The #3 pick in the draft

[better days]

I have posted this before in another thread but I heard again this morning on 620 WDAE Tampa that the Bucs would be happy to give the #3 pick away for next to nothing due to money concerns of the Glazer family that own the Bucs. If the Bills could move up there for their #1 & a 4th or 5th should they go for it?

[Buffalogic]

You mean any of the top 3 picks can be had. Just like every year. Nobody wants them this year either, too expensive. Bills would be very stupid to trade up.

[wmoz11]

Depends who is there at the time. If Okung is there, yes.

I doubt it would be that easy to move up, regardless of how much they don't want to be there.

[Demon]

I have posted this before in another thread but I heard again this morning on 620 WDAE Tampa that the Bucs would be happy to give the #3 pick away for next to nothing due to money concerns of the Glazer family that own the Bucs. If the Bills could move up there for their #1 & a 4th or 5th should they go for it?

I would think that the demanding price would be larger then just adding a 4th or 5th rounder on top of our 1st to move up to the 3rd slot.

[Dr. Lecter]

For that price? Sure. Especially if the Rams take Bradford.

[Ed]

If moving up to #3 only cost us a 4th or 5th, I would be all for it. I'd be happy with Bradford, Suh, McCoy or Okung.

[utmhead]

It would take you at least a 2nd round, 4th and 5th or a 2nd next year. According to the draft value chart

[better days]

[/b]I would think that the demanding price would be larger then just adding a 4th or 5th rounder on top of our 1st to move up to the 3rd slot.

The Glazers are really having financial difficulty because they paid a LOT of money to buy Manchester United just before the economy collapsed. Ian Beckles the host & former OT for the Bucs & Eagles speculated this morning that the Bucs would be happy with the #20 pick & a 6th rnd pick for the 3rd.

[Ed]

It would take you at least a 2nd round, 4th and 5th or a 2nd next year. According to the draft value chart
But the draft value chart doesn't come into play if the Bucs are worried about money and desperately want to move back. That's the point of this thread. If you can move up at a major discount, do you do it?

[Ed]

The Glazers are really having financial difficulty because they paid a LOT of money to buy Manchester United just before the economy collapsed. Ian Beckles the host & former OT for the Bucs & Eagles speculated this morning that the Bucs would be happy with the #20 pick & a 6th rnd pick for the 3rd.
So maybe they wouldn't even want the #9 pick as they'd still be looking at what, $15-20 million in guaranteed money?

[psubills62]

The Glazers are really having financial difficulty because they paid a LOT of money to buy Manchester United just before the economy collapsed. Ian Beckles the host & former OT for the Bucs & Eagles speculated this morning that the Bucs would be happy with the #20 pick & a 6th rnd pick for the 3rd.

The 9th pick is worth more than that. So maybe we could do a fair trade - #9 for #3?

Honestly, though, they are looking to upgrade their safety position. Why not just trade #9 and Whitner to them?

If you're correct and all it would take would be a combination of trading first rounders and a late-round pick, I'd be all for it. Assuming the Rams go with Bradford, if the Lions pick Suh, then we'll take Okung. If the Lions pick Okung, we'll go with Suh.

It's an interesting possibility that you bring up, but I just don't see it happening. If that is actually the case, then a ton of teams will start bidding on it and drive the price up significantly anyway.

[psubills62]

So maybe they wouldn't even want the #9 pick as they'd still be looking at what, $15-20 million in guaranteed money?

That's why we trade back, then trade up to #3 :up:

In all seriousness, you're probably right. If they are that desperate to get out of paying money, they won't want our pick, as it will still be too expensive.

[better days]

That's why we trade back, then trade up to #3 :up:

In all seriousness, you're probably right. If they are that desperate to get out of paying money, they won't want our pick, as it will still be too expensive.

I really don't know about the amount myself but I would think the #3 pick is much more expensive than #9. If they go down too much the Bucs fans will SCREAM about it.

[psubills62]

I really don't know about the amount myself but I would think the #3 pick is much more expensive than #9. If they go down too much the Bucs fans will SCREAM about it.

The early teens would probably be the best value for the money. Not sure how accurate "mac's football blog" is, but here's a list:

http://www.macsfootballblog.com/2009/04/2009-nfl-rookie-signing-status.html

#3: 31 million guaranteed
#9: 17.7 million guaranteed

Between picks 11 and 14, the guaranteed money decreases by about 1 million each time. After pick 14, the guaranteed portion decreases by about 0.5 million per pick. So I'd say pick 14 would be their best bet to get decent value, but not have to pay outrageous prices.

[TigerJ]

It's generally easier to move to than down from a higher spot in the top half of the first round. If the Bills can do it cheaply, they should consider it, but the same concerns would face the Bills. Can they afford the salary of the guy they pick there? There is a great likelihood of having to overpay.

[Mathja]

But the draft value chart doesn't come into play if the Bucs are worried about money and desperately want to move back. That's the point of this thread. If you can move up at a major discount, do you do it?

I think its time to throw the draft value chart out the window -- especially without a rookie wage scale and the cost involved with signing top 10 picks. Obviously, nobody wants a top 3 pick because of the expense. So, they're not as valuable. either toss the chart or re-work the values!!!!

[don137]

Even if the Bills could move up for a first and a fourth he question becomes is it worth it from a financial perspective to commit so much to one player factoring in Buffalo is not exactly Dallas or Washington and the Bills have a budget to work with.

[SirMcGee]

We have too many needs to fill to be trading up. And to trade up from 9 to 3, we'd have to give them our 1st, 2nd, and 4th. That's asking too much.

[Bill Cody]

If we could move up at a reasonable cost it would be worth exploring. Salary is not really an issue for Buffalo. If we want to compete we need some impact players. Who are our impact players now?

[SirMcGee]

If we could move up at a reasonable cost it would be worth exploring. Salary is not really an issue for Buffalo. If we want to compete we need some impact players. Who are our impact players now?

We don't need "impact" players. We need players in general. We're not even going to be able to fill all our needs with all the picks we have now. To get rid of picks now would be dumb. OT, ILB, OLB, NT, DE, WR, QB, RB. You think we can afford to waste draft picks for one player?

[better days]

We don't need "impact" players. We need players in general. We're not even going to be able to fill all our needs with all the picks we have now. To get rid of picks now would be dumb. OT, ILB, OLB, NT, DE, WR, QB, RB. You think we can afford to waste draft picks for one player?

I think the Bills could "waste" a 4th or 5th rnd pick for an IMPACT player that will be an impact player for years to come. The Bills don't just need players. Players like that will get you 7-9 over & over & over.

[YardRat]

If we could move up to #3 'cheap' (giving up a fifth or Whitner along with #9), I'd do it in a second.

[Luisito23]

Imagine if we can get the #3 pick without giving away our 9th....Bradford, and Spiller all the way!!!

[THRILLHO]

Why waste our time even talking about it? If any team can finagle a trade like that, it is NE.

[better days]

Why waste our time even talking about it? If any team can finagle a trade like that, it is NE.

You are right about that. The Pats* are great at trading picks, but they usually trade down not up.

[THRILLHO]

You are right about that. The Pats* are great at trading picks, but they usually trade down not up.
Well what I mean is, they could trade up with only a 4th and get away with it just because they get away with that stuff somehow. Like last year when they were just collecting picks, and I think they eventually traded a pick in last year's draft for a pick in a higher round this year.

[ublinkwescore]

If we take a QB, let it be Clausen over anyone else with first round written on it.

that being said, I don't want a QB this year - build our lines and WR corps first, and then take a qb next season and see what we've got this year - if we want to go into rebuilding mode, let's do it right, and make the qbs job as easy as possible.