Keep the picks or just get a QB?

[GunnerBill]

Just now, K-9 said:

Key word for me is “invest.” How many first round picks did we invest in Losman? How many did it take to secure his selection? In my way of thinking it’s two;  the one we used to draft him in 2004 and our 2005 first round pick that it took to make it happen. 

 

No. 1.  All we did was move the 2005 pick forward a year.  The cost to do that was the 2004 2nd rounder.  

 

This is not like Sammy Watkins.... that was 2 1st rounders. The 2014 first which was #9 and the 2015 1st.  

[I_want_2_BILL_Lieve]

15 minutes ago, NewEraBills said:

 

I think you're reading way too much into that.  This roster has holes up and down and the cupboard needs to be stocked.  That's the reason for the trading last year.  They are trying to build a COMPLETE, competitive roster.  You don't do that by selling all your picks for 1 guy.

 

Every roster has holes. Injuries and free agency see to that.

 

I don't think anyone is interested in "selling all your picks." But if the Bills were sold on a guy being a career top 10 QB, then yeah I'm OK with trading 2 #1s and possibly a #2 for that guy.  QB is that only position I'd do that for. By the way, we're not devoid of talent. Nine wins was far more than most thought we'd get. 

 

Just our 2 #1s give us just around 1500 points in the Draft Trade Chart.That gets us into around the 7th pick. See who's there, and who wants to deal.  and Use 'em. We've been wandering the desert since Kelly left. It's time for a real franchise QB to lead us for a good 10 -15 years. 

Edited January 4, 2018 by I_want_2_BILL_Lieve

[K-9]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

No. 1.  All we did was move the 2005 pick forward a year.  The cost to do that was the 2004 2nd rounder.  

 

This is not like Sammy Watkins.... that was 2 1st rounders. The 2014 first which was #9 and the 2015 1st.  

We could argue semantics all day, but what’s the point? I agree to disagree and will let it go at that. 

[NewEraBills]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I didn't say it is the only way.  I said it is the quickest way..... like quicker than 17 years.  

 

 

And I'm saying the claim is mere conjecture.

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, NewEraBills said:

 

 

And I'm saying the claim is mere conjecture.

 

Fair enough but the weight of evidence is on my side.  

[NewEraBills]

1 minute ago, I_want_2_BILL_Lieve said:

 

Every roster has holes. Injuries and free agency see to that.

 

I don't think anyone is interested in "selling all your picks." But if the Bills were sold on a guy being a career top 10 QB, then yeah I'm OK with trading 2 #1s and possibly a #2 for that guy.  QB is that only position I'd do that for. By the way, we're not devoid of talent. Nine wins was far more than most thought we'd get. 

 

We've been wandering the desert since Kelly left. It's time for a real franchise QB to lead us for a good 10 -15 years. 

 

 

I'm sorry but when you have multiple games where your defense is 29th in run defense;  your QB is the 3rd most sacked in the league because your OL is 31st in pass protection something is amiss and it ain't just the QB.

 

Again, this is about building a roster.  A QB is definitely A PART of that.  

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, K-9 said:

We could argue semantics all day, but what’s the point? I agree to disagree and will let it go at that. 

 

It isn't really semantics though.... it is fact it was 1 first round pick (2005) and 1 second round pick (2004).  

[Mat68]

18 minutes ago, Buddo said:

Since making the playoffs, the notion we have the draft capital to trade up for one of, or the best, prospect, simply doesn't scan so well. Not only will our 2 first round picks be of lesser value than anticipated, the same applies to the other picks we have accumulated. Iirc, just about every team we traded with, is in the playoffs. I'd say that his probably means we will have to give up an extra pick to make up a value difference, if we did try to move way up, and with the amount of needs still within the roster, I don't think we should be doing that.

 

Tbh, I think it's way too early to be thinking about trades, as nobody knows how the FA market is going to shake out, and there are an awful lot of possibilities there, for QB 'needy' teams, to go out and find themselves a guy they would be happy to have starting for them - and that includes the Bills.

 

I genuinely believe that it is going to cost way too much to move up high enough to get one of the top QB prospects. Too many teams at the top, need one themselves, as do many of the teams just below them. The Colts are probably going to make a killing, if they trade down, and the Giants could also do quite well for themselves, just by dropping a few places, and taking a guy who they could develop behind Eli for a year or two.

 

Currently, I have no real sense of what the best areas of this years draft will be, or if it's actually got any It does sound like there are a fair number of decent QB prospects, and as such, my inclination would be to see if we can get one of those, without giving up the farm. As others have pointed out, we should be able to move up into the low teens without too much trouble - or giving up half this years draft, and I think that doing that isn't going to compromise getting some of the holes of the roster filled.

NYG, Indy, CLE all could trade down.  3 first rounders?  They have the ammunition.

[NewEraBills]

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Fair enough but the weight of evidence is on my side.  

Where is that evidence?  

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, NewEraBills said:

Where is that evidence?  

 

Well if you look over the last 10 years at the number of times teams with true franchise QBs make the playoffs and the number of times teams without make the playoffs it is pretty evident.  

[NewEraBills]

1 minute ago, Mat68 said:

NYG, Indy, CLE all could trade down.  3 first rounders?  They have the ammunition.

 

Cleveland is not trading this time man.  I'm not sure why people think they will but they set themselves up for this EXACT scenario.  Unless they pay Cousins, they are taking Darnold or Rosen at 1.  Believe it.  Nobody is going to do the Bills favors and pass on a franchise QB when they set themselves up for this just because Bills fans are desperate for a QB (and I'm not saying we shouldn't want one, because we should).

[I_want_2_BILL_Lieve]

9 minutes ago, NewEraBills said:

 

 

I'm sorry but when you have multiple games where your defense is 29th in run defense;  your QB is the 3rd most sacked in the league because your OL is 31st in pass protection something is amiss and it ain't just the QB.

 

Again, this is about building a roster.  A QB is definitely A PART of that.  

 

We also had a TE be our leading receiver with just over 500 yards. A QB that throws with anticipation lowers the sack total.  I think that those are on the QB. And by the way, I like TT. But you and I disagree on how to build a team. 

 

 

Edited January 4, 2018 by I_want_2_BILL_Lieve

[NewEraBills]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Well if you look over the last 10 years at the number of times teams with true franchise QBs make the playoffs and the number of times teams without make the playoffs it is pretty evident.  

 

That's not evidence.  That's an interpretation of what you see.  I could actually make the exact opposing argument based on what I've seen.  It's not evidence, it's an interpretation.

[K-9]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

It isn't really semantics though.... it is fact it was 1 first round pick (2005) and 1 second round pick (2004).  

What about the first round pick we used to pick him in 2004? Why doesn’t that count in the total number of first round picks used? 

I’m not saying we lost a first round pick, only that we used one to pick him and gave up one for the right to do so. That’s two invested. 

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, NewEraBills said:

 

Cleveland is not trading this time man.  I'm not sure why people think they will but they set themselves up for this EXACT scenario.  Unless they pay Cousins, they are taking Darnold or Rosen at 1.  Believe it.  Nobody is going to do the Bills favors and pass on a franchise QB when they set themselves up for this just because Bills fans are desperate for a QB (and I'm not saying we shouldn't want one, because we should).

 

Agreed - Cleveland won't trade out this time they have done that twice and missed two franchise altering players.  The Giants however..... I don't think it is the slam dunk everyone presumes that they go Quarterback.  They might but I don't think they are already fixed on that in the way Cleveland is.  It will come down to their evaluations and who Cleveland take at 1.  

[foreboding]

Why do people think Keenum will be available? I cannot imagine he is not the Vikes new QB going forward...

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, K-9 said:

What about the first round pick we used to pick him in 2004? Why doesn’t that count in the total number of first round picks used? 

I’m not saying we lost a first round pick, only that we used one to pick him and gave up one for the right to do so. That’s two invested. 

 

That WAS the 2005 pick.  Or else where did it come from?  We didn't go into the 2004 draft with 2 first rounders.  We got the second one used to select Losman by moving our 2005 1st rounder forward a year.  The cost to do that was a 2nd round pick in 2014.  

 

If it is 2 first round picks invested in Losman then in order to select Losman and Evans over a two year period we would have needed 3 First Round picks to start with (2 for Losman and 1 for Evans).  

5 minutes ago, NewEraBills said:

 

That's not evidence.  That's an interpretation of what you see.  I could actually make the exact opposing argument based on what I've seen.  It's not evidence, it's an interpretation.

 

Fine.  I think you interpretation is off.... way off.  

[I_want_2_BILL_Lieve]

11 minutes ago, NewEraBills said:

 

Cleveland is not trading this time man.  I'm not sure why people think they will but they set themselves up for this EXACT scenario.  Unless they pay Cousins, they are taking Darnold or Rosen at 1.  Believe it.  Nobody is going to do the Bills favors and pass on a franchise QB when they set themselves up for this just because Bills fans are desperate for a QB (and I'm not saying we shouldn't want one, because we should).

 

You're right. They wont trade out of #1. 

 

But I think Cleveland's #4 overall is in play. By trading with the Bills (our 2 #1 plus change if necessary),  they really get to address other areas of need twice. 

Edited January 4, 2018 by I_want_2_BILL_Lieve

[BigDingus]

Get a damn QB already! I cannot believe anyone actually thinks because we made it to the playoffs that our QB situation is somehow settled. It's been bad all year, just as it has for years, with Tyrod getting worse & worse each season. 

As the Bengals have shown us, a LOT has to go right in order for a team to make the post season. Every year we're "in the hunt" the last few games of the season but something dumb happens & we blow it. This year we got a ton of help, but that doesn't mean we just ignore the rebuilding process we signed McDermott up for. This just shows he did a lot more with less than most other coaches in the league. TT isn't the worst QB, but man we NEED to take a shot at a franchise QB for once.

[Just in Atlanta]

Keep Taylor, who got us our playoff berth. Do whatever it takes to find our next 10-year franchise QB. Surprising to see so many fans talk about not messing up our draft bank, when the No. 1 reason for our failure has been QB. It’s a rinse and repeat mentality.