Sammy V Odell Beckham

[truth on hold]

With how needy we are at TE, I'd seriously consider Ebron + our 2015 1st and 4th back to Watkins. And even having any debate regarding ODB + 2015 1st and 4th as preferable to Watkins is silly, when clearly ODB alone is superior to watkins.

Edited January 28, 2015 by JTSP

[Thurman#1]

 

You aren't going to get an answer, because I've asked that question half-a-dozen times and gotten none.

 

You are absolutely correct that it's part of the equation...and I'll give you my opinion: there isn't a player at 19th overall in the 2015 draft that I feel is a significantly greater difference-maker to this team than what they'll get at 50.

Correct...it wasn't even close.

 

That's not what K-9 is saying...c'mon Rob, you know that.

 

Straight from the mouth of Whaley, unless you want to call Kelly the Dog--a guy with over 30k posts on this board and a reputation for having reliable info--a liar:

 

http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/172744-doug-whaley-joined-la-bills-backers-to-watch-games-this-morning/

(post #15)

 

 

First, none of this has been about calling anyone a liar. Much more about people being desperate to hear what they want to hear and see what they want to see. The Chris Brown and Tim Graham articles absolutely don't prove this, they don't even say that they know for sure.

 

The Kelly the Dog post, though, seems pretty believable. He doesn't seem to have an iron in the fire. OK, I'm convinced. All I've been asking for is a believable link. This seems like one.

 

Alright, now I believe it would have been Ebron.

 

Of course, this makes me feel worse about Whaley, not better. I've seen two sources, Graham and Buscaglia, saying that the three guys they had considered there at #9 were Zack Martin, Beckham Jr., and Ebron. The fact they would have picked Ebron doesn't make me feel good.

 

Of course, down the line that may look much better. But from the results of the first year, it looks bad indeed.

 

Generally, I like the way the Bills have been going, under Nix and now under Whaley. But that trade looked bad to me from minute one, and so far it still looks bad.

[John from Riverside]

I'm not arguing that it was a poor draft. I'm not even necessarily saying it was a bad trade, although I don't think it was a particularly good one either, but we'll see. I'm saying this isn't a purely hindsight argument.

 

As far as the trade I'll put it this way: If I could stand here today and choose to have just Sammy Watkins or a probable bust and the 1st and 4th back I'd take Watkins. But if I can have one of Beckam, Mike Evans, or K Benjamin and the 1st & 4th I take that. Maybe in 5 years I'd regret it but I'll take those odds.

 

To piggyback on what Thurman said about only trading up for a QB, when the trade happened I said he'd have to be the next Randy Moss to really make it a good move. If he's a solid no 1 WR who maybe goes to a few pro-bowls but never really dominates and lights up the league then I still think it was ok, but just ok - you're hitting on 50% of your first rounders (and busting on a 4th) which is about average - but if you drafted a Roddy White one year and then took Maybin the next, wouldn't you feel like you should have done better?

Rob,

 

Unfortunately the bills dont get the luxury of a time machine in a draft......I am sure if they could go back and redo the Aaron Maybin pick they would do it......I am NOT sure they would redo the trade for Sammy Watkins if they could do it. We now get into projections which fans will do with what how they feel. I feel that Sammy Watkins will be a elite WR player and not just a NFL number 1 starter like say a Lee Evans.

we don't know who yet -- havent even been thru the combine. But one thing is almost certain: not having a 1st round pick precludes us from nabbing a top ranked QB like a Winston or Mariotta because we don't have enough value to trade up.

And we would not have the value to trade up had we had our 19th pick......that is the point of this whole discussion.

 

 

Don't have to bother writing anything new here ...

 

 

 

To repeat:

It's a simple thing ... did we pay too much? Putting it mathematically, is Sammy Watkins equal to or greater than ((Odell Beckham Jr. or Kelvin Benjamin or any of the other top five or six guys, not including Evans) plus one 2015 1st round pick and one 2015 4th round pick).

And there is no way on God's green earth that - based on the information we've seen so far - you can say that that that equation represents reality. Watkins isn't worth that.

Could that change as time passes? Sure. Is it likely to change enough that that equation ever becomes true? The odds are very low. MIniscule.

What I am saying is that we dont know the answer to that yet....you cannot know after 1 season.

With how needy we are at TE, I'd seriously consider Ebron + our 2015 1st and 4th back to Watkins. And even having any debate regarding ODB + 2015 1st and 4th as preferable to Watkins is silly, when clearly ODB alone is superior to watkins.

I bet that Thurman and Robb wished you would not post in this debate.....your the weak link to the conversation.

 

You dont draft based totally on need....and Ebron frankly does not look like a Roman type TE because he requires his TE's to block. In time Ebron could end up being a good player but Sammy is a good player RIGHT NOW and the arrow points up with him for multiple reasons. Ebron was having a hard time grasping the Lions playbook.

 

And just because ODB had one season where he put up better numbers to Watkins does not make him a better player to Watkins.....it means just what it means. In year one ODB put up better numbers then Watkins with a better QB and more opporunities to make plays.

[bisonbrigade]

The Bills attempted five screen passes to wide receivers, according to ESPN Stats & Information. Only three teams -- the Titans, Chiefs, and Buccaneers -- attempted fewer screen passes to wide receivers. One of Sammy Watkins strengths out of college was the screen, Another Marrone mistake.

[truth on hold]

 

And we would not have the value to trade up had we had our 19th pick......that is the point of this whole discussion.

 

What I am saying is that we dont know the answer to that yet....you cannot know after 1 season.

No its not. You stated earlier theres no one in round 1 we would have wanted at 19 anyway. You never considered the possibility of trading the foregone pick to move up.

[John from Riverside]

 

 

First, none of this has been about calling anyone a liar. Much more about people being desperate to hear what they want to hear and see what they want to see. The Chris Brown and Tim Graham articles absolutely don't prove this, they don't even say that they know for sure.

 

The Kelly the Dog post, though, seems pretty believable. He doesn't seem to have an iron in the fire. OK, I'm convinced. All I've been asking for is a believable link. This seems like one.

 

Alright, now I believe it would have been Ebron.

 

Of course, this makes me feel worse about Whaley, not better. I've seen two sources, Graham and Buscaglia, saying that the three guys they had considered there at #9 were Zack Martin, Beckham Jr., and Ebron. The fact they would have picked Ebron doesn't make me feel good.

 

Of course, down the line that may look much better. But from the results of the first year, it looks bad indeed.

 

Generally, I like the way the Bills have been going, under Nix and now under Whaley. But that trade looked bad to me from minute one, and so far it still looks bad.

It only looks bad if we are trying to win the draft trade value Super Bowl

 

Just like the money that they give to players to get them here......its not my money.....and just its not my draft picks.

 

I just care about the result. At the end of the day do we have a elite wide receiver that we can call our number 1 to pair with Robert Wood who I consider an excellent number 2.

 

And maybe that is to black and white for some.....I just care about winning games.

No its not. You stated earlier theres no one in round 1 we would have wanted at 19 anyway. You never considered the possibility of trading the foregone pick to move up.

No...we were talking about QB....and we are not in a positon to get Marriota or Winston with that 19th pick......

[truth on hold]

 

I bet that Thurman and Robb wished you would not post in this debate.....your the weak link to the conversation.

 

You dont draft based totally on need....and Ebron frankly does not look like a Roman type TE because he requires his TE's to block. In time Ebron could end up being a good player but Sammy is a good player RIGHT NOW and the arrow points up with him for multiple reasons. Ebron was having a hard time grasping the Lions playbook.

 

And just because ODB had one season where he put up better numbers to Watkins does not make him a better player to Watkins.....it means just what it means. In year one ODB put up better numbers then Watkins with a better QB and more opporunities to make plays.

Never said to draft totally based on need. But if you're saying you dont think "need" shouldnt factor in, man you totally put your foot in your mouth again, defending the use of 2 firsts and a 4th on a perceived need at WR

[thewildrabbit]

About the only people on the planet that think this was a good trade are Buffalo Bills fans. ESPN didn't even name SW as one of the top three rookies this year.

 

My take is if Bill Polian would have been hired as team president he would have replaced Whaley for making this trade. Bill made a blockbuster trade for Biscuit, and he could get away with that because he had the franchise QB in Jim Kelly. The Falcons traded 5 draft picks for Julio Jones, and the GM got away with it because he already had his franchise QB in Matt Ryan. Needless to say both moves cost their respective teams precious draft picks that could have bolstered other areas of the team.

 

Save the picks, and acquire FA WR Vincent Jackson....ever think of that? Seems like a stupid move now doesn't it when you consider they gave up the 2011 1st, 2nd, 4th, and the 2012 1st, 4th. That's right, 5 players. It didn't get them to a SB, and in fact crippled the team by not allowing them to draft 4 players that could have made an impact on the both sides of the ball.

 

The Buffalo Bills gave up RB Greg Bell, their #1 pick in 88, and #1 in 89, #2 in 89. One could argue that those three picks, 4 players in all, would have been better spent on bolstering both sides of the lines. I gotta admit tho I loved the trade at the time, as i loved watching him play at Bama. Then hated that Bennett was drafted by the Colts.

 

 

Bottom line is the Bills aren't 100% sure EJ is the franchise, and shoot, whats more they don't even have a RB for the ground and pound they want to run this year. Much less 3 of the 5 O linemen still stink badly.

 

http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/12179331/how-many-players-away-super-bowl-was-team

[thebandit27]

With how needy we are at TE, I'd seriously consider Ebron + our 2015 1st and 4th back to Watkins. And even having any debate regarding ODB + 2015 1st and 4th as preferable to Watkins is silly, when clearly ODB alone is superior to watkins.

Now I know you're just trolling.

 

You would honestly make that trade? You'd rather do that than either (a) sign a guy like Julius Thomas, Charles Clay, or Jermaine Gresham or (b) draft a guy like Maxx Williams or Clive Warford in the 2nd round?

 

That, IMO, is certifiable.

[truth on hold]

 

No...we were talking about QB....and we are not in a positon to get Marriota or Winston with that 19th pick......

Uhhh yeah qb, thats why I mentioned those QB names in my post. Probably won't be able to get them at 19, however may have had a chance to use our 19th pick along with other picks to trade up and get one ....something eagles who draft behind us are already working on

[thebandit27]

Never said to draft totally based on need. But if you're saying you dont think "need" shouldnt factor in, man you totally put your foot in your mouth again, defending the use of 2 firsts and a 4th on a perceived need at WR

Need should take a backseat to value every single time. That's how the best teams draft.

Uhhh yeah qb, thats why I mentioned those QB names in my post. Probably won't be able to get them at 19, however may have had a chance to use our 19th pick along with other picks to trade up and get one ....something eagles who draft behind us are already working on

Let me get this straight:

 

You are wholly against trading up for the #1 offensive prospect in one of the best draft classes in recent memory--seemingly because the team should've known that other guys would be just as good and giving up resources to get the better prospect would not be worth it--yet you are here endorsing using up future 1st round picks to move up and draft a QB in what's considered yet another weak QB class?

 

I have to say that I don't understand that twisted logic one bit.

[truth on hold]

Let me get this straight:

 

You are wholly against trading up for the #1 offensive prospect in one of the best draft classes in recent memory--seemingly because the team should've known that other guys would be just as good and giving up resources to get the better prospect would not be worth it--yet you are here endorsing using up future 1st round picks to move up and draft a QB in what's considered yet another weak QB class?

 

I have to say that I don't understand that twisted logic one bit.

Its because you don't take the time to read posts and you're a little slow anyway (pretty much applies to all the watkins-trade apologists). That observation was made in response to people saying there's no QB wed want at 19 anyway in an attempt to devalue the foregone pick. Perhaps, however not having a first does preclude us from being able to trade up higher to where better QBs may be had. Edited January 28, 2015 by JTSP

[thewildrabbit]

 

 

First, none of this has been about calling anyone a liar. Much more about people being desperate to hear what they want to hear and see what they want to see. The Chris Brown and Tim Graham articles absolutely don't prove this, they don't even say that they know for sure.

 

The Kelly the Dog post, though, seems pretty believable. He doesn't seem to have an iron in the fire. OK, I'm convinced. All I've been asking for is a believable link. This seems like one.

 

Alright, now I believe it would have been Ebron.

 

Of course, this makes me feel worse about Whaley, not better. I've seen two sources, Graham and Buscaglia, saying that the three guys they had considered there at #9 were Zack Martin, Beckham Jr., and Ebron. The fact they would have picked Ebron doesn't make me feel good.

 

Of course, down the line that may look much better. But from the results of the first year, it looks bad indeed.

 

Generally, I like the way the Bills have been going, under Nix and now under Whaley. But that trade looked bad to me from minute one, and so far it still looks bad.

If the trade hadn't happened the Bills would have drafted Eric Ebron #1, and Cyrus Kouandjio #2 What does that tell you about the Bills ability to judge offensive talent. I can recall reading that the Bills scouts were very high on Odell Beckham Jr a few weeks before the draft, and am not sure why they moved away from him.

 

I don't think this team is going to make a strong transition out of the cellar on offense this year. No QB, NO RB, Bad O line, and bad scouting.= not good.

 

 

Anyway...

 

http://www.sbnation.com/lookit/2014/11/30/7311043/mike-evans-block-terrance-newman-video-buccaneers-bengals

[thebandit27]

Its because you don't take the time to read posts and you're a little slow anyway (pretty much applies to all the watkins-trade apologists). That observation was made in response to people saying there's no QB wed want at 19 anyway in an attempt to devalue the foregone pick. Perhaps, however not having a first does preclude us from being able to trade up higher to where better QBs may be had.

Cute.

 

Actually, you are doing exactly as I said--arguing against trading up for an elite talent and simultaneously endorsing trading up for a flawed talent.

 

Also, for a guy that thinks (rightly so IMO) that pick value plays into the compensation of the trade, it seems remarkably short-sighted of you to ignore the relative strength (or lack thereof) of this draft class.

 

Lastly, please stick to the topic...tossing out insults is one of the truest admissions that your argument is falling flat on its face.

 

Still waiting on the "jump-ball" analysis by the way...(not holding my breath though).

Edited January 28, 2015 by thebandit27

[truth on hold]

Now I know you're just trolling.

 

You would honestly make that trade? You'd rather do that than either (a) sign a guy like Julius Thomas, Charles Clay, or Jermaine Gresham or (b) draft a guy like Maxx Williams or Clive Warford in the 2nd round?

 

That, IMO, is certifiable.

Yeah I'd rather build thru the draft if possible. High priced FAs are cap busters and come with a lot of risk. If Thomas becomes available how much you think it would cost us? Right now I think ebron is better than any TE on our roster, and I'm finding it painful not having a first this year.

[Maury Ballstein]

Its because you don't take the time to read posts and you're a little slow anyway (pretty much applies to all the watkins-trade apologists). That observation was made in response to people saying there's no QB wed want at 19 anyway in an attempt to devalue the foregone pick. Perhaps, however not having a first does preclude us from being able to trade up higher to where better QBs may be had.

yea mariota is what we need ! Bortles Carr Bridgewater and Manziel all fixed their new teams quickly huh ?

 

So full of fail, nice name calling though, guess you feel threatened as you dodge his questions for years.

 

Only one here who can't have a civilized conversation is you. Notice the ebb and flow between thurmal and rob who share similar beliefs ? Grow up joe.

Edited January 28, 2015 by Ryan L Billz

[thebandit27]

Yeah I'd rather build thru the draft if possible. High priced FAs are cap busters and come with a lot of risk. If Thomas becomes available how much you think it would cost us? Right now I think ebron is better than any TE on our roster, and I'm finding it painful not having a first this year.

This post is the book definition of duality.

 

You believe that Beckham is better than Sammy because the numbers say so, yet you also believe that Ebron is better than Chandler despite the overwhelming difference in their numbers (in Chandler's favor).

 

I don't think there's a discussion to be had with you on this topic...the logic you're applying just doesn't pass muster.

[truth on hold]

This post is the book definition of duality.

 

You believe that Beckham is better than Sammy because the numbers say so, yet you also believe that Ebron is better than Chandler despite the overwhelming difference in their numbers (in Chandler's favor).

 

I don't think there's a discussion to be had with you on this topic...the logic you're applying just doesn't pass muster.

No I know that Beckham is better and its not only about numbers. Hes simply doing things on the field that Watkins isn't. Ebron over chandler any day. The bogus "duality" as I've pointed out is people saying you cant make a call on ODB vs Watkins after a year, yet already labelling ebron a bust after a year

[thebandit27]

No I know that Beckham is better and its not only about numbers. Hes simply doing things on the field that Watkins isn't. Ebron over chandler any day. The bogus "duality" as I've pointed out is people saying you cant make a call on ODB vs Watkins after a year, yet already labelling ebron a bust after a year

Yeah...we're done here.

[Thurman#1]

What I am saying is that we dont know the answer to that yet....you cannot know after 1 season.

 

 

 

 

Thanks for telling me what I've said numerous times in this thread.

 

It's true we can't know. But we what we can do is look at the odds. And for what feels like the eight millionth time, the odds against Sammy turning out to be equal to or better than the sum of the best WR in the league drafted #9 or better plus a 2015 first and a 20156 4th is absolutely infinitesimal.

 

The odds were slight the minute the trade was made. But after the years ODB and Benjamin have had the chances have greatly dropped.

It only looks bad if we are trying to win the draft trade value Super Bowl

 

Just like the money that they give to players to get them here......its not my money.....and just its not my draft picks.

 

I just care about the result. At the end of the day do we have a elite wide receiver that we can call our number 1 to pair with Robert Wood who I consider an excellent number 2.

 

And maybe that is to black and white for some.....I just care about winning games.

No...we were talking about QB....and we are not in a positon to get Marriota or Winston with that 19th pick......

 

 

 

No, it really does look bad. Have no idea what you mean by the draft super bowl.

 

But it looked bad from minute one and continues to do so.

 

You "just care about winning games"? Fine, drafting well, which includes getting good value in any trades you make, will eventually lead to winning games.

 

As for QB, if you really only wanted a QB out of this, and you were utterly convinced that there won't be any good QBs available for us till the 2016 draft, then you trade your 2015 first back a year. If you don't demand tremendous value, you'll find a taker. Then you have two firsts the next year and a terrific shot at trading up for the great QBs everyone seems so convinced won't be there till then.

 

 

It\s not your draft picks? Fine. But it's mine. I'm a Bills fan. I want them to make good decisions with their picks. Nothing they do will have a bigger effect on winning games and getting to the Super Bowl.

 

If you're fine with wasting picks, great. You must have loved the last fifteen years or so.

Anyway, off to bed.

 

It's late over here.