SoonerBillsFan Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 3 minutes ago, mannc said: Have we decided if it’s better or worse to have a first round pick (along with the 5th year option) vs an early second? That is something Beane has to consider. Good point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 19 hours ago, billieve420 said: I am leaning more and more that the Bills should try to trade back into the early 2nd and get back a 3rd rounder. Draft a boundary guy like Legette or roll the dice on a guy like Worthy and grab Tez Walker later. Same here. If we could add a 3rd and still land Mcconkey, Legette, Mitchell, Franklin or worthy I’d be happy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 20 minutes ago, SoonerBillsFan said: I got to thinking about that. We would have to toss in some lower picks, but it would be worth it. If not, I think Washington as 2 picks in both the 2nd and 3rd rounds. Going by the JJ chart we’d have to throw in every day 3 pick we have (except our 7th rounder) to make up the difference. Carolina would not do that. The Bills wouldn’t want to either. Washington could be a reasonable trade partner. Something like 28 and 128 for 40 and 78 makes sense. Trade value chart 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 47 minutes ago, BarleyNY said: I’m betting that doesn’t happen. It would be a massive overpay by Carolina. A move from 33 to 28 would be worth less than their fourth round pick at 101. Yea it'd likely be #28 for #33 and #101 (a small but pretty normal overpay) and if needed to get it over the line the Bills would throw in maybe #204 or something. Then from there the Bills could get up into the range of our original 3rd (i.e. bottom of the round) by using #101 and their first of three 5ths.... #144. Not saying that trade will happen but if it does that is the value and the way Beane could manufacture a 3rd rounder. 6 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Process Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 8 hours ago, Sweats said: The more i think about it, i think we should just let the board fall to us or even trade back, get a couple extra picks and make a splash in the 2nd and 3rd (if we end up getting a 3rd round pick with trades). I am warming up to this as well. Either a huge move to get one of the top 3, or trade back. There are so many good WRs in this draft, really good prospects are going to end up falling to early-mid second round. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f0neguy Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 If a receiver the Bills like is available at 28 I hope they just take him. Don’t move down a few spots to pick up another draft pick. Beane and his scouts have these guys in a particular order. Don’t overthink this, take the best receiver and get ready for day two… 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beck Water Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 20 hours ago, Dr. Who said: Some folks have written extensively pro and con. I can't do them justice briefly. Since I am in the opposition to Coleman, at least at #28, the case against is that historically, WRs with 4.6 forty times have a low rate of success. He doesn't give you explosiveness or separation. He wins contested balls, and he may have a harder time doing that in the pros when the dbs are bigger and faster. Those who like him think he would thrive with Allen, and like that he can bulldoze players on the other side of the ball. We don't have that now, unless Shorter emerges as a player, I guess. Some analyses suggest that players with his size and relative lack of speed may do well as a big slot, but I don't want a WR that needs to take snaps from Kincaid to be successful. Overall, I prefer Legette if we don't make an expensive play for a big 3 WR or Thomas. I also prefer Mitchell, even though he probably has as many detractors as those who don't want Coleman. And naturally, if we do take him, I hope he will be a smashing success. Thank you very much, this is exactly the high-level summary I was looking for. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roundybout Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 Dammit Von now it’s never going to happen. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warriorspikes51 Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Roundybout said: Dammit Von now it’s never going to happen. Could a trade for #4 happen before the draft? None of the top 3 teams are going to trade down and give up their QB…right? Edited April 13 by Warriorspikes51 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Stampede Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 35 minutes ago, Roundybout said: Dammit Von now it’s never going to happen. It’s over. We’ve been mushed. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonzo1105 Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 1 hour ago, Roundybout said: Dammit Von now it’s never going to happen. Well there you have it folks, we are def not trading up for a WR because Von Miller has never been right about anything Bills personnel wise. 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Noggin Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 7 hours ago, Process said: I am warming up to this as well. Either a huge move to get one of the top 3, or trade back. There are so many good WRs in this draft, really good prospects are going to end up falling to early-mid second round. Love this as SOP for the draft on a continuing basis. Once you've got a franchise QB in place you need to maximize the draft return each year to ensure ongoing cap health and position group pipelines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solomon Grundy Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 On 4/11/2024 at 10:29 PM, Dr. Who said: Some folks have written extensively pro and con. I can't do them justice briefly. Since I am in the opposition to Coleman, at least at #28, the case against is that historically, WRs with 4.6 forty times have a low rate of success. He doesn't give you explosiveness or separation. He wins contested balls, and he may have a harder time doing that in the pros when the dbs are bigger and faster. Those who like him think he would thrive with Allen, and like that he can bulldoze players on the other side of the ball. We don't have that now, unless Shorter emerges as a player, I guess. Some analyses suggest that players with his size and relative lack of speed may do well as a big slot, but I don't want a WR that needs to take snaps from Kincaid to be successful. Overall, I prefer Legette if we don't make an expensive play for a big 3 WR or Thomas. I also prefer Mitchell, even though he probably has as many detractors as those who don't want Coleman. And naturally, if we do take him, I hope he will be a smashing success. Why can't Kincaid play the TE position? Because they have to make room for an overpaid Dalton Knox? Wouldn't Kincaid be more potent there allowing Coleman to play the big slot? Didn't Coleman run one of the fastest 10 yard splits at the combine? Do that equate to explosiveness off the line of scrimmage? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 24 minutes ago, Solomon Grundy said: Why can't Kincaid play the TE position? Because they have to make room for an overpaid Dalton Knox? No. Because he isn't much of a blocker. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonzo1105 Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: No. Because he isn't much of a blocker. For a guy who couldn’t block they sure lined him up a lot in the traditional Y position last year which really surprised me. I expected him to play a lot more F than he did in actuality. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 26 minutes ago, gonzo1105 said: For a guy who couldn’t block they sure lined him up a lot in the traditional Y position last year which really surprised me. I expected him to play a lot more F than he did in actuality. And in fairness he didn't totally suck at it. Although think the usage was influenced by Knox missing time. It is a decision for them this year though. Because I think Josh looks better with us in pure 11. I would expect other than in the redzone where Knox is very good they dial the 12 back somewhat this year. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonzo1105 Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 12 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: And in fairness he didn't totally suck at it. Although think the usage was influenced by Knox missing time. It is a decision for them this year though. Because I think Josh looks better with us in pure 11. I would expect other than in the redzone where Knox is very good they dial the 12 back somewhat this year. I agree and I 100% think we are going to take a blocking TE somewhere in the mid rounds so we can keep Kincaid flexed if Knox gets injured or cut after this season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Who Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 2 hours ago, Solomon Grundy said: Why can't Kincaid play the TE position? Because they have to make room for an overpaid Dalton Knox? Wouldn't Kincaid be more potent there allowing Coleman to play the big slot? Didn't Coleman run one of the fastest 10 yard splits at the combine? Do that equate to explosiveness off the line of scrimmage? Others answered. It's fine if you like Coleman. He's not my choice. I don't care what Knox is paid. He's a decent TE when healthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddaryl Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 21 hours ago, mannc said: Have we decided if it’s better or worse to have a first round pick (along with the 5th year option) vs an early second? I like the 5th year OPTION. The key word here is option Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bills!Win! Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 Is there a reason why we wouldn’t want MHJ? The guy will be as good as dad with JA17 throwing to him. It seems like most of you want a bunch of picks that aren’t likely to turn into anything when you could have this guy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.