Jump to content


This is our ticket - Vikings trade-down


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 BillsFan3434

BillsFan3434

    UDFA

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 73 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 08:11 AM

http://profootballta...in-first-round/

Viking want to move down in the first road to take a WR for losing Percy Harvin (Patterson, Austin).

We pick up their 23rd or 25th and also gain another pick in the 2nd round to help them move up at least 15 spots.  

Pick up our quarterback here and possibly our WR and LB in the 2nd that could possibly be starters.  If our WR or LB is there that we wanted to get rid of we take a TE.

Thoughts???

#2 Carey Bender

Carey Bender

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,223 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 08:13 AM

I'd be too concerned the QB they've targeted would be gone at that point.

#3 buffalobillsfansince1918

buffalobillsfansince1918

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 107 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 08:14 AM

Why not?  No player @ 8 is going to make that much of an impact

#4 NewEra

NewEra

    I don't "know", I "think"

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,610 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 08:18 AM

View Postbuffalobillsfansince1918, on 19 April 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

Why not?  No player @ 8 is going to make that much of an impact

Because the same goes for the Vikings.  They can stay put and draft Justin Hunter, Keenan Allen AND Aaron Dobson.  No way they give up that many picks for Patterson.  Austin.....maybe, but I won't believe it til it happens.  

Original thread btw.  Nice thinking.

#5 qwksilver

qwksilver

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 436 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 08:35 AM

View PostBillsFan3434, on 19 April 2013 - 08:11 AM, said:

http://profootballta...in-first-round/

Viking want to move down in the first road to take a WR for losing Percy Harvin (Patterson, Austin).

We pick up their 23rd or 25th and also gain another pick in the 2nd round to help them move up at least 15 spots.  

Pick up our quarterback here and possibly our WR and LB in the 2nd that could possibly be starters.  If our WR or LB is there that we wanted to get rid of we take a TE.

Thoughts???

It appears to be a buyer's market (more teams want to trade down) but I would want something more than just  a 2nd to move down that far. Maybe next years 3rd rounder as well.

the chart says 1400 for 8th. 760 for 23, 390 for 51st and about 175 for next years 3rd. this would work for me.
Now make it happen Buddy!

Edited by qwksilver, 19 April 2013 - 08:36 AM.


#6 Hyphe23

Hyphe23

    Probation

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 26 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 08:37 AM

View PostCarey Bender, on 19 April 2013 - 08:13 AM, said:

I'd be too concerned the QB they've targeted would be gone at that point.

I was thinking about this a little more (and I'll be transparent I've been the one posting that I really like the idea of us trading back to 23) and thought it would be interesting to look at who picks between 8 and 23 that we would be worried about taking a QB. Here is what I came up with:

9) NYJ - Could pick one, but I think most people expect them to fill one of their many other holes.
10) TEN - Have Jake Locker, likely wouldn't pick one.
11) SD - Have Phillip Rivers, likely wouldn't pick one.
12) MIA - Drafted Tannehill last year, won't pick one here.
13) TB - Have Josh Freeman, seriously doubt they would pick one.
14) CAR - Cam Newton, enough said.
15) NO - Drew Brees, yeah....
16) STL - Sam Bradford, they won't draft one.
17) PIT - Ben Roethlisberger, they won't draft one.
18) DAL - Tony Romo, did you see the deal they just gave him?
19) NYG - Eli Manning, yeah...
20) CHI - Jay Cutler, they won't draft one, not here at least.
21) CIN - Andy Dalton, I personally don't think they would draft one, but there have been rumors about them not being too happy with Dalton (I live in Cincinnati so I hear a lot more of it)
22) STL - See above comment

In fact the next logical team to take a QB would seem to be Jacksonville at 33, which would mean they would have to trade up at least 11 spots to get ahead of us for a QB if we made this trade.

I guess my only point from all of this is that I'm not all that concerned with any QB's being taken before the end of round 1 unless its us or another team that has to move up quite a bit.

#7 Mr. WEO

Mr. WEO

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,051 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 08:43 AM

http://forums.twobil...-4-most-likely/

#8 Triple Threat

Triple Threat

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,122 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 08:47 AM

View PostHyphe23, on 19 April 2013 - 08:37 AM, said:

In fact the next logical team to take a QB would seem to be Jacksonville at 33, which would mean they would have to trade up at least 11 spots to get ahead of us for a QB if we made this trade.

I guess my only point from all of this is that I'm not all that concerned with any QB's being taken before the end of round 1 unless its us or another team that has to move up quite a bit.

Trading up to get QB's has been happening.  Can you imagine if someone did trade up in front of us and picked a QB that went on to have a great 12 year NFL career?  Of course speculation would always be would that have been the guy the Bills would have picked anyway, but my point is the Bills can no longer be scared to be wrong.  Pick a damn QB at 8 and lets go.

#9 KOKBILLS

KOKBILLS

    Master of My Domain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,077 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 08:56 AM

View PostBillsFan3434, on 19 April 2013 - 08:11 AM, said:

http://profootballta...in-first-round/

Viking want to move down in the first road to take a WR for losing Percy Harvin (Patterson, Austin).

We pick up their 23rd or 25th and also gain another pick in the 2nd round to help them move up at least 15 spots.  

Pick up our quarterback here and possibly our WR and LB in the 2nd that could possibly be starters.  If our WR or LB is there that we wanted to get rid of we take a TE.

Thoughts???

It would take Minnesota's #23, their #52, and something more to get it done...Maybe a 2nd next year? But I'd be all for it...I think #23 is the perfect area to take a QB in this Draft, and all but Geno will likely be there... B-)

View PostNewEra, on 19 April 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

Because the same goes for the Vikings.  They can stay put and draft Justin Hunter, Keenan Allen AND Aaron Dobson.  No way they give up that many picks for Patterson.  Austin.....maybe, but I won't believe it til it happens.  

Original thread btw.  Nice thinking.

I think maybe, and I have no idea really...but just maybe, with the loss of Harvin and what he did for that Offense and ST's, Austin would be the Vikings main target...Remember Austin is a very good Kick Return guy as well...And when healthy Harvin averaged over 35 yds per Kick Return in 2012...Austin would seemingly be a perfect match for what the Vikes lost in Harvin...And no way Austin lasts till #23... B-)

#10 Green Lightning

Green Lightning

    Mr. Peanut

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,823 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 09:01 AM

View PostHyphe23, on 19 April 2013 - 08:37 AM, said:



I was thinking about this a little more (and I'll be transparent I've been the one posting that I really like the idea of us trading back to 23) and thought it would be interesting to look at who picks between 8 and 23 that we would be worried about taking a QB. Here is what I came up with:

9) NYJ - Could pick one, but I think most people expect them to fill one of their many other holes.
10) TEN - Have Jake Locker, likely wouldn't pick one.
11) SD - Have Phillip Rivers, likely wouldn't pick one.
12) MIA - Drafted Tannehill last year, won't pick one here.
13) TB - Have Josh Freeman, seriously doubt they would pick one.
14) CAR - Cam Newton, enough said.
15) NO - Drew Brees, yeah....
16) STL - Sam Bradford, they won't draft one.
17) PIT - Ben Roethlisberger, they won't draft one.
18) DAL - Tony Romo, did you see the deal they just gave him?
19) NYG - Eli Manning, yeah...
20) CHI - Jay Cutler, they won't draft one, not here at least.
21) CIN - Andy Dalton, I personally don't think they would draft one, but there have been rumors about them not being too happy with Dalton (I live in Cincinnati so I hear a lot more of it)
22) STL - See above comment

In fact the next logical team to take a QB would seem to be Jacksonville at 33, which would mean they would have to trade up at least 11 spots to get ahead of us for a QB if we made this trade.

I guess my only point from all of this is that I'm not all that concerned with any QB's being taken before the end of round 1 unless its us or another team that has to move up quite a bit.

Except that any number of teams can trade up or down to spoil your scenario. If you think you have a franchise guy,  take him at 8.

#11 Carey Bender

Carey Bender

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,223 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 09:02 AM

View PostHyphe23, on 19 April 2013 - 08:37 AM, said:

In fact the next logical team to take a QB would seem to be Jacksonville at 33, which would mean they would have to trade up at least 11 spots to get ahead of us for a QB if we made this trade.

I guess my only point from all of this is that I'm not all that concerned with any QB's being taken before the end of round 1 unless its us or another team that has to move up quite a bit.
But would that be worth the risk? It only takes one team to move up. If you feel any of these QBs are worth a 1st round pick is the low 2nd rounder you're going to get from Minnesota worth risking not getting them?

#12 NewEra

NewEra

    I don't "know", I "think"

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,610 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 09:26 AM

View PostGreen Lightning, on 19 April 2013 - 09:01 AM, said:



Except that any number of teams can trade up or down to spoil your scenario. If you think you have a franchise guy,  take him at 8.

View PostKOKBILLS, on 19 April 2013 - 08:56 AM, said:



It would take Minnesota's #23, their #52, and something more to get it done...Maybe a 2nd next year? But I'd be all for it...I think #23 is the perfect area to take a QB in this Draft, and all but Geno will likely be there... B-)



I think maybe, and I have no idea really...but just maybe, with the loss of Harvin and what he did for that Offense and ST's, Austin would be the Vikings main target...Remember Austin is a very good Kick Return guy as well...And when healthy Harvin averaged over 35 yds per Kick Return in 2012...Austin would seemingly be a perfect match for what the Vikes lost in Harvin...And no way Austin lasts till #23... B-)

And if the QB we wanted is gone..... We lose.  I'll say it again, I'm all for trading down, but if there's a QB they really covet, they should take him at 8.  If there isn't, trade down.  We don't know how they feel about these QBs for sure, but I don't like bypassing a QB we're enamored with in order to trade down and hope that he's there later.  Risky business, especially for a team that hasn't had a decent QB in 17 years.

#13 KOKBILLS

KOKBILLS

    Master of My Domain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,077 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 09:29 AM

View PostTriple Threat, on 19 April 2013 - 08:47 AM, said:

Trading up to get QB's has been happening.  Can you imagine if someone did trade up in front of us and picked a QB that went on to have a great 12 year NFL career?  Of course speculation would always be would that have been the guy the Bills would have picked anyway, but my point is the Bills can no longer be scared to be wrong.  Pick a damn QB at 8 and lets go.

It all depends on how the Bills rate the QB's...For example...Lets say they have Geno, Manuel, and Nassib rated FAR ahead of the other QB's...They get to #8 and all 3 are still available...The chance that all 3 go before pick #23, especially in this Draft, are very, very slim...

On the other hand...Lets say the Bills have Nassib rated higher than any other QB...And Geno goes in the Top 7 picks...If the Bills want Nassib they better take him at #8 or they're probably going to lose him in a trade down to #23...

So...There are a lot of variables here...I think, IF the Bills were to trade down that far, Bills fans can rest assured that they have at least a couple QB's they feel will be available at #23...Because if it's really just one guy they're after...the trade down, at least that far, is too risky... B-)

Edited by KOKBILLS, 19 April 2013 - 09:30 AM.


#14 mjt328

mjt328

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 533 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 09:58 AM

View PostKOKBILLS, on 19 April 2013 - 09:29 AM, said:

It all depends on how the Bills rate the QB's...For example...Lets say they have Geno, Manuel, and Nassib rated FAR ahead of the other QB's...They get to #8 and all 3 are still available...The chance that all 3 go before pick #23, especially in this Draft, are very, very slim...

On the other hand...Lets say the Bills have Nassib rated higher than any other QB...And Geno goes in the Top 7 picks...If the Bills want Nassib they better take him at #8 or they're probably going to lose him in a trade down to #23...

So...There are a lot of variables here...I think, IF the Bills were to trade down that far, Bills fans can rest assured that they have at least a couple QB's they feel will be available at #23...Because if it's really just one guy they're after...the trade down, at least that far, is too risky... B-)

Agreed.

I think everyone would agree the "ideal" situation is to move down, and still get the guy we want.  But you've got Jacksonville, Oakland, Arizona, Philadelphia and New York - and quite possibly Kansas City and Cleveland - all thinking the exact same thing.  Every QB-needy team is targeting their guy in the early 2nd.  It's quite possible that one or more will panic and trade back into the first.

Unfortunately, we are probably in the worst position of them all.  Our first pick is too high to waste on a 2nd round talent (at least according to most experts).  But our second pick comes after all of the teams listed above.

#15 Dr. Trooth

Dr. Trooth

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,205 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 09:59 AM

View Postbuffalobillsfansince1918, on 19 April 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

Why not?  No player @ 8 is going to make that much of an impact

If that's the case, what would motivate the Vikings to trade up?  No impact player at #8, why piss away picks for no reason?

#16 Dr. Trooth

Dr. Trooth

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,205 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 10:12 AM

View PostHyphe23, on 19 April 2013 - 08:37 AM, said:



I was thinking about this a little more (and I'll be transparent I've been the one posting that I really like the idea of us trading back to 23) and thought it would be interesting to look at who picks between 8 and 23 that we would be worried about taking a QB. Here is what I came up with:

9) NYJ - Could pick one, but I think most people expect them to fill one of their many other holes.
10) TEN - Have Jake Locker, likely wouldn't pick one.
11) SD - Have Phillip Rivers, likely wouldn't pick one.
12) MIA - Drafted Tannehill last year, won't pick one here.
13) TB - Have Josh Freeman, seriously doubt they would pick one.
14) CAR - Cam Newton, enough said.
15) NO - Drew Brees, yeah....
16) STL - Sam Bradford, they won't draft one.
17) PIT - Ben Roethlisberger, they won't draft one.
18) DAL - Tony Romo, did you see the deal they just gave him?
19) NYG - Eli Manning, yeah...
20) CHI - Jay Cutler, they won't draft one, not here at least.
21) CIN - Andy Dalton, I personally don't think they would draft one, but there have been rumors about them not being too happy with Dalton (I live in Cincinnati so I hear a lot more of it)
22) STL - See above comment

In fact the next logical team to take a QB would seem to be Jacksonville at 33, which would mean they would have to trade up at least 11 spots to get ahead of us for a QB if we made this trade.

I guess my only point from all of this is that I'm not all that concerned with any QB's being taken before the end of round 1 unless its us or another team that has to move up quite a bit.

I could make a case that the Bucs could go for a qb. Its well documented that Schiano is not in love with Freeman and wants someone to compete.

Jets... they lost both starting guards and need a right tackle... I suspect their eyes are on warmack or Cooper.

The one component that must be considered is that when a trade down happens... and in this case, 15 spots, you don't know what the domino affect will be.  Other teams may react by trading up to jump in front of the Bills to grab their qb.

Trade downs work for teams that really don't have obvious needs.  They don't necessarily have one targeted player. Bills need to grab their qb at #8 or run the risk of losing him altogether.


#17 simpleman

simpleman

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 689 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 10:13 AM

I just do not have any belief that any one of the QBs this year is a decent bet to be a Franchise QB. One may be a surprise everyone and become one, maybe not. Yes, 2 or 3 have a chance to become starting NFL QBs. But for how long?
As much as I liked Andy Dalton, I still don't see him as a Franchise QB. Decent QB, but not a Franchise QB. I see the QBs this year as at his level and nothing more. Next year seems loaded with 3 or 4 QB's who have will be a decent bet to possibly be a Franchise QB. Which one, I don't know. But this year I don't see any good bets, just long shots. I want quality players for this year and in the future that are good bets to be quality players for the next 5-10 years.
I am against taking any QB at 8. Wait till next year when the gamble is less. I really don't see any as that much better than Kolb. And I don't claim he is anything but an acceptable starting QB, definitely not a Franchise QB. If your first choice is gone if you trade down, just pick the next one on your list. None are any thing close to a sure a bet. As the saying goes, six of one, half a dozen of the other. But no reaches or long shots with high picks, only bets with good odds . Save the reaches and big gambles for the later rounds.

#18 Triple Threat

Triple Threat

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,122 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 03:05 PM

View PostKOKBILLS, on 19 April 2013 - 09:29 AM, said:

It all depends on how the Bills rate the QB's...For example...Lets say they have Geno, Manuel, and Nassib rated FAR ahead of the other QB's...They get to #8 and all 3 are still available...The chance that all 3 go before pick #23, especially in this Draft, are very, very slim...

On the other hand...Lets say the Bills have Nassib rated higher than any other QB...And Geno goes in the Top 7 picks...If the Bills want Nassib they better take him at #8 or they're probably going to lose him in a trade down to #23...

So...There are a lot of variables here...I think, IF the Bills were to trade down that far, Bills fans can rest assured that they have at least a couple QB's they feel will be available at #23...Because if it's really just one guy they're after...the trade down, at least that far, is too risky... B-)

That's basically what I meant by "could you imagine someone picking our guy that we assumed would be there by trading down".  I just didn't break it down like you did, which you did very well.  If we have a QB rated at the top of our list, which I suspect we do, and he's there at 8 you have to pick him even if your gut tells you he'll likely still be there if you trade back.

#19 Astrobot

Astrobot

    TSW's Draft Droid

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,189 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 03:19 PM

http://forums.twobil...-4-most-likely/

#20 OldTimer1960

OldTimer1960

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,629 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 05:14 PM

I wouldn't be too happy to move down that far unless we got significant compensation and then traded up from 23 again.  Example 23 and Vikings' 2nd for 8, then 23 and our 3rd for a pick in the top 15.  Even then, I wouldn't mess around.

If they like a QB enough to think he is the answer as a good starter, take him at 8.  If not, then take the best player at another position - you could consider moving down at that point.