Buffalo Rumblings: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: MLB Hot Stove: blogging the rumors, trades, signings Bar-right-arrows



Will the Bills trade down in April?

Teams may be willing to deal up for Mendenhall (AP Photo)

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 | Comment 44 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

There are definitely a few teams that can
For reference, here is the draft order and points, and # of draft picks per team:
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
I didn't finish that thought, I don't think the Texans, Buccaneers, Steelers, Titans, or Seahawks have enough picks to throw together an offer without jeapordizing their draft.

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 to parent up   0 recs

Further limitations
If the Bills want the top WR on their board, they shouldn't even be talking with the Eagles, Redskins or Cowboys - all of whom may end up taking a WR. I don't think Dallas will trade up, anyhow.

#17, Minnesota, is the absolute furthest I'd trade down.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Apr 2, 2008 8:14 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The top WRs on the board are not worth trading up
for.  That is why the Bills have no worries about drafting the WR of their choice at #11 if they so choose.  If someone does want to trade up with the Bills, it will not be to take a WR!!!

by Joe P. on Apr 2, 2008 9:27 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

You misinterpreted
We can only trade with one of Philly, Washington and Dallas. Two of those teams (plus Tampa Bay, who could use a WR) will still be picking 19-20-21-22 if the Bills were to trade down that far. I wasn't saying someone would be trading up for a WR, just that to trade down that far would be to sacrifice the #1 WR on their board since one of those three teams left down there might take him.
Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Apr 2, 2008 9:36 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Right
What I was saying was that those teams would be perfect trading partners because if they traded up, they would not take a WR.  Thus making it more likely for one of the top 4 to still be available at the later pick.

by Joe P. on Apr 2, 2008 9:45 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yes...
... but what I'm saying is that if the Bills want the top guy on their WR board in a trade down - and why wouldn't they? - then they can't trade down into that range, because the chances are sky high they'd lose out on him. There will probably not be a "oh, we can get one of these four guys" decision for Buffalo; they'll have one guy in mind.
Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Apr 2, 2008 9:50 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

So Kelly is
that much better than Sweed and Thomas that we can not afford to let him go to pick up an extra pick?  I hope their thinking is not that rigid.

by Joe P. on Apr 2, 2008 11:12 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If they do think Kelly has separated himself
Then why would their being rigid in their stance be a problem? If they have a clear-cut favorite, I trust the Bills' scouting department much more than my own opinion. Go get him.
Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Apr 2, 2008 11:28 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Fair enough
They have done a good job the past two drafts.

by Joe P. on Apr 2, 2008 11:43 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

#11
You might be surprised to see the number of mock drafts showing Buffalo taking a CB with this pick...not WR.
Get the Bills back to the big game!

by Blitz on Apr 3, 2008 9:54 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Oh, I'm aware :)
And that's recent. The month prior to this was all WR, all the time. Popular opinion is now, because Kelly hasn't worked out, that WR is a reach at 11. Gut instincts are usually the best instincts come draft day, and all these mockers picking Kelly could turn out to be right.
Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Apr 3, 2008 10:37 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

And before that
a lot of sites seemed to be on the Keith Rivers bandwagon.

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...

Get the Bills back to the big game!

by Blitz on Apr 3, 2008 10:46 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

And..
Since I don't have a strong preference for 1 WR, I'd take any of these deals down to 22 and pick the WR available at that point.

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
I think you're absolutely right, South123, except I would only trade down as far as the the Eagles at #19.  After that, the Bills would run the risk of not getting the kind of WR they want.

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.

Get the Bills back to the big game!

by Blitz on Apr 2, 2008 9:20 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Lions or Cards
Otherwise you could lose the WR you want, which I hope is Devin Thomas
The Bills can win every game

by killascript on Apr 2, 2008 8:37 AM EDT   0 recs

Risk vs reward
I would love to see the Bills trade down several spots to pick up an extra 3rd or 4th round pick. This would be great for us to trade back up and gets players we want.

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...
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)?

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.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Apr 2, 2008 9:58 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'd love it!
By only getting an extra third, you wouldn't be moving back too far in the first round, unless you were getting fleeced a little.  Still, I don't view that as a worst case scenario.  

by krytime on Apr 2, 2008 10:07 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

What about completely trading out of the 1st?
I'd have no problem with that at all.  I'm of the belief that the best way to build your team via the draft is by getting extra picks in the 2nd to 4th round, and staying away form the top half of the 1st.  With the 11th pick being worth 1250 points, I could see getting 2 2nd round picks and a 3rd.  

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...
... you're essentially saying that you're fine with your starting lineup. It's asking a second round draft pick a lot to jump into a starting lineup, and that's what Buffalo needs, not just at WR but potentially at TE as well. I don't like that idea at all (no offense, of course). :)
Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Apr 2, 2008 10:04 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Oh, none taken whatsoever..
But, you could probably get two of the 2nd tier WRs, and maybe the top TE with the extra picks.  Offensively speaking, would you be happy with a scenario that would net us Jordy Nelson, Earl Bennett or Doucet, and Martellus Bennett?  I'd call that a good day for the offense.

by krytime on Apr 2, 2008 10:13 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'd be more content
Having Kelly, Bennett and Tyvon Branch in the third, to tell you the truth.
Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Apr 2, 2008 11:29 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

My wishful thinking.
By the way - I like Branch too.

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 to parent up   0 recs

That could work ok
but going from #11 completely OUT of the 1st round is a little much.  No team is going to want to trade from the 2nd round all the way up to #11 because they'll have to give up a bunch of picks.

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.

~K

by Kurupt on Apr 2, 2008 1:22 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Just throwing it out there
But what if we traded back with philly, for their first and Lito Shephard in exchange for our 1st and maybe a 3rd. Then we could get a PROVEN starter (2 pro bowls) at cb, one of top WR in the first, and a tight end in the 2nd? Plus we know Philly is def looking to move him. I'd be willing to even throw them a 6th rounder in next years draft..... Just a thought, let me know what people think

by LuBAR on Apr 2, 2008 11:03 AM EDT   0 recs

Lito
He would want us to redo his contract and he would be asking for too much money. This would greatly hinder us extending Evans and Crowell. The Rookies salary even for a #11 CB would be less then what Lito would ask for. Talent wise it would be great for us and it would allow Philly to grab a high draft pick.

by hilliarddavid on Apr 2, 2008 1:21 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yup
I couldn't imagine Lito not asking for something in the ballpark of what Samuel or even Marcus Trufant got.  Those are some hefty contracts....
~K

by Kurupt on Apr 2, 2008 1:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

isn't there
ANYTHING the league can do about these growingly outrageous CB price tags? Its not even the top 5 corners getting this kind of money anymore. Anyone who can play man coverage against a number 1 receiver has become ridiculously overpriced! This has to be a major issue at some point right? The rest of us (meaning not the raiders, cowboys, etc.) can't live off jabari greer's forever can we?

ps i like greer a lot that wasn't a rip on him.

It's not delivery, It's DiGiorgio!

by poz on Apr 2, 2008 1:41 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Well
Until the league does something about the ridiculous contracts (which the NFLPA wouldn't allow anyhow), there won't be anything we can do about it.

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...

~K

by Kurupt on Apr 2, 2008 1:54 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

A false truth...
One argument I keep seeing is that Buffalo is to risk-adverse to trade back.  The common example is the Whitner pick in 2006.  There is one problem with that argument:  Levy has the final say back then and he is no longer with the team.  The Bills have a new man in charge in Russ Brandon and the fact is, no one knows how risk adverse (or not) he is.  In addition, Tom Modrak will likely have more say in the draft this season, especially considering Brandon's lack of experience in player evaluations.  In that vein, here's a look at the Eagles draft history for the three seasons Tom Modrak was director of football operations:

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)
2001 Draft:  
  • 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.
The year after Modrak left (2002 draft) the Eagles participated in no trades
John I.

by jri111 on Apr 2, 2008 11:33 AM EDT   0 recs

Solid points all
But with all that said, do you think that the Bills are more or less likely to trade?
Man do I miss #78

by sireric on Apr 2, 2008 11:57 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Brandon
That is a great point that nobody knows what Russ Brandon is thinking and what kind of GM he is going to be.  If anything the Stroud trade would leave me to believe that he is going to be a fairly aggressive GM.  It is unfair to assume that he is going to run the team like Marv did.

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 to parent up   0 recs

Historic Draft Pick Trades and Values
These recent trades can have an impact on what the Bills can expect.  I put the points in to make it easy to see the value of the trade.  Sorry if this is too long (Brian, feel free to delete if necessary), but I like the idea of trading down and wanted to see what we can get for it.  I went back only to 2004 where applicable.

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.

I'm the jolly little baker and you'll find me on the label of Kaufman's Rye Bread

by DCRumbler on Apr 2, 2008 11:48 AM EDT   0 recs

Using the point system
What do you think it would take us to get Lito from the eagles? Do you think Swaping 1st's and giving them our 3rd would be enough?

by LuBAR on Apr 2, 2008 12:10 PM EDT   0 recs

That's too much, IMO
The difference between #11 and #19 is 375 points, which is equivalent to a mid-late 2nd round pick.  Throwing in our 3rd (235 points) would make Lito worth about 610 points, which is a late 1st round pick.  Throw in the big contract he'd want and it just doesn't make sense for us to pursue such an offer.

Unless we would give him the big deal, it doesn't make sense to make a trade like that...

~K

by Kurupt on Apr 2, 2008 1:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

yeah
thats way too much for what would basically be equivalent to a free agent signing.  The ONLY time I would ever trade a high pick for a player who wants to massively re-work a contract is if he is still very young and has some room for growth still.  If the Bills felt like giving huge money to CB then they would have just signed Asante Samuel and kept the picks.

by kaisertown on Apr 2, 2008 2:17 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Not trade-related
or not anything that we didn't already know, but a good read otherwise (from the Buffalo News):

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

How good do you want the Bills to be?

by Fort Worth on Apr 2, 2008 1:35 PM EDT   0 recs

CB
I more I read, the more I think Buffalo will take a WR in the 1st round, and address the CB position later on in the draft, say round 4 or 5.
Get the Bills back to the big game!

by Blitz on Apr 2, 2008 4:07 PM EDT   0 recs

Best Hands vs. KR playmaker (trust the Bills)
This is a very tough choice. Not like last year where Marshawn was there and we nabbed him. Each of this players is a game breaker in different ways.
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

The Bills can win every game

by killascript on Apr 2, 2008 9:03 PM EDT   0 recs

Another way to look at it.
While I agree with South123 overall position and trading partners in a trade down  ,What I have not heard and what the Bills have a history of doing is Trading back into the late first for a player they want. With the extra picks they have they could make a pitch to get back into the late first at say #26 Jacksonville and get a player they have rated highly. This means they could take a player they love at any position at 11 and still get one of the designated top4 big WR in the late first.  Anyboy have thoughts on this???

by Rocco58 on Apr 3, 2008 9:12 AM EDT   0 recs

Best WR available
The Bills will probably want to make sure they get the exact reciver they want since it is a major need for us.  Check that, the biggest need.  Therefore, we will probably make sure we draft a WR before teams like Philly, Wash, Dallas, and T.B. have a crack at the best ones.

by jj24 on Apr 3, 2008 9:20 AM EDT   0 recs

Down to 17 only
Chances are still good the Bills would have their pick at 17, and trading down 6 spots should be good enough to get a 3rd round pick still.  If the Bills really only like 1 WR above all others, then don't risk it.  But if there is any debate and a few guys nearly equal likely to be there later, go for it.  

by Brainiac on Apr 3, 2008 11:24 AM EDT   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Daily updates on the Buffalo Bills, featuring opinions, analysis, news updates and the most thorough community of Bills fans on the Internet.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

0194604180_small
My rambling Rumblings and thoughts (SUPER LONG)

Recent FanPosts

Homersimpson3_small
Does Andre Reed belong in the Hall of Fame?
Small
Buffalo Draft 2009
Buffalo_skull_small
Interesting Early Picks...
Homersimpson3_small
McShay has Bills taking TE: From Chris Brown
Images_small
2008 Year End Statistics
Small
I'm Watching the Fiesta Bowl Tonight
Seagalwithpanda_small
Somethings Haven't Changed
T_edwards_070930_gallery_600_1__small
SURVEY SAYS: Angelo Crowell
Dynamics_small
Offseason shopping list

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Executive Editor

Rorschach_small Brian Galliford

The Triumvirate

0194604180_small Kurupt

Oni_s_first_days_079_small sireric

Daffy_duck_small jri111

Analyst

Dynamics_small Ron From NM

ad

Site Meter