otisly00 Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 I dont understand why so many people want to trade down from 11 to the bottom of the first round. We have 10 picks! We are not going to get any better by drafting 13 dudes - most of which would be from rounds 4-7. We need a couple more instant starters - whether its WR, TE, CB etc. I think we are much better off drafting 'our' guy (whomever that is) at 11, and then trading one of our 3 4th rounders along with a 2nd back into bottom of the first to get another playmaker. Whether we go CB then WR or vice versa, this seems much better than trying to further stockpile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreamOnDan Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 What if DRC was available and Dallas gave up #22 and #28 which is realistic if they really really want the guy. Its not far off the draft chart from a perfect trade. Then trade 2nd and 3rd to San Diego for their 1st #27... I'd draft Hardy, Devin Thomas, and Antoine Cason, in the 4th Martin Rucker, see mock for 5th-7th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zona Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 I am fan of stockpiling picks, but only in the first 3 rounds. The talent level after that is thin. 5 picks in the first 3 rounds is better than 8 picks in the last three... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazed and Amuzed Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 I dont understand why so many people want to trade down from 11 to the bottom of the first round. We have 10 picks! We are not going to get any better by drafting 13 dudes - most of which would be from rounds 4-7. We need a couple more instant starters - whether its WR, TE, CB etc. I think we are much better off drafting 'our' guy (whomever that is) at 11, and then trading one of our 3 4th rounders along with a 2nd back into bottom of the first to get another playmaker. Whether we go CB then WR or vice versa, this seems much better than trying to further stockpile. I disagree and think trading down is the right thing to do. Still a good first post though. Better then a lot of other first posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 I dont understand why so many people want to trade down from 11 to the bottom of the first round. We have 10 picks! We are not going to get any better by drafting 13 dudes - most of which would be from rounds 4-7. We need a couple more instant starters - whether its WR, TE, CB etc. I think we are much better off drafting 'our' guy (whomever that is) at 11, and then trading one of our 3 4th rounders along with a 2nd back into bottom of the first to get another playmaker. Whether we go CB then WR or vice versa, this seems much better than trying to further stockpile. The more picks you have the more likely you'll find a jem ala Tom Brady, marques Colston ect. But quality over quantity should also be considered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UticaBill Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 ITs important to remember that if we could trade down and somehow wind up with two firsts or two high 2nds there is a much better chance of getting someone who can help right away. I don't know where WRs will start getting taken, but all signs point to about halfway into the first round. With the top five possibly lasting to the Bills #41 pick. Now if someone they covet on Defense is available at #11 I think we stay... and go WR later.... there is still the TE spot and some nice looking WRs that might not make it the first day but have legit potential to be quality starters. Our extra 4 will give us a lot of flexibility in filling back up roles or could be packaged in a trade to get us another 2nd..... Our extra 7s will be for STers and other backfill... so we can draft for best available most of the rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marauderswr80 Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 I love having more draft picks then other teams. You have more shots at talent then most teams do. I compare draft picks like lotto tickets, the more tickets you got the more of a chance you have to win. Same with draft picks, more picks you have more chances you have at obtaining some talent for your team. And to be honest with the past few drafts this team has had, more draft picks would do this team wonders!!!! If Buffalo can trade down and obtain more picks, they can be more aggressive early in the draft, then start filling out the team with depth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 I disagree and think trading down is the right thing to do. Still a good first post though. Better then a lot of other first posts. Agree. I do like the scenario of trading back into the first (pulling a McCargo, we could call it). I think if we could get a CB at #11 (assuming nobody knocks on our door to get an offensive tackle at #11), we can have a good choice of WR in the bottom half of the 1st Round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marauderswr80 Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 Yeah thats one thing I see Buffalo doing this year trading back into the first and taking a WR. I would think it would have to be Hardy or Sweed. I do think CB is possible now, wether it be Dominique Rodgers Cromarti or McKelvin whoever is there at 11. But I also think we could see a DE with the 11th aswell. I just see teams doing what the Giants did this year with the Pats, having a huge pash run certainly takes ALOT of heat of the rest of the defense. Giants didnt have that great of a secondary, they compare to what Buffalo has now.....but that front line tore teams up. So I can really see Buffalo taking Harvey or trading down and taking Merling.......I do think our first pick will be defensive and Buffalo trading back into the first getting Sweed or Hardy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trader Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 I dont understand why so many people want to trade down from 11 to the bottom of the first round. We have 10 picks! We are not going to get any better by drafting 13 dudes - most of which would be from rounds 4-7. We need a couple more instant starters - whether its WR, TE, CB etc. I think we are much better off drafting 'our' guy (whomever that is) at 11, and then trading one of our 3 4th rounders along with a 2nd back into bottom of the first to get another playmaker. Whether we go CB then WR or vice versa, this seems much better than trying to further stockpile. The extra picks give you more room to move in the bottom of the first and the top of the second. This is a draft were the very good talent is deep. After the top 7-8 picks there is a lack of "excellent" players. There is going to be a very good player at 11. The question is will it be at a position where we have an urgent need? I would not mind having no 1st round picks with 2 seconds, 2 thirds and 3 4's. the moving up the board at any point we need to to grab a specific player. Or sitting tight and waiting for a player to fall to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trader Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 What if DRC was available and Dallas gave up #22 and #28 which is realistic if they really really want the guy. Its not far off the draft chart from a perfect trade. Then trade 2nd and 3rd to San Diego for their 1st #27... I'd draft Hardy, Devin Thomas, and Antoine Cason, in the 4th Martin Rucker, see mock for 5th-7th. I do that in a minute! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 This does not seem to be a good draft overall, except perhaps for DTs and OL. If we are not going that way in round 1, I wish there was a way for the Bills to trade down and pick up an extra 1st in 09. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 I am fan of stockpiling picks, but only in the first 3 rounds. The talent level after that is thin. 5 picks in the first 3 rounds is better than 8 picks in the last three... This is my feeling as well.....I really dont want any 6th and 7th round picks and would rather package to improve positions/picks in rounds 1-4 If we were able to move down (god I would love to get Dallas picks) we could get both one of the top wideouts AND get a quality tight end......2 things we really really need. If we have to stay put at 11 I hope they take a DE and use picks to move up into the latter 1st to get a wideout..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UticaBill Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 IF we got Dallas's two 1st I don't think we'd use them on a WR and a TE.... maybe, but Most/all of the TE's will be their at #41 I could see us taking a WR and a DB, or an LB or even a lineman at #28 assuming we grab our WR at #21 Who would Dallas want that bad that would still be there at #11? We might have to package our 4th or 5th into that deal to make it palatable to them.... IF Dallas was going to move up, I think they would want to get into the #3 or #4 slot... but that would cost them nearly the entire draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marauderswr80 Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 If Buffalo was to get Dallas's 2 first round picks via trade, I wouldnt rule out Buffalo taking 2 WR's!!!!! Especially if they keep that 2nd round pick! If thats the case, you can give me Sweed & Hardy and I will take Cason in the 2nd and best TE in the 3rd! All of a sudden when you have Sweed & Hardy, the TE spot might not need as much attention! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 Best case scenario - you trade down in the first round to load up on premium, day one picks, and then trade up on day two to make sure you hit all of your diamonds in the rough if it's looking dicey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 I disagree and think trading down is the right thing to do. Still a good first post though. Better then a lot of other first posts. Lets not forget that you also need a trading partner who is going to offer you something of value for your picks...wanting to trade down is great, but unfortunately you can't trade down if their is noone willing to give up a small ransom to move up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbfan54 Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 No matter the situation some people think trading down is always the right move. If you take out the obvious reason of getting better value there are two conditions that make trading down a good strategy. The first would be if there is no real way to evaluate which players would be most successful. If this is the case then having more picks gives you a higher probability of selecting an impact player. In reality, talent evaluation isn't perfect but the higher the pick the more likely the player will contribute to the team eventhough many players don't live up to their potential. The other way that trading down generally makes sense is if the differences in talent between players is small. I think in the later rounds of the draft is actually where the lack of real talent evaluation and differentiation of talent make trading down more sensible, however, time constraints and the willingness of teams to trade late in the draft make it difficult to execute late round trades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 <sarcasm on> The Bills should trade down because their cupboard is overflowing with talent already. They really don't have any needs. This year, the Bills are just drafting camp fodder and maybe will find a couple guys to stash on the practice squad. <sarcasm off> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 IF we got Dallas's two 1st I don't think we'd use them on a WR and a TE.... maybe, but Most/all of the TE's will be their at #41 I could see us taking a WR and a DB, or an LB or even a lineman at #28 assuming we grab our WR at #21 Who would Dallas want that bad that would still be there at #11? We might have to package our 4th or 5th into that deal to make it palatable to them.... IF Dallas was going to move up, I think they would want to get into the #3 or #4 slot... but that would cost them nearly the entire draft. Dallas wants CB and RB. Both RB's are there at #11, and they'd have a choice of at least 3 top shelf CB's at #11. I'd give them our #11 and a 5th so I can still get Schmitt with one of our 4th's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts