HailMary Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 Two impact signings today with implications on us - Hyde to the Browns and Solder to Giants. Looks like the Browns are locked in at #1 with QB. With the Giants signing Solder and their win-now mentality they can easily move from #2 to #5 and get the impact player they want. There's a really good chance Nelson and/or Barkley will fall to #5 especially if Chubb goes to Indy at #3. If the Bills can't jump to #2 now they can work their way there through Denver at #5 then jump to #2. Going to cost picks but they seem prepared to do whatever they have to do now. From #5 going to #2 will cost at least two additional picks or they can gamble and hope their guy is there at #5. Bottom line - getting to #5 is the move and it could include Siemian.
Chuck Wagon Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 #12 / #53 / #96 for #5 / Siemian #5 / #56 / #65 for #2 Then Beane trades #22 for an early 2nd / early 3rd, then the early 2nd for a late 2nd and late 3rd Ends up with #2 / ~#60 / ~#70 / #90 End result: Trades #21 / #22 / late 2nd / Tyrod / Cordy Glenn for #2 1
K D Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 too much paperwork to trade up that many times. it's a administrative nightmare 1
Tyrod's friend Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 What the signings say to me is that the Giants can move to 12, get McGlinchey, draft a Center in the second round and have their entire line remade.
Gregthekeg Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 My brain hurts after reading that... but if it works, Id take it!
MrEpsYtown Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 1 minute ago, kdiggz said: too much paperwork to trade up that many times. it's a administrative nightmare Only for Sashi Brown! 1
LABILLBACKER Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 pass on Siemian....but yes we need to get to 2.
Tyrod's friend Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 3 minutes ago, Chuck Wagon said: #12 / #53 / #96 for #5 / Siemian #5 / #56 / #65 for #2 Then Beane trades #22 for an early 2nd / early 3rd, then the early 2nd for a late 2nd and late 3rd Ends up with #2 / ~#60 / ~#70 / #90 End result: Trades #21 / #22 / late 2nd / Tyrod / Cordy Glenn for #2 I'm missing the reason why the Denver Broncos need to move down 7 spots. Are they getting something they need there, other than essentially two second round picks? I can see why the Giants move to #5. That gets them the guard.
CuddyDark Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 If it's Allen they can probably trade to 7-10. 1
Chuck Wagon Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 10 minutes ago, Tyrod's friend said: I'm missing the reason why the Denver Broncos need to move down 7 spots. Are they getting something they need there, other than essentially two second round picks? I can see why the Giants move to #5. That gets them the guard. A big infusion of cheap young talent into an old expensive roster? 1
HailMary Posted March 14, 2018 Author Posted March 14, 2018 2 minutes ago, Tyrod's friend said: I'm missing the reason why the Denver Broncos need to move down 7 spots. Are they getting something they need there, other than essentially two second round picks? I can see why the Giants move to #5. That gets them the guard. Easily Denver gets 4 picks from Buffalo. Bills are going to have to give Denver both #12, #22 and then some to get the conversation going. They can address positional need at #12 with a development QB option (Rudolph or Jackson) at #22 plus additional picks.
SouthNYfan Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 16 minutes ago, tannins said: Two impact signings today with implications on us - Hyde to the Browns and Solder to Giants. Looks like the Browns are locked in at #1 with QB. With the Giants signing Solder and their win-now mentality they can easily move from #2 to #5 and get the impact player they want. There's a really good chance Nelson and/or Barkley will fall to #5 especially if Chubb goes to Indy at #3. If the Bills can't jump to #2 now they can work their way there through Denver at #5 then jump to #2. Going to cost picks but they seem prepared to do whatever they have to do now. From #5 going to #2 will cost at least two additional picks or they can gamble and hope their guy is there at #5. Bottom line - getting to #5 is the move and it could include Siemian. There is zero reason to believe the browns are "locked in at QB" for #1. Is it a possibility? Sure, it always has been. There are headlines with the Hyde signing that they are still very much high on Barkley @#1 and after what the saints did last year with Kamara and Ivory, there is a precedent set for them to take Barkley and run both backs. Hyde is going to turn 28 next season and still has yet to break 1,000 yards. They didn't sign prime Barry Sanders, what they signed is a very solid RB who can share time with Barkley and not burn out the rookie from day 1. Again, nothing is certain, but to say they are now "locked in at QB with the #1 pick" is completely wrong. They most likely will go Barkley at #1 then either QB @4 or trade back (maybe with us) to get extra picks, then take a later QB (maybe they like Jackson and will take him at #12 or #22 if they trade back with us) 1
Tyrod's friend Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 1 minute ago, tannins said: Easily Denver gets 4 picks from Buffalo. Bills are going to have to give Denver both #12, #22 and then some to get the conversation going. They can address positional need at #12 with a development QB option (Rudolph or Jackson) at #22 plus additional picks. Perhaps (not according to JJ's chart, but whatever) they can get that much and if that's the case - well, duh, yeah the Broncos would love two 1s for their 5.. But of course that's not what Chuck Wagon was saying.
HailMary Posted March 14, 2018 Author Posted March 14, 2018 1 minute ago, SouthNYfan said: There is zero reason to believe the browns are "locked in at QB" for #1. Is it a possibility? Sure, it always has been. There are headlines with the Hyde signing that they are still very much high on Barkley @#1 and after what the saints did last year with Kamara and Ivory, there is a precedent set for them to take Barkley and run both backs. Hyde is going to turn 28 next season and still has yet to break 1,000 yards. They didn't sign prime Barry Sanders, what they signed is a very solid RB who can share time with Barkley and not burn out the rookie from day 1. Again, nothing is certain, but to say they are now "locked in at QB with the #1 pick" is completely wrong. They most likely will go Barkley at #1 then either QB @4 or trade back (maybe with us) to get extra picks, then take a later QB (maybe they like Jackson and will take him at #12 or #22 if they trade back with us) I hope you're right.
Tyrod's friend Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 2 minutes ago, SouthNYfan said: There is zero reason to believe the browns are "locked in at QB" for #1. Is it a possibility? Sure, it always has been. There are headlines with the Hyde signing that they are still very much high on Barkley @#1 and after what the saints did last year with Kamara and Ivory, there is a precedent set for them to take Barkley and run both backs. Hyde is going to turn 28 next season and still has yet to break 1,000 yards. They didn't sign prime Barry Sanders, what they signed is a very solid RB who can share time with Barkley and not burn out the rookie from day 1. Again, nothing is certain, but to say they are now "locked in at QB with the #1 pick" is completely wrong. They most likely will go Barkley at #1 then either QB @4 or trade back (maybe with us) to get extra picks, then take a later QB (maybe they like Jackson and will take him at #12 or #22 if they trade back with us) As of now, I don't see the Browns trading with anyone out of the top 4. Darnold/Rosen is to Taylor as Barkley is to Hyde. They have sufficient firepower with the remainder of their picks to complete the change over and the two veterans are signed to essentially a 1 year and a 2 year contract. 1
SouthNYfan Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 6 minutes ago, Tyrod's friend said: As of now, I don't see the Browns trading with anyone out of the top 4. Darnold/Rosen is to Taylor as Barkley is to Hyde. They have sufficient firepower with the remainder of their picks to complete the change over and the two veterans are signed to essentially a 1 year and a 2 year contract. I agree I think they go Barkley then QB @#4 , unless as I said, they love Jackson, and it's silly to take him at #4 when you could get picks and get him later
HailMary Posted March 14, 2018 Author Posted March 14, 2018 3 minutes ago, Tyrod's friend said: Perhaps (not according to JJ's chart, but whatever) they can get that much and if that's the case - well, duh, yeah the Broncos would love two 1s for their 5.. But of course that's not what Chuck Wagon was saying. With franchise QBs in the conversation the JJ chart isn't as relevant. Let's look at the Eagles trade to move up to #2. To get Wentz, Eagles traded Byron Maxwell (Second/Third Round Value) and Alonso (Second/Third Round Value) with #13 pick to move up to #8. From there they swapped 1st and 4th rounders with Browns giving up a future first-round, second rounder and third rounder so the Eagles could move up from #8 to #2. So essentially to get from #13 to #2 they gave up additional draft capital value of one First Rounder, 2 Second-Rounders and 2 Third-Rounders. Perhaps if the Bills could dangle a player like Shaq Lawson in the deal to Denver or the Giants they can maybe pull this off with less picks.
Tyrod's friend Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, tannins said: With franchise QBs in the conversation the JJ chart isn't as relevant. Let's look at the Eagles trade to move up to #2. To get Wentz, Eagles traded Byron Maxwell (Second/Third Round Value) and Alonso (Second/Third Round Value) with #13 pick to move up to #8. From there they swapped 1st and 4th rounders with Browns giving up a future first-round, second rounder and third rounder so the Eagles could move up from #8 to #2. So essentially to get from #13 to #2 they gave up additional draft capital value of one First Rounder, 2 Second-Rounders and 2 Third-Rounders. Perhaps if the Bills could dangle a player like Shaq Lawson in the deal to Denver or the Giants they can maybe pull this off with less picks. Not to debate this value chart thing endlessly, but I'll disagree. Redskins move from 6 to 2 to pick up their Franchise QB. This is post-rookie cap moves. The value chart says it's 1000 point differential. They also give up a 1st in each of the next two years. It is typical to at least discount the next year's pick by one round. The mid-value of a 2nd rounder is roughly 350 points. If anything, they gave up less to get the franchise QB. Trubisky trade is awfully close as well; a 400 point differential gets #67 or 255 points. The rest of the trade is barely equal to the other 150 points. Plenty of examples where the draft chart works, or closely enough to make it relevant. [Edit: I think that this thing about the Trade Value Chart not having relevance is overdone. Yes, teams have their own format, but for the most part? Yeah, from what I see it holds true.] Edited March 14, 2018 by Tyrod's friend
Bill Murray Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 if im the giants i draft Barkley and then best G with their 2nd. now have protection, upgraded line, and a legit running threat to keep the secondary honest.
BillsFan130 Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 I still think Denver drafts a QB at 5. In my opinion the Bills will have to jump ahead of the Jets and Denver if they want either Darnold, Rosen, or Mayfield . They may be in a bidding war with the Jets to get to 2 or 3
Recommended Posts