TSW Mock Draft 3.0 - Trade Up Poll

[Virgil]

49 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

Its interesting that every poll @Virgil has put out nobody wants to trade or in this one still not giving a 2nd round pick.  Then the mock draft happens and people say we should have traded up or down. LOL

You’re not wrong.  Personally, I don’t like the last trade up option because I don’t see that putting us in position for anyone that won’t still be there at 30.  
 

Almost every player people on here are clamoring for went in the top 20, but no one wants to trade up and get it.   I’m sorry, but Amos and Grant are not in the same tier to ke as players in that top 20.  
 

But I’m going to respect the outcome of the poll

[chongli]

So what if no team wants to trade with us?

[Virgil]

7 minutes ago, chongli said:

So what if no team wants to trade with us?

As it stands now, I would try to make the winning trade first, pre-draft.   If they say no, then I move on to the next team, and so on.  

If no one is willing to trade, then we don’t trade. 

[Richard Noggin]

It's not generally wise to trade up in round 1 unless it's for a QB or it's for some presumed "last piece of the championship puzzle"...whatever that really means. So without knowing who we're trading up for, it's really difficult for me to sign off on surrendering what should be multiple future cost-controlled starters for one unknown prospect at DT, WR, or CB. 

 

56 and 62 are VALUABLE picks. I prefer letting the board fall in round 1, and then potentially moving around at reduced cost/risk. Or, I'd understand moving up a handful of picks in round 1 if the guy they truly covet is sticking out and there's intel that he's about to be scooped. Need to hit on multiple impact players every draft, if possible, to continue to grow and evolve. 

 

2 minutes ago, Virgil said:

As it stands now, I would try to make the winning trade first, pre-draft.   If they say no, then I move on to the next team, and so on.  

If no one is willing to trade, then we don’t trade. 

 

This is what you'd like to see for the 3.0 mock, or the real Bills 2025 draft? 

Edited Saturday at 04:49 AM by Richard Noggin

[GuardianAngel]

Man I would really enjoy shooting up to pick around 11, I don't think it would be worth it exactly but it would be fun to get a shot at a higher talent guy instead of hoping one falls to where the Bills pick.

Edited Saturday at 05:09 AM by GuardianAngel

[Virgil]

26 minutes ago, Richard Noggin said:

It's not generally wise to trade up in round 1 unless it's for a QB or it's for some presumed "last piece of the championship puzzle"...whatever that really means. So without knowing who we're trading up for, it's really difficult for me to sign off on surrendering what should be multiple future cost-controlled starters for one unknown prospect at DT, WR, or CB. 

 

56 and 62 are VALUABLE picks. I prefer letting the board fall in round 1, and then potentially moving around at reduced cost/risk. Or, I'd understand moving up a handful of picks in round 1 if the guy they truly covet is sticking out and there's intel that he's about to be scooped. Need to hit on multiple impact players every draft, if possible, to continue to grow and evolve. 

 

 

This is what you'd like to see for the 3.0 mock, or the real Bills 2025 draft? 

The Bills are going to do whatever wins the poll in the next mock 

[Richard Noggin]

12 minutes ago, Virgil said:

The Bills are going to do whatever wins the poll in the next mock 

 

Copy that. This is not real world commentary. Heard.

[gjv]

I would trade up high for a player that Beane and McDermott believe would be a difference-maker for the Bills. Preferably on the Defensive side of the ball, but that's secondary to their belief this payer is worth the draft capital to select. Otherwise, depending on how the Draft plays out, I would be inclined to trade back to the top of round two and pick up a third-round pick that could get me another pick at the top of the second round. Thus, swapping picks 30, 56, and 62 for two picks in round two that fall into the range from 33 to 36 and a later round pick.

[GunnerBill]

7 hours ago, Virgil said:

You’re not wrong.  Personally, I don’t like the last trade up option because I don’t see that putting us in position for anyone that won’t still be there at 30.  
 

Almost every player people on here are clamoring for went in the top 20, but no one wants to trade up and get it.   I’m sorry, but Amos and Grant are not in the same tier to ke as players in that top 20.  
 

But I’m going to respect the outcome of the poll

 

Yea I am just not that sure I agree. Clearly there are some players I would be interested in the Bills getting who likely aren't available to them at #30 I jusy don't see a big drop off between those and the guys who will be. I've speculated on the small trade up to the Rams spot if say Matthew Golden made it there.... or maybe James Pearce made it there (who knows if he is on their board). I'd do a bigger trade up for Barron too but I don't think he is the Bills type so I kind of dismiss it.

[nosejob]

7 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea I am just not that sure I agree. Clearly there are some players I would be interested in the Bills getting who likely aren't available to them at #30 I jusy don't see a big drop off between those and the guys who will be. I've speculated on the small trade up to the Rams spot if say Matthew Golden made it there.... or maybe James Pearce made it there (who knows if he is on their board). I'd do a bigger trade up for Barron too but I don't think he is the Bills type so I kind of dismiss it.

Not a fan of trading but to 26 if say Grant and Harmon are gone, I would do it for Nolan before KC or Philly jump us.

[ProcessTruster]

this draft doesn't seem worthy of lots of dramatic move-ups and the like.   

 

Just get as many picks inside the top 100 as all of them probably look like starters (but not stars)

 

Just stay where you are at 30 but see if you can add a 3rd round choice somehow.  thats about it.   

 

Maybe next years draft will have something to get really excited about.   This one is kind of a yawner

[frostbitmic]

Who would we be trading up for ?

 

If a CB like Barron was available at 17 I make the move, if not I probably don't ... We can still get a DT in the 2nd.

 

I think I'd rather trade both 2nds to move into the top of the 2nd round.

Edited Saturday at 02:19 PM by frostbitmic

[mannc]

What would people think about trading both seconds to move up to 26, so we’d have 26 and 30?  haven’t heard that possibility discussed much…

Edited Saturday at 02:26 PM by mannc

[MrEpsYtown]

20 minutes ago, mannc said:

What would people think about trading both seconds to move up to 26, so we’d have 26 and 30?  haven’t heard that possibility discussed much…

I think it’s a good idea. The trick is getting a team to agree to that. I suppose the Vikings are a possibility since they only have 4 picks in the draft. I also don’t think the Bills would do it because the would not pick again until the 4th round and they seems to operate in tiers. But it makes sense depending on what is on the board. 

[mannc]

39 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:

I think it’s a good idea. The trick is getting a team to agree to that. I suppose the Vikings are a possibility since they only have 4 picks in the draft. I also don’t think the Bills would do it because the would not pick again until the 4th round and they seems to operate in tiers. But it makes sense depending on what is on the board. 

I was thinking Rams at 26…they don’t have second round pick.  I think we would have to throw in a 5th to get that done.  This would enable the Bills to come away with one of their top CBs and one of the top DTs, which would be huge, and we’d still have a lot of day 3 picks…I’m not saying I’d do it, but it’s worth talking about…

Edited Saturday at 03:29 PM by mannc

[Chas56]

I'd like to see the Bills come away with the best mix of DT, CB, WR that they can get. That will be all their round one and two picks, in no particular order. I'm not at all sure I would move up for any one because that means a lower grade on another position. 

[Virgil]

I added another trade option to the poll, that I think might be the best trade up option.  We would move up to 20, lose our later 2nd, but gain a 3rd.  We would sacrifice some of the 5th round picks as well.

 

 

[Westside]

21 hours ago, MJS said:

I prefer no trade, so I voted for the smallest trade up to 26.

I agree. Not enough blue chip players in this draft. We have a better chance of staying where we are and getting a solid starter and depth players.

[Bill from NYC]

On 4/18/2025 at 6:51 PM, KOKBILLS said:

I'm not in favor of any trade up tbh...

Totally agree. This draft looks to be a weak one, or so I think. 

 

I wouldn't mind trading out of round one if we could make a trade that would include a #1 in 2026 and other considerations.