billybob Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 Bills trade pick 12 to Atlanta for picks 39,44, and 75 Bills trade picks 75 and 92 from Balt for pick 56 from Den Bills now have pick 39, 43,44,56, 74, 107, 169, 203, 220 or 2a 2b 2c 2d 3 4 6 7a 7b 2a traded to Chargers for M Turner RB- Chairman of RB Commitee for Bills 2b Marcus McCauley CB 2c Eric Wright CB flawed but talented CBs to compete with Youboty 2d David Harris ILB- can attack if nothing else 3 Marcus Thomas DT- another quick DT for the rotation 4 Antwan Barnes OLB- great athlete, special teams potential while learning 6 Nate llaoa RB- good receiving ability for a bowling ball 7a Laurent Robinson WR 7b Jordan Kent WR good height, and hops Flame away good people
Navy Chief Navy Pride Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 huh??? Exactly what he said ^^^^^^^
billybob Posted March 22, 2007 Author Posted March 22, 2007 Exactly what has you stumped? Bills trade their 1st which is pick 12 to Atlanta for their 2nd, the 2nd Atl aquired form Houston and Atl's 3rd- the Bills then use the 3rd from Atl and the 3rd from Balt (McGahee trade) to move back into the 2nd round =pick (56)- it's two trades not rocket science, Brain surgery, or taxes.
Koufax Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 Exactly what has you stumped? Bills trade their 1st which is pick 12 to Atlanta for their 2nd, the 2nd Atl aquired form Houston and Atl's 3rd- the Bills then use the 3rd from Atl and the 3rd from Balt (McGahee trade) to move back into the 2nd round =pick (56)- it's two trades not rocket science, Brain surgery, or taxes. But it is fuzzy draft chart imaginary math which in the end doesn't seem to make us as good a team as just sticking and drafting good players where we are.
billybob Posted March 22, 2007 Author Posted March 22, 2007 Using draft pick trade value chart and a palyer ranking charts is just a way to keep things reasonable - and yes I'm giving up on potential stars - Lynch, Willis, to cover more needs- RB, CB, LB, DT, WR
ROCCEO Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 You are aware that you can only have a certain number of players on the roster, correct? No point in drafting guys we'll likely cut.
D_House Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 I'd rather we stay put. We can draft a solid RB in the second without the hefty contract that Turner will require. And then we can keep our first and use it for the best available defensive player, be it a DT, LB, or CB.
Bill from NYC Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 Bills trade pick 12 to Atlanta for picks 39,44, and 75Bills trade picks 75 and 92 from Balt for pick 56 from Den Bills now have pick 39, 43,44,56, 74, 107, 169, 203, 220 or 2a 2b 2c 2d 3 4 6 7a 7b 2a traded to Chargers for M Turner RB- Chairman of RB Commitee for Bills 2b Marcus McCauley CB 2c Eric Wright CB flawed but talented CBs to compete with Youboty 2d David Harris ILB- can attack if nothing else 3 Marcus Thomas DT- another quick DT for the rotation 4 Antwan Barnes OLB- great athlete, special teams potential while learning 6 Nate llaoa RB- good receiving ability for a bowling ball 7a Laurent Robinson WR 7b Jordan Kent WR good height, and hops Flame away good people I am not gong to flame, but you are selling the #12 WAY, repeat WAY too short! If Atlanta wants our 1st round pick, the 39th, 44th, and a 1st in 08 would seem far more appropriate, and I for one wouldn't even pull the trigger on that.
ROCCEO Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 I am not gong to flame, but you are selling the #12 WAY, repeat WAY too short! If Atlanta wants our 1st round pick, the 39th, 44th, and a 1st in 08 would seem far more appropriate, and I for one wouldn't even pull the trigger on that. I dunno, good things happen when we trade with atlanta.
The Tomcat Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 I dunno, good things happen when we trade with atlanta. Like what? jk
billybob Posted March 25, 2007 Author Posted March 25, 2007 peerless price can we trade him again to Atlanta I'd take a 2nd this time
JAMIEBUF12 Posted March 25, 2007 Posted March 25, 2007 if anything.......if it looks like atlanta will try and grab adrian peterson,we need to think about trading up not down.
nemhoff Posted March 25, 2007 Posted March 25, 2007 very maddenesque and slightly confusing, but I really don't see the Bills making that many moves. We don't need that many players and there are high quality options available without all that movement.
billybob Posted March 25, 2007 Author Posted March 25, 2007 you can not like it- fine -but it's two moves one down and one up
sarmanuscg07 Posted March 25, 2007 Posted March 25, 2007 Im completely confused by this email...... but it may be that im just DRUNK now but still... im confused!!!!!!!!!!!??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!???!!!!!!!!???
sarmanuscg07 Posted March 25, 2007 Posted March 25, 2007 peerless price can we trade him again to Atlanta I'd take a 2nd this time hahahahaha... yea that would be the best move EVER for the second time in a row.. try pitching that on an ATL message board.
Pyrite Gal Posted March 25, 2007 Posted March 25, 2007 Using draft pick trade value chart and a palyer ranking charts is just a way to keep things reasonable - and yes I'm giving up on potential stars - Lynch, Willis, to cover more needs- RB, CB, LB, DT, WR The presentation does not resonate for me as it seems like too much effort being made for positions which do not appear to be priority needs for making this team better. Specifically, I think that getting additional CB competition will see the Bills look for one more player, but even though I do not think they should stand pat where they are, i think the braintrust may be comfortable going into the season with McGee and Youbouty or Thomas as their starters with the loser being their nickel and Greer as their dime. I think they are more likely interested in getting a safety (they only have 3 on the current roster) rather than looking to CB. In general, I think many Bills fans are simply freaked out about losing Clements when actually, the Bills decided last off-season when they promised NC they would not tag him that CB value is really lessened the way we run the Cover 2. I also think that your draft and trades puts more emphasis on getting a WR than the Bills braintrust does. Again, they decided long ago when they signed him to a two season deal that PP was their #2. Overall, while his performance disappointed folks who seem to want to compare his production to PP's last year as a Bill, they actually saw his work as great progress from what he produced in AT and Dallas and the overall result was not completely out of line for what many #2 WRs produce. I think that Faurchild used him inappropriately as I think it was a waste of the speed he apparently still has to use him as a possession WR. I think to the extent they were dissatisfied with PP's production as a possession receiver, I think they were so pleased with Reed's output that he will be used more. While I can see them drafting another WR for competition, i doubt this is a priority for the Bills and I would not be surprised to see them draft no WRs.
billybob Posted March 25, 2007 Author Posted March 25, 2007 The presentation does not resonate for me as it seems like too much effort being made for positions which do not appear to be priority needs for making this team better. Specifically, I think that getting additional CB competition will see the Bills look for one more player, but even though I do not think they should stand pat where they are, i think the braintrust may be comfortable going into the season with McGee and Youbouty or Thomas as their starters with the loser being their nickel and Greer as their dime. I think they are more likely interested in getting a safety (they only have 3 on the current roster) rather than looking to CB. In general, I think many Bills fans are simply freaked out about losing Clements when actually, the Bills decided last off-season when they promised NC they would not tag him that CB value is really lessened the way we run the Cover 2. I also think that your draft and trades puts more emphasis on getting a WR than the Bills braintrust does. Again, they decided long ago when they signed him to a two season deal that PP was their #2. Overall, while his performance disappointed folks who seem to want to compare his production to PP's last year as a Bill, they actually saw his work as great progress from what he produced in AT and Dallas and the overall result was not completely out of line for what many #2 WRs produce. I think that Faurchild used him inappropriately as I think it was a waste of the speed he apparently still has to use him as a possession WR. I think to the extent they were dissatisfied with PP's production as a possession receiver, I think they were so pleased with Reed's output that he will be used more. While I can see them drafting another WR for competition, i doubt this is a priority for the Bills and I would not be surprised to see them draft no WRs. I draft 2 WRs in the 7th round hardly an emphansis- an emphansis would be trading up for Calvin Johnson- I question the reading ability of many on this board- btw are you dating Peerless - you defend him harder than the mother on American Idol defends her talentless child's signing.
Recommended Posts