RuntheDamnBall Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 Next WR went before #9, so the question you have to ask is how much better he is than the #3 guy, and was the trade worth that difference Good pickup.
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 Even if they don't, Seattle and San Fran. didn't have a clear #1 and most people think they were the 2 best teams. Fair point. And I, as a point, do dislike the term. And, had they waited until 9, or traded back, I would have defended such a choice in the extreme. But trading up, in my mind, puts an extra onus on what I expect.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 Fair point. And I, as a point, do dislike the term. And, had they waited until 9, or traded back, I would have defended such a choice in the extreme. But trading up, in my mind, puts an extra onus on what I expect. That sounds like a you problem rather than the Bills'.
LOVEMESOMEBILLS Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 Next WR went before #9, so the question you have to ask is how much better he is than the #3 guy, and was the trade worth that difference Umm Evans went #7 to T.B.
beerme1 Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 Some will never be happy here no matter who is drafted. So screw you. I will enjoy getting better under the Dougs this year. Go Bills!
NoSaint Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 Umm Evans went #7 to T.B. Right so the bills option at 9 was beckham... So the gap from Watkins to Evans matters little in the discussion was the point he was making about giving up value vs staying put
LOVEMESOMEBILLS Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 7 is before 9, isn't it? Sorry, my bad misread the post.
offyourocker Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 Well receivers really come into their game in the NFL in their third year so let's not judge or get rid of Stevie for a while.
NoSaint Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 There goes the Benjamin at 41 talks too for the crowd that didnt like Watkins
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 Fair point. And I, as a point, do dislike the term. And, had they waited until 9, or traded back, I would have defended such a choice in the extreme. But trading up, in my mind, puts an extra onus on what I expect. That sounds like a you problem rather than the Bills'. ...Yeah. It's my F*ckig problem. I hope to see improvement in the team I root for. That's my F*ckig problem Beginning my fandom at the tail end of their Super Bowl years. That's my f*cking problem. Expecting, hoping, praying for, begging against all odds that the front office makes informed, incisive decisions with knowledge that I have not. Yeah, no control over that. Seeing the FO take a risk (and make no F*cking mistake, they took one tonight), and hoping that they were right...oh my, I wish that they were correct? Good golly! That never happens in Neverland!
WotAGuy Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 (edited) With respect to Whaley's comment, I'm assuming he was saying there "wasn't that much difference" between Watkins and Evans. So, my first thought was "why not trade for Evans then, assuming it would have cost less?" But perhaps they figured the price was going to be steep either way and they may as well go all in. It's just a surprising comparison considering Watkins was the highest rated guy on their board. Must be they had Evans right up there too. Edited May 9, 2014 by WotAGuy
DrDawkinstein Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 Great move/trade, great pick. Bills just got a superstar! That was a championship move. Ready to win now. Welcome to Buffalo, Sammy! Go Bills!
NoSaint Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 With respect to Whaley's comment, I'm assuming he was saying there "wasn't that much difference" between Watkins and Evans. So, my first thought was "why not trade for Evans then, assuming it would have cost less? But perhaps they figured the price was going to be steep either way and they may as well go all in. It's just a surprising comparison considering Watkins was the highest rated guy on their board. Must be they had Evans right up there too. I've seen several in the know say that they had the two close before tonight. I'm not sure getting to 5 or 6 would be much cheaper so may as well get your guy if the difference is a 4th next year
OCinBuffalo Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 I don't understand how next year's 1st round pick keeps being transmuted into being "like a 2nd round pick". Unless every other team has traded away next year's 1st round pick and due to some unusual coincidence every team somehow misplaces them. In this case I would assume that the first round would be skipped and they start in the second round. That would make next year's 1st round pick like a 2nd round pick......wait this makes absolutely no sense either. 2nd try: No one at any position in the 1st 32 picks next year would benefit our team at all because they will suck so bad, so I will be ever so happy that the Bills won't have one of those losers on the team next year. I hope the bills turn out to be smarter than I think they are. Um. No. Again, there is no transmutation going on here. This is simply an exercise in probability. The probability that we have given away a chance to draft our 10 year answer at QB next year, given the talent on the team this year, is nearly negligable. You need to be picking top 5 to maximize the chance that you get your answer QB. The pick is the pick. It's the team, that likely pushes the value of the pick down to "very unlikely to select answer QB" territory. Consider: the reason the 6th round pick we gave away for Mike Williams was so expendable? Because the talent on this team says: that 6th round pick wasn't going to make this team.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 (edited) ...Yeah. It's my F*ckig problem. I hope to see improvement in the team I root for. That's my F*ckig problem Beginning my fandom at the tail end of their Super Bowl years. That's my f*cking problem. Expecting, hoping, praying for, begging against all odds that the front office makes informed, incisive decisions with knowledge that I have not. Yeah, no control over that. Seeing the FO take a risk (and make no F*cking mistake, they took one tonight), and hoping that they were right...oh my, I wish that they were correct? Good golly! That never happens in Neverland! Excellent, you've identified your problem. Now take a deep breath and consider this: gnashing your teeth about whether this was a good move or not (when you admittedly know little about Watkins) is about as useful as a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. It accomplishes nothing -- unless you're just here to B word for bitching sake. Which is valid, just uninspiring. With respect to Whaley's comment, I'm assuming he was saying there "wasn't that much difference" between Watkins and Evans. So, my first thought was "why not trade for Evans then, assuming it would have cost less?" But perhaps they figured the price was going to be steep either way and they may as well go all in. It's just a surprising comparison considering Watkins was the highest rated guy on their board. Must be they had Evans right up there too. It's only surprising if dw was telling the whole truth and not speaking to a reporter... You're assuming too much and looking too deep. Edited May 9, 2014 by GreggyT
Superb Owl Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 (edited) These guys are overconfident. Live or die kind of move Fixed. Edited May 9, 2014 by Just Nguyen Baby
Recommended Posts