PAuline: agreement in principle with giants

[Awwufelloff]

The Jets are going to get Rosen aren't they.

[DCOrange]

2 minutes ago, par73 said:

Wasn't this non-story posted last week?

Yes. 

[thunderingsquid]

58 minutes ago, BillsFanMike said:

Please stay where we are at McBean. We need to gather talent and a QB will fall in the draft. It happens every year. Build up our depth.

 

Absolutely.   I am totally down for the next JP Losman or EJ Manuel.  

 

SMH.  

[gobills1212]

And there didnt seem to be any certainty as implied, just speculation or hear say...

[SoTier]

29 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Hey, it's worked for this team for the last half-century, right?

 

Well, actually it did.   LOL.   In 1983, the Bills had 2 first rounders.  They stayed where they were and took Kelly with the second of those picks at #14.  The one time they traded up (from the 2nd round back into the first) in 2004, they got the booby prize of JP Losman at #22.  In 2013, determined to take a first round QB but not loving EJ Manuel or any of the other duds from that class, they traded back to 16, and Manuel was still there.

 

BTW, the Bills missed out on Aaron Rodgers because they took Losman the year before and didn't have a first rounder in 2005.  They also had to take Leotus McKelvin at #11 in 2008 instead of grabbing Joe Flacco, and in 2012, they had to grab TJ Graham while Russell Wilson was still available.  The Bills problems at QB over the years hasn't been that they didn't have opportunities to draft franchise QBs because they didn't trade up to get them, but that they repeatedly failed to pick the right player, except once, when they had future franchise QBs available. 

 

Hopefully, the Beane/McDemott regime picks the right player, whether they trade up or stay at #12.  Getting the right player seems to be a much more effective strategy than simply obtaining any player who plays a specific position of need, no matter how desperate that need. 

[BigBuff423]

8 minutes ago, What a Tuel said:

 

You are still changing the narrative here. The post we disagreed with pleaded for Beane to stay where we were. All I want is for Beane to do what he thinks puts us in the best position to get the QB he considers the best prospect. I do not want him to settle, I do not want him to reach, I want him to do his job and do it right. 

 

But that had nothing to do with me...someone posted about getting the hottest girl at the bar instead of waiting for closing time and hoping to take home a beast. I clarified the analogy to be much more like marrying a virtual stranger based on looks, and all that such a commitment entails and what is at risk in terms of assets and major changes. That's all....

 

I'm fine with staying at 12, and I'm fine with trading up....just not so far up that it cripples the ability of the team to address not only QB but other areas as well. So, trading up and giving up the extra 1st and a 2nd....sucks, and that's about the line, I personally could stomach. But in the scenario posted, that was NOT the asking it price. To me, the price was much, much steeper and that's where I waded into the conversation to say, if you do that, be so sure about your pick, you know you're married to this person for the next five years with no way out and without knowing what you're getting. That's all.....

[reddogblitz]

Just now, thunderingsquid said:

 

Absolutely.   I am totally down for the next JP Losman or EJ Manuel.  

 

SMH.  

 

I am totally down with the next JaMarcus Russell or Ryan Leaf.

[jo39416]

oh god.

 

Just let it end.  I cant work .

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

47 minutes ago, ddaryl said:

 

Boy if I had a dime

 

 

....LMAO....she probably would have taken it.............

[Captain Murica]

4 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Well, actually it did.   LOL.   In 1983, the Bills had 2 first rounders.  They stayed where they were and took Kelly with the second of those picks at #14.  The one time they traded up (from the 2nd round back into the first) in 2004, they got the booby prize of JP Losman at #22.  In 2013, determined to take a first round QB but not loving EJ Manuel or any of the other duds from that class, they traded back to 16, and Manuel was still there.

 

BTW, the Bills missed out on Aaron Rodgers because they took Losman the year before and didn't have a first rounder in 2005.  They also had to take Leotus McKelvin at #11 in 2008 instead of grabbing Joe Flacco, and in 2012, they had to grab TJ Graham while Russell Wilson was still available.  The Bills problems at QB over the years hasn't been that they didn't have opportunities to draft franchise QBs because they didn't trade up to get them, but that they repeatedly failed to pick the right player, except once, when they had future franchise QBs available. 

 

Hopefully, the Beane/McDemott regime picks the right player, whether they trade up or stay at #12.  Getting the right player seems to be a much more effective strategy than simply obtaining any player who plays a specific position of need, no matter how desperate that need. 

 

 

What type of flower is that, Leotus? 

 

Just messing, its Leodis. 

[thunderingsquid]

5 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

I am totally down with the next JaMarcus Russell or Ryan Leaf.

 

reddogblitz:  Struck out looking 

[Bill_with_it]

7 minutes ago, BigBuff423 said:

 

I'm not insinuating anything (also, I held out hope for EJ, but was never convinced)...the scenario posted I restated: an extra 1st this year, two 2nds this year, McCoy....that's a ton of assets and yes, you forfeit a MLB, WR and Offensive lineman in exchange for the QB you creamed your jeans over....meanwhile, Jackson and even MAYBE Rosen is still there at 12 or even trading up to 7, but not giving up your other 1st this year or even one of your 2nds this year, probably a 3rd this year.....THAT's a big difference and if you don't think so, then there's nothing I can say.

 

Also, I'm not "over reacting drama specialist" I merely clarified the analogy. Take it down a notch....you tried to say that I wanted to wait in the later rounds to Draft a QB, which I do not, I clarified that as well despite your assumption and failure to comprehend what I wrote. That said, we agree to disagree, best wishes on the rest of your day and as always, Go Bills!

What will Mccoy, the drafted MLB,  and drafted WR do with aj mccarron leading the team or an ej manuel prospect that was settled on? That is  what you fail to fundamentally understand. Barring drafting the Chicago Bear’s or Baltimore Raven’s historic defenses, those picks are worthless regarding the teams ultimate goal to win a championship. 

11 minutes ago, BigBuff423 said:

 

I'm not insinuating anything (also, I held out hope for EJ, but was never convinced)...the scenario posted I restated: an extra 1st this year, two 2nds this year, McCoy....that's a ton of assets and yes, you forfeit a MLB, WR and Offensive lineman in exchange for the QB you creamed your jeans over....meanwhile, Jackson and even MAYBE Rosen is still there at 12 or even trading up to 7, but not giving up your other 1st this year or even one of your 2nds this year, probably a 3rd this year.....THAT's a big difference and if you don't think so, then there's nothing I can say.

 

Also, I'm not "over reacting drama specialist" I merely clarified the analogy. Take it down a notch....you tried to say that I wanted to wait in the later rounds to Draft a QB, which I do not, I clarified that as well despite your assumption and failure to comprehend what I wrote. That said, we agree to disagree, best wishes on the rest of your day and as always, Go Bills!

Noni never stated that you wanted to wait till the later rounds. I stated you were insinuating and EJ manuel pick of proportionality with regard to the QB. Which is settling on leftovers. BTW which round was EJ drafted and how did that work out for us?

[4merper4mer]

1 hour ago, What a Tuel said:

 

Doesn't matter if a QB falls, it should be the QB Beane wants. I would hope the 6 top QBs in this draft are not considered interchangeable.

As long as we trade as many picks as possible, the new QB will be absolutely awesome.  This chick Pauline says we are almost there.

[JaCrispy]

45 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Including the Bills.  That's what you want, though, and that's how smart GMs operate.  That's why these kind of trades happen on draft day when the team with the higher pick is on the clock.   A team doesn't trade up just to get "a player" (well, maybe if they're the Jests they do), but "the player they want".  What's the point of trading up if the guy you want is already gone?

 

Obviously, the Giants want a player that they think Cleveland might want, too.  If Cleveland doesn't take him, then they aren't trading.  If Cleveland doesn't, they open to a trade -- provided that Cleveland didn't take the player the Bills wanted. 

I don’t really understand why some people have a problem with what the Jets did...is it jealousy? Because if you ask me, I would love it if the Bills were in their spot...they are guaranteed to get one of the top 3 QBs... isn’t that we would want as Bills fans? That’s why I don’t get the bashing of the Jets for trading to 3.

[reddogblitz]

1 minute ago, thunderingsquid said:

 

reddogblitz:  Struck out looking 

 

Sometime instead of swinging at that high inside fastball so you don't miss it, you take the pitch.  You get to first on a walk.  You steal second.  The next guy up hits a slow roller to first and you get to third.  The next guys hits a long fly ball, and YOU SCORE!!

 

There's more than one way to skin a cat. 

 

This notion that you have to trade all your picks for a try at a golden armed franchise QB or you want to settle and are OK with bad QB play is glorified Horse **** IMHO.

[thunderingsquid]

2 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Sometime instead of swinging at that high inside fastball so you don't miss it, you take the pitch.  You get to first on a walk.  You steal second.  The next guy up hits a slow roller to first and you get to third.  The next guys hits a long fly ball, and YOU SCORE!!

 

There's more than one way to skin a cat. 

 

This notion that you have to trade all your picks for a try at a golden armed franchise QB or you want to settle and are OK with bad QB play is glorified Horse **** IMHO.

 

We may not agree but in this draft, you are so much more likely to score on one the top 4 than a Lauletta or a Rudolph.  

[Epstein's Mother]

40 minutes ago, No Place To Hyde said:

My elite sources have confirmed:

 

Buffalo will draft at 12 & 22 next Thursday. Or they will move those picks and pick somewhere else. They may pick as high as 2 and as low as 32 in round 1. Also the guy they are locked into and WILL select will be both loved and hated on these boards. 

 

This is also my theory.  We must have the same elite source.

[ddaryl]

14 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Sometime instead of swinging at that high inside fastball so you don't miss it, you take the pitch.  You get to first on a walk.  You steal second.  The next guy up hits a slow roller to first and you get to third.  The next guys hits a long fly ball, and YOU SCORE!!

 

There's more than one way to skin a cat. 

 

This notion that you have to trade all your picks for a try at a golden armed franchise QB or you want to settle and are OK with bad QB play is glorified Horse **** IMHO.

 

 

But this year is not 2005 and the QB that slides to #12 won't be the 1st 2nd or 3rd QB off the board most likely at best we would get 4th choice....   Now unless the BIlls view the top 4 QB's with very close grades you would be better served going up and get the guy your team of scouts and coaches have identified as better than the rest.

 

This whole sit back an dlet the qb fall to us mentality is concerning because fortune favors the bold

Edited April 18, 2018 by ddaryl

[SoTier]

18 minutes ago, Captain Murica said:

 

 

What type of flower is that, Leotus? 

 

Just messing, its Leodis. 

 

I thought it looked odd, but drafthistory.com has him as "Leotis" so I thought I had it wrong!

[TigerJ]

1 hour ago, DasNootz said:

so wouldn't that say that there is no agreement in place...?

I don't think that is unusual.  Teams negotiate terms that are acceptable if they do decide to trade, but usually neither team wants to pull the trigger until the team with the higher draft pick is on the clock.  There may be unforeseen circumstances and events that waiting affords the opportunity to change their mind.  If another team were to come in and offer the Giants a lot more than Buffalo's offer, the Giants are free to take it.

[reddogblitz]

Just now, ddaryl said:

 

 

But this year is not 2005 and the QB that slides to #12 won't be the 1st 2nd or 3rd QB off the board most likely at best we would get 4th choice....   Now unless the BIlls view the top 4 QB's with very close grades you would be better served going up and get the guy your team of scuots and coaches have identified as better than the rest.

 

This whole sit back an dlet th eqb fall to us mentality is concerning because fortune faovrs the bold

 

We'll see.  We won't know how good any of these guys really are for at least 3 years.

 

I don't care what we do.  It's not my call and they're not going to ask me my opinion.  I just hope it works whatever it is.  I'm not a gambler. When I go to Vegas, I watch live music and the Bellagio light show etc.  I don't bet my house payment money on a lucky 13 on the roulette wheel.  I'd like to see us keep the picks probably, but whatever they do, if it works, it will be pure brilliance.

 

go BILLS !!

[BuffaloBillyG]

2 minutes ago, Epstein's Mother said:

 

This is also my theory.  We must have the same elite source.

My source has also just let me know this draft nugget. Each of the players we draft...will be male and be coming from college. More to come...

[DefenseWins]

Just DO IT BEANE. DO IT.

[Epstein's Mother]

Just now, No Place To Hyde said:

My source has also just let me know this draft nugget. Each of the players we draft...will be male and be coming from college. More to come...

 

No, I didn't get that.  We must have different sources after all.

[GG]

1 hour ago, BigBuff423 said:

 

But in your analogy, it's not just hitting it with the girl in the bar where the investment is basically a few hours and just a little bit of money. But, instead, you have marry her, forfeit your house, agree to the number of kids to have in 4 years, pay for her vehicle, be willing to relocate at any time necessary, be willing to get rid of two of your best and closest friends because she doesn't like them, and ready to forego wild vacations for the next 12 years for someone you've met, and chatted with in an intoxicated condition (QB drunk) over the period of about 3 hours. That's the analogy....

 

So, you can take the hottest girl with all of this tied to the cost, which also comes with a complete unknown as to how she'll age, what friends she'll bring into her life, what her parents or family is like, if she's way over her head in debt, and whether she's carrying any diseases...

 

Or, you can take the girl who's cute, not as drunk, fun and smart and says, just take me as I am, no strings, no requirements and I'll give up for you everything I've got to make this work. 

 

That's full string in your analogy....

 

And what if that hot girl ends up being the best thing that's ever happened to you because your house was a pile of trash that was decorated from dumpster diving; your friends were unemployed crackheads who stole the last bit of valuables you thought you owned; you moved from the decrepit pit you called home into a place where you didn't have to worry that a little drizzle would pour through the 10-yr old tarp that you masqueraded as the roof; your 4 kids grew up to be pillars of society who took care of all your & wife's needs for the rest of your lives?

 

That's the real full string of the analogy of not going for the best girl at the dance.

[ddaryl]

1 minute ago, reddogblitz said:

 

We'll see.  We won't know how good any of these guys really are for at least 3 years.

 

I don't care what we do.  It's not my call and they're not going to ask me my opinion.  I just hope it works whatever it is.  I'm not a gambler. When I go to Vegas, I watch live music and the Bellagio light show etc.  I don't bet my house payment money on a lucky 13 on the roulette wheel.  I'd like to see us keep the picks probably, but whatever they do, if it works, it will be pure brilliance.

 

go BILLS !!

 

 

It all comes down to our talent evalutors.. If they make the right choice nobody will complain... Which is where all our trepedation lies... Can we finally get this one right

[dollars 2 donuts]

1 hour ago, BillsFanMike said:

Please stay where we are at McBean. We need to gather talent and a QB will fall in the draft. It happens every year. Build up our depth.

 

 

Part of me truly believes this.  However, the other part of me wants to find out where you live and heckle you all weekend long, just outside the perimeter of your property line.

 

I am sure you can respectfully appreciate that.

 

 

 

[thebandit27]

35 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Well, actually it did.   LOL.   In 1983, the Bills had 2 first rounders.  They stayed where they were and took Kelly with the second of those picks at #14.  The one time they traded up (from the 2nd round back into the first) in 2004, they got the booby prize of JP Losman at #22.  In 2013, determined to take a first round QB but not loving EJ Manuel or any of the other duds from that class, they traded back to 16, and Manuel was still there.

 

BTW, the Bills missed out on Aaron Rodgers because they took Losman the year before and didn't have a first rounder in 2005.  They also had to take Leotus McKelvin at #11 in 2008 instead of grabbing Joe Flacco, and in 2012, they had to grab TJ Graham while Russell Wilson was still available.  The Bills problems at QB over the years hasn't been that they didn't have opportunities to draft franchise QBs because they didn't trade up to get them, but that they repeatedly failed to pick the right player, except once, when they had future franchise QBs available. 

 

Hopefully, the Beane/McDemott regime picks the right player, whether they trade up or stay at #12.  Getting the right player seems to be a much more effective strategy than simply obtaining any player who plays a specific position of need, no matter how desperate that need. 

 

No, actually it hasn't worked.

 

They got lucky with Kelly once, and aside from that their lack of aggressiveness to draft the position has been nothing short of unmitigated failure.  They traded up in 2004 only after being unwilling to give up the bounty that Jacksonville wanted to move down from the 9 slot, which would have allowed them to take Roethlisberger.  Instead they waited and took Lee Evans at 13.

 

They drafted Manuel in 2013 after trading back...and I maintain that it was the right thing to do.  More than 50% of the franchise QBs in the NFL were drafted in the top 5; the other half come from the remaining 250 picks...the odds are much, much higher of getting a franchise guy in the top 5.  Playing it passive and waiting doesn't often work out.

 

This team has tried the "let's see who nobody else wants" approach for 50+ years; it's time to try the "we found our guy, now let's go get him" approach.

[SoTier]

11 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

I don’t really understand why some people have a problem with what the Jets did...is it jealousy? Because if you ask me, I would love it if the Bills were in their spot...they are guaranteed to get one of the top 3 QBs... isn’t that we would want as Bills fans? That’s why I don’t get the bashing of the Jets for trading to 3.

 

Well, if your aim is to take a first round qb to placate fans and sell tix, then there's nothing wrong with it.  You can't miss.  If your aim is to build a winning team, however, it could be a costly mistake.   What if neither Cleveland nor the Giants take QBs?   Wow, great the Jests get first crack at the QBs, but since they had the sixth pick anyways, how are they all that much better off picking at 3 rather than 6.  Indy wasn't taking a QB.  The Browns aren't taking two.  So, that leaves Denver, which doesn't seem likely to draft a QB with both Keenum and Lynch on the roster.  So, the Jest gave up a lot to get the same or slightly better choice than they would have had if they stayed put ... and they don't control their destiny any more at #3 than they would have at #4.  They bought into the "4 QBs are going to go in the top 5" hype being spewed by the media mavens and got played by the Colts.

 

That's not even dealing with the bigger issue of picking the right QB in a draft class that simply has a lot of flawed prospects rather than only 1 or 2 outstanding ones. 

[Epstein's Mother]

28 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

I don’t really understand why some people have a problem with what the Jets did...is it jealousy? Because if you ask me, I would love it if the Bills were in their spot...they are guaranteed to get one of the top 3 QBs... isn’t that we would want as Bills fans? That’s why I don’t get the bashing of the Jets for trading to 3.

 

It's a heck of a lot cheaper to get to 3 from 6 (3 second round picks) than it is to get from 22 to 3.  Of course Bills fans would love to be there but at what price?

[TOboy]

1 hour ago, kdiggz said:

Bills have agreed to a trade with the Giants. But the Giants don't want to trade! Sounds like we don't have an agreement

 

I hear what you're saying...how I'm reading it is that we currently have the best deal on the table. The Giants are waiting to see if anyone else blows them away. 

 

Or...we could be waiting to see who Cleveland picks at 1. Perhaps what the Giants are asking is too much to pay, except for one guy (Darnold maybe?)? 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

What have I just read in this thread?

 

[DasNootz]

Agreed - it comes down to who they value as "their guy".  If they value Rosen or Mayfield, there's a possibility that either is still available at 12, and a strong possibility that they'll only have to get in front of Miami to have their pick of the two.  If they value Darnold or Allen, they likely have to move up to 2 to make sure they get "their guy".

 

Personally based upon all of the information that's available to the common fan, I'd rather have Rosen or Mayfiled AND 22 AND one of our seconds, AND both 3rds AND next year's 1st, rather than Darnold or Allen and one 2nd, one 3rd and no 1st next year.

[BuffaloBaumer]

Donte Whitner's son at pick #12

[BigBuff423]

21 minutes ago, GG said:

 

And what if that hot girl ends up being the best thing that's ever happened to you because your house was a pile of trash that was decorated from dumpster diving; your friends were unemployed crackheads who stole the last bit of valuables you thought you owned; you moved from the decrepit pit you called home into a place where you didn't have to worry that a little drizzle would pour through the 10-yr old tarp that you masqueraded as the roof; your 4 kids grew up to be pillars of society who took care of all your & wife's needs for the rest of your lives?

 

That's the real full string of the analogy of not going for the best girl at the dance.

 

Nice try....but no, not really. Also, please read more carefully....in my analogy I simply said the difference as not taking the hot girl home for a good night, it was taking her home via marriage, not a one night stand. In other words, the marriage analogy is much closer to the football equivalent of trading up and giving up said assets than just taking a chance on the hot girl at the bar for an evening. 

44 minutes ago, Bill_with_it said:

What will Mccoy, the drafted MLB,  and drafted WR do with aj mccarron leading the team or an ej manuel prospect that was settled on? That is  what you fail to fundamentally understand. Barring drafting the Chicago Bear’s or Baltimore Raven’s historic defenses, those picks are worthless regarding the teams ultimate goal to win a championship. 

Noni never stated that you wanted to wait till the later rounds. I stated you were insinuating and EJ manuel pick of proportionality with regard to the QB. Which is settling on leftovers. BTW which round was EJ drafted and how did that work out for us?

 

I just.....can't.....

[SoTier]

1 minute ago, thebandit27 said:

 

No, actually it hasn't worked.

 

They got lucky with Kelly once, and aside from that their lack of aggressiveness to draft the position has been nothing short of unmitigated failure.  They traded up in 2004 only after being unwilling to give up the bounty that Jacksonville wanted to move down from the 9 slot, which would have allowed them to take Roethlisberger.  Instead they waited and took Lee Evans at 13.

 

They drafted Manuel in 2013 after trading back...and I maintain that it was the right thing to do.  More than 50% of the franchise QBs in the NFL were drafted in the top 5; the other half come from the remaining 250 picks...the odds are much, much higher of getting a franchise guy in the top 5.  Playing it passive and waiting doesn't often work out.

 

This team has tried the "let's see who nobody else wants" approach for 50+ years; it's time to try the "we found our guy, now let's go get him" approach.

 

That they didn't trade up says, again, that the fault was in not picking the right QB; they failed to recognize the qualities that would make him a significantly better pick than Losman.  Furthermore, If they had stayed put in 2004, they would have been in a position to take Rodgers the next year (Bledsoe was still their starter so they could have waited).  They could have also taken Cutler in 2006 who while not all that great a QB was certainly better than Losman, Edwards, Fitzpatrick, Manuel, and Orton.

 

You ignored my statements that they chose to pass on both Flacco and Wilson when they drafted in those rounds with both QBs still on the board.

 

Trading back for Manuel only mitigates the stupidity of picking a QB in the first round just to placate fans and put butts in the seats, but it doesn't change the fact that the Bills should have passed on a QB in the first round completely in 2013.  They could have taken Bridgewater or Carr in 2014 and been much better off.   Once again, the Bills picked the wrong guy, and whether they stayed where they were or traded back, it would have made no difference.  They lost out on useful QBs in order to grab a bust.  That's the real story of the Bills' QB woes.

[Captain Murica]

4 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

What have I just read in this thread?

 

The distorted thoughts of a manic fan base... 

[aristocrat]

Just go up and get baker not Allen I will have zero problems 

[North Buffalo]

1 hour ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Instead of getting the hottest girl at the bar, I’m going to wait until bar closing and hopefully a non-beast will be left.  It’s a great strategy.

Always depended on how much I drank or she drank..

[Awwufelloff]

I don't understand if a deal is in place why hasn't it been completed? These reports are conflicting. One guy says giants want Barkley which they will definitely get at pick 2 because the browns are going QB at 1. If this is the case and the giants want barkley there is no deal to be made for pick 2. 1.) Darnold  2) Barkley 3) Rosen 4.) Chubb

 

The Bills are better off saving some capital and trading between the 4-8 range.  One of Darnold, Allen, Rosen, Mayfield will be there.

Edited April 18, 2018 by Awwufelloff