12 + 22 = what pick?

[Wayne Cubed]

2 minutes ago, bkep32 said:

yes 6 37 and 49 will get them to #2

 

For a team devoid of talent, I just can’t see the Jets giving up that much.  

[stony]

Just now, Kelly the Dog said:

True. There are a lot of variables. I predict there will be a lot of wheeling and dealing right when the draft starts rather than someone moving up to 1 or 2 in the days leading up to it. But you never know.

I would think Beane wants it done ASAP.

[Lurker]

3 minutes ago, thunderingsquid said:

 

"Hello, Giants?  We need to talk."

 

By that chart, 12 + 21 + next year's 2nd gets you there...

[dave mcbride]

Just now, Kelly the Dog said:

True. There are a lot of variables. I predict there will be a lot of wheeling and dealing right when the draft starts rather than someone moving up to 1 or 2 in the days leading up to it. But you never know.

The one thing I'm hoping is that the Giants don't want to hand a star to the Jets -- that and Gettleman's relationship with Beane. Make no mistake, though -- the object is to get to #2. 

[bkep32]

i love this bills been wheeling and dealing....i dont mind giving up the 2 first and next yrs 2nd so we keep our 2 2nds and cleveland 3rd

[Kelly the Dog]

5 minutes ago, bkep32 said:

yes 6 37 and 49 will get them to #2

Regardless of what the draft chart says I would personally rather have 12 and 22 than 6, 37 and 49. I understand both sides but I think if you look at the histories of 37 and 49 the chances of getting two solid if not star players would be better at 12 and 22.  

[dave mcbride]

Just now, Kelly the Dog said:

Regardless of what the draft chart says I would personally rather have 12 and 22 than 6, 37 and 49. I understand both sides but I think if you look at the histories of 37 and 49 the chances of getting two solid if not star players would be better at 12 and 22.  

Disagree with this logic for a simple reason - you're not factoring in players. A team may absolutely love a player who will be there at 6 and not at 12. That has to be factored in.

[bkep32]

1 minute ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Regardless of what the draft chart says I would personally rather have 12 and 22 than 6, 37 and 49. I understand both sides but I think if you look at the histories of 37 and 49 the chances of getting two solid if not star players would be better at 12 and 22.  

that maybe true but the bills arnt gunna end having those picks

[Green Lightning]

38 minutes ago, stony said:

I think the Giants have been the target.

If I were the Giants, I'd ask for our Pick 12, next year's first and one of our thirds this year. They're banking on we won't be as good a team next year and they'd get a higher pick in the first round.

Edited March 12, 2018 by Green Lightning

[Kelly the Dog]

2 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Disagree with this logic for a simple reason - you're not factoring in players. A team may absolutely love a player who will be there at 6 and not at 12. That has to be factored in.

True. But at six you never know if he is going to be available. I guarantee you they love a dozen players at 22 versus 37. 

[Drunken Pygmy Goat]

11 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Yep, that is my worry. 

 

But for the Bills to move up to 2, they'll have to throw in more than 3 picks. Perhaps the Giants would be willing to move further down in the first in exchange for more total picks than what the Jets would have to offer (in that scenario).

 

Besides, do the Giants really want the Jets to have a franchise QB, making them the big dogs in the Meadowlands? 

[dave mcbride]

2 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

True. But at six you never know if he is going to be available. I guarantee you they love a dozen players at 22 versus 37. 

They generally will know because it's highly likely that 3 and quite possibly 4 of the first 5 picks will be qbs. 

[bkep32]

come april we wont have the 12th and 22nd pick

[dave mcbride]

1 minute ago, Drunken Pygmy Goat said:

 

But for the Bills to move up to 2, they'll have to throw in more than 3 picks. Perhaps the Giants would be willing to move further down in the first in exchange for more total picks than what the Jets would have to offer (in that scenario).

 

Besides, do the Giants really want the Jets to have a franchise QB, making them the big dogs in the Meadowlands? 

The last question is real, but at the end of the day it's not rational to want to stick it to the Jets simply they're a NY team. They're in the other conference and aren't a rival.

[Kelly the Dog]

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

They generally will know because it's highly likely that 3 and quite possibly 4 of the first 5 picks will be qbs. 

I don't think anyone in the world knows with any certainty whether there will be 2, 3 or 4 QBs in the top 5 right now. 

[mjt328]

Looking at the draft order, I don't think getting to #12 is our ultimate goal.

 

In terms of "QB-needy" teams, that only gets us ahead of Arizona.  Even if the Bills like 4-5 guys, I don't think they can be confident that Cleveland, New York, Denver, New York and Miami are going to pass on someone.  Not to mention someone else trading up.  I also don't think Beane makes this trade without a plan already in place to go higher.  Imagine moving up 9 spots, only to have other teams jump ahead and take the guy(s) you were after.  Or getting up this far, then not having a willing trade partner to swap.  That would be a major blunder from our front office.

 

My guess is that we have already discussed this with other teams, and have a pending trade in place with Cleveland, New York Giants or Indianapolis.  Don't be surprised if something else pops in the next week or so.

[RiotAct]

2 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

The last question is real, but at the end of the day it's not rational to want to stick it to the Jets simply they're a NY team. They're in the other conference and aren't a rival.

correct.  it should simply come down to who offers the Giants a better package for their pick

[Drunken Pygmy Goat]

21 minutes ago, Captain Murica said:

I understand that, but when has the last time a raw project QB has worked out in the NFL? 

 

I feel like I would be reliving EJ all over again.. 

 

 

 

I compare the Allen situation to Gabbert when he came out. Not comparing talent at all, just how they shot up the draft board after the combine, and due to the nature of the position they play. Now Allen has more talent than Gabbert did, but personally, I wasn't all that impressed by him. Too inconsistent for me. I get that he wasn't surrounded by great talent at Wyoming (to Klaista's point), but he didn't exactly face top talent every week either. They were largely ineffective against Iowa and Oregon, which was expected, but they faced several cream puffs and didn't exactly blow them away either.

 

I would side with you Captain on this one, but who knows? Maybe Allen turns out to be the best QB in this draft, or at least a franchise QB, but I just don't see it.

19 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

The one thing I'm hoping is that the Giants don't want to hand a star to the Jets -- that and Gettleman's relationship with Beane. Make no mistake, though -- the object is to get to #2. 

Beat me to it

Edited March 12, 2018 by Drunken Pygmy Goat

[Rico]

39 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:

I guarantee you we'll do a trade up again with the Browns for 4. It will cost 12+21. They have TT now and who better to groom Lamar Jackson @ 12.  The problem is who will be there left @4 between Darnold,  Rosen & Mayfield?

No point in possibly settling for the 3rd best. #2 is calling the Bills name, "Come get me, come get me..."

[Drunken Pygmy Goat]

10 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

The last question is real, but at the end of the day it's not rational to want to stick it to the Jets simply they're a NY team. They're in the other conference and aren't a rival.

 

The same can be said for the Bills, though. I'm sure it's far from the top of the list of factors, but I guarantee you the Giants would rather see the Bills with that QB than the team that shares their stadium, while picking up an additional pick (including 2 firsts) in the process. 

 

The Gettleman connection is very real, though, and may actually be the key to it all.

[Rico]

41 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I think the Giants are the target. They can't afford to take chances if they've identified the QB they want. 

Exactly.

[Beast]

1 hour ago, Jamie Muellers Ghost said:

The bills would need 2200 points to move up to the third pick, right now pics 22 and 12 equals 1780 points which would be enough for the 4th overall pick.

 

That “points chart” is outdated.

[Rico]

34 minutes ago, bkep32 said:

yes 6 37 and 49 will get them to #2

I don't think Gettleman will take less from Beane, but I do think he'll give him a chance to beat the best offer. Good thing we have all those extra day 2 draft picks to play with.

[FearLess Price]

56 minutes ago, Klaista2k said:

We should definitely be able to trade into the top 5 now.

 

The question is what quarterback are we targeting? Darnold, Rosen, Allen, Mayfield? 

 

Gotta be Rosen since we traded TT.

 

Best pure passer in the draft.

[Augie]

1 hour ago, Wayne Cubed said:

 

I don’t think they’ll need to, not according to the Rich Hill chart.

 

If they need a sweetener, I hope it’s MUCH later. 

[TheFunPolice]

Moving down from 2, 3 or 4 to #12 is a lot more palatable for a team than all the way to 21, especially if you don't need a QB since a there could be 4 gone in the 1st 10 picks, plus Barkley. Lots of other players are going to slip down to you at #12.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 12, 2018 by TheFunPolice

[3rdand12]

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

Every time I see stuff about this way of grading picks I'm reminded of hearing Polian laugh at the concept and saying no GMs take it seriously.

you realize he lost his marbles awhile ago. When did he make that statement?

 

Like vernier calipers, they are just for reference. got have some form of measurement everyone understands.

 But i get yur point Pops !

12 minutes ago, Rico said:

I don't think Gettleman will take less from Beane, but I do think he'll give him a chance to beat the best offer. Good thing we have all those extra day 2 draft picks to play with.

I might agree. I expect no BS between the two. 

[NewEra]

1 hour ago, Seanbillsfan2206 said:

Yes

Can’t see it happening.

1 hour ago, buffalostu2 said:

It may be likely but why is it a given that this move is to get in better position to trade up again for a top QB?   12 is exactly where Georgia Middle Linebacker Roquan Smith is supposed to go and the Bengals were a  common spot he was mocked to.  We have a defensive coach and MLB is the biggest need behind QB.   Smith is also a leader and fits the McDermott player profile.  

 

I know we all want a QB but just saying

He’s also a very common spot for the niners and raiders. I think the chances are, we are trading up for a QB, not a LB.  If they think Bradford, Keenum or someone else is the answer, you very well be right.  

 

I dont think smith will be available at 12.

 

 

Casserly said it’s going to cost us 12 + next year’s 1st as the starting point

Edited March 12, 2018 by NewEra

[Billznut]

2 hours ago, Seanbillsfan2206 said:

Hopefully they can stay right there and get their guy

Not a chance they are staying at 12

[billsfan89]

You have to throw out the draft pick formula when it comes to QB's. The Redskins gave up a high second-round pick (39th overall), pick 6, and 2 future 1st round picks to get pick number 2. In no sane world is that sensible under the points system. The Dolphin traded from pick 12 to 3 to pick up Dion Jordan and all it cost Miami was the 42nd pick. When QB's are being bid on you are going to pay up the ass. Fortunately for Buffalo they now have the most draft capital of any team outside of the Browns. 

Edited March 12, 2018 by billsfan89

[CountryCletus]

3 hours ago, NewEra said:

How high will those 2 picks get us in the draft?  We’re still behind the dolphins (who are rumored to love Baker Mayfield). Will Josh Allen fall?  Is Lamer Jackson really an option?  

 

12+22 + what gets us top 3?  Which QB are we in love with?  Or do we love more than one.

I’m confident that it can get us to #3

3 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

With this chart we should be able to get to 2, easily....

[DrDawkinstein]

2 hours ago, Rico said:

I don't think Gettleman will take less from Beane, but I do think he'll give him a chance to beat the best offer. Good thing we have all those extra day 2 draft picks to play with.

 

The biggest thing we have going for us is that we are the ONLY team looking to trade up that can offer 2 1sts this year.

 

No one should underestimate the value in that. A "next year" pick is always valued a round lower than a "this year" pick. Plus, it gives GMs the ability to make a difference right now. That's appealing to both the Gettleman (to help reset quicker), and the Colts (to help right the ship quicker).

 

Next year's picks shouldnt be in discussion, nor do they need to be. Package #12, #22, #56, and #96 together and make it happen.

[BuffaloHokie13]

3 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

It’s based on actual trades that have been made. It’s pretty interesting.

I like the base 100 one even more after looking into the actual trades since 2011

 

Just remember that trades up into the top 3 have ~30% inflation, trades into the top 5 have ~12%inflation, and trades into the top 10 have ~4% inflation.

Edited March 13, 2018 by BuffaloHokie13

[DrDawkinstein]

6 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

The biggest thing we have going for us is that we are the ONLY team looking to trade up that can offer 2 1sts this year.

 

No one should underestimate the value in that. A "next year" pick is always valued a round lower than a "this year" pick. Plus, it gives GMs the ability to make a difference right now. That's appealing to both the Gettleman (to help reset quicker), and the Colts (to help right the ship quicker).

 

Next year's picks shouldnt be in discussion, nor do they need to be. Package #12, #22, #56, and #96 together and make it happen.

 

 

BTW, just did the math, that equals 736.87 on Kirby's chart. Get to #2.

[BillsFan130]

3 hours ago, simool said:

 

I am fairly certain that this point chart it antiquated.  They still use a point system but Jimmy's values are no longer accurate.

Supply and demand as well. I don’t think it’s as simple as just looking at the charts for value.

 

Teams know that the Bills need a QB, and the Bills will almost certainly have to overpay to move into the top 5.

 

The good news is they have tons of picks so can throw in a 2nd or 3rd if necessary 

Edited March 13, 2018 by billsfan11

[NewEra]

Sorry if this is posted already, but how much cap space do we save this year by trading Cordy?

[Ryno23]

Tradung up into the top 4 might be tricky.  Boils down to Cle at 1.  If they take QB then i dont see Giants moving from 2 as they will take Barkley.

 

If Cle takes Barkley 1 will Giants want to trade out of 2 and lose the chance to draft the heir apparant to Eli

 

Indy at 3 needs Chubbs or Barkley if he falls.  Would need  huge offer to move out of 3

 

At 4 if cle went Barkley at 1 would stay to draft other QB 

 

So moving into top 4 might be tough.

[KRT88]

If I’m in the top 5 and you want my pick, better throw the draft chart out because I’m charge 25% at least! 

 

Like I’ve said before, the NYG have only 5 picks in the draft. If you offer, 12, 22, 56, 65 and a 2019 2nd they’ll move the #2 pick. 

 

That gives them 8 picks to help Eli, assuming one of those, maybe 34 is used to pick a Mason Rudolph/Mike White they can groom behind Eli. 

Edited March 13, 2018 by KRT88

[CSBill]

4 hours ago, berg1029 said:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/draft/draft_trade_value.htm

 

1200 + ~800 =2000 which is somewhere between the third and fourth picks

 

Also, taking the difference between 12 and 21... 1200-800=400 which is about a middle of the second value for Cordy Glenn

 

Surprisingly, the other teams GM's also have this chart, and they will want more than the chart says.

[Big Blitz]

I think the worst case target is Cleveland at 4 but will cost us a first or 2nd next year as well.  Or maybe Hughes to pair with Garrett.  

 

I'm of the belief that the Giants and Colts won't trade out and want Saquan and Chubb.  

 

If we turn Hughes and 22 into the 7th we could package 7 and 12 and possibly move up to 3.  

 

We should have more trade ammo then Denver the Jets and Cardinals when all is said and done.