Big Blitz Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 I have to think they would take 21 and 22 for 13 now that they have their QB. Some mocks had them taking one. Kiper (?) had them taking Mayfield. And we absolutely could go higher. I consider pick 13 is the lowest we could trade up to and still get one of the top 4 or 5 QBs. But I still think it's crazy that many go in the top 15. In other words, if we're in love with one of the top 4, I gotta think he'll be there at 13. And with the Redskins having holes to fill would absolutely take our 2 firsts perhaps just one of them and a later pick for 13. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Just now, Big Blitz said: I have to think they would take 21 and 22 for 13 now that they have their QB. Some mocks had them taking one. Kiper (?) had them taking Mayfield. And we absolutely could go higher. I consider pick 13 is the lowest we could trade up to and still get one of the top 4 or 5 QBs. But I still think it's crazy that many go in the top 15. In other words, if we're in love with one of the top 4, I gotta think he'll be there at 13. And with the Redskins having holes to fill would absolutely take our 2 firsts perhaps just one of them and a later pick for 13. That would be too much for jumping up 9 spots and too late to get one of the top four QBs. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDIGGZ Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 I wouldn't give both 1sts. I would give a 1st and a 2nd since we have an extra one of those as well. But 13th might only get us the 5th best QB and if they trade up and don't take a QB I might throw my tv out the window 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnBonhamRocks Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 1 minute ago, 26CornerBlitz said: That would be too much for jumping up 9 spots and too late to get one of the top four QBs. Could do what I believe the Eagles did for Wentz - 2 trades. Get to #13 with maybe #21 and one or two of the 2nds. Then trade from #13 up to #2, #3, or #4 with the other 1st and other pick(s)? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted January 31, 2018 Author Share Posted January 31, 2018 Also, if Cousins ends up in Denver or with the Jets, that's one less team likely to take a QB in the top 10. We want Cousins to sign with one of those teams. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 #21 and #22 together should get us up araound #7 as it is. Our #21 and our earlier 2nd rounder is enough to get up to #13 according to the chart. I like that move, and then package #13 and #22 together to move up into top 5. Assuming there are teams that want to play along. 1 minute ago, JohnBonhamRocks said: Could do what I believe the Eagles did for Wentz - 2 trades. Get to #13 with maybe #21 and one or two of the 2nds. Then trade from #13 up to #2, #3, or #4 with the other 1st and other pick(s)? Im on the same track, but if you go strictly off the chart, we end up losing points by doing that. I wonder if teams would prefer #13 and #22, OR... #21, #22, #53 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnBonhamRocks Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 3 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said: #21 and #22 together should get us up araound #7 as it is. Our #21 and our earlier 2nd rounder is enough to get up to #13 according to the chart. I like that move, and then package #13 and #22 together to move up into top 5. Assuming there are teams that want to play along. Im on the same track, but if you go strictly off the chart, we end up losing points by doing that. I wonder if teams would prefer #13 and #22, OR... #21, #22, #53 Yeah I was just trying to estimate in my head w/o looking at the chart. And I would guess they would want #13 and #22. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Just now, JohnBonhamRocks said: Yeah I was just trying to estimate in my head w/o looking at the chart. And I would guess they would want #13 and #22. I'd bet that we'd get an almost 50/50 split on preference. THREE picks that are (basically) in the Top 50... Up those odds of hitting on a player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roundybout Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 (edited) Not a bad idea. It's possible someone like Mayfield will be left at 13. I worry that the 'Skins have the same idea as we did, signing a vet to groom a young draft pick behind him, and they won't want to trade down. Edited January 31, 2018 by BillsEnthusiast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnBonhamRocks Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 1 minute ago, DrDawkinstein said: I'd bet that we'd get an almost 50/50 split on preference. THREE picks that are (basically) in the Top 50... Up those odds of hitting on a player. Would you trade #13 for #21 and #53? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yungmack Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 12 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said: That would be too much for jumping up 9 spots and too late to get one of the top four QBs. I don't see 4 top QBs in the draft. At the most there are 2 that might justify a huge move up in the draft, though maybe none of them are worth that price. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 15 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: I have to think they would take 21 and 22 for 13 now that they have their QB. Some mocks had them taking one. Kiper (?) had them taking Mayfield. And we absolutely could go higher. I consider pick 13 is the lowest we could trade up to and still get one of the top 4 or 5 QBs. But I still think it's crazy that many go in the top 15. In other words, if we're in love with one of the top 4, I gotta think he'll be there at 13. And with the Redskins having holes to fill would absolutely take our 2 firsts perhaps just one of them and a later pick for 13. I don't think moving up 9 spots is good value for 2 1sts this year. But I could be off. Also don't think moving up 9 spots will get us our preferred QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEraBills Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 (edited) It still might not be for sale. Smith might be their bridge QB and they may take a QB at 13. Just because they signed Smith that doesn't mean they are not going to draft a QB early. They could very well have Allen in the plans thinking he needs to sit for two years. Edited January 31, 2018 by NewEraBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 2 minutes ago, BillsEnthusiast said: Not a bad idea. It's possible someone like Mayfield will be left at 13. I worry that the 'Skins have the same idea as we did, signing a vet to groom a young draft pick behind him, and they won't want to trade down. BE, once the details of the contract came out (4 years, high guaranteed money) that can't be the case. It would put them in Garoppolo land, having their young groomed pick ready to start with only 1 year left on his contract + an option, while they're still paying Smith starter $$ Just now, NewEraBills said: It still might not be for sale. Smith might be their bridge QB and they may take a QB at 13. Just because they signed Smith that doesn't mean they are not going to draft early. They could very well have Allen in the plans thinking he needs to sit for two years. They're paying Smith $70M guaranteed on a 4 year deal. Draft Allen, and his rookie contract will be expiring (or in its option year) and he's never played (or you're paying a Very Expensive Backup) 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Only way I give up both firsts is to trade up into the top 3 and I don't even want that to happen 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted January 31, 2018 Author Share Posted January 31, 2018 Tampa would have to consider an offer of 21 and 22 for the 7th. I'm targeting Tampa at 7 as most likely highest trade up partner. Top 5 not impossible but I think it'd be tough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEraBills Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 3 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: I don't think moving up 9 spots is good value for 2 1sts this year. But I could be off. Also don't think moving up 9 spots will get us our preferred QB. I agree 2 1sts to move up 9 spots is absolutely terrible value and if Mayfield is the guy then we'll need to move up more than 9 spots. Same with Darnold/Rosen. Allen could be there unless people just get crazy. 2 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: BE, once the details of the contract came out (4 years, high guaranteed money) that can't be the case. It would put them in Garoppolo land, having their young groomed pick ready to start with only 1 year left on his contract + an option, while they're still paying Smith starter $$ They're paying Smith $70M guaranteed on a 4 year deal. Draft Allen, and his rookie contract will be expiring (or in its option year) and he's never played (or you're paying a Very Expensive Backup) Yeah but Snyder is known to waste money LOLl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RochesterRob Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 6 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said: #21 and #22 together should get us up araound #7 as it is. Our #21 and our earlier 2nd rounder is enough to get up to #13 according to the chart. I like that move, and then package #13 and #22 together to move up into top 5. Assuming there are teams that want to play along. Im on the same track, but if you go strictly off the chart, we end up losing points by doing that. I wonder if teams would prefer #13 and #22, OR... #21, #22, #53 The chart is only a guide for a layperson. The market is much more dynamic the few days before and on the day the draft opens then it is supply and demand at its most basic. I think that you would have to sweeten your proposal at the top 5 and have a provision that if your guy is not there then the deal is off. Further, teams do the unexpected so don't be surprised that if the QB's are as highly prized as you maintain then teams will see the same thing and may think the opportunity is too much to pass up. I don't believe despite how much "Bills wishing" that goes on here that we can believe that Cleveland or the Giants have utterly no interest in a QB. One single pick is darn cheap insurance whether you have Cousins or Manning on the roster. By the way I believe it when I see it in terms of Cousins signing with Cleveland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 17 minutes ago, JohnBonhamRocks said: Could do what I believe the Eagles did for Wentz - 2 trades. Get to #13 with maybe #21 and one or two of the 2nds. Then trade from #13 up to #2, #3, or #4 with the other 1st and other pick(s)? Too many moving parts, IMO. You'd likely be stuck holding #13 if some other team jumps ahead of the Bills into the top 4, which ultimately would be too expensive... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CritMark Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Everyone is talking about the pick at 13. I would look at the #12 pick from Cincy. Rumors are already floating around that they would entertain a trade for a lower 1st round and a 2nd round. Obviously whose picks they are will make a big difference. The only team with a big need at QB between the Bills and Bengals is AZ. With nobody under contract I expect them to sign a veteran. Their interest in a QB, if they do that, depends on who they sign and who is still on the board. That notwithstanding, that is where I would target for a trade, be it that trade only or the first of two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 17 minutes ago, JohnBonhamRocks said: Would you trade #13 for #21 and #53? Maybe. Bills traded #8 for #16 and #46 in 2013. Plenty of other teams have. It happens. Depends on what you want and need versus how the draft is shaking out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjt328 Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 We should have a MUCH better idea of trade targets after free agency. Where Kirk Cousins lands is going to shake up everything. If he lands with someone in the Top 6 like Cleveland, New York Giants/Jets or Denver, that will start pushing the better prospects farther down the board. We may be able to get by with just getting ahead of Arizona (sitting at #15) to get our guy. This would probably be the ideal scenario for us. But if Cousins lands with Arizona or someone totally unexpected, we probably need to squeeze into the Top 5. That means targeting Indianapolis or Cleveland's #4 selection, which is going to get really pricey. Probably both #1s this year, and some more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrEpsYtown Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 I think trading up to 13 gets you closer to trading into the top 3, but anything short of a trade up for Allen-Darnold-Rosen, I probably would not bother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koufax Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 35 minutes ago, kdiggz said: I wouldn't give both 1sts. I would give a 1st and a 2nd since we have an extra one of those as well. But 13th might only get us the 5th best QB and if they trade up and don't take a QB I might throw my tv out the window We do not trade up to get the 5th best QB. We trade up when we think one of the five QBs who has fallen to a spot is better than fifth best. A minor but important distinction. I can't remember any draft where the fifth best QB was any good, but I can remember some where the fifth QB chosen was really good. Obvious example is 1983 where Elway went #1, but then Blackledge was picked at #7 before Kelly went #14, then Eason and O'Brien before Marino went #27. So that is a draft where there were hall of famers available in the teens and the twenties, but getting the 5th best QB wasn't a good idea, but being better in your ranking and projections of the top three QBs you like than other teams were was the secret. I don't even remotely consider trading up if we aren't getting someone we think is one of the top three QBs in this draft, but we also hope other teams make mistakes and our #4 and #5 rated QBs get picked earlier than someone in our top 3. But there is just about never a case where there end up being more than three good QBs in a draft, so unless you think you are getting one of YOUR top three, I don't see any reason to draft a QB in the first. In 2004 we picked the 4th best QB in a three QB draft. We can read the tea leaves better and smarter than other teams and laugh when they pick Blackledge and we get Kelly, but while the 5th best WR or LB or RB can often be a very useful player, I'm not aware of any time where the 5th best QB was a useful player. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CritMark Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 1 minute ago, mjt328 said: We should have a MUCH better idea of trade targets after free agency. Where Kirk Cousins lands is going to shake up everything. If he lands with someone in the Top 6 like Cleveland, New York Giants/Jets or Denver, that will start pushing the better prospects farther down the board. We may be able to get by with just getting ahead of Arizona (sitting at #15) to get our guy. This would probably be the ideal scenario for us. But if Cousins lands with Arizona or someone totally unexpected, we probably need to squeeze into the Top 5. That means targeting Indianapolis or Cleveland's #4 selection, which is going to get really pricey. Probably both #1s this year, and some more. You are correct. However, looking at landing spots for Cousins, I think AZ is the least likely. Given the competition in that division, I think that he would look elsewhere unless the economics were so compelling. The Rams look to be a good team on the rise and the Seahawks are still a formidable team to face twice a year. That is going to be a very difficult division to reach the playoffs in if he goes there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roundybout Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 43 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: BE, once the details of the contract came out (4 years, high guaranteed money) that can't be the case. It would put them in Garoppolo land, having their young groomed pick ready to start with only 1 year left on his contract + an option, while they're still paying Smith starter $$ This makes sense, thanks. I do wonder if there is an out clause, though, just in case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenorthremembers Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 You would have to see how free agency and the top portion of the draft plays out. But if a scenario plays out like this Jets- Sign Cousins Browns- Take Rosen #1 Giants- Pass on a QB and take Barkley #2 Broncos- Take Darnold and Mayfield starts to slide, I serious hope the Bills start working on getting ahead of Arizona. No reason they can't get up to #13 or #14 by trading the 21st and 53rd pick. The chart may be dependent on the situation, but it seems like a great deal of the trades that happen follow the formula closely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CritMark Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 5 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said: I think trading up to 13 gets you closer to trading into the top 3, but anything short of a trade up for Allen-Darnold-Rosen, I probably would not bother. Your assumption is the three top QBs are the three you named. Not all evaluators agree and many that have those three at the top are including Mayfield in that same group with the drop off after the top four. It's going to come down to who is available at a spot the Bills are willing to trade up to. Nobody is going to tip their hand in advance. Once all the UFAs have signed, we will have a clearer picture on who is likely to draft a QB. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Unless you're trading into the top 3, you get no guarantee that one of your guys is there... You have to have packages ready in case a player you want falls though. There's always shocks in the top 10, and there will be trades. 45 minutes ago, thenorthremembers said: You would have to see how free agency and the top portion of the draft plays out. But if a scenario plays out like this Jets- Sign Cousins Browns- Take Rosen #1 Giants- Pass on a QB and take Barkley #2 Broncos- Take Darnold and Mayfield starts to slide, I serious hope the Bills start working on getting ahead of Arizona. No reason they can't get up to #13 or #14 by trading the 21st and 53rd pick. The chart may be dependent on the situation, but it seems like a great deal of the trades that happen follow the formula closely. Where do keenum, bridgewater, bradford fall? What if the Giants really are planning on playing for 3-5 years with Eli? Ton of variables beyond cousins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CritMark Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 3 minutes ago, dneveu said: Unless you're trading into the top 3, you get no guarantee that one of your guys is there... You have to have packages ready in case a player you want falls though. There's always shocks in the top 10, and there will be trades. Where do keenum, bridgewater, bradford fall? What if the Giants really are planning on playing for 3-5 years with Eli? Ton of variables beyond cousins. The Vikings will not keep both Keenum and Bridgewater. Keenum wants to start and not have to compete with another starting quality QB for a job. If the Vikes want to sign Bridgewater I think the likelihood of Keenum signing as well is maybe 5% and I think that may be high. I'm thinking AZ is a likely landing spot for him but just a guess. Bradford is another story. He has shown when he is on a decent team he can play pretty well. His obvious knock is his ability to stay on the field. He would be a very good option for a short term contract to mentor a rookie with every intention of the rookie being the long term option. The contract would likely have incentives for being available to play as opposed to a big guarantee. That seems like a reasonable option for both the player and the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, CritMark said: The Vikings will not keep both Keenum and Bridgewater. Keenum wants to start and not have to compete with another starting quality QB for a job. If the Vikes want to sign Bridgewater I think the likelihood of Keenum signing as well is maybe 5% and I think that may be high. I'm thinking AZ is a likely landing spot for him but just a guess. Bradford is another story. He has shown when he is on a decent team he can play pretty well. His obvious knock is his ability to stay on the field. He would be a very good option for a short term contract to mentor a rookie with every intention of the rookie being the long term option. The contract would likely have incentives for being available to play as opposed to a big guarantee. That seems like a reasonable option for both the player and the team. I'd have my trainers take a long look at bradfords knee's before I'd even consider him. I don't even know what happened and he ended up on IR. He did shred the saints on MNF to open the season though Edited January 31, 2018 by dneveu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LABILLBACKER Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: I don't think moving up 9 spots is good value for 2 1sts this year. But I could be off. Also don't think moving up 9 spots will get us our preferred QB. You're right. Both moves would be bad. Darnold is the only qb worth moving up that high and either the Browns or Giants will take him. We needed to land Smith and Cousins isn't worth that ridiculous guaranteed money. I don't know what plan B is? Most LA sports announcers are saying it's very unusual this Smith deal was done before the combine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CritMark Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 5 minutes ago, dneveu said: I'd have my trainers take a long look at bradfords knee's before I'd even consider him. I don't even know what happened and he ended up on IR. He did shred the saints on MNF to open the season though He also had pretty good stats in 2016 where he played all but the opening game. Completed 71.6% of his passes, 20 TDs/5 INTs. A lot of his passes were short because the O-Line for them last year was exceptionally bad. He got hammered. So much so that one of his O-Lineman asked him after a particularity big hit if he was dead. If he checks out physically, he will serve some team as a very good rental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenorthremembers Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 21 minutes ago, dneveu said: Unless you're trading into the top 3, you get no guarantee that one of your guys is there... You have to have packages ready in case a player you want falls though. There's always shocks in the top 10, and there will be trades. Where do keenum, bridgewater, bradford fall? What if the Giants really are planning on playing for 3-5 years with Eli? Ton of variables beyond cousins. Completely expect either Keenum or Bradford to end up here. Still feel like the Bills draft a long term answer in the first round, but I don't see them starting a rookie. Expect them to sign one of the two, most likely Bradford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LABILLBACKER Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 10 minutes ago, dneveu said: I'd have my trainers take a long look at bradfords knee's before I'd even consider him. I don't even know what happened and he ended up on IR. He did shred the saints on MNF to open the season though Inject some of that magical TB12 Kale right into Sam's knees. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Just now, LABILLBACKER said: Inject some of that magical TB12 Kale right into Sam's knees. With some Pink Himalayan salt. Or maybe some of whatever they put into bartolo colons shoulder. 2 minutes ago, thenorthremembers said: Completely expect either Keenum or Bradford to end up here. Still feel like the Bills draft a long term answer in the first round, but I don't see them starting a rookie. Expect them to sign one of the two, most likely Bradford. I tend to agree - I don't see Beane and McDermott trying to make a huge move up to the top 3 though. 3 minutes ago, CritMark said: He also had pretty good stats in 2016 where he played all but the opening game. Completed 71.6% of his passes, 20 TDs/5 INTs. A lot of his passes were short because the O-Line for them last year was exceptionally bad. He got hammered. So much so that one of his O-Lineman asked him after a particularity big hit if he was dead. If he checks out physically, he will serve some team as a very good rental. Yeah - they had like 0 run game in 2016 too. This year they upgraded that with Cook, and even though he went out for the year, they also added Murray in FA to add some meat to their run game. Their o-line improved a ton from 2016 - 2 new tackles and drafted a center. Interested to see where Minnesota goes with their QB situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CritMark Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 4 minutes ago, dneveu said: With some Pink Himalayan salt. Or maybe some of whatever they put into bartolo colons shoulder. I tend to agree - I don't see Beane and McDermott trying to make a huge move up to the top 3 though. Would they have to move up to #3 though? Moving to #5 for 21, 22 & 53 is a good deal for the Broncos if they sign Cousins. If Barkley is there at #4 Cleveland will not trade out of that spot. Indy is not drafting a QB. Baring an Indy trade, a top QB is available at #5. Likewise, if Indy takes Barkley, trading those same three picks for #4 based on the value chart is a good deal for Cleveland. I think that is where you are likely going to need to get to #4 or #5 unless something odd happens at 1 through 3. The nightmare scenario for a QB needy team is if Cleveland takes Barkley at #1 assuming they determine they will be happy with any one of three QBs, no matter how they rank them. If they do that I would expect the Giants to take Rosen and someone move up to #3 to take a QB. That means 2-3-4 are all QBs. That is the scenario where you would have to trade up to #3 as your only option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RochesterRob Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 17 minutes ago, thenorthremembers said: Completely expect either Keenum or Bradford to end up here. Still feel like the Bills draft a long term answer in the first round, but I don't see them starting a rookie. Expect them to sign one of the two, most likely Bradford. I could see Bradford come here if his physical checks out. This would mean keeping Glenn, draft an interior OL, and draft at least one offensive skill player. This would make many here unhappy but as has been said here in the last day perhaps the expectations this fall should not be ultra high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 If we are trading up to 13 for a QB then the only one likely to be left is Marshall. God knows I hope that doesn't happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 The Bills are !@#$ed. They aren't going to get a very good QB this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts