Jump to content

Would you be pissed if the Bills traded up and drafted Barkley?

Jobot

By Jobot
in The Stadium Wall Archives

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

mannc
mannc

If they traded into the top 5 and took a RB, the entire front office should be fired on the spot. It’s not going to happen, though. Zero chance.

teef
teef

the only thing worse would be me having to eat applebees while the bills are drafting barkley.

Johnny Hammersticks
Johnny Hammersticks

I would be so done with this team ?

Dr. Who Veteran

Dr. Who

Posted
Posted

The cost to trade up for Barkley is the same as the cost to trade up for one of the top 4 qb (Darnold would cost more, of course.)  This is a deep draft for rb.  If you somehow can grab a qb and keep 22, Sony Michel and Darius Guise might be there for the taking.  Rashaad Penny might be available late second/early third.  So, it's a dim idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
photographicink Probation

photographicink

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

Yes. Any reasonable person would be upset giving up three first round picks for a RB. And that's without considering passing on a potential franchise QB.

Barkley may very well be there at number 6 and it shouldn't take more than 2 first rounders, the Colts are looking to trade down and there is a good chance that the first 3 picks are qb.  I actually have Baker Mayfield going number 1 which might get the Giants to hold out on trading down as they pick Darnold.  Jets would likely go Rosen and Chubb fourth to Browns.  Denver might get a hall of fame guard in Quenton Nelson leaving Barkley at 6.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
4merper4mer Hall of Famer

4merper4mer

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

4mer, it's not necessarily the same thing at all.  Surely you can see this?

 

The time you need to expend draft capital to try to get a surer bet at a position, is when you don't have an established starter at that position.

When you do have an established starter, you can try to take lower-probability shots later on, in the hope that if you take 3-4 shots you'll hit on one of them.

 

1) Do the Giants currently have a top-tier RB?  A Shady McCoy equivalent? 

2) Do the Giants currently have a very good NFL starting QB?  A guy who has won superbowls and who is publically given the nod as having "years left" by his new coach/GM?

3) Would the Giants have to expend extra draft capital to make this pick, or are they already there?

 

I think the answer is No, Yes, and No for the Giants.  The only way it would make sense for them to use a top draft pick on QB is if they feel last year means Eli is done right now, stick a fork in him.  That was the "desperation move" of the previous coach and GM, but the new coach and GM are on record pointing the finger at the OL and saying they like Eli.    Now they could be lying like rugs, but that is what they said right after they were hired, when there's generally a higher tincture of truth mixed into pressers than closer in to the draft.

 

 

That's pretty much what Rex Ryan and Whaley tried to do by trading for Shady and settling for Tyrod Taylor at QB.  And if the D had been decent and played up to its potential, it would probably have gotten us into the playoffs in 2015.  But it wouldn't have taken us very deep in them.

Not sure why the insult but the rest of your post is something I understand, but I don't agree with all of it.

 

All the QB talk is near unanimous on here except when it is inconvenient for fans wishful thinking.  "You never pass up a franchise QB", "Only trade up for a QB", "Do whatever it takes" etc. when it comes to the Bills but all of that goes out the window when it is the Giants.  

 

If Barkley is a generational talent for the Giants, then he is for almost every team in the league, including the Bills.  If not, the Giants should pass on him because there are quite a few very good RBs they could get later.  

 

Similarly, if there is truly a franchise QB available at 2, there is no way the Giants should ever pass on him.....if you take the franchise QB rhetoric from this site as gospel.  Give me a break with Eli.  He is 100 years old.  The same exact thing happened to his far superior brother.  

 

And the Giants "getting a premium" doesn't make sense either.  If any two teams make a trade, it means they both value the components as being equal or at least very close.  

 

A team like the Browns at 4, assuming they took a QB at 1, the Colts who still see their Emperor's clothes as beautiful, the Bucs , Bears, Niners and probably Raiders could swap out of their pick.  They all have young QBs who are solid and/or have major upside.  That said, that team would have to settle for 12 and pass up guys like Barkley, Chubb and others.

 

The Giants, Jets, Browns at 1 and Broncos make no sense at all given the QB gospel.  That would mean it either it is only gospel for us, or we could trade up to get QB5....maybe even stand pat if we get lucky....or we need to target the 4 very heavily with the realistic notion that 3 QBs would already be gone.

 

I do agree that in no scenario should we trade up for Barkley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wsam4031 RFA

Wsam4031

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, NextYear'sTheOne said:

Worse then  hiring Rex Ryan???

that's a close one but id have to say yes only because when Rex was hired our defense was good and he was supposed to be a GREAT defensive coach and bring it to the next level. I actually didn't hate the hire when it was done. Wasn't my first pick but didn't take long to hate it after. Trading up to get a RB when we have a pro bowl Rb on the roster is a terrible idea. Im not opposed to getting a RB in this draft just giving up what we would need to to get a RB would def beat the Rex hiring  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hapless Bills Fan Hall of Famer

Hapless Bills Fan

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Not sure why the insult but the rest of your post is something I understand, but I don't agree with all of it.

 

All the QB talk is near unanimous on here except when it is inconvenient for fans wishful thinking.  "You never pass up a franchise QB", "Only trade up for a QB", "Do whatever it takes" etc. when it comes to the Bills but all of that goes out the window when it is the Giants.  

 

If Barkley is a generational talent for the Giants, then he is for almost every team in the league, including the Bills.  If not, the Giants should pass on him because there are quite a few very good RBs they could get later.  

 

Similarly, if there is truly a franchise QB available at 2, there is no way the Giants should ever pass on him.....if you take the franchise QB rhetoric from this site as gospel.  Give me a break with Eli.  He is 100 years old.  The same exact thing happened to his far superior brother.  

 

And the Giants "getting a premium" doesn't make sense either.  If any two teams make a trade, it means they both value the components as being equal or at least very close.  

 

A team like the Browns at 4, assuming they took a QB at 1, the Colts who still see their Emperor's clothes as beautiful, the Bucs , Bears, Niners and probably Raiders could swap out of their pick.  They all have young QBs who are solid and/or have major upside.  That said, that team would have to settle for 12 and pass up guys like Barkley, Chubb and others.

 

The Giants, Jets, Browns at 1 and Broncos make no sense at all given the QB gospel.  That would mean it either it is only gospel for us, or we could trade up to get QB5....maybe even stand pat if we get lucky....or we need to target the 4 very heavily with the realistic notion that 3 QBs would already be gone.

 

I do agree that in no scenario should we trade up for Barkley.

 

No insult intended.

 

You say you understand but don't agree, but then what you write doesn't indicate understanding of my points (you're most welcome to disagree)  I'll try again.

 

I'm saying the Bills and the Giants are in different situations.  The Giants may still have a franchise QB.  The Bills have a league-leading RB.  Their needs are different.

 

I'm saying the fan talk "never pass up a franchise QB" etc is not universal.  If you have a franchise QB, you absolutely pass up the chance to draft another franchise QB in the first, in favor of trying to put a better team around the guy you've got.  So it all hinges on whether or not the Giants see Eli as still a franchise QB for the Giants.  If they think he's done, they should draft a QB.  If they were telling the truth back in Jan/Feb when Shurmer and Gettleman came on board, they don't think he's done.  (I'm not giving you a break on Eli.  He's 37.  Peyton had serious neck injuries and lasted 2 years longer.) 

 

Now you may say "Yes, Eli is done, therefore the Giants need a new franchise QB" and if the Giants agree with you - you're correct, they will not pass up that chance, and they shouldn't.

 

But if they feel they can get 3 more years out of Eli if they fix his OL - then wouldn't it make more sense for them, organizationally, to put the best supporting cast around Eli that they can with their top picks, and figure they can pull the trigger 3x on QB later on and hope to land one fish that can swim?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BadLandsMeanie Veteran

BadLandsMeanie

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, dollars 2 donuts said:

 

 

Considering the 50/50 possibility of my ensuing death I am not sure how to respond.

 

Oh, WTH...you got a thumbs up, BLM!

I don't think it would count against you as a suicide. I think it would go in the books as your having been tortured to death.

 

You might even posthumously get the nod as The Patron Saint of Bills Fans.

 

But I hope you stick around :)

 

 

 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BBillsWestCoast Practice Squad

BBillsWestCoast

Posted
Posted

Responding tom the original question: If we got Barkley at pick 6 or 7 (pipe dream) I would be fine with it, if they could keep pick #22. He would be the best receiver on the team and could work the slot when McCoy is in Or we could trade McCoy for a MLB/WR/OG. BUT... it would make zero sense when we have needs everywhere else. Truthfully, I am good with landing any of the top 3 rated players (Chubb, Barkley or Nelson) in this draft by moving up between picks 7-9 that are not a QB if we can keep pick #22 (MLB/WR/OG/C/DB/QB). Barkley would vault his way onto a Wheaties box in 2 years if we can put a line together. 

 

I do not want to take a QB if he has a low floor and a ton of risk. I can wait until rounds 2-3 if we don't have a shot at our guy. 1 or 2 of the top 5 rated QBs will drop and be there at 6-9. TB or SF are my most likely spots where we trade up to without giving away the farm. I am confident that the Bills WILL try and trade up to pick #2 and will give away 3x 1st rounders if they can swing a deal. Not sure the Giants or Cleveland will trade though. Denver and Colts are the wildcard spots, but they should stay and take the best available player to land a stud. I see QB going 1, 2 and 3, then best player/team needs. QBs always slide... Is all of the talk about Rosen Bull? Is Allen a smokescreen and he is the guy that slides? Will Mayfield slide out of the top 10? Can lamar Jackson crack the top 12 and he is the quiet storm or is he taking a nap in the green room?

 

Bottom line is that I think we will get a QB in the top 9 picks and I have zero clue who it may be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
4merper4mer Hall of Famer

4merper4mer

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

No insult intended.

 

You say you understand but don't agree, but then what you write doesn't indicate understanding of my points (you're most welcome to disagree)  I'll try again.

 

I'm saying the Bills and the Giants are in different situations.  The Giants may still have a franchise QB.  The Bills have a league-leading RB.  Their needs are different.

 

I'm saying the fan talk "never pass up a franchise QB" etc is not universal.  If you have a franchise QB, you absolutely pass up the chance to draft another franchise QB in the first, in favor of trying to put a better team around the guy you've got.  So it all hinges on whether or not the Giants see Eli as still a franchise QB for the Giants.  If they think he's done, they should draft a QB.  If they were telling the truth back in Jan/Feb when Shurmer and Gettleman came on board, they don't think he's done.  (I'm not giving you a break on Eli.  He's 37.  Peyton had serious neck injuries and lasted 2 years longer.) 

 

Now you may say "Yes, Eli is done, therefore the Giants need a new franchise QB" and if the Giants agree with you - you're correct, they will not pass up that chance, and they shouldn't.

 

But if they feel they can get 3 more years out of Eli if they fix his OL - then wouldn't it make more sense for them, organizationally, to put the best supporting cast around Eli that they can with their top picks, and figure they can pull the trigger 3x on QB later on and hope to land one fish that can swim?

 

 

I get it but disagree on the Eli part.  He doesn't need to be all the way done for them to target a franchise QB if we are applying this board's rules.  He is 38.  He is certainly almost done.  If you're telling me the Giants absolutely love Davis Webb then ok.

 

They simply can't think they can go from number 31 in the league, subtract JPP and build a contender around Eli before it is too late for him.  If they do, they are dumb.

 

I completely agree on Barkley & the Bills.  No way.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hapless Bills Fan Hall of Famer

Hapless Bills Fan

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, 4merper4mer said:

I get it but disagree on the Eli part.  He doesn't need to be all the way done for them to target a franchise QB if we are applying this board's rules.  He is 38.  He is certainly almost done.  If you're telling me the Giants absolutely love Davis Webb then ok.

 

They simply can't think they can go from number 31 in the league, subtract JPP and build a contender around Eli before it is too late for him.  If they do, they are dumb.

 

I completely agree on Barkley & the Bills.  No way.  

 

It's a good question what the Giants think they can do.  I guess that's up to Gettleman and Shurmer, as well as to their evaluation of Eli.  But if they do think Eli has 2-3 more years, then I can see it making sense to either get a player they believe will be a difference maker, or, take the extra picks to further stock the larder.

 

We in Buffalo are inured to an eternal 3-year turn around process that never completes, but other teams do manage to add a key piece and turn things around in 1-2 years.

 

 Elsewhere in the league we have the 2016 3-13 Jags becoming the 2017 10-6 Jags who gave the Pats** a good scare in the divisional round - wasn't adding Fournette a key piece in that turn-around?  We have the 2015 4-12 Cowboys becoming the 2016 13-3 Cowboys - yes, they added Prescott as well as Zeke Elliot.  SF went from 6-10 to 13-3 and 11-2 (SB) in 3 years when Harbaugh came in, under (initially) the same QB.  Teams do turn around from bottom-feeding to champion contention in 1-2 year, and it's not unprecedented for a new coaching staff and a game-changing RB to be part of that. 

 

One thing that makes me think they may well be going QB is Eli Manning quietly selling his condo.  If it hadn't sold for a record price, that likely would have passed without note.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...