eball Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 Back on to the topic of this post - trading Sheppard. This comment from an Indy journalist terrifies me - Now, the Colts parted ways and got a guy in Sheppard who also knows the scheme and gives way more effort. Sheppard is a lot quicker than Hughes despite their similar stature. He won’t be out of position and can defend in coverage. Read more at http://www.rantsport...UW3J6XGBqi3D.99 "Sheppard is a lot quicker than Hughes".....Sweet Jebus what did we just trade for? Sheppard appeared to be running in wet cememt most of the time...what's this Hughes going to look like? Hopefully, he will cost us less.... Reporter credibility debunked.
Lurker Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 Reporter credibility debunked. Reporter?!. More like this, with less insight... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USHZZ5bwASU
NoSaint Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 No, everyone doesn't. Even last season, Fitz performed at the level of his contract -- in fact, he posted the highest QB rating of his career (17th in the NFL). It is a fallacy that the Bills drastically overpaid for Fitz when they extended him. The rate that pay has gone up has really warped most fans concept of "average qb pay" Fitz was getting below average pay for his below average play..... But the raw number looked huge.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted May 3, 2013 Posted May 3, 2013 I tend to agree with you. I think where Nix and past GM's here have failed is not in their ability to scout and evaluate potential players, but in their inability to hire Head Coaches who can also evaluate and develop players. Although Nix has the final say on personnel decisions, we here every year around the draft how player X was drafted because everyone was on board with the selection. This process starts when the coaching staff meets with the scouting dept. and say this is what system we are running and what our needs are. When the scouting dept. and coaching staff meet and start assembling their board prior to the draft this is where i believe the breakdown in judgement occurs. I believe this is how we end up with player's like Maybe being drafted by Juron, and Shep drafted by Gailey and Wanny who was LB coach at the time. Chan was a great X's&O's coach, but horrid at evaluating talent (edwards over fitz, lynch over freddy, ect...) . I'm hopeful that Nix made the right decision with Marrone not just as our HC, but also as an evaluator and developer of talent. I like from Marrone so far, he reminds me of a younger less arrogant Bill Parcells. As far as the selection of EJ3, I considered Nassib as the benchmark that Marrone, Hackett, and the scouting dept. could make comparisons to during evaluations. If Manuel graded out as their highest rated and potential franchise QB, I could careless when he was drafted, so long as they're right. Go Bills! Very solid first post. Welcome aboard. Wawrow seemed to be suggesting it in several posts after the hiring was announced. That's right. I remember now. Thanks Coach. Back on to the topic of this post - trading Sheppard. This comment from an Indy journalist terrifies me - Now, the Colts parted ways and got a guy in Sheppard who also knows the scheme and gives way more effort. Sheppard is a lot quicker than Hughes despite their similar stature. He won’t be out of position and can defend in coverage. Read more at http://www.rantsport...UW3J6XGBqi3D.99 "Sheppard is a lot quicker than Hughes".....Sweet Jebus what did we just trade for? Sheppard appeared to be running in wet cememt most of the time...what's this Hughes going to look like? Hopefully, he will cost us less.... I would be skeptical of the credibility of this Eric Smith person and that site. Is there some discernible track record that lends itself to thinking he knows what he's talking about? His evaluation of Sheppard immediately casts his "expertise" in doubt. Bottom line, Indy was not the only team that had a first round grade on Jerry Hughes (Buddy said the Bills also did) and Hughes was viewed as a pass rush prospect. Hughes had 4 sacks last year. His problem is not quickness. There are however credible reports which bring to question Hughes' effort and work ethic.
Thurmal34 Posted May 3, 2013 Posted May 3, 2013 . Fitz already had the previous season under Gailey when he threw 23 TDs in 14 games. So, in reality, they had 20 games upon which to reflect when making the extension -- not the "5 or 6" you suggest. This. Why did it need to get done at that time? Why couldn't they have waited? Because he was going to be a free agent.
Sisyphean Bills Posted May 3, 2013 Posted May 3, 2013 No, everyone doesn't. Even last season, Fitz performed at the level of his contract -- in fact, he posted the highest QB rating of his career (17th in the NFL). It is a fallacy that the Bills drastically overpaid for Fitz when they extended him. Actually, I wasn't quibbling about the money in the contract. I don't care how much money comes out of Ralph's pocket. The point that I was making was that they locked Fitzpatrick in as THE guy.
eball Posted May 3, 2013 Posted May 3, 2013 Actually, I wasn't quibbling about the money in the contract. I don't care how much money comes out of Ralph's pocket. The point that I was making was that they locked Fitzpatrick in as THE guy. This has gone on long enough (truly) but as I and others have pointed out, that contract didn't "lock" the Bills into anything (and Buddy said as much). It was average starter money split into, essentially, two 3-year deals, and the Bills were not harshly penalized for getting out of it when they did. Anyway, it's a new era! Let's all hope Buddy learned from his mistakes and rewrites his GM legacy.
HankBulloughMellencamp Posted May 3, 2013 Posted May 3, 2013 Whether you want to call it "good faith" or "panic", the Bills were premature and did not wait it out for a more complete evaluation. It looks like everyone agrees that they "bought high", at the peak of Fitzpatrick's success. It's not the only time either. See: Jauron, Dick. The Nix/Fitz deal has been beaten to death in this thread, but based on the above quote from Sisyphean Bills, I would say that he was indeed referring to the money as well as the choice. It'd be super great for the owners/GMs if teams could just string guys along without paying them, let's call it "market value" for argument's sake, but at some point you have to pay guys what they are worth. Teams are still in the cat-bird seat ... if the player does not live up to the contract, you can always cut them. If the contract has good enough protections built-in, which I believe the Fiitz deal did, you don't hurt yourself with too much dead money if that option needs to be exercised. And the Jauron extension, while it played out in a similar fashion to how Fitzy's deal went, has about as much to do with the Nix conversation that evolved in this thread as the price of tea in China. It is much more analogous, in my opinion, to the extension the new UB AD gave to Jeff Quinn ... but I digress. At least most seem to agree that Sheppard was not ... not ... not good.
Sisyphean Bills Posted May 3, 2013 Posted May 3, 2013 The Nix/Fitz deal has been beaten to death in this thread, but based on the above quote from Sisyphean Bills, I would say that he was indeed referring to the money as well as the choice. Do not put words in my mouth. That is not what I meant as I previously explained. This has gone on long enough (truly) but as I and others have pointed out, that contract didn't "lock" the Bills into anything (and Buddy said as much). It was average starter money split into, essentially, two 3-year deals, and the Bills were not harshly penalized for getting out of it when they did. Anyway, it's a new era! Let's all hope Buddy learned from his mistakes and rewrites his GM legacy. There is more than one way to "lock in." Again, we'll have to agree to disagree.
HankBulloughMellencamp Posted May 3, 2013 Posted May 3, 2013 Do not put words in my mouth. That is not what I meant as I previously explained. Well, sir, you basically put words into mine by suggesting that we all agree that Nix "bought high" on Fitz, which I don't agree with. I made the point earlier that if Philly had a similar 'out' built into the Mike Vick deal, I would tend to think that, especially with Chip Kelly in there, they would have exercised the 'out' by now. Hindsight obviously tells us all that Fitz didn't work out for us, but I was OK with the logic of the extension at the time of it based on the need to secure the guy we thought we finally found. I agree that we disagree.
26CornerBlitz Posted May 3, 2013 Posted May 3, 2013 I still need to know who this Kelvin Shephard guy is.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted May 4, 2013 Posted May 4, 2013 Grammar notwithstanding.. True, and the spelling is off a bit. But good thoughts well-expressed.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Can we get the OP to correct Shephard to Sheppard in the thread title for the sake of future searches? Glad you suggested this or my search would have been fruitless. I thought it would be fun to see what people were saying about the Sheppard-Hughes trade. I thought Shep was gonna turn the corner for us this year. Unfortunately, it will be with a playoff team (not ours). Why is this a big deal? I must have missed something. So, lemme get this straight: Sheppard has more tackles in one season than Hughes has in his entire three-year career and 99% of the folks on this board think it was a good trade? Did someone spike the Kool Aid or something? someone wanted sheppard??...... Wow, 10 pages.....? Did we sign him yet? Who's going to Tempo? Great. Trade a semi productive guy for a bust. Just great. This team is getting stupid. If they don't make the playoffs, screw it.
Bangarang Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Where are the people in this thread calling this trade stupid and saying how much better Sheppard is? Hughes looks great so far and will likely have an important role with us. Meanwhile, is Sheppard even going to make the Colts roster?
billsfan89 Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Where are the people in this thread calling this trade stupid and saying how much better Sheppard is? Hughes looks great so far and will likely have an important role with us. Meanwhile, is Sheppard even going to make the Colts roster? I haven't heard anything about Sheppard good or bad from the Colts seems to be a middling player for them. Loved the trade when it happened still love it now. Only criticism of the trade that was valid was about how thin we were at MLB and trading away an MLB might not be the best idea, my response was always that Sheppard could easily be replaced while Hughes had much more tantalizing potential
BUNCH OF MULARKEY Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Sixteen victories , a Jerry Hughes film
boyst Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Glad you suggested this or my search would have been fruitless. I thought it would be fun to see what people were saying about the Sheppard-Hughes trade. Hey, how dare you take what I said seriously. I will have you know that the post quoted above is no different then anything else I have said and therefore must not be taken seriously, as nothing I have ever said was worth more then the previously said item. Red cows are bad.
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Where are the people in this thread calling this trade stupid and saying how much better Sheppard is? Hughes looks great so far and will likely have an important role with us. Meanwhile, is Sheppard even going to make the Colts roster? Shep is an decent MLB.... When he was actually in the game instead of that scheitty nickel he was fairly good at hitting the hole and slowing down the running game.
GG Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Sixteen victories , a Jerry Hughes film The one starring Anthony Michael Rhinehart?
Recommended Posts