dave mcbride Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Right, like Randy Moss. Moss's contract was up after this season (as was Seymour's when they traded him). Lynch's wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 The two points are mutually exclusive. Whether you like him or not, Lynch is a first round talent. Maybe not a Top 15 pick takent, but a first round talent, nevertheless. The fact that Bills only got a 4 & 6 for him is other teams taking advantage of Bills' situation which they created when they drafted Spiller. Everyone knows Bills have to move Lynch and that's the only reason he's been taking carries away from Freddie. Bills could have solved this problem either by trading Lynch on draft day, or by not drafting Spiller. If a 3rd or 4th was available on draft day, then it should have happened then, because this was another waste of time on a player with no future in Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike oxhurtz Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 People are complaing that Buffalo only got a 4th and a 6th round picks for Lynch, but Arizona got a 3rd and a 4th for Boldin... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 I wish we would have got a DL or OL player thrown in with the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 There are many factors to consider. That Moss was traded for what should be a late 3rd rounder (versus the early 4th plus a 6th rounder in 2012 the Bills will get) makes me feel less bad about the trade. Then you have to consider there might not be a 2011 season and Lynch has 1 year left on his contract (with an option year in 2012 that won't be exercised). Then you have to consider the Bills got worse offers over the off-season for him, and after some RB's have gone down, the offers didn't improve that much. Meaning RB's aren't as highly valued in trade. Last of all, this is clearly a rebuilding year for the Bills. Again, who said we have to get rid of him. It seems like the situation you just described is that we have 1000yd rushing RB that can get short yardage and he is more valuable than what he would attract in compensation. That, my friend, is the classic buyers market don't sell scenario. You keep that talent like the Cowboys with their 3 headed monster. If someone offers you fair compensation then you think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyd19 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 (edited) Randy Moss is in the final year of his contract, which the Patriots have chosen not to extend. Despite what people on this board seem to think Lynch was NOT in the final year of his contract. So basically the net result of this move is Ralph Wilson gets to save some more money. Hooray. Not only that but Moss is in his 30's. Lynch is 24 with two years remaining on his contract after this year. The voidible 2012 year is voidible by the team. He is cheap and basically the team that controls him(used to be us) has him by the short ones until after 2012. Horrible trade on our part. If we could not do better than what we got, we should have held him and waited till next year to trade him. Time was on our side in this case. People are complaing that Buffalo only got a 4th and a 6th round picks for Lynch, but Arizona got a 3rd and a 4th for Boldin... You don't point to one bad deal to justify another bad deal. Draft picks are waaaaaaaaaaaaay over valued right now. Smart GM's know this and will trade away "their sacred 4th through 7th round picks" for proven NFL talent that is young. Bad GM's collect lousy late round picks that historically do not consistantly produce quality players and give away their stars....Which one are we again?? Edited October 6, 2010 by tonyd19 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Syracuse Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Why is it so hard to understand that Lynch is one more stupid mistake away from a LONG vacation in the league? You simply can't evaluate this trade without giving consideration to how much his two prior offenses play into this equation. Lynch carries a MASSIVE amount of baggage, didn't show up for any of the offseason programs despite having a new head coach, new OC and new offense. Every team in the league knew he wanted out, therefore his value was diminished. You've also discounted the possibility of rolling these two picks into a higher pick or packaging them for another player. Take your emotions out of this, consider all the factors and you'll see that this was the best possible deal the Bills could have gotten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyd19 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 I am not upset that we traded one of our RB's. But I am soo pissed we got so little back for it. Lynch is a 2 time pro-bowl first round pick. He is 24 years old and under team control for three more seasons. His contract is cheap and he is a beast on the field. Yes he is one suspension away blah, blah, blah...So is Rothlisberger, so is Vick..If we could get that kind of talent for a 4th rounder I don't think anyone would think twice about pulling off that deal (Although I would hate to see either of these two in a Bills uniform.) But I think you guys get my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 That's kind of the point - nobody was offering commensurate value for Marshawn Lynch, so we just took the best below-value offer that was out there. The speculation is that good teams wouldn't trade their good players for nothing, just because it's the best offer they can get. They'd like, keep them on their team. Exactly, but we are not a good team so I guess common sense doesn't apply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyd19 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 I am not upset that we traded one of our RB's. But I am soo pissed we got so little back for it. Lynch is a 2 time pro-bowl first round pick. He is 24 years old and under team control for three more seasons. His contract is cheap and he is a beast on the field. Yes he is one suspension away blah, blah, blah...So is Rothlisberger, so is Vick..If we could get that kind of talent for a 4th rounder I don't think anyone would think twice about pulling off that deal (Although I would hate to see either of these two in a Bills uniform.) But I think you guys get my point. Also, Lynch's last offense was carrying a loaded weapon in his car. Last time I checked owning a gun in this country was still legal. it's not like he raped someone, shot someone, or brutally tortured and systematically killed some poor innocent animals. The point of this is that his chances of "relapsing" are much less than an actual felon is...based upon his behavior. And he skipped all the workouts and got back just in time to beat out this years first round pick and last years starter.....That is how bad a player he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brand J Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 A Packer fan tries to rationalize the trade: This league has proven that you can get a quality back with walk-on youth at RB. Ryan Grant was not anything until he was thrown away to GB. Lynch was everything until he actually played. Watched all his games, Lynch is an pansy, unless you like 225lbd backs that are afraid to get tackled. He will always run from contact, and his futile efforts to look like he is running hard are just a reaction to feeling vulnerable upon contact. It's self defense not toughness. Repeat he will sacrifice yards, to avoid all contact, and TT made a good decision not to waste huge money on the last two years of a back loaded 1rst round deal. ESPN Packer Msg Board What games was he watching?! There are posters here who do the same thing - de-value players if moves aren't made and offer blind praise when moves are made, although, the almost unanimous Kelsay bashing is refreshing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Again, who said we have to get rid of him. It seems like the situation you just described is that we have 1000yd rushing RB that can get short yardage and he is more valuable than what he would attract in compensation. That, my friend, is the classic buyers market don't sell scenario. You keep that talent like the Cowboys with their 3 headed monster. If someone offers you fair compensation then you think about it. If the Bills were contenders like the Cowboys are, I agree it would have been stupid to trade him. But they're building for the future, and I never got the sense that Nix and Gailey were enamored with him, and vice versa. Too bad things weren't different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike oxhurtz Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 People are acting like Lynch is a 1,500 yard 12 TD+ a season RB. Sorry, but the last best RB we had was Travis Henry who had seasons of 1,400+ and 1,300+ yards rushing. I know everyone likes to gauge RB's at 1,000 yards a season, but that's only 62.5 yards a game. Plus, Lynch was a troublemaker...the hit & run, the incident in Cali, the 20 dollar stuff at the McKinely Mall. One more incident and Lynch will be suspended for a year. Next to go should be Evans who has quit on the Bills. Get some more picks for him as well. So far this year, 10 receptions for 94 yards, that's only 23.5 yards per game, that's absolutely pathetic for a guy that's getting paid over $9 mil a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 That's kind of the point - nobody was offering commensurate value for Marshawn Lynch, so we just took the best below-value offer that was out there. The speculation is that good teams wouldn't trade their good players for nothing, just because it's the best offer they can get. They'd like, keep them on their team. Exactly, but we are not a good team (not even close-on the field or upstairs) so I guess common sense doesn't apply to the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offsides#76FredSmerlas Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 (edited) while I don't object to the trade, I find it highly questionable because the Bills could have made this trade pre-draft with Seattle who wanted him at that time and gotten the same pick this year. Considering all the holes on this team a real RT would have been nice Hmmmm, you must work in the Bills front office and had inside information. How do you know we could have got this same deal? Everyone thinks they know when the Bills could have made a better or equal move. The fans have no idea what the compensation was they could have got. Stop listening to the media; their wrong about 80% of the time. Edited October 6, 2010 by offsides#76FredSmerlas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 (edited) I thought all along the Bills were holding out for fair compensation. There's no RB SEA could've drafted in the 4th next year, that would've had the impact/talent of Lynch. If they wanted Marshawn so badly, as they have stated, then they would've had to separate from a 2nd round pick if I were GM. It made absolutely no sense to hold onto Lynch this long and then succumb to throwing him away for a 4th round pick. ... and in that case we would've ended the year with three RBs including an unhappy Lynch. That's what happens if you hold on. It's not all that great a situation either. Rock Bills Hard Place. Edited October 6, 2010 by Thurman#1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offsides#76FredSmerlas Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Hmmmm, you must work in the Bills front office and had inside information. How do you know we could have got this same deal? Everyone thinks they know when the Bills could have made a better or equal move. The fans have no idea what the compensation was they could have got. Stop listening to the media; their wrong about 80% of the time. Lynch is a step away from getting in to some major trouble with the NFL. I'm betting he won't go 3 years without another arrest or drug suspension. He also was a marked man on this team when he didn't show up for so-called voluntary workouts. He didn't want to be here and I'm glad they dumped his butt. Jackson is the better back anyways. Lynch got showcased for 3 games so they could get him out of Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 The two points are mutually exclusive. Whether you like him or not, Lynch is a first round talent. Maybe not a Top 15 pick takent, but a first round talent, nevertheless. The fact that Bills only got a 4 & 6 for him is other teams taking advantage of Bills' situation which they created when they drafted Spiller. Everyone knows Bills have to move Lynch and that's the only reason he's been taking carries away from Freddie. Bills could have solved this problem either by trading Lynch on draft day, or by not drafting Spiller. If a 3rd or 4th was available on draft day, then it should have happened then, because this was another waste of time on a player with no future in Buffalo. Name 5 times Lynch, over four years, was voted player of the week. Name 5 game changing plays he had over 3 years. First round label does not equal first round talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Also, Lynch's last offense was carrying a loaded weapon in his car. Last time I checked owning a gun in this country was still legal. it's not like he raped someone, shot someone, or brutally tortured and systematically killed some poor innocent animals. The point of this is that his chances of "relapsing" are much less than an actual felon is...based upon his behavior. And he skipped all the workouts and got back just in time to beat out this years first round pick and last years starter.....That is how bad a player he is. How do you know what his chances of "relapsing" are. If you're referring specifically to getting caught w/ a concealed loaded weapon in his car in contravention of California statute, you might be right. If you throw in hitting a person with his car and either lying about it or being such a bad driver that he didn't even know he hit her, the odds go down a bit. Having marijuana in his car, and the odds go down further. Intimidating people and taking their money and maybe they go down further. But take a guy with a record like this in such a short period of time and projecting that he'll have further run-ins with the law is a fairly high-percentage bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larz tex Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 while I don't object to the trade, I find it highly questionable because the Bills could have made this trade pre-draft with Seattle who wanted him at that time and gotten the same pick this year. Considering all the holes on this team a real RT would have been nice It probably would have been a fourth round tackle, and we got Wang who is a fifth round tackle, only one round later. They may just of taken Wang in the fourth round then. just my warped opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts