Astrobot Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 The draft-day trades possibly available that get us out of the #11 (using the Pick Value Chart) would necessitate a move from #11 to #18-19-20 for a Extra 2nd Rounder, or #11 to #15 for an Extra 3rd Rounder, or Losman or our 3rd Rounder to get Dallas's #22 and #28 picks. Who's at those picks, and why would that team trade with us? 14=Chicago at 14 wants to take their top OT choice and Jeff Otah/Chris Williams are both there at #11 but not at 14. Trades their RD#3 to move up to #11. (VERY LIKELY) 15=Detroit (less likely as they are setting sights on DE and Gholston will be long gone...but if they trade up to #5, the Jets will likely trade down--but not within the division) (NOT LIKELY) 18=Houston (wants a RB; Mendenhall could fall to #11 and if they have him rated higher than Stewart, they do it) (SOMEWHAT LIKELY) 19=Philly (less likely, as they want a WR) (NOT LIKELY) 20=Tampa Bay (wants CB, and DE; lots of choices at #11 that they wouldn't have at #20) (MORE LIKELY) 22=Dallas wants CB and RB. Both RB's are there at #11, and they'd have a choice of at least 3 CB's at #11 or the 4th leftover CB if they stay put) (VERY LIKELY) If the Bills trade to the #14 pick, I think it will be to select one of the 3 CB's that will be there. If they trade to the #20 iick it will be to select their WR. If they trade with Dallas at #22/28, they can pick up a WR (Thomas-Sweed-Hardy) and a CB (likely Talib or Cason) OR Fred Davis at TE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 The draft-day trades possibly available that get us out of the #11 (using the Pick Value Chart) would necessitate a move from #11 to #18-19-20 for a Extra 2nd Rounder, or #11 to #15 for an Extra 3rd Rounder, or Losman or our 3rd Rounder to get Dallas's #22 and #28 picks. Who's at those picks, and why would that team trade with us? 14=Chicago at 14 wants to take their top OT choice and Jeff Otah/Chris Williams are both there at #11 but not at 14. Trades their RD#3 to move up to #11. (VERY LIKELY) 15=Detroit (less likely as they are setting sights on DE and Gholston will be long gone...but if they trade up to #5, the Jets will likely trade down--but not within the division) (NOT LIKELY) 18=Houston (wants a RB; Mendenhall could fall to #11 and if they have him rated higher than Stewart, they do it) (SOMEWHAT LIKELY) 19=Philly (less likely, as they want a WR) (NOT LIKELY) 20=Tampa Bay (wants CB, and DE; lots of choices at #11 that they wouldn't have at #20) (MORE LIKELY) 22=Dallas wants CB and RB. Both RB's are there at #11, and they'd have a choice of at least 3 CB's at #11 or the 4th leftover CB if they stay put) (VERY LIKELY) If the Bills trade to the #14 pick, I think it will be to select one of the 3 CB's that will be there. If they trade to the #20 iick it will be to select their WR. If they trade with Dallas at #22/28, they can pick up a WR (Thomas-Sweed-Hardy) and a CB (likely Talib or Cason) OR Fred Davis at TE. If Gholston were there @ 11 I would like to see the Bills take him. Tampa's #1 need is WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 If Gholston were there @ 11 I would like to see the Bills take him. Tampa's #1 need is WR. If Gholston gets to #11, he will be a Buffalo Bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreamOnDan Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 If Gholston gets to #11, he will be a Buffalo Bill. If Gholston was at 11 the price to trade up would be very high. I'd at least see what they are... Not gonna happen though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ax4782 Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 The draft-day trades possibly available that get us out of the #11 (using the Pick Value Chart) would necessitate a move from #11 to #18-19-20 for a Extra 2nd Rounder, or #11 to #15 for an Extra 3rd Rounder, or Losman or our 3rd Rounder to get Dallas's #22 and #28 picks. Who's at those picks, and why would that team trade with us? 14=Chicago at 14 wants to take their top OT choice and Jeff Otah/Chris Williams are both there at #11 but not at 14. Trades their RD#3 to move up to #11. (VERY LIKELY) 15=Detroit (less likely as they are setting sights on DE and Gholston will be long gone...but if they trade up to #5, the Jets will likely trade down--but not within the division) (NOT LIKELY) 18=Houston (wants a RB; Mendenhall could fall to #11 and if they have him rated higher than Stewart, they do it) (SOMEWHAT LIKELY) 19=Philly (less likely, as they want a WR) (NOT LIKELY) 20=Tampa Bay (wants CB, and DE; lots of choices at #11 that they wouldn't have at #20) (MORE LIKELY) 22=Dallas wants CB and RB. Both RB's are there at #11, and they'd have a choice of at least 3 CB's at #11 or the 4th leftover CB if they stay put) (VERY LIKELY) If the Bills trade to the #14 pick, I think it will be to select one of the 3 CB's that will be there. If they trade to the #20 iick it will be to select their WR. If they trade with Dallas at #22/28, they can pick up a WR (Thomas-Sweed-Hardy) and a CB (likely Talib or Cason) OR Fred Davis at TE. Nice analysis. I tend to agree that these are the options, and I really hope that we trade with either Houston for an additional second, or even better with Dallas. I think that would put us in position to fill ALL three need positions with high quality players. Buffalo could draft a WR and Fred Davis in the first and get a highly rated CB in the second, like Flowers or the guy from South Florida. Very good post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trader Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 Nice analysis. I tend to agree that these are the options, and I really hope that we trade with either Houston for an additional second, or even better with Dallas. I think that would put us in position to fill ALL three need positions with high quality players. Buffalo could draft a WR and Fred Davis in the first and get a highly rated CB in the second, like Flowers or the guy from South Florida. Very good post. [/quot This is a good analysis but the problem with trading down is that there are normally more dance partners who want to move down than those who want to move up. The right deal just has to be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreamOnDan Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 I hope that the Cowboys offer both of their first rd picks for our 1st. I'd take it no matter who is on the board. Then I would draft 2 wr in the first rd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 I hope that the Cowboys offer both of their first rd picks for our 1st. I'd take it no matter who is on the board. Then I would draft 2 wr in the first rd. Why? If the Bills do that you can Tell Lee to pack his bags and the TD regime willl officially be dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 I hope that the Cowboys offer both of their first rd picks for our 1st. I'd take it no matter who is on the board. Then I would draft 2 wr in the first rd. WR and DT is what I would draft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 I hope that the Cowboys offer both of their first rd picks for our 1st. I'd take it no matter who is on the board. Then I would draft 2 wr in the first rd. Here's why you oughta wait on your 2nd WR: RD3--Jordy Nelson -Kansas St 6'3 4.5 RD4--Paul Hubbard-Wisc, 6'3,221,4.4 --hands need training but one of the best blockers RD5--Adarius Bowman - Ok St 6'3,223,4.7 RD6--Mario Urrutia - Louvl,6'6",232,4.5 RD7--Marcus Monk - AK 6'4,222,4.5 RD7--Todd Blythe, Iowa St.--6'5,214,4.6 7/UDFA--Ernie Wheelright,MN--6'5,215,4.5 7/UDFA--Marcus Henry,KS--6'4,207,4.5 7/UDFA--Chaz Shilens SDSt--6'4,208,4.3 7/UDFA--Jabari Arthur Akron--6'4,228,4.65 --Quebec native 7/UDFA--Micah Rucker, E Ill--6'6 217,4.4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Band of Merriman Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 I agree with your thought process. However, the only way I see Dallas part with both #1's is to get McFadden. Jerry Jones is a former Arkansas alum and the word here is he's very high on McFadden. Unfortunately I don't see any way he slips all the way to us at 11. If this were to happen I would love to see us go best CB then WR in the 1st. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Anderson's Lunch Pail Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Nice breakdown. To be honest, the one I see most likely is the Bears at 14. Both the Broncos (12) and Panthers (13) are looking at OTs. That puts us in a nice position, ESPECIALLY if only Jake Long goes in the top ten. If somehow Clady is there for us at 11, you know he won't get past Denver. So maybe the Bears will trade up. Or even the Panthers leapfrog Denver if they like someone. Maybe even Houston. This is something I had not realized until now. I'm excited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Why? If the Bills do that you can Tell Lee to pack his bags and the TD regime willl officially be dead. Not necessarily. I think that the Bills had visions of creating an East Coast version of the high-flying St. Louis Rams offende and this was part of the reason why Fairchild was attractive. As it turned out Fairchild was not the guy to direct an East Coast undomed version of the offense he trained in. However, though Fairchild is gone (thankfully) it would not surprise me if the Bills have not given up on this vision. Having 2 1st rounders to share time in a 3 WR offense with Evans and Lynch playing the run/pass catching Faulk role would not be bad at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Not necessarily. I think that the Bills had visions of creating an East Coast version of the high-flying St. Louis Rams offende and this was part of the reason why Fairchild was attractive. As it turned out Fairchild was not the guy to direct an East Coast undomed version of the offense he trained in. However, though Fairchild is gone (thankfully) it would not surprise me if the Bills have not given up on this vision. Having 2 1st rounders to share time in a 3 WR offense with Evans and Lynch playing the run/pass catching Faulk role would not be bad at all. I was thinking more along the lines of Lees contract and two first rounders. Could get very expensive a few years from now. See Cardnals, Arizona Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4BillsintheBurgh Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Not necessarily. I think that the Bills had visions of creating an East Coast version of the high-flying St. Louis Rams offende and this was part of the reason why Fairchild was attractive. As it turned out Fairchild was not the guy to direct an East Coast undomed version of the offense he trained in. However, though Fairchild is gone (thankfully) it would not surprise me if the Bills have not given up on this vision. Having 2 1st rounders to share time in a 3 WR offense with Evans and Lynch playing the run/pass catching Faulk role would not be bad at all. It would suprise the heck out of me because Jauron is still here. I think we have a better chance at another top flight RB than 2 #1 WRs this year. Mendenhall - Lynch anyone? Of course, I'll also be suprised if we take two pass catchers with our first three picks, assuming they work something out with Evans. I just don't think this tiger is changing his stripes and I think the goal is to run the ball. I think it's more likely that a tall TE becomes a redzone target and we sign some low level (Rasheed Davis) type as a number two WR. Or god forbid someone under 6'2" later in the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts