Reed83HOF Posted April 10, 2017 Posted April 10, 2017 I would take Mahomes or Trubisky at #10. Mahomes has top 3 QB potential, could be special. Trubisky looks like a potential franchise guy as well, ideal fit is a Shanahan WCO. Would not take Kizer or Watson. Later in the draft I would target Josh Dobbs and Chad Kelly. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5NHC4QH6-8 Well said!
YoloinOhio Posted April 10, 2017 Posted April 10, 2017 (edited) They've been linked to five of the top QBs. So, if a team behind them thinks they might take their guy, they could potentially trade down and depending on who is still there, still get their QB. It's pretty much exactly what they did in 2013, and despite the 1st rounder not working out, the strategy did. They ended up with their QB and a starting WR and starting MLB in the 2nd. And another pick I can't recall - Gragg maybe. The idea in theory is good imo. Especially if they would be happy with more than one of the QBs. Edited April 10, 2017 by YoloinOhio
Bill_with_it Posted April 10, 2017 Posted April 10, 2017 I don't know the draft. I don't know the QBs. I think what the Bills are doing is what they say they always do, and what I believe ALL teams do: They evaluate ALL the players who may be of interest so that they can put together their board. They rank players in order and, generally, they take the highest player who is left on their board. Now, if they have a QB at 10 and he's there, will they take him? I doubt it, but I don't know. But if they have a QB at 14 and he's sitting there when their turn comes up in the second round, they're taking him. So I think that's why they're looking at all these guys. They need to know what they think about each of these guys, because an opportunity may arise to steal someone. Like it or not, that's why they traded up for Ragland - they thought he had a much higher draft rank than where he had fallen, and they traded up not to miss out on him. Some rational thoughts rather than quick takes and hot takes. I agree with you 100. It also creates as you can see from the responses in this thread that the perception is they might take one at ten, so it might be an attempt to force a trade of picks in addition to the reasons and rational you stated.
LeGOATski Posted April 10, 2017 Posted April 10, 2017 (edited) The only thing about assigning proper draft value to players is that teams often seem to do so incorrectly. Case in point: The Bills are said to have had a 4th round grade on Russell Wilson. They stood pat and what happened? Seattle placed a higher value on him and took him before the Bills could. Likewise, how are all 32 teams' valuing of Dak Prescott as a 4th rounder looking right about now? To be clear, I'm not saying you should overdraft a guy or place a 1st round grade on a guy that you think doesn't deserve it. What I AM saying, though, is that the whole IDEA of deciding "what round player X 'should' be drafted in" is an objective and imperfect exercise. I am also saying that with the quarterback position, if you have a strong conviction that a guy can be a Franchise Quarterback and can lead you to a championship, how early is too early? If the goal is "let's just take a QB in the middle rounds and see how he turns out in a couple years", then fine. That's what you're doing. But if the goal is "let's identify and draft a guy that we think can lead us to a Super Bowl victory", then how early is "too early"? People often talk about draft value as if it's an absolute. In reality, draft value -- as determined by the 32 teams in the NFL -- is proven to be incorrect CONSTANTLY. Late round guys wind up being "first round caliber", and guys taken in the first round wind up busting. You still do your best to assign value, of course, but when it comes to the QB position in particular, I'm okay with "overdrafting" a guy if you think he can make you a perennial contender...bearing in mind that draft valuation is an objective and flawed process anyway. As if saying "this guy will make us a perennial contender" is so easy. You can only say that about a perfect prospect who's projected to go number 1, and even then, you could fail. The flip side to what you're saying about missing on a "Russel Wilson" (and something that seems to happen even more often) is drafting a "Blaine Gabbert" at number 10. This is why you simply trust your evaluation. That's your job and you spent the last year+ putting it together. Don't overdraft Trubisky, Mahomes, etc. They're not worth it. Wait until the value matches the player. That's also how teams end up with those their franchise guy. Oakland waited until the 2nd for Carr. Seahawks waited on Wilson until the 3rd, even though their OC was from Wisconsin and super-confident in him. Edited April 10, 2017 by LeGOATski
KollegeStudnet Posted April 10, 2017 Posted April 10, 2017 Still think Bills are selling the 10 for trade down/ extra picks. 6 picks, new coach, he need players. They've been linked to five of the top QBs. So, if a team behind them thinks they might take their guy, they could potentially trade down and depending on who is still there, still get their QB. It's pretty much exactly what they did in 2013, and despite the 1st rounder not working out, the strategy did. They ended up with their QB and a starting WR and starting MLB in the 2nd. And another pick I can't recall - Gragg maybe. The idea in theory is good imo. Especially if they would be happy with more than one of the QBs. True. Think they trade back and do the same as they did in 2013.
The Jokeman Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 (edited) With the current CBA it's foolish to take a QB in the top 10 picks if he isn't a franchise QB. As if you do then you have to give him a top 10 at his position contract in his 5th year if exercise his option. By contrast if taken outside the top 10 (in first round) if you take the option than you only give him a contract of average of QBs paid 3rd through 23rd aka most likely a much lower cap figure. Edited April 11, 2017 by The Jokeman
RyanC883 Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 smokscreen for trade-down partners? While at the same time looking at QB's like Peterson (and likely Dobbs at some point) who will be available later on.
Mark Vader Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 I don't know the draft. I don't know the QBs. I think what the Bills are doing is what they say they always do, and what I believe ALL teams do: They evaluate ALL the players who may be of interest so that they can put together their board. They rank players in order and, generally, they take the highest player who is left on their board. Now, if they have a QB at 10 and he's there, will they take him? I doubt it, but I don't know. But if they have a QB at 14 and he's sitting there when their turn comes up in the second round, they're taking him. So I think that's why they're looking at all these guys. They need to know what they think about each of these guys, because an opportunity may arise to steal someone. Like it or not, that's why they traded up for Ragland - they thought he had a much higher draft rank than where he had fallen, and they traded up not to miss out on him. I agree with your assessment. The Bills are evaluating as many players at a specific position, which is what they should do. It's no secret that I am no fan of this year's QB class, yet I would not be shocked if the Bills drafted a QB. I just don't want them taking on Day 1 or Day 2. They've been linked to five of the top QBs. So, if a team behind them thinks they might take their guy, they could potentially trade down and depending on who is still there, still get their QB. It's pretty much exactly what they did in 2013, and despite the 1st rounder not working out, the strategy did. They ended up with their QB and a starting WR and starting MLB in the 2nd. And another pick I can't recall - Gragg maybe. The idea in theory is good imo. Especially if they would be happy with more than one of the QBs. If the Bills were to trade down and gain more picks, then I could stomach drafting a QB with a higher pick. I wasn't all that thrilled with the drafting of E.J., but the extra picks made it more bearable. The Bills need more picks, due to the quality depth at certain positions in this years draft.
LeGOATski Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 With the current CBA it's foolish to take a QB in the top 10 picks if he isn't a franchise QB. As if you do then you have to give him a top 10 at his position contract in his 5th year if exercise his option. By contrast if taken outside the top 10 you only give him a contract of average of QBs paid 3rd through 23rd or a lower cap figure. That's a good point.
Thrivefourfive Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 Sadly, the Buffalo Bills are fooling no team into jumping up in the draft to pick one of the quarterbacks. Only Bills fans believe that's a possibility. The real talk around the shield is more like...hey, if the Bills want them, we don't.
Kemp2Warlick Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 Adam SchefterVerified account @AdamSchefter 6m6 minutes ago More Ron Jaworski on @SportsCenter on the top-rated QBs in this draft: "I wouldn't take any of these guys in the first round."
17 Josh Allen Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 There's only one QB I would consider drafting with the 10th pick in this draft and that's Patrick Mahomes. I consider him to be the best player in this draft and a future Pro Bowler and Franchise winning Super Bowl QB. To me he is a special player and if the Bills get him there QB problems will be solved for the next 12 years.
PromoTheRobot Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 (edited) Please keep in mind QBs always seem to rise in every draft. Without fail guys who were considered middling prospects get elevated to near god-like status by late April. That's a function of agents, media and the offseason. Prospects are who they are. They don't magically improve between January and April. Edited April 11, 2017 by PromoTheRobot
Bray Wyatt Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 With the current CBA it's foolish to take a QB in the top 10 picks if he isn't a franchise QB. As if you do then you have to give him a top 10 at his position contract in his 5th year if exercise his option. By contrast if taken outside the top 10 you only give him a contract of average of QBs paid 3rd through 23rd or a lower cap figure. This is an interesting fact that I did not know so thanks for sharing. That said, you would know by the time you need to exercise his option if he was a franchise QB so I do not think that really plays into consideration all that much as if he isn't you just wouldn't exercise it, and if he is you get a pretty good deal imo
thebandit27 Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 With the current CBA it's foolish to take a QB in the top 10 picks if he isn't a franchise QB. As if you do then you have to give him a top 10 at his position contract in his 5th year if exercise his option. By contrast if taken outside the top 10 you only give him a contract of average of QBs paid 3rd through 23rd or a lower cap figure. Except that the risk-reward is astronomically high if you get it right. If a guy proves himself a franchise QB, even by year 3, then you have him on a ridiculously cheap deal in years 3 and 4, and on a market-level deal in year 5.
Mr. WEO Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 I would take Mahomes or Trubisky at #10. Mahomes has top 3 QB potential, could be special. Trubisky looks like a potential franchise guy as well, ideal fit is a Shanahan WCO. Would not take Kizer or Watson. Later in the draft I would target Josh Dobbs and Chad Kelly. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5NHC4QH6-8 Top 3....where?
JMF2006 Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 I heard a lot of teams were planning on taking Brady in the 7th round! That's such crap, get the guy or don't, don't make excuses. If the QB you want is out there go get em or forever remain in purgatory. Coulda,shouda,didn't. BTW I think they draft Peterman in the 3rd after going safety /corner or corner/safety in rnds 1-2
Dorkington Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 They've been linked to five of the top QBs. So, if a team behind them thinks they might take their guy, they could potentially trade down and depending on who is still there, still get their QB. It's pretty much exactly what they did in 2013, and despite the 1st rounder not working out, the strategy did. They ended up with their QB and a starting WR and starting MLB in the 2nd. And another pick I can't recall - Gragg maybe. The idea in theory is good imo. Especially if they would be happy with more than one of the QBs. I for one hope we trade down, we need some more picks to shore up depth in many key positions.
jeffismagic Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 Top 3....where? One of the best 3 QB's in the NFL. I talked again to my friend that is a scout and he told me he thinks Mahomes will be better than Derek Carr. It's good to see the lights are on at One Bills Drive and they are looking at QB's. Let's hope they take the right one.
starrymessenger Posted April 11, 2017 Posted April 11, 2017 Adam SchefterVerified account @AdamSchefter 6m6 minutes ago More Ron Jaworski on @SportsCenter on the top-rated QBs in this draft: "I wouldn't take any of these guys in the first round." Well that may be what he would (or would not) do, but I would not be surprised if three QBs come off the board in the first round and maybe 4 by the high second. If I'm right about the interest its not unlikely that one goes top 10 either.
Recommended Posts