Time for Beane to Call Gettleman - Beane Says the Bills Have the Capital to Get to #2

[BADOLBILZ]

41 minutes ago, Ga boy said:

If any of these guys were considered can't miss like Peyton, Stafford, Cam or Ryan;  I would say 3 firsts would be justifiable.  Otherwise, let the draft come to you and see what's available in the 6-10 range.  C'mon, let's not be stupide with the risks.

 

Stafford, Cam and Ryan weren't considered can't miss.

 

Parcells even drafted Jake Long rather than draft Ryan.........he went 3rd.

 

Even though he wasn't can't miss he is about the only good player left from that 2008 first round and he'll probably play another 6-7 years.

 

And Flacco was also in that draft and won a SB and made many deep playoff runs as another non-can't miss.

 

In retrospect the only picks that usually look GREAT a decade later are QB's.     Everyone else looks like "wtf were they thinking?".

[BillsFan17]

Folks, why do we go through this religiously?!?! If these kids were true cant miss prospects, in the construct of this draft, there would be zero shot we could be in play for ANY of the top four.

 

They all are going to have question marks, they are all going to have some element that's going to be picked apart to no end leading up to the draft.

[Chuck Wagon]

Frankly I just don't see Denver dealing down without paying a huge price, the type of price you aren't paying if you know there's a chance you are stuck.  They know that if we go to 2, that pushes either Chubb or Barkley down to 5, as well as the last QB on the board.  So in essence, us trading to 2 makes the #5 pick more valuable.  

 

I think that's what the Giants would like, to stay in that pick, but I expect reality to set in, for Gettleman to see the premium that's going to have to go to Denver and not to the Giants to have that #5 pick and decide to just take all the premium for himself.  Pick 6 or 7 may still get the Giants the player they want (I still tend to believe Nelson) and be A LOT cheaper from #12 on draft night than right now once all the QBs have landed.

[KDIGGZ]

8 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

 

i heard these comments at the owner's meeting.  i don't agree at all with Beane's thoughts on trading up to twice.  "to your example, to 7, then what if you're stuck there?"  why would it be bad to be "stuck" at 7?  there's a very good chance you will get the 4th QB there before anyone else has a chance to trade up.  if you can't trade up again from there and the QB you wanted is gone (i doubt that would be the case but let's explore this), then why would it be bad to have the 7th pick where you have a ton of top talent available to you?  there's a chance one of the top 3 position players will be there.  tons of future pro bowlers available and maybe you only gave up a 2nd round pick to get there. 

[What a Tuel]

5 minutes ago, kdiggz said:

i heard these comments at the owner's meeting.  i don't agree at all with Beane's thoughts on trading up to twice.  "to your example, to 7, then what if you're stuck there?"  why would it be bad to be "stuck" at 7?  there's a very good chance you will get the 4th QB there before anyone else has a chance to trade up.  if you can't trade up again from there and the QB you wanted is gone (i doubt that would be the case but let's explore this), then why would it be bad to have the 7th pick where you have a ton of top talent available to you?  there's a chance one of the top 3 position players will be there.  tons of future pro bowlers available and maybe you only gave up a 2nd round pick to get there. 

 

I wouldn't necessarily listen to much of what he says at these things. He said he didn't really shop Sammy around, and that they haven't really decided anything about QB's the day before the Jets traded up to #3 as well.

 

If either were true, then that is pretty incompetent. Seeing as how he traded Tyrod away before those remarks, I would say he just makes it up as he goes along when he speaks publicly.

[BillsFan17]

8 minutes ago, kdiggz said:

i heard these comments at the owner's meeting.  i don't agree at all with Beane's thoughts on trading up to twice.  "to your example, to 7, then what if you're stuck there?"  why would it be bad to be "stuck" at 7?  there's a very good chance you will get the 4th QB there before anyone else has a chance to trade up.  if you can't trade up again from there and the QB you wanted is gone (i doubt that would be the case but let's explore this), then why would it be bad to have the 7th pick where you have a ton of top talent available to you?  there's a chance one of the top 3 position players will be there.  tons of future pro bowlers available and maybe you only gave up a 2nd round pick to get there. 

That's the thing, what's the price we are paying to move up? Because we gave up assets to get what was considered the best WR once upon a time and it failed.

 

Fore me, you don't give up assets unless you are going after a QB.

[26CornerBlitz]

13 minutes ago, kdiggz said:

i heard these comments at the owner's meeting.  i don't agree at all with Beane's thoughts on trading up to twice.  "to your example, to 7, then what if you're stuck there?"  why would it be bad to be "stuck" at 7?  there's a very good chance you will get the 4th QB there before anyone else has a chance to trade up.  if you can't trade up again from there and the QB you wanted is gone (i doubt that would be the case but let's explore this), then why would it be bad to have the 7th pick where you have a ton of top talent available to you?  there's a chance one of the top 3 position players will be there.  tons of future pro bowlers available and maybe you only gave up a 2nd round pick to get there. 

 

Because acquiring a franchise QB trumps those other position players and that would be his aim in moving up. 

Edited April 2, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz

[Forward Progress]

That depends on how much you need to give up to move to #7.  If the cost to move from #12 to #7 is more than the talent upgrade form #12 to #7, then it's a bad trade. 

 

 I feel like trades to move up and down the draft will be waiting until draft day, when both teams know which players are on the board for the team trading down.

 

[Chuck Wagon]

11 minutes ago, kdiggz said:

i heard these comments at the owner's meeting.  i don't agree at all with Beane's thoughts on trading up to twice.  "to your example, to 7, then what if you're stuck there?"  why would it be bad to be "stuck" at 7?  there's a very good chance you will get the 4th QB there before anyone else has a chance to trade up.  if you can't trade up again from there and the QB you wanted is gone (i doubt that would be the case but let's explore this), then why would it be bad to have the 7th pick where you have a ton of top talent available to you?  there's a chance one of the top 3 position players will be there.  tons of future pro bowlers available and maybe you only gave up a 2nd round pick to get there. 

 

 

I do believe there's a wide swing of value currently on a few of these picks.  #7 stands out for sure.  There's certainly a good chance all 4 QBs and Chubb / Barkley go top 6, which leaves #7 looking at Nelson or one of the defensive players, not a great position.  So I can see Licht wanting to sell the pick now, while there's still some of the uncertainty on who might be there, and I can also see Beane not wanting to do it because if you are looking at the "Nelson + defense" available on the board, the pick isn't worth all that much more than #12.  But on the flip side, there's a chance someone slides into the top 6 and suddenly with 7 you are auctioning off the last best QB.  For that reason, I think there's a huge value swing between pick 6 and 7.  Basically at 6 Indy knows they are getting Chubb / Barkley or auctioning off the last QB.  It's potentially why we need to get to 5 to trade to 2.  But there's going to be a big premium on that pick at 5, which is why I tend to believe the Giants will see us as the only real bidder and just take all the premium, figuring things out later.  It's going to end up as a "Do we want Saquon or do we want one of Ward-Fitzpatrick-Edmonds-James-Smith-Nelson and a ton of other picks"?

[KDIGGZ]

Just now, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Because acquiring a franchise QB trumps those other position players and that would ne his aim in moving up. 

Yea i'm saying move up to 7 with the plan that you are going to be in a better position to trade up again or at the very least get the 4th QB.  But you would never be "stuck" there because you have way more options at 7 than you do at 12 if things don't go your way

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, kdiggz said:

Yea i'm saying move up to 7 with the plan that you are going to be in a better position to trade up again or at the very least get the 4th QB.  But you would never be "stuck" there because you have way more options at 7 than you do at 12 if things don't go your way

 

The stuck comment makes perfect sense from a QB acquisition perspective with that being the ultimate goal. He obviously wouldn't be looking for his 4th best guy. 

[CommonCents]

1 minute ago, kdiggz said:

Yea i'm saying move up to 7 with the plan that you are going to be in a better position to trade up again or at the very least get the 4th QB.  But you would never be "stuck" there because you have way more options at 7 than you do at 12 if things don't go your way

I agree with 7 if the cost is a second. I don't agree with 5 because the cost will most likely include the 22nd pick.

[Chuck Wagon]

12 minutes ago, kdiggz said:

Yea i'm saying move up to 7 with the plan that you are going to be in a better position to trade up again or at the very least get the 4th QB.  But you would never be "stuck" there because you have way more options at 7 than you do at 12 if things don't go your way

 

 

It all depends on the price to move to 7 currently.  If it's strictly a straight up swap on the draft value chart it's one thing, but as I detailed above there's a real chance #7 is looking at the same tier as #12, ie not something that opens up a lot more options and not something worth paying for in premium.  I'm guessing if Licht is selling the pick, it's more based on "what could be there" than what is likely there.  It also jives with his comment about having 7 guys they would be happy to take at 7.  Teams likely have a very strong idea the player value at 7 is pretty comparable to 12.

 

[HiddenInLight]

This is the time of year where you can't really take anything a GM says to heart.  You know that Beane is looking at any and all possible paths to move up the board.  If he wasn't, he wouldn't be doing his job properly.  I bet that he has had conversations with every GM that is in front of him outside of maybe the Jets and Dolphins to get preliminary ideas of what it would take to move up.  In addition, I bet he has had some conversations with the teams behind him with them asking what it would take for them to move up in the event that things don't go his way in the QB market.   He seems to go about his job very methodically, and the fact that he doesn't seem to make snap decisions and moves is probably a good thing for this team.  He also seems to come to the same conclusion that general logic dictates in many situations, especially with trading players and signing new players.  Personally I like that about him.  That being said, I believe he will do everything in his power to get his QB this year.  I can't see him making all of the moves he has made since his joining the team, and him stopping at 12 without at least trying to go further up.

[ndirish1978]

Ugh. The first draft ever was held in Feb. I wish they didn't feel the need to spread everything out too much and the draft could just happen the first week of April, this whole spreading out the offseason is such a pain. 

[FearLess Price]

9 hours ago, Commonsense said:

Will they? What if the draft goes Darnold, Rosen, and then Mayfield to the Jets?

 

Think anyone is going to be calm about sitting there at 5 waiting for Allen? Who actually wants Allen in Buffalo and then what if they get jumped at 4 by another desperate team.

 

So at that time the Bills would have given up multiple first round picks, A LT, and only received the 4th best QB available in the 18' draft. That's a steep price for a low floor high ceiling type of guy like Allen. 

 

IF three QBs come off the board in the first 3 picks I will not be excited at all sitting at 5.

 

I would be pissed if that scenario plays out like that.

 

 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[Punching Bag]

On 3/30/2018 at 11:38 AM, What a Tuel said:

True, but it was a "that guy can really play" type of endorsement. Not the over the top take this guy or bust type of endorsement you'd get from Rex.

 

If Rex is not willing to foot the salary from the money he scammed from Bills if he is a bust it means nothing.

[BillsFan17]

In starting to feel like there is too much smoke around buffalo and the NYG trading for something not to happen.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

19 minutes ago, BillsFan17 said:

In starting to feel like there is too much smoke around buffalo and the NYG trading for something not to happen.

 

...still think McBeane plays it close to the vest and stays at #12 with Options A,B ,C and perhaps D lined up as his QB pick....wherever and whenever......wouldn't surprise me one bit if McBeane and his Gang of 17+ see marginal differences between QB candidates versus the WIDE disparity of opinions offered up here by TBD pundits......no matter what he does, the firestorm is just around the corner.....

Edited April 3, 2018 by OldTimeAFLGuy

[26CornerBlitz]

Ranking the NFL teams most likely to trade up to draft a QB

1. Buffalo Bills

This is the most obvious choice. The Bills already moved up from No. 21 to No. 12 in a deal that sent left tackle Cordy Glenn to Cincinnati, and they still hold the No. 22 overall pick. Having two first-rounders gives Buffalo a unique ability to maneuver in the first round, and having unproven options AJ McCarron and Nathan Peterman on the roster gives the team motivation. Problem is, the old draft value chart developed by Jimmy Johnson assigns a point value of 1,200 to the No. 12 pick and 800 to the No. 21 pick, which adds up to 2,000 and is therefore a bit less than, say, the 2,600 points assigned to the Giants' No. 2 pick. So if the Bills want to jump the Jets, it's going to take more than just their two 2018 first-rounders. Buffalo might be better off eyeing the Browns' No. 4 overall pick, though by that point, the Bills could be left with their fourth-choice quarterback.

[Roundybout]

I think we need to make sure the Browns are taking Darnold at 1. Just like the Eagles were sure the Rams were taking Goff. As soon as that happens, then things can be put in motion.

[BillsFan17]

25 minutes ago, BillsEnthusiast said:

I think we need to make sure the Browns are taking Darnold at 1. Just like the Eagles were sure the Rams were taking Goff. As soon as that happens, then things can be put in motion.

Absolutely, especially since the Giants would absolutely pounce if Darnold was there at two.

 

Darnold needs to go first overall and then I think things can get rolling, but it's hard for Buffalo, because to have to wait until the Browns make their pick to make the trade into the top ten, then all the way up to two.

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[NewEraBills]

26 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

 

I like it.  Dave may be looking at them for the Giants but hey share the notes you have on them   How were they in the interviews and would you take one of these guys at two? If so which one?  Be a good friend Dave 

 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

    

 

Well?  Any update yet? 

[BillsFan17]

 Now McShay hearing some buzz about Buffalo potentially getting that second overall.

[26CornerBlitz]

2 minutes ago, BillsFan17 said:

 Now McShay hearing some buzz about Buffalo potentially getting that second overall.

 

43 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

McShay has the Bills trading up to 2 to select Allen.  Kiper has them staying but at 12 and 22 to select Termaine Edmunds and Lamar Jackson.

 

At 53 Kiper has the Bills selecting Courtland Sutton.  At 56 Kiper goes with CB Carlton Davis while McShay has WR James Washington.

 

[4thandGoal]

and thats what it is--just a buzz. Why would Gettleman even commit to trading down right now? he can wait to the draft and either get a better offer or select Darnold if Cleveland doesnt. 

[DCOrange]

12 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

 

 

I prefer Kiper's for Buffalo personally

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, DCOrange said:

 

I prefer Kiper's for Buffalo personally

 

I do as well with both Jackson and Allen being developmental QBs who need time.

[What a Tuel]

8 minutes ago, 4thandGoal said:

and thats what it is--just a buzz. Why would Gettleman even commit to trading down right now? he can wait to the draft and either get a better offer or select Darnold if Cleveland doesnt. 

 

Why would the colts commit? This pessimism about the bills has been beaten into us for 18 years, but get a grip guys. We have to get past this "what can go wrong will go wrong" moping. It is getting old.

Edited April 4, 2018 by What a Tuel

[Boatdrinks]

If the Bills move all the way to #2 pick ( still a big IF) it won't be for Allen 

1 minute ago, What a Tuel said:

 

Why would the colts commit?

It's a fair question, but look at the move. It was 3 picks for 3spots, and the Colts aren't taking a QB. There was almost zero risk for the Colts losing out on any player, and are still in prime position to move down again. The Giants would be moving out of the top ten, so it's not an apples to apples thing. There's still talk of a QB for them at 2 depending on CLE pick. Seems they are in wait and see mode. 

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

4 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

If the Bills move all the way to #2 pick ( still a big IF) it won't be for Allen 

Not a chance, they do all that to get a huge project, one who is likely the number 4 QB prospect in the draft. Nope

[thenorthremembers]

Just now, horned dogs said:

Not a chance, they do all that to get a huge project, one who is likely the number 4 QB prospect in the draft. Nope

 

I still think he goes #1 to Cleveland.   However, to your point if you move to #2 it's for whoever you like most, who you also think the Jets covet.  In this case I'd say thats Rosen.

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

Just now, thenorthremembers said:

 

I still think he goes #1 to Cleveland.   However, to your point if you move to #2 it's for whoever you like most, who you also think the Jets covet.  In this case I'd say thats Rosen.

I think Allen will go in the first, I just believe teams are using him at the top to divert intentions.

You are correct about Rosen.

[What a Tuel]

10 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

If the Bills move all the way to #2 pick ( still a big IF) it won't be for Allen 

It's a fair question, but look at the move. It was 3 picks for 3spots, and the Colts aren't taking a QB. There was almost zero risk for the Colts losing out on any player, and are still in prime position to move down again. The Giants would be moving out of the top ten, so it's not an apples to apples thing. There's still talk of a QB for them at 2 depending on CLE pick. Seems they are in wait and see mode. 

 

It is plenty of risk. The top 5 picks are not going QB because like you say in this very post, teams are only interested if "their guy" will be there - i.e. Giants and Darnold. So it is very risky for the Colts to trade back to 6 bc the Browns and Broncos may pick the guy they wanted, not to mention the Giants picking a non QB.

 

It only feels like wait and see mode bc we literally don't know what will happen. We have no reports of the Giants rejecting or sitting on an offer.

[DCOrange]

46 minutes ago, thenorthremembers said:

 

I still think he goes #1 to Cleveland.   However, to your point if you move to #2 it's for whoever you like most, who you also think the Jets covet.  In this case I'd say thats Rosen.

 

We'll see what happens on draft night but my guess is that Rosen is #4 on the Jets list.

[Boatdrinks]

35 minutes ago, What a Tuel said:

 

It is plenty of risk. The top 5 picks are not going QB because like you say in this very post, teams are only interested if "their guy" will be there - i.e. Giants and Darnold. So it is very risky for the Colts to trade back to 6 bc the Browns and Broncos may pick the guy they wanted, not to mention the Giants picking a non QB.

 

It only feels like wait and see mode bc we literally don't know what will happen. We have no reports of the Giants rejecting or sitting on an offer.

Colts have a ton of holes, and there will be lots of action on QBs at the top of the draft. They don't need a specific player, and there's a fair chance their choice at 3 will be there at 6 anyway. Jets are going QB at 3, so it's really just two spots for the Colts to wait at 4 and 5. One of those may be another QB. It's not much risk at all for Colts GM Ballard, but it IS tremendous value. 3 second rounders almost for doing nothing. The Giants situation is different, as they seem to have some interest in a specific QB. 

[thebandit27]

4 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

 

We'll see what happens on draft night but my guess is that Rosen is #4 on the Jets list.

 

I am unlikely to be moved off of my position that Darnold and Allen will be the first 2 QBs off the board.