No first round pick? Why not trade Sammy?

[What a Tuel]

A team in the bottom of the first round would probably give up a first rounder for Beckham to maybe get over the edge in a push for a Super Bowl but not for Sammy. Beckham had a much better season in less games. WRs are just not valuable except for maybe 2-3 and Sammy didn't prove he's one of those guys this year. I doubt anyone would give a first rounder for him and definitely not a top first rounder

 

No Sammy didn't prove that to you because he didn't do better than Beckham.

 

I saw the change in attitude amongst many people as soon as Beckham started doing well (mostly the fingertip catch). They all went to their computers and looked up when Beckham was drafted, and monday morning quarterbacked the draft pick.

 

That is when people started devaluing Sammy Watkins. The funny part is that he is the same WR that we drafted him to be, and he will be successful. The Bills failed to do their part and get him a QB. Constantly had to adjust to the ball all year and make circus catches, or play defense.

 

Of course beckham gets a first, but he's on a completely different level than Watkins. Only in the mind of bills homers are they somehow equals

We will come back to this debate in 3-4 years.

Edited January 2, 2015 by What a Tuel

[jletha]

 

 

No Sammy didn't prove that to you because he didn't do better than Beckham.

 

I saw the change in attitude amongst many people as soon as Beckham started doing well (mostly the fingertip catch). They all went to their computers and looked up when Beckham was drafted, and monday morning quarterbacked the draft pick.

 

That is when people started devaluing Sammy Watkins. The funny part is that he is the same WR that we drafted him to be, and he will be successful. The Bills failed to do their part and get him a QB. Constantly had to adjust to the ball all year and make circus catches, or play defense.

 

I love Sammy and I think he'll be a very good WR for us in the future especially with a good QB. I definitely am not for trading him at all. My point is that he won't draw a first round pick from a team, especially not a team in the top half. I'm not devaluing him and his future but facts are facts. He went for less than 1000 yards, had some games where he was non-existent and dropped way more passes than he should have. If a team were looking to trade for a WR they would likely trade for Beckham first. My opinion of Sammy didn't change at all with Backham breaking out, my opinions were formed by watching him every game.

[What a Tuel]

I love Sammy and I think he'll be a very good WR for us in the future especially with a good QB. I definitely am not for trading him at all. My point is that he won't draw a first round pick from a team, especially not a team in the top half. I'm not devaluing him and his future but facts are facts. He went for less than 1000 yards, had some games where he was non-existent and dropped way more passes than he should have. If a team were looking to trade for a WR they would likely trade for Beckham first. My opinion of Sammy didn't change at all with Backham breaking out, my opinions were formed by watching him every game.

 

There are 8 wide receivers who had 1,000+ yard rookie seasons in 20 years.

 

Sammy had 982.

 

You are devaluing him because of Beckham in every post. "if a team were looking to trade for a WR, they would trade for Beckham first". What does Beckham have to do with trading for a WR? Do you not trade for Drew Brees because you would prefer Peyton Manning? Rough comparison I know, but you get the gist. You may not think he is worth it, but we will have to agree to disagree because I think he clearly is and I think a few WR needy teams would jump at the chance.

Edited January 2, 2015 by What a Tuel

[enlightener]

yes and since we need a guard, lets just trade glen and henderson for one, problem solved!

 

you realize youd be trading in essence, two first rounders and a 4rth for one first rounder? this is what in mathematics is called, "an idiot trying to calculate something"

[jletha]

 

 

There are 8 wide receivers who had 1,000+ yard rookie seasons in 20 years.

 

Sammy had 982.

 

You are devaluing him because of Beckham in every post. "if a team were looking to trade for a WR, they would trade for Beckham first". What does Beckham have to do with trading for a WR? Do you not trade for Drew Brees because you would prefer Peyton Manning? Rough comparison I know, but you get the gist. You may not think he is worth it, but we will have to agree to disagree because I think he clearly is and I think a few WR needy teams would jump at the chance.

 

I guess we will agree to disagree. But saying person 1 is more valuable than person 2 doesn't mean I'm de-valuing person 2. It's not like I my thoughts and perceived value of Sammy dropped when Beckham came around. If you had a choice between Manning and Brees you would likely take Manning. likewise I think teams would rather have Beckham than Sammy and therefor would be willing to give up more for him. That's all I'm trying to say

[What a Tuel]

I guess we will agree to disagree. But saying person 1 is more valuable than person 2 doesn't mean I'm de-valuing person 2. It's not like I my thoughts and perceived value of Sammy dropped when Beckham came around. If you had a choice between Manning and Brees you would likely take Manning. likewise I think teams would rather have Beckham than Sammy and therefor would be willing to give up more for him. That's all I'm trying to say

 

But there are plenty of players that are better or worse. Beckham may not be on the table, but Watkins would. (not really though, because we both agree its ridiculous ) It just sounds as if you are saying Beckham or no one else is worth it. I don't think that's the way to approach it. But to each their own.

[Nitro]

Logic is never a prerequisite for starting a discussion on TBD. Trading one of you most talented players on your team and the best WR they have had in a decade for a first round draft pick in a lean draft year. Every draft is not the same. Last years draft was very deep. Experts have said this will be a down year in talent. No trade. Work to build up the core of the team. Hire a rock solid forward thinking Head Coach and an Offensive Coordinator who can design an offense that exploits the talents of the players. The fans deserve a shot at the play offs.

[ndirish1978]

I find it fascinating how organizations (and fans) think. A few questions to clarify what I mean:

 

1. If you're the Vikings, would you trade Bridgewater for Sammy? I think we all agree that the answer is "of course not."

 

2. Some fans bemoan the trading up to draft Sammy rather than taking a QB with our initial pick, or even trading down to take a QB later. The same fans agree that Sammy had a very good rookie season (particularly given the fact that he didn't exactly have great QB play feeding him), and that his star is on the rise. Yet they never consider trading Sammy for what we need more: a QB, or the chance to draft a QB.

 

This is what economists call the "endowment effect." You tend to overvalue what you have, and undervalue what you could get.

 

http://en.wikipedia....ndowment_effect

 

This is something some great sports GMs like Billy Beane do not run afoul of. Think you need a pitcher to finally make it to a World Series? Go get Lester and Samardzija! That doesn't work? Let Lester go, trade Samardzija, reload with some other players! If you want a QB now your best trade chip is Sammy and it's not even close. So at least consider it ... all you'd be doing is a classic Billy Beane transaction: you traded up to try to get it done in 2014, you came close, but didn't make it. Now you're stuck with no first round pick in 2015? Simply undo that by trading Sammy. No harm done. But it takes guts, which most GMs lack.

 

 

Are you TRYING to start the year off with the worst post of 2015? It's ambitious, but I think you've legitimately got a shot!

[The Frankish Reich]

Are you TRYING to start the year off with the worst post of 2015? It's ambitious, but I think you've legitimately got a shot!

You're right. We went 9-7! A winning record! Why fix what ain't broken! And dammit, we have the best tailgating experience in the NFL! Such are the low expectations of Bills fans ...

[Section242]

I find it fascinating how organizations (and fans) think. A few questions to clarify what I mean:

 

1. If you're the Vikings, would you trade Bridgewater for Sammy? I think we all agree that the answer is "of course not."

 

2. Some fans bemoan the trading up to draft Sammy rather than taking a QB with our initial pick, or even trading down to take a QB later. The same fans agree that Sammy had a very good rookie season (particularly given the fact that he didn't exactly have great QB play feeding him), and that his star is on the rise. Yet they never consider trading Sammy for what we need more: a QB, or the chance to draft a QB.

 

This is what economists call the "endowment effect." You tend to overvalue what you have, and undervalue what you could get.

 

http://en.wikipedia....ndowment_effect

 

This is something some great sports GMs like Billy Beane do not run afoul of. Think you need a pitcher to finally make it to a World Series? Go get Lester and Samardzija! That doesn't work? Let Lester go, trade Samardzija, reload with some other players! If you want a QB now your best trade chip is Sammy and it's not even close. So at least consider it ... all you'd be doing is a classic Billy Beane transaction: you traded up to try to get it done in 2014, you came close, but didn't make it. Now you're stuck with no first round pick in 2015? Simply undo that by trading Sammy. No harm done. But it takes guts, which most GMs lack.

 

Comparing to MLB is tough. I believe the A's get a 2nd rd pick for Lester signing with the Cubs. Would get Cubs pick in 1st but it's protected. Also can't trade draft picks in MLB. Also the A's collapsed after the Lester trade.

 

I'd trade any guy on this roster for a proven elite QB. With that said the valuable trade parts on the Bills are more valuable to the Bills than they are to other teams. Like buying a new car, once you drive it off the lot it's value goes down.

 

Watkins had a decent season and I think because he's good already we're also diminishing him. As a rookie with below average QB play he was the Bills best play-maker. Anything less than an elite QB then no.

[truth on hold]

 

 

 

We will come back to this debate in 3-4 years.

I think you and some others are awfully confused in this entire thread. One on hand it centers on Sammy's trade value now, then you say no wait 3-4 years. This thread would have been better off not having started.

Edited January 2, 2015 by JTSP

[What a Tuel]

I think you and some others are awfully confused in this entire thread. One on hand it centers on Sammy's trade value now, then you say no wait 3-4 years. This thread would have been better off not having started.

 

No my statement was derived from your post that Beckham is on a whole different level. If you were limiting it to trade value at this point in time then I would agree.

 

However, something tells me those "Bills Homers" you were speaking of aren't thinking of trade value though. Regardless I think we both agree it's not safe to say one is leagues better than the other before we give it a few years right?

 

You're right. We went 9-7! A winning record! Why fix what ain't broken! And dammit, we have the best tailgating experience in the NFL! Such are the low expectations of Bills fans ...

 

Do you think Foles throwing to Woods, and Goodwin is really even 9-7 material? I like Woods and all but geez. Next thing we know, we will hear that "QBs cant be expected to be good if they have noone to throw to! Look at Cam Newton"

 

For that matter, do you think maybe its a possibility we could get a QB without giving away our best offensive weapon? If you think we are a QB away from the playoffs then let's trade next years 1st round pick for someone. Imagine your dream QB WITH Watkins.

Edited January 2, 2015 by What a Tuel

[Canadian Bills Fan]

I find it fascinating how organizations (and fans) think. A few questions to clarify what I mean:

 

1. If you're the Vikings, would you trade Bridgewater for Sammy? I think we all agree that the answer is "of course not."

 

2. Some fans bemoan the trading up to draft Sammy rather than taking a QB with our initial pick, or even trading down to take a QB later. The same fans agree that Sammy had a very good rookie season (particularly given the fact that he didn't exactly have great QB play feeding him), and that his star is on the rise. Yet they never consider trading Sammy for what we need more: a QB, or the chance to draft a QB.

 

This is what economists call the "endowment effect." You tend to overvalue what you have, and undervalue what you could get.

 

http://en.wikipedia....ndowment_effect

 

This is something some great sports GMs like Billy Beane do not run afoul of. Think you need a pitcher to finally make it to a World Series? Go get Lester and Samardzija! That doesn't work? Let Lester go, trade Samardzija, reload with some other players! If you want a QB now your best trade chip is Sammy and it's not even close. So at least consider it ... all you'd be doing is a classic Billy Beane transaction: you traded up to try to get it done in 2014, you came close, but didn't make it. Now you're stuck with no first round pick in 2015? Simply undo that by trading Sammy. No harm done. But it takes guts, which most GMs lack.

 

 

 

 

You @$#hole

 

CBF

[truth on hold]

 

 

No my statement was derived from your post that Beckham is on a whole different level. If you were limiting it to trade value at this point in time then I would agree.

 

However, something tells me those "Bills Homers" you were speaking of aren't thinking of trade value though. Regardless I think we both agree it's not safe to say one is leagues better than the other before we give it a few years right?

 

 

Again you're very confused. My comment clearly was about trade value now as I said "of course beckham gets a 1st". And I never said "leagues" better just that he's on another level. My long term view on them is not relevant to the subject of this thread, and clearly it was not referenced here either.

[YoloinOhio]

 

Your question is wrong. The correct questions are:

1. Can we make the playoffs and be competitive in them over the next 2 seasons with Sammy at WR and Manuel or Matt Moore at QB?

2. Can we make the playoffs and be competitive in them over the next 2 seasons without Sammy at WR but with someone like Foles, or the 3rd best QB in the draft, or even Winston (if he drops) at QB?

 

I think the answer is clearly "no" to Q.1, and very possibly "yes" to Q.2.

why is the answer to the first question clearly no?

[RogerNapalm]

This thread made me GOL. (Groan out loud)

[Fadingpain]

You're right. We went 9-7! A winning record! Why fix what ain't broken! And dammit, we have the best tailgating experience in the NFL! Such are the low expectations of Bills fans ...

 

I don't disagree with your fundamental assumptions here at all, unlike a lot of posters in this thread.

 

If Sammy can be moved for a quality QB one way or the other, you move him. Period. That's a no brainer.

 

But as Ludwig Mies van der Rohe once said: "God is in the details."

 

What's the plan? What are you coupling with Sammy? What are you getting in return at QB? How proven is that QB?

 

It has to be the right deal.

 

Someone up thread said if he could get a young top 10 QB for Alonso and Sammy, both are gone tomorrow. Hell, throw in some draft picks too! Until we have "the guy" at QB, we will more or less be on the outside looking in.

 

Not to change topics, but Whaley has amply demonstrated that he doesn't get this. Our QB situation has been and remains a train wreck. Whaley should be gone for this reason alone.

[What a Tuel]

Again you're very confused. My comment clearly was about trade value now as I said "of course beckham gets a 1st". And I never said "leagues" better just that he's on another level. My long term view on them is not relevant to the subject of this thread, and clearly it was not referenced here either.

I'm not confused at all. I very clearly stated if you meant one thing thing I agree. If you meant the other then I don't.

 

We clearly agree that in terms of trade value at this moment in time, beckham is worth more. Long term is different but you weren't commenting on that.

 

I think you have fooled yourself into thinking this is some type of battle that you need to win or lose.

 

It's just a conversation.

[SmokinES3]

You're right. We went 9-7! A winning record! Why fix what ain't broken! And dammit, we have the best tailgating experience in the NFL! Such are the low expectations of Bills fans ...

God forbid some outside the box type thinking after 15 years... We don't take kindly to original thought around these parts.

I don't disagree with your fundamental assumptions here at all, unlike a lot of posters in this thread.

 

If Sammy can be moved for a quality QB one way or the other, you move him. Period. That's a no brainer.

 

But as Ludwig Mies van der Rohe once said: "God is in the details."

 

What's the plan? What are you coupling with Sammy? What are you getting in return at QB? How proven is that QB?

 

It has to be the right deal.

 

Someone up thread said if he could get a young top 10 QB for Alonso and Sammy, both are gone tomorrow. Hell, throw in some draft picks too! Until we have "the guy" at QB, we will more or less be on the outside looking in.

 

Not to change topics, but Whaley has amply demonstrated that he doesn't get this. Our QB situation has been and remains a train wreck. Whaley should be gone for this reason alone.

+1,000

Nice post. Though I'm not sure it all falls on Whaley. Buddy was, and for a short time still is, far too involved.

Edited January 3, 2015 by SmokinES3

[ALLEN1QB]

I refuse to get involved in this nonsense