2021 Buffalo Bills - Same as it ever was*** (3 Viewers)

[QuizGuy66]

The fact that the Giants didn't take what the Jets were offering kind of tells me they aren't too interested in trading out and want a QB.

There's a different dynamic at play there.

1) The fact that it would be the team that they share their stadium with complicates things.  Trading away the rights to the next Tom Brady only to watch him dominate in their own market is not desirable - I assume any trade with the Jets would require an extra premium.

2) By waiting it out they now hold even more leverage than before.

Or it could be just like you say - Gittleman hasn't given any clues at all.  But regardless the Bills need to put in the effort and due diligence.

-QG

 

[Grahamburn]

There's a different dynamic at play there.

1) The fact that it would be the team that they share their stadium with complicates things.  Trading away the rights to the next Tom Brady only to watch him dominate in their own market is not desirable - I assume any trade with the Jets would require an extra premium.

2) By waiting it out they now hold even more leverage than before.

Or it could be just like you say - Gittleman hasn't given any clues at all.  But regardless the Bills need to put in the effort and due diligence.

-QG

Any GM thinking that way doesn’t deserve a job. 

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

Any GM thinking that way doesn’t deserve a job. 

I couldn't agree more.

You do whatever you have to do to make your team better. You don't worry about the other side.

 

[Grahamburn]

He’s right about the leverage part. They can rebuild the entire team with one draft if they trade the pick.

 

[QuizGuy66]

I couldn't agree more.

You do whatever you have to do to make your team better. You don't worry about the other side.

That may be - but you see it in sports especially in this shared market.  Very very seldom do teams in this area trade with each other.  The Devils and Rangers made their first trade in 36 years just this year.

Do we know for sure that the Jets tried to deal with the Giants?

-QG

 

[NYRAGE]

That may be - but you see it in sports especially in this shared market.  Very very seldom do teams in this area trade with each other.  The Devils and Rangers made their first trade in 36 years just this year.

Do we know for sure that the Jets tried to deal with the Giants?

-QG

It's a safe assumption. It was reported that they talked to Cleveland, so they probably also talked to the Giants before trading for the third pick.

 

[Grahamburn]

That may be - but you see it in sports especially in this shared market.  Very very seldom do teams in this area trade with each other.  The Devils and Rangers made their first trade in 36 years just this year.

Do we know for sure that the Jets tried to deal with the Giants?

-QG

For sure?  No.  But, if the Jets didn't make that offer for the #1 and the #2 before settling on #3 they're buffoons. 

I don't disagree regarding teams in the same market trading, but like I said, that's not the way a smart franchise operates.  Hence the Cubs and White Sox striking a deal last year for the first time in ever.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Any GM thinking that way doesn’t deserve a job. 

The Giants are not worried about the Jets. The Giants have dominated the market forever and that will continue. There's probably many reasons why the Giants didn't make the trade with the Jets but the most likely one is they weren't ready yet. They are likely still evaluating the QBs, Barkely, Nelson and Chubb and trying to decide which way to go - if they decide to trade back Buffalo, Miami, Arizona, etc. will still be there and they will likely pony up more than the Jets did. The Jets traded an early second, a late second and a future second - it's not like it was a goldmine.

 

[Grahamburn]

G-Men might be thinking Chubb after trading JPP to my Bucs! 

 

[BlueDredSo]

G-Men might be thinking Chubb after trading JPP to my Bucs! 

Giants are a 3-4 team now, which is probably part of the reason why they moved JPP. I don't think they draft another similar DE.

Bills needs to trade up with Cleveland to #4, then with Giants to #2. I think that's much more enticing for NY than moving all the way down to #12.

Get it done, Beane!

 

[Tommy Collins]

That may be - but you see it in sports especially in this shared market.  Very very seldom do teams in this area trade with each other.  The Devils and Rangers made their first trade in 36 years just this year.

Do we know for sure that the Jets tried to deal with the Giants?

-QG

I read somewhere that there was no communication between the 2 teams.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Giants are a 3-4 team now, which is probably part of the reason why they moved JPP. I don't think they draft another similar DE.

Bills needs to trade up with Cleveland to #4, then with Giants to #2. I think that's much more enticing for NY than moving all the way down to #12.

Get it done, Beane!

Assuming that a) the Browns have any interest in moving all the way down to #12 and b) the Giants aren't taking a QB, then that makes a ton of sense for all involved.

I think you'd have to make the move in one fell swoop though, otherwise you risk possibly the Broncos getting involved and trying to flip the #5 for the #2 and driving up the price.

Also, I would kind of hate giving up a 1st next year. A 2nd next year would be somewhat swallowable, 3 1sts and more to move up from 12 to 2...ugh.

 

[SanDawg]

Assuming that a) the Browns have any interest in moving all the way down to #12 and b) the Giants aren't taking a QB, then that makes a ton of sense for all involved.

I think you'd have to make the move in one fell swoop though, otherwise you risk possibly the Broncos getting involved and trying to flip the #5 for the #2 and driving up the price.

Also, I would kind of hate giving up a 1st next year. A 2nd next year would be somewhat swallowable, 3 1sts and more to move up from 12 to 2...ugh.

Would getting up to 5 do it?  Then trade again w/Giants.  Would the Giants be happy w/ Chubb or Barkley?  Because one of them goes at 4 one would assume if they go QB at one then allowing the Giants to grab the other and some additional picks.

 

[NYRAGE]

Would getting up to 5 do it?  Then trade again w/Giants.  Would the Giants be happy w/ Chubb or Barkley?  Because one of them goes at 4 one would assume if they go QB at one then allowing the Giants to grab the other and some additional picks.

I think that's the best way to get the Giants to move off their pick, but that's probably the priciest way, too. They will have to pay a lot to make both moves imo.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Would getting up to 5 do it?  Then trade again w/Giants.  Would the Giants be happy w/ Chubb or Barkley?  Because one of them goes at 4 one would assume if they go QB at one then allowing the Giants to grab the other and some additional picks.

Once they move from 5 to 12 what will they have left to offer to move from 5 to 2?

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

Assuming that a) the Browns have any interest in moving all the way down to #12 and b) the Giants aren't taking a QB, then that makes a ton of sense for all involved.

I think you'd have to make the move in one fell swoop though, otherwise you risk possibly the Broncos getting involved and trying to flip the #5 for the #2 and driving up the price.

Let's make this one of the biggest trades ever. Let's get the Colts/Bucs/Bears involved with the Giants, Browns, and Bills that nets the Bills the #2. 4 team trade with picks flying everywhere. Bills go to #2, Giants to #4, Browns to Colts/Bucs/Bears, Colts Bucs/Bears to #12.

 

[Mr. Peterson]

The Jets really hurt us big time with that trade.  I’m almost impressed by how smart it was and how damaging it could be to us.  

 

[Alluro]

Nah. Keep the picks and hope to find our own Rodgers, Brady, or Brees somewhere other than the very top of the draft. 

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

Nah. Keep the picks and hope to find our own Rodgers, Brady, or Brees somewhere other than the very top of the draft. 

Yeah, that's been our M.O. for the past 20 years. It's worked well, so far.

 

[Alluro]

Yeah, that's been our M.O. for the past 20 years. It's worked well, so far.

Buffalo has gone through how many coaches, GMs, or scouting departments in that timespan? Heck, even ownership changed. 

The team just made the playoffs with Tyrod Taylor. Nick Foles, Blake Bortles, and Case Keenum all made the conference championship games (Foles obviously winning it all). If the team is strong enough, the team can succeed even without a top QB.

With that said, I was all for taking Mahomes last year. I'm in favor of taking a QB at 12 this year. What I don't want to see is the team selling the farm for a QB (multiple firsts, seconds, etc) when Buffalo could fill so many other holes on cost controlled rookie contracts. 

 

[Mr. Peterson]

Nah. Keep the picks and hope to find our own Rodgers, Brady, or Brees somewhere other than the very top of the draft. 

Not sure if this is relevant or not...  but even though Rodgers and Brees were steals where they were drafted, they were actually only the 2nd QB’s taken that year.

If we were hoping to get a steal, they would at best be the 5th QB taken (unless one of the top 4 fell to us). 

 

[humpback]

Buffalo has gone through how many coaches, GMs, or scouting departments in that timespan? Heck, even ownership changed. 

The team just made the playoffs with Tyrod Taylor. Nick Foles, Blake Bortles, and Case Keenum all made the conference championship games (Foles obviously winning it all). If the team is strong enough, the team can succeed even without a top QB.

With that said, I was all for taking Mahomes last year. I'm in favor of taking a QB at 12 this year. What I don't want to see is the team selling the farm for a QB (multiple firsts, seconds, etc) when Buffalo could fill so many other holes on cost controlled rookie contracts. 

I tend to agree. I wish they would have added 1 more cheap veteran like Bridgewater or even Glennon, but I'd prefer to give McCarron a shot and stay put over giving up the farm to move up.

Not sure if this is relevant or not...  but even though Rodgers and Brees were steals where they were drafted, they were actually only the 2nd QB’s taken that year.

If we were hoping to get a steal, they would at best be the 5th QB taken (unless one of the top 4 fell to us). 

Wilson, Foles, and Cousins were the 6th, 7th, and 8th QBs drafted in 2012, but the Bills drafted the great TJ Graham instead because they mistakenly gave Fitzpatrick that giant contract. Derek Carr and Garoppolo were the 4th and 5th QBs drafted in 2014, Dak was something like 8th, etc.

I'm not saying it's easy to find a good QB later, but it isn't like the top QBs drafted have a perfect track record either.

 

[Super King]

If they do trade up to the 2nd or 4th pick, who does everyone want to be the pick? 

 

[ScottNorwood]

EJ Gaines would've been a better signing than Chris Ivory.  They went for similar money. They could probably have gotten a good backup RB in the 3rd round of the draft or so.

 

[GroveDiesel]

If they do trade up to the 2nd or 4th pick, who does everyone want to be the pick? 

Josh Rosen.

 

[Alluro]

https://billswire.usatoday.com/2018/03/24/nfl-buffalo-bills-johnny-manziel/

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

https://billswire.usatoday.com/2018/03/24/nfl-buffalo-bills-johnny-manziel/

Oof

 

[The Duff Man]

https://billswire.usatoday.com/2018/03/24/nfl-buffalo-bills-johnny-manziel/

It must suck to be forced to come up with content to satisfy the need to publish articles. 

This one is complete BS

 

[SanDawg]

Once they move from 5 to 12 what will they have left to offer to move from 5 to 2?

Not sure exactly how to pull it off to be honest. But I have to think you get to 5 from 12 it will cost some major picks ( 12,22, 2nd and a 3rd) for sure but you will have something in the tank, even if it is next year.  To go 5th to 2nd you give Pick 5 and a 2nd this year and next years 2nd.  I just hate to think we will get the 4th, 5th or maybe 6th QB off the board.  

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Not sure exactly how to pull it off to be honest. But I have to think you get to 5 from 12 it will cost some major picks ( 12,22, 2nd and a 3rd) for sure but you will have something in the tank, even if it is next year.  To go 5th to 2nd you give Pick 5 and a 2nd this year and next years 2nd.  I just hate to think we will get the 4th, 5th or maybe 6th QB off the board.  

Jets paid three seconds to go from 6 to 3. You’d need to pay at least that you go from 5 to 2.

 

[The Duff Man]

Mock I just read was something like:

12, second and third to get up to 6. 

6, 21, second to get up to 2. 

I think that is light on the second trade, at least another third needed  

So you are looking at six picks + if you want to get to 2. Two firsts, seconds and thirds. And maybe something next year...

 

[Borden]

I was listening to the Move the Sticks podcast today and they were talking about the Giants owner (I think) talking about they will listen to any offer on any player or something which was some what regarding OBJ. So they said what about the Browns trading #4 and #33 for OBJ because they would be a team that could support a OBJ contract.

I will now tie that into our discussion here. OBJ for 4 and 33 then 2 for 12, 22, 53, 56, 65. ***Maybe someone more knowledgeable could help out with the proper pick compensation for me?*** This is obviously a rebuild move but Eli is old and it would allow them to be major players in FA next year too. But for the draft they would end up with...

4, 12, 22, 33, 34, 53, 56, 65, 66

That’s a huge haul. You could basically rebuild in one offseason including a QB. There’s only one OBJ but he’s also going to cost them a fortune to resign.

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

I was listening to the Move the Sticks podcast today and they were talking about the Giants owner (I think) talking about they will listen to any offer on any player or something which was some what regarding OBJ. So they said what about the Browns trading #4 and #33 for OBJ because they would be a team that could support a OBJ contract.

I will now tie that into our discussion here. OBJ for 4 and 33 then 2 for 12, 22, 53, 56, 65. ***Maybe someone more knowledgeable could help out with the proper pick compensation for me?*** This is obviously a rebuild move but Eli is old and it would allow them to be major players in FA next year too. But for the draft they would end up with...

4, 12, 22, 33, 34, 53, 56, 65, 66

That’s a huge haul. You could basically rebuild in one offseason including a QB. There’s only one OBJ but he’s also going to cost them a fortune to resign.

Unless the Bills can pry the pick away I think the Giants will take Barkley or Chubb. They've rebuilt the OLine, get OBJ back, and can make a push with Eli now. I don't think they'll pass on that opportunity. Who knows, though...

 

[Borden]

Unless the Bills can pry the pick away I think the Giants will take Barkley or Chubb. They've rebuilt the OLine, get OBJ back, and can make a push with Eli now. I don't think they'll pass on that opportunity. Who knows, though...

Unless OBJ holds out for an extension. Or Eli gets hurt because he is old. The NFC too strong for the Giants roster. I don’t think they can make a legitimate push. The worst thing they can do is step up to a mediocre team and have Eli retire or have declining play. This thread knows about “quarterback purgatory” as much as anyone. 

I’m not saying you’re wrong either and they might do that. It seems like one of those things a team looks back on and says “that was a chance for us to rebuild and we missed it.” Especially because with those two trades there’s so much they could just do so much.

With the #4 take Mayfield. At 12 they might get Minkah to pair with Collins or more likely Johnson or Ward at CB. 22 for a WR. 33 for a guard/tackle. 34 for an RB. Those picks all have multiples of those positions being floated around that area on big boards. That still leaves 4 basically second round picks where they can add DE and BPA. 

I think even for this year that team is greatly improved by taking the picks. The names aren’t as big but then the team is setup long term and still has cap space. 

 

[Tommy Collins]

EJ Gaines would've been a better signing than Chris Ivory.  They went for similar money. They could probably have gotten a good backup RB in the 3rd round of the draft or so.

For $4m. What a steal. I know he was injured, but he was damn good when he was out there. 

 

[On The Rocks]

Is there any consensus on the plus / negatives of Mason Rudolph?

I don't see a lot of talking heads spending time on him, I was wondering if anyone on here would hate him as a pick at 22 and if so why?  Or using a creative but not too expensive  package of picks to get him early in the second round if he were still there.

 

[BlueDredSo]

Nah. Keep the picks and hope to find our own Rodgers, Brady, or Brees somewhere other than the very top of the draft. 

No. Just no. Why are people using outliers as examples of success? It is a proven fact that there is a much higher hit rate on getting a good QB the higher they are drafted. Could a QB late in Rd 1, or anywhere in Rds 2-6 work out? Of course they could, but the chances are way lower.

Now, that doesn't mean I want them to panic and trade up to draft their 3rd highest QB. I think they absolutely need to wait until pick 4 to determine whether they make a strong trade offer to Cleveland. That is if they don't trade up to pick #2 with the Giants. At this point I don't think a deal is getting done before the draft unless they REALLY want pick #2 and the Giants are blown away with what the Bills offer. I don't want that happening as the Bills are going to have to give up way too much.

 

[BlueDredSo]

Is there any consensus on the plus / negatives of Mason Rudolph?

I don't see a lot of talking heads spending time on him, I was wondering if anyone on here would hate him as a pick at 22 and if so why?  Or using a creative but not too expensive  package of picks to get him early in the second round if he were still there.

I'm wondering the same. There just isn't much out there on him. Chris Trepasso, formerly of Buffalo Rumblings and now with CBS, has had Rudolph as his #1 QB all along. His argument is that Rudolph seems to be the most pro ready right now, even more than Rosen. Only thing is his potential is probably capped whereas the other guys could become better than what they are now. Seems like Rudolph has realized his full potential and team that draft him takes him for what he is and that's it. At least that's what I've heard.

I would be completely fine if the Bills drafted him at 22. Crappy thing is there will be no way to know if the Bills really liked someone else and just couldn't move up to draft their guy, or if they really liked Rudolph this whole time and knew they could wait.

 

[BlueDredSo]

Jeremy White apparently has a guy on Twitter who is never wrong about the Sabres and is saying the Bills covet Mayfield.

I think that makes complete sense as there's been buzz mostly about Rosen and Allen. People are saying the Bills are making it clear they are interested in Allen. What? Why would they do that? Nothing leaks out of that office, but all of a sudden they want to let the world know they want to draft Josh Allen? It doesn't make sense. It would be a total Beane move to talk up Josh Allen in the hopes that he gets drafted early so Mayfield slides further down the board.

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

Jeremy White apparently has a guy on Twitter who is never wrong about the Sabres and is saying the Bills covet Mayfield.

That's who I've been warming up to.

I just hope they get their top choice, though.

 

[humpback]

No. Just no. Why are people using outliers as examples of success? It is a proven fact that there is a much higher hit rate on getting a good QB the higher they are drafted. Could a QB late in Rd 1, or anywhere in Rds 2-6 work out? Of course they could, but the chances are way lower.

Now, that doesn't mean I want them to panic and trade up to draft their 3rd highest QB. I think they absolutely need to wait until pick 4 to determine whether they make a strong trade offer to Cleveland. That is if they don't trade up to pick #2 with the Giants. At this point I don't think a deal is getting done before the draft unless they REALLY want pick #2 and the Giants are blown away with what the Bills offer. I don't want that happening as the Bills are going to have to give up way too much.

Did he say otherwise? I'm guessing he knows that odds are better the higher you draft them, but that's not the relevant comparison considering they'd have to give up a ton to move up. You seem to agree with your 2nd paragraph...

 

[BlueDredSo]

Did he say otherwise? I'm guessing he knows that odds are better the higher you draft them, but that's not the relevant comparison considering they'd have to give up a ton to move up. You seem to agree with your 2nd paragraph...

I went back and read it again, and I was a bit aggressive and assuming on my response. I get the idea of holding onto the picks and drafting Jackson or Rudolph at 12, or not drafting a QB at all and possibly having a higher pick next year to draft a QB. However, they have the ammo to move up in the draft and I'm of the belief they have their eyes on one or more of those top 4 QB's. When you have a strong desire for one of those guys and the ability to go get him, then you should do it. QB is not a position you just settle on drafting your 3rd or 4th choice.

 

[BlueDredSo]

I originally wasn't on board with the Bills potentially trading their 1st round pick next year. However, if they have to do it to get "their" guy then I guess I'm alright with it. I don't want them being stubborn and then drafting their 3rd or 4th preferred QB. Do what you have to do to get your #1 guy, assuming the Browns don't draft him (Darnold?)

 

[humpback]

I went back and read it again, and I was a bit aggressive and assuming on my response. I get the idea of holding onto the picks and drafting Jackson or Rudolph at 12, or not drafting a QB at all and possibly having a higher pick next year to draft a QB. However, they have the ammo to move up in the draft and I'm of the belief they have their eyes on one or more of those top 4 QB's. When you have a strong desire for one of those guys and the ability to go get him, then you should do it. QB is not a position you just settle on drafting your 3rd or 4th choice.

The thing is, we have no idea how they really feel about the QBs in this class, and we likely never will.

I originally wasn't on board with the Bills potentially trading their 1st round pick next year. However, if they have to do it to get "their" guy then I guess I'm alright with it. I don't want them being stubborn and then drafting their 3rd or 4th preferred QB. Do what you have to do to get your #1 guy, assuming the Browns don't draft him (Darnold?)

See above, even after the fact- say the #4 pick is OTC and they pull off a blockbuster to move up and take the 3rd or 4th QB off the board. There's no way of knowing if he was their #1 target the whole time (they'll almost certainly say he was), or if he was their 3rd or 4th ranked guy and they just didn't want to get shut out completely.

Either way, the issue with giving up a ton to move up is that there is zero margin for error. The pick has to be a franchise QB, otherwise the team will be set back for years.

 

[Mr. Peterson]

Let’s say Cleveland is willing to trade us one of their picks.  

Would you rather give up say, 12, 22, 53 and 96 for the 1.4?

Or would you rather give all this picks plus a 1st and a 3rd next year for the 1st overall pick to KNOW they get their #1 guy?  

I think I’d be more willing to give up whatever it took to know for sure we get the right guy. 

 

[Grahamburn]

If I'm the Bills I sit tight with the picks and let the draft come to me.  The sharks are swirling knowing Buffalo has all of these selections.  I'm not sure why any of these "big 4" QB's are any better than Jackson or Rudolph, and I certainly don't view any of them worthy of multiple early picks.  Draft one of them at 22 or 12 if you're nervous and use all of those other picks to build the rest of the team around them. 

 

[humpback]

Let’s say Cleveland is willing to trade us one of their picks.  

Would you rather give up say, 12, 22, 53 and 96 for the 1.4?

Or would you rather give all this picks plus a 1st and a 3rd next year for the 1st overall pick to KNOW they get their #1 guy?  

I think I’d be more willing to give up whatever it took to know for sure we get the right guy. 

How do you "know for sure" that "their #1 guy" is "the right guy"?

 

[Mr. Peterson]

How do you "know for sure" that "their #1 guy" is "the right guy"?

Good point.  But I’d rather know we got our guy.  And if we fail, then we know for sure it was our teams fault and we didn’t fail because the guy we really believed in wasn’t available.  

But I’ll take it if we get the 3rd best guy and we luck out. 

 

[GroveDiesel]

If the Bills think that they can trade up and get a QB that has a good chance of being a franchise QB, then I think they should do it regardless of the cost.

I know that the analytics supposedly say that drafting is a 50/50 proposition at best and that trading away picks has a negative expected return...but, I think that the analysis used in that reasoning misses some important things. 

A QB is undoubtedly the most important position in football. A franchise QB gives a team a much MUCH greater chance of winning year after year than a star at any other position. 

But it goes further than that. Yes, it is possible to build a contender by having really good players at a ton of positions, but the ability to keep that team intact over the long haul is virtually impossible because then you have a whole bunch of guys looking to get paid. And then you either run into salary cap issues or you have to constantly look to replace those players by either gambling on vets with question marks or by drafting more players at 50/50 returns.

But if you have an elite QB, you pay ONE player a bunch of money and have the luxury of surrounding him with lesser talented guys that he makes up for. An elite QB makes such a huge difference for 10-15 years and gives the franchise much more flexibility and breathing room.

To get that QB, history says that they're generally drafted pretty high in the first round. Talented ones do fall sometimes, but the odds are much lower the lower you get.

So some would say, then just pick a bunch of lower ones and eventually you'll hit on one rather than trade away draft picks.

Only, that's no guarantee either and how much of a waste would it be to keep using draft picks every year on lower odds picks while wasting season after season? Unless your team is terrible, it's very difficult to trade up to get a QB. The Bills have the resources to trade up. There is no guarantee that they will be in a position to draft a QB in the top 5 anytime again in the near future.

All that being said, if they are not fairly certain that the guy they are trading up to get is a franchise QB, then they should sit and wait. Don't get desperate and trade up for a guy that you think is as likely to be Blake Bortles as he is to be Ben Roethlisberger. If you aren't sure, then don't waste the resources. Take Jackson/Mayfield/Allen at 12 or Rudolph at 22 and fill in other gaps.

 

[BlueDredSo]

If the Bills think that they can trade up and get a QB that has a good chance of being a franchise QB, then I think they should do it regardless of the cost.

I know that the analytics supposedly say that drafting is a 50/50 proposition at best and that trading away picks has a negative expected return...but, I think that the analysis used in that reasoning misses some important things. 

A QB is undoubtedly the most important position in football. A franchise QB gives a team a much MUCH greater chance of winning year after year than a star at any other position. 

But it goes further than that. Yes, it is possible to build a contender by having really good players at a ton of positions, but the ability to keep that team intact over the long haul is virtually impossible because then you have a whole bunch of guys looking to get paid. And then you either run into salary cap issues or you have to constantly look to replace those players by either gambling on vets with question marks or by drafting more players at 50/50 returns.

But if you have an elite QB, you pay ONE player a bunch of money and have the luxury of surrounding him with lesser talented guys that he makes up for. An elite QB makes such a huge difference for 10-15 years and gives the franchise much more flexibility and breathing room.

To get that QB, history says that they're generally drafted pretty high in the first round. Talented ones do fall sometimes, but the odds are much lower the lower you get.

So some would say, then just pick a bunch of lower ones and eventually you'll hit on one rather than trade away draft picks.

Only, that's no guarantee either and how much of a waste would it be to keep using draft picks every year on lower odds picks while wasting season after season? Unless your team is terrible, it's very difficult to trade up to get a QB. The Bills have the resources to trade up. There is no guarantee that they will be in a position to draft a QB in the top 5 anytime again in the near future.

All that being said, if they are not fairly certain that the guy they are trading up to get is a franchise QB, then they should sit and wait. Don't get desperate and trade up for a guy that you think is as likely to be Blake Bortles as he is to be Ben Roethlisberger. If you aren't sure, then don't waste the resources. Take Jackson/Mayfield/Allen at 12 or Rudolph at 22 and fill in other gaps.

I agree with this entire post and is basically how I've felt all along regarding drafting a QB. However, I don't think Mayfield or Allen are going to be available at #12. There will be teams coveting them enough to move up, or just draft at their own spots (Jets, Broncos, Dolphins)