Tyler Dunne Asks: Was the Watkins Trade Worth It?

[Steve in Carolina]

Whaley made a deal for a player who he thought was going to be an elite player. In my view that is what he is. Has his talents been maximized? No. But that is mostly due to the qb play. I don't understand the criticism Whaley is drawing for a player who turns out to be a top end talent.

 

There are opportunities to fill in holes through the draft and free agency. But there are few opportunities to get elite players unless you are at the top of the draft. Watkins has demonstrated that he was well worth the cost. The argument that Becham was also available has some merit but I am not bothered by not taking that option because the player that Whaley targeted as special turned out to be the caliber of player he envisioned.

 

I get tired of the argument that we gave up two first round picks for Watkins. That is not accurate characterization of that transaction. We gave up one first round pick for him. We moved up the draft in his draft year and we gave up a first in the next year. As it turned out our second round selection was worthy of a first round value. So the deal was on balance very fair and reasonable.

Yahhh someone that can actually count draft picks. I'm sick of hearing that two 1st round pick crap.

[PlayoffsPlease]

Yahhh someone that can actually count draft picks. I'm sick of hearing that two 1st round pick crap.

we used the 2014 and the 2015 first round picks for Watson. That is two picks. We used one pick on Stephon Gilmore for example.

 

And if we had the 2015 first round pick, Darby still would have been their in the second round.

[John from Riverside]

we used the 2014 and the 2015 first round picks for Watson. That is two picks. We used one pick on Stephon Gilmore for example.

 

And if we had the 2015 first round pick, Darby still would have been their in the second round.

Who is Watson?

[26CornerBlitz]

Who is Watson?

The guy that Sherlock works with.

[Reed83HOF]

The guy that Sherlock works with.

 

Sherlock is definitely worth 2 first rounders; Watson might be worth a first and a fourth

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Sherlock is definitely worth 2 first rounders; Watson might be worth a first and a fourth

 

Not with that war wound, I think it makes Watson slip until the 6th or even a UDFA.

[Reed83HOF]

 

Not with that war wound, I think it makes Watson slip until the 6th or even a UDFA.

 

I concur.

 

The valuation on our board was with the other ranked players; before the medical evaluation. It obviously depends on what Doc says and if he should be removed from the board or slide down...

[Deranged Rhino]

[Nihilarian]

Whaley made a deal for a player who he thought was going to be an elite player. In my view that is what he is. Has his talents been maximized? No. But that is mostly due to the qb play. I don't understand the criticism Whaley is drawing for a player who turns out to be a top end talent.

 

There are opportunities to fill in holes through the draft and free agency. But there are few opportunities to get elite players unless you are at the top of the draft. Watkins has demonstrated that he was well worth the cost. The argument that Becham was also available has some merit but I am not bothered by not taking that option because the player that Whaley targeted as special turned out to be the caliber of player he envisioned.

 

I get tired of the argument that we gave up two first round picks for Watkins. That is not accurate characterization of that transaction. We gave up one first round pick for him. We moved up the draft in his draft year and we gave up a first in the next year. As it turned out our second round selection was worthy of a first round value. So the deal was on balance very fair and reasonable.

In that first sentence, you just answered your own question. I'm criticising Whaley for the lack of critical thinking in what he does because the team didn't already have an established franchise QB and until you have that known quantity at QB all other positions simply aren't that important to warrant three draft picks for one player.

 

Then, why does it escape every other bills fan posting here that Whaley went all out to get a WR and then he was still asking his second year QB to play behind one of the very worst offensive lines in the league? We all now see what a top OG in Incognito can do for the two players on either side of him and yet the Bills had complete garbage Erik Pears at RG that season. Henderson stunk at RT, Pears stunk at RG, Woods and Glenn's play both suffered due to Chis Williams lasting only three games at LG before Cyril Richardson got the nod in four starts (who really stunk) and soon to be replaced by Urbik who couldn't run block to save his life.

 

Sure, Whaley went out and got a stud WR in a draft loaded with stud WR's and used three draft picks to do so. The 2014 Buffalo Bills first round pick and the 2015 Buffalo Bills first round pick and a 2015 fourth round pick all to the Cleveland Browns for the rights to draft Sammy Watkins # 4 overall.

 

While all of those guys are pretty good I would bet (with the possible exception of Beckham) the GMs of those teams would trade any of those guys straight up for Watkins. That was a great WR draft. When all is said and done though I think that the guy the Bills got will be one of the 2 best. They went out and got an elite player with little downside. In addition to his massive upside he had little downside. There was no risk with Watkins.

 

Watkins has shown he has immense talent, no question about it! And until the team makes it a priority to get him 10 to 15 targets a game we might never see his true potential in a season while he is in Buffalo. I would expect if the Bills did get him that many targets we all might see a DeAndre Hopkins type season From Sammy.

[JohnC]

In that first sentence, you just answered your own question. I'm criticising Whaley for the lack of critical thinking in what he does because the team didn't already have an established franchise QB and until you have that known quantity at QB all other positions simply aren't that important to warrant three draft picks for one player.

 

Then, why does it escape every other bills fan posting here that Whaley went all out to get a WR and then he was still asking his second year QB to play behind one of the very worst offensive lines in the league? We all now see what a top OG in Incognito can do for the two players on either side of him and yet the Bills had complete garbage Erik Pears at RG that season. Henderson stunk at RT, Pears stunk at RG, Woods and Glenn's play both suffered due to Chis Williams lasting only three games at LG before Cyril Richardson got the nod in four starts (who really stunk) and soon to be replaced by Urbik who couldn't run block to save his life.

 

Sure, Whaley went out and got a stud WR in a draft loaded with stud WR's and used three draft picks to do so. The 2014 Buffalo Bills first round pick and the 2015 Buffalo Bills first round pick and a 2015 fourth round pick all to the Cleveland Browns for the rights to draft Sammy Watkins # 4 overall.

 

 

Watkins has shown he has immense talent, no question about it! And until the team makes it a priority to get him 10 to 15 targets a game we might never see his true potential in a season while he is in Buffalo. I would expect if the Bills did get him that many targets we all might see a DeAndre Hopkins type season From Sammy.

What you are doing is conflating a number of issues to make a particular transaction look bad. If you want to criticize the Kujo pick (as I have often done) for not properly addressing an OL position that it is a reasonable argument to make. But it is unfair and unreasonable to put so much onus on the Watkins pick when in reality it worked out.

 

Incognito was a marvelous pickup. It helped the OL. That doesn't disprove my position on the Watkins transaction, it reinforces it. We added a playmaker for an offense that didn't have many playmakers and an offensive weakness on the OL was addressed through free agency. There are a variety of avenues to improve the roster. You are attributing too many non-related deficiencies to this one transaction.

 

When a somewhat risky transaction works out to the extent that this one has worked out it should be celebrated not diminished because there are other deficiencies on the roster. If Whaley hasn't adequately addressed those other problem areas then it is fair to criticize him for that. But it is unfair to blame the transaction that worked out well for the reason why there are other areas of need.

[birdog1960]

the move was cavalier and bordering on reckless. it smelled like desperation. and it didn't work. the team was marginally better with Watkins than without. isn't the success of the team the most importanat outcome?

[Reed83HOF]

[Kirby Jackson]

the move was cavalier and bordering on reckless. it smelled like desperation. and it didn't work. the team was marginally better with Watkins than without. isn't the success of the team the most importanat outcome?

I could never consider it reckless because Watkins had little to no downside. If it would have been for Clowney (for example) that had potential to be great but a lot of risk I may agree. Watkins was similar to Andrew Luck in sense that there was so little risk associated with him. His floor was a low end #1. The worst case scenario for the Bills was Stevie Johnson's production.

[birdog1960]

I could never consider it reckless because Watkins had little to no downside. If it would have been for Clowney (for example) that had potential to be great but a lot of risk I may agree. Watkins was similar to Andrew Luck in sense that there was so little risk associated with him. His floor was a low end #1. The worst case scenario for the Bills was Stevie Johnson's production.

i analyze the question this way: could the team have been made better by another draft approach? was it reasonable for whaley to conclude at the time that another approach would be a better bet at making the team better?

 

I feel the answer to both questions is a solid yes.

 

looked at another way, one could ponder whether the gm of an unnamed perennial playoff team make the same move in the same situation. i think it's highly unlikely that he would.

[C.Biscuit97]

I could never consider it reckless because Watkins had little to no downside. If it would have been for Clowney (for example) that had potential to be great but a lot of risk I may agree. Watkins was similar to Andrew Luck in sense that there was so little risk associated with him. His floor was a low end #1. The worst case scenario for the Bills was Stevie Johnson's production.

I generally agree with this. It's more about the position value. Great teams are not built on Wrs. How many great Wrs haven't won SBs?

 

A great wr is pointless if your qb and line suck. I love Watkins but he will never be a major difference in wins and losses. He still is a great, great talent.

[Kirby Jackson]

i analyze the question this way: could the team have been made better by another draft approach? was it reasonable for whaley to conclude at the time that another approach would be a better bet at making the team better?

 

I feel the answer to both questions is a solid yes.

 

looked at another way, one could ponder whether the gm of an unnamed perennial playoff team make the same move in the same situation. i think it's highly unlikely that he would.

I don't know. Watkins was graded higher on a few team's board than anyone in the 2013-2015 draft. He was the highest rank player on the Bills board in a 3 year window. To them (and others) you were chasing an ELITE player. Not a nice player like a Gilmore but a franchise cornerstone. If you asked the Browns would you trade Justin Gilbert and Cameron Erving for Sammy Watkins I would imagine that it would be a pretty quick phone call.

 

To flip the question though would you have been okay if the Bills had Watkins a 2015 1st and no Cyrus Kuoandjio? That was the other option. They could have used their 2014 2nd instead of the next year's 1st in all likelihood. The 2014 draft was said to have good depth and the 2015 draft only had 19 players with a 1st round grade. They opted to keep the pick in 2014 but I assume if you added Watkins while just subtracting CK you would be thrilled.

I generally agree with this. It's more about the position value. Great teams are not built on Wrs. How many great Wrs haven't won SBs?

 

A great wr is pointless if your qb and line suck. I love Watkins but he will never be a major difference in wins and losses. He still is a great, great talent.

I think that this is fair. Look at the damage that he did last year when he got pretty good QB play. Now imagine, if he played with Aaron Rodgers. We would think that the guy was Jerry Rice 2.0.

 

I guess that I just view it as when you have a chance to get a great player you do it. I always said and still believe that the only time that you trade up is for a high floor, high ceiling guy. In that draft those two players were Watkins and Mack. You can't trade up for someone with a lot of risk (like Clowney) because the downside is potentially catastrophic. You can't trade up for a high floor low ceiling guy like Jake Mathews because the cost is not worth the lack of upside. If the player isn't very good with a chance to be elite you should never trade up.

[C.Biscuit97]

I don't know. Watkins was graded higher on a few team's board than anyone in the 2013-2015 draft. He was the highest rank player on the Bills board in a 3 year window. To them (and others) you were chasing an ELITE player. Not a nice player like a Gilmore but a franchise cornerstone. If you asked the Browns would you trade Justin Gilbert and Cameron Erving for Sammy Watkins I would imagine that it would be a pretty quick phone call.

 

To flip the question though would you have been okay if the Bills had Watkins a 2015 1st and no Cyrus Kuoandjio? That was the other option. They could have used their 2014 2nd instead of the next year's 1st in all likelihood. The 2014 draft was said to have good depth and the 2015 draft only had 19 players with a 1st round grade. They opted to keep the pick in 2014 but I assume if you added Watkins while just subtracting CK you would be thrilled.

But again position value. IMO and think a lot of people's, receiver isn't high up on the positional ranking. For instance, Watkins is probably a better talent than Gilmore. But a good CB like Gilmore might be worth more than Watkins. Same thing with Passrushers and obviously qbs.

 

Good franchises don't spend too many valuable receivers on Wrs. See the Pats, Steelers, and Packers.

I don't know. Watkins was graded higher on a few team's board than anyone in the 2013-2015 draft. He was the highest rank player on the Bills board in a 3 year window. To them (and others) you were chasing an ELITE player. Not a nice player like a Gilmore but a franchise cornerstone. If you asked the Browns would you trade Justin Gilbert and Cameron Erving for Sammy Watkins I would imagine that it would be a pretty quick phone call.

 

To flip the question though would you have been okay if the Bills had Watkins a 2015 1st and no Cyrus Kuoandjio? That was the other option. They could have used their 2014 2nd instead of the next year's 1st in all likelihood. The 2014 draft was said to have good depth and the 2015 draft only had 19 players with a 1st round grade. They opted to keep the pick in 2014 but I assume if you added Watkins while just subtracting CK you would be thrilled.

 

I think that this is fair. Look at the damage that he did last year when he got pretty good QB play. Now imagine, if he played with Aaron Rodgers. We would think that the guy was Jerry Rice 2.0.

 

I guess that I just view it as when you have a chance to get a great player you do it. I always said and still believe that the only time that you trade up is for a high floor, high ceiling guy. In that draft those two players were Watkins and Mack. You can't trade up for someone with a lot of risk (like Clowney) because the downside is potentially catastrophic. You can't trade up for a high floor low ceiling guy like Jake Mathews because the cost is not worth the lack of upside. If the player isn't very good with a chance to be elite you should never trade up.

Watkins is a stud and would be one of the best Qbs in NFL with better qb play.

 

That said, elite franchises would never pay the price to get Watkins. Calvin Johnson is one the greatest physical talents to ever play wr. How much did that affect Detroit in the long run? Very little and they didn't have to give up a first for him.

[Kirby Jackson]

But again position value. IMO and think a lot of people's, receiver isn't high up on the positional ranking. For instance, Watkins is probably a better talent than Gilmore. But a good CB like Gilmore might be worth more than Watkins. Same thing with Passrushers and obviously qbs.

 

Good franchises don't spend too many valuable receivers on Wrs. See the Pats, Steelers, and Packers.

 

Watkins is a stud and would be one of the best Qbs in NFL with better qb play.

 

That said, elite franchises would never pay the price to get Watkins. Calvin Johnson is one the greatest physical talents to ever play wr. How much did that affect Detroit in the long run? Very little and they didn't have to give up a first for him.

I guess that I just see it changing in the new pass happy NFL. Of the top 11 WR last year 8 of them were taken in the 1st round (1 of them won the Super Bowl).

[GunnerBill]

People say it is all about the record.... well let me give you the record since we drafted Sammy Watkins. 17-15.

 

Now compare that to the two years previous which were 12-20 or the two years prior to that which were 9-23.

 

We drafted the positions that people are arguing are more valuable - we went corner and we went D-line and we even went QB and we kept losing. The first round pick that pre-dated an end to the losing was Sammy Watkins.

 

I was torn on the trade at the time. I now absolutely believe it was the right move. There isn't a single doubt in my mind. Sammy is elite. He was the best receiver in the league the 2nd half of last season. If Tyrod even just plays the same again Sammy will have a monster, monster year.

 

This guy is not just good. He is great. You can keep the one handed catch machine. I wouldn't swap Sammy for a single other receiver in the NFL.

[C.Biscuit97]

I guess that I just see it changing in the new pass happy NFL. Of the top 11 WR last year 8 of them were taken in the 1st round (1 of them won the Super Bowl).

Fair point and you're right about the league changing. It's just such a dependent position. And D Thomas had 5 yards I think in the SB. . He was low on the list of reasons why the Broncos won the SB.

 

But Watkins is a stud. I just think it was too much for any wr minus Calvin Johnson.

People say it is all about the record.... well let me give you the record since we drafted Sammy Watkins. 17-15.

 

Now compare that to the two years previous which were 12-20 or the two years prior to that which were 9-23.

 

We drafted the positions that people are arguing are more valuable - we went corner and we went D-line and we even went QB and we kept losing. The first round pick that pre-dated an end to the losing was Sammy Watkins.

 

I was torn on the trade at the time. I now absolutely believe it was the right move. There isn't a single doubt in my mind. Sammy is elite. He was the best receiver in the league the 2nd half of last season. If Tyrod even just plays the same again Sammy will have a monster, monster year.

 

This guy is not just good. He is great. You can keep the one handed catch machine. I wouldn't swap Sammy for a single other receiver in the NFL.

Good post and I generally agree. I will say that Mario and Dareus are a lot more of the reason for those wins than Watkins. jMO.