billsfreak Posted March 3, 2010 Posted March 3, 2010 I bet both are gone by pick 7 So do I and most of the so called "Pros" on mock drafts. Redskins are almost a lock to pick a QB and the odds are the Rams will too, if not the Seahawks will.
Calgary_JG Posted March 3, 2010 Posted March 3, 2010 Ok GM, here is my response: Rams- Yes they could use a QB but Spagnola is a defensive minded coach first and suring up that D with SUh is too good to pass up. Washington- Their OL is probably worse than ours and putting a rookie QB behind it would be career suicide, plus Campbell can obviously play behind it. Seattle- With Walter Jones all but done, they will be reaching for another OT to protect the beaten Hassleback Cleveland- Brady Quinn is the Qb, enough said. Raiders- Too much invested in Russel at this point. They liked what they saw from Gradkowski if you can believe it. The Rams have used a first round pick on DL twice in the past 3 yrs, you really think they'll use a #1 overall so they can pay a DT that kind of cash and have probably half of their money invested on an uproven DL? The Rams have more holes to fill than us, their fans had better hope they don't "sure up" a line that's already young and expensive. Bradford's going to the Rams at #1. The only way that doesn't happen is if they trade out of it, in which case a QB is still going #1 because nobody's trading up to take Suh, McCoy or Berry. Once that happens, if the Bills want a QB they have to hope that none of the other 4 teams ahead of them take Claussen. No way that Bradford or Claussen make it to #9. Detroit's smart if they are shopping the pick, because Buffalo and Cleveland can't sit back and hope a QB falls to them. Detroit can still get the player they want drafting later in the top 10.
tennesseeboy Posted March 3, 2010 Posted March 3, 2010 No matter how you cut it Suh, Okung, Berry, Bradford are going in the first five or six picks...almost for sure. These are blue chip players (except Bradford...but he's the best of a poor qb crop and someone on the bottom will have to take a chance on him.) Baluga, Davis, Williams, and McLain and a few others are great players in the next batch and I'm sure there will be some more defensive linemen in the mix at this level as well. I'm tickled that we will certainly have a choice at one of the best players in the draft at 9. It would be pretty hard to screw this up.
NobesBLO13 Posted March 3, 2010 Posted March 3, 2010 I'm proud of everyone, two pages and not one Eckland reference, on trade deadline day no less!
Thurman#1 Posted March 3, 2010 Author Posted March 3, 2010 These wild rumors are just going to get worse and worse. I am willing to bet both Bradford and Clausen will be there at 9. I'll take you up on that one. What do you say, $20 to the American Cancer Society, loser pays?
Thurman#1 Posted March 3, 2010 Author Posted March 3, 2010 I think Clausen will be there........and beyond. Both are almost certain to be gone, but if Clausen is still there, get used to rooting for him.
Thurman#1 Posted March 3, 2010 Author Posted March 3, 2010 Ok GM, here is my response: Rams- Yes they could use a QB but Spagnola is a defensive minded coach first and suring up that D with SUh is too good to pass up. Washington- Their OL is probably worse than ours and putting a rookie QB behind it would be career suicide, plus Campbell can obviously play behind it. Seattle- With Walter Jones all but done, they will be reaching for another OT to protect the beaten Hassleback Cleveland- Brady Quinn is the Qb, enough said. Raiders- Too much invested in Russel at this point. They liked what they saw from Gradkowski if you can believe it. My offer stands. You don't convince me.
Thurman#1 Posted March 3, 2010 Author Posted March 3, 2010 simply out of control. to move up to #2 from #9 will require our 1st, 2nd, and next year's 1st..easily. No way. We've got more holes than swiss cheese and can't afford to give up that many picks. Obviously, if that trade were to get done, the Lions would have to accept much less than the trade chart recommends. I'm betting they would indeed sell out for a bargain rate, but am not sure this deal ever happens.
Thurman#1 Posted March 3, 2010 Author Posted March 3, 2010 no, i'm perfectly sane. look at the value chart for picks. THE 2nd overall pick is worth 2600 points. our 9th pick is worth 1350. our 2nd pick is worth 490. our 4th pick is worth 84 points. I also may be wrong, but next year's 2nd would automatically be of less value than this year's second. DO THE MATH. You're absolutely right if you go by the chart, but clearly we wouldn't, and the Lions wouldn't expect us to. Part of their swag would be paying much much less salary for their draft, and part of our costs would be paying much more.
Thurman#1 Posted March 3, 2010 Author Posted March 3, 2010 Zero interest. If anything, I'd trade down from #9 and get more picks. Draft picks are a crapshoot--the more picks, the better your chances of getting a good player. See NE Patriots. Who have steadily lost talent and are a shell of themselves.
SuperKillerRobots Posted March 3, 2010 Posted March 3, 2010 I'm proud of everyone, two pages and not one Eckland reference, on trade deadline day no less! Wrong sport
It's in My Blood Posted March 3, 2010 Posted March 3, 2010 Only way I trade up to the #2 spot is if the Rams take McCoy ( which is most likely not gonna happen) and Suh is there. No quarterback in this draft is worth the investment/risk of moving up.
BUFFALOTONE Posted March 3, 2010 Posted March 3, 2010 Both are almost certain to be gone, but if Clausen is still there, get used to rooting for him. hey i would love Clausen, but he wont have a fighting chance behind this OL.
BUFFALOTONE Posted March 3, 2010 Posted March 3, 2010 I'll take you up on that one. What do you say, $20 to the American Cancer Society, loser pays? Deal.
Mr. WEO Posted March 3, 2010 Posted March 3, 2010 simply out of control. to move up to #2 from #9 will require our 1st, 2nd, and next year's 1st..easily. No way. We've got more holes than swiss cheese and can't afford to give up that many picks. No way. 2 1sts to move up 7 spots? With a team that may be itching to avoid picking second?
LABills08 Posted March 3, 2010 Posted March 3, 2010 To move up to number one will probably require this year's 1st and 2nd. Giving up the 1st from next year will depend on the other offers and whether or not we throw in any players (parrish?). Note that the Jets got Sanchez for their 2009 1st and 2nd plus 3 players (none of which were particular stand outs, but Mangini liked them). This rumor shouldn't be seen so outlandish. There is no indication (contrary to popular media thought) that Gailey or Nix are here for a short rotation. New coaches want to get their QB. If they think Bradford is that guy, why not move up for him? Many are comparing him to Matt Ryan. If it was my choice, I would just take the best player available at 9, whether it be a DT, a linebacker or an OT. But, the Bills have played it safe the last couple drafts. They might as well take a gamble.
thebandit27 Posted March 3, 2010 Posted March 3, 2010 No matter how you cut it Suh, Okung, Berry, Bradford are going in the first five or six picks...almost for sure. These are blue chip players (except Bradford...but he's the best of a poor qb crop and someone on the bottom will have to take a chance on him.) Baluga, Davis, Williams, and McLain and a few others are great players in the next batch and I'm sure there will be some more defensive linemen in the mix at this level as well. I'm tickled that we will certainly have a choice at one of the best players in the draft at 9. It would be pretty hard to screw this up. I agree with your premise in principle. The top several players in the draft will go in the top several picks. As of now, unless something major changes, that top group consists of (in no particular order): Sam Bradford - QB/Oklahoma Jimmy Clausen - QB/Notre Dame Russell Okung - OT/Oklahoma State Brian Bulaga - OT/Iowa Ndamukong Suh - DT/Nebraska Gerald McCoy - DT/Oklahoma Eric Berry - S/Tennessee 7 players total, all will very likely be gone in the top 7 picks. So the right way to look at it, IMO, is to pick the best players from the remaining crop and take the one you feel can help you the most at #9. Of course, that all is predicated upon Oakland not taking your guy (and I'll go on the record as saying that I have a funny feeling about the Raiders pulling a deja vu maneuver and picking a Maryland Terrapin--OT Bruce Campbell--in the top 10 for the 2nd consecutive year when nobody expects it). So the question I'm asking is: who would Buffalo pick under this scenario? My preferred player would be Sergio Kindle - LB/Texas, who can play rush LB and make an immediate impact on the defensive side of the ball, but I have a feeling that the team would take Anthony Davis - OT/Rutgers instead. Just my 1 cent.
machinegun12 Posted March 3, 2010 Posted March 3, 2010 Who have steadily lost talent and are a shell of themselves. ...and are still in the playoffs virtually every year anyways. What I would give just to get there again. (the one year they missed it was still an 11-5 season with a backup QB who hadn't started a game since high school)
LABills08 Posted March 3, 2010 Posted March 3, 2010 Everyone is saying Bradford isn't worth taking. But literally every single person on this board would have drafted him above Stafford last year. It just doesn't add up. The kid is a great player. Will he be a top 5 QB in 3 years? Doubtful. But can he perform as well (if not better) than someone like Matt Ryan? I don't see why not.
billsfreak Posted March 3, 2010 Posted March 3, 2010 hey i would love Clausen, but he wont have a fighting chance behind this OL. I am not sure anyone who has a bust in Canton would even survive behind this OL to be honest.
Recommended Posts