JohnC Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 And i think that is the quandary McBeane faced. I don't think there is one person who can say with a straight face the Bills offense is better off without Sammy. But let's say he gets you 2 extra wins, and now you go 7-9 instead of 5-11. Now, you don't have that extra second, you are faced with a tag/no tag decision, and you prolly still do not have enough ammo to get a franchise QB. And roundand round we go as Bills fans Terrific post and point. The Whaley roster was built to be at best an 8-8 roster. McDermott and Beane are not attempting to build off of it but to dramatically rebuild it and restructure it cap wise. In short order they not only reshaped the defensive backfield but also restructured the cap balance in that unit. As you smartly understand there is a bigger picture that goes beyond a particular controversial transaction. It is about looking at the roster as a whole and reconfiguring it so that it is better balanced from both a talent and cap standpoint.
BuffaloRebound Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 If QB needy teams are ahead of the Bills, that extra 2nd round pick won't matter one bit. It will if Bears or Colts are in a position to draft one of the top QBs.
CommonCents Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 If QB needy teams are ahead of the Bills, that extra 2nd round pick won't matter one bit. That's right. For the Bills to move up in a major deal teams are going to want future Bills picks. That KC pick would be a throw in when it comes to climbing into the top 3 of this draft.
JohnC Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 If QB needy teams are ahead of the Bills, that extra 2nd round pick won't matter one bit. That second round pick certainly can tip the balance if the extra first round pick and third round pick are added to the deal.
IDBillzFan Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 And i think that is the quandary McBeane faced. I don't think there is one person who can say with a straight face the Bills offense is better off without Sammy. But let's say he gets you 2 extra wins, and now you go 7-9 instead of 5-11. Now, you don't have that extra second, you are faced with a tag/no tag decision, and you prolly still do not have enough ammo to get a franchise QB. And roundand round we go as Bills fans All I'm suggesting is let's consider this deal not from a one year perspective but consider it from at least a three year perspective. You still might not agree with the deal but it should become more understandable and reasonable. You boys need to hush with this long-term thinking and planning stuff, grab yourselves a torch and pitchfork and join the riot!
26CornerBlitz Posted September 22, 2017 Author Posted September 22, 2017 That second round pick certainly can tip the balance if the extra first round pick and third round pick are added to the deal. Won't matter. Those teams will select their potential franchise QB regardless of a Bills' offer if the prospects are as good as some are saying.
CommonCents Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 That second round pick certainly can tip the balance if the extra first round pick and third round pick are added to the deal. Have you seen the haul it took for the Rams to go from 15th to 1 when they selected Goff? The Bills would basically need to trade away 5/6 of their picks in the first three rounds in 18' and then trade away their first for the following year.
JohnC Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 Won't matter. Those teams will select their potential franchise QB regardless of a Bills' offer if the prospects are as good as some are saying. I'm not looking at the top two qbs as being necessarily attainable. However, if you consider the top five prospects as being legitimate franchise qb prospects then we should be in the running. If we don't find ourselves in position to draft a franchise qb then use the picks to bolster the roster. Let's not again be so foolish as to take the EJ first round route. Have you seen the haul it took for the Rams to go from 15th to 1 when they selected Goff? The Bills would basically need to trade away 5/6 of their picks in the first three rounds in 18' and then trade away their first for the following year. Refer to post #904.
plenzmd1 Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 (edited) Have you seen the haul it took for the Rams to go from 15th to 1 when they selected Goff? The Bills would basically need to trade away 5/6 of their picks in the first three rounds in 18' and then trade away their first for the following year. so many chips still to fall, will be fascinating to watch down the stretch. If the Colts shut down Luck, if the Bears continue to be bad, if Cousins winds up in San Fran and they are close to the top of the draft, all could potentially be in front of the Jets. PLus, seems like 5 of the top 6 prospects can still go back to school next year. I was never a big draft guy, but you can bet dollars to donuts my son and I will be at draft in April. BTW, let's say Colts have top pick..I think it takes a 1,1,2,3 this year, and a 1 next to get it. Edited September 22, 2017 by plenzmd1
Kirby Jackson Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 Someone else brought up the point regarding Watkins and his status with the Rams. Will the Rams be able to sign him to his next contract? The Rams are going to be cap squeezed if they do go out and sign him at what his market rate is. They already have contract problems with some of their best players, now and next year. I have never been a doubter over Watkins's dynamic skills but it is a legitimate issue to have doubts about his durability. It appears to me that McDermott wasn't willing to offer Watkins a yield contract and saddle his cap with a contract that would limit other player options. Gilmore and his high cost requirements was let go and replaced with a rookie player who is cheaper and more effective in his zone system. That was a good cost/benefit deal. Don't be dismissive of getting another starting CB in the Watkins deal. And if that acquired second pick is used in a deal to draft a high end qb prospect then the Watkins deal looks much better, at least in my eyes. My point here is that the Watkins deal is not such an irrational and imbalanced deal as some people are trying to portray it (not necessarily you?) Sometimes a deal is good for each party involved in the transaction because each team has different circumstances. Ask yourself if the Rams have Watkins for one year is it a good deal for them? All I'm suggesting is let's consider this deal not from a one year perspective but consider it from at least a three year perspective. You still might not agree with the deal but it should become more understandable and reasonable. Fair questions and I agree 100% on the Gilmore deal. He's a nice player but not worth that money. I felt the same way on Woods too. If he was at $4M it's an easy decision. The Rams are supposedly already working on the Watkins extension. They are going to spend A LOT this offseason between him and Donald. They probably let Trumaine Johnson walk. As of right now though they have the 3rd most cap space in the league next year. They can add $6.5M by cutting Saffold, $7M by cutting Barron, $4.1M by cutting Brockers and the one that will almost assuredly happen, $11.5M to cut Quinn. Basically, they can add $30M more if they want!!! They are in great cap shape. I see it as an imbalanced deal because the Bills sold low. The return was okay but I'd never trade Watkins for Gaines and pick 40. That's a dime for 2 nickels. Time will tell how it will play out but I am very confident that the Rams will look back on the trade as one of the turning points for their franchise. I'm glad that we sent him somewhere like that though that you only have to see every 4 years.
GunnerBill Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 so many chips still to fall, will be fascinating to watch down the stretch. If the Colts shut down Luck, if the Bears continue to be bad, if Cousins winds up in San Fran and they are close to the top of the draft, all could potentially be in front of the Jets. PLus, seems like 5 of the top 6 prospects can still go back to school next year. I was never a big draft guy, but you can bet dollars to donuts my son and I will be at draft in April. BTW, let's say Colts have top pick..I think it takes a 1,2,3 this year, and a 1 next to get it. And yes, our #1, not the Chiefs Depends where the Bills pick is. If the Bills are at say 7 or 8 (not unrealistic) I think both our 2018 #1s, one of our 2018 #2s and obe of our 2018 #3s would get it done.
CommonCents Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 so many chips still to fall, will be fascinating to watch down the stretch. If the Colts shut down Luck, if the Bears continue to be bad, if Cousins winds up in San Fran and they are close to the top of the draft, all could potentially be in front of the Jets. PLus, seems like 5 of the top 6 prospects can still go back to school next year. I was never a big draft guy, but you can bet dollars to donuts my son and I will be at draft in April. BTW, let's say Colts have top pick..I think it takes a 1,1,2,3 this year, and a 1 next to get it. Sounds about right if the Bills land at the 10th pick or so. Seeing the haul that it would take and the holes in the current roster I'm ready for the tank. If they can get the QB of their choice without trading away picks that would set them up for a franchise altering draft. If they end up picking 5th and the QB they want is going 2nd just give up all the picks and go get him. No more excuses. Come out of that draft with "your guy" even if it means leaving with nothing else.
26CornerBlitz Posted September 22, 2017 Author Posted September 22, 2017 I'm not looking at the top two qbs as being necessarily attainable. However, if you consider the top five prospects as being legitimate franchise qb prospects then we should be in the running. If we don't find ourselves in position to draft a franchise qb then use the picks to bolster the roster. Let's not again be so foolish as to take the EJ first round route. Refer to post #904. Well quite a bit certainly depends on which QB prospects declare and how many teams have a need that might be in line ahead of the Bills.
apuszczalowski Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 (edited) Your point might have more validity if Watkins was an older player, but we're talking about a guy who's just 24 years old. but you are only guaranteed one more year with him unless you are willing to tie up a large chunk of your cap space to keep him around.so it doesn't matter if he is 24/25, 20 or 45, your only going to get one more year if you picked up his 5th year option. Something the front office didn't want to do based off his history of not being able to stay on the field or always playing with some sort of injury. So were those same comments about the Bills letting all the great players go being made about whitner? Byrd? Maybin? How many people here expected or wanted the bills to pay what the rams did for woods? The majority eoukd have lived to bring him back but at a much lower cost, which is most likely the same thought as the front office. Almost everyone was ready to pack Goodwins stuff and send him out the door too because he could not be expected to stay on the field healthy. Even Hogan many here couldn't wait to get rid of and he was hated around here, no one understood what was seen in him until the Pats picked him up and then all the whining came out that the bills let him go. Edited September 22, 2017 by apuszczalowski
26CornerBlitz Posted September 22, 2017 Author Posted September 22, 2017 but you are only guaranteed one more year with him unless you are willing to tie up a large chunk of your cap space to keep him around.so it doesn't matter if he is 24/25, 20 or 45, your only going to get one more year if you picked up his 5th year option. Something the front office didn't want to do based off his history of not being able to stay on the field or always playing with some sort of injury. So were those same comments about the Bills letting all the great players go being made about whitner? Byrd? Maybin? News flash! Football players get injured and I don't see other NFL teams being so quick to trade away talented young players. IMO it's smart to keep guys like Watkins around, but instead the Bills extended Eric Wood a pretty good player at 30+ years old who has twice been felled by season sending leg injuries. Doesn't add up to me. This can't be a real question regarding Whitner and Maybin?
26CornerBlitz Posted September 22, 2017 Author Posted September 22, 2017 @Cole_Kev Goff & Wentz improving their true pass efficiency in year 2. Historically, successful QBs need to show some promise in their second seasons
Deranged Rhino Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 This morning kind of feels like the day after a loss for me. I didn't know that it would because I enjoyed that game so much. I just keep thinking about how much bettter the guys the Bills got rid of are than the guys that the Bills got. It kind of has me nauseated. Now we have all of the jokes and criticism too. It's very "Brownsish."
GG Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 (edited) @Cole_Kev Goff & Wentz improving their true pass efficiency in year 2. Historically, successful QBs need to show some promise in their second seasons So what does he say about QBs in their 7th season? Edited September 22, 2017 by GG
26CornerBlitz Posted September 22, 2017 Author Posted September 22, 2017 @Cole_Kev So what does he say about QBs in their 7th season? Goff & Wentz improving their true pass efficiency in year 2. Historically, successful QBs need to show some promise in their second seasons It says look elsewhere for a long term solution. Hopefully in the 2018 draft.
GoBills808 Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 @Cole_Kev Goff & Wentz improving their true pass efficiency in year 2. Historically, successful QBs need to show some promise in their second seasons I appreciate how that graph uses ANY/A as its variable.
Recommended Posts