Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Draft position has nothing to do with whether a player is top 'o the heap in the NFL. Your argument makes no sense in the context of the conversation (to me). If you are that good your draft position means nothing. If you think that you could plug Joe Average RB into philly and get the same results you'd be wrong. McCoy brings something extra.

My point is more: you don't need to spend a lot to get a serviceable RB. Whether that is using a high draft pick, making a big trade, or paying a lot to a FA-- those "expensive" moves are unnecessary, IMO.

 

Again, don't get me wrong. I think McCoy is great and he is going to out-produce nearly every back in the league. But is it more valuable to have a great 1700 yard back, or instead a platoon of a couple of good guys who can get you 1300 combined yards (plus still have Kiko)?

 

Looking at our current situation, I would have probably gone with Bryce, boobie, and fred, and then signed a cheap vet to a 1-yr deal, like Gore. Then, next year with fred retiring likely, draft a guy in the 3rd or 4th round.

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)

What in his history bothers you?

The track record for RBs over 250 carries and 5 yards per carry in a season isn't great, and he did it with probably the best line in the nfl two years ago, and really struggled with running when the line got hurt, bouncing runs outside way too much, kinda like cj.

How come there are some who prefer average players over great ones?

I'd rather have great players everywhere. But it's the opportunity cost of having a great rb. In our case, giving up a great lb. In Dallas case, giving up Dez because they can't afford both. Edited by BlueFire
Posted (edited)

The track record for RBs over 250 carries and 5 yards per carry in a season isn't great, and he did it with probably the best line in the nfl two years ago, and really struggled with running when the line got hurt, bouncing runs outside way too much, kinda like cj.

I'd rather have great players everywhere. But it's the opportunity cost of having a great rb. In our case, giving up a great lb. In Dallas case, giving up Dez because they can't afford both.

That is my perspective as well. RB is not a position I would prioritize with high opportunity cost and that's what I feel we did with McCoys salary (which is overvalued for that position) and giving up Kiko.

Edited by BuffaloBillsForever
Posted

My point is more: you don't need to spend a lot to get a serviceable RB. Whether that is using a high draft pick, making a big trade, or paying a lot to a FA-- those "expensive" moves are unnecessary, IMO.

 

Again, don't get me wrong. I think McCoy is great and he is going to out-produce nearly every back in the league. But is it more valuable to have a great 1700 yard back, or instead a platoon of a couple of good guys who can get you 1300 combined yards (plus still have Kiko)?

 

Looking at our current situation, I would have probably gone with Bryce, boobie, and fred, and then signed a cheap vet to a 1-yr deal, like Gore. Then, next year with fred retiring likely, draft a guy in the 3rd or 4th round.

 

To the bold: Considering that's almost exactly what the Buffalo Bills did in 2014, you tell me?

Posted

The track record for RBs over 250 carries and 5 yards per carry in a season isn't great, and he did it with probably the best line in the nfl two years ago, and really struggled with running when the line got hurt, bouncing runs outside way too much, kinda like cj.

I'd rather have great players everywhere. But it's the opportunity cost of having a great rb. In our case, giving up a great lb. In Dallas case, giving up Dez because they can't afford both.

 

 

That is my perspective as well. RB is not a position I would prioritize with high opportunity cost and that's what I feel we did with McCoys salary (which is overvalued for that position) and giving up Kiko.

 

Well, let me just say I'm glad the two of you aren't making the personnel decisions for this Buffalo Bills team. Moves like this aren't made in a vacuum -- they have to do with the rest of the team, what the current needs are, and what they can do to fill holes using some of their other assets. An underutilized or ill-fitting Kiko Alonso was not worth much to this team, particularly if they could gain a gamebreaker on offense.

Posted

 

 

 

An underutilized or ill-fitting Kiko Alonso was not worth much to this team, particularly if they could gain a gamebreaker on offense.

Quite an assumption that he would be ill-fitted or "not worth much to this team".

 

It's easy to take things out of thin air I guess.

Posted

My point is more: you don't need to spend a lot to get a serviceable RB. Whether that is using a high draft pick, making a big trade, or paying a lot to a FA-- those "expensive" moves are unnecessary, IMO.

 

you dont have to spend a lot to get a serviceable anything. the upgrade cost of a RB is not a ton (we just got an ELITE guy for 8m per -- what other position can you do that? Guard?) and the guy is going to have 400 touches this year plus blocking, etc....

Posted

Quite an assumption that he would be ill-fitted or "not worth much to this team".

 

It's easy to take things out of thin air I guess.

 

That was proved last year. The defense was better without Kiko, there is no assumption to be made.

Posted (edited)

 

That was proved last year. The defense was better without Kiko, there is no assumption to be made.

We have a 360 in terms of scheme this year. In Kiko's rookie year which was a Rex Ryan scheme he played well. So your point doesn't prove anything as it doesn't translate properly.

Edited by BuffaloBillsForever
Posted

We have a 360 in terms of scheme this year. In Kiko's rookie year which was a Rex Ryan scheme he played well. So your point doesn't prove anything as it doesn't translate properly.

 

He played in a Mike Pettine scheme, not a Rex Ryan scheme. Just because Mike worked for Ryan doesn't mean they run the exact same scheme. Notice how Ryan's teams never have a problem with the run game, notice how Mike's do. And you are assuming the Bills will run a "360 degree" different scheme. Ryan has already talked about he's run a 4-3. 3-4. 4-6.... he's run all of them.

 

Ryan is the expert here in defense, he doesn't seem to think he'll need Kiko. He watched the Bills defense twice last year completely destroy his own team all without Kiko. I don't think it's an assumption at all on Ryan or the Bills part that Kiko's value to the team is much less considering how the team performed last year. It was proven.

 

And speaking of assumption, you are assuming Kiko will pick right back up where he left off.

Posted

Quite an assumption that he would be ill-fitted or "not worth much to this team".

 

It's easy to take things out of thin air I guess.

 

It's not an assumption; it's a logical assertion based upon the facts in front of us:

 

-- the Bills defense improved in all areas last season, when Kiko did not play a single down

-- Nigel Bradham and Preston Brown played at a very high level and do not have an injury history like Kiko

-- the scheme Rex Ryan implements places less of a priority on lighter, faster LBs

 

What did I grab out of thin air?

Posted

 

It's not an assumption; it's a logical assertion based upon the facts in front of us:

 

-- the Bills defense improved in all areas last season, when Kiko did not play a single down

-- Nigel Bradham and Preston Brown played at a very high level and do not have an injury history like Kiko

-- the scheme Rex Ryan implements places less of a priority on lighter, faster LBs

 

What did I grab out of thin air?

I am baffled. If you really thought this can you point me to your and Wayne's posts on Kiko in Rex's scheme that he is il-fitted, underutilized and worth trading. Otherwise I find you are just conjuring stuff up to rationlize the trade.

 

Actually can you point me to any poster on here where they wanted Kiko gone because he doesn't fit Rex's scheme?

Posted

I am baffled. If you really thought this can you point me to your and Wayne's posts on Kiko in Rex's scheme that he is il-fitted, underutilized and worth trading. Otherwise I find you are just conjuring stuff up to rationlize the trade.

 

Actually can you point me to any poster on here where they wanted Kiko gone because he doesn't fit Rex's scheme?

 

You're not addressing the point. Which of those three facts I just stated is not true? Just because I wasn't beating the drum for Kiko to be traded (I never would have) doesn't mean I can't see a logical basis for the trade. The blind love for all things Kiko from some on this board is a little much.

Posted

 

You're not addressing the point. Which of those three facts I just stated is not true? Just because I wasn't beating the drum for Kiko to be traded (I never would have) doesn't mean I can't see a logical basis for the trade. The blind love for all things Kiko from some on this board is a little much.

Actually, I don't have blind love for Kiko at all. I was presently surprised with his play but I was never in the legend of kiko crowd. I realize his flaws.

Posted

I am baffled. If you really thought this can you point me to your and Wayne's posts on Kiko in Rex's scheme that he is il-fitted, underutilized and worth trading. Otherwise I find you are just conjuring stuff up to rationlize the trade.

 

Actually can you point me to any poster on here where they wanted Kiko gone because he doesn't fit Rex's scheme?

What does me never posting about Kiko being "il-fitted, underutilized and worth trading" have to do with Kiko being all 3 of those things. The facts, which are the emergence of Brown and Bradham and how the defense played last year, are why Ryan wanted to trade Kiko. Those facts don't change just because I never posted it.

Posted

Actually, I don't have blind love for Kiko at all. I was presently surprised with his play but I was never in the legend of kiko crowd. I realize his flaws.

 

Then you should understand my point perfectly.

×
×
  • Create New...