Dr. Who

Possible the Bills are doing this as a tactic to instill some urgency in the Giants if we are pursuing trading up to 2.

You don't think you can build a reasonably good team around a fella like Darnold in three or four years? Draft, plust FA (we have a lot of money next year) -- and it's five years for a first round rookie contract. You can't presume incompetency. If you do, then why play at all? You go get a franchise qb with the thought it is the most crucial piece and hardest to get in football.

Yeah, why not?

I don't think the Process envisions a complete roster for 2018. They will rightly go get the potential franchise qb. They will still have a second and third to address crucial needs. Lots of FA money next year. What won't be available in 2019? Numerous first round qb prospects.

Alright, I'll take them. FInally get revenge for Music City Forward Pass

I am technically at work, so I can't do justice to your thoughts. They seem rational and plausible to me at first glance, though I still suspect Cards or Chargers are more likely to trade up for qb than you suspect. I personally would trade up to four under this scenario and take Josh Allen or Baker Mayfield. I am torn on trading a 2019 1st, because the fellas who seem to know something say next year is a superlative year for DL in the first round. I do like the idea of hanging on to 22 where I would probably target lb.

The most gaping hole on the team is qb. They are not going to risk losing out on a potential franchise qb by waiting to 22 to draft one. The pick at 12 will be qb or they will trade up. Still think the latter is most likely. I suspect in the end a fortune is paid to the Gmen to secure #2. They will pick a Josh, but I'm not sure which one.

Ideally, you can have both talent and intangibles. I think if you lack arm talent and have the intangibles, you can be an average starter. Unfortunately, if you have superior talent and lack the qualities that cannot be quantified, you may be a bust. You have to judge beyond the measurable. On balance, however, I personally would opt for the fella with the talent. If you want a franchise qb, there's a threshold of natural talent, below which you just aren't going to have a top 5 qb.

I'm sort of like a Trump voter. I'm afraid to tell folks I'm secretly rather hoping we get him.

One should probably add that bringing a young, potential franchise qb in with the burden of still not having broken the playoff drought would have added undue pressure. The ethos of the team is much more positive now which ought to promote further success rather than desperation to get rid of ignominy.

Well, I was happy for Kyle and the Pegulas. Maybe getting into the playoffs helps McD promote the process and build a winning culture. Too bad the Chiefs recovered from their mid-season swoon. Tactically, I'd rather have a poor record and a top five pick right now, but hypotheticals after the fact are useless. Look forward and act shrewdly from where you are.

There's real gray area on this issue. You can rationally hold various positions. Beane has to make his best guess how likely teams like the Giants, Broncos, or Dolphins are to choose qb. He also has to anticipate a team like the Cardinals or even the Chargers moving up to grab a future qb. One can stipulate that most teams are in a win now mode, but that doesn't preclude a "lower odds likelihood" event where a team opts to get a qb for the future. Browns and Jets get qb; 2 of the top 4 should be qb. After that, it's a guess where and when.

Interesting argument. My perfect spot is a bit of a gamble. I want to get to 6 because I think a qb I am happy with will be available without having to include 22 in the trade up.

I hope folks pass on this guy because of his height. I'd love to get him at twelve, but I think I would get antsy and trade up some. I'll really be surprised if he isn't a very good pro.

Sorry, that is more emotive than rational. No reason to be so anguished. They will get a qb in round one.

I do not see how you can actually know this. I think you are letting the failures of the past too strongly influence your anticipation of the future.

I understand your angst, but this is recklessly pessimistic. They literally had to sign a vet after trading Taylor. McCarron is a good choice at a nice contract. It does not in any way imply some refusal to get a qb in the draft. I'll be shocked if qb isn't picked at12 or higher if there is a trade-up.

Nice analogy. I have that sense about them as well, though I am somewhat more inclined to gamble.

I'm not against drafting him if OBD determines he is worth the risk. I kind of like him, but this seems to me a fair, well-reasoned argument.

Seems to me urgency is an equivocal factor. It could work for you just as much as against.

I kinda do. If you are talking moving into the six to ten range, I think you can package 12 and a second. If it costs more, I don't think it costs 22.

I'd be surprised if Darnold isn't the first qb off the board. I'm okay with taking a shot on Allen, especially if it is at #12.

Your initial post ended in the middle of an incomplete sentence. After a trip through the Twilight Zone, you return to spew out ridiculous hypotheticals. If you don't know trading for both 1 and 4 is impossible, you are ignorant. If you do, you are wasting folks' time to get a reaction. That's juvenile to say the least. Reasoning cannot provide logic to a stupid proposal.

. . . someone cut the line apparently.

Temperament and individual character are a complex mix. It isn't a simple diagnosis, so what is a positive contributor with one person might work against another. To many elements to be able to quickly discern, imo. I don't care about Rosen's quirky personality. I worry about the concussions. You better build a strong oline. That's always important, but with a somewhat lean fella with a history of concussions and poor pocket awareness (at least, that's what Mayock says, I don't know,) you better emphasize protection. Anyway, I like Rosen, but he's not my first choice.