GunnerBill

I agree we don't need to trade back but there is nothing wrong with the value of that trade. It is what the value looks like.

If they are doing that and actively tanking I kind of commend them. I'm not sure that is who Sean Peyton is.

But then what do they do at QB? That's the question for me. I actually think the Vikings could if they really had to roll Darnold out. The Raiders could role out Minshew. These guys have started in the NFL. But who are the Broncos rolling out? There is nobody on that roster capable of starting and not being by far and away the worst QB in the league. They have no second round pick either. So if they don't take one at #12 they have to hope one gets to round 3. I can imagine a world where they trade back in round one.... but even then the Raiders are right behind them and the risk is four are already gone.... if you only like one of the other two are you going to risk letting the Raiders get him? They are in the worst spot in the NFL right now IMO. And I think they are almost forced to reach on a QB at #12. They have been horribly mismanaged.

I've been trying to do the QBs properly this week it is literally the last group I've done this year and I am really close to bumping Penix up to a 1st round grade. Basically my first two entries in the cons column are "injury red flags" and "lefty". Once you get past that..... Seriously there are one or two other concerns but at the same time I think this kid can darn well play Quarterback. I'd have no problem taking him in round 1 if I was a QB needy GM. None whatsoever.

Teams get obsessed with physical profiles and lose sight of skillsets. But equally amazing is there were four DCs on that Bears staff and a defensive Head Coach - John Fox, Fangio, Staley, Desai and Donatell. It is not as though they are a bunch of total amteurs!

That is a good one too. Interesting I think the 3 best examples - Hughes, Floyd and Reddick - are rushers who were miscast in the wrong scheme. I wonder if that makes edge rusher a more likely position for that kind of turnaround?

I think Miami are completely committed to the idea that they will win with offense. McDaniel was basically slobbering over Worthy at the Texas pro day.

I don't think Polk will go round 1. I do think Worthy will somewhere. I still have spidey senses about Miami. I also still think Daniels will be #2.

Yes. I think the Ravens, Lions, 49ers and KC are all possible OL teams. Especially it has started to thin out there....

But Odunze isn't just a regular #1 prospect. Passing a player like that up for some picks is a mistake IMO.

I think Polk is a safe floor guy. He is going to play in this league and be a starting receiver. The upside is what I question a tad. He reminds me a bit of Alec Pierce who went to the Colts a couple of years ago in the second. Probably a better route runner. Doesn't quite have Pierce's size. He is a bit lacking after the catch for my money and while I don't think his top speed is terrible he doesn't get to it quickly. I think if you are double dipping and going like a Worthy for example then Polk in the 2nd... I like what you have as a compliment of skills there. If we only took one and it was Polk in the second I think you have an upgrade on Gabe Davis. But you don't have a true #1 IMO.

Thing is if Odunze is there I don't think the Bears trade back. If he is gone I think they will. I think #8 is the target spot for Odunze.

I have done my true sleepers already but for the specific purposes of this thread I think Zinter absolutely meets the criteria. I am still frustrated we didn't throw a day 3 pick at Andrew Vorhees last year. I know it was a bad injury but I thought he was the best guard in the draft prior to that.

Yep. I have long been there. Matt Harmon thinks the same too.

That is true. I definitely think Franklin is in play. Although other visits can leak late. The visit with Elam is always my go-to which literally leaked out 24 hours before the draft. Not sure how many of our 30 are now accounted for?

I know Colin Cowherd isn't popular around here, but he has a phrase he uses a lot "nothing's everything but everything's something." And I think that is basically how I feel here. It isn't a "no-go" for Mitchell in round one on that basis but it does become part of a team's consideration. It goes on the list of cons whether people like that or not.

Thomas and Baker would be a nice duo. I like Bishop as well although a safety at #60 isn't exciting and I don't know that I think he is a totally natural fit for us. I wonder if they drafted him if they'd use him a lot as the dime the way they used Po down the stretch last year. I think his ability to come up and cover a guy 1 on 1 is one of the things that stands out on his tape.

The reason I compared with Demitroff is to make the point that you don't need to have a history of outlandish moves to make a move like this. Indeed Demitroff's first round trade up track record was otherwise pretty similar to Beane's. It would, I agree, be an outlier move. And there may be good reasons it won't happen (quite apart from finding the right situation in terms of trade back partner is tricky) but it won't be "because Beane has never done it before." These moves are outliers that you can't predict based on previous behaviour.

No.

What if he has a crash in the 4th quarter of a critical game though and suddenly you can't use your top weapon on a potential game winning drive? It's that more than anything else that would make me fidgety about drafting someone with type 1 diabetes in the first round. Yes, you can have the best dieticians, you can come up with plans, you can try and manage but in a sport where you then have to go 3 and a half hours on a Sunday and monitor and control constantly in that time.... I dunno. Would concern me. Wouldn't take him off the board but would likely make me drop him a bit if I was a GM.

I don't see a move to #4 because I think New England is picking a QB and then Minnesota is coming up to #4 and picking a QB (and the Cardinals will get their "three 1s" but they will give back their 2025 #2). The issue with #5 is while I think LA would go back, will they go that far? I'm not persuaded. Having said that, on your first point.... of course Beane's history isn't massive trade ups. No GM has that history. This is a once in a decade type move. Thomas Demitroff was GM of the Falcons for 12 years. The Juilo Jones trade wasn't a sign of a consistent pattern. It was a one off move to get a guy they thought was a star. In fact in his 12 years as GM he traded up 3 times in the first. The other two were moving up 4 or 5 spots within the 20s to get their guy..... that remind you of anyone? I am sceptical it will happen because I'm not sure I see a deal that makes sense. The mock that has it here makes it make sense my not having the Patriots take a QB and therefore Minnesota go to #3. Just not sure I see that myself. But I am not dismissing it because "Beane has never done it before." Of course he hasn't. It is a rare type of a move.

Murphy isn't bigger though. He is shorter, lighter and has the same length arms as Newton (both just under 33"). They are slightly different shapes, Newton's weight is distributed a bit more evenly whereas Murphy has a thick lower half and I know some teams care about that but they are both technically undersized.... although actually you look at the 3Ts getting drafted early in NFL drafts these days.... I mean they are all kinda in this size range.

I don't think they are going to have that much wiggle room cap wise in 2025. They have more than this year, sure, but by the time they have paid this rookie class they will be right on the cap number for next year (if it is around Spotrac's $273-275m estimate.... it may be a little higher than that). You can manufacture them 35-40m in space pretty easily, so they can go and do some business but it is 2026 before I think they become serious FA buyers again.

I will say this: the two round mock I did way back in Jan pre-FA and the two exercises we have just done here in the @Virgil mocks has convinced me that I don't want to pick at #60. I think it is a really bad spot for value for a team like Buffalo. I'm thinking more you go up a few spots with it or back a few spots with it into the early 3rd and try and pick up another 4th that allows you to then come up into the late 3rd too by bundling picks.... #28, #69, #94 something like that.... BUT giving away #60 is not a deal breaker for me in making a trade into the top 6 for Harrison, Nabers, Odunze. Okay Harrison, a 4th, two 5ths, two 6ths and a 7th probably means you are not filling many holes in this draft but you'd end up in 2025 with a 2nd, a 3rd, two 4ths and two 6ths plus likely a couple of comp picks. And you'd have an elite difference maker. That is what we have been short of more than anything else IMO.