Hyphe23 Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 I know everyone loves speculating on what we can do in the draft and here is my turn at it. From what I have heard from everyone on this board the top needs that most people can agree on are TE, C, DE and possibly a LB to replace Crowell (I leave out WR because I dont think we will draft one). So here is my scenario, feel free to rip it apart: Lions have the 20th overall pick as well as the first pick in the 2nd round. Looking to get a high impact player at either LB or DT to help their struggling run defense they trade up with Buffalo to get either Maulaluga or BJ Raji. Trade: Bills Receive 20th overall 33rd overall Lions Receive 11th overall Bills 3rd rounder Bills Draft: 20th: Best DE available (Everette Brown maybe?) 33rd: Pettigrew if he is still there if not best linebacker available (Cushing, Clay Mathews, Laurinaitis, Marcus Freeman) and if none of them are available best Center available (No tight end other than Pettigrew is worthy of this pick now that Gresham is going back 43rd: If no Pettigrew at 33rd then address TE here with Chase Coffman I know that was kind of long and this is all a crap shoot until we know what we address in FA, but let me know what you think.
RayFinkle Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 The Lions have more holes in their roster than any team in the NFL. Why do you feel they would give up what basically amounts to another first round pick (Number 33) just to move down 9 slots?
Hyphe23 Posted January 28, 2009 Author Posted January 28, 2009 The Lions have more holes in their roster than any team in the NFL. Why do you feel they would give up what basically amounts to another first round pick (Number 33) just to move down 9 slots? Excellent point, I think its less likely if that they would trade up for a LB, and I dont necessarily think it would be that smart for them to do it for DT either, but there is an extreme dropoff at DT after Raji and I think he is one of the few players they could draft that could help their run defense.
Huuuge Bills Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 This has to be a first! A trade idea that actually makes sense and addresses our needs. If Raji get selected before our pick, I'm all for trading down. I don't care for any of the DE prospects that much, and 11 is too high for Pettigrew. Nice first post.
HotPocket Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 I'm torn on this. Not only from the Bills' perspective, but the Lions' as well. The Lions have problems top to bottom on their roster, would they sacrifice adding depth for a few higher rated players? Same for the Bills, are they willing to do the opposite? Personally, I wouldn't jump at the trade immediately if Raji was on the table, I'd take him before trading down for the crapshoot of taking 2 players later on. But at the same time, if we could have the shot at taking Pettigrew and some OL/DL/DE help with those two picks later on, it'd be tough to pass that chance up.
robkmil Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 This has to be a first! A trade idea that actually makes sense and addresses our needs. If Raji get selected before our pick, I'm all for trading down. I don't care for any of the DE prospects that much, and 11 is too high for Pettigrew. Nice first post. The Bills seem to get stuck and not trade back. I would like to trade back and grab more craft picks.
lets_go_bills Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 I really like this trade scenario. While unlikely it certainly seems plausable. The idea of having three high picks in close proximity is great, it would mean a quick picking of three guys that figure to fill needs.
Hyphe23 Posted January 28, 2009 Author Posted January 28, 2009 I had debated making it with Philly for their first first rounder and their second, which would be a little more realistic based on what they would be giving up, but I couldnt figure out what Philly would be moving up for. Any ideas?
billnutinphoenix Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 I think I'd trade down no matter what!!! We'll have a choice of 5 players that we like and we have too many needs to pick a player and be satisfied...
SKOOBY Posted January 29, 2009 Posted January 29, 2009 We could have 3 stabs at a better player within the first 45 or so taken. I think that also would mean that we have to use up a majority of our rookie money on them, which is OK. Sounds like a decent plan.
OCinBuffalo Posted January 29, 2009 Posted January 29, 2009 At first glance this seems plausible...but with so many holes, the Lions need as many draft picks as they can get. So I don't see them giving up picks, just the opposite, right? Then again, we are talking about the Lions so perhaps the conventional wisdom goes by the boards here.
Astrobot Posted January 29, 2009 Posted January 29, 2009 The same scenario could happen with another team such as Minnesota. Let's not throw the idea out just because he selected the Lions. I too think a trade down is better for the Bills especially if there isn't an impact player that falls to us.
OCinBuffalo Posted January 29, 2009 Posted January 29, 2009 The same scenario could happen with another team such as Minnesota. Let's not throw the idea out just because he selected the Lions. I too think a trade down is better for the Bills especially if there isn't an impact player that falls to us. IF is the whole thing. IF we think we can trade up and get an impact player for the O or D line, then I say they do it.
Recommended Posts