Would you deal with the devil (Pats) with our 10th pick ??

[Skooby]

The Pats have the 27th & 31st pick in the 2012 draft, so would you be willing to trade our 10th pick for their 2 - 1st round picks & their 4th ??

3 picks in the first 41 of a deep draft is enticing, isn't it?

Draft chart for review - http://drafttek.com/tradechart.html

[clumping platelets]

:nod:

[SquishDaFish]

I would make them OVERPAY! **** them LOL

[Skooby]

I would make them OVERPAY! **** them LOL

Agreed, they are based on my scenario.

[ublinkwescore]

I would rather not deal with the pats at all.

[Skooby]

I would rather not deal with the pats at all.

It look like you have a devil phobia already, so normally this wouldn't be your cup of tea.

[YardRat]

It would have to be more than the two firsts and a fourth to even start to considerate it, DVC goes out the window within the division, especially with the Pats.

[Extremebillsfan247]

The Pats have the 27th & 31st pick in the 2012 draft, so would you be willing to trade our 10th pick for their 2 - 1st round picks & their 4th ??

3 picks in the first 41 of a deep draft is enticing, isn't it?

Draft chart for review - http://drafttek.com/tradechart.html Short answer is no. There are a few reasons why that would be a bad idea. First, moving from 10th to the 27th is a huge drop for a team that went 6-10 last year. Unlike some drafts, there are quite a few prospects with 2nd round talent that will make it into the bottom of the first because first round talent is actually lacking this year.

Trading with a division rival, you have to assume, they know something that you don't. You also have to keep in mind that helping the Bills will never be in the Patriots best interest. The longer they can keep this team down, the better it is for them. If the Patriots feel the advantage is greater for them, they'd do it. They wouldn't do it to help the Bills, but to hurt them. Just saying. So, my answer is no, I wouldn't do it.

[Skooby]

Short answer is no. There are a few reasons why that would be a bad idea. First, moving from 10th to the 27th is a huge drop for a team that went 6-10 last year. Unlike some drafts, there is quite a bit of 2nd round talent that will make it into the bottom of the first because first round talent is actually lacking this year.



The main reason we were 6-10 is injuries with no depth, so this type of opportunity should create 2 improvements at current positions versus possibly just 1 of 2. I'd also have to weigh in that the Bills draft board targeted the mid-round 1st through our 2nd for targeted players.

Basically, it's easier to hit with 3 chips on the table versus 2. Add in that first rounder that was expected to go early that falls every year should be available late in the 1st round, odds are someone will be there that the Bills liked but was a reach at our current 10th spot.

[Bangarang]

Don't the Pats always try and trade for more picks instead of less?

[clumping platelets]

I'd give them #10 for both #1's, 4th this year and a pick in 2013

[Skooby]

Don't the Pats always try and trade for more picks instead of less?

They normally do that but a certain player they love might fall to 10th, so this isn't out of the realm of possibility.

[BLeonard]

Well, I don't see the Pats doing that... Belichick likes to trade back and acquire picks, not give them up.

But, let's assume that they would offer that. Here's my questions:

1: Who's off the board?
2: What are other teams offering?

The Pats being willing to trade up like that tells me that there is someone there that they want, which likley means someone has fallen that wasn't expected to fall. That means other teams would likely want to try to trade up as well.

Now, if Cleveland is on the phone, I'd be willing to give the #10 to them for thir second first (22 overall) and their second (37 overall). I'd still get 3 picks in the first 41 and not have to deal within the division.

Even better, if Cincy is on the phone offering both of their first round picks (17 and 21 overall). I might even be willing to give Cincy a lower round pick in order to make that happen... again, I get my 3 picks in the first 41 and get 2 picks before NE gets one.

But, if I'm the Bills, and the guy I want is there at 10, I dunno that I risk trading down at all, for the simple reason that "my guy" could very well be gone by the time I get back on the clock.

Only if I don't have "my guy" at 10 do I consider trading down with anyone.

-Bill

[clumping platelets]

Well, I don't see the Pats doing that... Belichick likes to trade back and acquire picks, not give them up.

But, let's assume that they would offer that. Here's my questions:

1: Who's off the board?
2: What are other teams offering?

The Pats being willing to trade up like that tells me that there is someone there that they want, which likley means someone has fallen that wasn't expected to fall. That means other teams would likely want to try to trade up as well.

Now, if Cleveland is on the phone, I'd be willing to give the #10 to them for thir second first (22 overall) and their second (37 overall). I'd still get 3 picks in the first 41 and not have to deal within the division.

Even better, if Cincy is on the phone offering both of their first round picks (17 and 21 overall). I might even be willing to give Cincy a lower round pick in order to make that happen... again, I get my 3 picks in the first 41 and get 2 picks before NE gets one.

But, if I'm the Bills, and the guy I want is there at 10, I dunno that I risk trading down at all, for the simple reason that "my guy" could very well be gone by the time I get back on the clock.

Only if I don't have "my guy" at 10 do I consider trading down with anyone.

-Bill


:goodpost:

[SquishDaFish]

Two firsts this year a 4th this year and a 2nd next year or better. OR NO`

[CleveSteve]

Even better, if Cincy is on the phone offering both of their first round picks (17 and 21 overall). I might even be willing to give Cincy a lower round pick in order to make that happen... again, I get my 3 picks in the first 41 and get 2 picks before NE gets one.

I think If I were at 10 and willing to drop, I'd be happy to get Cincy's #17 and their second before taking #27 and #31. At least at #17 you can still get one of the top OL.

[BADTHINGSMAN]

No way the Pats would let us "make them pay". They are very smart on draft day.

[Skooby]

No way the Pats would let us "make them pay". They are very smart on draft day.

That's why I set up a reasonable scenario, it's a touch more value for the Bills with the 4th. We'd have to like a few guys that are later 1st round / early 2nd talent, knowing the Pats really like who's available at our 10th pick.

The Cincy idea is strong but there's several guys that are late 4th that could be worth drafting. I actually think the Bills are out for depth in all the positions unless we can move up in this draft for a talent without a major punishment.

[ServoBillieves]

No.

I have never wanted a draft to just get here like thid one. I'll probably be even more frustrated when we draft, but I'm so sick of a post about every. Stupid. Single. Possible. Beyond -impossible scenario.

[Extremebillsfan247]

Well, I don't see the Pats doing that... Belichick likes to trade back and acquire picks, not give them up.

But, let's assume that they would offer that. Here's my questions:

1: Who's off the board?
2: What are other teams offering?

The Pats being willing to trade up like that tells me that there is someone there that they want, which likley means someone has fallen that wasn't expected to fall. That means other teams would likely want to try to trade up as well.

Now, if Cleveland is on the phone, I'd be willing to give the #10 to them for thir second first (22 overall) and their second (37 overall). I'd still get 3 picks in the first 41 and not have to deal within the division.

Even better, if Cincy is on the phone offering both of their first round picks (17 and 21 overall). I might even be willing to give Cincy a lower round pick in order to make that happen... again, I get my 3 picks in the first 41 and get 2 picks before NE gets one.

But, if I'm the Bills, and the guy I want is there at 10, I dunno that I risk trading down at all, for the simple reason that "my guy" could very well be gone by the time I get back on the clock.

Only if I don't have "my guy" at 10 do I consider trading down with anyone.

-Bill This post was way better than mine. It hits well on some key points I was trying to convey to the OP in my post and sadly missed the mark. New England would only trade with us if they feel the strategic advantage outweighs the cost, not only from the viewpoint of their team, but how it potentially effects ours as well being in the same division. You are far more likely to benefit by just staying put, or looking for a trade partner outside of the division where your chances of getting more out of the trade are greater. Fantastic post. JMO

[Skooby]

This post was way better than mine. It hits well on some key points I was trying to convey to the OP in my post and sadly missed the mark. New England would only trade with us if they feel the strategic advantage outweighs the cost, not only from the viewpoint of their team, but how it potentially effects ours as well being in the same division. You are far more likely to benefit by just staying put, or looking for a trade partner outside of the division where your chances of getting more out of the trade are greater. Fantastic post. JMO

It's brilliant, it's just out draft chart / value & the Bills lack of depth really get in the way. We're several healthy players from making the playoffs, several more from competing for it all. Those players aren't showing up on FA, they'll be drafted by someone to make it happen.

There actually a few at OLB that can show their stuff this year that should be available late in the first, Upshaw being one of them. Our mid-field defense looks like a $2 hooker on Saturday night, always ready to be scored on. Merriman is about as dependable as Judas, about as trusting as Thomas.

[jamze132]

I would trade #10 if we were able to somehow procure two frst rounders in a heart beat.

[PTI]

No way. The reason Pats actually have done well in the regular season (beside have Brady) is they have decent depth (well, everywhere but CB). They have traded back for years and lost out on true impact players, I don't want to give them the chance to get one.

[Jan Reimers]

Not just no, but *&#%$^*#$&* NO.

It's the Pats, so you know that a really good player will unexpectedly fall to them at 10, and the guy will kill us for the next 10 years.

I don't really understand the great desire of many posters for us to trade down.

[justasportsfan]

If Richardson is there, they may draft him with our 10th pick and it might come back to bite us in the butt. However, anyone worried with Kyle and Dareus up the middle?

[dannyek71]

Our entire draft, Eric Wood and Stevie for Tom Brady. Tom is immediately given a key to the city. We tell him to try it on city hall. As he enters city hall, the doors are locked shut behind him. We torch the place. Tom dies. Mass parties around the country ensue. I sober up 7.5 months later with a mustache, a tattoo of the hungry hungry hippos game on my butt and a voided marriage licence to spike lee.

[DraftBoy]

Yes.

[OpIv37]

Not just no, but *&#%$^*#$&* NO.

It's the Pats, so you know that a really good player will unexpectedly fall to them at 10, and the guy will kill us for the next 10 years.

I don't really understand the great desire of many posters for us to trade down.

I think it's a paranoia from poor picks in the past. If we can trade our #1 for 3 picks, then we get 3 picks to screw up instead of just one.

I don't understand the desire to trade within the division. Remember the last time we traded NE a first round pick (actually, 2)? They spent the next decade killing us, and now they're still good and we're still rebuilding.

[stuckincincy]

The Pats have the 27th & 31st pick in the 2012 draft, so would you be willing to trade our 10th pick for their 2 - 1st round picks & their 4th ??

3 picks in the first 41 of a deep draft is enticing, isn't it?

Draft chart for review - http://drafttek.com/tradechart.html

I can't see any reason why teams with multiple 1st round picks (CLE, CIN, NE) would be looking to obtain BUF's #10...in a deep draft, as you say.

[Skooby]

I can't see any reason why teams with multiple 1st round picks (CLE, CIN, NE) would be looking to obtain BUF's #10...in a deep draft, as you say.

Coveting.

[ddaryl]

I would do it

BUT

for their #27 and #31 this year, and their #1 pick in 2013

Make the division rival pay to play.

It will never happen though

[stuckincincy]

Detailed response! :kid:

[Skooby]

Detailed response! :kid:

Silence of the Lambs has been on TV, so this holds more meaning for me right now than you.

[Ginger Vitis]

I can't see any reason why teams with multiple 1st round picks (CLE, CIN, NE) would be looking to obtain BUF's #10...in a deep draft, as you say.

By next Thursday..Skooby will create separate threads detailing trade down or trade up scenarios with every team that has multiple 1st round picks.. And trade down scenarios with every team picking picking between 14 and 21

[Skooby]

Yes.

I'd thought you'd like this, for every one of the reasons mentioned.

[Skooby]

Sources tell me both the Buffalo Bills and Arizona Cardinals are interested in moving back, given the offensive line depth in this draft (a need for both clubs).

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d828701a4/article/nfl-draft-buzz-ryan-tannehill-still-the-key-fletcher-cox-at-6?module=HP11_hot_topics

[better days]

Agreed, they are based on my scenario.

I don't know the draft chart, but the Pats* 4th is just about like a 5th rnd pick because they pick so late.

The #10 pick for two late first rnd picks & a 5th rnd pick does not sound like a great deal for the Bills to me.

[Skooby]

I don't know the draft chart, but the Pats* 4th is just about like a 5th rnd pick because they pick so late.

The #10 pick for two late first rnd picks & a 5th rnd pick does not sound like a great deal for the Bills to me.

2 first rounders this year would probably get us 2 starters, even the same scenario with Cincy would work but I just don't see them doing that.

I can see us getting a LB / OT late in the first, they'd most likely play from game one.

[acehole]

2 first rounders this year would probably get us 2 starters, even the same scenario with Cincy would work but I just don't see them doing that.

I can see us getting a LB / OT late in the first, they'd most likely play from game one.


Much rather deal with Cini on this...possibly giving them our 2nd in the deal. With some other swaps.

We could in theory Get Cordy Glenn and Steven Hill.

Dont want to give up our third as we need QB or CB or OLB with that pick.

So we can drop down with cinci second 1rst rounder and pick up one more pick.\

Risky but the payoff would be tremendious.

If Hill is gone there are so many good players we could have at that pick that would/could start.

[Skooby]

Much rather deal with Cini on this...possibly giving them our 2nd in the deal. With some other swaps.

We could in theory Get Cordy Glenn and Steven Hill.

Dont want to give up our third as we need QB or CB or OLB with that pick.

So we can drop down with cinci second 1rst rounder and pick up one more pick.\

Risky but the payoff would be tremendious.

If Hill is gone there are so many good players we could have at that pick that would/could start.

I don't like giving up our 2nd rounder this year, maybe next year but not this year that early. We move up to the 9th pick in the 2nd round (SOS tie-breaker), so it's almost like giving up a late 1st.