John Wawrow: "better chance of the Bills moving up for a player than moving back"

[NewEra]

3 minutes ago, ndirish1978 said:

 

I think you're right. But if he slips past them I could see them making a move. I don't see us trading up that high for any single player but I think 6-8 might be on the table based on what we'd have to give up and our ability to jump back into the late 3rd rd after trading our 3rd away since we have 2 4s. Just a complete opinion and obviously not based on anything factual.

I just don’t think there’s any chance he’s not a Jet.  It just makes way too much sense

[LSHMEAB]

3 minutes ago, NewEra said:

I just don’t think there’s any chance he’s not a Jet.  It just makes way too much sense

I think people are underestimating just how good a prospect Josh Allen is. He's not getting past the 3rd pick. He may very well be a better prospect than JB and I hear zero speculation that Bosa will drop. Pure wishful thinking to think the other JA is going to be there at 6-8.

[NewEra]

11 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

I think people are underestimating just how good a prospect Josh Allen is. He's not getting past the 3rd pick. He may very well be a better prospect than JB and I hear zero speculation that Bosa will drop. Pure wishful thinking to think the other JA is going to be there at 6-8.

Yeah, I’m hoping the niners take him at 2.  I think he fits Greggos system better than anyone in the draft 

[LSHMEAB]

1 minute ago, NewEra said:

Yeah, I’m hoping the niners take him at 2.  I think he fits Greggos system better than anyone in the draft 

I feel like the 9'ers fanbase would not be happy with another 1st round edge draft pick the same way ours would dislike a corner. If the 9'ers FO has Allen as the BPA, it will certainly test their commitment to that philosophy. Like you, I'd much rather see him in the NFCW.

[Alphadawg7]

I don't know why so many people assume this means a trade up from 9.  JW said we are more likely to do a trade up then a trade down.  Nothing about that specifically indicates it would include the 9th pick in a trade up.

 

Everything we know about Beane goes against a trade up from 9.  He covets draft picks and value...trading up from 9 is terrible value and will cost a bounty of picks, especially when there is a going to be an elite prospect, in fact more than 1 and at different positions, on the board at 9.  

 

All JW statement means is that is less likely we trade down to get MORE draft assets, and more likely Beane uses some of his draft capital (10 picks) at some point to move up.  The much more likely scenario and probable scenario IMO is that that we stay put at 9 and then move up from our 2nd or 3rd round pick.  Heck, depending on how far the first trade up was and what it cost, I could see Beane trading up more than once in this draft.  But I am highly skeptical we will trade up from 9.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Alphadawg7

[mannc]

On 4/5/2019 at 5:34 PM, ndirish1978 said:

I can see us trading up for Josh Allen and picking up a DT in the 2nd. 

Yes!! Let’s burn three or four more high draft picks on defense!!  I love watching 9-6 football games!

[4merper4mer]

3 hours ago, john wawrow said:

 

bands dressing up as giant eyeballs?

i do think you clearly have me mistaken for someone like an early genesis fan or something.

 

please.

 

jw

 

The Replacements were your favorite right?  They dressed up like giant eyeballs.  They also had crap songs like Santa Dog.  

 

Genisis dressed up like tree stumps and sang crap songs like Sledgehammer.

[Thurman#1]

On ‎4‎/‎2‎/‎2019 at 9:49 PM, Mickey said:

 

Studies that verify self fulfilling prophecies are not worth much no matter how often they are repeated. Good teams already have their aces at key positions and so can afford to trade down sacrificing quality for quantity. Struggling teams do not have those positions filled and the players that can fill them are more likely found at the top of the draft. What do these studies say about trade ups that landed teams players like Mahomes and Geoff? 

 

 

Nah. Whether or not a study verifies a self-fulfilling prophecy is beside the point. That it verifies something is the point. Plenty of things that people call self-fulfilling prophecies are actually ... not self-fulfilling prophecies.

 

And one example is exactly what you're talking about here. This isn't a self-fulfilling prophecy at all. Yeah, good teams trade down. So do bad ones. Were the Browns a terrific team when they kept trading down the past few years. Were the  7-8 2016 Bills a good team? They traded down with the Chiefs in 2016. Were the 2016 Chiefs who traded up with us to get Mahomes a bad team? They had just gone 12-4. It's nonsense that only bad teams trade up and good teams trade back. It's just not true.  

 

What do these studies say about trading up for QBs? I think it's already pretty clear from my earlier post, but to repeat ... the rule is that you don't trade up by giving up important picks, that if you do, your outcome will worsen a large number of times, but that the exception is trading up for a QB, because without a QB in or extremely near the top ten, you're not likely to see Super Bowls. Trading up for a QB early is where a desperation move can be your best move. The studies understand this. If you're actually curious, go read the studies. They're the new best practices.

 

 

17 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

The Replacements were your favorite right?  They dressed up like giant eyeballs.  They also had crap songs like Santa Dog.  

 

Genisis dressed up like tree stumps and sang crap songs like Sledgehammer.

 

 

That was the Residents, not the Replacements. The Replacements are terrific.

 

Edited April 9, 2019 by Thurman#1

[billsfan89]

I don't buy it. I don't see what talent they are in love with to trade up massively. In the NFL trade ups for non-QB's rarely end up panning out. Yes the Falcons lucked out with Julio Jones but that tends to be the exception. The Bills got lucky that they got value for Sammy (even though Sammy is a more than respectable NFL player he wasn't worth the cost.) I wouldn't hate the Bills packaging 9, 40, and a mid rounder to go up and get a Josh Allen or another elite pass rusher. But that would greatly limit the Bills ability to go out and address other needs losing a premium pick plus a 4th rounder to go up and get one player. 

 

I say stick at 9 and take one of the pass rushers that fall to you or trade down to a team looking to get ahead of Denver for Lock or Haskins. Ideally the Bills could trade back with Washington and just take BPA at pick 15 and then go out and fill needs with 2 second round picks and pocket some additional mid round selections and 2020 picks. 

[Fred Slacks]

Chances of us trading up I think are slim. I don’t think they feel this roster is anywhere close to being finished even with all the FA moves. They want premium picks. Unless they fall in love with the Kentucky Josh Allen during their 30 visits. But I think they need to hit on their first 3 rounds and maybe even a 4th rounder. I’m with the majority here who think that they’ll use as many lower picks as possible to move up. Maybe slide back or fourth in round 2, 3 or 4 to get targeted players as well as pick up possibly get more ammo to move around in round 3 and 4

[Boatdrinks]

2 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

The Replacements were your favorite right?  They dressed up like giant eyeballs.  They also had crap songs like Santa Dog.  

 

Genisis dressed up like tree stumps and sang crap songs like Sledgehammer.

Sledgehammer is Peter Gabriel, not a Genesis song. 

[XABI64]

we are in under no circumstance to trade away picks and move up for a defensive guy

 

we have had a bottom 3 offense in the NFL for the last 5 years. that needs to * change. 

 

*Moderator edited.

[section122hero]

I'm all in on whatever makes this team better. I would assume that means get 2 top 40 rookies but ya know what happens when you assume....

[4merper4mer]

7 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Nah. Whether or not a study verifies a self-fulfilling prophecy is beside the point. That it verifies something is the point. Plenty of things that people call self-fulfilling prophecies are actually ... not self-fulfilling prophecies.

 

And one example is exactly what you're talking about here. This isn't a self-fulfilling prophecy at all. Yeah, good teams trade down. So do bad ones. Were the Browns a terrific team when they kept trading down the past few years. Were the  7-8 2016 Bills a good team? They traded down with the Chiefs in 2016. Were the 2016 Chiefs who traded up with us to get Mahomes a bad team? They had just gone 12-4. It's nonsense that only bad teams trade up and good teams trade back. It's just not true.  

 

What do these studies say about trading up for QBs? I think it's already pretty clear from my earlier post, but to repeat ... the rule is that you don't trade up by giving up important picks, that if you do, your outcome will worsen a large number of times, but that the exception is trading up for a QB, because without a QB in or extremely near the top ten, you're not likely to see Super Bowls. Trading up for a QB early is where a desperation move can be your best move. The studies understand this. If you're actually curious, go read the studies. They're the new best practices.

 

 

 

 

That was the Residents, not the Replacements. The Replacements are terrific.

 

The Residents went through three phases.  When a couple guys quit they became The Replacements.  I think they stopped dressing like eyeballs but still sucked.   Then when some more quit they did the theme from Friends which also sucked.

[LancasterSteve]

On 4/1/2019 at 4:52 AM, nucci said:

where do you get points from? 

DRAFTTEK.com has the Point Value Draft chart : https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp   

[Delete This Account]

On 4/8/2019 at 10:30 PM, 4merper4mer said:

The Replacements were your favorite right?  They dressed up like giant eyeballs.  They also had crap songs like Santa Dog.  

 

Genisis dressed up like tree stumps and sang crap songs like Sledgehammer.

 

you're clearly high on some kind of delusional substance or substances.

i've never read a post filled with so much inaccurate information as this one.

 

not even the first sentence is correct.

 

The Replacements "are" my favorite.

the rest of your post is incoherent drivel.

 

jw

 

 

 

Edited April 25, 2019 by john wawrow

[Reed83HOF]

2 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

 

you're clearly high on some kind of delusional substance or substances.

i've never read a post filled with so much inaccurate information as this one.

 

not even the first sentence is correct.

 

The Replacements "are" my favorite.

the rest of your post is incoherent dribble.

 

jw

 

 

 

 

Any football related tidbits?

[Chandler#81]

yeah, jw, is this Bills/Jets trade talk your doing?

[Delete This Account]

4 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

 

Any football related tidbits?

 

1 minute ago, Chandler#81 said:

yeah, jw, is this Bills/Jets trade talk your doing?

 

I dare not ask or dip a toe into that mucky swamp of rumors and spin that happens every afternoon before the draft.

The reasons:

 

1. I'd be skeptical of any front-office person or agent telling me anything today.

2. It would be next impossible to confirm.

3. There's little shelf-life to whatever scoop you may or may not have, because it will all be proven right or wrong in the coming hours. What's the point of risking being used and being wrong on something you might not entirely trust.

4. This is why I don't lean on my sources today, especially when I can get more insight on other things later on and with more riding on the story.

 

jw

 

 

 

 

[Shaw66]

3 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

 

 

I dare not ask or dip a toe into that mucky swamp of rumors and spin that happens every afternoon before the draft.

The reasons:

 

1. I'd be skeptical of any front-office person or agent telling me anything today.

2. It would be next impossible to confirm.

3. There's little shelf-life to whatever scoop you may or may not have, because it will all be proven right or wrong in the coming hours. What's the point of risking being used and being wrong on something you might not entirely trust.

4. This is why I don't lean on my sources today, especially when I can get more insight on other things later on and with more riding on the story.

 

jw

 

 

 

 

I gotta say that in a world where people seem desperate to be the first with any story, this is a refreshingly old-fashioned approach.   Thanks. 

 

Okay, so what's REALLY going on?