Dr. Who

Or, Watkins had an injury that often takes two years to fully heal. He is elite when healthy; he is healthy. We bought high and traded low. Watkins, Matthews, and Jones sounds like a much better receiving corps, don't it? Peterman is not a high potential kid. He's likely a quality backup if he reaches his potential. Beane and McD do not have a track record, so whether one is optimistic or not, it is speculation either way. I think trading Sammy was foolish, but it isn't a bad year to be bad, given the quality of the 2018 draft. My guess is we are tanking without coming out and saying so and the new fellas feel they have the go-ahead from Terry and Kim to do so.

I grant that holistically, one should probably view it that way. I still think a probable 2018 potential franchise qb would be in a better position with Sammy as a #1 WR, but that is a hypothetical that will never play out, so you can't compare it to whatever actually happens.

Well stated. If Sammy stays healthy, this will go down as one of the worst trades in Bills' history.

Yes, that is painting the bleakest possible scenario and interpretation. I don't feel compelled to accept it, but if true, obviously your conclusion is logical. Btw, Sammy should have been targeted much more. I don't blame him for complaining about that.

The concept of building a team and not simply an aggregate of talented players that are less than the sum of the parts is fine. I think one can buy into that and still wonder about the value of trading Sammy Watkins. The fella who simply dismissed Watkins as the "oft injured" is begging the question. He played through injuries before. Other wrs have needed a second surgery on his foot issue. If he's healthy, he's a rare talent. The return does not seem equitable. How is it that McD and Beane determined that one could not fit Sammy into their concept of a team? There reasoning will probably remain opaque to fans, but it's not irrational for fans to question the merits of the trade.

I have a hard time getting past that logic. Unless there is undisclosed negative knowledge about Sammy, the trade makes no sense.

I have never said Taylor was awful. I don't think he's a franchise qb and I think you need one for long term success. I'd be happy for Taylor to wildly exceed my expectations. I don't think getting rid of Sammy helps him do that.

Don't know how one can presume Watkins is not healthy now. That particular foot injury often takes two years to fully heal. Sammy played through pain. He's not soft. As for Taylor, he remains the best available option. Building up draft resources could plausibly be an indication Snake Opie and Mr. Bean don't think highly of him long term.

It can't sit well with the vets, can it?

Any chance the team unhappiness is a reaction to the trades? I would hate to lose an elite player on my team for a marginal starting db and a draft pick.

Well, that would be a classy way to treat a fella who should finish his career wearing red, white, and blue.

Well, I hope not, but I would never have traded Sammy. If he stays healthy, OBD will look very foolish, indeed.

Darby for Matthews and a third seems like a reasonable return. Watkins for Gaines and a second seems too light. It really depends on whether Watkins can stay healthy. If he can, I don't see how the Bills win the trade. I also don't see them making the trade unless they had continuing reservations about Watkins. Sammy was my favorite player on the team, so I am biased. He is elite level talent. I don't think you trade those kind of players unless you are getting elite level back. On the plus side, April 2018 should be interesting and we now have the ammo to go get a top qb if necessary (and I think odds are it will be.)

Thanks for the analysis. I haven't seen the game yet, but I trust the judgment of OP.

LOL. I did a double-take. Didn't know you had that kind of funny in you, Fig. Nicely done.

Always enjoy your perspective. I have fairly sanguine hopes for the new regime, but I'll be surprised if we aren't picking qb in the first next year. Fine with me if Taylor works out, but I am skeptical. Anyway, at least there is never a conflict between the anniversary and a game that really means anything. Then we'd find out if you have your priorities right

I think this is true. Since he is our qb, I will hope he improves dramatically, but I just don't see the basis for optimism shared by zealous fans of his potential.

We got lucky the kid couldn't do a pull-up and apparently some GMs thought that meant bad at hockey.

I think the OP emphasizes the defense and certainly notes the question marks at qb. I am skeptical about Tyrod, but he could exceed my expectations. If he does, this is a playoff contender imo.

Pretty much agree with all these sentiments.

I think the defense may improve simply by more rational coaching and the personnel appears better suited to a 4-3. I don't see this team tanking. Another mediocrity is perhaps most likely. Anyway, I prefer to hope they play well. If they play dreadfully, there's always two first rounders in a supposedly qb rich draft.

I like the work of many classical musicians. Vivaldi and Bach are favorites -- the baroque in general can be listened to in a variety of moods and settings. Henry Purcell lived a short, productive life. His short opera, Dido and Aeneas, is often pleasing even to folks who don't like opera. I like choral religious music such as Allegri's Miserere as well. Classical music, per se, is often associated with the big four -- Haydn, Mozart, Schubert, and Beethoven. It's kinda odd, because if one talks about classical literature or architecture, one is definitely talking about antiquity, but classical music is really early modern era through the Enlightenment and up through the Romantic era. Bruckner and Brahms are excellent. Twentieth century still has some interesting composers, though. I like Gustav Holst, Arvo Part, and John Tavener. P.S. JR in Pittsburgh, you are a nice fella, but I don't understand despising Mozart unless you are related to Salieri . . .

Opening sequence to Bergman's Wild Strawberries is spookily surreal and memorable.

I am actually guardedly optimistic with the new regimes. I liked both DW and TM, but they were both more scouts than GMs. Neither seemed to think strategically enough or had a sufficient sense of building a team. Alas, prolonged disappointment tends to create bitterness rather than build character. It will be almost surreal if we actually start to be good.

Okay, I'm not going to convince you to moderate your contempt for Tim Murray. When I say 3 years, I mean three years from being a playoff team with at least a plausible chance at competing for the Cup. I think there is an outside chance the Sabres make the playoffs this year. It will be a disappointment if they do not at least capture an eight seed next year.