cvanvol Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 Why tarde Lynch? Does that make the Bills a better team? Someone explain that. we are 0-4 and most games are nearly unwatchable that fourth round pick will bring us joy for 4 months until we watch him play and then be sadly disappointed
ChasBB Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 There was no 3rd round trading partner. +1 I don't know why it is so hard for people to understand that the market dictated that we got what we did. Obviously, if there were trading partners out there willing to give up a 3rd rounder, Buddy would have made that deal. We got what we could.
Dorkington Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 What a !@#$ing joke. Why would you trade your best running back??? Freddie has maybe one or two seasons left. CJ isn't useful until the OL is shored up. God this team continues to disappoint me.
LGB Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 At some point are we going to land a 1st rounder that is productive and does not have to be jettisoned for a 4th rounder or cut?
BADOLBILZ Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 Terrible trade? Freddy has gas in the tank. He is a good all purpose back. Spiller is one of the few potential stars on the team and he will get a lot of touches. If this trade is real it is about all you can expect. Best wishes to Lynch but he is caught in a numbers game. He has great ability. A numbers game? You mean the logjam created by the men who drafted CJ Spiller in round 1 despite having 2 good running backs on the roster and little else. In their minds the Bills just got rid of a player who didn't want to be here. Something they have been doing with regularity since Donahoe was fired. What they actually did, from a personnel standpoint is trade their first round pick from the last draft for a 4th rounder next year. That's the way these deals work out. You are either getting better, or getting worse. Adding another RB when RB wasn't a problem was a mistake. Trading Lynch compounds it because at least Lynch is proven and was certainly one of the 5-6 best best football players on the team. Remember, there was a time when people were certain that Donte was going to be a better player than Lawyer Milloy. Lawyer won't make the HOF, but Donte has been a dime-a-dozen. I hope we use our new 4th round pick to draft a running back! They will use a higher pick. You can't scrimp when it comes to RB.
jahnyc Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 Seems like a crummy deal to me. Lynch can be a pro bowl caliber player. I understand that he has had off field problems, but Seattle got him really cheap. The Bills probably thought that Lynch would holdout in the offseason to force a trade since next year is the last year of his original contract.
birdog1960 Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 (edited) A numbers game? You mean the logjam created by the men who drafted CJ Spiller in round 1 despite having 2 good running backs on the roster and little else. In their minds the Bills just got rid of a player who didn't want to be here. Something they have been doing with regularity since Donahoe was fired. What they actually did, from a personnel standpoint is trade their first round pick from the last draft for a 4th rounder next year. That's the way these deals work out. You are either getting better, or getting worse. Adding another RB when RB wasn't a problem was a mistake. Trading Lynch compounds it because at least Lynch is proven and was certainly one of the 5-6 best best football players on the team. Remember, there was a time when people were certain that Donte was going to be a better player than Lawyer Milloy. Lawyer won't make the HOF, but Donte has been a dime-a-dozen. They will use a higher pick. You can't scrimp when it comes to RB. by my math the bills have traded 2 first round picks and marshawn lynch for cj spiller and a 4th round. im not sure if thats a good deal even if you replaced spiller with barry sanders in his prime and cj isn't reminding me much of barry so far. Edited October 5, 2010 by birdog1960
Simon Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 Adding another RB when RB wasn't a problem was a mistake. I didn't care for the pick either but when you look at it from the perspective of the new administration, it's not an egregiously bad selection. These guys knew from Day1 that Lynch was not a part of their plans and from the moment they were hired they had every intention of moving him when his value had seemingly peaked. With his complete lack of burst, his awful vision and his potential to be suspended on any given day, they wanted no part of relying on him as a primary ballcarrier. Taking that as a given, they were looking at a roster with only 1 viable running back, a journeyman who is going to be in his 30's by the time this team is ready to compete. This team had 20 holes to fill, and when you consider it from the perspective of Lynch being a non-factor, RB was indeed one of them.
John from Riverside Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 Dont understand why anyone would complain about this..... We need draft picks.....badly
SkunkChet Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 For those of you bummed out by the trade, I wrote/filmed a series of spoof videos based on NBC's "The More You Know" for Bills fans at SkunkPost... hopefully this makes the suffering of being a sports fan in Buffalo a little less harsh, check it: http://skunkpost.com/news.sp?newsId=3061
MDH Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 I didn't care for the pick either but when you look at it from the perspective of the new administration, it's not an egregiously bad selection. These guys knew from Day1 that Lynch was not a part of their plans and from the moment they were hired they had every intention of moving him when his value had seemingly peaked. With his complete lack of burst, his awful vision and his potential to be suspended on any given day, they wanted no part of relying on him as a primary ballcarrier. Taking that as a given, they were looking at a roster with only 1 viable running back, a journeyman who is going to be in his 30's by the time this team is ready to compete. This team had 20 holes to fill, and when you consider it from the perspective of Lynch being a non-factor, RB was indeed one of them. Problem is spending a top 10 pick on that RB. RBs are a dime a dozen and can be gotten in middle rounds or traded for for 4th round picks... Not to mention it's not a need that was immediate. RBs are the quickest to make the transition to the NFL, a RB could have been drafted a few years from now while another position player got his NFL feet under him in the meantime.
Sisyphean Bills Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 (edited) I didn't care for the pick either but when you look at it from the perspective of the new administration, it's not an egregiously bad selection. These guys knew from Day1 that Lynch was not a part of their plans and from the moment they were hired they had every intention of moving him when his value had seemingly peaked. With his complete lack of burst, his awful vision and his potential to be suspended on any given day, they wanted no part of relying on him as a primary ballcarrier. Taking that as a given, they were looking at a roster with only 1 viable running back, a journeyman who is going to be in his 30's by the time this team is ready to compete. This team had 20 holes to fill, and when you consider it from the perspective of Lynch being a non-factor, RB was indeed one of them. An NFL insider mentioned that there were teams that he knew for a fact had approached the Bills around the time of the draft feeling them out about a trade. That the Bills front office blew them off (in a sort of abrasive way apparently) and said they were in no way interested in talking about Lynch. He added, that Marshawn's value then, with several teams interested and the chance to get him before training camp, would have definitely been higher than what the Bills ultimately got. In Buddy, we trust. Edited October 5, 2010 by Sisyphean Bills
MDH Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 Trading Lynch compounds it because at least Lynch is proven and was certainly one of the 5-6 best best football players on the team. I'm with you on most everything you say except this. While it would have been better to not draft Spiller at all and just go with Lynch and Jackson for the foreseeable future, trading Lynch doesn't compound the problem. The Bills already have a viable RB on the roster in Jackson - better than Lynch Imo. So it's not like the Bills are going with an unknown. Since the Bills have a better option in Jackson and a shiny new toy in Spiller Lynch's value to the team was nil (unless Jackson gets injured.) A 4th round pick, on the other hand, has value to the team (albeit future value.)
Simon Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 Problem is spending a top 10 pick on that RB. RBs are a dime a dozen and can be gotten in middle rounds or traded for for 4th round picks... Not to mention it's not a need that was immediate. RBs are the quickest to make the transition to the NFL, a RB could have been drafted a few years from now while another position player got his NFL feet under him in the meantime. That's precisely why I didn't care for the pick. If you're going to spend that high of a pick on a position that easy to fill, you'd damned well better be drafting a HOF caliber player. I like what Spiller brings and think he's going to be good for us, but they'd have been better off moving down and stockpiling picks. I think the new admin got a little giddy wanting to enjoy their new toptentoy on their first real day of work. An NFL insider mentioned that there were teams that he knew for a fact had approached the Bills around the time of the draft feeling them out about a trade. That the Bills front office blew them off (in a sort of abrasive way apparently) and said they were in no way interested in talking about Lynch. He added, that Marshawn's value then, with several teams interested and the chance to get him before training camp, would have definitely been higher than what the Bills ultimately got. In Buddy, we trust. The guy is dancing around the truth. If the Bills were abrasive in any way (and Buddy is a direct and honest man) it's because people were offering them 5th and 6th rounders for Lynch, which they were rightly not interested in. The tall tales of being offered a 3rd for Lynch around the draft are nothing more than speculation, and incorrect speculation at that. At no point in the offseason could they have gotten a better return on Lynch than they just did.
The Big Cat Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 Lynch had a shot at 48 games over 3 seasons, plus 4 this year. That's 52 games. He lost some to injury. He lost some more to suspensions. But, that's not to say no other running back could have played in all those games, so let's just say he had a 52 game opportunity. Name for me the 10 ten games of his careers. Name for me 10 game changing plays, or 10 spectacular plays he made over a 52 game span. Why are we all of a sudden pretending like just beause he was drafted in the first round that he played like or carried the value of a first round pick? Sure, it's an indictment of the 2007 draft, but get over it. Change your diaper, already. That was 2 GM's ago. As the new administration has shown, players with a storied past will get their chance to show what they can offer. When they fail to be the dynamic players this team needs them to be(Trent/Marshawn), and when we have two other guys on the roster who can do their jobs as well as they can (again, Trent/Marshawn), then it's time to cut ties with whatever we can get in return.
Sisyphean Bills Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 (edited) The guy is dancing around the truth. If the Bills were abrasive in any way (and Buddy is a direct and honest man) it's because people were offering them 5th and 6th rounders for Lynch, which they were rightly not interested in. The tall tales of being offered a 3rd for Lynch around the draft are nothing more than speculation, and incorrect speculation at that. At no point in the offseason could they have gotten a better return on Lynch than they just did. Maybe. Just reporting what I heard. I don't really have much of an issue with believing that Buddy doesn't play the NFL poker game well. Edit: I mean the guy "joked" around that he wasn't going to do anything but sleep when the free agency period started. Does that sound like a top executive that's doing everything possible to build his team? Not to me. In fact, it's pretty disrespectful. Given the results, it probably wasn't even a joke. Edited October 5, 2010 by Sisyphean Bills
Bill from NYC Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 (edited) That's precisely why I didn't care for the pick. If you're going to spend that high of a pick on a position that easy to fill, you'd damned well better be drafting a HOF caliber player. I like what Spiller brings and think he's going to be good for us, but they'd have been better off moving down and stockpiling picks. I think the new admin got a little giddy wanting to enjoy their new toptentoy on their first real day of work. I for one don't mind the trade, but I am thinking that it was mandated by Mr. Wilson. Ralph is giving this kid a ton of money and talked of "excitement." The kid had 15 yards from scrimage last week. I am too lazy to look up his totals in 4 games but I'm guessing it's not so pretty. In order to bring any "excitement" to the fans (and sell tickets), Mr. Wilson is going to want him on the field. It makes sense Simon; how much money did Ralph shell out to Spiller? Ya think he doesn't want him earning it? I agree that Spiller will probably be a good player down the road and again, I don't mind the trade, but in all I think it was a business move. And maybe a good one considering we drafted Spiller in the first place. What a mess. Edited October 5, 2010 by Bill from NYC
Cash Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 As the new administration has shown, players with a storied past will get their chance to show what they can offer. When they fail to be the dynamic players this team needs them to be(Trent/Marshawn), and when we have two other guys on the roster who can do their jobs as well as they can (again, Trent/Marshawn), then it's time to cut ties with whatever we can get in return. Chris Kelsay says hello.
Drifter Posted October 5, 2010 Posted October 5, 2010 I don't mind the trade at all. It's a position the Bills actually have quality depth in. We have to face the fact that the Bills need all the picks they can get for the next 3 years just to get competitive with the rest of the league. Obviously they will not hit on all their draft picks, that's why they need every one they can get. New England has missed on plenty of players in recent years, but due to the amount of players brought in by additional picks you don't hear about it.
Recommended Posts