bigfootindy Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 Very early, just hypothetical trade. Maybe the Raiders want a QB before the Broncos/Dolphins have a shot. Trade chart shows: Bills 9th: 1350 Raiders picks: 740 + 680 = 1420 (About a 5% premium) Thoughts? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) I’d do it Would need a little bit more though. Plus 10% sounds about right. With it, I'd take the TE and then BPA Edited January 17, 2019 by Virgil 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rc2catch Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) Nope.. I want a extra 2 this year or a 1 next year on top of both those 1’s Gruden can afford it Edited January 17, 2019 by Rc2catch 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Is that for their two later first rounds? Definitely. Do that trade and then take whichever WR tickles the fancy, and Fant. Or a Lineman. Either way, the sweet spot of our biggest needs (WR, TE, OL, RB) is starting at pick 20 and moving back. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussie Joe Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 So can you tell me who is going to still be there at 9 so I can evaluate? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albany,n.y. Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) Why do some people still think the Raiders are looking to replace Carr? After a rough start he went 10 straight games without an INT before throwing a couple in the season finale. There's no way a QB will be sitting at 9 who will ever be better than Carr in this bad QB year. Edited January 17, 2019 by Albany,n.y. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Duffy Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) I think it may cost more than just their 24 and 27th to move from the mid 20's all the way to top 10. Anyway I say no, need more compensation, if not then a definite no for me. Rather stay at 9. Edited January 17, 2019 by Patrick_Duffy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 I voted in a heartbeat even though they can get a great player at 9. I’m thinking 24 and 27 would get you something like Dre’Mont Jones and Hollywood Brown. I think that’s better than Gary or someone like that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark92 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) Well if you look at the #10 pick we gave to KC for the #27 and the following years 1st in 2017 then it may not be quite enough. I would do #9 for #24, #27 and a 2nd rounder. Turn 1 top ten pick into 3 probable starters. Yep. Edited January 17, 2019 by Mark92 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 5 minutes ago, Mark92 said: Well if you look at the #10 pick we gave to KC for the #27 and the following years 1st in 2017 then it may not be quite enough. I would do #9 for #24, #27 and a 2nd rounder. Turn 1 top ten pick into 3 probable starters. Yep. you're hired ! mathematically it works for me. Can likely move back up if need something too good to miss on. But , I would want more considering there might be leverage. the thing i cannot do is measure the BPA level and look at "need" picks , and consider what the Bills see of value there as compared to what the see from the first ten picks look like. am sure some here can give us and educated opinion. as i mentioned the math works well enough. But they best have some players they really like and can get to if they trade out. Hard to give up drafting in the top ten !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warcodered Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 54 minutes ago, Rc2catch said: Nope.. I want a extra 2 this year or a 1 next year on top of both those 1’s Gruden can afford it If you can get it sure not sure I'd say no to the other if you can't. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPbillsfan Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Fair trade factoring in a top 10 pick gets a 5 yr deal there would be a premium. Let's say a 3rd round pick which would be the 68th pick. We would be drafting 24, 27, 40, 64, 74 in the first three rounds. Plus have two picks in the 4th, 5th and 7th and one in the 6th. If we add a WR, OG, C, T and TE and maybe an OLB in free agency we could draft: 24 - Hakeem Butler - WR 27 - Dexter Lawrence - DT 40 - Irv Smith - TE 64 - Youdny Cajuste - OT 70 - Chris Lidstrom then in 4th round LB Kahil Hodge and RB Josh Jacobs thoughts please 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njbuff Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 4 minutes ago, RPbillsfan said: Fair trade factoring in a top 10 pick gets a 5 yr deal there would be a premium. Let's say a 3rd round pick which would be the 68th pick. We would be drafting 24, 27, 40, 64, 74 in the first three rounds. Plus have two picks in the 4th, 5th and 7th and one in the 6th. If we add a WR, OG, C, T and TE and maybe an OLB in free agency we could draft: 24 - Hakeem Butler - WR 27 - Dexter Lawrence - DT 40 - Irv Smith - TE 64 - Youdny Cajuste - OT 70 - Chris Lidstrom then in 4th round LB Kahil Hodge and RB Josh Jacobs thoughts please Unless something drastic happens, there is no way Jacobs is there in the 4th round. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPbillsfan Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 minute ago, njbuff said: Unless something drastic happens, there is no way Jacobs is there in the 4th round. Probably not, but maybe a Bryce Love who is coming off an injury or the kid from Texas A & M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njbuff Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, RPbillsfan said: Probably not, but maybe a Bryce Love who is coming off an injury or the kid from Texas A & M I don’t know how RB is going to work in this draft or how the Bills plan on fixing the RB position, but if the Bills are fancy on Jacobs, they might be busy this draft with trades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Joshin' Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 While the points add up a 3rd pick in the later rounds required to seal the deal. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JD Hill Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 8 minutes ago, RPbillsfan said: Probably not, but maybe a Bryce Love who is coming off an injury or the kid from Texas A & M Agree Jacobs may go in the first but Love might be there and a great pick. Especially if we actually keep Shady this year. Love will have a year of RB by committee and then take over in 2020. Sign me up for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 42 minutes ago, Mark92 said: Well if you look at the #10 pick we gave to KC for the #27 and the following years 1st in 2017 then it may not be quite enough. I would do #9 for #24, #27 and a 2nd rounder. Turn 1 top ten pick into 3 probable starters. Yep. They did this for their QB of the future (boy, did theirs come early!). I really don't think there's anyone at 9 the Raiders will want. If anything, I could see Gruden trading the Cards for the #1 pick to get Bosa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wppete Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 I would do that. Draft 2 o-linemen. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Can I see the Bills draft board first? OK, I’d probably do it unless they LOVE someone at 9. Can I see the draft board now? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CEN-CAL17 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) #24 TE TJ Hockenson #27 RB Josh Jacobs #41 WR Hakeem Butler All contingent on they sign a stud FA Center and RT. 3rd round OG Edited January 17, 2019 by 1ZAYDAY1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Now Moment Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, 1ZAYDAY1 said: #24 TE TJ Hockenson #27 RB Josh Jacobs #41 WR Hakeem Butler Now that’s interesting. You could even add another side receiver later in the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodneykm Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 I get that the chart says we get a premium, but I'm not feeling it. Maybe a 1st this year, 3rd and their 1st next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CEN-CAL17 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 5 minutes ago, Buffalo30 said: Now that’s interesting. You could even add another side receiver later in the draft. Those 3 I grabbed could all be huge targets in the passing game. Not to mention Jacobs steps in right away knowing the system and is an amazing runner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Now Moment Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 4 minutes ago, 1ZAYDAY1 said: Those 3 I grabbed could all be huge targets in the passing game. Not to mention Jacobs steps in right away knowing the system and is an amazing runner. Even if Hakeem didn’t make it to 42, I think there will be plenty of wide receivers to choose from with the depth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swill Merchant Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 All damn day. This draft is deep but not terribly top heavy, and we're looking for multiple starters. I wouldn't even hesitate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) I would do it but would like more , 9th to 24th is a big drop. Edited January 17, 2019 by Buffalo Barbarian 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cle23 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 hour ago, RPbillsfan said: Fair trade factoring in a top 10 pick gets a 5 yr deal there would be a premium. Let's say a 3rd round pick which would be the 68th pick. We would be drafting 24, 27, 40, 64, 74 in the first three rounds. Plus have two picks in the 4th, 5th and 7th and one in the 6th. If we add a WR, OG, C, T and TE and maybe an OLB in free agency we could draft: 24 - Hakeem Butler - WR 27 - Dexter Lawrence - DT 40 - Irv Smith - TE 64 - Youdny Cajuste - OT 70 - Chris Lidstrom then in 4th round LB Kahil Hodge and RB Josh Jacobs thoughts please Every 1st rounder gets a 5 year deal, not just top 10. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 The Raiders don't want a QB at 4 but need one desperately at 9? 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dkollidas Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) I think trading down with a team like Washington is more realistic. With Alex Smith’s issues Recovering from surgery, they need to draft a guy of the future. Denver at #10 does as well. There could be teams looking at a guy like Drew Lock, Daniel Jones, or even Haskins if he slips, when we pick at #9 overall. A move like that could maybe get us a 2nd and a 3rd or 4th and allow us to really build up the roster. Edited January 17, 2019 by Dkollidas 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CEN-CAL17 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 hour ago, Buffalo30 said: Even if Hakeem didn’t make it to 42, I think there will be plenty of wide receivers to choose from with the depth. Preston Williams would be my next option. IMO top 5 WRs (not college, but nfl potential) DK Metcalf Kelvin Harmon NKeal Harry Hakeem Butler Preston Williams 13 minutes ago, Dkollidas said: I think trading down with a team like Washington is more realistic. With Alex Msith’s issues Recovering from surgery, they need to draft a guy of the future. Denver at #10 does as well. There could be teams looking at a guy like Drew Lock, Daniel Jones, or even Haskins if he slips, when we pick at #9 overall. A move like that could maybe get us a 2nd and a 3rd or 4th and allow us to really build up the roster. Yep to leapfrog Denver. Cincy and Miami could be in the running too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dkollidas Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, 1ZAYDAY1 said: Yep to leapfrog Denver. Cincy and Miami could be in the running too. Exactly. I’d look to go WR TE OL with the first 3 picks. In any order depending on the teams preference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misterbluesky Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Make no mistake about it...the Beane Counter is moving down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CEN-CAL17 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, Dkollidas said: Exactly. I’d look to go WR TE OL with the first 3 picks. In any order depending on the teams preference. I love TJ Hockenson as the best all around TE since Gronk. Potentially I think he’s better all around TE over OJ Howard who went 19 overall. I’d take Washingtons pick 15 and have zero issues grabbing Hockenson. He may not be flashy but I think him and Josh could connect. Plus grab a 3rd this year and next year. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dkollidas Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Just now, 1ZAYDAY1 said: I love TJ Hockenson as the best all around TE since Gronk. Potentially I think he’s better all around TE over OJ Howard who went 19 overall. I’d take Washingtons pick 15 and have zero issues grabbing Hockenson. He may not be flashy but I think him and Josh could connect. Plus grab a 3rd this year and next year. I’d be happy with any of Fant, Hockenson or Irv Smith if they take one in rounds 1 or 2. Then grab a receiver. Any of Harry, Butler, Marquise Brown, Metcalf, etc. I also think they look more for interior help than exterior. Between Trent Brown, Smith from Tampa, and Daryl Williams from Carolina, I think there’s more free agent help available at tackle. Not elite, but serviceable. They get their higher end RT in free agency, sign a decent level interior lineman, and then draft another interior lineman early. Defenses are trying to get more of a pass rush from the interior, and therefore The interior linemen are almost becoming just as valuable as the tackles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cage Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) 8 hours ago, Misterbluesky said: Make no mistake about it...the Beane Counter is moving down. I'm definitely in favor of trading down and getting more, given all of our needs, but that depends on a bunch of things. Several teams could jump ahead of the Bills as well. If say 2-3 QBs were selected in the top 8, he might just sit there and have someone drop to him that he can't resist? Edited January 17, 2019 by cage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgewaycynic2013 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 11 hours ago, bigfootindy said: Maybe the Raiders want a QB before the Broncos/Dolphins have a shot. Thoughts? Gruden wants to know can he get them in ‘six packs’. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) 11 hours ago, Mark92 said: Well if you look at the #10 pick we gave to KC for the #27 and the following years 1st in 2017 then it may not be quite enough. I would do #9 for #24, #27 and a 2nd rounder. Turn 1 top ten pick into 3 probable starters. Yep. That’s not the way it works. 24 and 27 this year are worth more than 27 this year and a 1 next year from a team like KC. Next year’s picks are generally devalued by one round. The Raiders (even with a fool like Gruden) would never trade those three picks just to get to 9 in a so-so draft. Edited January 17, 2019 by mannc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsredneck1 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 36 minutes ago, cage said: I'm definitely in favor of trading down and getting more, given all of our needs, but that depends on a bunch of things. Several teams could jump ahead of the Bills as well. If say 2-3 QBs were selected in the top 8, he might just sit there and have someone drop to him that he can't resist? if josh allen makes it to 9....no way do i trade out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 12 hours ago, bigfootindy said: Very early, just hypothetical trade. Maybe the Raiders want a QB before the Broncos/Dolphins have a shot. Trade chart shows: Bills 9th: 1350 Raiders picks: 740 + 680 = 1420 (About a 5% premium) Thoughts? Generally in a crucial year like this one I figure you need impact guys and I don't trade down. This would bring in two firsts, so I'd strongly consider it. If there was someone high I thought might fall to #9 and I was desperate for, or if I thought there were exactly nine guys who were blue chippers and would help this team, I'd understand them turning it down. But I don't see Oakland offering a deal like this. 32 minutes ago, mannc said: That’s not the way it works. 24 and 27 this year are worth more than 27 this year and a 1 next year from a team like KC. Next year’s picks are generally devalued by one round. The Raiders (even with a fool like Gruden) would never trade those three picks just to get to 9 in a so-so draft. Yup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts