BuffaloHokie13 Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 This is a question that really shouldn't be asked until about pick 8 on draft night imo.
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 same. Trade down for picks this year - yes. Jake Butt is in this year's draft. The question is about trading for picks in 2018. the question is about trading down for picks in next year's' draft... Ha! They must have changed that in the title on me.
bigK14094 Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 I think everyone near the top of the draft wants to trade down so I doubt we'll be able to. The Browns want to trade down, the 49ers publicly announced they want to trade down. The top pool of players isn't all that great. Probably our best bet is if Mike Williams is still there and a team down a few spots needs a receiver. I think Whaley will trade down if he can but I don't see it happening. Yes, it will be a tactical decision by a trading partner, whoever that might be. And, Whaley can't anticipate who will call. He just needs to know how much he can get. There is a chart I saw one time that gives points on future draft picks....and is allegedly used to even up trades. For the Bills current situation.....another first plus and additional 2 or 3 would do it for me depending on what team called.
somnus00 Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 Depends how the first 9 picks go. I don't believe in trading down just for the sake of it if there are still elite level players available. Now if the players available at 10 aren't graded much higher than guys projected to go later then absolutely try and trade down. Almost word for word what I was planning on writing.
aristocrat Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 same. Trade down for picks this year - yes. Jake Butt is in this year's draft. The question is about trading for picks in 2018. the question is about trading down for picks in next year's' draft... misread....my apologies.
PlayoffsPlease Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 All you Whaley bashers crack me up. He's about to paint his masterpiece. And if not,he's done no worse.The guy can GM He has done it all as a GM, except put a playoff team on the field.
BobChalmers Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 If there is a willing dance partner, sure! Guessing there is a lot of competition to move back this year - so it will be easier said than done. Would only advise against it if they feel like a star player from their evaluation is there at 10 - then just stay put. This - a lot of teams are wanting to move back - based on the buzz anyway. They'll need to have a top guy fall that they don't want to have a good trade option.
Beef Jerky Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 You privy to something we aint?? You not see everything that has happened like the rest of us?
KollegeStudnet Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 Wouldn't mind them getting a couple extra picks.
billykaykay Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 Yes, it will be a tactical decision by a trading partner, whoever that might be. And, Whaley can't anticipate who will call. He just needs to know how much he can get. There is a chart I saw one time that gives points on future draft picks....and is allegedly used to even up trades. For the Bills current situation.....another first plus and additional 2 or 3 would do it for me depending on what team called. http://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 the experts here can figure out the doables.....it is well beyond my limited cranial capacity.....find a willing partner in the 20's......grab an extra 2018 1st.....2017 booty could be a 2nd or 3rd as well (Attention Chart Gurus)....use the extra 2nd or 3rd on a QB and posture for 2018 with two 1sts when your availability of your prized QB is forecasted with a much better outlook....go into 2017 with TT, Yates, later draftee and Jones......one gets cut, one to PS and two to active roster.....
Buffalo Barbarian Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 I’m glad to see the Bills do their due diligence on the QB’s in the draft. If the Bills do take a QB in the first round, I hope it’s not another bust like EJ Manuel or JP Losman. If there isn’t a QB worthy of a high round draft pick and the Bills are truly in the market for their “future” QB, IMO, they should move back with teams in the draft, ask for 2018 draft picks instead, that way if the Bills need to trade up in next year’s draft to get a good QB that has the potential to be a franchise QB, they’ll have the assets to do it with instead of sacrificing multiple draft picks of their own. With the Bills drafting at 10, I’m sure they could move down at least twice in this year’s draft. absolutely, I started a whole thread on this. No point for Whaley to get 2018 draft picks when he needs a stellar draft his year just to keep his job. Whaley ?? you mean the scout ? McD is picking these kids or Pegs if he is feeling enamored. All you Whaley bashers crack me up. He's about to paint his masterpiece. And if not,he's done no worse.The guy can GM QB offense
Direhard Fan Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 (edited) NO! Take the best man out there at ten and we have a good second round also. We did well in Free Agents. There are no good QB's in this draft. Pleas accept that. If we took one in the first or second it would be a waste. We have four in camp already. Edited April 14, 2017 by Direhard Fan
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 NO! Take the best man out there at ten and we have a good second round also. We did well in Free Agents. ...respectfully disagree....six is NOT enough......strong secondary draft class where Bflo is deficient for starters............
Mickey Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 I don't trust Whaley and the scouts to find a gem late in Round 1 so I would rather we stick at 10 unless the trade down is just a few picks back. If Adams, Hooker or Reddick are there at 10, I'd definitely prefer they stick. I could probably be talked into Mahomes or Trubisky as well and not because they are likely franchise QB's but because we need a backup for Tyrod. He is a QB who runs a fair amount, is on the small side, missed some games in 2015 and had to have off-season surgery after 2016. Oh, and he plays behind a line that includes one of the worst RT's in the league. We need a backup.
Mad Mike Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 Yes., yes, yes....Do it twice. Get a good player in round 1 who can help right away. And, in this draft you want multiple round 2&3 picks because there is a lot of value . Attaboy.
Buffalo86 Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 None of the above. I'm all for moving back to get more players in THIS draft.
CEN-CAL17 Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 Trade down to like 12-14, gain an extra 3rd. Then trade that pick and drop down to 20, and gain a 2nd. Imagine having a top 20 pick, 2 seconds rd picks and 2 third rd picks. 5 picks in top 90 picks for dropping down 10 spots.
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 I don't trust Whaley and the scouts to find a gem late in Round 1 so I would rather we stick at 10 unless the trade down is just a few picks back. If Adams, Hooker or Reddick are there at 10, I'd definitely prefer they stick. I could probably be talked into Mahomes or Trubisky as well and not because they are likely franchise QB's but because we need a backup for Tyrod. He is a QB who runs a fair amount, is on the small side, missed some games in 2015 and had to have off-season surgery after 2016. Oh, and he plays behind a line that includes one of the worst RT's in the league. We need a backup. ...now there is a real bold and brassy assessment.....Whaley is damned if he does or damned if he doesn't.....he fails at 10 or fails late in the 1st if he trades down.....YAWN...................
ChanOverChin Posted April 14, 2017 Posted April 14, 2017 Yes. It's a no-brainer to move down from #10 to obtain more picks. The only way that I wouldn't do it would be if Trubisky is available at #10 and I thought that he was a franchise type QB. NFL Scouts BTW don't seem to think so.
Recommended Posts