ESPN Insider--some doubt as to how Watkins game translates at NFL leve

[Big Turk]

Lmao!!! Seriously? Supposed to be the best WR prospect in 5 years and because the Bills drafted him, now there is "doubt" as to how good he will be...

 

GTFO...let me guess Mike "nose up the Patriots @ss" Rodak wrote this?

 

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10927729/nfl-sammy-watkins-impact-not-equal-price-buffalo-bills-paid

Edited May 15, 2014 by matter2003

[FireChan]

It's not because the Bills drafted him, it's because they went all in on him.

 

There's a difference. Had some team traded up for Mack, they'd get the same articles.

[Dawgg]

This board never ceases to amaze me. The amount of kool-aid drinking following 3 straight 6-10 seasons and a bet-the-farm / mortgage-the-future trade for a wide receiver is nothing short of amazing

[Big Turk]

It's not because the Bills drafted him, it's because they went all in on him.

 

There's a difference. Had some team traded up for Mack, they'd get the same articles.

 

The price paid is only a concern if the performance doesn't warrant it. He puts up 1,000 yards and 10 TDs thus season and those same people will be calling it brilliant

[26CornerBlitz]

Lmao!!! Seriously? Supposed to be the best WR prospect in 5 years and because the Bills drafted him, now there is "doubt" as to how good he will be...

 

GTFO...let me guess Mike "nose up the Patriots @ss" Rodak wrote this?

 

http://insider.espn....falo-bills-paid

 

It's Scott Kacsmar from Football Outsiders who authored this piece.

 

My repsonse to the posting of it in the pinned Watkins thread:

 

That's largely a function of the way college defenses played against Watkins last year. In his freshman year, they didn't show him as much "respect" because he was an unproven commodity and the Tigers used him much more like a conventional WR by running different routes.

 

Someone at ESPN hasn't done their homework.

[Big Turk]

This board never ceases to amaze me. The amount of kool-aid drinking following 3 straight 6-10 seasons and a bet-the-farm / mortgage-the-future trade for a wide receiver is nothing short of amazing

 

So you are telling me you wouldn't have made that trade for AJ Green or Julio Jones?

 

This board never ceases to amaze me. The amount of kool-aid drinking following 3 straight 6-10 seasons and a bet-the-farm / mortgage-the-future trade for a wide receiver is nothing short of amazing

 

Yeah, they really bet the farm...I guess when teams just draft a player in round 1 that contributes nothing which happens all the time, like Aaron Maybin, its just a bad pick, but when they use it to get a pretty much sure-fire WR stud, its "mortgaging the future"....

 

[eball]

This board never ceases to amaze me. The amount of kool-aid drinking following 3 straight 6-10 seasons and a bet-the-farm / mortgage-the-future trade for a wide receiver is nothing short of amazing

 

"Mortgage the future" -- yeah, not having a first round pick in 2015 will DOOM the franchise for another 14 years!

[Dawgg]

"Mortgage the future" -- yeah, not having a first round pick in 2015 will DOOM the franchise for another 14 years!

 

When:

 

1) There's "reasonable" (i.e. greater than 25%) likelihood that the pick will be in the top 10

2) The team has an unproven QB and

3) The team is coming of 3 successive 6-10 finishes

 

A trade like this is not a prudent gamble to make, unless it's for a franchise QB. Classic go-for-broke strategy wreaks of a front office that knows it may not be around to face the consequences under new ownership this time next year

 

The price paid is only a concern if the performance doesn't warrant it. He puts up 1,000 yards and 10 TDs thus season and those same people will be calling it brilliant

If he puts up 1,000 yards and 10 TDs and the team still finishes 7-9 or worse, it's still a questionable trade. Surrendering next year's first round pick is essentially betting that the the pick will be later in the round (i.e. the 20's). With an unproven QB and a young roster, it's not the most prudent bet to make. I hope it turns out to be a good one, but given the information we have today, looks pretty reckless to anyone not seeing it through red, white and blue lenses.

[eball]

When:

 

1) There's "reasonable" (i.e. greater than 25%) likelihood that the pick will be in the top 10

2) The team has an unproven QB and

3) The team is coming of 3 successive 6-10 finishes

 

A trade like this is not a prudent gamble to make, unless it's for a franchise QB. Classic go-for-broke strategy wreaks of a front office that knows it may not be around to face the consequences under new ownership this time next year

 

You, and a lot of others, simply can't come to grips with the fact the Bills have evaluated their roster differently than you have.

 

They think they have their QB (it doesn't matter what you or I think).

 

They think the team will contend for the playoffs.

 

If they are correct, the 1st round pick they gave up to get a stud on the roster will be in the 20s -- not top 10.

 

Those are FACTS -- not the ramblings of a homer or pie-in-the-sky musings.

 

Just enjoy the freaking season and see if their calculated gamble (that isn't much of a gamble) pays off.

[Dean Cain]

EJ Manuel's play will be a huge factor in determining if Sammy Watkins is a success.

[bmur66]

That is the dumbest article I have read in quite awhile. I can't believe someone at ESPN got paid to spit out that garbage. Would the same thing be said about Sammy if he went to Dallas, New England, SF, Philly or other big market team on their suck up rating list?

Edited May 15, 2014 by bmur66

[Big Turk]

 

 

When:

 

1) There's "reasonable" (i.e. greater than 25%) likelihood that the pick will be in the top 10

2) The team has an unproven QB and

3) The team is coming of 3 successive 6-10 finishes

 

A trade like this is not a prudent gamble to make, unless it's for a franchise QB. Classic go-for-broke strategy wreaks of a front office that knows it may not be around to face the consequences under new ownership this time next year

 

 

If he puts up 1,000 yards and 10 TDs and the team still finishes 7-9 or worse, it's still a questionable trade. Surrendering next year's first round pick is essentially betting that the the pick will be later in the round (i.e. the 20's). With an unproven QB and a young roster, it's not the most prudent bet to make. I hope it turns out to be a good one, but given the information we have today, looks pretty reckless to anyone not seeing it through red, white and blue lenses.

 

Surrendering next year's first pick was the price of getting an elite prospect the likes of which they may not have a chance at getting again in many years...

[GG]

That is the dumbest article I have read in quite awhile. I can't believe someone at ESPN got paid to spit out that garbage. Would the same thing be said about Sammy if he went to Dallas, New England, SF, Philly or other big market team on their suck up rating list?

 

Doesn't matter where he would have ended up, but matters where he was picked and what the team gave up for him. That article wasn't about the Bills per se, but about Watkins.

 

Stop with the garbage that media picks on Buffalo as a sport. They have other things to worry about.

[Dawgg]

You, and a lot of others, simply can't come to grips with the fact the Bills have evaluated their roster differently than you have.

 

They think they have their QB (it doesn't matter what you or I think).

 

Of course they think they have their QB when they spent the #16 overall selection on him last year.

Sure, they may think they are on the verge of the playoffs given that they surrendered next year's first round pick.

And yes, if they are correct, the 1st round pick they gave up to get a stud on the roster will be in the 20s -- not top 10.

 

Still doesn't make it a good trade.

 

You don't make trades that big based on what you "think." You make them based on facts. When Atlanta traded up for Julio Jones, they had a Pro Bowl franchise QB in place (FACT), they had made the playoffs in 2 out of the past 3 years (FACT) and those facts provided them with the confidence to make the trade. The Bills are in an entirely different situation.

 

3 straight 6-10 seasons

QB with tremendous potential but still unproven (even if they justifiably think he's the guy)

Lack of depth on the roster - good roster, but many of the backups are questionable NFL players. An injury here and there can turn a good season sour.

 

It was a bad gamble to make. But if I knew I might not around here next year anyway, I might do the same thing.

[Kellyto83TD]

It's not because the Bills drafted him, it's because they went all in on him.

 

There's a difference. Had some team traded up for Mack, they'd get the same articles.

 

Bull ****. No one had nearly the cow with Atlanta for Julio Jones. Lets take off the blinders here, they are on the Bills case because we are the ones that did the move. Had the Lions they would be praised for doing it.

 

Doesn't matter where he would have ended up, but matters where he was picked and what the team gave up for him. That article wasn't about the Bills per se, but about Watkins.

 

Stop with the garbage that media picks on Buffalo as a sport. They have other things to worry about.

 

Not a sport just a way of doing business. Easy for them to just give the FU to Buffalo and anything it does. I can not wait till it pisses them off royally when we start making the playoffs again. NFLN, ESPN, CNN, CBS etal would freaking explode if we won the Superbowl!

[Dawgg]

Bull ****. No one had nearly the cow with Atlanta for Julio Jones. Lets take off the blinders here, they are on the Bills case because we are the ones that did the move. Had the Lions they would be praised for doing it.

 

Read my post above as to why Atlanta's trade is wholly different from Buffalo's trade for a top receiver. To even compare the two situations is laughable.

[CodeMonkey]

Yeah, they really bet the farm...I guess when teams just draft a player in round 1 that contributes nothing which happens all the time, like Aaron Maybin, its just a bad pick, but when they use it to get a pretty much sure-fire WR stud, its "mortgaging the future"....

Well, the Bills traded next years first and fourth round picks to move up this year and get Watkins. By definition that is "mortgaging the future".It may end up being a really good move, a really bad move, or something in between. That remains to be seen of course. But mortgaging the future is a fact.

[Kellyto83TD]

Of course they think they have their QB when they spent the #16 overall selection on him last year.

Sure, they may think they are on the verge of the playoffs given that they surrendered next year's first round pick.

And yes, if they are correct, the 1st round pick they gave up to get a stud on the roster will be in the 20s -- not top 10.

 

Still doesn't make it a good trade.

 

You don't make trades that big based on what you "think." You make them based on facts. When Atlanta traded up for Julio Jones, they had a Pro Bowl franchise QB in place (FACT), they had made the playoffs in 2 out of the past 3 years (FACT) and those facts provided them with the confidence to make the trade. The Bills are in an entirely different situation.

 

3 straight 6-10 seasons

QB with tremendous potential but still unproven (even if they justifiably think he's the guy)

Lack of depth on the roster - good roster, but many of the backups are questionable NFL players. An injury here and there can turn a good season sour.

 

It was a bad gamble to make. But if I knew I might not around here next year anyway, I might do the same thing.

 

Not a bad gamble at all. FACT This team really hasn't had a True #1 WR since Moulds and none as talented as Reed.

[Dawgg]

Surrendering next year's first pick was the price of getting an elite prospect the likes of which they may not have a chance at getting again in many years...

Fair enough. I hope he turns into a Hall of Fame player and that the Bills never look back. But this was a pretty reckless trade to make for a non-QB and if I'm a Browns fan, I feel very good about the chances of next year's pick being a good one.

[CountryCletus]

 

 

You, and a lot of others, simply can't come to grips with the fact the Bills have evaluated their roster differently than you have.

 

They think they have their QB (it doesn't matter what you or I think).

 

They think the team will contend for the playoffs.

 

If they are correct, the 1st round pick they gave up to get a stud on the roster will be in the 20s -- not top 10.

 

Those are FACTS -- not the ramblings of a homer or pie-in-the-sky musings.

 

Just enjoy the freaking season and see if their calculated gamble (that isn't much of a gamble) pays off.

 

Wait, wait, wait... Are you trying to suggest that the front office has more intel on this team than most posters do??? Hold on a second, I need to sit down and soak this all in...