thebandit27 Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 Sooooo you're saying it's complicated. Not at all
eball Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 Not at all What I'd really like to know, in order to understand the Bills' decision-making process here, is how MG performed on runs of 2nd and 6-9 yards to go in the 3rd quarter of games during which Shady had already rushed for at least 63 yards and Tyrod had a passer rating of somewhere between 82.6 and 93.4. That will tell me something.
YoloinOhio Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 What I'd really like to know, in order to understand the Bills' decision-making process here, is how MG performed on runs of 2nd and 6-9 yards to go in the 3rd quarter of games during which Shady had already rushed for at least 63 yards and Tyrod had a passer rating of somewhere between 82.6 and 93.4. That will tell me something. really makes you think
NewEra Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 (edited) Great post. I'm glad someone said this.I think Badol's point is that we have to play for the near term and not really think about the long term (2019 and beyond). Planning to lay low low for a couple of years and then become good because we accumulated 5th round picks is a recipe for continued failure. This is a short term league -- the most short term of all of them. And if there wver was a short-term position, it is RB. My two cents on Gillislee-- it is PATENTLY obvious that he is good and could start for a lot of teams. Is this not obvious to, well, everyone? And yes, his ypc is augmented by the presence of Taylor, as is McCoy's. That is also patently obvious. Thanks Dave. Makes sense. Yes, I think Gillislee could start for more than a few teams. Like I've said, I love Gillislee and really want to match the offer. I don't think that it's too much money for him and I think he's worth every penny. That being said, I can also see that there's 2 sides to every arguement and not every arguement has a definitive right or wrong answer. In this case, I think the 5th rd tender had a chance to put us in a win win situation. From the front offices standpoint, if they wanted to keep him for more than 1 season, placing the tender allowed another team to set the parameters for the deal and if we thought if he was worthy of said contract, we match and get him for more than just the one tendered season. If they didn't think he was worthy of it they're get a valuable pick in a deep draft that we only have 6th picks. With a 2nd rd tender, he'd be ours for 1 season and that's that. The pats made the contract tougher to swallow, but there's was a chance that a team would've signed him to a fair contract, one that we'd gladly pay and could keep him for more than a season, a la Ryan Groy. Sure it's a gamble, but every contract is a gamble. This way, they had 2 options. Like I've stated, I want gillislee back, but I can also see that there are 2 sides of the arguement and can see positive outcomes for both. The thing that hasn't been mentioned is our change of offenses. Sure, we're going to be heavy run offense, but we're going from a man block scheme to a zone. In most situations, the Kubiak/shanahan offense was led by 1 RB dominating and not action for the backups. Denver had multiple bell cow backs in 90s, Washington had Portis, Houston had Foster. Dennisons plan might be to feature McCoy even more. Or maybe he has so much confidence in his scheme that he doesn't need to pay the backup that much money and can fill the spot with a minimum salary, like olandis Gary and Terrell Davis. Point is, while YOU (Badol) may think there was only one proper way to play this hand (which is a 2nd rd tender) there are other positive outcomes that can play out. Your line of thinking is shortsighted and a bit cocky, especially coming from someone who is sitting on the couch. I get what your saying, the problem is, you don't get what anyone else is saying. It seems as if you just argue just to argue and can never see the other side of the coin. What I'd really like to know, in order to understand the Bills' decision-making process here, is how MG performed on runs of 2nd and 6-9 yards to go in the 3rd quarter of games during which Shady had already rushed for at least 63 yards and Tyrod had a passer rating of somewhere between 82.6 and 93.4. That will tell me something. Lol Edited April 24, 2017 by NewEra
Captain Murica Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 Was hoping this would hit 100 pages before the deadline. I'm hoping they do not match but would not be too upset if they did but I prefer the 5th round pick.
mikemac2001 Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 97 pages later and here's where we are: We can choose to keep a known quantity for upper-level backup RB money, or we can choose to go with an unknown quantity for lower-echelon backup money. How is this a difficult decision? There is no major salary-cap-impacting decision on the horizon for the upcoming season, so the only cap implications are on 2018, when the cap figure will actually be less than it will this season. Exactly the cap hit isn't the problem because he will be cheaper next year. It's if they value him or the 5th Rd pick more So the whole cap thing should be thrown out
NoSaint Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 Exactly the cap hit isn't the problem because he will be cheaper next year. It's if they value him or the 5th Rd pick more So the whole cap thing should be thrown out the cap is a small piece. Its the 5th AND some space we are getting back. I wouldnt stress hard over it. ultimately, the decision here should amount to "if shady gets hurt, am i comfortable with MG filling in for a few weeks" if the answer is yes -- no brainer, just do it and have the position settled. if its uncertain, you start leaning towards pass.
HappyDays Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 Crazy prediction: we use the extra 5th to trade up in the 2nd and snag Jabrill Peppers
YoloinOhio Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 Crazy prediction: we use the extra 5th to trade up in the 2nd and snag Jabrill Peppersto play RB
BillnutinHouston Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 I for one am pretty excited about my favorite football team parlaying a scrap heap mid-season free agent signing into an extra draft pick today. Don't understand the infatuation with picks. Crapshoots at best. Gillislee has already far outperformed the vast majority of 5th round picks, and his best years are still in front of him.
KellyToughII Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 Don't understand the infatuation with picks. Crapshoots at best. Gillislee has already far outperformed the vast majority of 5th round picks, and his best years are still in front of him. But he is just a backup.
dave mcbride Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 (edited) Thanks Dave. Makes sense. Yes, I think Gillislee could start for more than a few teams. Like I've said, I love Gillislee and really want to match the offer. I don't think that it's too much money for him and I think he's worth every penny. That being said, I can also see that there's 2 sides to every arguement and not every arguement has a definitive right or wrong answer. In this case, I think the 5th rd tender had a chance to put us in a win win situation. From the front offices standpoint, if they wanted to keep him for more than 1 season, placing the tender allowed another team to set the parameters for the deal and if we thought if he was worthy of said contract, we match and get him for more than just the one tendered season. If they didn't think he was worthy of it they're get a valuable pick in a deep draft that we only have 6th picks. With a 2nd rd tender, he'd be ours for 1 season and that's that. The pats made the contract tougher to swallow, but there's was a chance that a team would've signed him to a fair contract, one that we'd gladly pay and could keep him for more than a season, a la Ryan Groy. Sure it's a gamble, but every contract is a gamble. This way, they had 2 options. Like I've stated, I want gillislee back, but I can also see that there are 2 sides of the arguement and can see positive outcomes for both. The thing that hasn't been mentioned is our change of offenses. Sure, we're going to be heavy run offense, but we're going from a man block scheme to a zone. In most situations, the Kubiak/shanahan offense was led by 1 RB dominating and not action for the backups. Denver had multiple bell cow backs in 90s, Washington had Portis, Houston had Foster. Dennisons plan might be to feature McCoy even more. Or maybe he has so much confidence in his scheme that he doesn't need to pay the backup that much money and can fill the spot with a minimum salary, like olandis Gary and Terrell Davis. Point is, while YOU (Badol) may think there was only one proper way to play this hand (which is a 2nd rd tender) there are other positive outcomes that can play out. Your line of thinking is shortsighted and a bit cocky, especially coming from someone who is sitting on the couch. I get what your saying, the problem is, you don't get what anyone else is saying. It seems as if you just argue just to argue and can never see the other side of the coin. Lol Good post. I see your point. A question, though: why do people only bring 2nd and 5th round tenders? Is that the rule? Can't you offer, say, a 3rd or 4th round tender? Edited April 24, 2017 by dave mcbride
klos63 Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 But he is just a backup. he's still very important to the offense. 9 TD's are pretty valuable.
GG Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 Good post. I see your point. A question, though: why do people only bring 2nd and 5th round tenders? Is that the rule? Can't you offer, say, a 3rd or 4th round tender? I think there's only a 2nd round tender and the original pick tender, which is 5th for MG.
ProbablyWrong Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 Good post. I see your point. A question, though: why do people only bring 2nd and 5th round tenders? Is that the rule? Can't you offer, say, a 3rd or 4th round tender? The options, as I understand it, are "First Round Tender", "Second Round Tender", or "Original Round Tender". Gillislee was a 5th round pick, hence why it was a 5th round tender.
PaattMaann Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 he's still very important to the offense. 9 TD's are pretty valuable. just to put it out there: Karlos Williams TD's from the year before were replaced by Mike G...whats to say the next man up cant repeat that same production? This rushing offense proved they can make a capable 2nd RB (Karlos, then Mike, now who?) And for the record I'd like to keep Mike G
YoloinOhio Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 The options, as I understand it, are "First Round Tender", "Second Round Tender", or "Original Round Tender". Gillislee was a 5th round pick, hence why it was a 5th round tender. that's correct
DrDawkinstein Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 (edited) Don't understand the infatuation with picks. Crapshoots at best. Gillislee has already far outperformed the vast majority of 5th round picks, and his best years are still in front of him. He's already 26, will be 28 when Pats deal is up. You think those are "best years" for a RB in this league? Edited April 24, 2017 by DrDareustein
dave mcbride Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 The options, as I understand it, are "First Round Tender", "Second Round Tender", or "Original Round Tender". Gillislee was a 5th round pick, hence why it was a 5th round tender. OK - thanks (and thanks to Gerry too). I didn't know that.
NoSaint Posted April 24, 2017 Posted April 24, 2017 He's already 26, will be 28 when Pats deal is up. You think those are "best years" for a RB in this league? roughly, yea? Vet enough to know systems, blocking schemes etc.... but not losing steps yet? if doing a 2 year window on "prime years" you wouldnt shift it more than a year or so earlier.
Recommended Posts