Potential Trade Down Partners

[section122]

I know a popular idea is always to trade down. I also know the popular rebuttal is that you need a partner. I did some digging to see what teams drafting behind us need and what it would gain the Bills in return. I'm going to use the draft trade chart (even if it is a bit out of date) to make it work as best as possible.

 

11. Saints - right behind us, I just don't see a scenario for them to give up anything to move up a spot.

 

12. Browns - they have a ton of draft capital. In my mind a team would trade up because they are worried a team will grab what they want. Here the Browns would have to want defensive help to move in front of the Saints as that is where I see the Saints going. I don't think this fits the philosophy the Browns are using and I wouldn't be surprised to see Browns go best available QB. Keep that in mind.

 

13. Cardinals - I could see them interested in moving up. If they want their choice of QB before the Browns the Bills and Saints would be options. If Foster is sitting there I think they could try to jump ahead of the Saints who could use him. Making the trade is a bit difficult but it would look something like Buffalo gives 10, 156 (5th), and 171 (5th) for Arizona's 13 and 77. While this trade would give the Bills 4 picks in the top 77 It would lower their picks from 6 to 5.

 

14. Eagles - If a Jonathan Allen, Solomon Thomas, or Leonard Fournette are at 10 I could see the Eagles interested. Before FA I thought this pick was WR for sure but the Eagles made some serious moves to help their young QB (wish whaley could have done more but different topic). Philly still could take a WR with Alshon on a 1 year deal or a CB. That would make me nervous to trade with them. However a trade would look like 10 and 171 for 14 and 74. This is right in the sweet spot of improving later picks while maintaining the same amount.

 

15. Colts - help on the line. I think a Jonathan Allen or Solomon Thomas again could help make a move happen. Especially since I could see all 4 teams between us snapping up dl in front of them. This trade would look like 10 and 171 for 15, 46, and 158. Now we are starting to see a wide enough gap to get an extra 2nd!

 

There are more partners as you go down the list but 15 is right around where you see a huge benefit of getting to. Down this deep though teams have to give up a lot to move up.

 

16. Ravens - don't remember a trade up since Flacco so I'll skip them.

 

17. Redskins - No GM I would be surprised to see trading around

 

18. Titans - If the 2 top WRs are on the board I could see them trying to get up higher than Cleveland/Philly. I don't particularly like the idea of trading with a team that will likely take a guy you like but going this far down it could just as easily be another team... They don't have a second so you would move down 8 spots in the first and get a bunch of late picks. Not a move I'd like.

 

19. Tampa Bay - Solomon Thomas or Jonathan Allen again. I hope this drives home the point of d-lineman being a need in these groups and why people might want to come up. However they also could use a S so if Hooker or Adams are there (I would hope the Bills would just take them) they likely wouldn't be after this pick. give 10, 75 get 19, 50, 84, 125, 162. TB would really have to like a player to mortgage almost their entire draft. Bills would have 19, 44, 50, 84, 125, 156, 162, 171, and 195. That is a lot of picks!

 

I think this is the range where teams may be willing to part with a first next year instead of giving up a ton of their draft capital this year.

 

20. Broncos - Could go D-line or O-line. I think they stay put. Not big enough needs and no top o-line talent to make them move.

 

21. Lions - Talk to their fans. They NEED a LB. I could see Foster being eye candy for them. give 10, 171, and 195 get 21, 53, 85. 5 picks in the top 85 would be a nice boost to the Bills.

 

22. Miami - Trade in the division? Nah

 

23. NYG - O-line, maybe QB to groom I would expect them to stay put as that is the range they can grab either of those.

 

24. Oak - another d-line team. Possibly a CB. It would take Oaklands first 5 picks just to get enough for #10. The Raiders of old maybe. Reggie's Raiders? I don't see it.

 

25. Houston - QB I could see them trying to get in front of Cleveland's 2nd pick to grab their QB and I would make them pay for it. At this point a first next year would have to be on the table. They already gave up their 2nd next year so I don't know if they would be willing to do that. For a team on the cusp though it may be possible to get them to push all of their chips in.

 

I don't think any of the rest of the teams would be moving up. 25 is about as low as the Bills could go and I think 15 might be as low as I would go. C Davis, M Williams, any of the QBs, Peppers ( ), Howard could all still be sitting there.

 

Thoughts?

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

I know a popular idea is always to trade down. I also know the popular rebuttal is that you need a partner. I did some digging to see what teams drafting behind us need and what it would gain the Bills in return. I'm going to use the draft trade chart (even if it is a bit out of date) to make it work as best as possible.

 

11. Saints - right behind us, I just don't see a scenario for them to give up anything to move up a spot.

 

12. Browns - they have a ton of draft capital. In my mind a team would trade up because they are worried a team will grab what they want. Here the Browns would have to want defensive help to move in front of the Saints as that is where I see the Saints going. I don't think this fits the philosophy the Browns are using and I wouldn't be surprised to see Browns go best available QB. Keep that in mind.

 

13. Cardinals - I could see them interested in moving up. If they want their choice of QB before the Browns the Bills and Saints would be options. If Foster is sitting there I think they could try to jump ahead of the Saints who could use him. Making the trade is a bit difficult but it would look something like Buffalo gives 10, 156 (5th), and 171 (5th) for Arizona's 13 and 77. While this trade would give the Bills 4 picks in the top 77 It would lower their picks from 6 to 5.

 

14. Eagles - If a Jonathan Allen, Solomon Thomas, or Leonard Fournette are at 10 I could see the Eagles interested. Before FA I thought this pick was WR for sure but the Eagles made some serious moves to help their young QB (wish whaley could have done more but different topic). Philly still could take a WR with Alshon on a 1 year deal or a CB. That would make me nervous to trade with them. However a trade would look like 10 and 171 for 14 and 74. This is right in the sweet spot of improving later picks while maintaining the same amount.

 

15. Colts - help on the line. I think a Jonathan Allen or Solomon Thomas again could help make a move happen. Especially since I could see all 4 teams between us snapping up dl in front of them. This trade would look like 10 and 171 for 15, 46, and 158. Now we are starting to see a wide enough gap to get an extra 2nd!

 

There are more partners as you go down the list but 15 is right around where you see a huge benefit of getting to. Down this deep though teams have to give up a lot to move up.

 

16. Ravens - don't remember a trade up since Flacco so I'll skip them.

 

17. Redskins - No GM I would be surprised to see trading around

 

18. Titans - If the 2 top WRs are on the board I could see them trying to get up higher than Cleveland/Philly. I don't particularly like the idea of trading with a team that will likely take a guy you like but going this far down it could just as easily be another team... They don't have a second so you would move down 8 spots in the first and get a bunch of late picks. Not a move I'd like.

 

19. Tampa Bay - Solomon Thomas or Jonathan Allen again. I hope this drives home the point of d-lineman being a need in these groups and why people might want to come up. However they also could use a S so if Hooker or Adams are there (I would hope the Bills would just take them) they likely wouldn't be after this pick. give 10, 75 get 19, 50, 84, 125, 162. TB would really have to like a player to mortgage almost their entire draft. Bills would have 19, 44, 50, 84, 125, 156, 162, 171, and 195. That is a lot of picks!

 

I think this is the range where teams may be willing to part with a first next year instead of giving up a ton of their draft capital this year.

 

20. Broncos - Could go D-line or O-line. I think they stay put. Not big enough needs and no top o-line talent to make them move.

 

21. Lions - Talk to their fans. They NEED a LB. I could see Foster being eye candy for them. give 10, 171, and 195 get 21, 53, 85. 5 picks in the top 85 would be a nice boost to the Bills.

 

22. Miami - Trade in the division? Nah

 

23. NYG - O-line, maybe QB to groom I would expect them to stay put as that is the range they can grab either of those.

 

24. Oak - another d-line team. Possibly a CB. It would take Oaklands first 5 picks just to get enough for #10. The Raiders of old maybe. Reggie's Raiders? I don't see it.

 

25. Houston - QB I could see them trying to get in front of Cleveland's 2nd pick to grab their QB and I would make them pay for it. At this point a first next year would have to be on the table. They already gave up their 2nd next year so I don't know if they would be willing to do that. For a team on the cusp though it may be possible to get them to push all of their chips in.

 

I don't think any of the rest of the teams would be moving up. 25 is about as low as the Bills could go and I think 15 might be as low as I would go. C Davis, M Williams, any of the QBs, Peppers ( ), Howard could all still be sitting there.

 

Thoughts?

 

...EXCELLENT write up......what would be most advantageous to Bflo as far as gaining additional pick(s) in your view?......

[section122]

 

...EXCELLENT write up......what would be most advantageous to Bflo as far as gaining additional pick(s) in your view?......

 

I think 15 is the sweet spot for players that would fit a need and gain us enough picks to make it worthwhile. Like I said some of the guys we would be happy with at 10 should still be there. We would have 3 picks in the top 46 which would allow the Bills to go WR, CB, S and address the 3 biggest holes (imo) with potential impact players.

 

Further down 20 or so is where next year's firsts come in to play. If the long term strategy is 2018 for a QB that would be huge in allowing the Bills to move up next year. 25 is the absolute lowest I would go from 10 and that would require next years first for me.

 

edit: and thanks

Edited March 24, 2017 by section122

[Bigantall]

I know a popular idea is always to trade down. I also know the popular rebuttal is that you need a partner. I did some digging to see what teams drafting behind us need and what it would gain the Bills in return. I'm going to use the draft trade chart (even if it is a bit out of date) to make it work as best as possible.

 

11. Saints - right behind us, I just don't see a scenario for them to give up anything to move up a spot.

 

12. Browns - they have a ton of draft capital. In my mind a team would trade up because they are worried a team will grab what they want. Here the Browns would have to want defensive help to move in front of the Saints as that is where I see the Saints going. I don't think this fits the philosophy the Browns are using and I wouldn't be surprised to see Browns go best available QB. Keep that in mind.

 

13. Cardinals - I could see them interested in moving up. If they want their choice of QB before the Browns the Bills and Saints would be options. If Foster is sitting there I think they could try to jump ahead of the Saints who could use him. Making the trade is a bit difficult but it would look something like Buffalo gives 10, 156 (5th), and 171 (5th) for Arizona's 13 and 77. While this trade would give the Bills 4 picks in the top 77 It would lower their picks from 6 to 5.

 

14. Eagles - If a Jonathan Allen, Solomon Thomas, or Leonard Fournette are at 10 I could see the Eagles interested. Before FA I thought this pick was WR for sure but the Eagles made some serious moves to help their young QB (wish whaley could have done more but different topic). Philly still could take a WR with Alshon on a 1 year deal or a CB. That would make me nervous to trade with them. However a trade would look like 10 and 171 for 14 and 74. This is right in the sweet spot of improving later picks while maintaining the same amount.

 

15. Colts - help on the line. I think a Jonathan Allen or Solomon Thomas again could help make a move happen. Especially since I could see all 4 teams between us snapping up dl in front of them. This trade would look like 10 and 171 for 15, 46, and 158. Now we are starting to see a wide enough gap to get an extra 2nd!

 

There are more partners as you go down the list but 15 is right around where you see a huge benefit of getting to. Down this deep though teams have to give up a lot to move up.

 

16. Ravens - don't remember a trade up since Flacco so I'll skip them.

 

17. Redskins - No GM I would be surprised to see trading around

 

18. Titans - If the 2 top WRs are on the board I could see them trying to get up higher than Cleveland/Philly. I don't particularly like the idea of trading with a team that will likely take a guy you like but going this far down it could just as easily be another team... They don't have a second so you would move down 8 spots in the first and get a bunch of late picks. Not a move I'd like.

 

19. Tampa Bay - Solomon Thomas or Jonathan Allen again. I hope this drives home the point of d-lineman being a need in these groups and why people might want to come up. However they also could use a S so if Hooker or Adams are there (I would hope the Bills would just take them) they likely wouldn't be after this pick. give 10, 75 get 19, 50, 84, 125, 162. TB would really have to like a player to mortgage almost their entire draft. Bills would have 19, 44, 50, 84, 125, 156, 162, 171, and 195. That is a lot of picks!

 

I think this is the range where teams may be willing to part with a first next year instead of giving up a ton of their draft capital this year.

 

20. Broncos - Could go D-line or O-line. I think they stay put. Not big enough needs and no top o-line talent to make them move.

 

21. Lions - Talk to their fans. They NEED a LB. I could see Foster being eye candy for them. give 10, 171, and 195 get 21, 53, 85. 5 picks in the top 85 would be a nice boost to the Bills.

 

22. Miami - Trade in the division? Nah

 

23. NYG - O-line, maybe QB to groom I would expect them to stay put as that is the range they can grab either of those.

 

24. Oak - another d-line team. Possibly a CB. It would take Oaklands first 5 picks just to get enough for #10. The Raiders of old maybe. Reggie's Raiders? I don't see it.

 

25. Houston - QB I could see them trying to get in front of Cleveland's 2nd pick to grab their QB and I would make them pay for it. At this point a first next year would have to be on the table. They already gave up their 2nd next year so I don't know if they would be willing to do that. For a team on the cusp though it may be possible to get them to push all of their chips in.

 

I don't think any of the rest of the teams would be moving up. 25 is about as low as the Bills could go and I think 15 might be as low as I would go. C Davis, M Williams, any of the QBs, Peppers ( ), Howard could all still be sitting there.

 

Thoughts?

My thoughts are you have to much time on your hands way to much reading

[NewEra]

 

I think 15 is the sweet spot for players that would fit a need and gain us enough picks to make it worthwhile. Like I said some of the guys we would be happy with at 10 should still be there. We would have 3 picks in the top 46 which would allow the Bills to go WR, CB, S and address the 3 biggest holes (imo) with potential impact players.

 

Further down 20 or so is where next year's firsts come in to play. If the long term strategy is 2018 for a QB that would be huge in allowing the Bills to move up next year. 25 is the absolute lowest I would go from 10 and that would require next years first for me.

 

edit: and thanks

Going CB WR and S makes sense and would be my ideal scenario (as long as we sign zach brown or another good LB) but I can't see us not drafting a QB somewhere in there if we have 3 picks in the first 2 rds. Could definitely seeing us grab Watson, trubisky, Maholmes or Kizer (I pray we don't take Kizer) if we trade down and then grab a cb and we with the other 2 picks. Hyde is going to be playing a lot of safety and I believe they view poyer as a starter. Hyde will probably be sliding down into the slot on occasion but I really think we're going to take a CB with our 1st or second pick. I don think baker falls to us in rd 2 or he might be the pick instead of a CB

[frogger]

I like it 122, good job

[Kirby Jackson]

 

I think 15 is the sweet spot for players that would fit a need and gain us enough picks to make it worthwhile. Like I said some of the guys we would be happy with at 10 should still be there. We would have 3 picks in the top 46 which would allow the Bills to go WR, CB, S and address the 3 biggest holes (imo) with potential impact players.

 

Further down 20 or so is where next year's firsts come in to play. If the long term strategy is 2018 for a QB that would be huge in allowing the Bills to move up next year. 25 is the absolute lowest I would go from 10 and that would require next years first for me.

 

edit: and thanks

Great stuff!! I think a run on DL or QB would be best case for a trade down. The Saints are taking a pass rusher at 11 and if they are thin someone may want to get in front of them. Jonathan Allen or Barnett would have to be off the board (assuming that Thomas and Garrett are gone). QB would be the other option. We would need (at least) 1 gone by 10. IMO, the best case scenario for a trade down would look something like this:

Cleveland - Garrett

SF - Solomon Thomas

Bears - Watson

Jags - Allen

Titans - Lattimore

Jets - Trubisky

Chargers - Hooker

Panthers - Fournette

Bengals - Foster

[papazoid]

wouldn't it suck if the saints, browns or cardinals traded up to #10....drafted the QB of the future .....and hit on it ??

[H2o]

I would like the scenario with the Lions. Having 5 picks in the top 85 of this heavy defensive draft with our needs could be a franchise changer.

[K D]

If there's multiple options at WR or S I would definitely trade down if there are takers

[section122]

My thoughts are you have to much time on your hands way to much reading

 

That's why I posted at the end of the day Friday. Killing the last of my clock!

 

Going CB WR and S makes sense and would be my ideal scenario (as long as we sign zach brown or another good LB) but I can't see us not drafting a QB somewhere in there if we have 3 picks in the first 2 rds. Could definitely seeing us grab Watson, trubisky, Maholmes or Kizer (I pray we don't take Kizer) if we trade down and then grab a cb and we with the other 2 picks. Hyde is going to be playing a lot of safety and I believe they view poyer as a starter. Hyde will probably be sliding down into the slot on occasion but I really think we're going to take a CB with our 1st or second pick. I don think baker falls to us in rd 2 or he might be the pick instead of a CB

 

I wouldn't be mad with a qb if they have extra picks. As it stands now there are much bigger holes than QB imo (I'm a known TT supporter ) and I forgot about the hole at LB. I absolutely don't see Poyer as a starter and hope the Bills don't either. I agree with your stance on Hyde though.

 

I like it 122, good job

 

Thanks!

 

Great stuff!! I think a run on DL or QB would be best case for a trade down. The Saints are taking a pass rusher at 11 and if they are thin someone may want to get in front of them. Jonathan Allen or Barnett would have to be off the board (assuming that Thomas and Garrett are gone). QB would be the other option. We would need (at least) 1 gone by 10. IMO, the best case scenario for a trade down would look something like this:

Cleveland - Garrett

SF - Solomon Thomas

Bears - Watson

Jags - Allen

Titans - Lattimore

Jets - Trubisky

Chargers - Hooker

Panthers - Fournette

Bengals - Foster

 

If this was the draft I would run for Adams! lol. Do you think it would be better to have both groups run out? I think having a couple of each left would force teams to move up and get their guy. I definitely think NO goes defense and wouldn't be surprised to see it be a d-lineman.

 

wouldn't it suck if the saints, browns or cardinals traded up to #10....drafted the QB of the future .....and hit on it ??

 

Sure it would but I don't know about any of these guys. Watson is my favorite but that arm strength scares me.

[Perk71]

I know a popular idea is always to trade down. I also know the popular rebuttal is that you need a partner. I did some digging to see what teams drafting behind us need and what it would gain the Bills in return. I'm going to use the draft trade chart (even if it is a bit out of date) to make it work as best as possible.

 

11. Saints - right behind us, I just don't see a scenario for them to give up anything to move up a spot.

 

12. Browns - they have a ton of draft capital. In my mind a team would trade up because they are worried a team will grab what they want. Here the Browns would have to want defensive help to move in front of the Saints as that is where I see the Saints going. I don't think this fits the philosophy the Browns are using and I wouldn't be surprised to see Browns go best available QB. Keep that in mind.

 

13. Cardinals - I could see them interested in moving up. If they want their choice of QB before the Browns the Bills and Saints would be options. If Foster is sitting there I think they could try to jump ahead of the Saints who could use him. Making the trade is a bit difficult but it would look something like Buffalo gives 10, 156 (5th), and 171 (5th) for Arizona's 13 and 77. While this trade would give the Bills 4 picks in the top 77 It would lower their picks from 6 to 5.

 

14. Eagles - If a Jonathan Allen, Solomon Thomas, or Leonard Fournette are at 10 I could see the Eagles interested. Before FA I thought this pick was WR for sure but the Eagles made some serious moves to help their young QB (wish whaley could have done more but different topic). Philly still could take a WR with Alshon on a 1 year deal or a CB. That would make me nervous to trade with them. However a trade would look like 10 and 171 for 14 and 74. This is right in the sweet spot of improving later picks while maintaining the same amount.

 

15. Colts - help on the line. I think a Jonathan Allen or Solomon Thomas again could help make a move happen. Especially since I could see all 4 teams between us snapping up dl in front of them. This trade would look like 10 and 171 for 15, 46, and 158. Now we are starting to see a wide enough gap to get an extra 2nd!

 

There are more partners as you go down the list but 15 is right around where you see a huge benefit of getting to. Down this deep though teams have to give up a lot to move up.

 

16. Ravens - don't remember a trade up since Flacco so I'll skip them.

 

17. Redskins - No GM I would be surprised to see trading around

 

18. Titans - If the 2 top WRs are on the board I could see them trying to get up higher than Cleveland/Philly. I don't particularly like the idea of trading with a team that will likely take a guy you like but going this far down it could just as easily be another team... They don't have a second so you would move down 8 spots in the first and get a bunch of late picks. Not a move I'd like.

 

19. Tampa Bay - Solomon Thomas or Jonathan Allen again. I hope this drives home the point of d-lineman being a need in these groups and why people might want to come up. However they also could use a S so if Hooker or Adams are there (I would hope the Bills would just take them) they likely wouldn't be after this pick. give 10, 75 get 19, 50, 84, 125, 162. TB would really have to like a player to mortgage almost their entire draft. Bills would have 19, 44, 50, 84, 125, 156, 162, 171, and 195. That is a lot of picks!

 

I think this is the range where teams may be willing to part with a first next year instead of giving up a ton of their draft capital this year.

 

20. Broncos - Could go D-line or O-line. I think they stay put. Not big enough needs and no top o-line talent to make them move.

 

21. Lions - Talk to their fans. They NEED a LB. I could see Foster being eye candy for them. give 10, 171, and 195 get 21, 53, 85. 5 picks in the top 85 would be a nice boost to the Bills.

 

22. Miami - Trade in the division? Nah

 

23. NYG - O-line, maybe QB to groom I would expect them to stay put as that is the range they can grab either of those.

 

24. Oak - another d-line team. Possibly a CB. It would take Oaklands first 5 picks just to get enough for #10. The Raiders of old maybe. Reggie's Raiders? I don't see it.

 

25. Houston - QB I could see them trying to get in front of Cleveland's 2nd pick to grab their QB and I would make them pay for it. At this point a first next year would have to be on the table. They already gave up their 2nd next year so I don't know if they would be willing to do that. For a team on the cusp though it may be possible to get them to push all of their chips in.

 

I don't think any of the rest of the teams would be moving up. 25 is about as low as the Bills could go and I think 15 might be as low as I would go. C Davis, M Williams, any of the QBs, Peppers ( ), Howard could all still be sitting there.

 

Thoughts?

Well thought out post. Thank you!

[Domdab99]

My thoughts are you have to much time on your hands way to much reading

 

My thoughts are that if you did a little more reading, you'd be able to write a coherent sentence and understand the difference between "to" and too."

[Kirby Jackson]

If this was the draft I would run for Adams! lol. Do you think it would be better to have both groups run out? I think having a couple of each left would force teams to move up and get their guy. I definitely think NO goes defense and wouldn't be surprised to see it be a d-lineman.

 

Adams is high on my list too. I'd probably do the same.

 

The Saints have signed some LBs (Teo, Klein). I could see a CB too. The fear that they may take a DL should be enough for someone to jump them. Pass rushers and QBs are the positions that people will trade up for luckily. The worst case scenario (and more likely IMO) is 1 or less QB and 2 DL.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

 

I think 15 is the sweet spot for players that would fit a need and gain us enough picks to make it worthwhile. Like I said some of the guys we would be happy with at 10 should still be there. We would have 3 picks in the top 46 which would allow the Bills to go WR, CB, S and address the 3 biggest holes (imo) with potential impact players.

 

Further down 20 or so is where next year's firsts come in to play. If the long term strategy is 2018 for a QB that would be huge in allowing the Bills to move up next year. 25 is the absolute lowest I would go from 10 and that would require next years first for me.

 

edit: and thanks

 

...again great job......you analysis makes me think about trying to balance 2017 and 2018....2017 is thin with only 6 picks......so trading down is mandatory IMO....getting into the 20's with another 1st in 2018 is intriguing with an "allegedly" better QB class.....I'm not sure how much more $$$ can be invested in the receiving corp (WR &TE) right now with the uncertainty at QB with TT......he has yet to show the knack to process the entire field in time allotted (5+ seconds) to find or spot receivers....I'd bet film rats could find many examples of where receivers broke off routes or coasted because they doubted TT would ever see them, with his wheels being his perceived savior.....Dennison has his work cut out to retrain TT's "gray matter" and I'm not sure that is doable...so although the receiving corp is NOT marquee names other than Sammy and perhaps Clay, you may stop investing in that and let McCoach concentrate on filling defensive voids in the draft, one that is supposedly rich in DB's....stay tuned......

[LABILLBACKER]

If Adams and Hooker are both gone by our pick, you immediately started calling teams 11-15. I don't see as trading down below the Colts. If we could pick up OJ Howard or Corey Davis and get a couple extra picks that would be huge. It all depends on the wants of the trade partner and what they're willing to give up. I think Cleveland is the most likely candidate.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

If Adams and Hooker are both gone by our pick, you immediately started calling teams 11-15. I don't see as trading down below the Colts. If we could pick up OJ Howard or Corey Davis and get a couple extra picks that would be huge. It all depends on the wants of the trade partner and what they're willing to give up. I think Cleveland is the most likely candidate.

 

...maybe it's just me being older than dirt, but I'm struggling with more investment in WR or TE spot early on when TT has yet to demonstrate he can find the guys we have....this offense needs greater BALANCE versus "run or done" or "my wheels will save the day".....

[Beef Jerky]

wouldn't it suck if the saints, browns or cardinals traded up to #10....drafted the QB of the future .....and hit on it ??

Well it is impossible for the Browns to draft "QB of the future" so I am not worried about them.

[aristocrat]

a trade back makes so much sense for us. i'd love something like mike williams at 15-16, the uconn corner in 2nd, tabor cb from florida and jake butt in the 3rd. boom.

[Kirby Jackson]

 

...maybe it's just me being older than dirt, but I'm struggling with more investment in WR or TE spot early on when TT has yet to demonstrate he can find the guys we have....this offense needs greater BALANCE versus "run or done" or "my wheels will save the day".....

We aren't a great passing team so we shouldn't invest in upgrading the weapons? I've never (and will never) understand that logic. You have a GLARING hole at the #2 pass catcher. I specifically worded it that way because I think OJ Howard is certainly a possibility. This team has big holes in the secondary as well. I can't see the 1st pick invested anywhere else. It should be ideal in this draft too because there are a handful of players in those areas that are valued right around pick 10. Edited March 24, 2017 by Kirby Jackson