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

[Wayne Cubed]

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.

 

I don't think it's a media bias, this article. But I think he's way off in his judgment of Watkins.

 

He talks about how he has a high YAC and that won't translate to the NFL. Sure maybe he won't run the same plays, but the reason he had such a high YAC was because they ran a lot of short throws and screens to him. Why did they do that? Well in Watkins freshman year, he wasn't respected as a receiver, so they played a lot of press coverage on him. He would push right past the press and posted ridiculous numbers for a freshman. That meant they had to change how they defended him. Enter cover 2 and cover 3. The cornerback would play off the line and basically give Watkins a 5 yard cushion. Watkins be the strong receiver he is, with a 5 yard head start would just plow over the cb for another 5-10 yards. The offense took what the defense gave them, which was a cushion on Watkins.

[Dawgg]

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...

A front office that has presided over 3 straight 6-10 seasons?

[CodeMonkey]

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...

They do, of course. But man I have to tell you, the last 14 seasons has me wondering at times

Edited May 15, 2014 by CodeMonkey

[C.Biscuit97]

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.

 

And based on the Bills' track record, you probably should. I don't backpedal and wasn't a fan of trading up for any player in the draft. Too risky and I agree that it really should be for a QB. That said, given the rules of today's NFL, receiver has never been more valuable. Also, it's two fold because you are giving your (hopefully) franchise Qb the true #1 target he needs. Personally, I thought we need a Mike Evans type but without a doubt Watkins was talked about as being one of the special talents of the draft.

[The Jokeman]

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.

 

It has nothing to do with the Bills, there was some doubt even before the draft as here's something from an SI article:

 

When you picture the most physically gifted and dominating receivers in today’s NFL, the list goes something like this: Calvin Johnson, A.J. Green, Andre Johnson, Dez Bryant, Brandon Marshall, Larry Fitzgerald, Julio Jones, Josh Gordon and Demaryius Thomas. They are the best of the best, true nightmare matchups, players for whom defensive coordinators must tailor their game plans.

 

What do they have in common? They are all extremely strong on the ball in contested scenarios, and each is a perfect blend of size, speed and overall athletic ability. And did I mention size? All of the aforementioned but Bryant and Andre Johnson measured 6-foot-3 or taller at their respective combines. And those two—who aren’t exactly smurfs at a combine-measured 6-foot-2—have vertical jumps of at least 38 inches (not to mention 34-inch arms) that allow them to play even bigger.

 

Watkins is being talked about as a sure-fire top-10 pick in next month’s draft, perhaps even a top-five pick, which means people are expecting him to have the same impact as today’s top receivers. Yet he stands a mere six-feet and three-quarters of an inch, with 32-inch arms, and has a pedestrian 34-inch vertical. Which means Watkins will have to break the mold in order to live up to the hype.

http://mmqb.si.com/2014/04/15/sammy-...son-nfl-draft/

[GG]

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!

 

Ok, let's play along. What's in it for these guys to intentionally make Buffalo look bad? Do they get a cookie? Do they get a new iPad for every bad story about Buffalo? There has to be some motivation for them to intentionally trash Buffalo, right?

 

Or are they simply calling it like they see it from an organization with the longest streak of futility in the league?

 

I don't think it's a media bias, this article. But I think he's way off in his judgment of Watkins.

 

Agree, which is a totally separate point from the mythical sport of Buffalo bashing.

[Kelly the Dog]

A front office that has presided over 3 straight 6-10 seasons?

Not the same guy drafting or making trades, not any of the same guys coaching, not the same pro player personnel guy, not the same top scout, not the same guy making ultimate money decisions.

 

Other than that, it's exactly the same people making decisions as the 3 straight 6-10 seasons.

[C.Biscuit97]

It has nothing to do with the Bills, there was some doubt even before the draft as here's something from an SI article:

 

[/background][/i][/size][/font][/color]

http://mmqb.si.com/2....son-nfl-draft/

 

You could find that about almost every player before the draft. mike Mayock said he'd take Gabbert over Newton. But the general thought was that Watkins was one of the special type of wrs.

[John from Riverside]

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.

 

Could you please explain how they went "all in him"

 

Did they trade all their draft picks this year? Next year?

 

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.

 

You know...this would make more sense if this was the ONLY thing the bills have done this offseason.....

 

Im not going to get into the list because Im sure you already know....but we have made moves in trades, and free agents......and we had ALL of our draft picks this year except for a 6th......

 

This team is better at nearly every position then it was last year and this is WITHOUT the Sammy Watkins pick

[Dawgg]

And based on the Bills' track record, you probably should. I don't backpedal and wasn't a fan of trading up for any player in the draft. Too risky and I agree that it really should be for a QB. That said, given the rules of today's NFL, receiver has never been more valuable. Also, it's two fold because you are giving your (hopefully) franchise Qb the true #1 target he needs. Personally, I thought we need a Mike Evans type but without a doubt Watkins was talked about as being one of the special talents of the draft.

I share those thoughts. WR is definitely important, no doubt about that - but is it so valuable that you should surrender next year's first round pick? Especially when your QB has yet to establish himself as a franchise QB? It was a reckless risk given where the franchise sits today. Again, I hope I'm wrong and Watkins pushes the team to a playoff berth but even the very best receivers take some time to acclimate the NFL game (Julio Jones included).

[C.Biscuit97]

I share those thoughts. WR is definitely important, no doubt about that - but is it so valuable that you should surrender next year's first round pick? Especially when your QB has yet to establish himself as a franchise QB? It was a reckless risk given where the franchise sits today. Again, I hope I'm wrong and Watkins pushes the team to a playoff berth but even the very best receivers take some time to acclimate the NFL game (Julio Jones included).

 

I generally agree with all this. I don't know if I would have do it either. At the same time, maybe it's about time the Bills try something different.

 

1) A 1st isn't guaranteed to bring anything. We know how the Bills have spent 1st in the past. Also, there's no rule saying the Bills can't trade back into the 1st.

 

2) Would you trade a 1st and 4th for Julio Jones or Antonio Bryant (assuming he didn't have the off field issues)?

 

3) I would have kept SJ as a veteran leader and to get some of the pressure of Watkins.

 

I agree it's a big risk. It makes me nervous. I probably won't have done it. At the same point, it shows confidence in EJ and Watkins. It's about time this franchise shows some balls. Let's hope Watkins is the truth.

[1B4IDie]

The Artice is 100% true.

If the Bills use Watkins exactly like Clemson used Watkins then he will not have the same stats.

There is no arguing with that statement.

 

However it is an asinine premise. Obviously Watkins will be used differently and will not catch as many passes behind the line of scrimmage.

 

This is true:

"This is why Buffalo continues to miss the postseason. Big resources are used on players who turn out to be adequate, but not great. Watkins and Manuel have to make each other great, but it's going to take much more than dozens of bubble screens to get there in the NFL."

Again no one in their sane mind would think that Buffalo is just going to throw more bubble screens with Watkins and that is it.

 

Buffalo is everyone's favorite whipping boy.

Edited May 15, 2014 by Why So Serious?

[ko12010]

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

 

 

 

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"....

Exactly. I don't why people keep saying this--this wasn't a future-mortgaging decision at all. It was a decent price to pay to move up to select a top notch prospect. Whaley and co. may be more inclined to use future draft picks in deals than other front offices given the Bills owner situation, but in no way is he screwing up the team's future to get better instantly. He's being aggressive, and still building a long-term contender. People just LOVE to parrot what the dumb dumbs on ESPN and other networks say. So annoying.

[RussellDopeland]

Getting Watkins was about getting an "elite" talent in this draft. To be able to draft such elite talent, one either has to A) Draft in the top five or B) Facilitate a trade to move up to that level. That's exactly what the Bills did. There were 4 elite talents in this draft (Clowney, Watkins, Robinson, Mack)- then a drop-off. Whaley targeted his guy and went up to nab him. This team has been devoid of "elite" talents for years. On the roster currently, who's elite? Mario Williams and who else? Maybe Glenn and Alonso can become elite players- it's hard to say. We have very good players (Dareus, Kyle Williams, Spiller), but not many elite ones. So I'm on-board with the effort to add elite talent to a roster that shows significant promise and upside. As far as this article is concerned- the national media considers the Bills to be a laughingstock- thus they will question any/all moves this team makes until such time as the Bills become a legitimate playoff team once again. There's nothing that can done about that but wait and see, not to mention hope that the Bills can do exactly that. ESPN can instead focus on the Jets, Cowboys and Manziel all they want. And instead of spending your hard-earned money on ESPN "Insider", go into your bathroom and flush that money down the toilet (the end-result is the same).

[Lurker]

And instead of spending your hard-earned money on ESPN "Insider", go into your bathroom and flush that money down the toilet (the end-result is the same).

More satisfying as well...

[xsoldier54]

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

This guy was the consensus best receiver in the draft and filled a huge need. They did not "bet the farm" as some have claimed. They gave fair value in a trade to get the player that they wanted and desperately needed. That's how you change three straight 6-10 seasons, not by sitting back and doing nothing. I am not a kook aid drinker by any means and am as critical as the next guy if I think they have done something stupid. In this case, I cannot agree that they have. I think it was a smart move that will pay dividends. Just my opinion, but that's what I think.

[Gordio]

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.

 

Sorry man but your a little off base here. The old regime would of sat tight @ 9, took ODB & called it a day. That safe approach, not going for broke line of thinking has lead us to 14 non playoff seasons. I got to give the Bills credit, they went out & got the most dynamic player in the draft. Was it the right move? Only time will tell, but doing the same ole same ole crap that has been going on for the last decade + wasn't going to cut it & I give Whaley props for going out & getting his guy.

[TC in St. Louis]

The Bills are free to trade their way back into the 1st if they so choose next year.....

And they can sign Free Agents to compensate for that.

All is not lost.

Let's get the car on the road.

[Dawgg]

Sorry man but your a little off base here. The old regime would of sat tight @ 9, took ODB & called it a day. That safe approach, not going for broke line of thinking has lead us to 14 non playoff seasons. I got to give the Bills credit, they went out & got the most dynamic player in the draft. Was it the right move? Only time will tell, but doing the same ole same ole crap that has been going on for the last decade + wasn't going to cut it & I give Whaley props for going out & getting his guy.

CJ Spiller was once considered the most dynamic player in the draft. I think Watkins is a very very very good player. But that doesn't make it a good trade. The old regime would have sat tight at 9 and reached for a player with a late first round grade (see: Donte Whitner). The new regime actually knows how to draft well, which is all the more reason why I think this trade was reckless.

 

You have to consider where the franchise is when making the trade. 3 straight 6-10 seasons. "Potential" franchise QB, yet unproven. Questionable depth. This makes it a high risk trade because the probability of another subpar season is by no means insignificant. Under these circumstances, do you surrender next year's first rounder to move up 5 spots? I don't think so and nor would most top front offices.

 

Having said that, if I think there's a reasonable chance I'll be an unemployed GM next year when a new owner cleans house, I make that deal every time.

[BuffaloRebound]

What is the point of writing this article after the draft? I can at least respect the si.com article raising questions before the draft. ESPN jumped the shark a long time ago. They are Disney's cash cow and 90% of what they spew is bottom-line driven and to get clicks.