Trade Dion Dawkins

[Starr Almighty]

Dont need an offensive line if you have a QB that gets it out quickly ????

[BigBuff423]

1 hour ago, Putin said:

So your telling me that ( for example of course)  we have the deal with the Giants / Colts in place the only issue they want Dawkins instead of Glenn and McBean says no and walks away from trade deal ?  Because I guess Dawkins is more important to the team and would be so much harder to replace that McBean would just walk away from a chance of FINALLY  getting our potential franchise QB !!!   

+1

 

In that scenario you’re giving away a known commodity for an unknown one; additionally what guarantees do you have that Glenn’s foot is ready to be full time LT again?? If he’s not you’ve just taken away your young QB’s blindside protection. IMHO, that’s not smart.

[nucci]

11 hours ago, Ittakestime said:

I know some will say that's ridiculous, but he could be the key to getting a franchise QB.

 

Glenn is worth more to the Bills than any other team.  We know how good he is and we have spent the time healing his foot.

 

The LT draft prospects are not good this year.  There is a good chance Dawkins would be a first round pick this year.

 

If the Giants wanted Dawkins and both firsts, would you do it?  I know I absolutely would.  I may be more confident than others that Glenn will come back and be good again, but I need a QB bad right now.

That's ridiculous

[sodbuster]

If Dawkins was a similar talent at a different position, I'd agree with you. But trading away a very promising OT to get a rookie QB is like selling your tires to put gas in your car.

Edited March 8, 2018 by sodbuster

[GunnerBill]

11 hours ago, Ittakestime said:

 

The LT draft prospects are not good this year.  There is a good chance Dawkins would be a first round pick this year.

 

 

The top 3 LTs are all better than any left tackle in the draft last year, even after Brown's shocking combine.  That said part of the reason Dawkins ended up low 2nd was because people were not sure he could play LT at the NFL level a lot of people had him sliding inside which probably hurt his draft value a bit. 

[ALF]

I think that's what it would take to move up that far for this draft, especially if Barkley goes #1.

Edited March 8, 2018 by ALF

[BillsFanForever19]

Just posted on Twitter:

 

@JeremyWGR: Twitter trade offer - 

Bills #21, #22, Dion Dawkins, and next years 2nd round pick to NYG for #2. Who says no?

 

Ittakestime - are you Jeremy White?

[Captain Murica]

42 minutes ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

Just posted on Twitter:

 

@JeremyWGR: Twitter trade offer - 

Bills #21, #22, Dion Dawkins, and next years 2nd round pick to NYG for #2. Who says no?

 

Ittakestime - are you Jeremy White?

 

I just saw this lmao, I came directly here to say the same thing. 

[Ittakestime]

I'm not Jeremy White, but White is realistic about what it will take it get a franchise QB so I'm not surprised he is talking about it.

[BillsFan2313]

This actually isn't a bad idea, at all. Not sure why some of you are trashing it like it's ridiculous. Hell, I think there were a couple threads trashing Dawkins, with complaints of trading up for him on this board early on. Was Dawkins a 2nd round pick? Was a Glenn a 2nd round pick? If I have a chance to get a potential franchise QB, while keeping both 2nds, sign me up. 

[The Now Moment]

YOU DON"T TRADE YOUNG TALENT LIKE DAWKINS INSTEAD OF DRAFT PICKS!!!! I'd trade 3 more draft picks before giving away a guy who could be our left tackle of the future.  Those draft picks are not sure things by any means.  This is beyond stupid IMO

[Guest K-GunJimKelly12]

Honestly, if this is what it would take to get to 2 and get the best QB in the class, I wouldn't think twice about it.  If we don't hit on a QB in the next 3 years, we might watch Dawkins walk away in free agency for nothing anyways.  I would be totally fine if the Bills make this trade.  I would applaud their aggressiveness.

[BillsFan2313]

1 minute ago, Buffalo30 said:

YOU DON"T TRADE YOUNG TALENT LIKE DAWKINS INSTEAD OF DRAFT PICKS!!!! I'd trade 3 more draft picks before giving away a guy who could be our left tackle of the future.  Those draft picks are not sure things by any means.  This is beyond stupid IMO

 

Oh, so if the Lions called and said we will give you Stafford for a 1st and Tre White, you so no? THAT is beyond stupid. 

[The Now Moment]

2 minutes ago, BillsFan2313 said:

 

Oh, so if the Lions called and said we will give you Stafford for a 1st and Tre White, you so no? THAT is beyond stupid. 

WHAT??!!??  That isn't the scenario.  If the option is to trade 5 draft picks or 2 draft picks and Dawkins, I choose giving away the draft picks.  They aren't sure things, Dawkins could be our franchise tackle for years.  Who said anything about Stafford and White??

[teef]

i certainly understand the idea, and if you really could jump to 2, you'd at least have to give it consideration.  i would just hate to lose dawkins.  i think he's going to be a massively important part of this team moving forward.  as badol mentioned, i think i'd rather give up the first next year instead.

[BillsFan2313]

Just now, Buffalo30 said:

WHAT??!!??  That isn't the scenario.  If the option is to trade 5 draft picks or 2 draft picks and Dawkins, I choose giving away the draft picks.  They aren't sure things, Dawkins could be our franchise tackle for years.  Who said anything about Stafford and White??

 

WHAT??? and I quote "YOU DON'T TRADE YOUNG TALENT LIKE DAWKINS INSTEAD OF DRAFT PICKS" 

You made it sound like you don't trade young talent in any scenario. Be more clear next time. 

 

 

[The Now Moment]

4 minutes ago, BillsFan2313 said:

 

WHAT??? and I quote "YOU DON'T TRADE YOUNG TALENT LIKE DAWKINS INSTEAD OF DRAFT PICKS" 

You made it sound like you don't trade young talent in any scenario. Be more clear next time. 

 

 

I explained it in the following sentence man...thanks though

Edited March 8, 2018 by Buffalo30

[BillsFan2313]

Just now, Buffalo30 said:

I explained it in the following sentence man...thanks though 

 

You're welcome

[The Now Moment]

3 minutes ago, BillsFan2313 said:

 

You're welcome

A suggestion for you, don't dream up a scenario that isn't remotely realistic to attempt to make an argument.  Also, read the full posts and dissect what it means before jumping off a cliff over one sentence that could be explained later.

[JohnBonhamRocks]

[BillsFan2313]

1 hour ago, Buffalo30 said:

A suggestion for you, don't dream up a scenario that isn't remotely realistic to attempt to make an argument.  Also, read the full posts and dissect what it means before jumping off a cliff over one sentence that could be explained later.

 

Wow, Mr. Caps lock is telling someone not to jump off a cliff. I am on the cliff, don't you worry. You are the one who seems to be jumping off a cliff with the idea of trading Dawkins.  No, I wouldn't trade 3 more 1st round picks instead of Dawkins, are we to assume you meant 3 draft picks in this draft, or 3 draft picks in general? It would be pretty stupid to trade 3 future 1st round picks, instead of Dawkins.

[The Now Moment]

54 minutes ago, BillsFan2313 said:

 

Wow, Mr. Caps lock is telling someone not to jump off a cliff. I am on the cliff, don't you worry. You are the one who seems to be jumping off a cliff with the idea of trading Dawkins.  No, I wouldn't trade 3 more 1st round picks instead of Dawkins, are we to assume you meant 3 draft picks in this draft, or 3 draft picks in general? It would be pretty stupid to trade 3 future 1st round picks, instead of Dawkins.

Three other draft picks good sir.  Dawkins is a first round talent in my opinion.  I'd rather have the player than the draft pick

[Buffalo_Stampede]

If Dawkins gets me a franchise QB, he gone. 

[billsfan89]

16 hours ago, BillsFan4 said:

I love Dawkins, but if the Giants were actually willing to accept 21, 22 and Dawkins for #2, I think I'd have to do it. 

 

Thats really not that steep of a price for the #2 pick, and like you said we still have Glenn who we know is a franchise LT. Outside of this foot injury, he really hasn't missed time or shown to be injury prone. So I'm relatively confident that he will be a reliable LT again. 

 

Problem is that i don't think it's a realistic scenario. it'll take take more than that to get to #2. 

 

If the choice is picks 21, 22, 53, and next years 1st for pick 2 or picks 21, 22, 53, and Dawkins I think I would rather give up next years 1st. Glenn is a stud and should remain on the team but Dawkins anchors the other side and is a nice insurance policy incase Glenn can't come back from injury. 

 

Next years 1st is valuable but I would rather have a young cheap player who has proven himself locked into 3 more seasons at a low rate than a 1st next season. 

[BuffaloRebound]

20 minutes ago, TheTruthHurts said:

If Dawkins gets me a franchise QB, he gone. 

 

As absurd as the original post initially sounded, everything should be on table to get a franchise QB.  Dawkins right now in my opinion is worth somewhere around the 10th-15th overall pick.  Tredavious is worth around the 6th--9th overall pick.  Would you trade Tredavious straight up for Mayfield?  Or Dawkins plus pick 21 for Rosen?

[ndirish1978]

17 hours ago, Ittakestime said:

I know some will say that's ridiculous, but he could be the key to getting a franchise QB.

 

Glenn is worth more to the Bills than any other team.  We know how good he is and we have spent the time healing his foot.

 

The LT draft prospects are not good this year.  There is a good chance Dawkins would be a first round pick this year.

 

If the Giants wanted Dawkins and both firsts, would you do it?  I know I absolutely would.  I may be more confident than others that Glenn will come back and be good again, but I need a QB bad right now.

 

Sometimes a post reinforces everything you already thought about someone. Thanks for this!

[Ittakestime]

According to over 5000 votes on Jeremy white twitter poll, 30% said it was a good trade, and another 26% said Giants would actually say no. So I think that shows the majority of the reaction of people on here was laughable. 

[simool]

6 minutes ago, Ittakestime said:

According to over 5000 votes on Jeremy white twitter poll, 30% said it was a good trade, and another 26% said Giants would actually say no. So I think that shows the majority of the reaction of people on here was laughable. 

 

Your logic is either broken or non-existent. The response you received was appropriate, expected, and logical.  

[HiddenInLight]

Honestly, I'd trade anybody on the roster as part of a deal to get Rosen.  QB is the most important piece and we don't have a good one.  Get the QB now then worry about filling other holes.  We get a TON of space on the cap after this year, and have a ton of assets to move in the form of draft picks.  Next year's QB class won't be great.  If we have the opportunity to move up to 2nd overall, I don't care what we need to trade in return.

[simool]

5 minutes ago, HiddenInLight said:

Honestly, I'd trade anybody on the roster as part of a deal to get Rosen.  QB is the most important piece and we don't have a good one.  Get the QB now then worry about filling other holes.  We get a TON of space on the cap after this year, and have a ton of assets to move in the form of draft picks.  Next year's QB class won't be great.  If we have the opportunity to move up to 2nd overall, I don't care what we need to trade in return.

 

I wouldn't. Capable LT's do not grow on trees. We are a bit spoiled because it seems if there is one position we consistently fill well, it's LT. Dawkins is exactly what you want from a draft pick. To realize his true value you keep him and continue to develop him. If they keep Glenn all the better. I would much rather have a Mike White behind a line that has Glenn and Dawkins as bookends rather than Rosen, Mayfield, et al playing behind a line with Mills and god knows who on the other side.

 

Good QB's with good upside wash out of the NFL far more often than they succeed.  Generally it is because they don't have a good line in front of them or the skill position assets to offset a less than good line.

[HiddenInLight]

Just now, simool said:

 

I wouldn't. Capable LT's do not grow on trees. We are a bit spoiled because it seems if there is one position we consistently fill well, it's LT. Dawkins is exactly what you want from a draft pick. To realize his true value you keep him and continue to develop him. If they keep Glenn all the better. I would much rather have a Mike White behind a line that has Glenn and Dawkins as bookends rather than Rosen, Mayfield, et al playing behind a line with Mills and god knows who on the other side.

 

Good QB's with good upside wash out of the NFL far more often than they succeed.  Generally it is because they don't have a good line in front of them or the skill position assets to offset a less than good line.

 

At worst, we currently have 2 above average LT's on our roster.  I don't see us keeping both of them.  If we have to get rid of the younger option and hold onto Glenn a while longer I'm Okay with that.  Capable RT's aren't as difficult to find, so upgrading on Mills wont be too hard.

[JPP]

Offence lines are way over rated......there just a bunch of large fat guys who dont move much....you know dime a dozen....lol....

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

15 hours ago, simool said:

 

Try and apply a little critical thinking to your hypothesis.

 

1. Dawkins gone via trade

2. Top-tier QB acquired

3. Cordy Glenn is your blind side protector.

4. After two games Cordy's reoccurring ankle and knee problems show their face again.

5. Cordy goes to IR

6. Team moves Jordan Mills to left tackle.

7. Starts a rookie at RT.

8. First game Mills gets beat repeatedly.

9. Your shiny new QB gets destroyed.

10. You ruin another QB and set the franchise back many many years through your unorthodox team building methods.

 

This idea is so f'ing ludicrous even Matt Millen thinks you should be beaten like a red-headed stepchild.

 

You build your lines before you start mortgaging the future to draft one guy.  Our Oline and Dline are a mess.  I hope Beane either stays where he is or trades back and acquires more picks.  I want a franchise QB just as bad as everyone else. But if we don't fix the offensive line its not going to matter who we take.  They are going to get destroyed and may never recover.  Just look at Trent Edwards. It is no accident that Bill Walsh liked him and pretty much guaranteed he would be a successful QB.  You could see it.  He was going to be a good one.  Then he got friggin' smoked in Phoenix and that guy was forever gone and Captain Checkdown was born.

 

Just put down the crack pipe son.

 

Ouch “Matt Millen” ...

[BillsFan4]

2 hours ago, billsfan89 said:

 

If the choice is picks 21, 22, 53, and next years 1st for pick 2 or picks 21, 22, 53, and Dawkins I think I would rather give up next years 1st. Glenn is a stud and should remain on the team but Dawkins anchors the other side and is a nice insurance policy incase Glenn can't come back from injury. 

 

Next years 1st is valuable but I would rather have a young cheap player who has proven himself locked into 3 more seasons at a low rate than a 1st next season. 

Both Glenn and Dawkins play LT. They tried Dawkins on the right side and he struggled mightily. He couldn't even beat out Mills. Maybe Glenn can play the right, I don't know. But as of now it seems like we have 2 starting caliber LT's on the roster.

 

The OP asked if the Giants were willing to take 21, 22 and Dawkins for the #2 overall pick. I still say yes.

 

That would be amazing value for Dawkins IMO. He played well last year in spot duty but he still has a lot to prove. 

 

Who knows how high our 1st will be next year, especially if we were starting a rookie QB...

 

 

All this stuff is just pure fantasy though anyway. It'll take more than Dawkins, 21 and 22 to get the #2 overall pick. 

And I don't want to trade Dawkins BTW. It was just the scenario the OP presented was too good to pass up for the Bills. 2 late 1st round picks and 1 player for the #2 overall pick so we can draft our hopeful long term franchise QB. Something we haven't had in 20 years. We've had numerous good LT's in that same time. We can replace a LT easier than a franchise QB that's for sure.

Edited March 8, 2018 by BillsFan4

[Mrbojanglezs]

he makes a good point. To trade up likely 15 + spots why would a team want our damaged goods, some of what we are going to have to give up to get up there will be painful. A team especially a team like the giants who have limited cap would value a young cheap tackle more than an older expensive one (who may not be healthy)

Edited March 8, 2018 by Mrbojanglezs

[Spiderweb]

19 hours ago, Ittakestime said:

 

How is it creating another hole?  We would be filling a hole we had for over 20 frickin years.

To me, the price is simply way too high, not that moving up is a bad idea. 

[billsfan89]

2 hours ago, BillsFan4 said:

Both Glenn and Dawkins play LT. They tried Dawkins on the right side and he struggled mightily. He couldn't even beat out Mills. Maybe Glenn can play the right, I don't know. But as of now it seems like we have 2 starting caliber LT's on the roster.

 

The OP asked if the Giants were willing to take 21, 22 and Dawkins for the #2 overall pick. I still say yes.

 

That would be amazing value for Dawkins IMO. He played well last year in spot duty but he still has a lot to prove. 

 

Who knows how high our 1st will be next year, especially if we were starting a rookie QB...

 

 

All this stuff is just pure fantasy though anyway. It'll take more than Dawkins, 21 and 22 to get the #2 overall pick. 

And I don't want to trade Dawkins BTW. It was just the scenario the OP presented was too good to pass up for the Bills. 2 late 1st round picks and 1 player for the #2 overall pick so we can draft our hopeful long term franchise QB. Something we haven't had in 20 years. We've had numerous good LT's in that same time. We can replace a LT easier than a franchise QB that's for sure.

4

 

I was more scoffing at the idea that 21, 22, and a good 2nd year player was enough to swing the number 2 pick. I think that if the choice is between including Dawkins or next years first into a package I include next years 1st. I would much rather give up a pick even a 1st rounder to keep Dawkins who is coming off of a strong rookie year at a premium position. Glenn is injury prone the last couple of seasons and if Dawkins really can't play RT they can always switch Glenn over to RT and figure it out (Glenn would be a mauler at RT and I don't think he would mind the switch in position as long as he was getting paid on his current deal.)

 

So yes if Dawkins is a must get in a package to trade up for a QB I think you can't let that be the holdup but if you have other options like giving up more picks I think it is obvious what you do then.  

[BillsFan4]

33 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

I was more scoffing at the idea that 21, 22, and a good 2nd year player was enough to swing the number 2 pick. I think that if the choice is between including Dawkins or next years first into a package I include next years 1st. I would much rather give up a pick even a 1st rounder to keep Dawkins who is coming off of a strong rookie year at a premium position. Glenn is injury prone the last couple of seasons and if Dawkins really can't play RT they can always switch Glenn over to RT and figure it out (Glenn would be a mauler at RT and I don't think he would mind the switch in position as long as he was getting paid on his current deal.)

 

So yes if Dawkins is a must get in a package to trade up for a QB I think you can't let that be the holdup but if you have other options like giving up more picks I think it is obvious what you do then.  

That's fair. And I agree with much of what you said.

 

My line of thinking in this fantasy scenario where including Dawkins negates the need to include next year's 1st is that if you gave up next year's 1st it could be a top 10 pick (esp. if we are playing the rookie QB we trade up for), and if you gave me the choice of Dawkins or a top 10 pick, I'd take the top 10 pick.

 

You can either get a potentially elite player with that pick or trade back again and pick up another 1st + 3rd rounder. 

 

 

I like the the idea of Glenn and Dawkins as our bookend tackles too. It just hasn't worked out that way so far. Maybe it will this season? 

Or maybe neither Glenn nor Dawkins can play RT... seems worth a try though. 

[NastyNateSoldiers]

22 hours ago, BillsFan4 said:

I love Dawkins, but if the Giants were actually willing to accept 21, 22 and Dawkins for #2, I think I'd have to do it. 

 

Thats really not that steep of a price for the #2 pick, and like you said we still have Glenn who we know is a franchise LT. Outside of this foot injury, he really hasn't missed time or shown to be injury prone. So I'm relatively confident that he will be a reliable LT again. 

 

Problem is that i don't think it's a realistic scenario. it'll take take more than that to get to #2. 

If this is the price i would do this trade right now.  

 

After making the deal u go to the draft with plans to trade bk with Cleveland at #4.  With them thinking the Bills will take Darnold the Browns grab him at #1 . Cleveland gives us a 2 & 3 to move up and select Barkley #2 . Bills take Mayfield or Rosen at #4 and now we have 3 2s and 2 3s to fill out the team.  

 

Giants- 21,22, Dawkins & 2019 2nd

Bills  #4 , Browns 2nd-#33 & 3rd-#65

Browns get pks 1 and 2 to draft Barkley and Darnold. 

 

I know this is draft day stuff but one can dream . 

[BillsFan4]

2 minutes ago, NastyNateSoldiers said:

If this is the price i would do this trade right now.  

 

After making the deal u go to the draft with plans to trade bk with Cleveland at #4.  With them thinking the Bills will take Darnold the Browns grab him at #1 . Cleveland gives us a 2 & 3 to move up and select Barkley #2 . Bills take Mayfield or Rosen at #4 and now we have 3 2s and 2 3s to fill out the team.  

 

Giants- 21,22, Dawkins & 2019 2nd

Bills  #4 , Browns 2nd-#33 & 3rd-#65

Browns get pks 1 and 2 to draft Barkley and Darnold. 

 

I know this is draft day stuff but one can dream . 

That's actually a really interesting idea. It would definitely soften the blow of trading up and help the Bills to still fill holes this season. 

 

It would only work if the Bills were equally comfortable with both Rosen and Mayfield though. 

 

I really like both QBs, so I'd be ok with it. But TBH I am definitrly higher on Josh Rosen, so I'm not sure that I'd want to miss the opportunity to draft him. 

 

I do really like this idea of yours though.