a long-term deal or he walks. If you are willing to tag a guy that’s you’ve hardly seen i wouldn’t think that you use a top 2 pick on the same position. It’s one or the other imo.

 

They have like $100 mil in cap space.

They can do whatever they want. 

[xRUSHx]

Just now, jrober38 said:

 

Tyrod is done here. He's cut as soon as the season ends. 

 

The Bills don't need to trade up into the top 5 for a QB. All that will do is gut the roster of the necessary talent it needs to compete. 

 

Without massive upgrades to the defense this team is going nowhere regardless of who is playing QB.

 

Once we lose some more games, we'll probably wind up picking in the 12-16 range. We can pick the best guy there, and then use the rest of our picks upgrading the rest of the roster which quite simply isn't good enough. This team is Swiss Cheese. 

Hey man I know the team has a bunch of needs but QB has to be the main goal for this draft IMO. 

I hope your right about Tyrod being let go, what worries me is the Chan/Fitz era and this team going down the same exact way.

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

In the next draft there are a lot of plausible qb scenarios that can be embraced. For me, if the Bills don't come out of this year's draft with a high end qb prospect I will really be disappointed/discouraged to the extent that I could go by the wayside. If this isn't the year to make a serious effort to secure a franchise qb then when is it? 

 

I don't care what qb the Bills draft it simply needs to be done. Getting a qb is not a magic elixir that is going to immediately  make the Bills a serious team. As it currently stands I consider this team a very hollowed out team. Without a doubt a major infusion of talent still needs to be added to make this team competitive. However, until an authentic franchise is taking the snaps little else matters. That is my unyielding position!

I don’t see a situation where they don’t take a QB early. That’s the clear plan (if they have a plan). There are holes everywhere but this is the year to get the QB. The guys are there to be had.

[Real McClappy]

5 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

The problem is that they are going to either commit to Jimmy G or let him walk. They won’t have the luxury of sitting on him. They gave up an early #2 for him. They will either have to tag him, sign him to a long-term deal or he walks. If you are willing to tag a guy that’s you’ve hardly seen i wouldn’t think that you use a top 2 pick on the same position. It’s one or the other imo.

They do have a ton of Cap room like jrober pointed out. I could see it as a possibility still not knowing what Jimmy is 100%.

 

I really think our trade partners are either the Colts or Bears sitting at 3-7 with current QB's on their rosters already. 

Edited November 24, 2017 by Real McCoy

[jrober38]

Just now, xRUSHx said:

Hey man I know the team has a bunch of needs but QB has to be the main goal for this draft IMO. 

I hope your right about Tyrod being let go, what worries me is the Chan/Fitz era and this team going down the same exact way.

 

There is no chance Tyrod is coming back. 

 

And I agree, they need a 1st round QB, I just don't they need to be set on trading up to get one. We need to add 5-6 new starters to the defense if this team is going to compete. A couple new DTs, a new DE, a couple LBS, a CB.

 

It's great that we have a bunch of picks, but we need to find a couple impact players from this draft. Trading the whole farm for a shot at a QB isn't going to solve our problems. The whole roster is a mess. 

[Coach Tuesday]

They may stay put and try to land a WR, DT LB or DE with one of their firsts and a QB with the other.

[Kirby Jackson]

3 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

They have like $100 mil in cap space.

They can do whatever they want. 

They certainly can but that’s a terrible use of resources. No team is giving up a top 35 pick for a guy that they are ready to move on from already. They are going to give him a big deal (likely) and then see how he plays. In a year or 2 they may be looking again if he doesn’t work out but you can’t commit to 2 guys as your future franchise QB at the same time. That’s essentially what they would be doing if they took one in the 1st. 

[Tatonka68]

1 minute ago, jrober38 said:

 

There is no chance Tyrod is coming back. 

 

And I agree, they need a 1st round QB, I just don't they need to be set on trading up to get one. We need to add 5-6 new starters to the defense if this team is going to compete. A couple new DTs, a new DE, a couple LBS, a CB.

 

It's great that we have a bunch of picks, but we need to find a couple impact players from this draft. Trading the whole farm for a shot at a QB isn't going to solve our problems. The whole roster is a mess. 

Not a one year fix, want quality not quantity. Go for the best, not a leftover. That has been the Bills game plan for the last 17 years. 

[xRUSHx]

4 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

There is no chance Tyrod is coming back. 

 

And I agree, they need a 1st round QB, I just don't they need to be set on trading up to get one. We need to add 5-6 new starters to the defense if this team is going to compete. A couple new DTs, a new DE, a couple LBS, a CB.

 

It's great that we have a bunch of picks, but we need to find a couple impact players from this draft. Trading the whole farm for a shot at a QB isn't going to solve our problems. The whole roster is a mess. 

It starts with the QB man. SF traded for Grap but yet there is still talk they may take another . That shows SF is getting more respect at finding a franchise worthy QB over the we need to many players talk so we need to just let a QB fall to us and use our picks for other positions.

 

I'm all in for the trade up, go get our guy

Edited November 24, 2017 by xRUSHx

[jrober38]

Just now, Kirby Jackson said:

They certainly can but that’s a terrible use of resources. No team is giving up a top 35 pick for a guy that they are ready to move on from already. They are going to give him a big deal (likely) and then see how he plays. In a year or 2 they may be looking again if he doesn’t work out but you can’t commit to 2 guys as your future franchise QB at the same time. That’s essentially what they would be doing if they took one in the 1st. 

 

I don't see why they can't. 

 

Just franchise Garoppolo on a 1 year deal, and draft a QB. Let those two guys compete, then make a decision after the 2018 season. 

 

Having two quality QBs compete for the job would be in their best interests as opposed to going all in on a guy who has played 6 quarters of meaningful regular season football. 

[Real McClappy]

3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

They certainly can but that’s a terrible use of resources. No team is giving up a top 35 pick for a guy that they are ready to move on from already. They are going to give him a big deal (likely) and then see how he plays. In a year or 2 they may be looking again if he doesn’t work out but you can’t commit to 2 guys as your future franchise QB at the same time. That’s essentially what they would be doing if they took one in the 1st. 

Is that really a bad decision though if it locks up a 15 year starter as a franchise QB? You can build around him for 5years and go on deep consistent playoff runs after.

Edited November 24, 2017 by Real McCoy

[Kirby Jackson]

2 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

They do have a ton of Cap room like jrober pointed out. I could see it as a possibility still not knowing what Jimmy is 100%.

 

I really think our trade partners are either the Colts or Bears sitting at 3-7 with current QB's on their rosters already. 

It’s not about cap space as much as it is committing to 2 guys.

 

The thought of the Bears or Colts is an interesting (and plausible) one. The Bears may take the 2 1sts for example. They dealt away some capital last year for Trubisky. They may be looking for quantity this year.

[jrober38]

1 minute ago, Tatonka68 said:

Not a one year fix, want quality not quantity. Go for the best, not a leftover. That has been the Bills game plan for the last 17 years. 

 

Lots of good franchise QBs weren't the #1 overall pick. 

 

The notion that we need the "best" prospect is flawed. 

[xRUSHx]

1 minute ago, jrober38 said:

 

Lots of good franchise QBs weren't the #1 overall pick. 

 

The notion that we need the "best" prospect is flawed. 

After waiting so dam long for a QB worthy to call a franchise QB IMO most fans will give away the farm to get one of the top dogs.

[Kirby Jackson]

Just now, jrober38 said:

 

I don't see why they can't. 

 

Just franchise Garoppolo on a 1 year deal, and draft a QB. Let those two guys compete, then make a decision after the 2018 season. 

 

Having two quality QBs compete for the job would be in their best interests as opposed to going all in on a guy who has played 6 quarters of meaningful regular season football. 

Then they would have to tag Jimmy G again or let him walk or trade the other QB. Why wouldn’t they trade down or draft BPA and see if Garoppolo can play? If he can’t they will be picking early in 2019. If he can they will be on their way. That’s just a terrible use of resources. You pick a guy and give him the shot whether you are right or wrong. The 49ers picked Jimmy G. 

4 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

Is that really a bad decision though if it locks up a 15 year starter as a franchise QB? You can build around him for 5years and go on deep consistent playoff runs after.

Of course not but you can’t commit to 2 guys at once. You have to pick a guy and see if he can play. 

[xRUSHx]

1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Then they would have to tag Jimmy G again or let him walk or trade the other QB. Why wouldn’t they trade down or draft BPA and see if Garoppolo can play? If he can’t they will be picking early in 2019. If he can they will be on their way. That’s just a terrible use of resources. You pick a guy and give him the shot whether you are right or wrong. The 49ers picked Jimmy G. 

IMO SF will want picks and will take another QB later in the draft to sit behind Grap

[HappyDays]

7 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

There is no chance Tyrod is coming back. 

 

And I agree, they need a 1st round QB, I just don't they need to be set on trading up to get one. We need to add 5-6 new starters to the defense if this team is going to compete. A couple new DTs, a new DE, a couple LBS, a CB.

 

It's great that we have a bunch of picks, but we need to find a couple impact players from this draft. Trading the whole farm for a shot at a QB isn't going to solve our problems. The whole roster is a mess. 

 

I’ve been looking at LBs. Roquon Smith should be our target with the KC pick, assuming we have a 1st rounder left over after a possible trade up. Reminds me of Zach Brown with more potential. Fast, all over the field, can play pass coverage. Fits our defense.

[Kirby Jackson]

2 minutes ago, xRUSHx said:

IMO SF will want picks and will take another QB later in the draft to sit behind Grap

That I could see (unless they like Beathard). They could go down to 10 or so and try to add Sutton (for example) while recouping that 2nd and a 1st next year. They can swing at a guy like Ferguson in the 3rd.

1 minute ago, HappyDays said:

 

I’ve been looking at LBs. Roquon Smith should be our target with the KC pick, assuming we have a 1st rounder left over after a possible trade up. Reminds me of Zach Brown with more potential. Fast, all over the field, can play pass coverage. Fits our defense.

Monster

Edited November 24, 2017 by Kirby Jackson

[Real McClappy]

7 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Of course not but you can’t commit to 2 guys at once. You have to pick a guy and see if he can play. 

I guess the whole not starting him this year is puzzling to me them. I'm not sure why they are waiting to see what he can possibly become?

 

Edited November 24, 2017 by Real McCoy

[Kirby Jackson]

2 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

I guess the whole not starting him this year is puzzling to me them. I'm not sure why they are waiting to see what he can possibly become?

 

Yeah, it is beyond weird.

[yungmack]

2 hours ago, jrober38 said:

 

We should just target Mayfield with our 1st round pick. He'll probably be available in the 12-20 range, which is where we'll end up picking. 

 

Then cut Tyrod, bring in a cheap veteran, and let Mayfield, Peterman and the vet compete for the job. Then spend the rest of our picks fixing the defensive front seven. 

You see no red flags with a 5' 11'' QB who exhibits some Ryan Leaf-like characteristics? 

[xRUSHx]

6 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

I guess the whole not starting him this year is puzzling to me them. I'm not sure why they are waiting to see what he can possibly become?

 

Maybe they have a hidden deal with another team to trade with before the draft?

[BillsFan4]

The problem with trading up is that we need talent on the field to surround a QB with, and especially a rookie QB.

 

This team has been stripped down. I know many people seem to think that the Bills front office collected all these picks just to trade up for a QB. But I don't think that's the case At All... 

 

I think they collected all these picks to rebuild the whole team, not just the QB position. 

 

I want a great QB as much as all of you do. But I just don't think we are in a position to give away a draft (or two) for a single position. The Bills need talent at sooooo many other positions too. If you stick a rookie QB on this current Bills team, you are just asking for him to fail. 

 

Id like to see them use their own 1st on a QB and the rest to help fill out the Bills roster. 

 

IMO you can't just trade away a draft and stick a 1st or 2nd overall pick on a team that's void of talent. That is setting him up to fail. We are not the Eagles when they traded for Wentz, or the Rams when they traded for Goff. We dont have that type of talent right now to surround a rookie QB with and give him a chance at success. 

Adtually using all of our draft picks on a bunch of players could go a long way to adding the talent that the Bills need to be successful. Using all those picks on 1 guy doesn't IMO.

 

We are at the start of a rebuild. If you trade away our stockpile of picks, how do you get the draft capital to rebuild the team? 

 

[billieve420]

1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

Cleveland is taking a qb. I pretty much guarantee it.

 

Unless Cleveland makes a run at Cousins or Jimmy Garoppolo they have to draft a QB at #1 can't see anyway around it.

[Kirby Jackson]

2 minutes ago, xRUSHx said:

Maybe they have a hidden deal with another team to trade with before the draft?

That would be so Brownsie. They didn’t trade for him with the 2nd and now give up 2 2nds for him. 

 

The other scenario, I think, is that they are really high on him and are trying to keep that contract down. 

[BarleyNY]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

If I were to rank the list above in order of guys that I’d want it would be:

- Rosen

- Darnold

- Baker

- Jackson

- Allen

- Rudolph (but I’d prefer Falk and Finley)

 

I think the opposite with Cleveland. They are over being the smartest guy in the room. They will pick a QB at 1 and it will be Rosen or Darnold (if he comes out). 

 

I love Mayfield. 

 

Cleveland has even said that now is the time to cash in on their draft capital, so yes, they’re taking a QB at 1.  Almost certainly that’ll be Rosen.  Darnold will be in the conversation but Rosen is showing more.

 

And that is where my agreement with you ends.  I’d be fine with Mayfield if he was taller but he’s not close to tall enough for the NFL.  That makes his odds of success very long. 

 

[Dr. Who]

2 hours ago, jrober38 said:

 

We should just target Mayfield with our 1st round pick. He'll probably be available in the 12-20 range, which is where we'll end up picking. 

 

Then cut Tyrod, bring in a cheap veteran, and let Mayfield, Peterman and the vet compete for the job. Then spend the rest of our picks fixing the defensive front seven. 

Well, I mostly agree, but you better use some draft capital or free agency to improve the o-line as well.

[xRUSHx]

10 minutes ago, BillsFan4 said:

The problem with trading up is that we need talent on the field to surround a QB with, and especially a rookie QB.

 

This team has been stripped down. I know many people seem to think that the Bills front office collected all these picks just to trade up for a QB. But I don't think that's the case At All... 

 

I think they collected all these picks to rebuild the whole team, not just the QB position. 

 

I want a great QB as much as all of you do. But I just don't think we are in a position to give away a draft (or two) for a single position. The Bills need talent at sooooo many other positions too. If you stick a rookie QB on this current Bills team, you are just asking for him to fail. 

 

Id like to see them use their own 1st on a QB and the rest to help fill out the Bills roster. 

 

IMO you can't just trade away a draft and stick a 1st or 2nd overall pick on a team that's void of talent. That is setting him up to fail. We are not the Eagles when they traded for Wentz, or the Rams when they traded for Goff. We dont have that type of talent right now to surround a rookie QB with and give him a chance at success. 

Adtually using all of our draft picks on a bunch of players could go a long way to adding the talent that the Bills need to be successful. Using all those picks on 1 guy doesn't IMO.

 

We are at the start of a rebuild. If you trade away our stockpile of picks, how do you get the draft capital to rebuild the team? 

 

Its about getting one worthy of calling a franchise QB. IMO even if they use more picks to move up some in this draft we can fill in with FAs and what is left of our draft picks then reload in the 2019 draft. The Bills  do not have enough to fix the team all in one draft anyway but they do have the tools to get us a top QB from this draft.

 

This is why IMO there is zero reason to win anymore games this season

Edited November 24, 2017 by xRUSHx

[apuszczalowski]

18 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Then they would have to tag Jimmy G again or let him walk or trade the other QB. Why wouldn’t they trade down or draft BPA and see if Garoppolo can play? If he can’t they will be picking early in 2019. If he can they will be on their way. That’s just a terrible use of resources. You pick a guy and give him the shot whether you are right or wrong. The 49ers picked Jimmy G. 

Of course not but you can’t commit to 2 guys at once. You have to pick a guy and see if he can play. 

The redskins took RGIII and Cousins, the Pats have Brady and continue to add was early to sit behind him. It never hurts to have too many QBs. They can sign Garrapolo to a decent deal right now because of the lack of experience as a starter and still have another in case he doesn't work out. If he works out you now have another QB that a can be dealt later. If you don't pick another just because you don't know what you have in Garapollo, you risk setting yourself back even further and wind up similar to what we have here where tour scrambling for stop gaps and waiting til next year's draft

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, apuszczalowski said:

The redskins took RGIII and Cousins, the Pats have Brady and continue to add was early to sit behind him. It never hurts to have too many QBs. They can sign Garrapolo to a decent deal right now because of the lack of experience as a starter and still have another in case he doesn't work out. If he works out you now have another QB that a can be dealt later. If you don't pick another just because you don't know what you have in Garapollo, you risk setting yourself back even further and wind up similar to what we have here where tour scrambling for stop gaps and waiting til next year's draft

They took Cousins in the 4th round or something. That’s totally different. The plan was for him to be RG’s backup.

 

The Pats took a 2nd on Jimmy G and like a 3rd on Brissett. Their QB is 40. It turns out that he doesn’t age so they moved both young guys for basically what they used in the draft. They got Dorsett and a 2nd. That is a net zero. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Why would Jimmy sign that deal? He will get more on the open market.

Not accurate enough for me, I wouldn’t want him in the middle rounds.

 

What deal?  I didn't say the 49ers could sign Garoppolo for what the Eagles spent on Bradford, just that if they do sign him (and why would they trade so much if that's not their intent?), don't assume they intend to trade away their pick.

21 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

The other scenario, I think, is that they are really high on him and are trying to keep that contract down. 

 

I've thought of that.  On the other hand,

1) I don't think they should underestimate the fervor with which quarterback hungry teams will pursue him anyway - the bitter lesson of the Osweiler signing has worn off a bit around the league, and if they keep him under wraps it may enhance, not diminish, his value

2) They shouldn't underestimate the handicap they place on their negotiations by keeping a competitive athlete on the bench behind a QB he may see as less competent.

Edited November 24, 2017 by Hapless Bills Fan

[aceman_16]

1 hour ago, billieve420 said:

 

Also, seems like a bit of a head case wouldn't be surprised if he slid to the 2nd round. Height is also an issue we already have a smaller QB who struggles seeing the field. Would Dennison be creative enough to cater an offense to Mayfield I have my doubts. I think the organization prefers bigger QBs with traditional measurables.

Yeah the height 6'1+ is Tyrod height. However, Drew Brees (6'0") and Russell Wilson (5'11") make it because they improvise and anticipate. Measurables are good but not the only thing ... it is how the Bills screwed themselves over with the Rob Johnson (6'4") vs Doug Flutie (5'10") debacle.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

It’s possible. Teams fall in love with their guys, supposedly the Jets really like Allen. Last year Whaley was in love with Watson.

 

I actually think Baker and Lamar go higher than projected for that reason. It is kind of like Mahomes. It only takes one team to love them. While they may have some polarizing traits you don’t need a consensus of all 32 teams. You need one that sees through it. It’s the same reason that I think Rudolph drops. He doesn’t do anything special. That’s a big investment for a guy that could be “solid.”

 

If Whaley was in love with Watson, then why didn't we draft him?  We could have!

[Kirby Jackson]

8 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

What deal?  I didn't say the 49ers could sign Garoppolo for what the Eagles spent on Bradford, just that if they do sign him (and why would they trade so much if that's not their intent?), don't assume they intend to trade away their pick.

 

I've thought of that.  On the other hand,

1) I don't think they should underestimate the fervor with which quarterback hungry teams will pursue him anyway - the bitter lesson of the Osweiler signing has worn off a bit around the league, and if they keep him under wraps it may enhance, not diminish, his value

2) They shouldn't underestimate the handicap they place on their negotiations by keeping a competitive athlete on the bench behind a QB he may see as less competent.

I guess my point is that they wouldn’t have given up what they did without believing that Jimmy G is their guy. He may end up being bad. It’s certainly possible. They are going to commit to giving him the chance for AT LEAST 2018. That’s why I see no chance that they miss the opportunity to get a great player at 2 or trade back. They won’t use that valuable of a resource on another QB. 

[The Frankish Reich]

8 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

What deal?  I didn't say the 49ers could sign Garoppolo for what the Eagles spent on Bradford, just that if they do sign him (and why would they trade so much if that's not their intent?), don't assume they intend to trade away their pick.

 

I've thought of that.  On the other hand,

1) I don't think they should underestimate the fervor with which quarterback hungry teams will pursue him anyway - the bitter lesson of the Osweiler signing has worn off a bit around the league, and if they keep him under wraps it may enhance, not diminish, his value

2) They shouldn't underestimate the handicap they place on their negotiations by keeping a competitive athlete on the bench behind a QB he may see as less competent.

What if CJ Beathard is actually kind of o.k.? Or even better? As a Bills fan, it would just rub salt in my 17 year festering wound if we were to discover that the Niners have two competent QBs AND the 2nd overall pick in the draft, while we have, umm, whatever it is that we have.

[Kirby Jackson]

Just now, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

If Whaley was in love with Watson, then why didn't we draft him?  We could have!

He didn’t have the power. 

[The Frankish Reich]

Just now, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

If Whaley was in love with Watson, then why didn't we draft him?  We could have!

Because by the time the draft came along Whaley wasn't making the decisions anymore?  And hadn't been for a long time?

[yungmack]

The problem inherent in going all in on a top QB - aside from the obvious history of flops with so many of them - is the quality of the O as it now exists and with the inept coaching of Rico and his staff. Put any of the elite college QBs into that mess and it's likely to resemble Peterman and the Chargers week after week than Dak Prescott's rookie year.

 

There is an old adage that says you build a team from front to back, inside to outside. With that in mind, I would replace the O staff first of all then spend the picks on the O line and both a top, field-stretching receiver and a running back. Until the O is improved talent-wise, no QB, elite or otherwise, will make a damned bit of difference, and particularly a rookie. The only way the Bills should pick a QB in the first two rounds is if one of the top 3 QBs not named Mayfield happens to fall to them for some unknown reason. Otherwise, use this draft to "set the table" for one next year or the year after.

2 hours ago, jrober38 said:

 

We should just target Mayfield with our 1st round pick. He'll probably be available in the 12-20 range, which is where we'll end up picking. 

 

Then cut Tyrod, bring in a cheap veteran, and let Mayfield, Peterman and the vet compete for the job. Then spend the rest of our picks fixing the defensive front seven. 

You see no red flags with a 5' 11'' QB who exhibits some Ryan Leaf-like characteristics? 

[Wayne Arnold]

Teddy Bridgewater is the target. 

 

And you don't need to trade valuable draft picks to get him.