papazoid Posted April 20, 2012 Posted April 20, 2012 According to NFL Network insider Jason LaCanfora: Sources tell me both the Buffalo Bills and Arizona Cardinals are interested in moving back, given the offensive line depth in this draft (a need for both clubs). http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d828701a4/article/nfl-draft-buzz-ryan-tannehill-still-the-key-fletcher-cox-at-6?module=HP11_hot_topics
JPS Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Barron may be the trade up target. Hope so. Getting Reiff plus one of the top 5 DTs or CBs would be a plus.
PromoTheRobot Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Someone hot would have to fall to us for there to even be a chance of a trade down. It's more likely such a deal happens ahead of #10. PTR
billnutinphoenix Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 I'd be very happy....Everyone's favorite WR from Notre Dame will likely be available up until pick 20...
jjmac Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 This could happen as we are all sitting in front of our TVs and/or computers...the commish walking to the podium before our pick and announcing, "We have a trade."
scurdog1 Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Every team outside the top 2 is looking to trade down....the question is are there REALLY any teams that are going to trade up...maybe 1, 2 at the most
BillsWatch Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Lots of teams looking to trade up a few slots if a player they really like is on board and they someone else may pick. It is unlikely to happen before draft day. Question is will any team do a "Vikings" and miss putting in their pick prompting a team trying to pick fast and bypass them.
BuffaloRebound Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Seems like a consensus is starting to form after the top 6 guys and Tannehill. Cox, Barron, Kuechly and Gilmore are the next 4 guys. Could see Dallas or Philly giving up a 3rd to move up to #10 and get one of those guys. Both teams are aggressive and have Manning, Vick, Romo, and now RG3 in the division. I guess the Browns could move up to #10 also if Tannehill doesn't go to Dolphins.
Dennis in NC Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Lots of teams looking to trade up a few slots if a player they really like is on board and they someone else may pick. It is unlikely to happen before draft day. Question is will any team do a "Vikings" and miss putting in their pick prompting a team trying to pick fast and bypass them. Have the Vikings done that (missed their selection) more than once? I remember the Vikes doing that a few years ago, but has it happened (to any team) any other time? I don't think so.
mrags Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Have the Vikings done that (missed their selection) more than once? I remember the Vikes doing that a few years ago, but has it happened (to any team) any other time? I don't think so. actually it happened to the Vikings on back to back years.
Wagon Circler Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 I want to end up with an off. tackle AND Michael Kendricks, the middle linebacker from cal. So a trade down would be an ideal scenario.
Reed83HOF Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Trading down is going to be very difficult in this draft. Not a lot separates the 10-20 talent, a team would really have to covet a player to trade up. The talent left at spot 10 for us to chose will either be a top 6 player that slides (Kalil, Blackmon, Claiborne or Richardson - none will happen) or that Floyd, Kuechly, Gilmore or Kirkpatrick will be there. I don't see us trading back with one of these remaining 8 guaranteed to be there. The picks given to us would have to be amazing...
jjmac Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Trading down is going to be very difficult in this draft. Not a lot separates the 10-20 talent, a team would really have to covet a player to trade up. The talent left at spot 10 for us to chose will either be a top 6 player that slides (Kalil, Blackmon, Claiborne or Richardson - none will happen) or that Floyd, Kuechly, Gilmore or Kirkpatrick will be there. I don't see us trading back with one of these remaining 8 guaranteed to be there. The picks given to us would have to be amazing... I read somewhere about the Patriots trading both of their 1st-rounders for our #10. Would you be interested?
BillsWatch Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Trading down is going to be very difficult in this draft. Not a lot separates the 10-20 talent, a team would really have to covet a player to trade up. The talent left at spot 10 for us to chose will either be a top 6 player that slides (Kalil, Blackmon, Claiborne or Richardson - none will happen) or that Floyd, Kuechly, Gilmore or Kirkpatrick will be there. I don't see us trading back with one of these remaining 8 guaranteed to be there. The picks given to us would have to be amazing... Lots separates the 10-20 talent - teams' opinions about them. All teams do not evaluate players the same way. How many players who have been guaranteed to be in top 10 and sitting in studio have waited while they were passed repeatedly by teams. Guarantees are worth the electrons they are written on.
Reed83HOF Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Lots separates the 10-20 talent - teams' opinions about them. All teams do not evaluate players the same way. How many players who have been guaranteed to be in top 10 and sitting in studio have waited while they were passed repeatedly by teams. Guarantees are worth the electrons they are written on. I don't dispute anything you have said as you are correct. However in this draft, after the top 6 picks or so, each player has more question marks than in previous years. Even Charlie Casserly has said that there is not a lot that separates the talent from 10-20... "In the eyes of most those half dozen elite prospects are Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin III, Matt Kalil, Trent Richardson, Morris Claiborne and Justin Blackmon. From pick seven to pick 20 there's a widely held view that the difference between the seventh best prospect and 20th best prospect is negligible. "I agree with the premise that there might not be a lot of difference," said Casserly. Buffalo at 10 is near the top of that range of second tier of prospects. Knowing the caliber of player the Bills can get at 10 is seen by many in the know as marginally better than what can be had at 20 leads some draft analysts to make the blanket conclusion that whomever GM Buddy Nix and his personnel staff target at 10 is seen as a reach. Casserly says that thinking is misguided, and that NFL clubs in a position like that of the Bills take a different approach to such scenarios. “I think what you have to do is get into a mindset of this, first of all you want to take the best player on the board, however it is set up," he said. "You can’t get into a mindset where if you’re picking at 10 that there are six elite players and you’ll be disappointed if you don’t get one of those six. If you’re picking 10 think about if you’re picking 20 or 25 and you’re going to get a good player there. The point is take a step back and don’t be too critical of the players that are sitting there and say they’re not worth the 10th pick." "Personnel executives just try to keep it all in perspective, line the board up with the best player on down the line," said Casserly. "When it comes to 10 you take him or you try to trade back and get into a group.” While trading back seems like a very sensible option, especially knowing the difference in player value is seen as marginal, that’s exactly why teams down at 18, 19 or 20 would be unwilling to move up. So finding a trade partner could prove difficult knowing teams at the bottom of the mid-first round range would not want to give up anything significant to get a player that isn’t seen as a whole lot better than what they can get where they currently sit."
jjmac Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Lots separates the 10-20 talent - teams' opinions about them. All teams do not evaluate players the same way. How many players who have been guaranteed to be in top 10 and sitting in studio have waited while they were passed repeatedly by teams. Guarantees are worth the electrons they are written on. The first thing that needs to happen is to determine who is in the 10-20 range. I can think of only 6 players this year who are guaranteed to be gone before our pick: Luck, RG3, Kalil, Richardson, Claiborne, and Blackmon.
BuffaloRebound Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 I don't dispute anything you have said as you are correct. However in this draft, after the top 6 picks or so, each player has more question marks than in previous years. Even Charlie Casserly has said that there is not a lot that separates the talent from 10-20... "In the eyes of most those half dozen elite prospects are Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin III, Matt Kalil, Trent Richardson, Morris Claiborne and Justin Blackmon. From pick seven to pick 20 there's a widely held view that the difference between the seventh best prospect and 20th best prospect is negligible. "I agree with the premise that there might not be a lot of difference," said Casserly. Buffalo at 10 is near the top of that range of second tier of prospects. Knowing the caliber of player the Bills can get at 10 is seen by many in the know as marginally better than what can be had at 20 leads some draft analysts to make the blanket conclusion that whomever GM Buddy Nix and his personnel staff target at 10 is seen as a reach. Casserly says that thinking is misguided, and that NFL clubs in a position like that of the Bills take a different approach to such scenarios. “I think what you have to do is get into a mindset of this, first of all you want to take the best player on the board, however it is set up," he said. "You can’t get into a mindset where if you’re picking at 10 that there are six elite players and you’ll be disappointed if you don’t get one of those six. If you’re picking 10 think about if you’re picking 20 or 25 and you’re going to get a good player there. The point is take a step back and don’t be too critical of the players that are sitting there and say they’re not worth the 10th pick." "Personnel executives just try to keep it all in perspective, line the board up with the best player on down the line," said Casserly. "When it comes to 10 you take him or you try to trade back and get into a group.” While trading back seems like a very sensible option, especially knowing the difference in player value is seen as marginal, that’s exactly why teams down at 18, 19 or 20 would be unwilling to move up. So finding a trade partner could prove difficult knowing teams at the bottom of the mid-first round range would not want to give up anything significant to get a player that isn’t seen as a whole lot better than what they can get where they currently sit." It works both ways in that teams like the Bills will be more willing to trade down than they would have in the past. Just means that you're not gonna get as much trading down but you still have to field the best team possible. Barron is much more valuable to the Cowboys than the Bills because Barron is a huge upgrade over what the Cowboys have. Kuechly is more valuable to the Bills than the Cowboys.
NoSaint Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 (edited) I forgot about this good reason to trade a few slots possibly, instead of reaching- even if we don't get a ransom -assuming there are a few players or decent range before our guys taken. (final year of rookie deal salary calculations) http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/20/fifth-year-contract-formula-could-push-tannehill-out-of-top-10/ And yet another way the 80s value chart is now off actual value (besides the advent of free agency and several cbas since the numbers were established) Edited April 21, 2012 by NoSaint
Reed83HOF Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 It works both ways in that teams like the Bills will be more willing to trade down than they would have in the past. Just means that you're not gonna get as much trading down but you still have to field the best team possible. Barron is much more valuable to the Cowboys than the Bills because Barron is a huge upgrade over what the Cowboys have. Kuechly is more valuable to the Bills than the Cowboys. I entirely agree and the point you raise is exactly correct; we won't get as much as trading down, which is why I don't think we will. Just using the past as an example and yes I know that isn't a golden indicator - things are different this year. If we won't get as much this year, I don't know if Buddy would bother trading down or not. He is on record saying that he doesn't like to get fancy with value, meaning that if you like the guy what is the difference between 10 and 15? You take him and don't try to get too fancy because somebody else might swoop in and steal him from you... For us to trade, Buddy is going to want a good deal...I just don't see a team giving us enough to move down...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 According to NFL Network insider Jason LaCanfora: Sources tell me both the Buffalo Bills and Arizona Cardinals are interested in moving back, given the offensive line depth in this draft (a need for both clubs). http://www.nfl.com/n...HP11_hot_topics Interesting also is the discussion of the dynamic that Tannehill holds over the dominos in the first round. Have the Vikings done that (missed their selection) more than once? I remember the Vikes doing that a few years ago, but has it happened (to any team) any other time? I don't think so. That player was Kevin Williams… a great player. And in fact, two teams, Jacksonville AND Carolina slipped in picks before the Vikings recovered. I forgot about this good reason to trade a few slots possibly, instead of reaching- even if we don't get a ransom -assuming there are a few players or decent range before our guys taken. (final year of rookie deal salary calculations) http://profootballta...-out-of-top-10/ And yet another way the 80s value chart is now off actual value (besides the advent of free agency and several cbas since the numbers were established) That's VERY interesting. So if you're taken in the Top Ten of the draft, your 5th year salary is based upon the Top Ten players at that position? I wonder how much weight teams give that, especially regarding Talley… er… Tannehill who might have to sit for a year or two. I entirely agree and the point you raise is exactly correct; we won't get as much as trading down, which is why I don't think we will. For us to trade, Buddy is going to want a good deal...I just don't see a team giving us enough to move down... Again though, even if the compensation for our first is not necessarily fully in line with previous values that have been established, you have to consider each proposal as a unique entity.
Recommended Posts