oman128 Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 I prefer the move down as we have holes at RT, LG, swing tackle, Punter, WR,TE, ILB, (4-3 DE), FS and QB back up.
RyanC883 Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 so, let me get this straight in regards to what counts for news at this time of year. Bills have the ninth pick. That suggest there will be better players available before it comes time to make a selection. Bills like better players. Best way to get better players is to consider trading up. Bills will then consider trading up, because it's the responsible thing to do. That said, no guarantee they will be able to get a deal done. Which means, Bills will then consider staying at No. 9. Or perhaps, trading down to add pick. The sky remains blue. jw well said.
filthymcnasty08 Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 (edited) I can't stop thinking about the possibility that we may need next years picks to package together to draft our next franchise QB. No 2015 picks should leave our hands because we are not yet set at QB for the future. I would bet our phone will ring at 9 once the QB's start moving ahead of us (and they will), the QB teams panic and we will have the option for a player we did not think we would have OR get to trade down for a small ransom. Hoping we stay cool at 9 and see what happens...I believe we will as we used FA to set ourselves up for pure BPA. If we are moving up....god speed - I hope its Clowney and I hope he's the 2nd coming of Bruce. Edited April 30, 2014 by filthymcnasty08
RyanC883 Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 They may want K. Mack. D would be incredibly nasty. Perhaps the Bills are following the Ravens and Tampa plan for success: overload of D talent, and slightly average to above average offensive play to make the Playoffs, and even win the SB.
BobbyC81 Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 I know it aggravates most when new topics that are similar get started but I personally would rather have the topic start over than weed through 17 pages. I agree.
RyanC883 Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 I can't stop thinking about the possibility that we may need next years picks to package together to draft our next franchise QB. No 2015 picks should leave our hands because we are not yet set at QB for the future. I would bet our phone will ring at 9 once the QB's start moving ahead of us (and they will), the QB teams panic and we will have the option for a player we did not think we would have OR get to trade down for a small ransom. Hoping we stay cool at 9 and see what happens...I believe we will as we used FA to set ourselves up for pure BPA. If we are moving up....god speed - I hope its Clowney and I hope he's the 2nd coming of Bruce. I generally agree with you. That we should save our picks because we may need them to go after Marcus Mariota next year. That said, I think adding K. Mack would give the defense the imposing, physical attitude it needs to dictate to every offense it faces. If it only costs a second this year and next, I'd do it. I still have Mack rated higher than Clowney, IMO. So, basically, if they trade up for the next B. Smith, I'm okay. otherwise, we need insurance to get Mariota in case Manuel does not perform.
CountryCletus Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 Kirby, we are on the same page... I am bouncing around between a few threads- too many people are trying to give up 9, 73, and Stevie, along with next years picks to slide up a few spots... It's disturbing...
Big C Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 I'd bet the Falcons are happy with the trade moving up for Julio Jones. With that said Falcons traded up 21 spots. They also were set at QB. It'd be a ballsy move, I still wouldn't trade up unless you're one player away from a SB. Or going for a QB. But look at what happened to the Falcons last year.
RyanC883 Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 Kirby, we are on the same page... I am bouncing around between a few threads- too many people are trying to give up 9, 73, and Stevie, along with next years picks to slide up a few spots... It's disturbing... that would be a terrible move. I'd only trade 2 seconds to move up. no way I'm trading Stevie. Having two vet WR's is a great thing to have. Plus Goodwin, Woods, and perhaps Watkins. (or K. Mack on D!)
filthymcnasty08 Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 They may want K. Mack. D would be incredibly nasty. Perhaps the Bills are following the Ravens and Tampa plan for success: overload of D talent, and slightly average to above average offensive play to make the Playoffs, and even win the SB. Mack is my bet for the player that suffers the unexpected fall on draft day. Call it a hunch...hard for a GM to pull the trig on a weak conference LB (with off the charts athleticism) in the top few picks vs. a blue chip OT, a stud WR, a franchise QB and a once in a lifetime DE. I think it's a lock that.... at least 2 QBs go 1-8 2 WR's go 1-8 2 OT's go 1-8 1 DE goes 1-8 Depending on how they fall, it leaves one team ahead of us to take Mack or theres a chance we could get him at 9. Minnesota is desperate for a QB, they will have to go QB...so basically 7 teams have to select other players. Stranger sh-t has happened on draft day.
dave mcbride Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 (edited) But look at what happened to the Falcons last year. ... And they were 26-9 the previous two seasons with two division titles. When was the last time the Bills won either a division title or 10 games? Fortune favors the bold - not weak teams with marginal talent bases on offense who are afraid to gamble. Mack is my bet for the player that suffers the unexpected fall on draft day. Call it a hunch...hard for a GM to pull the trig on a weak conference LB (with off the charts athleticism) in the top few picks vs. a blue chip OT, a stud WR, a franchise QB and a once in a lifetime DE. I think it's a lock that.... at least 2 QBs go 1-8 2 WR's go 1-8 2 OT's go 1-8 1 DE goes 1-8 Depending on how they fall, it leaves one team ahead of us to take Mack or theres a chance we could get him at 9. Minnesota is desperate for a QB, they will have to go QB...so basically 7 teams have to select other players. Stranger sh-t has happened on draft day. You may be right. I also find it hard to fathom that a DT or a CB doesn't go in the top 10. Edited April 30, 2014 by dave mcbride
CodeMonkey Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 (edited) so, let me get this straight in regards to what counts for news at this time of year. Bills have the ninth pick. That suggest there will be better players available before it comes time to make a selection. Bills like better players. Best way to get better players is to consider trading up. Bills will then consider trading up, because it's the responsible thing to do. That said, no guarantee they will be able to get a deal done. Which means, Bills will then consider staying at No. 9. Or perhaps, trading down to add pick. The sky remains blue. jw Yes I believe you just summed up all Bills related "news" in all outlets both amateur and professional for the past few months. But you forgot the Jills feminine hygiene. Edited April 30, 2014 by CodeMonkey
offyourocker Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 I hope so....not liking the idea of trading up and losing picks in this years deep draft! Same here. Especially for Watkins. If he had the size of Megatron then yes. If it is for Clowney the maybe. All together i would rather pick a tackle at 9
qwksilver Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 (edited) First I think Atlanta goes to 1 for Clowney. I think we trade with Houston to 6 to get ahead of Tampa and take Evans. Our 9, 5th and SJ or our 9 and 73. Then Houston could have their pick of qb's @ 9 plus a boatload of other picks from us and Falcons. It costs too much to go any higher than 6. Hopefully the qb's go early but that doesn't look like the case. Edited April 30, 2014 by qwksilver
SBUffalo Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 (edited) Nevermind. Misread. Edited April 30, 2014 by SBUffalo
Solomon Grundy Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 I generally agree with you. That we should save our picks because we may need them to go after Marcus Mariota next year. That said, I think adding K. Mack would give the defense the imposing, physical attitude it needs to dictate to every offense it faces. If it only costs a second this year and next, I'd do it. I still have Mack rated higher than Clowney, IMO. So, basically, if they trade up for the next B. Smith, I'm okay. otherwise, we need insurance to get Mariota in case Manuel does not perform. To hell with Marcus Mariota! By the time the draft comes around next year they would have broken him down and devalued him like they did Teddy Bridgewater. We have our QB! Whaley and Marrone knows this, that's why they are in the trade up scenario. I'd give the 2nd and swap 1st to get Watkins, then with my 3rd I'd snag Fiedorowicz(TE) who Greg Cosell compares to Gronk.
SBUffalo Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 This is the first time in years that I had absolutely no idea what might happen. Last year I guessed correctly that they would trade down with St. Louis and pick a QB at 16 (was wrong on which QB). The year before the buzz right before was that Gilmore was well-liked by Buffalo and there were a few other obvious option. The year before was either Miller or Dareus depending on who fell. This year? -Could stick at 9 to pick one of Ebron, the tackle who falls, the WR who falls -could trade back, but for what? -could trade up for multiple different options. I can normally get a good guess, and I thought they were zeroing in on a tackle but now I have no clue. A trade up would be fun, but this is a deep draft so giving up extra picks might hurt.
mannc Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 To hell with Marcus Mariota! By the time the draft comes around next year they would have broken him down and devalued him like they did Teddy Bridgewater. We have our QB! Whaley and Marrone knows this, that's why they are in the trade up scenario. I'd give the 2nd and swap 1st to get Watkins, then with my 3rd I'd snag Fiedorowicz(TE) who Greg Cosell compares to Gronk. Wouldn't it have been easier to just tank a few games at the end of the season? Did you really enjoy that victory over Fins that much?
PO'14 Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 Wouldn't it have been easier to just tank a few games at the end of the season? Did you really enjoy that victory over Fins that much? I thought they tanked very well against the Pats
maryland-bills-fan Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 Stupid. We have multiple holes. Losing 4-5 top picks for one player is not going to do anything. Some jerk trolling for fame.
Recommended Posts