Who Should the Bills take at #28 (TSW Mock 2.0 2024) *Mitchell has been removed please revote!

[HappyDays]

1 hour ago, Logic said:

If the Visits list and the recent Tweets by ECB are to be believed...

The Bills have done the most work (wide receiver wise) on McConkey, Worthy, Franklin, and Pearsall.

I notice a common them there: lighter, faster guys and route technician types. Following in the footsteps of John Brown, Emmanuel Sanders, and Stefon Diggs.

Just thought it was interesting, and y'all can take it with as big a grain of salt as you like.

 

 

Beane has always gone physical traits in the 1st round. I'm probably projecting my own desires here but I think his plan might be to trade up in the 2nd (using the 2025 2nd we received in the Diggs trade) to take one of those route technician types, which would explain why he's meeting with all of them. I would bet 1st round will be Legette, Coleman, or Worthy. Allen has never had a physical stud on the field with him. I think Beane will try to correct that.

[nosejob]

2 hours ago, Chuck Schick said:

I am really coming around to McConkey.  Allen often talks about how so much of his game is based on being on the same page with his receiver, almost by feel as opposed to rigid timing and routes.  Of all the prospects, I can picture Allen maximizing that with McConkey compared to the others.

True, but I'd rather get the size and speed while the gettings there. I would love if they could land both, but if not, give me Legette and Pearsall.

[dave mcbride]

5 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Beane has always gone physical traits in the 1st round. I'm probably projecting my own desires here but I think his plan might be to trade up in the 2nd (using the 2025 2nd we received in the Diggs trade) to take one of those route technician types, which would explain why he's meeting with all of them. I would bet 1st round will be Legette, Coleman, or Worthy. Allen has never had a physical stud on the field with him. I think Beane will try to correct that.

I guess I would trade back (out of the first) at this point. Regarding trading that 2025 second rounder, I'm looking at this - https://walterfootball.com/draft2025charlie.php - and noticing a lot of pass rushing talent going early. I could see the Bills being all in on that position come 2025 and will want the draft capital to move up. They'll need to replace Von Miller.

Edited April 12 by dave mcbride

[Virgil]

@section122
 

I forgot to mention, we can’t draft the same player twice.   Can you please remove AD Mitchell?   
 

We already know that’s the preferred pick, so this is meant to be what our second option would be.  
 

My apologies for not mentioning that sooner 

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

 

I just can't get excited about a route running specialist in the 1st round. Diggs was the best route runner in the NFL for three seasons. It was great in the regular season, but as we saw in the playoffs that skill set can be erased by physical DBs. The 1st round should be about physical traits.

This is why I think the Bills like Franklin from Oregon. His tape looks fairly similar to Diggs IMO

2 hours ago, boyst said:

If @Virgilcan package those two Carolina picks in the 2nd for our third and first I think it is worth it. That 5th year option for Carolina is important, especially if you want a QB this year. The problem is there isn't a good QB for you... so... hmm.

 

@Alphadawg7 the 1st for our first does not get us in the second. we need youth now.

 

 

The players Carolina wanted are gone.  We tried to trade up, but were denied.  At this point, we’d have only cared to get a 5th year option on a QB, but they are all gone too 

[section122]

22 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

Trade back 5 picks and get a 3rd and then use the 3rd to trade up from 60 to around 35 and get 2 of those guys

 

This isn't realistic.  Going back 5 spots nets you an early 4th rounder.  The first realistic chance to get a 3rd rounder is dropping to 36 and getting the literal last pick in the 3rd (100).  You could also do 40 and 78 for 28 and 133 but that is a large drop back.

[OldTimer1960]

I voted trade down if possible.  There are still a number of WR left and most could help the Bills if they pan out.  I don’t know that I’d be tempted by Nate Wiggins, but I would have had to think hard if Verse, Latu or even Robinson is left.

[section122]

6 minutes ago, Virgil said:

@section122
 

I forgot to mention, we can’t draft the same player twice.   Can you please remove AD Mitchell?   
 

We already know that’s the preferred pick, so this is meant to be what our second option would be.  
 

My apologies for not mentioning that sooner 

This is why I think the Bills like Franklin from Oregon. His tape looks fairly similar to Diggs IMO

The players Carolina wanted are gone.  We tried to trade up, but were denied.  At this point, we’d have only cared to get a 5th year option on a QB, but they are all gone too 

 

I took him out and added some people back in just in case people didn't want to vote for Legette.  It was a pretty tight race between them this time and last time though so I don't think too many people will end up caring about the minor mix up.

[Mat68]

Worthy.  Trade up from 128 to 80’s 90’s for Burton.  Go Dline at 60.    

[Brandon]

McConkey would be my choice and I think is my WR #5 in this draft.

 

Legette, Worthy and Franklin are about even with each other,  but slightly below him.

[schoolhouserock]

A trade down is so enticing here, but I voted Legette because I didn’t want to get too cute and miss out on him.

[LabattBlue]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I voted Legette. McConkey and Worthy were also to be considered. A trade back getting 2 would be ideal. 

I would love this scenario.  

[OldTimer1960]

22 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I guess I would trade back (out of the first) at this point. Regarding trading that 2025 second rounder, I'm looking at this - https://walterfootball.com/draft2025charlie.php - and noticing a lot of pass rushing talent going early. I could see the Bills being all in on that position come 2025 and will want the draft capital to move up. They'll need to replace Von Miller.

I would not want to trade next year’s picks this year.  Going in, you are accepting $0.50 on the dollar when you do that.  The 2025 picks are worth a round more next year than they are this year.

[Brandon]

1 hour ago, Logic said:

If the Visits list and the recent Tweets by ECB are to be believed...

The Bills have done the most work (wide receiver wise) on McConkey, Worthy, Franklin, and Pearsall.

I notice a common them there: lighter, faster guys and route technician types. Following in the footsteps of John Brown, Emmanuel Sanders, and Stefon Diggs.

Just thought it was interesting, and y'all can take it with as big a grain of salt as you like.

 

 

Yeah, looking at the list of visits and interviews for the Bills, I had also noticed that as a common theme.  They also apparently had interest in Addison last year who also seems to fit that type.  And we also know how they'd really been trying hard to acquire Emmanuel Sanders for awhile before they actually did it. Given that, I went with McConkey here. Seems like the the best all around guy of the group to me.  

 

The one outlier I included is Legette and while he's not similar to that group as a technical route runner etc, I do think the Bills would be interested.

Edited April 12 by Brandon

[KDIGGZ]

18 minutes ago, section122 said:

 

This isn't realistic.  Going back 5 spots nets you an early 4th rounder.  The first realistic chance to get a 3rd rounder is dropping to 36 and getting the literal last pick in the 3rd (100).  You could also do 40 and 78 for 28 and 133 but that is a large drop back.

If it's for a QB then throw out your sheet. If Penix or Nix are there someone will want to get them in round 1 to get the 5th year option 

[Logic]

9 minutes ago, Brandon said:

 

Yeah, looking at the list of visits and interviews for the Bills, I had also noticed that as a common theme.  They also apparently had interest in Addison last year who also seems to fit that type.  And we also know how they'd really been trying hard to acquire Emmanuel Sanders for awhile before they actually did it. Given that, I went with McConkey here. Seems like the the best all around guy of the group to me.  

 

The one outlier I included is Legette and while he's not similar to that group as a technical route runner etc, I do think the Bills would be interested.

It makes sense to me.

Unless they suddenly change their WR archetype, I think they'll continue to go after the quick route technician types, which makes sense, because Allen has generally thrived with them. Conversely, whenever he's had a stiffer, big-bodied guy -- and granted, the sample size is small, with only Gabe Davis and the ghost of Kelvin Benjamin coming to mind -- he hasn't had as consistently successful of a connection.

It also makes sense from a yards-after-catch standpoint. I think they want guys who can gain clear separation, and then do damage after the catch. If that's a correct assumption, then McConkey, Worthy, Franklin, and Legette (and Nabers, but they likely can't get up high enough to get him) all make sense.

[nosejob]

32 minutes ago, OldTimer1960 said:

I would not want to trade next year’s picks this year.  Going in, you are accepting $0.50 on the dollar when you do that.  The 2025 picks are worth a round more next year than they are this year.

2025 Picks be damned. We need pieces in place this year and it just so happens to be a good year to do it.

 

For example: If somehow Murphy or Latu make it to 24, IDK if I can pass that, so that means throwing a 2025 1st, 26-32 pick and a 2nd in that area to get right back in the game. I'd turn that 1st into a 2nd and 3rd and that 2nd for a 3rd.

 

I'm not worried. We can get a WR at 28  then whatever at 60 and sit on our thumbs for 68 more picks. Does anyone really think that's what will happen?

Beane's gonna have an amazing draft!

[section122]

33 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

If it's for a QB then throw out your sheet. If Penix or Nix are there someone will want to get them in round 1 to get the 5th year option 

 

While I agree you throw out the sheet, I still think it is a difficult proposition. 

 

Drafting after the Bills are the Lions, Ravens, Chiefs, 49ers, and Panthers.  All are set at QB.  Then you have NE (likely drafting one in the top 3 and if not are you going to help a division rival?), Cardinals (set), Commanders (def taking one at 2), Chargers (set), Titans (first maybe but very doubtful after they took Levis last year), Panthers again, Commanders again, and Packers.  

 

Just looking at the 2nd round, the first team that might think about QB is the Falcons at 43 (invested in Cousins or the Raiders at 44 (if they didn't take one of the 2nd tier guys in the first).

 

I still think your original premise of just trade back 5 spots for an extra 3rd is flawed at best if not a pie in the sky dream.

 

 

[MrEpsYtown]

Di everybody who voted for AD Mitchell re-vote? 

[2003Contenders]

Given that there are 3-4 receivers on the board that are pretty closely rated, I voted to trade down. Ideally, that would mean moving into the top part of the 2nd round (where at least one of those receivers will still be available) -- and hopefully picking up a 3rd rounder for the trouble.

 

Obviously, we would have to find a serious trading partner.

[TOboy]

Without AD i switched to trade down, hopefully only 5-10 spots to grab one of the next tier of receivers and add ammo to get back into the 3rd.

[2003Contenders]

1 hour ago, section122 said:

 

This isn't realistic.  Going back 5 spots nets you an early 4th rounder.  The first realistic chance to get a 3rd rounder is dropping to 36 and getting the literal last pick in the 3rd (100).  You could also do 40 and 78 for 28 and 133 but that is a large drop back.

With all the picks the Bills have on Day 3, maybe they can package one or more of them in the hypothetical trade to make it more reasonable/enticing.

[mrags]

I voted trade back because Mitchell was gone. Don’t believe any of the others is worth it there. But do we have a specific trade back option? Who is offering us their picks and what are the offers? Because I wouldn’t want to trade back to the 50s for an extra 3rd rounder. It’s need to know info 

[OldTimer1960]

41 minutes ago, nosejob said:

2025 Picks be damned. We need pieces in place this year and it just so happens to be a good year to do it.

 

For example: If somehow Murphy or Latu make it to 24, IDK if I can pass that, so that means throwing a 2025 1st, 26-32 pick and a 2nd in that area to get right back in the game. I'd turn that 1st into a 2nd and 3rd and that 2nd for a 3rd.

 

I'm not worried. We can get a WR at 28  then whatever at 60 and sit on our thumbs for 68 more picks. Does anyone really think that's what will happen?

Beane's gonna have an amazing draft!

Looking at the roster, this team, in my opinion, needs a lot more than 2 WR and they are not going to address those gaps in one offseason.  Nobody wants to admit that this team probably will not be as good as it has been the last few years.

 

I think that the front office saw that as an opportunity to do a mini-rebuild, especially on defense.  They have seemingly improved their cap situation going forward in the process.

 

i know that I am in the minority of fans, but I am fine with that approach.  But, if we recognize that is what is going on and that they need at least 1 starting WR and another young one, a pass rusher to replace Von Miller, another starter at CB for after 30 y.o. Douglas is done and hopefully 2 better safeties than they have now, then it lessens the urgency to get both WR this year.  
 

Keep next year’s picks and use them when they have full value unless there is an opportunity to get a definite star in a trade up.  35 years of following the draft tells me that none of these prospects are absolutely sure things, so I don’t think giving up future picks at less than face value is wise in most circumstances.

 

To your last point, I think they will try to use their excess 4th, 5th and 6th picks to make small moves up.

Edited April 12 by OldTimer1960

[Alphadawg7]

Have I missed something?  Why was Mitchell removed?  Did something happen that takes him off the board as an option?

[boyst]

Just now, Alphadawg7 said:

Have I missed something?  Why was Mitchell removed?  Did something happen that takes him off the board as an option?

the rules are we can't draft the same player twice.

[Virgil]

7 minutes ago, OldTimer1960 said:

Looking at the roster, this team, in my opinion, needs a lot more than 2 WR and they are not going to address those gaps in one offseason.  Nobody wants to admit that this team probably will not be as good as it has been the last few years.

 

I think that the front office saw that as an opportunity to do a mini-rebuild, especially on defense.  They have seemingly improved their cap situation going forward in the process.

 

i know that I am in the minority of fans, but I am fine with that approach.  But, if we recognize that is what is going on and that they need at least 1 starting WR and another young one, a pass rusher to replace Von Miller, another starter at CB for after 30 y.o. Douglas is done and hopefully 2 better safeties than they have now, then it lessens the urgency to get both WR this year.  
 

Keep next year’s picks and use them when they have full value unless there is an opportunity to get a definite star in a trade up.  35 years of following the draft tells me that none of these prospects are absolutely sure things, so I don’t think giving up future picks at less than face value is wise in most circumstances.

 

To your last point, I think they will try to use their excess 4th, 5th and 6th picks to make small moves up.

 

I agree that we may not be as good as last offseason, but I also think most teams took a step back and the playing field will be level.  

 

What's tough for me is there's not a lot of good value between picks 20-60.  So you are either going to reach, or lose to teams who reached.   

[Alphadawg7]

Just now, boyst said:

the rules are we can't draft the same player twice.

 

Ah...gotcha, thanks

[Virgil]

4 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Have I missed something?  Why was Mitchell removed?  Did something happen that takes him off the board as an option?

 

Every year, I stick to the rule that we can't draft the same person twice.  As of right now, we know that Mitchell is who we would take.  Now we are seeing what plan B would become.  

 

 

I've also decided we are going to end up in an Elam/Benford situation.

We will draft a WR high, but our 6th round receiver will end up being the man

Edited April 12 by Virgil

[OldTimer1960]

4 minutes ago, Virgil said:

 

I agree that we may not be as good as last offseason, but I also think most teams took a step back and the playing field will be level.  

 

What's tough for me is there's not a lot of good value between picks 20-60.  So you are either going to reach, or lose to teams who reached.   

Agree - for me, I would take the best BPA at WR, DE, DT, CB in round 1 (or after trade down), then repeat the rest of the way while expanding the positions to choose from as it gets later in the draft.  Smaller trade ups using later picks to nail guys they like, if there are any that late.

 

I could possibly see them being in the race for division or wild card this year, but I don’t think they are really challenging for the Super Bowl this season.  So, no need to stress about filling one specific need.

Edited April 12 by OldTimer1960

[Alphadawg7]

Legette is going to go later than people think, I would not take him here.  He could reach us at 60, his average WR draft ranking is 12th for a reason.  At the very least, if he is our guy, trade back and get him and pick up a 3rd along the way.  28 would be a reach banking on high ceiling and gambling on the low floor he has.  I love his potential, and I am all for getting him in the 2nd, but 28 is early.  

 

With Mitchell no longer an option, I voted trade back, in which I would be fine taking Legette on the trade back pick. 

 

 

[Big Blitz]

I voted trade back - I’d see what the Eagles and Commanders want to do.   

I would not want to trade back later than 40.  

[mrags]

Just now, Big Blitz said:

I voted trade back - I’d see what the Eagles and Commanders want to do.   

I would not want to trade back later than 40.  

I think this is where I’m at. Not later than 40. 

[section122]

Poll has been pared down to a group of 5.

 

Have there been any serious trade up offers?

 

[gonzo1105]

11 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Legette is going to go later than people think, I would not take him here.  He could reach us at 60, his average WR draft ranking is 12th for a reason.  At the very least, if he is our guy, trade back and get him and pick up a 3rd along the way.  28 would be a reach banking on high ceiling and gambling on the low floor he has.  I love his potential, and I am all for getting him in the 2nd, but 28 is early.  

 

With Mitchell no longer an option, I voted trade back, in which I would be fine taking Legette on the trade back pick. 

 

 

I think he’s going to go somewhere between 40-50 myself. I took him in the last mock because I wanted a high upside guy to go with Harrison or I would have gone McConkey 

[Virgil]

3 minutes ago, section122 said:

Poll has been pared down to a group of 5.

 

Have there been any serious trade up offers?

 

 

We have one trade back offer with the Packers: 

 

Green Bay would do 41 (490) and 58 (320) and 88 (150) for 28 (660) 60 (320) 

4 minutes ago, section122 said:

Poll has been pared down to a group of 5.

 

Have there been any serious trade up offers?

 

 

You good with closing the poll at 3p est?  I think we have enough information

[Big Blitz]

Just ran a PFF sim.  The Bills took Mitchell at 28

 

 

WRs available at pick 40

 

Ladd

Wilson

Pearsall

Burton

Keon

Polk

McMillan 

Walker

Baker

Thrash

Corley 

 

 

 

 

[mrags]

12 minutes ago, Virgil said:

 

We have one trade back offer with the Packers: 

 

Green Bay would do 41 (490) and 58 (320) and 88 (150) for 28 (660) 60 (320) 

 

You good with closing the poll at 3p est?  I think we have enough information

Prolly doing this 100% 

[NeverOutNick]

I’m confused. Did Mitchell get taken before our pick?

Edited April 12 by NeverOutNick

[Virgil]

2 minutes ago, NeverOutNick said:

I’m confused. Did Mitchell get taken before our pick?

 

He was selected in Mock 1.0, so he's not an option to select him again.  We know he would be our choice, so this is Plan B

[NeverOutNick]

34 minutes ago, Virgil said:

 

Every year, I stick to the rule that we can't draft the same person twice.  As of right now, we know that Mitchell is who we would take.  Now we are seeing what plan B would become.  

 

 

I've also decided we are going to end up in an Elam/Benford situation.

We will draft a WR high, but our 6th round receiver will end up being the man

Ok I get it now 

 

personally in this epic WR class I’m going to that well 3 times. I’d go day 1, day 2 and day 3 because it’s such a deep and awesome class and it’s the position we need most. And lastly it’s the position outside of OT or pass rusher that costs the most to find really good Free agents so might as well just get cheap beasts in the draft 

1 minute ago, Virgil said:

 

He was selected in Mock 1.0, so he's not an option to select him again.  We know he would be our choice, so this is Plan B

I would’ve taken Franklin but since he has no chance I’ll go trade back and double dip at WR with 2 of our 3 second rounders