Will the Bills trade down in April?
![]() |
|
|
Even though I wrote a while back that the odds are against the Buffalo Bills making a trade on draft day to move back, I think it might still be wise to discuss some scenarios in which they may entertain the idea. You should still keep in mind that trades might be a little tougher to come by this year, as the time between first round picks has been reduced from 15 minutes to 10 minutes. While that doesn't sound like a big deal, you must also remember that this is the first year of the rules change and teams might have a hard time adjusting the way they operate. You would also be wise not to forget the 2006 draft, when the Bills could have easily traded down and still gotten Donte Whitner (they even had an offer on the table) and decided not to. If the guy they like (Malcolm Kelly?) is available at #11 they will most likely take him and not trade down.
With all of that said however, lets look at some situations in which the Bills might trade down:
Enticing O-Linemen: There are several players that teams might want to move up to get, and the main reason is because they won't make it past the four teams directly behind the Bills. Denver, Carolina, Chicago, and Detroit, respectively pick after the Bills and all four have needs along the offensive line. Most of the top O-line prospects should still be on the board at 11. Ryan Clady (Boise State), Chris Williams (Vanderbilt), Jeff Otah (Pittsburgh) , Gosder Cherilus (Boston College) and Branden Albert (Virginia) could all be available when the Bills pick. Teams like Seattle, Green Bay, and Pittsburgh could be looking to jump ahead of the pack to get their hands on the cream of the crop, also keep in mind that Detroit could be looking to get in front of those others so they can snag their guy.
Moving for Mendenhall?: The other player that could entice teams to move up is Illinois RB Rashard Mendenhall. Mendenhall is easily the second best running back in the draft; some even say the best. Carolina, Chicago and Detroit will all give him a long look and it is highly doubtful that Mendenhall is on the board after pick #15. Oregon's Jonathan Stewart has undergone surgery on his big toe that will sideline him right up to training camp. If everything goes well he should be ready for the start of the season. Some teams may back off of him however due to the injury and this could force some teams to make getting Mendenhall a priority. Philadelphia, Arizona, and maybe even Dallas or Tampa Bay could all look to move up and grab him. Again, Detroit could look to jump up also.
Defensive Options: The last scenario involves defense, namely pass rushers. If Denver doesn't pick O-line they most certainly will pick a player for their defense, and teams like the Vikings and Texans have had their eyes on defenders such as Phillip Merling (Clemson) and Derrick Harvey (Florida) for quite some time now. Teams like San Francisco or Jacksonville might want to move up in front of Denver to grab an elite pass rusher. Draft Tek did a simulation detailing this very scenario, and ran a mock to show how things could shake out.
Overall I think that if the Bills want to trade out of the #11 pick, they will have ample opportunities, and potential partners to do so. The question is, will the Bills risk missing out on the guy they want (presumably Malcolm Kelly) by trading down and obtaining more picks? Given the Bills' conservative nature and their history (Whitner), I just don't see it happening. If you have any trade thoughts, feel free to leave them in the comments section, but keep in mind the trusty draft trade chart.
0 recs |
44
comments
Comments
There are definitely a few teams that can
11 1250pts Bufalo
12 1200 Denver
13 1150 Carolina
14 1100 Chicago
15 1050 Detroit 8 picks (includes 2 3rds)
16 1000 Arizona 10 picks
17 950 Vikings 9 picks (includes 2 3rds)
18 900 Texans only 5 picks
19 875 Eagles 11 picks !
20 850 Bucc's only 5 picks
21 800 Redskins 9 picks (includes 2 3rds)
22 780 Cowboys 8 picks
23 760 Steelers 6 picks
24 740 Titans 7 picks
25 720 Seahawks 6 picks
26 700 Jags 8 picks (2 3rd and 3 5th rds)
27 680 Chargers only 5 picks, none until 5th rd
28 660 Cowboys (Again, see pick 22)
29 640 49's 6 picks
30 620 Packers 6 picks
31 600 Giants 8 picks
The 15-Lions, 16-Cards, 17-Vikings, 19-Eagles, 21-Redskins and 22-Cowboys are all viable, and the 26-Jags could if they were desperate.
by south123 on Apr 2, 2008 8:00 AM EDT 0 recs
Forgot to finish my thought
So I would limit my discussions to:
15-Lions
16-Cards
17-Vikings
19-Eagles
21-Redskins
22-Cowboys
by south123 on
Apr 2, 2008 8:04 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Further limitations
#17, Minnesota, is the absolute furthest I'd trade down.
by Brian Galliford on
Apr 2, 2008 8:14 AM EDT
up
0 recs
The top WRs on the board are not worth trading up
by Joe P. on
Apr 2, 2008 9:27 AM EDT
up
0 recs
You misinterpreted
by Brian Galliford on
Apr 2, 2008 9:36 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Right
by Joe P. on
Apr 2, 2008 9:45 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Yes...
by Brian Galliford on
Apr 2, 2008 9:50 AM EDT
up
0 recs
So Kelly is
by Joe P. on
Apr 2, 2008 11:12 AM EDT
up
0 recs
If they do think Kelly has separated himself
by Brian Galliford on
Apr 2, 2008 11:28 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Fair enough
by Joe P. on
Apr 2, 2008 11:43 AM EDT
up
0 recs
#11
by Blitz on
Apr 3, 2008 9:54 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Oh, I'm aware :)
by Brian Galliford on
Apr 3, 2008 10:37 AM EDT
up
0 recs
And before that
It's funny how this thing evolves, when you take a step back from it.
I'll be happy if Buffalo's 1st rounder turns out to be an impact player, whomever that turns out to be. This franchise doesn't need another pick like Mike Williams...
by Blitz on
Apr 3, 2008 10:46 AM EDT
up
0 recs
And..
I'd much rather have an extra pick or two. The team needs so much.
Ok, NOW I'm done.
by south123 on Apr 2, 2008 8:12 AM EDT 0 recs
Trade Down
An extra pick would afford Buffalo the luxury of picking up an extra impact player for offense (WR, TE, C, FB) or defense (DE, LB, CB). Noone in their right mind is going to say that we couldn't use an extra impact player for this team.
by Blitz on
Apr 2, 2008 9:20 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Lions or Cards
by killascript on Apr 2, 2008 8:37 AM EDT 0 recs
Risk vs reward
IMO by draft day, we will have set which WR is #1 in the draft and we will not risk losing him. If we traded back, whose to say another team in need of a WR will not try to jump a pick ahead of us and grab the player we were hoping to get.
I do think this draft is really deep and if we trade back and Kelly is our #1 WR and he is gone and we land Thomas, I would be fine with that.
JUST THROWING THIS OUT THERE:
What would everyone think if we traded back and picked up an extra 3rd round pick, but lost out on Sweed, Kelly and Thomas (I dont think Hardy would be a choice with his history)?
by hilliarddavid on Apr 2, 2008 9:51 AM EDT 0 recs
Eesh...
I don't even want to think about that possibility. We need a starting wide receiver, and those four guys you named (including Hardy) are probably the only guys who could do it. (I don't even think DeSean Jackson can start as a rookie). So that scenario is absolutely worst-case for Buffalo.
by Brian Galliford on
Apr 2, 2008 9:58 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I'd love it!
by krytime on
Apr 2, 2008 10:07 AM EDT
up
0 recs
What about completely trading out of the 1st?
Now the trick is trying to find someone willing to dance to that song with us...
by krytime on Apr 2, 2008 10:03 AM EDT 0 recs
By doing that...
by Brian Galliford on
Apr 2, 2008 10:04 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Oh, none taken whatsoever..
by krytime on
Apr 2, 2008 10:13 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I'd be more content
by Brian Galliford on
Apr 2, 2008 11:29 AM EDT
up
0 recs
My wishful thinking.
Nevertheless, my idea of trading that pick would net possibly 2 2nd rounders and a third. This would enable the Bills to get another DT to protect against Stroud's injury concerns, and a CB like Branch.
Obviously, I don't think my scenario will happen. But if they could trade completely out of the first, and pick up the equivalent points/picks via the trade chart, I think they'd be silly not to follow up on it.
by krytime on
Apr 2, 2008 12:53 PM EDT
up
0 recs
That could work ok
Maybe someone like ATL would consider it since they have 3 relatively high 2nd rounders and may want to secure a QB like Brohm ahead of Carolina/Chicago/Minnesota, but they'd have to give up #34, 37 and #68, which is a lot. It would probably be the 48th instead of 37 if the trade value chart was to be used. I guess that could turn out ok for us especially if we considered trading back into the first with one of the 2nd's and our current 3rd. Still seems pretty unreasonable though.
by Kurupt on
Apr 2, 2008 1:22 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Just throwing it out there
by LuBAR on Apr 2, 2008 11:03 AM EDT 0 recs
Lito
by hilliarddavid on
Apr 2, 2008 1:21 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Yup
by Kurupt on
Apr 2, 2008 1:24 PM EDT
up
0 recs
isn't there
ps i like greer a lot that wasn't a rip on him.
by poz on
Apr 2, 2008 1:41 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Well
This is where teams like the Bills need to consider signing their younger players to new deals well before their rookie contracts are up. It's the only way they'll likely be able to retain players who become All-Pro's without eating up a huge chunk of their available money...
by Kurupt on
Apr 2, 2008 1:54 PM EDT
up
0 recs
A false truth...
1999 Draft:
- Trade Down: Traded 5th round pick to Detroit for the Lions 2000 4th round pick.
2000 draft:
- Trade up: Tennessee traded their 2nd round pick (61st overall) to Philadelphia for their 3rd round pick (68th overall) and their 5th round pick (135th overall)
- Trade down (for future pick): Philadelphia traded its fourth-round pick (111th Overall) to San Diego for San Diego's 2001 third-round draft choice
- Player Trade: Traded QB Bobby Hoying to Oakland for 6th round pick (178 overall. (in 1999)
- Player Trade: Traded QB Rodney Peete to Washington for 6th round pick (192 overall) (in 1999).
- Player Trade: Traded 7th round pick to NE for WR Dietrict Jells (in 1998)
- Trade down: Traded third round pick (88th overall) and 6th round pick(187th overall) to Miami for 2002 2nd round pick.
- Player Trade: Traded CB Allen Rossum in 2000 for 5th round pick (147th overall)
- Player Trade: Traded 7th round pick to Carolina for TE Luther Broughton in 1999.
by jri111 on Apr 2, 2008 11:33 AM EDT 0 recs
Solid points all
by sireric on
Apr 2, 2008 11:57 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Brandon
On the other hand, nothing in Modrak's trade history leads me to believe that the Bills will take a risk like trading down in the first round. There is a huge difference between moving around in the first round and moving around later in the draft.
by kaisertown on
Apr 2, 2008 2:22 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Historic Draft Pick Trades and Values
Obviously, a trade with Detroit mirrors a trade that St. Louis made with Denver in 2006. Rams gave their 11th (1250 points) to the Broncos for the 15th (1050) and a high 3rd: No. 68 (250). The 50 point difference means Denver basically gave up a phantom late 4th rounder in the deal, too. Clearly, Denver really wanted Cutler and was willing to do what it took to get him. Detroit's 76 (210) would make the deal copasetic, with Detroit only losing out on 10 points. But, supposing they get wind of Chicago looking to grab Mendenhall, a player Detroit has been speculated to have strong interest in. In that case, Detroit might also give up something like a 5th to the Bills, IMO.
Now, if you'd like the Bills to be dumb about it, you can look back to 2005 when Houston (13th) traded with New Orleans (16th) to get a 2006 3rd. While this makes sense from a trade chart prospective (the value difference between the 13th and the 16th is 150 points, and the No. 66 the Texan's received in 2006 is valued at 260 points: 110 point difference), this is clearly something I think the Bills have no interest in doing. We need players now.
I suppose you can also look at a trade last year that Jacksonville made with the Broncos; the value chart shows the point differential to be similar to a Bills-Detroit potential swap when the Jags gave their 17th (950) to Denver for the 21st (780), 86th (160) and 159th (27.8). If you do the math, you can see the boys were playing with the chart on that one.
Trading further down also interests a lot of people here, including me. A trade with the Cowboys for their 22nd (780), for example, would leave us with a 470 point gap. Everybody (but me-I always dream big) knows that the Boys will not give up their 2nd -62nd (284) and 92nd (132) together even though it makes sense in a chart-value sense. So what might we expect from that type of trade?
2007 saw the Panthers trade their 14th (1100) to the J-E-T-S for the No. 25 (720) and No. 59 (310). They also swapped 6th rounders. Points wise, New York won this trade, although I am sure the Panthers enjoyed the flexibility they had with having two 2nd round picks.
If you go back to 2004, you can see a trade where San Fran elected to drop 12 places when they made a deal with Philadelphia. The Niners gave up their 16th (1000) for the Eagles' 28th (660) and 58th (320) picks. In this scenario, the Niners took a 20 point hit, though, again, it doesn't really matter when you are getting a 2nd rounder.
So, those are the "historics" with trade value taken into account. From these examples, nobody tends to get too hosed, unless you think Cutler busts. What do all these trades mean for the Bills? Well, it looks as though trading relatively light (i.e. with Detroit, Chicago, ect.) will net us a third rounder (despite my ridiculous speculation that we'll get more), and value should give us a slight point advantage, if you care. If you trade big (as in with Dallas), you should expect a net loss but obviously a 2nd rounder (though considering how low Dallas' second round pick is, the Bills should seek another later round pick, IMO). Sorry for the point garbage, but I think it helps view of the whole thing.
Also, I don't see the point of trading out of the first. With all the picks we have now, plus a potential trade down with another team in the first, I don't think its necessary to continue stock-piling picks. We need players now; just my opinion.
by DCRumbler on Apr 2, 2008 11:48 AM EDT 0 recs
Using the point system
by LuBAR on Apr 2, 2008 12:10 PM EDT 0 recs
That's too much, IMO
Unless we would give him the big deal, it doesn't make sense to make a trade like that...
by Kurupt on
Apr 2, 2008 1:52 PM EDT
up
0 recs
yeah
by kaisertown on
Apr 2, 2008 2:17 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Not trade-related
In short, Bills want to be taller
Height at WR spot tops Jauron's wish list
by Mark Gaughan -- News Sports Reporter
Updated: 04/02/08 9:41 AM
PALM BEACH, Fla. -- The Buffalo Bills have a big-time need for a big wide receiver.
That's the gist of Dick Jauron's assessment of the Bills' roster heading into the NFL Draft.
"What I'd like to add to that group -- because it's not there -- is a big receiver; a big, physical receiver," the Bills coach said Tuesday at the NFL owners meetings. "Our guys are all physical, but they're not big. Josh [Reed] is compact. You wouldn't say Josh is small by any stretch. But we want a big, rugged, tall receiver that's open when he's not open. That's what I'd like to add."
Does that mean the Bills are a lock to take a wideout with the No. 11 pick in the draft? Obviously, Jauron is not making any guarantees. He says the Bills will not reach to fill their glaring need.
"We rank the board and then live by it," Jauron said. "We won't stray far from the board to pick a position if there was a huge discrepancy."
The need can not be overstated. Buffalo ranked 30th on offense last year and has finished in the bottom six in passing five straight years.
Furthermore, all the Bills' significant player moves this offseason have been on defense. The one big change for the offense is at coordinator, where Turk Schonert has taken over. So the offense needs more help.
The question for the Bills is whether there's a receiver worthy of the 11th spot in the draft.
The top two available wideouts may be Oklahoma's Malcolm Kelly and Michigan State's Devin Thomas. Kelly, 6-foot-3 and 219 pounds, has yet to run for pro scouts this spring because of a slight tear in his quadriceps muscle suffered in February. He's scheduled to run next Wednesday in Oklahoma.
There have been rumors about Kelly's knees, too. He had a torn ligament in junior high school and a minor knee surgery his sophomore season. But he never missed any playing time in his career.
Jauron said Tuesday he's not worried about Kelly's health, based on a check-up done at the scouting combine in February.
"We feel good about it," he said. "Our [medical] staff was in Indianapolis with everybody else. There's nothing I'm aware of [that's a problem] at this point."
Both Kelly and Thomas are leaving college after their junior seasons. Kelly was the fastest receiver to get to 1,000 yards in Sooners history. He had 49 catches for 821 yards and nine TDs on a running team last season. He gets especially high grades for character. Thomas, 6-2 and 213, had 79 catches for 1,260 yards as a junior with eight touchdowns. He also can return kicks.
"Both of them are similar," Jauron said. "Good run after catch, good size, good speed, good speed down the field, powerful guys, quick and explosive with good balance."
Thomas only has had one big year but it was spectacular.
"He had a huge year," Jauron said. "You hear all the quarterback gurus talking about college quarterbacks, and they want a guy who has thrown it a lot. I don't know if it's the same thing at receiver. I really believe you just keep looking at the tape and you get a feel for a guy."
Jauron said he thinks this is a good year for receivers in the draft beyond the first round.
"I think it's pretty deep," he said. "I don't know how many great players there are. You never know that. I think it has depth to it. I think you're going to get a good receiver down the line, a little deeper than what I would consider normal.
Big receivers who might be available in the second round include Indiana's James Hardy, a 6-6, 222-pounder; and Limas Sweed, a 6-4, 217-pounder. Michigan's Mario Manningham is good but not huge (at 5-11z 1/2 n 2/3 181). LSU's Early Doucet and Florida's Andre Caldwell, both 6-foot, also project as second-rounders.
There's no guarantee Sweed or Hardy will be on the board when the Bills' second pick comes up, at No. 41. And can a second- round receiver make difference on the 30th-ranked offense?
The Bills had a chance to add a big receiver in free agency. They interviewed free agent Bryant Johnson, a 6-3, four-year veteran. Johnson lingered on the open market for 12 days after he visited Buffalo before signing a modest, one-year deal with San Francisco. The fact the Bills didn't make a big pitch for him indicates they were confident they were getting somebody they liked in the draft.
If the Bills do not go receiver in the first round, cornerback is the next likeliest target.
Jabari Greer is the incumbent starter at No. 2 cornerback, opposite Terrence Mc- Gee.
"Jabari did such a good job for us a year ago," Jauron said. "He really played well, and he deserves to step in and try to hold that spot."
However, Jauron said recently signed free-agent William James has the ability to challenge Greer for the starting job. The Bills also have Ashton Youboty entering a key year in his Bills career.
At the least, the Bills need more bodies at cornerback.
"Yes, we need a couple," Jauron said. "We need to find two or three more corners just to go to camp."
http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/story/313439.html
by Fort Worth on Apr 2, 2008 1:35 PM EDT 0 recs
CB
by Blitz on Apr 2, 2008 4:07 PM EDT 0 recs
Best Hands vs. KR playmaker (trust the Bills)
Kelly seems polished, a good route runner and superb hands. A "sure thing" type of threat.
Thomas reminds me of a Torry Holt with a little more size, which frankly, is great.
Both guys appear to be high class great character guys, and humble, where each sees his game as needing improvement.
Kelly has injury issues, which our team will address with a fine tooth comb and therefore if they do pick him I will have full confidence that the health issues are not a problem.
However, with what I know, damn, this is hard.
THOMAS and have him return kicks to take the pressure off of McGee.
Then grab a big guy WR later and of course, a playmaking TE.
I would be happy with Kelly as wel considering I trust the front office
by killascript on Apr 2, 2008 9:03 PM EDT 0 recs
Another way to look at it.
by Rocco58 on Apr 3, 2008 9:12 AM EDT 0 recs
Best WR available
by jj24 on Apr 3, 2008 9:20 AM EDT 0 recs
Down to 17 only
by Brainiac on Apr 3, 2008 11:24 AM EDT 0 recs














