Trade Rumor with the Buffalo Bills...

and I think most people would be in favor.

What your saying in this pick is your getting 2 starters for 1 elite player and then an undiscloser pick next year.

3 1's is the starting framework for a trade. I think it would take 3 1's, a 2 and a 3.

5 for 1 might do it.

would take Darnold if he is there for us

They will need to give up a lot more than that

and we got a deal

they better be running that card up there

April 2018......so who are you really?

In comment 13931462 DavidinBMNY said:

Quote:

What your saying in this pick is your getting 2 starters for 1 elite player and then an undiscloser pick next year. 3 1's is the starting framework for a trade. I think it would take 3 1's, a 2 and a 3. 5 for 1 might do it.

He said, "both 1st rounders, next years 1st rounder and an additional undisclosed pick" That's 3 1st round picks, in total

I don't like the Bills trade - it moves us out of range to take the best prospects in this draft.

At 12, I think all of these guys are going to be gone....

Josh Rosen
Sam Darnold
Baker Mayfield
Josh Allen
Saquon Barkley
Bradley Chubb
Quenton Nelson
Minkah Fitzpatrick

Derwin James and Roquan Smith are probably gone by 12 too. Tremaine Edwards might not even be there.

I don't like the prospect of taking ourselves out of the running on all those guys.

I think you have to get one of those players in this draft.

The Cleveland rumor was one I liked way, way more- we swap 2 for 4 and their two second rounders. Sign me up for that.

4 overall and the first 3 picks in the 2nd round are picks you can significantly improve your roster with.

In comment 13931462 DavidinBMNY said:

Quote:

What your saying in this pick is your getting 2 starters for 1 elite player and then an undiscloser pick next year. 3 1's is the starting framework for a trade. I think it would take 3 1's, a 2 and a 3. 5 for 1 might do it.

Read the OP's post. He said both firsts this year, the 2019 first, and an additional pick. That's 3 firsts.

Then come calling with their best offer to get to 2.

If DG is passing on a QB, he could still get his guy at 4, and the extra picks would be great. Especially if one is the #22.

I don't want the Giants trading back farther than #4 or at worst #5.

But if Darnold is there...I think they are taking him.

In comment 13931484 AnnapolisMike said:

Quote:

But if Darnold is there...I think they are taking him.

Nah too risky with no guarantee you'd be able to trade back up. Pass on trading back to 12 for me.

In comment 13931477 arcarsenal said:

Quote:

I don't like the Bills trade - it moves us out of range to take the best prospects in this draft. At 12, I think all of these guys are going to be gone.... Josh Rosen Sam Darnold Baker Mayfield Josh Allen Saquon Barkley Bradley Chubb Quenton Nelson Minkah Fitzpatrick Derwin James and Roquan Smith are probably gone by 12 too. Tremaine Edwards might not even be there. I don't like the prospect of taking ourselves out of the running on all those guys. I think you have to get one of those players in this draft. The Cleveland rumor was one I liked way, way more- we swap 2 for 4 and their two second rounders. Sign me up for that. 4 overall and the first 3 picks in the 2nd round are picks you can significantly improve your roster with.

Might be able to get Vita Vea or Marcus Davenport AND Mike McGlinchey. Or McGlinchey AND Isaiah Wynn AND Michel.

The trade back thing is all of a sudden intriguing once 3 1sts come into play.

It's fun to hear from asshats, even if things can change from moment to moment...gives us things to discuss.

I do believe the Giants are going to use the full time they are allotted for #2, and the phones are going to be running hot in Giants Central!

Using the BBI Mock Draft as a guide, here is who Buffalo selected in the first round with their picks (Sy'56's grade for the prospect in parentheses...keep in mind that Sy had Darnold as an 81):

#12 - S Derwin James (90)
#13 - EDGE Marcus Davenport (82)
#14 - CB Jaire Alexander (82)
#15 - DT Da'Ron Payne (86)
#16 - EDGE Harold Landry (81)
#17 - DT Vita Vea (87)
#18 - OT Connor Williams (81)
#19 - WR Calvin Ridley (80)
#20 - OG Isaiah Wynn (81)
#21 - OT Mike McGlinchey (81)
#22 - QB Lamar Jackson (78)
#23 - EDGE Arden Key (75)
#24 - S Justin Reid (76)
#25 - WR Courtland Sutton (81)
#26 - OLB Leighton Vander Esch (78)
#27 - CB Mike Hughes (85)

Now I know the BBI Mock Draft is not law, and that Sy is not the end all be all on college scouting. But I think this is an effective exercise to demonstrate the level of talent that will be available in the first round.

Will go Allen or Mayfield at 1

I should have said Buffalo selected Derwin James and Lamar Jackson.

#4 pick in return

In comment 13931476 sphinx said:

Quote:

In comment 13931462 DavidinBMNY said: Quote: What your saying in this pick is your getting 2 starters for 1 elite player and then an undiscloser pick next year. 3 1's is the starting framework for a trade. I think it would take 3 1's, a 2 and a 3. 5 for 1 might do it. He said, "both 1st rounders, next years 1st rounder and an additional undisclosed pick" That's 3 1st round picks, in total

Understood. It's not enough. It's the start of it. You need 3 starters this year off a deal like this.
If you said 12,22, 53, 65, and next year's 1 , I'd do that. You have 65,66 and 69 and you can package one of those.

In comment 13931499 SHO'NUFF said:

Quote:

#4 pick in return

Buffalo doesn't have the #4 pick

camp, i dont lioe this trade at all unless we get a 4 or 5 instead of 12 and 22

would be willing to trade 6 picks to get the player they want.

12, 22, next years 1st is 3. There would be 3 other picks which I would guess would be a second and 3rd this year and probably a 3rd in 2020.

But not for the HOF Barkley? I wonder why?

Will be compelling for a move to 2. Because we'd get Barkley at 4.

I'd take 4 , and a second round pick and next year's 1. to go from 2 to 4.

Buffalo would have to give up 12, 22 and a second to get from 12 to 4.

"Prepared to be labeled an Asshat" even though you just joined?

Asshat has made it into the common vernacular now!!

If BUF can get up to 4 first, and then their trade includes that pick, I'd be much, much more interested.

In comment 13931507 Rflairr said:

Quote:

But not for the HOF Barkley? I wonder why?

In comment 13931513 sharpshooter66 said:

Quote:

In comment 13931507 Rflairr said: Quote: But not for the HOF Barkley? I wonder why?

Because everyone has their own unique situation. Let them reach for poaitional need while the top graded prospect falls right into our lap

are from teams that always lose.

Dropping back to 12 is too far to fall. At 12, all the blue chippers should be off the board. Plus you have to consider that there is a good chance the Bills 1st rounder next year will probably be somewhere in the 20's, which is good but not great.

In comment 13931496 DCPollaro said:

Quote:

Will go Allen or Mayfield at 1

Agreed. I don't think it's enough either, but Cleveland taking Darnold makes it moot anyway.

Then I’d swap it even for a 2 and 3

I don't trust Buffalo to be decent again. They'll probably have a high pick next year too and will be able to draft a QB then. Though I don't know what people think of that draft when it comes to QBs.

In comment 13931511 arcarsenal said:

Quote:

If BUF can get up to 4 first, and then their trade includes that pick, I'd be much, much more interested.

The problem is that the Bills are unlikely to move to a slot until they know who is available. I don't think that's a realistic expectation unless it's a weird 3 way deal. I'm also not sure a small trade down will be there if the Broncos posturing about not being set on QB is true.

If I'm the Giants, I try like hell to move back to 4 or 5, but if that's not available, I pull the trigger with the Bills if the value is there. There are rumors that the Broncos, Colts and Bears are looking to move down. The Giants can jump back up and I don't think they'll have much of a problem doing so. Even in the unlikely event that they can't, players drop all the time and the Giants may even have a couple of players (like one of the corners or Vea) ranked as a blue chip talent.

My thinking too. That Bills pick is likely to be Top 5, especially if they decide to start breaking in that rookie QB midseason.

My thinking too. A future 1 would be a must to make that deal. That Bills pick is likely to be Top 5, especially if they decide to start breaking in that rookie QB midseason.

In comment 13931515 sharpshooter66 said:

Quote:

In comment 13931513 sharpshooter66 said: Quote: In comment 13931507 Rflairr said: Quote: But not for the HOF Barkley? I wonder why? Because everyone has their own unique situation. Let them reach for poaitional need while the top graded prospect falls right into our lap

Yes but literally NOBODY is trying to trade up for Barkley. At least we havent heard rumors of it. Rflairr's point is a great one. As much as I love Barkley.

I am really confused about this pick and who I want them to take. The trade down with Buffalo netting us Vea or McGlinchey, a baby eating G like Hernandez or Wynn or a piece for the secondary AS WELL AS a likely high 1st next year is very tempting.

In comment 13931507 Rflairr said:

Quote:

But not for the HOF Barkley? I wonder why?

Whats happened to you?

There are arguments you can make for both sides - but to me, the most ideal scenario is being able to come away with one of the QB's, Barkley, Nelson, or Fitzpatrick and adding a few more picks in the process.

The only two players I see us drafting 2nd overall are Darnold or Barkley. And I think CLE is taking Darnold.

I just don't like moving down 10 spots. I think you take yourself out of the running for pretty much all of the top-end talent in this draft by doing that.

Sure, players drop all the time - things happen. But I don't know if I want to take that risk or bank on BUF being a bad team next season because that certainly isn't a given. Especially if they hit on the QB they take and he helps them in year one.

In comment 13931535 AcesUp said:

Quote:

In comment 13931511 arcarsenal said: Quote: If BUF can get up to 4 first, and then their trade includes that pick, I'd be much, much more interested. The problem is that the Bills are unlikely to move to a slot until they know who is available. I don't think that's a realistic expectation unless it's a weird 3 way deal. I'm also not sure a small trade down will be there if the Broncos posturing about not being set on QB is true. If I'm the Giants, I try like hell to move back to 4 or 5, but if that's not available, I pull the trigger with the Bills if the value is there. There are rumors that the Broncos, Colts and Bears are looking to move down. The Giants can jump back up and I don't think they'll have much of a problem doing so. Even in the unlikely event that they can't, players drop all the time and the Giants may even have a couple of players (like one of the corners or Vea) ranked as a blue chip talent.

What does Denver have to do with Buffalo getting to 4? Their interest or non interest in a QB is a moot point if Buffalo is ahead of them.

If Buffalo gets to 4, they'd have every reason to want to get to 2 IMO. They'd know which QB's are left after the Browns pick and jump in front of the Division rival Jets.

In a sense them getting to 4 would be a three way deal but they'd still get a QB at 4 if they couldn't swing a deal with the Giants for the 2. Just most likely not the QB they'd want most.

I really want to see Bradley Chubb beat up on NFC East quarterbacks

But,I can't do that if you're gonna keep spreading rumors.So please,take my football dreams into consideration.

Quote:

I just don't like moving down 10 spots. I think you take yourself out of the running for pretty much all of the top-end talent in this draft by doing that.

Is that really true, though? How do we know where the line is between blue chip and red chip? Given that we've all been in the dark as to who the first few picks are going to be, I think it's a fair question.

None of these guys stands out as the obvious guy. Going back a year or so it was supposed to be Darnold, but he's not in the Elway/Peyton class as a prospect.

Through this "draft season" I've been tracking the opinions of the following four guys: Sy'56, Dave Te Thomas, Mike Lombardi, and Greg Cosell. Whatever you think about any of the four, their opinions vary pretty widely on a lot of the prospects.

I think it's tough to have a conviction in this draft, and as such I think having more draft picks is a good thing.

And end up with that trade would be a major let down

so it won't matter.

I'm referring to the Giants ability to make a small move down when I mention Denver.

In terms of the Bills trying to jump twice - they're not making that deal unless they are sure they are getting their guy. This means that a 3 way deal would have to be worked out prior (which is rare) or they are comfortable that they'll be able to get their guy at 4 and would have no incentive to move up again. They're not taking a leap of faith there. Especially since nobody knows what the Browns are doing at 1 yet. More likely, they try to deal when the Giants are on the clock and then try again when the Browns are.

In comment 13931551 chopperhatch said:

Quote:

In comment 13931515 sharpshooter66 said: Quote: In comment 13931513 sharpshooter66 said: Quote: In comment 13931507 Rflairr said: Quote: But not for the HOF Barkley? I wonder why? Because everyone has their own unique situation. Let them reach for poaitional need while the top graded prospect falls right into our lap Yes but literally NOBODY is trying to trade up for Barkley. At least we havent heard rumors of it. Rflairr's point is a great one. As much as I love Barkley. I am really confused about this pick and who I want them to take. The trade down with Buffalo netting us Vea or McGlinchey, a baby eating G like Hernandez or Wynn or a piece for the secondary AS WELL AS a likely high 1st next year is very tempting.

Barkley is a suckers play this high.

They have to pay a heavy price.
I would tell them we want your two 1st this year,2nd this year,3rd this year, 1st next year and 2nd next year.
That is the price they have to pay for their choice of a franchise QB.

In comment 13931575 firedbytheboss said:

Quote:

In comment 13931551 chopperhatch said: Quote: In comment 13931515 sharpshooter66 said: Quote: In comment 13931513 sharpshooter66 said: Quote: In comment 13931507 Rflairr said: Quote: But not for the HOF Barkley? I wonder why? Because everyone has their own unique situation. Let them reach for poaitional need while the top graded prospect falls right into our lap Yes but literally NOBODY is trying to trade up for Barkley. At least we havent heard rumors of it. Rflairr's point is a great one. As much as I love Barkley. I am really confused about this pick and who I want them to take. The trade down with Buffalo netting us Vea or McGlinchey, a baby eating G like Hernandez or Wynn or a piece for the secondary AS WELL AS a likely high 1st next year is very tempting. Barkley is a suckers play this high.

What are you going to do when the draft is over and you can no longer whine about how against Barkley you are? Its the only thing you post about.

In comment 13931522 Beer Man said:

Quote:

Dropping back to 12 is too far to fall. At 12, all the blue chippers should be off the board. Plus you have to consider that there is a good chance the Bills 1st rounder next year will probably be somewhere in the 20's, which is good but not great.

^This

You don't pass up the chance at a blue chipper.

Trading to 12 is asinine. I can't believe how many are supporting this.