dave mcbride Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Chuck Wagon said: Gordon (or Coleman) could be part of the deal, both us and the Giants could certainly use help at WR. They've been the team most consistently linked to Beckham, he's obviously tight with Landry and they employ his college position coach. I don't think Gordon or Coleman has any impact on what Dorsey & co are going to do with the team. Fair point. That said, I do worry that we're moving into the land of magical thinking at this point. The trade sorta works for everyone, but it REALLY works for the Bills. Hence our love for the scenario. But if the Giants would take Darnold if he's there (as has been reported ad infinitum), and the Browns want to take Allen, why would the Giants ever make that trade? Edited April 16, 2018 by dave mcbride
Chuck Wagon Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 9 minutes ago, Wayne Cubed said: That would be crazy. Beckham, Landry and/or Gordon/Coleman... depending on which one they trade. Then they get a RB like Guice at 12..... wow. 12 going to the Giants. 12 & 22, 2 1sts for Beckham.
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 1 minute ago, Chuck Wagon said: I think they'd love to flip Gordon when he holds value and Coleman hasn't shown near enough to be considered part of the long term answer. After dealing with Beckham, Gordon may look like a minor inconvenience to the Giants. That's awesome!
Chuck Wagon Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 10 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: Fair point. That said, I do worry that we're moving into the land of magical thinking at this point. The trade sorta works for everyone, but it REALLY works for the Bills. Hence our love for the scenario. But if the Giants would take Darnold if he's there (as has been reported ad infinitum), and the Browns want to take Allen, why would the Giants ever make that trade? If the Browns say "we can live with Allen or Darnold" it makes all the sense in the world to sell Darnold at apex value, especially holding pick 4 where one can reasonably assume Allen is still there. The Browns tell the Giants "we are trading Darnold, so he's out of play for you, why not play ball and pick up some value to still get Barkley and we jump the Jets".
Wayne Cubed Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 Just now, dave mcbride said: Fair point. That said, I do worry that we're moving into the land of magical thinking at this point. The trade sort works for everyone, but it REALLY works for the Bills. Hence our love for the scenario. But if the Giants would take Darnold if he's there (as has been reported ad infinitum), and the Browns want to take Allen, why would the Giants ever make that trade? Maybe they don’t know? Bills to 1 would have to happens first. Cleveland gets its hall of picks. And knowing the Bills take Darnold, they wouldn’t have a shot. So they take picks off of Cleveland to move back and still get a guy they would have selected at 2. 3 minutes ago, Chuck Wagon said: 12 going to the Giants. 12 & 22, 2 1sts for Beckham. Ah right, I’m getting my trade rumor picks messed up ? 1
PIZ Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 32 minutes ago, whatdrought said: If that kid was right about the 3-way trade all hell will break loose. If that kid is right, I'll edit that thread about him from "rumor" and "Dunkirk type" to "Legendary kid from Cheektowaga".
Chuck Wagon Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 10 minutes ago, Wayne Cubed said: Maybe they don’t know? Bills to 1 would have to happens first. Cleveland gets its hall of picks. And knowing the Bills take Darnold, they wouldn’t have a shot. So they take picks off of Cleveland to move back and still get a guy they would have selected at 2. Could make some sense where there's been Allen to the Giants buzz. Giants trying to bluff the Browns "see we might take your guy", don't trade Darnold.
Domdab99 Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 22 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said: Moving up to 2 and selecting Allen would my my stomach churn , as opposed to any of the other 3 top QBs Staying at 12 and picking Allen would be a disaster....I wouldn't even know what to call trading up and then picking Allen. 1
dave mcbride Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 1 minute ago, Chuck Wagon said: If the Browns say "we can live with Allen or Darnold" it makes all the sense in the world to sell Darnold at apex value, especially holding pick 4 where one can reasonably assume Allen is still there. The Browns tell the Giants "we are trading Darnold, so he's out of play for you, why not play ball and pick up some value to still get Barkley and we jump the Jets". Hope you're right. We shall see. If the Bills get Darnold, this draft will be a huge success, at least by my reckoning.
Epstein's Mother Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 26 minutes ago, jo39416 said: Can you please elaborate on "that kid"? Derby Dan.
YoloinOhio Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 1 minute ago, dave mcbride said: Hope you're right. We shall see. If the Bills get Darnold, this draft will be a huge success, at least by my reckoning. He certainly has the fewest “issues”.... though still raw. But very “process” and while raw, he’s further along than Allen. Imo
Wayne Cubed Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 Just now, Chuck Wagon said: Could make some sense where there's been Allen to the Giants buzz. Giants trying to bluff the Browns "see we might take your guy", don't trade Darnold. Yea it’s all cat and mouse game at this point. Only bit that doesn’t make a ton of sense is Darnold to Bills. The Bills are the only QB needy team that needs their rookie QB to most likely start. That’s Rosen. Suppose Darnold could come in mid season. Allen to the Browns just makes too much sense based on their trade for Tyrod.
Chuck Wagon Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 I think the hold up on our deal with the Giants is both liking Darnold. If we deal above them that forces their hand. 1
Wayne Cubed Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 Just now, YoloinOhio said: He certainly has the fewest “issues”.... though still raw. But very “process” and while raw, he’s further along than Allen. Imo Yea he’s only 20 but he still needs to sit for a bit, maybe half the season I would imagine.
Chuck Wagon Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 10 minutes ago, Wayne Cubed said: Yea it’s all cat and mouse game at this point. Only bit that doesn’t make a ton of sense is Darnold to Bills. The Bills are the only QB needy team that needs their rookie QB to most likely start. That’s Rosen. Suppose Darnold could come in mid season. Allen to the Browns just makes too much sense based on their trade for Tyrod. Even if they are split between Darnold and Allen, it makes too much sense to sell the guy someone really wants at 1 vs selling the last guy left at 4.
CuddyDark Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 Just now, Chuck Wagon said: I think the hold up on our deal with the Giants is both liking Darnold. If we deal above them that forces their hand. But if we trade to the Browns for #1 they can't stop us taking Darnold. The rest of the trade can only happen after we get #1.
Domdab99 Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 Even though picking a RB #1 would normally be "LOL Browns" worthy, this year, I think if Cleveland picks Barkley No. 1, they are guaranteed one of Darnold, Rosen, or Mayfield. Why Allen is in this mix, I have no idea...but put him there, too, if they happen to like him. This would not be bad at all for the Browns. If Rosen is dropping, the Biills can just move up to 6 and pick him there. But if they're really going to move up to 1 or 2 for Darnold or - god forbid - Allen - this would not be good at all.
CuddyDark Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 1 minute ago, Wayne Cubed said: Yea he’s only 20 but he still needs to sit for a bit, maybe half the season I would imagine. Dude, they all have to sit. Unless it's Mayfield or Jackson because they can play RPO all game.
Recommended Posts