Rumor: Trade up discussion with Giants

[#34fan]

29 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

No, no it can't.

 

It's one draft class--if you get it wrong, you go after another QB next offseason.

 

I swear, some folks think that if you wait long enough a franchise QB just drops into your lap.  It's been 20 years since Kelly retired; it would've happened by now if that approach worked.

 

2018 1st Rd (#12 overall)
2018 1st Rd (#22 overall)
2018 2nd Rd (#53 overall)
2018 3rd Rd (#65)
2019 2nd Rd

 

It absolutely can! -Forget about the fact that you have no idea what kind of talent you're giving up this draft, (and next)

 

You may move up to draft something worse than a bad QB... -A mediocre QB... The kind of QB that can't get it done, but shows just enough year after year to

 

keep bringing him back.  Before you know it, three years are down the drain... The regime that made that mistake is now gone, now another half-assed regime

 

is  desperate again, so they make another dumb trade for what they believe might be "The Guy", and the process starts all over again... Mortgaging the future

 

isn't a remedy... I don't  think it's a bad idea to bite the bullet so your team can make real strides.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 20, 2018 by #34fan

[thebandit27]

1 minute ago, #34fan said:

 

2018 1st Rd (#12 overall)
2018 1st Rd (#22 overall)
2018 2nd Rd (#53 overall)
2018 3rd Rd (#65)
2019 2nd Rd

 

It absolutely can! -Forget about the fact that you have no idea what kind of talent you're giving up this draft, (and next)

 

You may move up to draft something worse than a bad QB... -A mediocre QB... The kind of QB that can't get it done, but shows just enough year after year to

 

keep bringing him back.  Before you know it, three years are down the drain... The regime that made that mistake is now gone, now another half-assed regime

 

is  desperate again, so they make another dumb trade for what they believe might be "The Guy", and the process starts all over again... Mortgaging the future

 

isn't a remedy... I don't  think it's a bad idea to bite the bullet so your team can make real strides.

 

 

 

 

 

That entire future scenario is predicated on the idea that drafting a QB this year precludes you from doing so again next year--and it doesn't.

 

Not getting it right in a trade-up is no more likely to set the team back than the scenario where you stay at 12 and 22, draft non-QBs, play out the 2018 season with below-average QB play winning 7-9 games, and end up picking 18-20 again next season.  Then what?

 

You have a chance to go get your guy right now; we don't know when we'll have the chance again.

[dave mcbride]

34 minutes ago, K-9 said:

It is NO difference in the expenditure of their draft capital. No matter how you slice it, the Bills used their first pick in the '98 draft on Rob Johnson, the #9 pick overall, etc. 

 

Too me, what's quibbling over split hairs is the '83 draft where folks like to point out how we took Hunter instead of Kelly at 12 vs. 14, respectively. I get it, but there just isn't that much difference. 

There is a significant difference depending on the prism you're looking through: have the Bills ever decided that they had enough confidence in their evaluation skills to draft a qb from college -- the players that are actually drafted! --  with either a) their first slotted pick  or b) via a tradeup?  That's the prism I look through. 

Your point about Kelly is a fair one. That said, it would have been sadly funny if the Lions had surprised the Bills and taken Kelly instead of James Jones at 13. The Bills were confident they wouldn't, but that logic seems pretty shaky in retrospect given that their qbs at the time were Gary Danielson and Eric Hipple. I'm guessing Lions fans rue that draft a lot.

[Radar]

I'll rain on the parade. No way are we going to move up to #2. Giants will not trade that pick. I can't see a scenario where the Browns trade either #1 or #4 to us but still could see movement between the #1-4 teams. If we take a quarterback in first round unless one of the top four prospects drops unexpectedly below #6 say probably we're left with someone like Jackson and the way it's looking he could be gone by the time we pick and can't see moving up to get him. 

[Jamie Mueller]

6 hours ago, TheTruthHurts said:

Not just my opinion. Most feel that way. 

 

Still an opinion... history has taught us that Darnold (or any of them) could be good or bad... or just OK... no one really knows for sure.  If you did, then making the trade would be easy.

[#34fan]

28 minutes ago, arcane said:

 while we sit on our thumbs spinning in circles making sure we have our Matt Milanos and Karlos Williams's. 

 

Passing on two first-rounders could get you exactly this... -In '18, this team is a GREAT position draftwise... I honestly don't see tons of difference between the

 

2nd tier QB's and the 1sts in this draft... KEEP THE DAMN PICKS...-Fill needs with young talent, instead of waiting for free agency every year.

Edited March 20, 2018 by #34fan

[Buffalo Bills Fan]

Let's say McCoy is the trade breaker for Giants would you do it without risking next year 1st round pick? Even with some picks like both of our firsts. A second as well. Or whatever

[Canadian Bills Fan]

Just now, Buffalo Bills Fan said:

Let's say McCoy is the trade breaker for Giants would you do it without risking next year 1st round pick? Even with some picks like both of our firsts. A second as well. Or whatever

 

 

No

[Chuck Wagon]

10 minutes ago, #34fan said:

 

2018 1st Rd (#12 overall)
2018 1st Rd (#22 overall)
2018 2nd Rd (#53 overall)
2018 3rd Rd (#65)
2019 2nd Rd

 

It absolutely can! -Forget about the fact that you have no idea what kind of talent you're giving up this draft, (and next)

 

You may move up to draft something worse than a bad QB... -A mediocre QB... The kind of QB that can't get it done, but shows just enough year after year to keep bringing

 

him back.  Before you know it, three years are down the drain... The regime that made that mistake is now gone, now another half-assed regime is  desperate again, so they make

 

another dumb trade for what they believe might be "The Guy", and the process starts all over again... Mortgaging the future isn't a remedy... I don't  think it's a bad idea to bite the

 

bullet so your team can make real strides.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's been 35 years since this franchise took the caliber of player the guys at the top of this draft represents.  I really don't understand why some people have determined whoever QB gets picked is a bust. 

 

Yes, Ryan Leaf was a bust, 20 years ago.  Jamarcus Russell was a bust 10 years ago.  Sam Bradford and RG3 got hurt, people get hurt playing football.  But Matt Ryan, Matt Stafford, Andrew Luck, Cam Newton, Wentz, Goff, outside of injuries QBs who are evaluated at the top of the draft aren't a coin flip in terms of succeeding, its ~75% odds you've got a franchise level guy who is the best QB to play the position since Kelly.  There's a reason people are going back 20 years to find examples of what goes wrong, they are picking up outliers and trying to paint a picture it's a complete coin flip.

[Wayne Cubed]

7 minutes ago, #34fan said:

 

2018 1st Rd (#12 overall)
2018 1st Rd (#22 overall)
2018 2nd Rd (#53 overall)
2018 3rd Rd (#65)
2019 2nd Rd

 

It absolutely can! -Forget about the fact that you have no idea what kind of talent you're giving up this draft, (and next)

 

You may move up to draft something worse than a bad QB... -A mediocre QB... The kind of QB that can't get it done, but shows just enough year after year to

 

keep bringing him back.  Before you know it, three years are down the drain... The regime that made that mistake is now gone, now another half-assed regime

 

is  desperate again, so they make another dumb trade for what they believe might be "The Guy", and the process starts all over again... Mortgaging the future

 

isn't a remedy... I don't  think it's a bad idea to bite the bullet so your team can make real strides.

 

 

 

 

 

Man that Sammy Watkins trade really set the franchise back 10 years didn't it? Or did they just end the drought 3 years later? I can't remember.

 

I love your plan, just keep hoping a QB lands in their lap, brilliant. And "bite the bullet" got the Bills Dareus and Mike Williams, you need to bit the bullet and have it a year where there is a QB to take.

[Franco_92]

9 minutes ago, #34fan said:

 

2018 1st Rd (#12 overall)
2018 1st Rd (#22 overall)
2018 2nd Rd (#53 overall)
2018 3rd Rd (#65)
2019 2nd Rd

 

It absolutely can! -Forget about the fact that you have no idea what kind of talent you're giving up this draft, (and next)

 

You may move up to draft something worse than a bad QB... -A mediocre QB... The kind of QB that can't get it done, but shows just enough year after year to

 

keep bringing him back.  Before you know it, three years are down the drain... The regime that made that mistake is now gone, now another half-assed regime

 

is  desperate again, so they make another dumb trade for what they believe might be "The Guy", and the process starts all over again... Mortgaging the future

 

isn't a remedy... I don't  think it's a bad idea to bite the bullet so your team can make real strides.

 

 

giving up all of that stuff still lets us make a 1st, 2nd, 3rd,4th,5th, 6th round pick this year, plus everything but a second next year. How often can we realistically take a qb high and still be able to say that? 

It's time. 

[BADOLBILZ]

28 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Two full decades before my time, but wasn't Lucas a signee in the inaugural AFL "free agent" (for lack of a better term) chase?

 

I could be wrong...

 

 

Yes.

 

The 1960 group is not universally recognized as an official draft class.

 

 

[Misterbluesky]

2 minutes ago, Buffalo Bills Fan said:

Let's say McCoy is the trade breaker for Giants would you do it without risking next year 1st round pick? Even with some picks like both of our firsts. A second as well. Or whatever

Throw in Hughes and Richie to..and White?

[Chuck Wagon]

12 minutes ago, Buffalo Bills Fan said:

Let's say McCoy is the trade breaker for Giants would you do it without risking next year 1st round pick? Even with some picks like both of our firsts. A second as well. Or whatever

 

 

I'm not going to let a 30 year old RB prevent me from getting a 21 year old QB.

[Buffalo Bills Detective]

2 minutes ago, #34fan said:

 

Passing on two first-rounders could get you exactly this... -In '18, this team is a GREAT position draftwise... I honestly don't see tons of difference between the

 

2nd tier QB's and the 1sts in this draft... KEEP THE DAMN PICKS...-Fill needs with young talent, instead of waiting for free agency every year.

So, rather than have a highly regarded QB prospect like Rosen or Darnold, you'd rather settle for Lamar "One Read and Run" Jackson, Mike White of Western Kentucky, Kyle Lauletta of Richmond, Luke "Another Mike Leach System QB" Falk or Mason "Another OK State System QB" Rudolph?

Pathetic.

[#34fan]

Just now, Wayne Cubed said:

 

Man that Sammy Watkins trade really set the franchise back 10 years didn't it? Or did they just end the drought 3 years later? I can't remember.

 

 

 Yah... Sammy ended the drought. ROTFL!

[Nineforty]

1 minute ago, Canadian Bills Fan said:

 

 

No

Ridiculous

 

3 minutes ago, Buffalo Bills Fan said:

Let's say McCoy is the trade breaker for Giants would you do it without risking next year 1st round pick? Even with some picks like both of our firsts. A second as well. Or whatever

Yes.

[gobills1212]

36 minutes ago, Tyrod's friend said:

The Washington Redskins are calling to say Hi. Something about not having a good draft position for years, and only getting freaking lucky a 4th round pick ... um .. FELL INTO THEIR LAPS.

So... max we are talking no 1st rd guy next year. We'd still have one this year... and then have one again in 2020. The skins gave away 2 yrs out. Totally different senerio.  Apples to oranges

[Franco_92]

4 minutes ago, #34fan said:

 

Passing on two first-rounders could get you exactly this... -In '18, this team is a GREAT position draftwise... I honestly don't see tons of difference between the

 

2nd tier QB's and the 1sts in this draft... KEEP THE DAMN PICKS...-Fill needs with young talent, instead of waiting for free agency every year.

You might not see the difference but it's there. Allen, Jackson, Rudolph etc are trash and we have as good a chance as any other year of getting a franchise qb up top. Continuing to do what you say will go a long way towards guaranteeing mediocrity until we suck so bad we dont have to trade up, which didn't happen ONCE during our !@#$ing century long playoff drought. 

!@#$ that plan. !@#$ that thinking. Get your franchise qb.

[K-9]

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

There is a significant difference depending on the prism you're looking through: have the Bills ever decided that they had enough confidence in their evaluation skills to draft a qb from college -- the players that are actually drafted! --  with either a) their first slotted pick  or b) via a tradeup?  That's the prism I look through. 

Your point about Kelly is a fair one. That said, it would have been sadly funny if the Lions had surprised the Bills and taken Kelly instead of James Jones at 13. The Bills were confident they wouldn't, but that logic seems pretty shaky in retrospect given that their qbs at the time were Gary Danielson and Eric Hipple. I'm guessing Lions fans rue that draft a lot.

I am looking at ONLY through the prism of draft capital invested which, as I've pointed out, represent several of their top selections in various drafts. 

 

I understand the point about evaluation of college prospects at the position, but I would posit that it was that precise evaluation that led them to go the veteran route vs. the prospect route at the time, especially in '98 when they had no chance at the top of the draft. 2003 was extremely bare as well. 

 

That said, I think '04 is an example of what you allude to here; Donahoe wanted Roethlisberger badly and should have pulled the trigger on the trade with the Texans to get him. If McBean are that convinced of somebody in this draft, they need to pull the trigger. Anything less than that and they are being hypocritical about their process. 

[gobills1212]

9 minutes ago, Radar said:

I'll rain on the parade. No way are we going to move up to #2. Giants will not trade that pick. I can't see a scenario where the Browns trade either #1 or #4 to us but still could see movement between the #1-4 teams. If we take a quarterback in first round unless one of the top four prospects drops unexpectedly below #6 say probably we're left with someone like Jackson and the way it's looking he could be gone by the time we pick and can't see moving up to get him. 

Hmmm.... then I'm curious, does Trump get a 2nd term? Oh, and when will the sabres get good again?

[thebandit27]

2 minutes ago, #34fan said:

 

 Yah... Sammy ended the drought. ROTFL!

 

Pretty sure you just proved Wayne's point.

 

The team gave up a relative bounty to move up and draft Watkins--a move that ended up not working out as they planned--and yet they ended the 17-year playoff drought a mere 3 seasons later.

 

Giving up a bounty didn't set the team back a decade then; why would it now?

[HappyDays]

45 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Yes, waiting and taking whatever QB is left later in the draft has worked out extremely well for the team these last 30 drafts. 

 

If we had drafted Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Cousins, Prescott, or Carr that strategy would have worked great. The problem hasn't been our unwillingness to trade up, it's been our inability to scout QBs and draft the right one at the right time. What if we had sold the farm for Winston or Mariota? That's the other side of this argument that these sorts of posts ignore. I would say this is actually the best draft in a long time to stay put and take what comes to you. 6 QBs will probably be drafted in the 1st round and there's no Andrew Luck among them. That means some QBs will get drafted lower than they would in other years. That's good value and IMO we'd be foolish to give up a crazy amount for any of them.

[Tyrod's friend]

2 minutes ago, gobills1212 said:

So... max we are talking no 1st rd guy next year. We'd still have one this year... and then have one again in 2020. The skins gave away 2 yrs out. Totally different senerio.  Apples to oranges

? The Redskins traded 

that year's 1st round

that year's  2nd Round

Plus #1 in the NEXT TWO YEARS

They were barren. It's actually quite an Apple to Apple comparison. You are saying a team won't get hurt by trading up. The Skins were totally fckd ...

And on top of that you made some kind of comment that you can't just wait for a QB to fall into your laps. LMAO. GTFO here.

[Radar]

1 minute ago, gobills1212 said:

Hmmm.... then I'm curious, does Trump get a 2nd term? Oh, and when will the sabres get good again?

Hopefully no on Trump and hopefully soon for the Sabres.  Now was your response in anyway related to my post?

[thebandit27]

1 minute ago, HappyDays said:

 

If we had drafted Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Cousins, Prescott, or Carr that strategy would have worked great. The problem hasn't been our unwillingness to trade up, it's been our inability to scout QBs and draft the right one at the right time. What if we had sold the farm for Winston or Mariota? That's the other side of this argument that these sorts of posts ignore. I would say this is actually the best draft in a long time to stay put and take what comes to you. 6 QBs will probably be drafted in the 1st round and there's no Andrew Luck among them. That means some QBs will get drafted lower than they would in other years. That's good value and IMO we'd be foolish to give up a crazy amount for any of them.

 

Which strategy gives you the best chance to get a long-term answer at QB: wait and hope you get it right later, or scout all of the top guys, decide which one(s) you like best, and being aggressive to go get him?

[Wayne Cubed]

2 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Pretty sure you just proved Wayne's point.

 

The team gave up a relative bounty to move up and draft Watkins--a move that ended up not working out as they planned--and yet they ended the 17-year playoff drought a mere 3 seasons later.

 

Giving up a bounty didn't set the team back a decade then; why would it now?

 

Thank you, that was my point.

[Wsam4031]

I don tcare what they give up this year IF they love a guy and feel like hes a franchise changer. Id give up every pick in this draft to get that guy. If they feel they need to do this but don't love anyone stay where we are and draft bpa

[Canadian Bills Fan]

I think having an elite QB is so rare these days that when your in a position to draft one, you have to. 

 

I have always said, I would rather strike out swinging than waiting for the right pitch

[dave mcbride]

7 minutes ago, K-9 said:

I am looking at ONLY through the prism of draft capital invested which, as I've pointed out, represent several of their top selections in various drafts. 

 

I understand the point about evaluation of college prospects at the position, but I would posit that it was that precise evaluation that led them to go the veteran route vs. the prospect route at the time, especially in '98 when they had no chance at the top of the draft. 2003 was extremely bare as well. 

 

That said, I think '04 is an example of what you allude to here; Donahoe wanted Roethlisberger badly and should have pulled the trigger on the trade with the Texans to get him. If McBean are that convinced of somebody in this draft, they need to pull the trigger. Anything less than that and they are being hypocritical about their process. 

Your last paragraph captures my view to a tee.

[#34fan]

11 minutes ago, Buffalo Bills Detective said:

So, rather than have a highly regarded QB prospect like Rosen or Darnold, you'd rather settle for Lamar "One Read and Run" Jackson, Mike White of Western Kentucky, Kyle Lauletta of Richmond, Luke "Another Mike Leach System QB" Falk or Mason "Another OK State System QB" Rudolph?
 

 

No... I'd rather grab 2 stud 1st rounders on defense, (Payne and Evans) so that an experienced defensive staff can coach those picks up... I'd take my QB at 53,

 

or 55, and still be able to score big at WR or TE at either pick... This is chance to load up... That's the opportunity I see here.

Edited March 20, 2018 by #34fan

[HappyDays]

2 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Which strategy gives you the best chance to get a long-term answer at QB: wait and hope you get it right later, or scout all of the top guys, decide which one(s) you like best, and being aggressive to go get him?

 

I don't know. Does anyone? What if instead of using a bunch of picks for one guy, we drafted 3 QBs with 3 of those picks? Would that have a higher success rate than going all in on one guy for even more picks? Again, I don't know. But the idea that there is exactly one sound strategy for getting your franchise QB is wrong. I won't hate it if we make a big trade up but I definitely won't cry that the Bills aren't trying if they sit and let the draft come to them.

[Wsam4031]

7 hours ago, Chuck Wagon said:

 

 

Oh no, what are we going to do at SAM linebacker, 3rd WR, backup DT and 3rd CB!  Way too many holes to get a franchise QB for the first time in 2 decades!

Thank you. I really didn't want to type all that. You did it for me!

[zevo]

The draft can’t get here soon enough

[TigerJ]

I don't know who it was, (I tuned in after the start of the interview) but a guest on the John Murphy Show representing the Giants point of view stated he thought the Giants were probably inclined to stay at #2 rather than trade.  Their owner has publicly stated something about getting a high impact player in the draft.  The question is whether that player is their QB of the future or a player who will contribute immediately.  The obvious choice for immediate impact is Saquon Barkley, but perhaps you can't rule out Bradley Chub.  The real point is that if the Giants are predisposed to staying put already, the price to get them to move may be extraordinarily difficult.  Add to that the fact that the Jets' trade up to #3 already set the market at an uncomfortably high level.

[Buffalo Bills Detective]

6 minutes ago, #34fan said:

 

No... I'd rather grab 2 stud 1st rounders on defense, (Payne and Evans) so that an experienced defensive staff can coach those picks up... I'd take my QB at 53,

 

or 55, and still be able to score big at WR or TE at either pick... This is chance to load up... That's the opportunity I see here.

At 53 or 55, you'd be left with Luke Falk, Mike White and Kyle Lauletta.  Guess what?  They are CRAP compared to what you could get by moving up for a top prospect.

[thebandit27]

4 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I don't know. Does anyone? What if instead of using a bunch of picks for one guy, we drafted 3 QBs with 3 of those picks? Would that have a higher success rate than going all in on one guy for even more picks? Again, I don't know. But the idea that there is exactly one sound strategy for getting your franchise QB is wrong. I won't hate it if we make a big trade up but I definitely won't cry that the Bills aren't trying if they sit and let the draft come to them.

 

For me, I'm looking at the percentage of "franchise QBs" (so defined as guys that a team could win a Super Bowl with as their starter) across the league, and what percentage of those guys are premium picks in the draft.  We could debate who counts and who doesn't, but I come up with around 20 guys that fit the description (I do not count anyone from the 2017 draft, nor am I including Mariota or Winston for reference).  Of those 20, only 6 come from outside the 1st round, and another 4 come from outside the top 8...which  means that 50% of the franchise QBs in the NFL come from the top 8 picks.

 

If I'm playing the percentages, that's where I want to be picking.

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, billykay said:

Lets say we move to #2. Does anyone think that it would be a good trade for us to move back to #3, especially if it seems that the Jets are panicking that they won't be getting their man? I think that we could wind up this way with our QB, perhaps Mayfield or Rosen, plus getting back some of the draft assets we lost in moving up to #2.

I don't see the Jets giving up more assets to move up one spot. Odds are that if their option A isn't available they would be comfortable with their option B. If the Bills swing a deal to move up to #2 they will know who they want and will run up to the podium to make their announcement. 

[GG]

14 minutes ago, Tyrod's friend said:

? The Redskins traded 

that year's 1st round

that year's  2nd Round

Plus #1 in the NEXT TWO YEARS

They were barren. It's actually quite an Apple to Apple comparison. You are saying a team won't get hurt by trading up. The Skins were totally fckd ...

And on top of that you made some kind of comment that you can't just wait for a QB to fall into your laps. LMAO. GTFO here.

 

How did Rams & Eagles fare in their recent moves to secure QBs at the top of the draft?

[BillsFan2313]

5 minutes ago, #34fan said:

 

No... I'd rather grab 2 stud 1st rounders on defense, (Payne and Evans) so that an experienced defensive staff can coach those picks up... I'd take my QB at 53,

 

or 55, and still be able to score big at WR or TE at either pick... This is chance to load up... That's the opportunity I see here.

 

So basically you want 2014 and 2015 all over again? Cool. Give me a QB, and then I will load up after.