PDaDdy Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 I do this every year and I know it won't change but trade down with WHO...for WHAT? Sorry, just trying to get a feel for if you have a plan or a hope.
jjmac Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 So are we agreeing that if he's there we take him? Because it sounds like you'd take him if he was there. I'm not quite sold on him at #10. Trade down, and I'd think about taking him there.
Mr_Blizzard Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 A few Bills fans have actually considered moving up in the draft to get Matt Kalil. As good a prospect he is this is not the year to give away draft picks for one player. Not when we have holes to fill. Yes we need a tackle. But we can find a decent tackle in rounds 2, 3, 4 even later than that. (if only we could sign Bell). If we traded down anywhere between 11-15 we would still pick ahead of the Jets and me not being a big fan of Jonathan Martin, I would leave the tackle position alone in the first and grab Michael Floyd WR with the pick if he's available for two reasons. 1. We need a WR. 2. I don't want the Jets to pick him up. Now if for some strange reason Melvin Ingram is available at 10? Then I say forget about trading down and we pull the trigger and get him. I know they say he's fit for a 3-4 or whatever but in an article I read from one of our members on TBD, Wanny's defense can be very well suited for short big and fast LB's. Either way the guy has a motor that doesn't stop. I say take him if he's there. If he isn't available and we trade down I say we go Michael Floyd with the first pick and take it from there. From that point on the we need a WR conversations will stop and we'll only have to focus on OT, pass rush depth, CB, maybe a TE and OLB. QB is a tricky one. I would like a decent backup but I don't want to draft a backup this year. God Forbid if we don't make the playoffs or even come close, then next year will be the focus on a QB year. I disagree. This is the year to get a blue-chip O.T.
DefenseWinzChampionshipz Posted March 20, 2012 Author Posted March 20, 2012 I disagree. This is the year to get a blue-chip O.T. Like who? Jonathan Martin? Please don't say it.
Bill from NYC Posted March 21, 2012 Posted March 21, 2012 In a 4-3, Ingram is a DE, not a LB. Same with Upshaw. I heard Wanny say it on Sirius. He said Upshaw would line up with "a hand on the ground."
jjmac Posted March 21, 2012 Posted March 21, 2012 Same with Upshaw. I heard Wanny say it on Sirius. He said Upshaw would line up with "a hand on the ground." Honestly, I see less of a chance of us drafting Upshaw than I do Ingram. He doesn't have that quick twitch it seems we're looking for.
tennesseeboy Posted March 21, 2012 Posted March 21, 2012 There are two or three stud OT's in the draft. I don't think Kalil will get past the first five, but Rief or Martin should be our targets. If Fitz has less than adequate blind side protection we have no passing game. This draft is heavy with wide receivers and we can get a first rate receiver in round 2.
DefenseWinzChampionshipz Posted March 21, 2012 Author Posted March 21, 2012 I do this every year and I know it won't change but trade down with WHO...for WHAT? Sorry, just trying to get a feel for if you have a plan or a hope. Read page 1 and it answers the "for WHAT?" part. The for who part is up in the air. I'll move back anywhere between 11-20. These are the picks from 11-20 11. Kansas City 12. Seattle Seahawks 13. Arizona Cardinals 14. Dallas Cowboys 15. Philadelphia Eagles 16. New York Jets 17. Cincinnati Bengals (From Raiders) 18. San Diego Chargers 19. Chicago Bears 20. Tennessee Titans 21. Cincinnati Bengals (Just to note that this may be a "from who" candidate because they have two 1st rounders) If Cincinnati likes somebody at 10 and want to trade up? It will cost them their 17th pick and a 2nd rounder. If Cincinnati wants to trade up and instead offer the 21st pick? It will most likely cost them the 21st pick, a 2nd rounder and a later round pick. There are two or three stud OT's in the draft. I don't think Kalil will get past the first five, but Rief or Martin should be our targets. If Fitz has less than adequate blind side protection we have no passing game. This draft is heavy with wide receivers and we can get a first rate receiver in round 2. So if you're Buddy Nix right now, are you telling me that you're 100% invested in a guy like Martin or Reiff at the 10 slot? A guy who you expect to start immediately? Come on. Kalil is the only sure shot at Tackle.
nucci Posted March 21, 2012 Posted March 21, 2012 If Kelsaya nd Spencer were OK to play LB this kid is a cinch! But they weren't. They were terrible as LBs.
PDaDdy Posted March 21, 2012 Posted March 21, 2012 Read page 1 and it answers the "for WHAT?" part. The for who part is up in the air. I'll move back anywhere between 11-20. These are the picks from 11-20 11. Kansas City 12. Seattle Seahawks 13. Arizona Cardinals 14. Dallas Cowboys 15. Philadelphia Eagles 16. New York Jets 17. Cincinnati Bengals (From Raiders) 18. San Diego Chargers 19. Chicago Bears 20. Tennessee Titans 21. Cincinnati Bengals (Just to note that this may be a "from who" candidate because they have two 1st rounders) If Cincinnati likes somebody at 10 and want to trade up? It will cost them their 17th pick and a 2nd rounder. If Cincinnati wants to trade up and instead offer the 21st pick? It will most likely cost them the 21st pick, a 2nd rounder and a later round pick. So if you're Buddy Nix right now, are you telling me that you're 100% invested in a guy like Martin or Reiff at the 10 slot? A guy who you expect to start immediately? Come on. Kalil is the only sure shot at Tackle. I get that you think we can get Floyd later which I don't really believe. Floyd will be gone by 15 at the latest I think. Who wants to move up for WHAT? WHAT player would look attractive enough for someone to move up for that we can't use ourselves? WHICH ONE of those 11 teams moves up to get them and WHY?
Hapless Bills Fan Posted March 21, 2012 Posted March 21, 2012 If Kelsaya nd Spencer were OK to play LB this kid is a cinch! Those guys should not have been playing LB in a 3-4 let alone a 4-3
JPS Posted March 21, 2012 Posted March 21, 2012 Trade down. Doubt it. In fact, I doubt that the Bills take more than 2 minutes to make their pick.
DefenseWinzChampionshipz Posted March 21, 2012 Author Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) I get that you think we can get Floyd later which I don't really believe. Floyd will be gone by 15 at the latest I think. Who wants to move up for WHAT? WHAT player would look attractive enough for someone to move up for that we can't use ourselves? WHICH ONE of those 11 teams moves up to get them and WHY? What if a team wants to trade to #10 FOR Michael Floyd? We still don't lose. We can still grab either a Stephen Hill or a Mohamed Sanu and have our #2 receiver position taken care of. Michael Floyd is my preference of course but if takes losing him to get an extra 2nd rounder it wouldn't be the end of the world. That extra 2nd round pick will do more good than bad for us. My theory is based solely on the level of talent there is in the 2nd and 3rd rounds of this draft. Other than the obvious top 5 picks in everybody's board, the only guys I'm interested in is Melvin Ingram and Michael Floyd. Those are the only two guys that realistically may still be on board when we're about to draft and wouldn't mind taking either. But every year in the draft somebody shocks the NFL nation and reaches for a player not projected to go where they were taken so we never will know how it pans out until draft day itself. Point being, If Ingram is there at 10 I say take him. Yes I know. He doesn't fit the scheme and all that good stuff but you can't pass on that dude. He's a monster. Something like a baby Dareus. Now if Floyd is there (and more so that he will be rather than Ingram), this is where the whole do I get him and have a great athlete at WR opposite Stevie? Or do I trade down because there has to be a team that would love Floyd on their squad and get more draft picks convo comes in to play. If we don't trade down and pick up Floyd? Then I'm still happy. But if we don't trade down and he's on the board and we pass him up to get let's say a Jonathan Martin or a Mike Adams? I'd be pissed. I can see Cincinnati easily wanting to trade up to #10 for Michael Floyd because just like you said, he will be gone by 15. Floyd opposite A.J. Green is something they would LOVE. But like I said. If we draft Floyd I won't be upset. What would upset me is if a team was willing to trade with us to get Floyd yet Nix and staff pass it up only to draft say a Martin a Reiff or a Mike Adams? Then I'm mad. Because now not only did we pick up a guy who "maybe" will contribute, but we also missed out on Floyd and/or more draft picks. Edited March 21, 2012 by DefenseWinzChampionshipz
biggerdaddynj Posted March 21, 2012 Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) I'm also in favor of trading down but don't see a partner because I believe the two trade up targets, Tannehill and Richardson will be gone. Though I personally favor an OT (I personally love what I've read about Martin as a player and person, e.g., http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/bills-nfl/article746147.ece) I would be happy with Floyd or Ingram (even if we have to scheme him into the game because he's not a perfect fit in a 43 he's going to be a beast). I'm nervous about Coples after hearing Casserly saying he's not a top 10 pick and then providing plenty of justifications to back it up. However, I'm a gambling man by nature so maybe Wannstedt and Super Mario will be able to motivate Coples into living up to his potential. At the end of the day, I think we'd all be OK with Martin, Floyd, Ingram or Coples. After all, we need an OT, WR and DE--it's just a matter of when we address it. Of course, that said, let's keep debating because we need something to do until the draft! Edited March 21, 2012 by biggerdaddynj
The Cincinnati Kid Posted March 21, 2012 Posted March 21, 2012 I want Floyd. What makes you think the Bills wouldn't love Floyd opposite Stevie, just like the Bengals would love him opposite Green? Secondly, I do not want to draft a "guy with potential." I want to draft a guy who is what we think he is. I like Luck better than Griffen. I know what Luck is, I know what Potential Griffen has. I like Floyd more than Stephan Hill. I know what Floyd is, I know the potential Hill has. I don't want to take anyone who hasn't reached their potential, because, they might not reach it, like Losman, Mike Williams, Erik Flowers, etc.
hondo in seattle Posted March 21, 2012 Posted March 21, 2012 I heard a GM saying once that getting guys to fill spots is easy. Every team has a bunch of role players. But what sets a Super Bowl team apart is that they have more play-makers on offense and defense. If some other franchise really offered a sweet deal for our 1st round pick, I would take it. But the great thing with a #10 is that it should be comparatively easy to find a play-maker at that spot. We have plenty of mediocre players and don't need a bushel-basket more. We need guys who will make a difference. So, in general, I'm opposed to trading down. I don't even care much what position we draft. A difference making OT, WR, LB or even a DE would be a great addition. I would hate to use a high draft pick on a QB when 1st round quarterbacks have such a poor success rate in the NFL and Fitz is serviceable.
OldTimer1960 Posted March 21, 2012 Posted March 21, 2012 I heard a GM saying once that getting guys to fill spots is easy. Every team has a bunch of role players. But what sets a Super Bowl team apart is that they have more play-makers on offense and defense. If some other franchise really offered a sweet deal for our 1st round pick, I would take it. But the great thing with a #10 is that it should be comparatively easy to find a play-maker at that spot. We have plenty of mediocre players and don't need a bushel-basket more. We need guys who will make a difference. So, in general, I'm opposed to trading down. I don't even care much what position we draft. A difference making OT, WR, LB or even a DE would be a great addition. I would hate to use a high draft pick on a QB when 1st round quarterbacks have such a poor success rate in the NFL and Fitz is serviceable. First round any position has a fairly high bust rate. There are no sure things in the draft. Have a look back at the top 10 picks in most drafts. I think you'll see a small number fo real stars, a few decent players and 2-3 busts.
DefenseWinzChampionshipz Posted March 21, 2012 Author Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) I want Floyd. What makes you think the Bills wouldn't love Floyd opposite Stevie, just like the Bengals would love him opposite Green? Secondly, I do not want to draft a "guy with potential." I want to draft a guy who is what we think he is. I like Luck better than Griffen. I know what Luck is, I know what Potential Griffen has. I like Floyd more than Stephan Hill. I know what Floyd is, I know the potential Hill has. I don't want to take anyone who hasn't reached their potential, because, they might not reach it, like Losman, Mike Williams, Erik Flowers, etc. Yea I believe I said i wouldn't mind Floyd. Read before you say anything. Your comment was very simple and was trying to make it sound as if I said I don't like or want Floyd. What I DID say is I wouldn't mind trading down and getting extra picks with the hope of Floyd still being there and if he's not? It's not the end of the world. That there are guys like Hill and Sanu out there still to be taken. But if we get Floyd I'd still be ok with it. I just don't want to miss out on either Floyd or extra draft picks to just go out and pick a guy like Jonathan Martin who a lot of members seem to be fond of. My choices for the #10 pick are Ingram, Floyd or trade down. That's it. Plain and simple. Edited March 21, 2012 by DefenseWinzChampionshipz
PDaDdy Posted March 21, 2012 Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) What if a team wants to trade to #10 FOR Michael Floyd? We still don't lose. We can still grab either a Stephen Hill or a Mohamed Sanu and have our #2 receiver position taken care of. Michael Floyd is my preference of course but if takes losing him to get an extra 2nd rounder it wouldn't be the end of the world. That extra 2nd round pick will do more good than bad for us. My theory is based solely on the level of talent there is in the 2nd and 3rd rounds of this draft. Other than the obvious top 5 picks in everybody's board, the only guys I'm interested in is Melvin Ingram and Michael Floyd. Those are the only two guys that realistically may still be on board when we're about to draft and wouldn't mind taking either. But every year in the draft somebody shocks the NFL nation and reaches for a player not projected to go where they were taken so we never will know how it pans out until draft day itself. Point being, If Ingram is there at 10 I say take him. Yes I know. He doesn't fit the scheme and all that good stuff but you can't pass on that dude. He's a monster. Something like a baby Dareus. Now if Floyd is there (and more so that he will be rather than Ingram), this is where the whole do I get him and have a great athlete at WR opposite Stevie? Or do I trade down because there has to be a team that would love Floyd on their squad and get more draft picks convo comes in to play. If we don't trade down and pick up Floyd? Then I'm still happy. But if we don't trade down and he's on the board and we pass him up to get let's say a Jonathan Martin or a Mike Adams? I'd be pissed. I can see Cincinnati easily wanting to trade up to #10 for Michael Floyd because just like you said, he will be gone by 15. Floyd opposite A.J. Green is something they would LOVE. But like I said. If we draft Floyd I won't be upset. What would upset me is if a team was willing to trade with us to get Floyd yet Nix and staff pass it up only to draft say a Martin a Reiff or a Mike Adams? Then I'm mad. Because now not only did we pick up a guy who "maybe" will contribute, but we also missed out on Floyd and/or more draft picks. Well at least you proposed a somewhat plausible scenario. The one problem is if Floyd makes it to us I think we will take him unless Buddy likes one of the tackle better. Remember we tried to get Meachem in here despite Buddy saying he "feels good" about our WRs. Interest in Meachem shows that he thinks we could be better. Edited March 21, 2012 by PDaDdy
DefenseWinzChampionshipz Posted March 21, 2012 Author Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) Well at least you proposed a somewhat plausible scenario. The one problem is if Floyd makes it to us I think we will take him unless Buddy likes one of the tackle better. Remember we tried to get Meachem in here despite Buddy saying he "feels good" about our WRs. Interest in Meachem shows that he thinks we could be better. I'm ok with us taking Floyd if he's there. I have him better rated than Blackmon to be honest with you. He wasn't shy about performing in the combine yet Blackmon didn't run the 40 but participated in all the other drills. Ego trip much? If Blackmon had a nagging injury like he said he had, he wouldn't have been catching balls at the combine either. (side note - he was running full speed and didn't look to have a hamstring issue at all). Point being is I love Floyd and I love Ingram at the #10 spot. I don't want to hear another guy's name being called by the commissioner. If they are both gone by 10? That's when our 1st round pick may go into "reach mode". I'm not sold on Jonathan Martin at all (sorry JM fans). The guy looks tired to me. Mike Adams I would actually get ahead of JM but I don't want him at 10 either. Nor do I want Reiff or Coples or Mercilus at number 10. Those names are names that will be called in the teens if not 20's and may even fall to the 2nd round which is why I'd rather trade down (if we could) if Ingram or Floyd isn't on the board at 10. Edited March 21, 2012 by DefenseWinzChampionshipz
Recommended Posts