Cost of Watkins = Typical Media Bias against Buffalo

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

Get the big picture. Whaley worked the draft like a stockbroker. The picks are commodities.

 

Yes! Players and picks are commodities. And like a pro trader he took calculated risks, and more importantly like a pro trader you only need to be right more often then you are wrong.

[BaaadThingsMan]

Stay at 9 and get the 3rd best T or the 2nd best WR, maybe the 3rd best DE type? I love the move, the compensation will be irrelevant in the long run. Watkins is one bad mofo! The teams 2nd rounder from 2013 worked out pretty well, proving good players can be had in rounds after 1.

Edited May 13, 2014 by NorCalBillsSabres

[OldNMBillsFan]

Most talking heads barely realize buffalo even has a team. They do so little show prep and research because we are irrelevant on the national stage until we start winning.

 

I cant say im surprised that most national media are mocking us over this. They also probably dont realize how a few seemingly insignificant plays last year resulted in us not finishing 9-7 but last place in the AFCE again. They probably dont realize we have significantly upgraded our run D which was a major flaw last year. Or that we probably won't have to start an undrafted rookie qb against a winnable team. Blah blah blah

 

 

This is a fact. I was watching the draft on NFL.com. After Buffalo picked Preston Brown the analysts said that it was a good pick, it allowed the Bills to move Kiko to the outside and put Brown inside to shore up the run defense. There was no mention of picking up Spikes in FA, because they were clueless. They did think that it was a significant upgrade to our run defense.

Edited May 13, 2014 by OldNMBillsFan

[K-9]

Opinion of retired NFL Scout

 

 

http://nfldraftdiamo....ls-draft-best/

 

I'm skeptical this is the opinion of a "former NFL scout." For anyone to have Seantrel Henderson as the 2nd best OT in this draft, well, what can I say? That's absurd.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Mr. WEO]

This same thread appears every year after the draft.

 

Who cares?--should be the only response.

[maryland-bills-fan]

Yikes how many posts for the same thing. Yes they gave up next years #1 so they gave up one additional #1 pick, correct. But in addition to next years #1, they used this years #1 as well. 1+1=2. That's their basis for saying 2 picks. Simple semantics people.

Sorry, but you have the semantics screwed up. The proper English is that we spend this years first and gave up next year's first round pick. When you "give up" pick(s), the universal understanding is that you gave the pick(s) to some other team in order to improve your situation. So you "give up" your seventh round pick to move up and swap picks with another team. IF you want to say that the language is that we "gave up" our third round pick to the league to draft Preston Brown, well go ahead. You might be the only person saying it that way.

 

I am stunned that people both locally & nationally question the pick. The Bills just drafted the top playmaker in the last 4-5 years!! There are people that were wishing that they would have taken a solid RT over Watkins!! Seriously?!? This guy is ELITE. I beg any of you questioning it to go watch this years Orange Bowl (it's on YouTube). Watch the whole game and then come back and report on what is wrong with Watkins game. This may very well be the best player that we have drafted since Thurman (and I'm serious about that). Please stop with the price being too high. They have tons of $ for free agency & can address holes there. You need generational players to win and the Bills just landed one.

But we did draft a top and solid RIGHT offensive tackle in the third round. In the first round, we didn't draft a LEFT offensive tackle to play RIGHT offensive tackle because that would be a waste of resources and would lead to problems down the line when that LOT demanded to be paid like a top LOT, and would probably be gone as a FA.

[Kirby Jackson]

 

But we did draft a top and solid RIGHT offensive tackle in the third round. In the first round, we didn't draft a LEFT offensive tackle to play RIGHT offensive tackle because that would be a waste of resources and would lead to problems down the line when that LOT demanded to be paid like a top LOT, and would probably be gone as a FA.

Exactly, we drafted the perfect guy to man that spot.

[BillsVet]

+1

 

Whaley is in good company when it comes to bucking the consensus opinion of the experts. In 1985 I recall that Bill Walsh's judgment was questioned for trading up in the 1st round and taking a little known receiver from a small college named Jerry RIce from Mississippi Valley State. Walsh had no 1st rounder in the 1986 draft as a result of the trade.

 

Rice struggled a little in '85 even with Joe Montana quarterbacking San Francisco. Much different era of offensive football, but WR's don't normally produce big time. Then again, some do.

 

But look at that '86 draft San Francisco had: Charles Haley, Steve Wallace, Tom Rathman, Tim McKyer, John Talyor, and Don Griffin. Walsh was a mastermind and one of the few in the league who could have a draft like that.

[Big Turk]

 

 

I'm skeptical this is the opinion of a "former NFL scout." For anyone to have Seantrel Henderson as the 2nd best OT in this draft, well, what can I say? That's absurd.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

Why? Colt Lyerla was probably better than Ebron talent wise but was a UFA because of off the field issues and acting reprehensibly on social media...

 

Players fall a long way regardless of talent if you are an idiot

Edited May 13, 2014 by matter2003

[major]

We will be looked down upon until we win. I hoping a new owner will bring a winning culture to obd

[Dorkington]

The difference, and what doesnt seem to brought up enough, is that even first round picks are boom or bust. I dont think anyone argues that Sammy is one of the most if not THE most bust free players in this or any draft. That's the reason it is a good trade. If they did it for Greg Robinson, even though he is very highly regarded, he still has a decent chance to be a bust. Half the first round picks are busts, not very good, or average players. Watkins is as sure of a sure thing as you can get. If you get one good player and one not so good, is that better than Sammy Watkins? I don't think so.

 

Again, time will only tell. But people arent factoring in the bust percentage. Before the draft, a #1 seems like a lot. Two years after the draft, only half of them will.

 

Yeah, I factored the boom or bust thing into my "C". If you use one #1 on a guy, a lot of times it's kind of a 50/50 chance on if you're getting greatness, or mediocre/bust. You use two #1s on a guy? That increases the risk, because you could wiff with one draftpick one year, and hit with the next... now we have both of those #1s invested in one guy.

 

I'm not crapping on the move. I think it's exciting. I just think it's risky, and considering what we have at HC/OC/QB it's even riskier. Hence the C.

 

I think Watkins, himself, looks to be an A+ player from what I've seen and heard (I'm no college expert, as has been said many times).

[Kelly the Dog]

Yeah, I factored the boom or bust thing into my "C". If you use one #1 on a guy, a lot of times it's kind of a 50/50 chance on if you're getting greatness, or mediocre/bust. You use two #1s on a guy? That increases the risk, because you could wiff with one draftpick one year, and hit with the next... now we have both of those #1s invested in one guy.

 

I'm not crapping on the move. I think it's exciting. I just think it's risky, and considering what we have at HC/OC/QB it's even riskier. Hence the C.

 

I think Watkins, himself, looks to be an A+ player from what I've seen and heard (I'm no college expert, as has been said many times).

But I think the point is, Watkins is elite, not just very good. It remains to be seen, of course. But if one of your #9-#15 picks is going to hit versus miss out of two, the "hit" guy is just going to be very good. Let's say CJ, Gilmore, kind of good. There is every reason to believe that Watkins is going to be AJ Green/Julio Jones kind of elite.

 

It hasn't happened yet either way, so all we can do whether we like it or not is to hope he is a star.

[Kirby Jackson]

 

But I think the point is, Watkins is elite, not just very good. It remains to be seen, of course. But if one of your #9-#15 picks is going to hit versus miss out of two, the "hit" guy is just going to be very good. Let's say CJ, Gilmore, kind of good. There is every reason to believe that Watkins is going to be AJ Green/Julio Jones kind of elite.

 

It hasn't happened yet either way, so all we can do whether we like it or not is to hope he is a star.

This exactly where I am Kelly. Would you trade Gilmore & Crabtree (I know that they are not on the same team) for AJ Green? I think that I would. The gap between Green and Crabtree would have to be greater than the gap between Gilmore and whoever took that spot (not to mention cap savings).

[Dragonborn10]

Hmmm I don't seem to recall the media bias against Buffalo when they made the playoffs regularly... The Bills have sucked for a decade and a half. What do you expect? Win some games and they will get some respect.

[Kirby Jackson]

Hmmm I don't seem to recall the media bias against Buffalo when they made the playoffs regularly... The Bills have sucked for a decade and a half. What do you expect? Win some games and they will get some respect.

The job of the analyst is to evaluate the talent that they added in the draft. It is not to judge the last 15 years. If they don't like the players that they added or the positions that they filled than they should get a low grade. It doesn't seem like that is the case.

[Rocky Landing]

Trading up for Watkins was a high risk/high reward move. That term, "high risk/high reward," means that there is the potential for high net gains, as well as the potential for high net losses. (In this context, I am talking about net gains and losses in very general terms.) What the analysts are seeing (and it certainly is debatable), is that the likelihood of net losses outweighs the likelihood of net gains. It's hard for Bills fans, especially during the offseason, to take off the rose-colored glasses. But, to just look at the potential rewards, while ignoring the risks is short-sighted. And, at any rate, regardless of how Watkins pans out, it's going to be very frustrating a year from now to spend the entire first round of the draft twiddling our thumbs.

Edited May 13, 2014 by Rocky Landing

[smapdi]

I love the move by Whaley to get Watkins. He was by far and away the most talented offensive player in the draft & truly an ELITE WR prospect . Before the draft, I was hesitant to move up because I felt for sure it would cost us our 2nd and there was no way I wanted to lose that pick. I knew therror woukd be a 1st round talent there, and there was.

 

Whaley did a masterful job. I will gladly give up next year's 1st in exchange for the best WR prospect to come out since Green/Jones. You rarely are ever in position to get a player of Sammy Watkins caliber. Whaley realized that & made it happen. On top of that, he kept our 2nd and turned that into a starting 1st round talent RT. I would be willing to bet Cyrus K will be better then whomever they could've picked with their 2015 1st.

 

The argument of we should've just stayed put and took Odell Beckam is bunk. Watkins is in the elite class of WRs that can do it all & has size. Beckam is just another small burner; we already have that in Goodwin. Watkins is a 6'1" / 212lb #1 WR that plays even bigger. We haven't had a true #1 with his size and skill set since Moulds.

 

All the haters that aren't just trolls will quit their whining as soon as Watkins takes his first 5 yard screen pass 70 yards to the house. Book it

Edited May 13, 2014 by smapdi

[zow2]

The most irritating thing is when I see media or posters incorrectly state we gave up 2 first round picks. We only lost ONE first round pick in the trade up. We traded 2 and got back one first rounder. 2-1 = 1 and for the life of me I can not figure out why that math equation is difficult for the media and posters on this board to grasp.

 

Once again, the ONLY cost associated with getting in position to get Watkins was the additional picks.

 

I just prefer to say we swapped 1st round picks with the Browns in 2014 (advantage Buffalo by moving up 5 slots!).... and we gave Cleveland a 1st and 4th rounder next year. I don't see how it's that hard to understand? We didn't give the Browns 2 first rounders.

Edited May 13, 2014 by zow2

[thewildrabbit]

NFL analysts have been conditioned that every time the Buffalo Bills made a move the last 14 years they have seen it blown up in Bills fans face.

 

This really was a huge gamble, and everyone that is cheering for it now...will be bitching like crazy on next years draft day should Watkins not take the league by storm this year.

 

 

This trade wouldn't even be an issue if it were for a QB. But its not, its for a WR from Clemson. Remember the last #1 pick from Clemson, a #9? Chan Gailey announced Spiller would be the starting RB in 2010, and he came out and fell on his face. Couldn't block, couldn't run routes, couldn't find a hole, and was benched after four plays. A very lackluster first year.

 

 

I'm hoping that the kid does great this year, leads the league in receptions, TD's and gets rookie of the year. Makes the pro bowl and saves everyone's job. But who really knows what will happen?

[RussellDopeland]

I wouldn't concern myself with the national media pundits and their views of this team. They certainly would've praised the Cowboys or Jets if they had been the ones to make a deal to move up for Watkins. That's just the nature of the national media types when it pertains to the Bills. This franchise is considered to be a joke- let them continue to think that way. If (and I know this is a BIG if) the Bills were to finally put it all together and win 11 games this year- then the national media people will be in love with this "loser" team that has risen above all expectations. I like the idea of the Bills just lurking in the background without much attention or praise from the media establishment. The reason I do is because of the fact that if the Bills were to rise-up and start kicking New England's ass, their collective jaws would drop. Let's be honest- they know next to nothing about this team or its roster- that's why they keep saying that the Bills gave up too much given "all of the needs" that they have. In truth- there aren't many needs, or holes, on this roster at all.