Sammy V Odell Beckham

[Lurker]

 

I hereby grant you license to use "idiot" to describe JTSP.

 

 

It's just too big a job for one person; I could use the backup.

Then again, we could just ignore him and save a lot of Scott's server space...

[Thurman#1]

And we got a pick back. The nets are the same.

 

We did not net loss a 2014 first rounder.

 

 

Picking Watkins had an opportunity cost of two firsts and a 4th. If we hadn't picked him, we could've picked three other guys.

 

Making the trade was a net loss of a first and a fourth. After that, picking Sammy was a net loss of the pick we got in the trade.

 

And yes, you "lose" your pick when you use it. If you didn't, if you still had the pick, you could turn around and draft somebody else. When you use a pick, you lose the chance to pick somebody else, it's opportunity cost. Sure, it's just as correct to say we "used" the pick to get the rights to the guy. Just as it's legit to say I "used" the money from my salary to buy ten bottles of premium whisky. Use and lose, both words are legit in that usage.

 

Apologist for what???? Getting a great pick, who won the Bills two games in 2014 and looks to be a star for years to come (with any passable QB)????? What a bust!!!!

 

 

 

You're missing the point. Deliberately, I assume.

 

There's huge apologism (???) going on here. Nobody's apologizing for Sammy. And nobody's calling Sammy a bust. But there's an awful lot of extremely legitimate criticism of the trade. In fact, it now looks like a bad trade, as there seems an extremely low level of possibility that we got the value we gave away.

 

Unless Sammy is the value of a first and a fourth round pick better than the next best WR in the draft excepting Evans, we didn't get back the value of what we traded. The best move now looks like it would have been staying at #9 and picking Beckham, Benjamin or maybe even another one or two very good-looking young receivers from that draft.

Edited January 27, 2015 by Thurman#1

[GA BILLS FAN]

Picking Watkins had an opportunity cost of two firsts and a 4th. If we hadn't picked him, we could've picked three other guys.

 

Making the trade was a net loss of a first and a fourth. After that, picking Sammy was a net loss of the pick we got in the trade.

 

And yes, you "lose" your pick when you use it. If you didn't, if you still had the pick, you could turn around and draft somebody else. When you use a pick, you lose the chance to pick somebody else, it's opportunity cost. Sure, it's just as correct to say we "used" the pick to get the rights to the guy. Just as it's legit to say I "used" the money from my salary to buy ten bottles of premium whisky. Use and lose, both words are legit in that usage.

 

 

 

 

 

You're missing the point. Deliberately, I assume.

 

There's huge apologism (???) going on here. Nobody's apologizing for Sammy. And nobody's calling Sammy a bust. But there's an awful lot of extremely legitimate criticism of the trade. In fact, it now looks like a bad trade, as there seems an extremely low level of possibility that we got the value we gave away.

 

Unless Sammy is the value of a first and a fourth round pick better than the next best WR in the draft excepting Evans, we didn't get back the value of what we traded. The best move now looks like it would have been staying at #9 and picking Beckham, Benjamin or maybe even another one or two very good-looking young receivers from that draft.

Well put Thurman.

 

What's going on here is not a "hindsight is 20/20" witch hunt. The issue at hand is why make the trade in the first place. The information available to the Bills on draft day was that they did NOT have a franchise QB and they were in a draft that all analysts and scouts said was DEEP at the WR position. I think the trade was a reckless attempt by the Bills FO to save their jobs by making a high risk/high reward trade.

 

We've examined two other high profile WR trades (Sea-Harvin and Julio Jones-Atl) and in both those cases the teams involved took a calculated risk to add a "final" piece to a playoff roster, gave up less and both had franchise QB's on roster.

 

Noone is saying Sammy isn't a good player and has potential to be a very god WR, what we are saying is exactly what Thurman wrote above, he is not a 1st and 4th better than the next best option at WR.

Edited January 27, 2015 by TXBILLSFAN

[FireChan]

 

Well put Thurman.

 

What's going on here is not a "hindsight is 20/20" witch hunt. The issue at hand is why make the trade in the first place. The information available to the Bills on draft day was that they did NOT have a franchise QB and they were in a draft that all analysts and scouts said was DEEP at the WR position. I think the trade was a reckless attempt by the Bills FO to save their jobs by making a high risk/high reward trade.

 

We've examined two other high profile WR trades (Sea-Harvin and Julio Jones-Atl) and in both those cases the teams involved took a calculated risk to add a "final" piece to a playoff roster, gave up less and both had franchise QB's on roster.

 

Noone is saying Sammy isn't a good player and has potential to be a very god WR, what we are saying is exactly what Thurman wrote above, he is not a 1st and 4th better than the next best option at WR.

Atlanta gave up more than the Bills did for Julio.

 

How do you know Sammy is not a 1st and a 4th better? Maybe he gets 2000 yards next season.

[thewildrabbit]

 

Well put Thurman.

 

What's going on here is not a "hindsight is 20/20" witch hunt. The issue at hand is why make the trade in the first place. The information available to the Bills on draft day was that they did NOT have a franchise QB and they were in a draft that all analysts and scouts said was DEEP at the WR position. I think the trade was a reckless attempt by the Bills FO to save their jobs by making a high risk/high reward trade.

 

We've examined two other high profile WR trades (Sea-Harvin and Julio Jones-Atl) and in both those cases the teams involved took a calculated risk to add a "final" piece to a playoff roster, gave up less and both had franchise QB's on roster.

 

No one is saying Sammy isn't a good player and has potential to be a very god WR, what we are saying is exactly what Thurman wrote above, he is not a 1st and 4th better than the next best option at WR.

While I can see why Whaley made the trade because in his view + Bills scouts that Watkins was a once in a generation talent like Andrew Luck. There is no question that Watkins is talented. The bigger question is just how talented is he, and what kind of numbers will he put up to justify being equal to three players?

 

To me this is like thinking that Sammy at #4 overall is equal to LBer Anthony Barr selected #9 by Minnesota, OT Ja'Wuan James selected at #19 by Miami, and WR Martivas Bryant chosen by the Steelers at #118.

 

 

NY Giants WR Odell Beckham Jr missed four complete games, and still almost broke Randy Moss's rookie receiving record with 1305 yards with 12 TD's, and he was 10th of all NFL WR's in yards. Tampa WR Mike Evans was 19th in yards 12 TD's. Panthers WR Kelvin Benjamin was 21st in yards with 1008. Sammy was 24th in yards.

 

 

What really bothers me about this trade is this teams offensive scouting evaluations have been mostly bad the last few years. From using that first round pick on EJ to overlooking other talent at QB in the likes of SB winning QB Russell Wilson. Nobody in the Bills FO noticed that EJ might not be the franchise guy, and allowed him to be benched after four games. QB Blake Bortles was drafted #3 overall by Jacksonville, and yet QB Derek Carr drafted by the Raiders in the 2nd round is the better player....also overlooked by this Bills scouting dept.

 

The 2014 draft might just be the best, and most WR talent laden draft in NFL history. Yet the Bills scouts / Whaley didn't see the talent in all those other receivers, or thought none were as good as Watkins. Then, nothing has changed in the college scouting dept, and that is where they have failed the most the last two years on the offensive side. Then, just who is supposed to throw to Sammy this year to get him all those yards?

[John from Riverside]

 

Well put Thurman.

 

What's going on here is not a "hindsight is 20/20" witch hunt. The issue at hand is why make the trade in the first place. The information available to the Bills on draft day was that they did NOT have a franchise QB and they were in a draft that all analysts and scouts said was DEEP at the WR position. I think the trade was a reckless attempt by the Bills FO to save their jobs by making a high risk/high reward trade.

 

We've examined two other high profile WR trades (Sea-Harvin and Julio Jones-Atl) and in both those cases the teams involved took a calculated risk to add a "final" piece to a playoff roster, gave up less and both had franchise QB's on roster.

 

Noone is saying Sammy isn't a good player and has potential to be a very god WR, what we are saying is exactly what Thurman wrote above, he is not a 1st and 4th better than the next best option at WR.

 

I feel that it is EXACTLY a "hindsight is 20/20 witch hunt" how can you say that it is not. The Houston Texans just got a pass rusher with the number 1 overall pick and they dont have a FRANCHISE QB......so its not just a bills thing.

 

The draft is a absolute crapshoot.........there have been years that positions were supposed to be deep and they ended up not being deep at all.

 

The one constant here that is undeniable.....Sammy Watkins

 

- Without 2 different QB's throwing at him

- With 3 separate injuries

- Not being targeted near as much as he should have

 

Still put up solid rookie WR numbers

 

That is the one thing that is undeniable....the rest of this is just Mickey Mouse horse crap being thrown at a wall because we dont have a first round pick in a weak draft

While I can see why Whaley made the trade because in his view + Bills scouts that Watkins was a once in a generation talent like Andrew Luck. There is no question that Watkins is talented. The bigger question is just how talented is he, and what kind of numbers will he put up to justify being equal to three players?

 

To me this is like thinking that Sammy at #4 overall is equal to LBer Anthony Barr selected #9 by Minnesota, OT Ja'Wuan James selected at #19 by Miami, and WR Martivas Bryant chosen by the Steelers at #118.

 

 

NY Giants WR Odell Beckham Jr missed four complete games, and still almost broke Randy Moss's rookie receiving record with 1305 yards with 12 TD's, and he was 10th of all NFL WR's in yards. Tampa WR Mike Evans was 19th in yards 12 TD's. Panthers WR Kelvin Benjamin was 21st in yards with 1008. Sammy was 24th in yards.

 

 

What really bothers me about this trade is this teams offensive scouting evaluations have been mostly bad the last few years. From using that first round pick on EJ to overlooking other talent at QB in the likes of SB winning QB Russell Wilson. Nobody in the Bills FO noticed that EJ might not be the franchise guy, and allowed him to be benched after four games. QB Blake Bortles was drafted #3 overall by Jacksonville, and yet QB Derek Carr drafted by the Raiders in the 2nd round is the better player....also overlooked by this Bills scouting dept.

 

The 2014 draft might just be the best, and most WR talent laden draft in NFL history. Yet the Bills scouts / Whaley didn't see the talent in all those other receivers, or thought none were as good as Watkins. Then, nothing has changed in the college scouting dept, and that is where they have failed the most the last two years on the offensive side. Then, just who is supposed to throw to Sammy this year to get him all those yards?

Just one question here....how many times was Sammy Watkins targeted compared to those other receivers?

[Rob's House]

 

I feel that it is EXACTLY a "hindsight is 20/20 witch hunt" how can you say that it is not. The Houston Texans just got a pass rusher with the number 1 overall pick and they dont have a FRANCHISE QB......so its not just a bills thing.

 

The draft is a absolute crapshoot.........there have been years that positions were supposed to be deep and they ended up not being deep at all.

 

The one constant here that is undeniable.....Sammy Watkins

 

- Without 2 different QB's throwing at him

- With 3 separate injuries

- Not being targeted near as much as he should have

 

Still put up solid rookie WR numbers

 

That is the one thing that is undeniable....the rest of this is just Mickey Mouse horse crap being thrown at a wall because we dont have a first round pick in a weak draft

 

Just one question here....how many times was Sammy Watkins targeted compared to those other receivers?

First off, how is one to accurately grade a draft without the benefit of hindsight?

 

Secondly, it was well established going into that draft that it was one of the deepest drafts in years both in terms of overall talent, but also at the WR position specifically. So it's a bit disingenuous to claim that it's a "hindsight witch hunt" when people were making the exact same arguments before the draft last year.

[John from Riverside]

First off, how is one to accurately grade a draft without the benefit of hindsight?

 

Secondly, it was well established going into that draft that it was one of the deepest drafts in years both in terms of overall talent, but also at the WR position specifically. So it's a bit disingenuous to claim that it's a "hindsight witch hunt" when people were making the exact same arguments before the draft last year.

I dont know how many times I need to say this.....

 

You cannot grade a draft after one year.....everyone who is bitching about the depth of the WR class could be WRONG.....

 

Its too early....the bills took a shot at what they felt was a special player.....

[truth on hold]

I dont know how many times I need to say this.....

 

You cannot grade a draft after one year.....everyone who is bitching about the depth of the WR class could be WRONG.....

 

Its too early....the bills took a shot at what they felt was a special player.....

unless it's labeling ebron a "bust" or dismissing all of ODB's accomplishments because of Eli Manning even though Cruz only managed 50 yards/game and 1 TD total thru 6 weeks with that same QB ... lol

Edited January 28, 2015 by JTSP

[Rob's House]

I dont know how many times I need to say this.....

 

You cannot grade a draft after one year.....everyone who is bitching about the depth of the WR class could be WRONG.....

 

Its too early....the bills took a shot at what they felt was a special player.....

Now you're just changing the subject. I asked how you could accurately grade a draft without the benefit of hindsight. Whatever you're answering or responding to has nothing to do with what I said.

 

So in answer to your question, none. You don't need to say it at all because it's irrelevant to the post you responded to.

 

I was talking about this ridiculous notion of a "hindsight witch hunt".

Edited January 28, 2015 by Rob's House

[FireChan]

First off, how is one to accurately grade a draft without the benefit of hindsight?

 

Secondly, it was well established going into that draft that it was one of the deepest drafts in years both in terms of overall talent, but also at the WR position specifically. So it's a bit disingenuous to claim that it's a "hindsight witch hunt" when people were making the exact same arguments before the draft last year.

Clearly, you need hindsight to grade a draft. However, you can use hindsight to be unfair in your grading. Like Russell Wilson, Tom Brady etc. You can say, "clearly the Bills screwed up by not grabbing those guys who have 4 Superbowls between them, how could they not know!" but that's unfair.

 

First and sometimes second rounders are really the only the picks that can be fair in a hindsight argument. However, if you redrafted the 2014 draft tomorrow, would ODB go higher? Maybe. Does that make TB idiots for taking Evans? Or Cleveland for taking Gilbert? Or Detroit for taking Ebron? It might. Will we know until any of those guys have more than, at most, 16 games? Absolutely not. Gilbert may become the next Revis. Ebron could blossom into a Gronk clone. ODB may slump and turn into a Stevie Johnson. We don't know yet.

 

Bottom-line is that while ODB looked like he could be a great WR (hence his draft position), he was less of a prospect than Sammy. Period. Sammy was as sure of a thing as any draft pick gets. ODB was not. Until we have more time with their careers, we know nothing. If Sammy goes for 1k the next 5 years, and ODB goes for 2k, will I be a little miffed at the trade? Sure. Will I hold it against this FO for making a risky move on the best offensive prospect in the draft? No.

unless it's labeling ebron a "bust" or dismissing all of ODB's accomplishments because of Eli Manning even though Cruz only managed 50 yards/game and 1 TD total thru 6 weeks with that same QB ... lol

Neither of those things have happened. You should go back to using pictures to argue on PPP. It had more success.

[John from Riverside]

unless it's labeling ebron a "bust" or dismissing all of ODB's accomplishments because of Eli Manning even though Cruz only managed 50 yards/game and 1 TD total thru 6 weeks with that same QB ... lol

You really have no place in intelligent discussion. You should go back to dropping dog **** into threads and moving on.

[Rob's House]

Clearly, you need hindsight to grade a draft. However, you can use hindsight to be unfair in your grading. Like Russell Wilson, Tom Brady etc. You can say, "clearly the Bills screwed up by not grabbing those guys who have 4 Superbowls between them, how could they not know!" but that's unfair.

 

First and sometimes second rounders are really the only the picks that can be fair in a hindsight argument. However, if you redrafted the 2014 draft tomorrow, would ODB go higher? Maybe. Does that make TB idiots for taking Evans? Or Cleveland for taking Gilbert? Or Detroit for taking Ebron? It might. Will we know until any of those guys have more than, at most, 16 games? Absolutely not. Gilbert may become the next Revis. Ebron could blossom into a Gronk clone. ODB may slump and turn into a Stevie Johnson. We don't know yet.

 

Bottom-line is that while ODB looked like he could be a great WR (hence his draft position), he was less of a prospect than Sammy. Period. Sammy was as sure of a thing as any draft pick gets. ODB was not. Until we have more time with their careers, we know nothing. If Sammy goes for 1k the next 5 years, and ODB goes for 2k, will I be a little miffed at the trade? Sure. Will I hold it against this FO for making a risky move on the best offensive prospect in the draft? No.

 

From 2 pages earlier in this thread:

 

I think this is how we should judge the move. It's not just Watkins v ODB, but to what extent he ultimately stands out from his draft class. Anytime you have a rookie WR that racks up ~ 1000 yds you can't really say you missed on the pick, but when 4 other rookie WRs from the same class have as good or better statistical production it's fair to wonder if the price was too high.

 

I don't think he necessarily has to be the best to justify the move - If SW goes on to have a HOF career I won't knock it b/c ODB has a HOF career also, but if he doesn't separate himself from the rest of the pack I think it will be safe to say that perhaps 2 1sts and a 4th was too high a price.

 

Obviously we won't really know for a few more years, but 1 year out that's how it looks.

[K-9]

Can anyone use hindsight and tell me why nobody traded up to draftdraft OBJ? Thanks.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[truth on hold]

Neither of those things have happened. You should go back to using pictures to argue on PPP. It had more success.

Lol @ you calling out someones attention to detail when you couldn't understand that trading one first for a guy another team drafted, doesnt require as many firsts as trading a first so you can move up in the first round to draft a guy. Lol lol lol ..still having a hoot over that one

[John from Riverside]

Now you're just changing the subject. I asked how you could accurately grade a draft without the benefit of hindsight. Whatever you're answering or responding to has nothing to do with what I said.

 

So in answer to your question, none. You don't need to say it at all because it's irrelevant to the post you responded to.

 

I was talking about this ridiculous notion of a "hindsight witch hunt".

I dont really think Im changing the subject.....the hindsight witch hunt is happening because people are upset that the bills used extra resources to draft a WR in what looks like a WR strong draft.

 

My point is....we really dont know that yet....you cannot really grade a draft for about 3 years after the draft.

 

But lets say for argument sake that the witch hunters are correct and this ends up being a strong WR draft?

 

So what?

 

- IMO you have to give a front office kudos for taking the shot that Sammy Watkins is gonna be a difference making player for the bills REGARDLESS of how other teams did in the draft.

 

- We have drafted players like Aaron Maybin in the first round......guys that never lived up to their billing (part of the reason why we have been bad so long) swinging for the fences on Sammy Watkins is a refreshing change to the Same old Bills.

 

- What are we actually losing by doing what we did? A difference making QB? HE ISNT THERE

[FireChan]

Lol @ you calling out someones attention to detail when you couldn't understand that trading one first for a guy another team drafted, doesnt require as many firsts as trading a first so you can move up in the first round to draft a guy. Lol lol lol ..still having a hoot over that one

Same traded net loss in draft picks. I was correct.

Edited January 28, 2015 by FireChan

[John from Riverside]

From 2 pages earlier in this thread:

 

Rob,

 

You bring up good points

 

But maybe what we should be doing is not worrying about the cost but whether or not we actually got what we needed?

 

This is the disconnect here that I am not understanding....we all pretty much concede that Sammy Watkins good but we are upset that we gave up what we feel is too much for him?

 

There is no such thing as too much if its a special player.....

[FireChan]

From 2 pages earlier in this thread:

 

You expect me to follow you around or something?

 

The price still would not be too high because we had the most assurance at the position. That's what we paid for. That's like saying is the price for world class insurance too much over the bare-minumum because you and some other guy never used it?

 

And seeing as Evans would've cost something similar, and KB would've been ridiculously overdrafted for someone of his skill level, I don't see how you can make that argument. In truth, the only person you can reasonably compare Sammy + price-tag to is ODB, not the pack. Without going into crazy, "trade back for pick number #25, get two second rounders vs. Sammy," at least.

 

Can anyone use hindsight and tell me why nobody traded up to draftdraft OBJ? Thanks.

 

GO BILLS!!!

Because only the Giants knew that he would have one of the best rookie seasons ever and that he would be available at their pick. That's how winning franchises roll.

Edited January 28, 2015 by FireChan

[What a Tuel]

I know this thing has been talked to death but geez people are still arguing about it.

 

Scenario 1

Bills draft Beckham - costs one 1st round pick

 

Scenario 2

Bills trade up and draft Watkins - costs two 1st round picks and a 4th.

 

The difference is 1 first round pick and one 4th round pick.