The "We have too many holes" argument

[bigduke6]

really we're just a QB away from being a threat in the AFC.

 

i look at most of our cast offs,  and they flourish elsewhere,  especially our maligned receivers,    competent QB throwing to them,  they put up numbers.   ex.  Woods,  Hogan,  Sammy, and even Goodwin.

 

sure we have holes to fill.  every team does.

 

DT is a must,  and of course QB.  

[Fetou]

2 minutes ago, prissythecat said:

 

 

Giving up six draft picks to move up is brilliant .  

You can turn over the whole !@#$ing team if you hit on a top QB. Especially in the current state of the NFL where there is a void of top-level QB talent left by the last generation retiring. It's not a short term decision. 

 

God forbid the Bills fail to go 7-9 for one year.

[Ga boy]

55 minutes ago, Fetou said:

I think the Bills should pretty much convert this draft into the #2 pick, and immediately start the QB selected. Deal whatever is needed to avoid giving up the 2019 first. Leave the team with many holes in important spots with and a rookie QB to struggle, post a poor record, and use the 2019 draft to shore up talent at the most needed positions, potentially with a blockbuster trade down of our own. From that point, we will ideally have an up-and-coming QB and a ton of cap space with some good young players to develop.
 

#21, #22, #53, #56, #65, Glenn, 2019 3rd, all for #2. Stay quiet in free agency this year, let young players start over veterans.  

SO it better be Lamar who has the wheels to run for his life.

[CheshireCT]

It's all about risk. If you bet the whole draft on a QB you take a big risk on one player. If you stay put and use all the picks, you spread the risk out and will likely have some great players and a few that don't pan out. For this reason, it's easier to convince yourself to stay put and make the "safer bet." But the problem is, it's SO HARD to get an amazing QB. Unless you draft one, it's nearly impossible to get one.

 

I'm all for betting the draft on a QB if the team has confidence in the guy. Every other player on the team is important, but it's MUCH easier to find players to plug holes at every other position in creative ways....for instance we saw how Beane signed some quality "no-name" guys to fill spots on the team last year for reasonable prices. Also, every other position on the team is more interchangeable and can adapt to new schemes and such. Of course it would be great to have stars at every single position, but even if you lose those guys because they cost too much, they're much easier to replace than quarterbacks. It's important that a GM has this kind of sense.

[Brand J]

Kansas City moved from #27 all the way to #10 by trading a 2018 first round draft pick. 17 spots in exchange for ONE extra first round pick. That's it. I don't have the draft value chart, but we can either give up both firsts for a pick in the top 10, or give up one and a second rounder. Any trade that includes more than multiple firsts doesn't interest me, not for this QB class.

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

With getting the 3rd rounder for TT, I'm not as concerned as likely can move up to #3 and still keep one 2nd and one 3rd round pick this year for other holes.  However still makes me nervous as for every "Can't Miss" pick out there in this years QB class there's also seems to be as many "Can't Make It" articles too.  So who ever we give up all these picks for will be great if it works out and we do get the right guy.  But history says probably 50% of this years QB picks will flame out.

[OldTimer1960]

43 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

With getting the 3rd rounder for TT, I'm not as concerned as likely can move up to #3 and still keep one 2nd and one 3rd round pick this year for other holes.  However still makes me nervous as for every "Can't Miss" pick out there in this years QB class there's also seems to be as many "Can't Make It" articles too.  So who ever we give up all these picks for will be great if it works out and we do get the right guy.  But history says probably 50% of this years QB picks will flame out.

I think it is even a bit worse than this.  50% bust probability is about right, but the "other" 50% is probably really 48% "decent to good starter, but can't single-handedly carry a team" and 2% "HOF level team carrying superstar".

 

if that is true, after giving up both firsts a 2nd and maybe next year's 1st, you need to hope you get a good starter and that he doesn't get ruined/run out of town in the next two years when the lack of picks will certainly hinder the ability to put a good team around him.  Maybe by year 3 they'll be able to build some talent around him and the team can do well...

Edited March 11, 2018 by OldTimer1960

[MJS]

Good post. I agree with it all. This team absolutely has holes, but we had holes last year and McDermott made it work. We went in to every game knowing that we had the potential to win it, even though we lacked talent across the board.

 

Get the QB, put some Band-Aids on the rest of the holes for a season. You can make it work. Continue to upgrade when you see an opportunity and next year draft more talent.

 

Slowly we'll see this team get better and better as we bring in more talent and guys that fit the schemes and culture.

 

Now, if the QB we do take doesn't pan out it will be another roller coaster.

[Lurker]

1 hour ago, JayBaller10 said:

Kansas City moved from #27 all the way to #10 by trading a 2018 first round draft pick. 17 spots in exchange for ONE extra first round pick. That's it. I don't have the draft value chart, but we can either give up both firsts for a pick in the top 10, or give up one and a second rounder. Any trade that includes more than multiple firsts doesn't interest me, not for this QB class.

 

I'm with you.   This QB class is not 1983 2.0.    We need a QB, but we also need to be realistic about what the cost/benefit of a Rosen or Mayfield is.   If you think they're potential HOFs, then 4-5 draft picks can be justified.   If you think they're Wentz, Goff, Marriota, then 2-3 picks are OK.  If you think they're just average starting quality NFL prospects, then I don't want to give up more than 2 picks...

[OldTimer1960]

10 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

I'm with you.   This QB class is not 1983 2.0.    We need a QB, but we also need to be realistic about what the cost/benefit of a Rosen or Mayfield is.   If you think they're potential HOFs, then 4-5 draft picks can be justified.   If you think they're Wentz, Goff, Marriota, then 2-3 picks are OK.  If you think they're just average starting quality NFL prospects, then I don't want to give up more than 2 picks...

Yes, and they very likely are not HOFers - maybe very good, but odds are way against HOF level.

 

i am not sure we want to include Mariota with Goff and Wentz.  He was pretty bad last year.

[DJB]

Once you have a franchise QB the rest of the holes become much easier to fill.

 

Get that QB this year. Punt next season and reload again at next years draft.

 

If all goes right 2019 is our year. 

[OldTimer1960]

3 minutes ago, DJB said:

Once you have a franchise QB the rest of the holes become much easier to fill.

 

Get that QB this year. Punt next season and reload again at next years draft.

 

If all goes right 2019 is our year. 

But if the coin comes up tails and the QB is a bust, then what with no 1st next year?

4 minutes ago, DJB said:

Once you have a franchise QB the rest of the holes become much easier to fill.

 

Get that QB this year. Punt next season and reload again at next years draft.

 

If all goes right 2019 is our year. 

Also, Colts haven’t won much even though they have Andrew Luck.

[ColdFront_USAF]

6 hours ago, jaybee said:

OK, I'll respectfully disagree.  I'd rather they lose picks for a proven Vet rather than losing picks and  playing Russian roulette on a high probability draft bust.  We've seen that movie too many times.  I'd go get a vet but I would also draft whomever is left that fits our scheme as a developmental project. Giving away the farm for a "might be good" QB isnt a good idea IMHO.

 

Its just an opinion so please dont jump off a cliff fellas. 

 

Isn't this the movie that we have seen too many times? How many veteran cast offs have we tried in the last 20 years, while having a Cardale Jones or Peterman developing behind them? 

 

Sure we've seen other teams miss on high qbs, but the Bills have taken so few actual shots at one over the drought. I'm in my 20s and the only first round qb I can clearly remember drafting is EJ, and that's just sad. 

 

I understand your point. If we trade away this draft for a quarterback that busts, we lose out on an opportunity to get 5 impact players and hit the reset button with no qb and no talent. But in my irrelevant opinion, I think it's a risk you have to take. Payoff is too big. 

[K-9]

There are too many holes every year for teams. But all those other holes combined don't begin to be as deep as the one at QB. 

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

This is no time to be risk averse. Go get the guy, otherwise you are hoping for friggin' miracle like NE had 20 years ago. That is not a plan it is luck.

[GoBills808]

4 hours ago, OldTimer1960 said:

Also, Colts haven’t won much even though they have Andrew Luck.

Yeah only 3 straight playoff appearances, two division titles, and one AFC Championship game. We can definitely scoff at that.

[BullBuchanan]

You think EJ is one of the worst QBs you've ever seen? Is he the only QB you've ever seen?

 

He's undeniably the best QB of his class, so what does that make the other guys? He's still in the league after 5 years, so what does that make the hundreds of NFL QBs that didn't make it that far?

He wasn't good, but he wasn't awful, and I don't think he's started his last game, either. 

[ColdFront_USAF]

5 hours ago, BullBuchanan said:

You think EJ is one of the worst QBs you've ever seen? Is he the only QB you've ever seen?

 

He's undeniably the best QB of his class, so what does that make the other guys? He's still in the league after 5 years, so what does that make the hundreds of NFL QBs that didn't make it that far?

He wasn't good, but he wasn't awful, and I don't think he's started his last game, either. 

 

Yes I do, and no, I've been watching football my entire life, I'm well aware of the difference between good and EJ Manuel. He's still in the league because he's cheap (nobody is going to pay him much) and because he has the physical prototype that teams look for. Makes for a half decent backup if you already have your starter in place. 

[BullBuchanan]

3 hours ago, ColdFront_USAF said:

 

Yes I do, and no, I've been watching football my entire life, I'm well aware of the difference between good and EJ Manuel. He's still in the league because he's cheap (nobody is going to pay him much) and because he has the physical prototype that teams look for. Makes for a half decent backup if you already have your starter in place. 

Did your life start in 2013? This is such ridiculous hyperbole. Then again, it's Buffalo I guess.

[Lfod]

From what I've seen on these boards is this off-season has a decent amount of choices of QBs in free agency and in the draft. I have no real preference I just hope they work some magic.

Edited March 12, 2018 by Lfod