Jump to content


Photo

Interesting 7 round mock.


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#41 Elite Poster

Elite Poster

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 331 posts

Posted 30 March 2017 - 11:48 AM

Trade the next three 1st round picks for #1 overall and draft Peppers.
Trade the next three 2nd round picks for #9 overall
Trade #9 overall for #10 and two first round picks plus a punt returner.
 
Championship!


Was this supposed to be funny?

#42 Mr. WEO

Mr. WEO

    Hall of Famer

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,391 posts

Posted 30 March 2017 - 12:01 PM

Why didn't Simulated Tennessee offer more picks for our #10.  And what is Simulated Seattle picking that they would cough up all those picks?



#43 John from Hemet

John from Hemet

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28,426 posts

Posted 30 March 2017 - 12:26 PM

Love the effort to create this....gain picks.....and fill needs at multiple positions

 

If we are NOT going to take a qb in round 2....i would at liked like to see Chad Kelly selected in one of these later draft picks



#44 Luxy312

Luxy312

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,075 posts

Posted 30 March 2017 - 12:34 PM

This mock is about 99.999% pipe dream.  Why are teams willing to give us so much to move up, especially in the later rounds?  Makes no sense, without context.  What makes Seattle so desperate to give us a handful of picks to move up in the first?  Did Mike Ditka suddenly become the G.M.? Please refer to the Ricky Williams trade a number of years ago if you're too young to get the reference.  It's a nice thought, and boy would I love to see 6 picks parlayed into 10-12.  I just don't think there's a realistic scenario in which that happens.



#45 dneveu

dneveu

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,827 posts

Posted 30 March 2017 - 12:45 PM

This mock is about 99.999% pipe dream.  Why are teams willing to give us so much to move up, especially in the later rounds?  Makes no sense, without context.  What makes Seattle so desperate to give us a handful of picks to move up in the first?  Did Mike Ditka suddenly become the G.M.? Please refer to the Ricky Williams trade a number of years ago if you're too young to get the reference.  It's a nice thought, and boy would I love to see 6 picks parlayed into 10-12.  I just don't think there's a realistic scenario in which that happens.

 

Yeah - the lack of explanations for why these teams want to move up makes it a bit far-fetched.  Like Seattle has to really want someone at 10 to move up that high.

 

OJ howard maybe?  Or allen if he slips?  cook or fournette?  just not sure why they think 10 is where seattle is going to need to be. 


Edited by dneveu, 30 March 2017 - 12:47 PM.


#46 Watkins101

Watkins101

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 226 posts

Posted 30 March 2017 - 01:05 PM

Trade the next three 1st round picks for #1 overall and draft Peppers.

Trade the next three 2nd round picks for #9 overall

Trade #9 overall for #10 and two first round picks plus a punt returner.

 

Championship!

Isn't this the plot for some movie about the Browns?



#47 BillsRdue

BillsRdue

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 675 posts

Posted 30 March 2017 - 01:20 PM

Oh how I wish this could happen. But I live on planet earth and root for the Buffalo Bills. #REALITYCHECK



#48 Captain Murica

Captain Murica

    I'm the Captain now.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,069 posts

Posted 30 March 2017 - 04:54 PM

Are we going to be running more zone coverage with McDermott's scheme? If so, filling the void at CB with the likes of Tabor or Rasul Douglas from WVU, on the second day would be nice. 

 

Prefer to spend day one on either Davis, Howard(trading down of course) or by a miracle Adams or Hooker fall to us at 10. 


Edited by Captain Murica, 30 March 2017 - 04:54 PM.


#49 ny33

ny33

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,496 posts

Posted 30 March 2017 - 05:59 PM

This isn't happening. The trades are absurdly unrealistic, Kevin King won't be there in the third, and Robert Quinn has consistently demonstrated that he is not a legitimate journalist.

Someday USA Today's blog network acquisition and Yahoo!'s partnership with Fansided will backfire on them. They are a grade below Bleacher Report, with articles that use fantasy draft tools to approximate mock drafts and are riddled with grammatical errors.

This isn't news.

Love the effort to create this....gain picks.....and fill needs at multiple positions
 
If we are NOT going to take a qb in round 2....i would at liked like to see Chad Kelly selected in one of these later draft picks


There is virtually zero effort involved in creating this travesty of an "article."

#50 1WATKINS4

1WATKINS4

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 133 posts

Posted 30 March 2017 - 06:51 PM

Pretty sure Bills should trade down say 5-10 spots in round 1 just to gain a few extra picks.

8 total picks would be great.

I just hope Buffalo can get another 2nd round pick.

1. Reddick
2. Q Wilson
2. A Stewart

#51 Blokestradamus

Blokestradamus

    Respected Vice

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,432 posts

Posted 31 March 2017 - 04:26 AM

This isn't happening. The trades are absurdly unrealistic, Kevin King won't be there in the third, and Robert Quinn has consistently demonstrated that he is not a legitimate journalist.

Someday USA Today's blog network acquisition and Yahoo!'s partnership with Fansided will backfire on them. They are a grade below Bleacher Report, with articles that use fantasy draft tools to approximate mock drafts and are riddled with grammatical errors.

This isn't news.

There is virtually zero effort involved in creating this travesty of an "article."

 

I've been with Bills Wire since Day 1 and, as far as I'm concerned, Rob is one of the best Bills writers that we've got. I'm acutely aware of his process and he puts as much time and effort into his research as anyone. For not being "legitimate journalists", we're certainly held to the same legal and style standards as anyone in print journalism.

 

The site has been up since August. In that time, if we're "a grade below Bleacher Report", thank you for the compliment. We've all put a lot of effort to getting the site going and, while I know you meant it as an insult, it's not taken as one. What Bleacher Report once was and what it is now are two very different things. If what we've produced is a rung on the ladder below guys like Matt Bowen, I'll take that.

 

You don't have to like everything or anything that we've produced, you're entitled to your opinion. If you want to take shots at a good friend of mine and belittle what I've put months of my time into, I'm not going to stand back and let you fire shots without giving a few back. In the kindest possible way, !@#$ you.



#52 Davejr511

Davejr511

    Probation

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 31 March 2017 - 05:02 AM

I can see trading down once in the 1st round but anything more than that well be sacrificing getting really good talent.
There are about 3 or 4 pick I like in that mock. The rest do nothing for me

#53 PIZ

PIZ

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,199 posts

Posted 31 March 2017 - 05:32 AM

Not saying it will happen, but how do we know it won't? Multiple trade downs could happen. With the culture change, I thinks it's a good possibility. They have lots of holes to fill. I wonder how many people said "there is no way EJ Manuel is taken in the 1st round"? We're not experts, but I do enjoy reading Bills Wire and reading their opinions / info. Thanks for your work Blokestradamus.

#54 bills_fan_in_raleigh

bills_fan_in_raleigh

    Live in Raleigh but Bleed Buffalo Sports

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,312 posts

Posted 31 March 2017 - 05:36 AM

i hate when the writers make you click through ten pages to see a list

plus the they post a bunch of other. Ads, tell ya you won a gift card etc. not sure why I bother clicking. A written summary would be great since I stopped after gift card win popped up

#55 Thurman#1

Thurman#1

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,185 posts

Posted 31 March 2017 - 06:12 AM

 

 

 

Love the trades back. Love 'em.

 

I'm not as thrilled with their SPARQ formula as they obviously are, but it looked decent to me who they picked with what little I know this year.


Edited by Thurman#1, 31 March 2017 - 06:26 AM.


#56 Thurman#1

Thurman#1

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,185 posts

Posted 31 March 2017 - 06:42 AM

Good picks, impossible trades. No way someone ofers that much.

 

 

On the contrary. 

 

Pretty much all of those trades are right on value. They're offering just what the chart says they're worth. It's not like they're giving the Bills a bargain. They're not, they're paying the expected price.

 

I'm not saying they will happen, of course. But they could. Easily. It would most likely require only that the Bills say "Yes."


 

Yeah - the lack of explanations for why these teams want to move up makes it a bit far-fetched.  Like Seattle has to really want someone at 10 to move up that high.

 

OJ howard maybe?  Or allen if he slips?  cook or fournette?  just not sure why they think 10 is where seattle is going to need to be. 

 

 

I disagree with this too. 

 

There will be plenty of guys up that high who Seattle might like. Enough to trade up? Maybe and maybe not, but it's not all that far-fetched.

 

If the Seahawks were offering a big premium, then yeah context for such an unlikely move would be necessary. But since they're giving pretty much list price, it's not, really. There are plenty of guys up that high a team like Seattle might be interested in. And Seattle has a history of draft trades.


Crazy, unrealistic, fantasy inspired trades waste of time

 

 

Last year there were about 47 trades in the draft.

 

This just isn't all that unrealistic. It requires that the Bills want to make those trades, but if they do, they could easily be there, with someone if not with the exact teams forecast here.


Edited by Thurman#1, 31 March 2017 - 06:56 AM.


#57 Kirby Jackson

Kirby Jackson

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,255 posts

Posted 31 March 2017 - 06:59 AM

 
I've been with Bills Wire since Day 1 and, as far as I'm concerned, Rob is one of the best Bills writers that we've got. I'm acutely aware of his process and he puts as much time and effort into his research as anyone. For not being "legitimate journalists", we're certainly held to the same legal and style standards as anyone in print journalism.
 
The site has been up since August. In that time, if we're "a grade below Bleacher Report", thank you for the compliment. We've all put a lot of effort to getting the site going and, while I know you meant it as an insult, it's not taken as one. What Bleacher Report once was and what it is now are two very different things. If what we've produced is a rung on the ladder below guys like Matt Bowen, I'll take that.
 
You don't have to like everything or anything that we've produced, you're entitled to your opinion. If you want to take shots at a good friend of mine and belittle what I've put months of my time into, I'm not going to stand back and let you fire shots without giving a few back. In the kindest possible way, !@#$ you.

Well said Blokes!! You guys do some great work (as does Bleacher Report). I read and learn a lot from you guys. It's the most in-depth Bills specific stuff being done. Keep up the GREAT work!!

#58 ChanOverChin

ChanOverChin

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 849 posts

Posted 31 March 2017 - 07:52 AM

The Bills will need to be creative in this draft if they hope to be competitive this year.  If they just straight select where they are now with just 6 picks (like B. Nix liked to do) I don't think they'll come away with enough good players to even come close to fulfilling their needs.

 

Since draft picks are cheap compared to signing FAs it makes sense for them to try to trade back in this draft several times... as long as they get good value.

 

The #10 overall pick has great value and will be highly sought after.....esp. if a team drafting behind us is in love with a certain player.  It could be a guy that they view as a franchise QB for instance.

 

I don't think I would trade down from #10 to #26 right away.  I'd want to do something in between...just in case a great player falls to us.

 

The #10 for #26 plus a R2, R3, R3 would certainly be very tough to turn down....esp. since those high picks would give us more valuable resources to trade down even further.

 

I think we can expect the Bills to trade down quite a bit in this draft because:

1. They are a team that needs a lot of good players rather than one great player.

2. Their cap situation has forced the issue.

 

 

 



#59 ny33

ny33

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,496 posts

Posted 31 March 2017 - 08:08 AM

 
I've been with Bills Wire since Day 1 and, as far as I'm concerned, Rob is one of the best Bills writers that we've got. I'm acutely aware of his process and he puts as much time and effort into his research as anyone. For not being "legitimate journalists", we're certainly held to the same legal and style standards as anyone in print journalism.
 
The site has been up since August. In that time, if we're "a grade below Bleacher Report", thank you for the compliment. We've all put a lot of effort to getting the site going and, while I know you meant it as an insult, it's not taken as one. What Bleacher Report once was and what it is now are two very different things. If what we've produced is a rung on the ladder below guys like Matt Bowen, I'll take that.
 
You don't have to like everything or anything that we've produced, you're entitled to your opinion. If you want to take shots at a good friend of mine and belittle what I've put months of my time into, I'm not going to stand back and let you fire shots without giving a few back. In the kindest possible way, !@#$ you.


Let me know when Sports Illustrated, ESPN, and PFF use Fanspeak to write an article. Please also let me know when they require you to click a link to go to a successive page within the same piece.

I think Billswire is slightly better than Fansided and Buffalo Rumblings post-Galliford, but I suggest your writers fix some basic recurring grammatical errors, e.g. the conflation between single and double quotation marks, if you want to be taken seriously.

#60 Blokestradamus

Blokestradamus

    Respected Vice

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,432 posts

Posted 31 March 2017 - 08:25 AM

Let me know when Sports Illustrated, ESPN, and PFF use Fanspeak to write an article. Please also let me know when they require you to click a link to go to a successive page within the same piece.

I think Billswire is slightly better than Fansided and Buffalo Rumblings post-Galliford, but I suggest your writers fix some basic recurring grammatical errors, e.g. the conflation between single and double quotation marks, if you want to be taken seriously.

 

At no point have we ever professed to be SI or ESPN (I'd be making a much better living if we were, trust me). As for the Fanspeak thing, the Draft Wire site used it for a simulation mocking for every team. If Luke is struggling to be taken seriously, how did he land an exclusive interview with the best player in the 2017 draft class? http://draftwire.usa...ith-draft-wire/

 

It's a fun tool to play around with and, as I've explained when I used it for a mock draft a couple of months ago, it helps to keep personal bias out of it by taking composite rankings over my own personal value. That comes out much more when I write about a prospect.

 

I'm not a fan of the multi-page layout either. I think it's cheap and a bit tacky, to be perfectly honest but it's a tool that pretty much every non-major site uses to boost traffic numbers. Again, don't like it, don't read it. It's hardly rocket science. I've not read some things on BR in the past because of it, it's not hard to do.

 

I'll relay your suggestions and I thank you for the feedback. Maybe next time, just put them across in a more constructive manner.


Edited by Blokestradamus, 31 March 2017 - 08:27 AM.