dave mcbride Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 (edited) Yeah? He was happier than me. Bill - i have reservations about the cost, but you can't knock the player selected. He's the best offensive player in a loaded draft. This is not donte whitner. Edited May 9, 2014 by dave mcbride
voodoo poonani Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 I doubt very much that Nix would have made such a deal.
jjmac Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 If you don't like this move you should thank God we didn't give a king's ransom to Houston to draft Clowney!!! Hate losing next year's #1 pick but if we were going to do it Watkins and Mack were the guys to target. Now we can go OT in the 2nd and then DE in the 3rd (or vice versa!). When do you pick a RB?
Mopreme Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 I think he would have been available at 9. Maybe Tampa would have picked him but doubt it. Not a fan of this trade.
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 Just one season? At least you're patient I am full of patience. What I am not full of is taking someone who seems like a gorramdamn clone of Mike Williams, while giving up a ton of picks in the process, leaving us overwhelmed at WR while having a sh*t ROT, a TE position which hasn't been relevant since Reimersma and a missing FS.
GG Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 Also, how many of you were naysayers in 1987 when we gave up two firsts and a second for Bennett? Our first pick in 1988, in the 2nd round? Some Thurman Thomas guy you may have heard of? Greg Bell feels slighted.
KD in CA Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 Essentially this move is putting a huge bet on 2014. If they make the playoffs and the 2015 pick ends up in the 20s, it's probably worth it. If they have a losing record, probably not. How about Cleveland....two firsts in both 2014 and 2015?? They are going to build something there.
Beebes Bubble Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 From what I've always read on the value chart picks a year out are worth one round lower, so it's basically the 9th, and a 2nd and 5th. It's a first next year, screw whatever "chart" you are looking at. A #1 is a #1.
dave mcbride Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 I think he would have been available at 9. Maybe Tampa would have picked him but doubt it. Not a fan of this trade. That's crazy talk. He would not have been there.
papazoid Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 HOW AND THE HECK IS THIS A GOOD DEAL ????? WE GOT FLEECED: #4 - 1800 POINTS #9 - 1350 POINTS #9 - 1350 POINTS 4TH - 100 POINTS total - 2800 POINTS
nucci Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 We did NOT give up a 1st round pick in 2014. Just moved up a few spots.
thewildrabbit Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 Well...They did it! I'm shocked they pulled it off...I know it sounds ridiculous but I like giving up the #1 next year more than #41 this year...We're still going to get two very good players in the 2nd and 3rd... And how can you not love the story...Bills fans gets Drafted by the Bills...I already love the kid... me too Not unhappy with the way things went down. So many stated that they thought Watkins was the best player overall
bbb Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 One 1st round pick will set them back 5 years? Glad this board wasn't around for the Bennett trade We had a quarterback in place on Halloween 1987.
Perk71 Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 They gave up the 32nd pick next year. I'm happy with the trade
nucci Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 HOW AND THE HECK IS THIS A GOOD DEAL ????? WE GOT FLEECED: #4 - 1800 POINTS #9 - 1350 POINTS #9 - 1350 POINTS 4TH - 100 POINTS total - 2800 POINTS Really? What the hell does this mean?
NoSaint Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 (edited) I normally hate these projections but if we go 4 wide it's now Williams - Stevie - woods - Watkins and cj in the backfield... Dynamic. Edited May 9, 2014 by NoSaint
Recommended Posts