RuntheDamnBall Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Tough to give you exact answers CVM, because I would have to judge any random offer by what the other team is willing to give up. Imo, trading down is one of the few ways that small franchises can stick it to the rich ones. I would NOT go down to 14 for a mere 2nd, and I don't give a crap about the "chart" in that sense. A 2nd, plus a 2nd or 3rd in 07, and then we can talk. If not, I would rather stay put. Jmo. 669769[/snapback] And the trade down would be best accomplished when we see what the cards are -- if Vince Young or Davis or somebody coveted shows up at #8, we can likely drive up the value more than just an extra #2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnakeOiler Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 trade value chart: http://www.theredzone.org/2005/draft/draftvaluechart.asp for the 8th pick, you could get 2 1st round picks (21 + 31)....of course u need a dancing partner. If u are able to move to 15th, you would expect a mid 2nd round pick in return. So your trading partner would give up their middle 1st and 2nd round picks for the 8th. that would give us #15, 42, ~45, 70, and 73 on day 1. Most all the mock drafts i have seen have ngata, bunckley, and justice gone by #15. Not sure what direction u go in that case, maybe a DB like jimmy williams or tye hill. This could mean that marv brought in ngata and huff, and wasn't impressed enough with either to take themn so high? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Marv might be using Vic as his PR agent as well, to drum up awareness that the #8 is available. I'd be happy with a trade down to 18-22 to for an extra second rounder to get guys like Winston, Joseph or Giles. 669820[/snapback] I think you may be right. You put it out there, and see if there is a market. I think there may be more than one team that would pay big to move up if Huff, Davis, or one of the big 3 QB's were available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like A Mofo Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 ol' vic was pretty tight with the marv-era bills, ghostwriting a couple of books. so i would assume he's at the front of the feeding trough with marv re tidbits. as for trading down, i expect that if the bills drop to 12 (trade with cleveland) and pick up an extra 3rd, everyone will be happy. cleveland will get ngata, who they openly covet, and we'll get bunkley. makes sense to me. 669812[/snapback] Man do I love the sound of this possibility! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jahnyc Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 I like the idea of trading down and getting more picks, but there seems to be a big drop-off between D'Brick/Justice and the rest of the OTs and between Ngata/Bunkley and the rest of the DTs. We need at least one or two immediate starters out of this draft, not developmental projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2003Contenders Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 I think Marv may indeed be targeting Cleveland at #12. Remember his comment that the guy they expect to take would probably still be available 4 picks later? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Tough to give you exact answers CVM, because I would have to judge any random offer by what the other team is willing to give up. Imo, trading down is one of the few ways that small franchises can stick it to the rich ones. I would NOT go down to 14 for a mere 2nd, and I don't give a crap about the "chart" in that sense. A 2nd, plus a 2nd or 3rd in 07, and then we can talk. If not, I would rather stay put. Jmo. 669769[/snapback] I agree with you here. Well said about the "chart" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
envirojeff Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 trade value chart: http://www.theredzone.org/2005/draft/draftvaluechart.asp for the 8th pick, you could get 2 1st round picks (21 + 31)....of course u need a dancing partner. If u are able to move to 15th, you would expect a mid 2nd round pick in return. So your trading partner would give up their middle 1st and 2nd round picks for the 8th. that would give us #15, 42, ~45, 70, and 73 on day 1. Most all the mock drafts i have seen have ngata, bunckley, and justice gone by #15. Not sure what direction u go in that case, maybe a DB like jimmy williams or tye hill. This could mean that marv brought in ngata and huff, and wasn't impressed enough with either to take themn so high? 669866[/snapback] I like this idea! As for Justice being gone by #15 - I think that you have to figure in that at least one team will trade up past #8 to get Young or Cutler or another top 5 guy. IMO there's a better chance now that we will get Justice. If we through the die and lose, we might as well trade uot of the first round (at #15ish). Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Well...I've been in favor of a Trade Down forever and a day now, but only if the Bills can land one from the Group of Ngata, Bunkley, Justice, Huff...I'm assuming all from that Group will be available at #8...If one is gone from that Group then Davis would likely be the replacement. With that in mind, Trading Down below #11 Overall likely lands the Bills in the 3rd Tier of 1st Round Prospects. In this Draft, there seems to be a HUGE dropoff in the OT/DT/S Talent after Bunkley, Ngata, Huff, and Justice. So even if the Bills pick up an extra 2nd Round Pick which I think would be great, there is a chance they would really lose out on the Talent level of the 1st Round Pick. In fact, I wonder if yet another Trade Down into the 20-30 Area of Round #1 would not be the proper strategy in that case. I'm hoping that Arizona or St. Louis feels it will be necessary top jump ahead of Detroit in order to get their Targeted Prospect. I think that would be the best-case-scenerio in a Trade Down. And who knows, if one of those Teams get desperate enough maybe the Bills can get a little more than Value Chart compensation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Trading down is risky business. I would sit tight and get a sure thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Trading down is risky business. I would sit tight and get a sure thing. 669943[/snapback] There are no sure things in any draft, especially past the top-5. The pool of second round OG's this year are worth the risk, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 With that in mind, Trading Down below #11 Overall likely lands the Bills in the 3rd Tier of 1st Round Prospects. In this Draft, there seems to be a HUGE dropoff in the OT/DT/S Talent after Bunkley, Ngata, Huff, and Justice. So even if the Bills pick up an extra 2nd Round Pick which I think would be great, there is a chance they would really lose out on the Talent level of the 1st Round Pick. In fact, I wonder if yet another Trade Down into the 20-30 Area of Round #1 would not be the proper strategy in that case. 669941[/snapback] I agree... like I wrote in another post, I do not like what appears to be passing for good value in the middle of the 1st round, too many DBs not named Huff/LBs not named Hawk/WRs and RBs. Someone like Mangold or Joseph with low 1st-early 2nd value would help this team out much more. So my preferences in order are to: 1. Stay at #8 and have your choice of the bottom tier of elite players. 2. Trade down only a few spots and grab who's left from that bottom elite tier. 3. Trade down to the bottom of the 1st/top of the 2nd and stock up on need positions (OG, C, 2nd-tier DTs, 2nd-tier S) that don't have 1st-round value... not interested in getting any 2007 picks, thanks, but I may package one to get another Day 1 pick this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiz Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 I think Marv may indeed be targeting Cleveland at #12. Remember his comment that the guy they expect to take would probably still be available 4 picks later? 669911[/snapback] And, Vic does work for the Browns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 I agree... like I wrote in another post, I do not like what appears to be passing for good value in the middle of the 1st round, too many DBs not named Huff/LBs not named Hawk/WRs and RBs. Someone like Mangold or Joseph with low 1st-early 2nd value would help this team out much more. So my preferences in order are to: 1. Stay at #8 and have your choice of the bottom tier of elite players. 2. Trade down only a few spots and grab who's left from that bottom elite tier. 3. Trade down to the bottom of the 1st/top of the 2nd and stock up on need positions (OG, C, 2nd-tier DTs, 2nd-tier S) that don't have 1st-round value... not interested in getting any 2007 picks, thanks, but I may package one to get another Day 1 pick this year. 669960[/snapback] Agreed 100%... Nothing new though Bro... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Agreed 100%... Nothing new though Bro... 669978[/snapback] Thanks... always love to read a KOK post myself! One other thing... no way do you make any kind of trade down until you see who's gone in picks 1-7, no telling who may drop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans4e64 Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 i would either trade down somewhere between the 8th and the 14th, if i couldnt get that i wouldnt touch picks 15-24 because i dont trust the players there, i dont see anyone we could get of value that is also a need. I would take a pick at the end of the first after the 24th and then look at a DT maybe gabe watson, maybe if DB jimmy williams is there, or an offensive lineman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayFinkle Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Meant to post this yesterday. Vic Carucci stated on the Channel 7 Sunday Night Sports Wrap show that the Bills were aggressively looking to trade down in Rd. 1 and pick up extra picks. 669748[/snapback] Translation: The Bills were actively trying to save money by not paying a top ten pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Carucci also said that from what he's hearing from GM's, the 1st round this year isn't that deep. As a whole, the draft is deep and you can get a talented guy in the late 3rd that would normally go in the second, but all in all there's only about 20 guys that have a "1st round grading." Further he said, that from a grading standpoint, pick #20 through the early 3rd isn't that far apart. Heard it on his call in to one of the local Atlanta sports talk stations. 669800[/snapback] heard a similar report, but the 1st round talent only went about 15 deep. Teams were looking to move into the top 15. Bills should not trade out of the top 15. Denver would be OK if we got the 2nd rounder from SF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkyMannn Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Why do I sense RW is moving down in the draft so as to move out of having to pay a hefty contract & bonus. With all his crying about $$$ lately, I would suspect he is interested in keeping the club costs down so as to make it more attractive and valuable for a potential buyer Or maybe I'm too cynical & suspicious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Translation: The Bills were actively trying to save money by not paying a top ten pick. 670024[/snapback] I disagree. They have too many holes to fill and need as many day-one picks as possible. Of course, this being Buffalo--where a significant portion of the population has a genetic need to believe in conspiracy theories--I'm sure the next few posts will agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts