Boatdrinks Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 I actually am fine with taking a 4th a year later. A 4th is better than a 5th. Period. I think the reason people like to downgrade it by a round for being a year later is the FO wants picks soon to keep their jobs. I LOVE being smart over "needing fast help" to save FO jobs. What's better for the franchise? It's just that time devalues the asset. Money now is worth more than money later. It's the same concept.
Bills Pimpin' Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 On its own the RR deal isn't a tank. But the high picks from the last 3 years are now virtually gone from the roster. Ragland is not back fully from his injury, but there is now way he is a third line talent in the NFL . Definitely not on this roster, with little of quality at LB. As a whole these moves of purging young talent look like a tank job. The only odd thing is keeping the aging vets around. These players were of higher talent than the picks received in return, so it's hard to see how the overall talent level will be improved. Perhaps McBeane will have the best drafting results seen by this franchise since the Polian era. I will say the odds are against it and the new regime is stacking the odds against themselves. If the next few drafts are as good as this 2016 looks I'd say the odds are pretty good.
Boatdrinks Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 I would hardly consider 5 months an "era". And "all players traded" equates to exactly 4 (one of them being the 4th QB on the depth chart). Well I'll go out on a limb and guess that McBeane will be here for awhile. It will be considered an " era" in Bills history. There is a pattern with the propaganda being leaked out re: these players ... Agitprop
Fan in Chicago Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 We practically did. He got a long term high paying deal. The other thing is that you can hire someone with shared philosophies as a replacement instead of alternating 34, 43, 34 and likewise on offense. I read iron clad to mean that its not possible to break out of. I was hung up on semantics and also commenting that there is pretty much no contract which cannot be broken. The issue is the price (as in Dareus's contract).
Augie Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 It's just that time devalues the asset. Money now is worth more than money later. It's the same concept. No, it's not the same concept as the time value of money because money will accrue interest/dividend income, etc. over that year. THAT is why it's worth more to take a million now as opposed to a million in a year. The value of a draft choice is impacted more by the quality of the players you can chose from, whether it be a better draft year or an earlier round giving you access to higher valued players.
YoloinOhio Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 It's just that time devalues the asset. Money now is worth more than money later. It's the same concept.they can use the 2019 pick as a chip in moving up in the 2018 draft, they can also use it as a chip to acquire a player. It's an asset they can use in a number of ways, not just to select a player in the 4th rd of the 2019 draft.
Boatdrinks Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 If the next few drafts are as good as this 2016 looks I'd say the odds are pretty good. Hmmm a CB and what might be a good #2 WR? You are easily pleased. Super Bowl in 2024
Fan in Chicago Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 they can use the 2019 pick as a chip in moving up in the 2018 draft, they can also use it as a chip to acquire a player. It's an asset they can use in a number of ways, not just to select a player in the 4th rd of the 2019 draft. Ya but if used in 2018, it would have a 5th rounder value or lower depending on our desperation.
Boatdrinks Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 No, it's not the same concept as the time value of money because money will accrue interest/dividend income, etc. over that year. THAT is why it's worth more to take a million now as opposed to a million in a year. The value of a draft choice is impacted more by the quality of the players you can chose from, whether it be a better draft year or an earlier round giving you access to higher valued players. And inflation will erode the value over time.. This isn't about money and it's simpler than that. A pick two years from now is less valuable because... it's two years from now. Time means a lot in the NFL they can use the 2019 pick as a chip in moving up in the 2018 draft, they can also use it as a chip to acquire a player. It's an asset they can use in a number of ways, not just to select a player in the 4th rd of the 2019 draft. Yes they can. I doubt it will result in a player as good as Ragland was in College. I could be wrong , but we haven't seen great drafting around here in manny many years and these guys have no track record so I'm not optimistic.
Augie Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 (edited) And inflation will erode the value over time.. This isn't about money and it's simpler than that. A pick two years from now is less valuable because... it's two years from now. Time means a lot in the NFL Only if you have a FO desperate to keep their jobs. A 4th is better than a 5th. Period. To say Two years form now is trying to imply more than it is, as it's only one year down the road from what could have been had. Nice try at the twist however. (Seriously, I appreciate that stuff.) And your inflation argument fails, as only Rex couldn't manage to do better than inflation. That was a reach on your part to try to support your pre-conceived opinion. Edited August 29, 2017 by Augie
Boatdrinks Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 Only if you have a FO desperate to keep their jobs. A 4th is better than a 5th. Period. And your inflation argument fails, as only Rex couldn't manage to do better than inflation. That was a reach on your part to try to support your pre-conceived opinion. I'm only going by how GMs around the league look at the value. Thanks
Domdab99 Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 Guys, trading a 3rd string LB isn't "tanking." Jesus.
Augie Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 I'm only going by how GMs around the league look at the value. Thanks Most GM's worried about being employed in 12 months. I actually like that we didn't worry about that. And please don't think I'm being snarky, that's not my deal. Just a difference of opinion.
Bills Pimpin' Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 Hmmm a CB and what might be a good #2 WR? You are easily pleased. Super Bowl in 2024 A starting corner, a potential #1 receiver, what looks like at the minimum an excellent backup QB, and an extra 1st round pick in 2018. Your memory sucks and you are too hard to please. Maybe you like 2 firsts for Sammy Watkins. Maybe you are that guy.
Paulus Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 Should have held onto him so we could have used him when McBeane Getz fired and we switch back to the 3-4...
BaaadThingsMan Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 Since I don't think they'd wanna help KC, this year especially, they must think Ragland really really sucks
Thurman#1 Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 (edited) If the next few drafts are as good as this 2016 looks I'd say the odds are pretty good. Hmmm a CB and what might be a good #2 WR? You are easily pleased. Super Bowl in 2024 A CB and what might be a good #2 WR and several more guys ... and a second first rounder next year. He isn't easily pleased. It's not easy to get somebody to give you two firsts for something. It was dumb when we did it for Sammy and it was smart when we got the Chiefs to do it this year, especially in a draft which at least so far looks strong in QBs early. It's just that time devalues the asset. Money now is worth more than money later. It's the same concept. That's nonsense. Time doesn't devalue a draft pick. Yeah, in the trade chart you usually a higher draft pick the next year, but not because a third rounder next year is actually worth less in terms of likelihood of getting a good player than a fourth rounder this year. You have to pay more next year because it's only desperate GMs in a weak bargaining position who make dumb tradeups like that. The smart teams accept those trades and get the higher pick next year. Look at Belichick who has made an absolute field day of stealing that extra value from desperate dumb GMs his whole career. The "have to win this year" guys will accept the fleecing and trade away the higher pick next year. That doesn't mean the next year's pick will be worth less in terms of what can be gotten with the pick. Edited August 29, 2017 by Thurman#1
Coach Tuesday Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 Satan the Ogre focuses on the following: - Make teams play left handed, taking away what they do best. Rush 7, drop 10, triple team the #1 receiver, spies, whatever it takes to get them off their game - Make teams first prove their strengths on game day, people change day to day. They'll give up points if needed - Bend the rules into their favor, drawing more penalties on the other team where they are weak and staying away or masking suceptible fouls his team makes - Focus on obscure minute details first, and then work inwards to the more fundamental. See things the opposition do not know about themselves - Make no mistakes of their own. Simplify if needed. Uncoachable fan favorites are gone. - Have their best players win the game. Not go for the buzzer beater, but dictate the game will be won in the red zone or the big play or ball control per the talent - Influence the league to change rules. Grudge match with no PI when Brady's starting out, then PI every down and no hits when Brady's a star. None of that involves who has their hand down, or how the plays get called in. Might as well start busting up a house based on what's in your toolbox. Quality post.
oldmanfan Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 Setting aside the fact that there are no iron clad contracts, would you have given one to Rex Ryan ? I never would have hired Rex.
May Day 10 Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 They have had a long time run of awful hires. The only two gms/coaches who have achieved equal level employment post bills... are the two guys who voluntarily walked away
Recommended Posts