Trade down...move 21 or 22

[RochesterRob]

13 minutes ago, OldTimer1960 said:

So, who is the sure-fire star that they could get if they trade the majority of their draft to get someone early?

 

i think the best of theses prospects is at best a 50-50 prospect.  I am not enamored with trading 4 high picks to get someone who is a coin flip to be a good starter.  I would be fine with Rudolph at 21 if he gets there AND one of the 2nds on another QB prospect.

 

i haven’t given up on Peterman, but he is a long-shot and his presence should not dictate draft selections in any way.

 

Beyond Cousins, I don’t think any of the available FA QBs are long-term answers and I would not want to trade more than the Bills’ 3rd round pick (96) for Nick Foles - he isn’t the answer (IMHO).

  Like others have pointed out this year's class looks a lot like the one in 2006 which consisted of Leinart among others.  A bunch of guys that look great on paper but real iffy in terms of reshaping an offense.  

[JohnC]

On ‎2‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 3:22 PM, KingRex said:

I think trading away resources we need to use to acquire 4 early draftees to move up to get a hoped for franchise QB would be one of the quickest ways to tank this season.

 

Remember, the Colts used a first day pick to get a franchise QB in the form of Peyton Manning.  Great pick that worked out EVENTUALLY.  however, even with a stud like Peyton this rookie FRANCHISE  QB elevated their record from 3-13 up to.... 3-13.

 

If the Bills draft a QB like Rosen or Darnold by trading away 20 and 21 (and more likely) it would likely result in us missing the playoffs again next year (and actually likel begin a new 17 year playoffless streak if we end up with a Ryan Leaf instead of a Peyton.

 

Even worse, at least Indy did not have to mortgage the future in trading away picks to move up.  We on the other hand would be throwing Rosen or Donald into a line-up that badly needs to use our draft picks to reload.

 

Trading up to get an alleged FRANCHISE  QB seems to be tanking to this football fan.

How did moving up work up for the Rams when they got Goff and the Eagles moving up to get Wentz who probably would have been the MVP this year? You may have forgotten that the Rams  a couple of seasons ago were a bad team. In one year after drafting the qb the team turned it around to participate in the playoffs. Also, if you have forgotten the Eagles won the SB with the qb they moved up for was instrumental in the team's successful season. Do you need to be reminded that Petyon Manning will in the not too distant future be a first ballot selection to be in the HOF? What you are selling is what I am not buying.  

 

[OldTimer1960]

16 minutes ago, JohnC said:

How did moving up work up for the Rams when they got Goff and the Eagles moving up to get Wentz who probably would have been the MVP this year? You may have forgotten that the Rams  a couple of seasons ago were a bad team. In one year after drafting the qb the team turned it around to participate in the playoffs. Also, if you have forgotten the Eagles won the SB with the qb they moved up for was instrumental in the team's successful season. Do you need to be reminded that Petyon Manning will in the not too distant future be a first ballot selection to be in the HOF? What you are selling is what I am not buying.  

 

Check out the Rams’ roster that was in place before Goff got there.  Their defensive depth chart is largely 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks.  Remember that they were picking very early for several years before they traded up for Goff.  They also went heavily into FA and trade this year to nab Watkins and Woods who helped a lot.  Also, don’t forget that they also picked Todd Gurley early very recently.

 

Likewise, the Eagles already had a very good defense when they picked Wentz and they’ve been fortunate that the Vikes gave them a #1 pick for Bradford.

Edited February 19, 2018 by OldTimer1960

[Reed83HOF]

32 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

I think so, yes.

 

I'm intrigued by Rudolph, but the air raid thing does cause some concern.

 

I have been agreeing too much with you today...Spot on dude

[JohnC]

9 minutes ago, OldTimer1960 said:

Check out the Rams’ roster that was in place before Goff got there.  Their defensive depth chart is largely 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks.  Remember that they were picking very early for several years before they traded up for Goff.  They also went heavily into FA and trade this year to nab Watkins and Woods who helped a lot.  Also, don’t forget that they also picked Todd Gurley early very recently.

 

Likewise, the Eagles already had a very good defense when they picked Wentz and they’ve been fortunate that the Vikes gave them a #1 pick for Bradford.

When you look at the Rams they brought in offensive linemen from the market and receivers through the draft and market. What you are not very often going to get from the market is a franchise qb. The same scenario applies to the Eagles. They accumulated talent through deals and the draft. They got their MVP caliber qb by trading up to get Wentz. My point is that you can get players in a variety of ways. What is usually not available from the market is that upper tier franchise qb. To me the model that the Rams and Eagles represent is being aggressive in the draft to get your qb. 

 

Being aggressive to get a qb in the draft doesn't mean that you stop building up the draft through other avenues. What I know for sure is if you want to be a serious team you have to have a top tier qb in place. That is usually (not always) the best approach to take.  

[OldTimer1960]

4 minutes ago, JohnC said:

When you look at the Rams they brought in offensive linemen from the market and receivers through the draft and market. What you are not very often going to get from the market is a franchise qb. The same scenario applies to the Eagles. They accumulated talent through deals and the draft. They got their MVP caliber qb by trading up to get Wentz. My point is that you can get players in a variety of ways. What is usually not available from the market is that upper tier franchise qb. To me the model that the Rams and Eagles represent is being aggressive in the draft to get your qb. 

 

Being aggressive to get a qb in the draft doesn't mean that you stop building up the draft through other avenues. What I know for sure is if you want to be a serious team you have to have a top tier qb in place. That is usually (not always) the best approach to take.  

We are agreeing, but I think both the Rams and Eagles had much better rosters than Buffalo currently does when they traded up for their QB.  I am pretty sure that their 1st round pick was also considerably higher than the Bills’ at 21.  For the Rams move from 15 to 1 it cost pick 15 and both 2nd round picks they owned and their 3rd plus a 1st and 3rd in the next year.  That is, 2 1sts, 2 2nds and 2 3rds.  Note that they had received a lot of picks earlier by trading with Washington to allow them to take Robert Griffin.

 

The Bills are not in the same position.

[RochesterRob]

10 minutes ago, JohnC said:

When you look at the Rams they brought in offensive linemen from the market and receivers through the draft and market. What you are not very often going to get from the market is a franchise qb. The same scenario applies to the Eagles. They accumulated talent through deals and the draft. They got their MVP caliber qb by trading up to get Wentz. My point is that you can get players in a variety of ways. What is usually not available from the market is that upper tier franchise qb. To me the model that the Rams and Eagles represent is being aggressive in the draft to get your qb. 

 

Being aggressive to get a qb in the draft doesn't mean that you stop building up the draft through other avenues. What I know for sure is if you want to be a serious team you have to have a top tier qb in place. That is usually (not always) the best approach to take.  

  What seldom works is starting the foundation with a QB such as Houston did with David Carr.  It never works to let the QB get rattled around for a few years because he has no supporting cast.  Then he wants out of town when contract time comes or says a few ugly words about the city so he becomes too toxic to retain.  

4 minutes ago, OldTimer1960 said:

We are agreeing, but I think both the Rams and Eagles had much better rosters than Buffalo currently does when they traded up for their QB.  I am pretty sure that their 1st round pick was also considerably higher than the Bills’ at 21.  For the Rams move from 15 to 1 it cost pick 15 and both 2nd round picks they owned and their 3rd plus a 1st and 3rd in the next year.  That is, 2 1sts, 2 2nds and 2 3rds.  Note that they had received a lot of picks earlier by trading with Washington to allow them to take Robert Griffin.

 

The Bills are not in the same position.

  And yet quite a few here think that the Bills are moving into the top 4 with maybe 1/2 or 2/3 of what the Eagles paid to move up.

[JohnC]

Just now, OldTimer1960 said:

We are agreeing, but I think both the Rams and Eagles had much better rosters than Buffalo currently does when they traded up for their QB.  I am pretty sure that their 1st round pick was also considerably higher than the Bills’ at 21.  For the Rams move from 15 to 1 it cost pick 15 and both 2nd round picks they owned and their 3rd plus a 1st and 3rd in the next year.  That is, 2 1sts, 2 2nds and 2 3rds.  Note that they had received a lot of picks earlier by trading with Washington to allow them to take Robert Griffin.

 

The Bills are not in the same position.

I agree with you that the Bills don't have the talent that the Rams and Eagles had when they pursued their respective qbs. In my mind the Bills are still in the process of rebuilding. But no matter where you are in the process if you don't already have a franchise qb you have to seize any opportunity to get one, and the sooner the better. 

 

The Rams upgraded their OL with two good free agent pickups in Whitworth and Sullivan. The bulking up of the OL had a significant affect on the running game and offense in general. They also revamped their receiver corps with the free agent pickup of Woods, trade for Watkins and the drafting of another receiver, Kupp, in the second round. By being aggressive in moving up to draft Goff the team is set for the next decade at the qb position. As I stated before the priority is to get the qb situation settled. Improving the roster is a continuous process whether you have a qb or not. But if you don't get a qb when you have an opportunity to do so you are making a mistake. 

 

I'm not diminishing the importance of the other transactions to upgrade the rosters for the two teams you cited. What I am emphatically saying is that the most important transactions that these two teams made was getting their respective qbs.  

 

18 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  What seldom works is starting the foundation with a QB such as Houston did with David Carr.  It never works to let the QB get rattled around for a few years because he has no supporting cast.  Then he wants out of town when contract time comes or says a few ugly words about the city so he becomes too toxic to retain.  

  

If the qb is not ready to play or the team isn't stable enough to give the young qb a chance to succeed then the solution is to not play the qb at that time. You develop players and put them a position to succeed. If it takes time before the young qb is ready then wait until the situation is right. When you have made a major investment then you need to handle it smartly and properly. 

[The Now Moment]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

There are good interior guys on both sides. I agree. The QBs and RBs are strong and LB is okay. In general though this is a weak draft class. The talent last year was well above the talent this year. The silver lining is that the Bills need QB, RB, DT, & LB for sure. 

There's always diamonds in the rough though.  I think this secondary class is underrated and I see a few studs coming out of the tight end class.  I think it's better than weak JMO

[RochesterRob]

12 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I agree with you that the Bills don't have the talent that the Rams and Eagles had when they pursued their respective qbs. In my mind the Bills are still in the process of rebuilding. But no matter where you are in the process if you don't already have a franchise qb you have to seize any opportunity to get one, and the sooner the better. 

 

The Rams upgraded their OL with two good free agent pickups in Whitworth and Sullivan. The bulking up of the OL had a significant affect on the running game and offense in general. They also revamped their receiver corps with the free agent pickup of Woods, trade for Watkins and the drafting of another receiver, Kupp, in the second round. By being aggressive in moving up to draft Goff the team is set for the next decade at the qb position. As I stated before the priority is to get the qb situation settled. Improving the roster is a continuous process whether you have a qb or not. But if you don't get a qb when you have an opportunity to do so you are making a mistake. 

 

I'm not diminishing the importance of the other transactions to upgrade the rosters for the two teams you cited. What I am emphatically saying is that the most important transactions that these two teams made was getting their respective qbs.  

 

If the qb is not ready to play or the team isn't stable enough to give the young qb a chance to succeed then the solution is to not play the qb at that time. You develop players and put them a position to succeed. If it takes time before the young qb is ready then wait until the situation is right. When you have made a major investment then you need to handle it smartly and properly. 

  The only way you sit a top 4 QB is when you have a high quality starter already on your roster such as the Giants with Eli Manning.  Not only can most teams not afford to get immediate production out of a top 4 prospect but there is the ego aspect that a QB will not be content most of the time to hold a clipboard 2 or 3 years.  Maybe a generation or two ago when that was more the practice to bring a player along slowly but the expectations have been raised in recent times.  Today anybody with an ego has an attitude of play me or trade me.

[Kirby Jackson]

7 minutes ago, Buffalo30 said:

There's always diamonds in the rough though.  I think this secondary class is underrated and I see a few studs coming out of the tight end class.  I think it's better than weak JMO

Yeah, I don’t think that it’s 2013. It’s not 2011 either. The QBs will make or break this draft. A few players will come out of nowhere like any draft. In general though I don’t see the depth. There were guys in the 2nd and 3rd the last two drafts that would be pushed up a round this year imo. 

[JohnC]

17 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  The only way you sit a top 4 QB is when you have a high quality starter already on your roster such as the Giants with Eli Manning.  Not only can most teams not afford to get immediate production out of a top 4 prospect but there is the ego aspect that a QB will not be content most of the time to hold a clipboard 2 or 3 years.  Maybe a generation or two ago when that was more the practice to bring a player along slowly but the expectations have been raised in recent times.  Today anybody with an ego has an attitude of play me or trade me.

Buffalo is in a very different situation that Houston was in when Carr was a rookie. The Bills were a marginal playoff team last year but they are still substantially better now than Houston was when he played there. I'm simply amazed how much effort many people make to justify not drafting a qb. The Bills have not had a legitimate franchise qb for almost a quarter century. Yet the chorus for let's wait longer to get a prime prospect qb is still loud. I'm not with you and will never be. 

Edited February 20, 2018 by JohnC

[dlonce]

21 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Buffalo is in a very different situation that Houston was in when Carr was a rookie. The Bills were a marginal playoff team last year but they are still substantially better now than Houston was when he played there. I'm simply amazed how much effort many people make to justify not drafting a qb. The Bills have not had a legitimate franchise qb for almost a quarter century. Yet the chorus for let's wait longer to get a prime prospect qb is still loud. I'm not with you and will never be. 

 

I agree with you.

 

This isn’t an era where you can actually take your time to build a roster. This is an era where players move on and peddle their skills elsewhere. The key is depth in positions.

This is said to be one of the strongest draft classes for QBs in over a decade and it is.We need a QB in the worst way and we will likely move up and draft one.

 

This dinosaur thinking of building a team before getting a QB is just that. 

[OldTimer1960]

3 hours ago, billsredneck1 said:

 

with an avg. qb last year we could have been 10-6 or better. we have what we need to contend for the most part now, but we're missing a qb who can play the position. 

On the flip-side, if not for a lucky 5-2 start fueled mostly by a lot of turnovers caused by the Defense, they could have been 6-10.

[RochesterRob]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

Buffalo is in a very different situation that Houston was in when Carr was a rookie. The Bills were a marginal playoff team last year but they are still substantially better now than Houston was when he played there. I'm simply amazed how much effort many people make to justify not drafting a qb. The Bills have not had a legitimate franchise qb for almost a quarter century. Yet the chorus for let's wait longer to get a prime prospect qb is still loud. I'm not with you and will never be. 

  The Bills were not as good as their record says they were and they need to address several positions.  

1 hour ago, dlonce said:

 

I agree with you.

 

This isn’t an era where you can actually take your time to build a roster. This is an era where players move on and peddle their skills elsewhere. The key is depth in positions.

This is said to be one of the strongest draft classes for QBs in over a decade and it is.We need a QB in the worst way and we will likely move up and draft one.

 

This dinosaur thinking of building a team before getting a QB is just that. 

  QB's can move on just like the others you cite.  We need a team that can stop the run plus give the QB time to find a receiver.  A QB less mobile than Taylor would have gotten dumped a lot more this season and we would certainly be in the top 10 in an ugly statistic.  Namely QB sacks.  Since most here are only concerned with winning the SB it should be noted that Philly did not get Wentz first thing in the jigsaw puzzle that was their SB team.  They got most of their other pieces prior to Wentz.  

 

  The thinking of grabbing a QB before the rest of the team is in place is like buying a horse a week ahead of a blizzard but planning on building the barn to keep the horse in next spring.  For a lot of reasons the horse will not be there next spring aka a few seasons into the future.

[RochesterRob]

1 hour ago, dlonce said:

 

I agree with you.

 

This isn’t an era where you can actually take your time to build a roster. This is an era where players move on and peddle their skills elsewhere. The key is depth in positions.

This is said to be one of the strongest draft classes for QBs in over a decade and it is.We need a QB in the worst way and we will likely move up and draft one.

 

This dinosaur thinking of building a team before getting a QB is just that. 

  We need an interior DL that can stop the run and an OL that will give a pocket QB time to find a target.  Maybe somebody like Mills can adapt to whatever scheme we employ next year or Henderson will start to look long lasting but we still lack quality depth at this point.  The defense flat out needs a talent infusion.

[simpleman]

14 hours ago, OldTimer1960 said:

i think the best of theses prospects is at best a 50-50 prospect.  I am not enamored with trading 4 high picks to get someone who is a coin flip to be a good starter.  I would be fine with Rudolph at 21 if he gets there AND one of the 2nds on another QB prospect.

 

I agree totally. A 50-50 chance is not enough to not only mortgage the teams future for 2 or 3 years,  but also possibly end up on the wrong side of the 50 percent .

 

 

Edited February 20, 2018 by simpleman

[The Now Moment]

13 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Yeah, I don’t think that it’s 2013. It’s not 2011 either. The QBs will make or break this draft. A few players will come out of nowhere like any draft. In general though I don’t see the depth. There were guys in the 2nd and 3rd the last two drafts that would be pushed up a round this year imo. 

I sincerely believe you will see the same thing happen this year except at different positions like DT, interior OL and RB.  The talent is just at different positions.