Astrobot Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 In the potential trade of the No. 3 overall pick from the Minnesota Vikings to the No. 8 Miami Dolphins for Ryan Tannehill, the Bills win in 3 ways. FIRST--The Dolphins don't address three areas of need that the Bills could address at #10 (OLB, OT, and WR). This means more players percolate down to the Bills if they stay put at #10. Simulating a draft trade, I had Michael Floyd, David DeCastro, Quinton Coples, Mike Adams, Melvin Ingram, Michael Brockers, Whitney Mercilus, and Dre Kirkpatrick at #10 SECOND--Because Minnesota doesn't take Matt Kalil at #3 in order to garner some picks (likely #8, #42, and #72), Kalil falls, and teams could trade up for him at a lower spot (CLE, TB, STL), ostensibly requiring fewer picks to do so. A drop of one spot might be enough to make an offer involving only 2 picks. CLE and TB have less need at LT than STL, so you'd have to trade with CLE or TB. THIRD--The Dolphins' resulting draft will be anemic. At best, they get Tannehill and Crick/Chandler Jones, and don't address OT against our newly-acquired defensive pressure. So if Miami trades up, smile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBD Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 I guess it would depend on the individuals opinion of Tannehill's potential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockinon Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Why would Miami trade up for Tannehill when he will likely still be there at #8? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 I guess my question to all this is......just how good IS kahil...... I mean....is he just the best LT in THIS draft or is he a guy that you could put up with other great LT's? because if he is just the best LT in this draft I dont want to do this.....but if he is someone we might see in the pro bowl year to year then hell yeah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted April 15, 2012 Author Share Posted April 15, 2012 http://miamiherald.typepad.com/dolphins_in_depth/2012/03/would-dolphins-trade-up-for-tannehill.html Miami covets Tannehill. Miami OC Mike Sherman was Tannehill's head coach at A&M. And Cleveland's a wild card. The fear is that Cleveland will trade their pick and allow the Chiefs (now behind the Bills at #11) or Arizona (at #13) to take Tannehill. Chiefs have Orton, Stanzi, Palko. Arizona has Skelton, Bartel, Kolb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 I knew you would come around ptr. Be sure that Whaley is well aware of the potential here. Dont think its gonna matter who lines up against our Mt. Rushmore, although still a good selling point. And if miami drafts Tanneyhill they are still taking a significant risk imo. C'mon Kalil I agree that Miami is considering a qb early Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud Adams Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Why would Miami trade up for Tannehill when he will likely still be there at #8? They need a "sexy pick" like a "franchise QB" to get their "fan base" "excited" and take some heat off themselves due to their horrible offseason, inept GM and anemic roster. They'd almost have to trade to No. 3 to ensure he's the pick. Look at last year's draft and how quickly the QBs went. If he's still there at 6-7, either the Rams or Jaguars could easily trade out of that position for a team that wants Tannehill, leaving the Fish empty. I believe the Fish are (wrongfully) sold on Tannehill, and will do what's necessary to land him. That likely means moving ahead of the Browns. BA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted April 15, 2012 Author Share Posted April 15, 2012 Interesting tidbits from this afternoon: Either Luck or RGIII will be a bust, according to history. On average, from '00-'09, there were 2.4 "start-able" QBs, 2.2 "backups" QBs drafted. Quite generous too. Source In just the last SIX drafts, 7 QBs drafted in the 6th/7th round have started, and 3(Flynn,Cassel, Fitzpatrick) are viewed as solid starters. Weeden and Cousins are tops in ball velocity. Only two QB's higher than Levi Brown in last 4 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobillies Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 http://miamiherald.typepad.com/dolphins_in_depth/2012/03/would-dolphins-trade-up-for-tannehill.html Miami covets Tannehill. Miami OC Mike Sherman was Tannehill's head coach at A&M. And Cleveland's a wild card. The fear is that Cleveland will trade their pick and allow the Chiefs (now behind the Bills at #11) or Arizona (at #13) to take Tannehill. Chiefs have Orton, Stanzi, Palko. Arizona has Skelton, Bartel, Kolb. orton signed with the cowboys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted April 15, 2012 Author Share Posted April 15, 2012 (edited) orton signed with the cowboys Didn't catch that. Neither did the NFL Chiefs Depth Chart! That only makes it more interesting between Chiefs and Dolphins! Edited April 15, 2012 by Astrobot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billshank Redemption Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Interesting tidbits from this afternoon: Either Luck or RGIII will be a bust, according to history. On average, from '00-'09, there were 2.4 "start-able" QBs, 2.2 "backups" QBs drafted. Quite generous too. Source In just the last SIX drafts, 7 QBs drafted in the 6th/7th round have started, and 3(Flynn,Cassel, Fitzpatrick) are viewed as solid starters. Weeden and Cousins are tops in ball velocity. Only two QB's higher than Levi Brown in last 4 years. interesting stuff, its also interesting that a lot of times the ones with the best velocity have the weakes arms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Either Luck or RGIII will be a bust, according to history. Oh, Horseradish. That's what statisticians call "insufficient sample size for a quality prediction". Leaf showed signs of immaturity and entitlement all along the way from his rep on campus, to no-showing the Colts interview he scheduled and so forth. There was never any doubt in the Colts camp as to their pick, just in the same media pundits that were slobbering over Gabbert last year. I haven't heard any similar disastrous character indicators about RGIII OR Luck. There is absolutely no reason to believe 2 or 3 quality QB can't be found in the same draft, just because media/fans/pundits like to try to puff second-rate hurlers into the "second coming" from time to time. Weeden and Cousins are tops in ball velocity. Only two QB's higher than Levi Brown in last 4 years. This badly needs an asterisk and an explanation: many of the top QB prospects did not throw. So we really don't know how many QBs are higher than Levi Brown, since so many of the top prospects sat that dance out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBD Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 The chiefs also have Matt Cassell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Interesting tidbits from this afternoon: Either Luck or RGIII will be a bust, according to history. On average, from '00-'09, there were 2.4 "start-able" QBs, 2.2 "backups" QBs drafted. Quite generous too. Source In just the last SIX drafts, 7 QBs drafted in the 6th/7th round have started, and 3(Flynn,Cassel, Fitzpatrick) are viewed as solid starters. Weeden and Cousins are tops in ball velocity. Only two QB's higher than Levi Brown in last 4 years. Good to know flynns a solid starter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogger Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 it pains me but its true, the more talk about Buffalo potentially trading up to get Tannehill the better. though the idea of doing so sickens me. As I see it Buffalo sits in a rather pretty spot. the threat makes Miami trade up, later they find that he will not be ready for prime time for 3 years. Fast forward three years and they find they drafted JP Losman. Meanwhile they gave up the farm for him...2013 they pass on drafting a QB even if its Barkley, because franchise QB is already selected. Minn moves to 8, the browns select Blackmon, St Louis figures why not trade down a few more and get another pick or two...bingo, bango, Buffalo gets a REAL Franchise LT, giving them an elite O-line. or they stay at ten and get the ILB or WR or they trade, down pick up additional picks and draft Reiff or Martin, I'd be okay with any of the above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayray808 Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 if Miami moves to 3 to draft a Tannehil... then likely... 4 - Browns - Richardson 5 - Bucs - Claiborne 6 - Rams - Blackmon which means we need to really think about trading with Jax to get that 7 pick and Kalil if Miami moves to 3 to draft Tannehil... worst case scenario... 4 - Browns - Richardson 5 - Bucs - Claiborne 6 - Rams - Kalil which means we could trade with Jax and get Blackmon at 7 or just sit at 10 and do what we would have done if Miami didn't even make the trade (since the same players would be gone anyway) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSBill Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Why would Miami trade up for Tannehill when he will likely still be there at #8? That is what I was thinking, and I don't think anyone in front of them is going to be interested in Tannehill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Interesting tidbits from this afternoon: Either Luck or RGIII will be a bust, according to history. On average, from '00-'09, there were 2.4 "start-able" QBs, 2.2 "backups" QBs drafted. Quite generous too. Source Is this a mean average compiled over a short period of time? If so it's meaningless. Didn't the 2004 draft produce Eli Manning, Phillip Rivers, and Ben Roethlisberger? Last year's draft is looking pretty good for QBs. The world is changing as to how QBs are developed, how they are scouted, and how the college and pro games are evolving… in this case towards each other. Who is Eric Galko? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud Adams Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 That is what I was thinking, and I don't think anyone in front of them is going to be interested in Tannehill. But a potential trading partner for someone in front of them might. BA Last year's draft is looking pretty good for QBs. Unless you're Jacksonville. That situation's gonna get ugly. Dude took 40 sacks last year, and many were not pretty. He's a tackling dummy. BA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geno Smith's Arm Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Only two QB's higher than Levi Brown in last 4 years. I'm watching you now. At first I thought this was just misleading, but looking at the list, I see it is misleading AND inaccurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts