Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, T.E. said:

This idea is no more crazy or unlikely than the dozens of "We should trade three firsts for Myles Garrett" suggestions we all read two months ago.

The difference there, is that Myles Garrett is a known 1st ballot HOF.  For all we know, any of these draft prospects could be busts, or never live up to their potential. That doesn't mean I agree that Myles was worth 3 1st's, but I was on board with 2, given how late we draft every year.  At the end of the day, we just need to do a better job on these early picks.  If we go CB, DT, and WR with our 1st 3 picks, and hit, we'll be in great shape.  It doesn't have to be in that order.  Beane needs to stick with BPA (within reason) and not continue to force his 1st pick.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, BarleyNY said:

Some innocent posters catching strays in this thread 

 

I need to think about how to respond to this. Let me get a Vodka and Tonic and ponder this. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
4 hours ago, harmonkillebrew said:

Addresses two needs at once.  We're the perfect team to employ him full-time at CB and as a complementary piece at WR.

If he drops past Cleveland, what would it take? 1st, both 2nds, next years 1st?

 

I don't think Beane would ever pull off this kind of move, but fun to think about. 

It’s also fun to think about winning the powerball lottery, but that ain’t happening either…

 

such a use of assets would hamstring addressing the teams needs, on yet another attempt at fixing our perennially underperforming defense, (time for a change coach) I’m guessing that this is a Madden / fantasy football sort of  thing where giving up a ridiculous amount of assets is a sign of how good at the game one is…, 

Posted
6 hours ago, Gregg said:

He is probably going to go in the top 5. Beane won't be able to trade that high up. If a player falls on the board that Beane likes then maybe he can move into the low 20's, but I doubt much more than that.

Are you Doug Whaley still trying to justify the Watkins trade up?  

Posted

He's the #1 guy I would go after if they did try some sort of historic trade up. But it won't happen.

 

We'd have to get into the Top 3. Nobody's moving from the Top 3 to 30 - even if you did meet the Trade Chart parameters. Which would be even higher than most bc we pick in the bottom 5 picks on a yearly basis. So those future 1's will be assumed to be that.

 

The easiest hurdle would be Beane willing to do that and make the call. And that wouldn't happen either. He wouldn't pay that kind of cost even if the team were open to it.

Posted
6 hours ago, ProcessTruster said:

man the offseason is slow


only 5 months to go …

 

The Bills news/interest for me around the lead up to the draft has seemed very underwhelming this year  IMO…

 

Anyone agree? 

Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:


only 5 months to go …

 

The Bills news/interest for me around the lead up to the draft has seemed very underwhelming this year  IMO…

 

Anyone agree? 

 

I think it's pretty on par with most years. At least as far as newsworthy things. Draft/Develop/Retain really is Beane's MO - for better or worse. He puts so much of the percentage of our cap into our own that it doesn't really leave much for him to go wild.

 

Combined with the fact that he's also fairly conservative, where his focus is making sure the team is in position to compete every year rather than mortgaging the future. Again, for better or worse.

 

Outside of the signing of Miller, the trade for Diggs, and the year we were after a QB and grabbed Allen, things have always been pretty underwhelming with him. 

 

It's the same story every year. The offseason comes and posters get it in their head this is the year he's going to go all in. Even though we have 8 years of data that shows that would be akin to a tiger changing it's stripes. And every year he shows - it's just not in his DNA and people are bored/disappointed.

Edited by BillsFanForever19
  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
7 hours ago, Low Positive said:

The Bills started at 21. They traded up to 12 with Cincinnati before the draft. 

 

Thanks.  I thought the #12 was too high because the Bills made the playoffs in 2017, but I couldn't find any references to a previous trade.  I guess I didn't ask the right questions ... like what did the Bills get for Cordy Glenn, whom I knew that they did trade.

 

 

Posted
4 hours ago, nuklz2594 said:

only player to trade up for.....mason graham

I'm actually starting to get wary of Michigan's DT's.  Could they have excelled so much because they have 2 beasts playing together?  I'm not saying this is the case but just something i've started worrying about.

Posted
1 hour ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

I think it's pretty on par with most years. At least as far as newsworthy things. Draft/Develop/Retain really is Beane's MO - for better or worse. He puts so much of the percentage of our cap into our own that it doesn't really leave much for him to go wild.

 

Combined with the fact that he's also fairly conservative, where his focus is making sure the team is in position to compete every year rather than mortgaging the future. Again, for better or worse.

 

Outside of the signing of Miller, the trade for Diggs, and the year we were after a QB and grabbed Allen, things have always been pretty underwhelming with him. 

 

It's the same story every year. The offseason comes and posters get it in their head this is the year he's going to go all in. Even though we have 8 years of data that shows that would be akin to a tiger changing it's stripes. And every year he shows - it's just not in his DNA and people are bored/disappointed.


Just in relation to the draft only …I thought that in comparison to last year, there seemed to be a lot more interest around which receiver(s) would be drafted with plenty of good candidates available in what was thought to be a deep class to choose from 

 

 

Posted
30 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:


Just in relation to the draft only …I thought that in comparison to last year, there seemed to be a lot more interest around which receiver(s) would be drafted with plenty of good candidates available in what was thought to be a deep class to choose from 

 

Ah, well - I think that's a combination of things. First, it's way more exciting when we're in the market for a playmaker than it is when we're in the market for things like a Nose Tackle or a Cornerback. On top of that, it was a very deep class for the things we were in the market for last year. This year's class seems pretty underwhelming. There's maybe 15 guys with a First Round grade. And we're probably not going to be in a position to grab one of those guys.

 

I do find myself way more detatched this year compared to other years bc of the positions we're looking at and our position in the Draft. Most years I do extensive work on prospects. This year I have a pretty rudimentary knowledge on some of the guys and am more or less just going to look into the guys we pick when we pick them.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
36 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:


Just in relation to the draft only …I thought that in comparison to last year, there seemed to be a lot more interest around which receiver(s) would be drafted with plenty of good candidates available in what was thought to be a deep class to choose from 

 

 


The WR class wasn’t as deep as I hoped. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...