Turbosrrgood Posted February 7, 2014 Posted February 7, 2014 I guess, but he'd be an UFA anyway. Exactly, if he plays for us this year...there will be no releasing him as he'll simply be a UFA.
GA BILLS FAN Posted February 7, 2014 Posted February 7, 2014 I don't think the Bills would or should (simply due to lack of value) trade him...However how can you say he's not a one-hit wonder as if it's fact? In his first 3 years of his career he had a total of 5 sacks...So his one year under Pettine (who is no longer here) is the norm, and the first 3 years are the oddities? I think for many people that is the real question...Was it just one great year because of a system that utilized him heavily? Or has he truly developed into a real pass rushing talent? It's all opinion at this time. You could look at college and how he was used in Indy and conclude the Colts didn't use him effectively. BTW, I wouldn't say the Bills used him heavily, I'd say they used him effectively, since he didn't play every snap.
Turbosrrgood Posted February 7, 2014 Posted February 7, 2014 (edited) You could look at college and how he was used in Indy and conclude the Colts didn't use him effectively. BTW, I wouldn't say the Bills used him heavily, I'd say they used him effectively, since he didn't play every snap. Everyone looks good in college, that's why they are drafted...However many don't pan out. They used him heavily in pass rushing situations, but he's not a 3 down player...That's the issue many have with him. Edited February 7, 2014 by Turbosrrgood
GA BILLS FAN Posted February 7, 2014 Posted February 7, 2014 Everyone looks good in college, that's why they are drafted...However many don't pan out. They used him heavily in pass rushing situations, but he's not a 3 down player...That's the issue many have with him. I get that he might not be a 3-down player, but in the NFL last year there were only 19 players to get 10 or more sacks, 19 ! Getting to the QB or putting pressure on him is paramount to playing effective defense in today's NFL. Just look at how Manning performed in SuperBowl or how Brady performs when under pressure, they are completely different passers. I think trading Hughes makes no sense this off-season. You can debate whether he deserves a long term extension or not, but trading away a guy that can get to the QB, is crazy when we could be on the verge of being a Top 5 defense. Add a very good LB and another cover CB for depth, resign Byrd and we are close. This is crazy talk (trading Hughes) and will only lead to another losing season.
MarkyMannn Posted February 7, 2014 Posted February 7, 2014 Are you advocating that the Bills should not resign both Dareus and Byrd? When Dareus hits FA, you bet you're butt he's going to want top 5 money for a DT. 110% guaranteed. Well let me say this..................glad it is not my decision
Tipster19 Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Could the Bills be willing to move up in the draft so they can take Stevie's replacement with Watkins? If so the Falcons might be able to work a deal with. They desperately need an edge rusher and trading them our #9 pick overall with Hughes and maybe a later rd pick in this year's draft or next might get something like this done.
dave mcbride Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 (edited) http://espn.go.com/blog/buffalo-bills/post/_/id/7143/williamsons-take-defensive-front-seven Here's someone else's take on Jerry Hughes, Lawson, Bradham, etc. It appears that everyone assumes Schwartz will be using the "wide 9" but I wouldn't be surprised if he tweaks it a bit to fit the players we have (like Pettine did). Interesting. My takeaway is that the Bills would best served if they stick with the scheme they have, more or less. Their defense was actually good this year, for chrissake. Dumping good players because they don't fit a wide nine scheme seems like the height of folly. From this piece, a wide nine isn't the best scheme for Mario, and if that's true that should end the discussion. Build the scheme around the good players you have. If the Bills don't, it'll be another example of a former Titans DC coming in and screwing up a good thing by mandating a new scheme that's inappropriate to the talent. Edited February 13, 2014 by dave mcbride
YoloinOhio Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 (edited) Interesting. My takeaway is that the Bills would best served if they stick with the scheme they have, more or less. Their defense was actually good this year, for chrissake. Dumping good players because they don't fit a wide nine scheme seems like the height of folly. From this piece, a wide nine isn't the best scheme for Mario, and if that's true that should end the discussion. Build the scheme around the good players you have. If the Bills don't, it'll be another example of a former Titans DC coming in and screwing up a good thing by mandating a new scheme that's inappropriate to the talent. It was good in certain games. I am not sure if the "wide 9" is that big of a deal. I think most teams run a version of it. Schwartz will advocate keeping Hughes if he thinks he is the best fit for the team and what they are doing... if he thinks they can upgrade or don't need him, they'll move on. I like Hughes in his role last year but this is a new year, whether we want it to change or not, it will. Blitzing or not blitzing doesn't matter as much as just getting pressure on the QB. Also, the Bills got 31 of their 57 sacks on plays that did NOT involve a blitz. Pepper Johnson will be highly involved, I think, in figuring out with Schwartz how to maximize the Bills very fine front 4.http://smartfootball...h.o41sphLi.dpbs Edited February 13, 2014 by YoloinOhio
Hazed and Amuzed Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Trading Jerry Hughes would be asinine. He's got one more year on his contract, lets see if there's a place for him in this defense. If there is, we resign him, if not let him walk. Anyone who thinks Hughes will net more than a 5th round pick is nuts. I highly doubt any team is dumb enough to risk a high draft pick for someone who may be a one year wonder, especially if that guy is a FA at the end of the season.
RuntheDamnBall Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 For all this talk of 3-down players, it might be interesting to see how many 3-down players successful teams seem to employ.
Beerball Posted February 13, 2014 Author Posted February 13, 2014 For all this talk of 3-down players, it might be interesting to see how many 3-down players successful teams seem to employ. Again, the point of the thread is "who is Hughes more valuable to, the Buffalo Bills or another team?" If he's more valuable to another team (his stock is at it's highest since he was drafted, agree?) should be Bills move him if they can get value for him?
RuntheDamnBall Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Again, the point of the thread is "who is Hughes more valuable to, the Buffalo Bills or another team?" If he's more valuable to another team (his stock is at it's highest since he was drafted, agree?) should be Bills move him if they can get value for him? That's the question and it's a good one - I guess the reason I brought that up was that I am not sure if he is more valuable to another team or the Bills. His stock is definitely the highest it's been. If Schwartz can't use him because he depends on these three-down players more (a query for which I don't have the answer) then the answer is obviously to move him providing he can fetch us something better than Kelvin Sheppard. Do we have enough information to suppose that he is more valuable to another team? Or would it just be another case of the Bills getting rid of a productive player in favor of a system for which we don't yet have the players? This is the danger.
FireChan Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Again, the point of the thread is "who is Hughes more valuable to, the Buffalo Bills or another team?" If he's more valuable to another team (his stock is at it's highest since he was drafted, agree?) should be Bills move him if they can get value for him? So you're allowed to make this thread and my trade Aaron Williams thread is, "reason enough why you shouldn't post drunk at 3 am." For shame Beerball.
RealityCheck Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Again, the point of the thread is "who is Hughes more valuable to, the Buffalo Bills or another team?" If he's more valuable to another team (his stock is at it's highest since he was drafted, agree?) should be Bills move him if they can get value for him? The problem with the point of this thread is that all of the factors involved in making any kind of informed opinion are a bit fuzzy at best. Given the lack of x's and o's knowledge amongst football fans in general, I doubt that anyone here can explain how Hughes was utilized this year in terms that don't include the phrase "passing downs" and resemble a coherent thought without vast generalities. There has to be some posters out there willing to explain some schematic bread and butter about how Hughes was used and what exactly would prevent Schwartz from keeping 10 sacks on the roster going into camp. Also, Schwartz runs nickel, dime, dollar, and quarters defenses regardless of his base the majority of snaps averaged out over his career. Why the fixation on the "wide 9" that will only see the field about 45% of the time? IF the Bills start heading to the 4th quarter up 2 scores, that percentage will start to free fall. Teams are not that exotic out of their bases anymore. The only thing that made his base 3-4 under look exotic was the clever alternating of rushers and coverage drops when not blitzing. The nickel was where the fire works happened for Pettine's D, both good and bad. Hughes and Robey appeared to thrive in the nickel. Is the Nickel defense really the lynchpin of this conversation, not the "wide 9"? I am being pretty vague too, but can someone out there explain what exactly these coaches are drawing up? I get the feeling that most of these younger coaches can run any kind of defense they want, and that "want" is really the issue. What does Schwartz want to do? What does he feel he needs to do? What does Marrone want him to do? I doubt that Schwartz was handed any sort of autonomy in the overall defensive scheme. Marrone wanted Pettine for a reason. He himself spoke at length about his personal desire to have a multiple front, pressure style defense. As for Hughes trade value, it is not high right now simply because it is cut time leading into FA. The week of the draft will likely begin an uptick in his trade value.
mattsox Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 How will Jerry Hughes fit into Schwartz' scheme? He's never used his LB's to blitz much and I don't think that Hughes can hold up as a DE. Is he someone the Bills should consider moving? What could they get for him (10 sacks, 2 forced fumbles, 46 tackles)? I don't see him having a role outside of obvious passing downs (maybe) & question whether he's worth more to someone else than the Bills. Keep!!!
Iraq Vet Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 (edited) This is a great idea.... trade Shepard for a guy (Hughes) that then out produced Shepard by a long shot... for a 4 round draft pick that may not work out. The logic is stunning. Worse yet... lets trade him for another middle of the pack TE and hope we strike gold. It is rare that trades work that well. Usually you trade your guy (a dog with fleas) for another team's dog with fleas. It is all built on hope, or else the other guy would not have been avalible in the 1st place. Unless Huges is part of a package (draft picks) that brings us Drew Brees or someone like that... why mess with it. Hughes is decent and we struck bronze (not gold) with him... leave him be. Rely on the draft and FA. Edited February 13, 2014 by Iraq Vet
FireChan Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 This is a great idea.... trade Shepard for a guy (Hughes) that then out produced Shepard by a long shot... for a 4 round draft pick that may not work out. The logic is stunning. Worse yet... lets trade him for another middle of the pack TE and hope we strike gold. It is rare that trades work that well. Usually you trade your guy (a dog with fleas) for another team's dog with fleas. It is all built on hope, or else the other guy would not have been avalible in the 1st place. Unless Huges is part of a package (draft picks) that brings us Drew Brees or someone like that... why mess with it. Hughes is decent and we struck bronze (not gold) with him... leave him be. Rely on the draft and FA. I see this as there are 3 possibilities here. 1. He continues his level of production next year and leaves for nothing when we cannot pay what he asks for. 2. He reverts to sucking next year, and is pretty much worthless on the roster as a sack specialist who relied on Pettine's schemes. 3. He performs just "ok" and we still pay him a decent amount, this leaving less money to sign Dareus, who is guaranteed to want a big pay day and is 10 times the player as Hughes, and maybe Spiller, who I don't care about but he's a fan favorite. I'd rather get a draft pick than any of those 3 scenarios.
stony Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Could the Bills be willing to move up in the draft so they can take Stevie's replacement with Watkins? If so the Falcons might be able to work a deal with. They desperately need an edge rusher and trading them our #9 pick overall with Hughes and maybe a later rd pick in this year's draft or next might get something like this done. I don't necessarily like that plan of action. It basically amounts to getting rid of our best WR and our D's best situational pass-rusher for another rookie WR. I truly believe we're an average season of QB play away from making it to the playoffs. Stevie divide's opinion, but I want some experience on that side of the ball. Adding another rookie to the mix isn't helping EJ take us to the next level. I see this as there are 3 possibilities here. 1. He continues his level of production next year and leaves for nothing when we cannot pay what he asks for. 2. He reverts to sucking next year, and is pretty much worthless on the roster as a sack specialist who relied on Pettine's schemes. 3. He performs just "ok" and we still pay him a decent amount, this leaving less money to sign Dareus, who is guaranteed to want a big pay day and is 10 times the player as Hughes, and maybe Spiller, who I don't care about but he's a fan favorite. I'd rather get a draft pick than any of those 3 scenarios. Scenario 1 isn't that bad considering his play has been "house money" when you think of it. Shep was gonna be off the team in another year anyhow. I don't think we would ever open the bank for him, so another season of 7-10 sacks is a great return on the investment, and worth more than a mid-round pick IMO.
Recommended Posts