Tipster19 Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 With numerous needs to address and a deep draft at the DB and LB positions, it makes the most sense for the Bills to trade down and accumalate more 2nd and 3rd rders. Although OT Ferguson being the only one worthy of being drafted at the #8 position, he won't be available when we select. Marv & Co. do realize that the O-Line does need to be address but they feel that there is value in the 2nd and 3rd rds. Outside of Vernon Davis, TE won't be thought of until these rds. A DT will be our first selection but not at the #8 pick. Based on who we trade down with will determine which DT we select, Ngata or Bunkley. With extra 2nd and 3rd rders, I fully expect that we take multiple O-Linemen, a LB and a DB. We already have three selections in these rds and I think that after we trade down in the 1st rd that we accumalate at LEAST two more picks in these rds. That fills an awful lot of need. Here's an article that may shed a little insight on the Bills' thinking. http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/p.../604260340/1021
stuckincincy Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 Well, they have 9 selections now. I'm not schooled on the ins and outs of the rookie signing money pool, but isn't it possible that with additional day 1 picks, the contract offers get diluted, and players and their agents will hold out because the offered $$$ is less than is expected for the player's position and slotting?
Mark VI Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 Well, they have 9 selections now. 671624[/snapback] 10 actually - extra's in Rounds 3, 5 and 7. I'd like to aquire an extra 2nd or 3rd in a trade down but we can't control what happens ahead of us...plus the phone must ring for an offer. I'll enjoy the day, either way.
Mark VI Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 One more thing. I could see a scenerio where Ferguson might fall to #8. The odds are against it but not impossible by any stretch.
Max997 Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 Well, they have 9 selections now. I'm not schooled on the ins and outs of the rookie signing money pool, but isn't it possible that with additional day 1 picks, the contract offers get diluted, and players and their agents will hold out because the offered $$$ is less than is expected for the player's position and slotting? 671624[/snapback] each teams rookie pool gets adjuested based on the number of picks they get to prevent a situation of having too many picks with not enough money in the rookie money pool
Ozymandius Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 One more thing. I could see a scenerio where Ferguson might fall to #8. The odds are against it but not impossible by any stretch. 671631[/snapback] Agreed. I think we just need the Titans to choose Young over Leinart and the rest of the dominoes (Jets take Leinart, etc) will fall into place. It's unlikely but will hardly be shocking if it happened.
BUFFALOTONE Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 I would actually like to package some of these extra picks. Like one of our 3rds and our 5th for and additional 2nd. Or even putting together a deal to get in the top of the first if Mangold is still there. He would ebe worth moving in there for.
Coach Tuesday Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 I would not be shocked if the Bills trade down - but I don't think they'll pick a DT if they do. I continue to be convinced that they will surprise us by taking one of the following: 1) Ernie Sims (fits the Derrick Brooks mold for the cover-2 defense) 2) Jay Cutler (dunno why, just a deep-seated fear that Marv will pull the trigger if he's there and take him) 3) Jimmy Williams (supposed to be one of the best pure athletes in the draft - Deion Sanders-type ability - also one of the biggest a-holes in the entire draft class)
obie_wan Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 I would not be shocked if the Bills trade down - but I don't think they'll pick a DT if they do. I continue to be convinced that they will surprise us by taking one of the following: 1) Ernie Sims (fits the Derrick Brooks mold for the cover-2 defense) 2) Jay Cutler (dunno why, just a deep-seated fear that Marv will pull the trigger if he's there and take him) 3) Jimmy Williams (supposed to be one of the best pure athletes in the draft - Deion Sanders-type ability - also one of the biggest a-holes in the entire draft class) 671645[/snapback] agree that a LB will be a surprise day 1 selection- even though it will totally disrupt Pyrite's concept of "team building"
BuckeyeBill Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 agree that a LB will be a surprise day 1 selection- 671647[/snapback] I would be jumping up and down if we pick Hawk at #8. That would make the whole draft in my opinion. I don't think I'd be too disappointed with Huff either. That might be an interesting pick.
Coach Tuesday Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 Lemme add one more surprise name to the list of possible trade-down selections: Santonio Holmes.
stuckincincy Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 each teams rookie pool gets adjuested based on the number of picks they get to prevent a situation of having too many picks with not enough money in the rookie money pool 671632[/snapback] Thanks! Makes for happy rookies!
stuckincincy Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 10 actually - extra's in Rounds 3, 5 and 7. I'd like to aquire an extra 2nd or 3rd in a trade down but we can't control what happens ahead of us...plus the phone must ring for an offer. I'll enjoy the day, either way. 671626[/snapback] Thanks. I wouldn't mind seeing them somehow end up with a high pick in '07. It worked out well for Dallas.
Mark VI Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 Lemme add one more surprise name to the list of possible trade-down selections: Santonio Holmes. 671668[/snapback] We could always use a 12th WR.
BuffaloRebound Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 I could see a scenario where Ferguson falls to #7, but not #8. The Raiders probably won't take him but there's plenty of teams that would trade up at the point. So the Bills would probably have to part with at least a 4th rounder to swap picks.
Tortured Soul Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 I would actually like to package some of these extra picks. Like one of our 3rds and our 5th for and additional 2nd. Or even putting together a deal to get in the top of the first if Mangold is still there. He would ebe worth moving in there for. 671644[/snapback] Did we sign Fowler to be our starter?
dave mcbride Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 I could see a scenario where Ferguson falls to #7, but not #8. The Raiders probably won't take him but there's plenty of teams that would trade up at the point. So the Bills would probably have to part with at least a 4th rounder to swap picks. 671720[/snapback] if that happens, they should make the trade, i think. i'm starting to think, though, that the guy they really, really want is hawk. barring injury, he's about a sure a thing as there is in this draft. he'd immediately improve the defense too.
apuszczalowski Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 Did we sign Fowler to be our starter? 671721[/snapback] Yeah, and we have a centre we have not seen play that position yet on the roster too (Preston) Why not bring in another C.
BUFFALOTONE Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 Did we sign Fowler to be our starter? 671721[/snapback] He can also play either guard spot. Mangold is from what the experts say the best pure center to come out in 10 years.
Original Byrd Man Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 if that happens, they should make the trade, i think. i'm starting to think, though, that the guy they really, really want is hawk. barring injury, he's about a sure a thing as there is in this draft. he'd immediately improve the defense too. 671742[/snapback] I would like to see them trade down unless there is a player that is a can't miss prospect there at #8
Recommended Posts