Reading tea leaves: Bills trade down with NYG or OAK

[Estro]

Less than 3 weeks out from the draft and there's a lot of rumors and smoke, most of which is nonsense, some though truth.

 

And it's my belief that the Bills would like to trade down in this years draft.  Of course they're doing work on a lot of the top 10 guys, as they should, you always have to be prepared to pick a guy at your spot.....but like I said if they had it their way I think they'd love to move down and pick up another premium pick.  This sentiment has been tossed around by a few of the twitter guys I think tend to have good info, Eric Galko being one of them.  That brings me to the 2 teams I think might mesh with the Bills desire to move down:

 

The Raiders and the Giants.

 

I think both teams would love to take a premium non QB player with their top pick, and then use their second 1st round pick as part of a package to move up and get their QB.  The kicker is I don't think either team wants Haskins.....I think it's Daniel Jones and/or Drew Lock that'll be the guy that goes at #9 if the Bills are able to pull off a trade down.  Here's how a potential trade down with both of these teams could look:

 

TRADE w/ Giants: Giants get: #9 & #74 (worth 1570 pts. on the draft trade value chart)

                                 

                                 Bills get: #17, #37 & #95 (1600 pts.)

 

TRADE w/ Raiders: Raiders get: #9 & #112 (1420 pts.)

 

                                  Bills get : #24 & #27 (1420 pts.)

 

I'd love either of these scenarios, as I'm always a fan of trading down.  I think we have a good chance 3 weeks from now!

 

[Buffalo Barbarian]

I want more. I dont buy into the draft values , need to capitalize on their desperation. Dont want to give them any our latter picks, unless its real late.

 

 

[Aussie Joe]

Why does there have to be equality on the points chart? 

 

I don’t remember the Bills getting equal value when they moved up for Allen last year..

 

They had to bend over as should whoever wants to move up this year..

 

Also.. If Oliver is still there at 9 then just pick him..

 

Edited April 7, 2019 by Aussie Joe

[Estro]

3 minutes ago, Buffalo Barbarian said:

I want more. I dont buy into the draft values , need to capitalize on their desperation. Dont want to give them any our latter picks, unless its real late.

 

 

I tend to agree, but for the sake of the post I wanted to make the trades as realistic as possible....I've seen some mocks with Bills trade downs that are totally unrealistic, like The Bills getting a 2nd rounder for moving down 2 spots.  It'd be awesome for the Bills, but it's a totally homer view of things.

[Just Joshin']

Why can't Buffalo have a premium player?  If there is a difference maker, take him.

 

You are not getting enough in those trades - ditch the chart.

[Estro]

10 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:

Why does their have to be equality on the points chart? 

 

I don’t remember the Bills getting equal value when they moved up for Allen last year..

 

They had to bend over as should whoever wants to move up this year..

 

Also.. If Oliver is still their at 9 then just pick him..

It doesn't have to be and you're right about the Bills massively overpaying last year.  By the standard of the draft value chart they got fleeced.  The Bills overpayed by 410 points, which is the equivalent of the 49th pick in the draft, a premium pick.  In order to get a massive overpay you have to have to teams bidding for the same spot, which apparently happened last year as it was widely reported the Cardinals coveted Josh Allen and were "heartbroken" via Chris Simms when they lost out to the Bills in their attempt to trade up for him........maybe the same thing can happen for the Bills this year at the #9 spot.

[Inigo Montoya]

I was initially hoping they would trade back but I think the value of the prospects around #9 is just too great.  If they can grab Oliver or Hockenson or one of the elite EDGE rushers that drops for some reason, I think you have to pull the trigger there.  One of the best things about the draft though is all the surprise moves and it seems that every year there are more trades and more moving around with teams jumping up and down the board.  It should be a fun to watch.  

 

I really have a lot of faith in our current front office.  I think they nailed free agency this year, I don't expect them to turn around and bungle the draft.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

2 minutes ago, Estro said:

I tend to agree, but for the sake of the post I wanted to make the trades as realistic as possible....I've seen some mocks with Bills trade downs that are totally unrealistic, like The Bills getting a 2nd rounder for moving down 2 spots.  It'd be awesome for the Bills, but it's a totally homer view of things.

 

Maybe not for two spots but i dont want to drop way back in the first like we did for White.

 

But anything past 14 i want your second.

 

 

But for fun lets see what we can get with these trades.

Giants

17 WR Hakeem Butler 66, 205

37 DE Oshane Ximines 63, 253

40 DT Jeffery Simmons 64, 300

95 RB Elijah Holyfield

 

Raiders

24 TE Noah Fant 64, 249

27 DT Dexter Lawrence 64, 342

40 WR JJ Arcega Whiteside 62, 222

74 DE Chase Winovich 62, 256

 

I think im going with the raiders.

 

[Estro]

I despise your Gants trade down sce

6 minutes ago, Buffalo Barbarian said:

 

Maybe not for two spots but i dont want to drop way back in the first like we did for White.

 

But anything past 14 i want your second.

 

 

But for fun lets see what we can get with these trades.

Giants

17 WR Hakeem Butler 66, 205

37 DE Oshane Ximines 63, 253

40 DT Jeffery Simmons 64, 300

95 RB Elijah Holyfield

 

Raiders

24 TE Noah Fant 64, 249

27 DT Dexter Lawrence 64, 342

40 WR JJ Arcega Whiteside 62, 222

74 DE Chase Winovich 62, 256

 

I think im going with the raiders.

 

I despise that Giants trade down scenario.  I like the Raiders one quite a bit.

[Aussie Joe]

41 minutes ago, Estro said:

It doesn't have to be and you're right about the Bills massively overpaying last year.  By the standard of the draft value chart they got fleeced.  The Bills overpayed by 410 points, which is the equivalent of the 49th pick in the draft, a premium pick.  In order to get a massive overpay you have to have to teams bidding for the same spot, which apparently happened last year as it was widely reported the Cardinals coveted Josh Allen and were "heartbroken" via Chris Simms when they lost out to the Bills in their attempt to trade up for him........maybe the same thing can happen for the Bills this year at the #9 spot.

 

The team moving up into the Top 10 should pay a premium... at least 20 per cent extra in my view but more if there is competition as you have alluded to was the case last year with the Bills..

 

The first issue is though that the Bills need to assess who is there first at 9... I think you take Oliver, if he is there..

 

I also can’t see the Giants passing on QB they like at 6 to move up again to 9 to take him.. take him at 6 then keep your other assets..

 

Raiders could be a chance though as they can take Williams or Allen at  4... then move up and perhaps offload Carr to another team for a pick..

 

If this is the case then the Raiders can hand over 24,27,35 for 9, 74.112.. there is your 20% premium..

 

The Bills are moving a long way down and need to be appropriately incentivised..

 

Edited April 7, 2019 by Aussie Joe

[Buffalo Barbarian]

4 minutes ago, Estro said:

I despise your Gants trade down sce

I despise that Giants trade down scenario.  I like the Raiders one quite a bit.

 

Blame Drafttek

 

but i did make the picks myself, hate those simulators, takes all the fun out picking players.

 

im not a fan of the giants one either but im really intrigued by Butler saw him make BIG plays, although many complain he has the drops but that can be overcome with hard work and gecko-grip glove, 3G technologies im patenting 

 

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/experiments/2324.html

 

 

[BillsfaninSB]

I don’t want the Bills to trade back.  They don’t need to.   We will get a great non- QB player. 

 

But if if we do trade back I want their second round pick no matter what.   Case closed. 

[BillsFan1988]

2 hours ago, Estro said:

Less than 3 weeks out from the draft and there's a lot of rumors and smoke, most of which is nonsense, some though truth.

 

And it's my belief that the Bills would like to trade down in this years draft.  Of course they're doing work on a lot of the top 10 guys, as they should, you always have to be prepared to pick a guy at your spot.....but like I said if they had it their way I think they'd love to move down and pick up another premium pick.  This sentiment has been tossed around by a few of the twitter guys I think tend to have good info, Eric Galko being one of them.  That brings me to the 2 teams I think might mesh with the Bills desire to move down:

 

The Raiders and the Giants.

 

I think both teams would love to take a premium non QB player with their top pick, and then use their second 1st round pick as part of a package to move up and get their QB.  The kicker is I don't think either team wants Haskins.....I think it's Daniel Jones and/or Drew Lock that'll be the guy that goes at #9 if the Bills are able to pull off a trade down.  Here's how a potential trade down with both of these teams could look:

 

TRADE w/ Giants: Giants get: #9 & #74 (worth 1570 pts. on the draft trade value chart)

                                 

                                 Bills get: #17, #37 & #95 (1600 pts.)

 

TRADE w/ Raiders: Raiders get: #9 & #112 (1420 pts.)

 

                                  Bills get : #24 & #27 (1420 pts.)

 

I'd love either of these scenarios, as I'm always a fan of trading down.  I think we have a good chance 3 weeks from now!

 

When it comes to QBs u have to pay threw the teeth . I dont like what we are getting here. Last yr we gave up 2 2s to move up 5 slots. The Raiders call I want 24,27,35 I'll be willing to give them bk #9 and # 112. The Giants I want 17, 37 and a 2nd next yr.

Edited April 7, 2019 by BillsFan1988

[Doc Brown]

1 hour ago, Aussie Joe said:

 

The team moving up into the Top 10 should pay a premium... at least 20 per cent extra in my view but more if there is competition as you have alluded to was the case last year with the Bills..

 

The first issue is though that the Bills need to assess who is there first at 9... I think you take Oliver, if he is there..

 

I also can’t see the Giants passing on QB they like at 6 to move up again to 9 to take him.. take him at 6 then keep your other assets..

 

Raiders could be a chance though as they can take Williams or Allen at  4... then move up and perhaps offload Carr to another team for a pick..

 

If this is the case then the Raiders can hand over 24,27,35 for 9, 74.112.. there is your 20% premium..

 

The Bills are moving a long way down and need to be appropriately incentivised..

 

I agree.  Last year the Bills lost in the point chart 1910 to 1500 to move up for Josh Allen so there's your approximate 20% premium.  Same thing with the Jets gave up 2,956 points for 2,200 points just to move up three spots with the Colts for Darnold.  It's the price you pay for a quarterback.

 

Other possible trade partners that might want to leapfrog the Broncos are the Bengals (pick 11) and Redskins (pick 15).  We could still get our coveted player and pick up some more draft capital.

 

[BillsFan1988]

25 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

I agree.  Last year the Bills lost in the point chart 1910 to 1500 to move up for Josh Allen so there's your approximate 20% premium.  Same thing with the Jets gave up 2,956 points for 2,200 points just to move up three spots with the Colts for Darnold.  It's the price you pay for a quarterback.

 

Other possible trade partners that might want to leapfrog the Broncos are the Bengals (pick 11) and Redskins (pick 15).  We could still get our coveted player and pick up some more draft capital.

 

The Raiders pks

#24  - 740

#27 - 680

#35  - 550

=        1970 

 

Bills =1350 

 

So 670 pt difference , that's the deal we should get from them.  Maybe kick bk a 4th for good measure 

 

#24 - TE Fant

#27 - DT Tillery

#35- OT Risner

#40 - DE Winovich

#74- Isabella 

 

Luck Charms Scenario

#24 DE Brian Burns 

#27 TE Noah Fant 

#35 DT Jeffery Simmons

#40  OT/G Dalton Risner

#74 Wr Andy Isabella 

Edited April 7, 2019 by BillsFan1988

[cage]

5 hours ago, Buffalo Barbarian said:

I want more. I dont buy into the draft values , need to capitalize on their desperation. Dont want to give them any our latter picks, unless its real late.

 

 

 

I was actually going to disagree with you, but then looked at the value chart for the Bills 2 first round trade-ups last year.  In the Allen trade they moved from 12 up to 7 and gave up to 2nds.  Per the chart, one of the 2nds should have been enough.  Then in the Edmunds trade they moved from 22 up to 16 for first pick of 3rd round and a 5th.  The 3rd by itself should have been enough for that trade.  So we paid a premium in both trade-ups even as they were down in the area of #16 pick.... I'll bump you a beer on your post!

Edited April 7, 2019 by cage

[ganesh]

4 hours ago, Estro said:

It doesn't have to be and you're right about the Bills massively overpaying last year.  By the standard of the draft value chart they got fleeced.  The Bills overpayed by 410 points, which is the equivalent of the 49th pick in the draft, a premium pick.  In order to get a massive overpay you have to have to teams bidding for the same spot, which apparently happened last year as it was widely reported the Cardinals coveted Josh Allen and were "heartbroken" via Chris Simms when they lost out to the Bills in their attempt to trade up for him........maybe the same thing can happen for the Bills this year at the #9 spot.

Who cares.  The picks made at 53 (Tampa Bay) and 56 (New England) are not even starting for their teams.

[BuffAlone]

5 hours ago, Just Joshin' said:

Why can't Buffalo have a premium player?  If there is a difference maker, take him.

 

You are not getting enough in those trades - ditch the chart.

I tend to agree about the premium player/ difference maker. The art of the draft however places the onus on GM/ scouts to do their jobs, and great ones do it well. For example....I would whole heartedly consider Tre White a premium difference maker that 26 teams did not realize, or did not value. So I'm gonna trust them to get it right once again, because I believe we have a bright, up n coming staff who are good at their jobs. Food for thought.....

[Forward Progress]

5 hours ago, Buffalo Barbarian said:

I want more. I dont buy into the draft values , need to capitalize on their desperation. Dont want to give them any our latter picks, unless its real late.

 

 

 

I want more too, but it always comes down to supply and demand. Detroit (picking at #8) has publicly stated that they are open to trading back in the draft. Assuming this is true, teams who want to trade up have at least two teams willing to trade back, which will reduce the compensation for the trade.

[Max Fischer]

The question is, who are the Giants, Raiders or anyone else trading up to get, and why wouldn’t the Bills select that player.  Moreover, who the Bills get? That’s the whole premise for the trade. Tell me that and I’ll give an opinion whether it’s worth doing.  In other words, I don’t want to miss out on a prime player just to get more picks. 

[Zerovoltz]

I read the leaves differently.  This draft, being deep on defense, isn’t going to have any teams trying to move up early.  Couple that with my opinion that outside of Kyler Murray ( who I love) this QB class is garbage.  I predict no trade up for QB in round one.

 

that said, I believe the Bills stay at 9 and take something on offense, and I’ll go further and say that you go Hockenson at TE.

 

Get Allen every possible weapon you can in the arsenal.  Tyler Kroft is not a weapon.  

 

 

[DCbillsfan]

The Bills will likely have a possible trade in place but if a guy they like is there at 9, they'll take that player.  Reminds me of Denver's situation last year.  Chubb was there at 5 so they canceled trade with Bills.

[Chuck Wagon]

I'm not moving down past 20 without a next year 1st attached.

[nucci]

Can we please stop referencing that trade chart? It has no meaning at all.....you trade a draft pick based on the player you want.  Do you really think GMs make trades based on it?

[YodaMan79]

1 hour ago, cage said:

 

I was actually going to disagree with you, but then looked at the value chart for the Bills 2 first round trade-ups last year.  In the Allen trade they moved from 12 up to 7 and gave up to 2nds.  Per the chart, one of the 2nds should have been enough.  Then in the Edmunds trade they moved from 22 up to 16 for first pick of 3rd round and a 5th.  The 3rd by itself should have been enough for that trade.  So we paid a premium in both trade-ups even as they were down in the area of #16 pick.... I'll bump you a beer on your post!

 

I like this post.  Throw the chart out, extract what you can if others want your spot.  The picks are worth what others are willing to part with, not what an antiquated spread sheet says.  I'm also a proponent of drafting the BPA at 9.  Who knows when they'll have a pick this high again?  I hope they'er not drafting this high for a long time.  

[Watkins101]

Why would the giants/raiders be desperate to trade up with us? They each have a pick a few rounds before us.

[Brianmoorman4jesus]

I’m actually starting to think the bills trade up with the giants and get a top player. Maybe the Giants go from 6 to 9 and the Bills get someone they really want. This team is almost literally full roster wise. I don’t see trading down. I feel like we are fixing all the leaks before draft night, so we can go for broke and move up. Could be wrong but I have been thinking a trade with the Giants. For 6 though, not 17.

[thebandit27]

I don't mean to blast the OP here...

 

The team already has 10 picks

They aren't devoid of the on-the-roster, role-player types that are found on days 2 and 3

The team lacks genuine studs at nearly all positions 

Free agency has brought a LOT of depth at the 2/3 spots at most positions 

 

All of the above indicate that they should trade UP, not down.

 

Accumulating picks can be a useful tool if a team needs to change culture and/or strengthen their depth. This team needs a few studs that other teams are forced to game plan around.

 

I would MUCH rather see them use their top 10 pick on a stud pass rusher (either at DT or EDGE) and then package day 2/3 picks and move back into round 1 for another stud at either WR, CB, DL, or LT.

[nucci]

3 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

I don't mean to blast the OP here...

 

The team already has 10 picks

They aren't devoid of the on-the-roster, role-player types that are found on days 2 and 3

The team lacks genuine studs at nearly all positions 

Free agency has brought a LOT of depth at the 2/3 spots at most positions 

 

All of the above indicate that they should trade UP, not down.

 

Accumulating picks can be a useful tool if a team needs to change culture and/or strengthen their depth. This team needs a few studs that other teams are forced to game plan around.

 

I would MUCH rather see them use their top 10 pick on a stud pass rusher (either at DT or EDGE) and then package day 2/3 picks and move back into round 1 for another stud at either WR, CB, DL, or LT.

I concur and you get them in 1st 2 rounds.....I can see picking at 9 and moving back in to 1st round as well

[mikemac2001]

Any trade down scenario I want a First next year on top of there first this year helps build the pipeline 

 

also it gives us us a chance for a top 5 pick if it’s the raiders or giants 

[Mark92]

We overpaid for the right to move up to #7 last year as did the Jets to move up to #3.  I would not be happy with losing #9 for #24 and #27.  Offer me a second also then we will talk.  I really think teams will be knocking on Beans door draft night.  There are 3-4 teams with picks between 10-15 I could see knocking.  

[Juice_32]

3 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I agree.  Last year the Bills lost in the point chart 1910 to 1500 to move up for Josh Allen so there's your approximate 20% premium.  Same thing with the Jets gave up 2,956 points for 2,200 points just to move up three spots with the Colts for Darnold.  It's the price you pay for a quarterback.

 

Other possible trade partners that might want to leapfrog the Broncos are the Bengals (pick 11) and Redskins (pick 15).  We could still get our coveted player and pick up some more draft capital.

 

I agree on Washington being a possible trade partner. Atlanta and Carolina could be as well. I am good with a trade back as long as it’s still top 20 and we get another 2nd. Now, if Q. Williams or J. Allen fall to 9, you have to keep it.

 

At some point though the actual amount of picks becomes as issue. I’d like to see Beane use the 2 7ths to move up for targeted guys in the 4th/5th.

 

Considering all the FAs we brought in, I don’t see a point in making more than 8 picks. 

[JaCrispy]

7 hours ago, Buffalo Barbarian said:

I want more. I dont buy into the draft values , need to capitalize on their desperation. Dont want to give them any our latter picks, unless its real late.

 

 

This is a good point, and normally if a team wants to trade up for a QB you can usually milk a little more out of them

[Dopey]

18 minutes ago, Mark92 said:

We overpaid for the right to move up to #7 last year as did the Jets to move up to #3.  I would not be happy with losing #9 for #24 and #27.  Offer me a second also then we will talk.  I really think teams will be knocking on Beans door draft night.  There are 3-4 teams with picks between 10-15 I could see knocking.  

I like that you mentioned picks 10-15. So, if Denver gets nervous and calls us, what would it take for us to move down 1 spot? Is a 3rd asking too much? If not a 3rd, how about a 4th and 5th?

[Foxx]

as has been pointed out, a trade up is more likely than a trade back. we signed what... 15 FA's and have 10 draft picks in the upcoming draft. if it does turn out we trade back, i want high draft picks for next years draft. trading up to get Quinnen Williams would be my ideal, pressure up the middle is how you wreck offensive plans.  then perhaps trade back into the late first to grab N'Keal Harry or maybe a OT.

Edited April 7, 2019 by Foxx

[Bill from NYC]

16 hours ago, Buffalo Barbarian said:

 

Maybe not for two spots but i dont want to drop way back in the first like we did for White.

 

But anything past 14 i want your second.

 

 

But for fun lets see what we can get with these trades.

Giants

17 WR Hakeem Butler 66, 205

37 DE Oshane Ximines 63, 253

40 DT Jeffery Simmons 64, 300

95 RB Elijah Holyfield

 

Raiders

24 TE Noah Fant 64, 249

27 DT Dexter Lawrence 64, 342

40 WR JJ Arcega Whiteside 62, 222

74 DE Chase Winovich 62, 256

 

I think im going with the raiders.

 

I would welcome a trade down that focuses on the Bills getting and extra 1st round pick in 2020.

 

BB, imo the 2020 draft could put this team over the top if it isn't bungled.

Edited April 7, 2019 by Bill from NYC

[dlonce]

People continue ignoring the facts here because they are from the trade down at all costs mindset.

 

The Bills WILL NOT trade down, if anything they trade up to utilize their draft capital and get a better player.

Teams with 10 draft picks, and multiple free agent signings don’t waste their draft. 

 

Repeat, there will be no trading down,especially in round one.

[Aussie Joe]

5 minutes ago, dlonce said:

 

Repeat, there will be no trading down,especially in round one.

 

They could trade down to the mid teens and then trade back into the first...

 

 

Edited April 7, 2019 by Aussie Joe

[Rubes]

2 hours ago, thebandit27 said:

I don't mean to blast the OP here...

 

The team already has 10 picks

They aren't devoid of the on-the-roster, role-player types that are found on days 2 and 3

The team lacks genuine studs at nearly all positions 

Free agency has brought a LOT of depth at the 2/3 spots at most positions 

 

All of the above indicate that they should trade UP, not down.

 

Accumulating picks can be a useful tool if a team needs to change culture and/or strengthen their depth. This team needs a few studs that other teams are forced to game plan around.

 

I would MUCH rather see them use their top 10 pick on a stud pass rusher (either at DT or EDGE) and then package day 2/3 picks and move back into round 1 for another stud at either WR, CB, DL, or LT.

 

This is much more likely to happen, in my opinion. I would prefer to see them stay at 9 and move back up into round 1 or 2.

 

[boater]

Trading away the chance to select an Avalon--for only a Camry and Corolla in return.