K-9 Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 Anything BUT house money. Those were OUR assets we gave up in order to acquire that additional draft capital; our investment in time and money on the players traded. No house money involved. 1
Real McClappy Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 (edited) Ok, so let's say tomorrow the Bills trade 5 picks to get to #2. Then, on 4/26 with the #2 we select say Allen or Jackson as they are the Bills #1 prospect or "their guy". Will people be able to live with that? Heads will explode on draft day. Just because you want them to draft up to #2 and even if they do it will guarantee nothing. Whomever we draft this year I hope our fan base gives them a fair shake. But, I see the threads already after 2 starts "We should have drafted QB x as our QBx sucks" Edited March 20, 2018 by Real McCoy 1
ChevyVanMiller Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 2 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said: The draft capital we'll give up is house money, even if it's all the way up to the Giants' #2 pick. (Obviously all of this is merely opinion ... I apologize for adding one more thread to a seemingly inundated and frustrated board) Our #12 pick was the result of swapping 1sts and trading away a player who may have played well for this team in years past but almost never saw the field (did he ever?) in 2017, our first playoff year in 17 years as a rookie filled in capably for the year and will only get better. Our #22 pick was from KC last year in our trade down in the 1st where we acquired a guy in Tre White who probably should have been in the pro bowl conversation if not the pro bowl itself. One of our 2nd rounders was acquired trading away a talented but oft-injured WR who then wasn't even resigned by the same team who traded for him. And based on Sammy's new salary with KC, he wouldn't be with the Bills even if McDermott exercised his 5th year rookie option. One of our 3rd rounders... the 1st one in the 3rd round, was acquired by trading away a QB that there was absolutely no long term plan on and filled in his slot with a QB who is at least capable of competing for the starting QB job at less than 1/3rd the cost of the guy we just traded away. We take those 4 picks, all "house money," and trade them all to the Giants for the #2 pick to grab Rosen/Darnold/Mayfield (please GOD not Allen!!!) and Beane still has all of Buffalo's original picks with a pick in all the remaining rounds other than the 7th. And before you say that cost isn't realistic, if you take a look at the Jimmy Johnson draft chart, I think you'll find different: #12 = 1200 points #22 = 780 points #53 = 370 points #65 = 265 points Grand total = 2615 points #2 pick = 2600 points So we're giving away picks Beane has been shrewdly acquiring, not picks we were already going to naturally possess. Now, perhaps it's going to take one more pick like a 2nd rounders next year to sweeten the pot a little, but maybe not. And that's in trading up to #2, which I believe is the highest we're going. Imagine if we wait until draft day and see a guy we want fall to #4 with the Browns or #6 with the Colts... it'll cost less and we'll still get our QB. I'm a little baffled that some are complaining about the idea of giving up draft picks, even if it ensures McBeane can get "their guy." I view this as the most important draft we've seen since maybe 1983 because we know with almost 100% certainty that the intent is to draft the guy who's going to be our QB for the next 10-15+ years. We can do that in a very strong QB draft class... and we can do it with house money You regurgitate Mike Schopp quite well, you should at least credit him.
Steve Billieve Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Scorp83 said: I made the same thread, only I dumbed it down in 2 simple sentences... & everyone act like it was a joke...smh. sounds like you tossed out your opinion, but there was already a much more appropriate space on the board for it in another thread. What the OP posted would have been less appropriate in an existing thread because of its length and details. Edited March 20, 2018 by Steve Billieve 1
RochesterRob Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 19 minutes ago, Real McCoy said: Ok, so let's say tomorrow the Bills trade 5 picks to get to #2. Then, on 4/26 with the #2 we select say Allen or Jackson as they are the Bills #1 prospect or "their guy". Will people be able to live with that? Heads will explode on draft day. Just because you want them to draft up to #2 and even if they do it will guarantee nothing. Whomever we draft this year I hope our fan base gives them a fair shake. But, I see the threads already after 2 starts "We should have drafted QB x as our QBx sucks" At this point people here can not agree on the top 3 or top 2.
gobills1212 Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said: The draft capital we'll give up is house money, even if it's all the way up to the Giants' #2 pick. (Obviously all of this is merely opinion ... I apologize for adding one more thread to a seemingly inundated and frustrated board) Our #12 pick was the result of swapping 1sts and trading away a player who may have played well for this team in years past but almost never saw the field (did he ever?) in 2017, our first playoff year in 17 years as a rookie filled in capably for the year and will only get better. Our #22 pick was from KC last year in our trade down in the 1st where we acquired a guy in Tre White who probably should have been in the pro bowl conversation if not the pro bowl itself. One of our 2nd rounders was acquired trading away a talented but oft-injured WR who then wasn't even resigned by the same team who traded for him. And based on Sammy's new salary with KC, he wouldn't be with the Bills even if McDermott exercised his 5th year rookie option. One of our 3rd rounders... the 1st one in the 3rd round, was acquired by trading away a QB that there was absolutely no long term plan on and filled in his slot with a QB who is at least capable of competing for the starting QB job at less than 1/3rd the cost of the guy we just traded away. We take those 4 picks, all "house money," and trade them all to the Giants for the #2 pick to grab Rosen/Darnold/Mayfield (please GOD not Allen!!!) and Beane still has all of Buffalo's original picks with a pick in all the remaining rounds other than the 7th. And before you say that cost isn't realistic, if you take a look at the Jimmy Johnson draft chart, I think you'll find different: #12 = 1200 points #22 = 780 points #53 = 370 points #65 = 265 points Grand total = 2615 points #2 pick = 2600 points So we're giving away picks Beane has been shrewdly acquiring, not picks we were already going to naturally possess. Now, perhaps it's going to take one more pick like a 2nd rounders next year to sweeten the pot a little, but maybe not. And that's in trading up to #2, which I believe is the highest we're going. Imagine if we wait until draft day and see a guy we want fall to #4 with the Browns or #6 with the Colts... it'll cost less and we'll still get our QB. I'm a little baffled that some are complaining about the idea of giving up draft picks, even if it ensures McBeane can get "their guy." I view this as the most important draft we've seen since maybe 1983 because we know with almost 100% certainty that the intent is to draft the guy who's going to be our QB for the next 10-15+ years. We can do that in a very strong QB draft class... and we can do it with house money Totally agree. It's seemed starting at last years draft a cache of ammo was being collected. Most dont even realize the gravity of the picks singly (myself included and id imagine most pro trade up pov) on their own bc theyve always just been ammo. Based on just the fact we may never have that along with multiple potential big talent (and of course the house that could fit inside next yrs cap) makes it a once in however long opportunity to 'sell the farm' and not actually feel any repercussions (except possibly winning) past next yr if that 1st or 2nd has to be added. I hope the LOVE a guy who isn't the same as the browns bc if there ever was a time... It's now!! Edited March 20, 2018 by gobills1212
Steve Billieve Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 I think there's a general consensus on who the top 2 and 3 prospects are. Not saying people don't disagree with that consensus, but that will always be true.
Inigo Montoya Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 (edited) I don't understand the term house money. Money is money. It doesn't matter where it comes from, what matters is how you spend it. Those monies / draft picks can all go towards trading up on a possible franchise QB, or they can be used to draft several other players who are likely to be long term contributors on cheap rookie contracts for the team. The question is which of those two options is best for the long term interest of the Buffalo Bills. Where the draft picks came from is absolutely irrelevant and should have no bearing on how they are used. Those draft picks represent hard earned capital for our team and they need to be used wisely. Edited March 20, 2018 by Inigo Montoya
RocCityRoller Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 No, there is not enough difference between QB2 and QB5. For Sam Darnold, yes.
apuszczalowski Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 25 minutes ago, Inigo Montoya said: I don't understand the term house money. Money is money. It doesn't matter where it comes from, what matters is how you spend it. Those monies / draft picks can all go towards trading up on a possible franchise QB, or they can be used to draft several other players who are likely to be long term contributors on cheap rookie contracts for the team. The question is which of those two options is best for the long term interest of the Buffalo Bills. Where the draft picks came from is absolutely irrelevant and should have no bearing on how they are used. Those draft picks represent hard earned capital for our team and they need to be used wisely. Its not even really house money, the Bills had to give up valuable assets to get those picks. Those picks weren't just found or given to them just because One of those picks involved giving up the only experienced QB on the roster Another pick cost them a valuable starting OT (when healthy) to improve an existing pick Another pick cost them the chance to already have that possible franchise QB on their roster in order to move down to a lower spot Another Pick cost them Sammy Watkins Another pick cost them Ron Darby Another pick cost them Marcel Dareus If you bought a $50k dollar car a couple of years ago and sold it no for $20k that you are going to use to buy something else with, say a house. Do you consider that House money or are you now willing to overpay for the house because you need a place to live and you want a new one? 14 minutes ago, RocCityRoller said: No, there is not enough difference between QB2 and QB5. For Sam Darnold, yes. Even then, thats your opinion, you could probably find just as many people that agree with you saying that Darnold is the top guy who will say Rosen is the top guy, and probably just as many who might say Allen or Mayfield are the best guys available. No one is sure who is the top guy or the best one. All they know is that there are anywhere between 4-6 good ones, but no one that is a sure thing top pick.
TigerJ Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 Perhaps Jimmy Johnson's draft point chart, or some updated version of it has its uses, but it is not the only criteria to determining whether a trade up is "worth it." More important might be where a team is in its rebuilding process. The picks you give up to move up aren't just bargaining chips. They represent potential players who could have five or even ten year careers on your team. With six picks in the top 100, buffalo could conceivably end up with six starters, and even if not every pick ends up as a starter, those who don't could be quality depth and role players. That's not necessarily a reason not to trade. You have to judge what your team needs. If you've got holes all over the place, you might be better off with six new starters than with a possible superstar and a couple lower level starters (because what you're left with would be third round picks). Buffalo arguably could still stand a major upgrade at right tackle and right guard, but their major hole right now, outside of QB is linebacker. Beane has used free agency well to patch up the D-line. The question Beane will have to ask is if it is time not to go all in on the QB of the future and hope that Les Frazier can use a little smoke and mirrors to cover up the deficiencies in his linebacking corps, or he should build up the rest of the team and hope that the QB he picks a little later (Jackson, Rudolph, Lauletta, White or whoever), develops beyond expectations or that Daboll can work some magic and in the 2019 draft the right QB falls into our laps. There are advantages and disadvantages to both positions. I'll let Brandon Beane try and figure it all out.
transplantbillsfan Posted March 20, 2018 Author Posted March 20, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, K-9 said: Anything BUT house money. Those were OUR assets we gave up in order to acquire that additional draft capital; our investment in time and money on the players traded. No house money involved. An LT who never saw the field under McDermott and a QB & WR they inherited. The reason they can see it as house money is because they hadn't invested in any of those guys and, if anything, probably felt hamstrung by them. So not only did they unload them, they unloaded them for valuable draft capital. For the same reason I'm sure Jerry Hughes is still in play. 1 hour ago, Real McCoy said: Ok, so let's say tomorrow the Bills trade 5 picks to get to #2. Then, on 4/26 with the #2 we select say Allen or Jackson as they are the Bills #1 prospect or "their guy". Will people be able to live with that? Heads will explode on draft day. Just because you want them to draft up to #2 and even if they do it will guarantee nothing. Whomever we draft this year I hope our fan base gives them a fair shake. But, I see the threads already after 2 starts "We should have drafted QB x as our QBx sucks" Yes, I'll live with it, even if it's Allen, who I really don't want, because I'll trust that he's the guy McBeane truly believe in. #processtrusted Edited March 20, 2018 by transplantbillsfan
Virgil Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 We possess them because we gave up assets. They didn’t just fall in our laps. If we trade up to #2, TT, Glenn, and the 17 spots we stopped last year are part of that
Jauronimo Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 How is it house money when we gave up assets to acquire those picks?
Boatdrinks Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 (edited) It's definitely not house money. Assets such as Watkins, Cordy Glenn were traded, there were opportunity costs associated w passing on QBs in 2017. I also believe that the draft chart will go by the wayside with the demand for QBs. The Jets overpaid by several hundred points on the chart. I think the Bills will have to do overpay a significant amount. Especially if trying to get to 2 from 12. That's IF the Giants spot at 2 is even available. Not having a top ten pick to offer is going to be VERY costly. Edited March 20, 2018 by Boatdrinks
Jauronimo Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 I'm going to trade my car for cash then buy lottery tickets with all that sweet house money! 1
transplantbillsfan Posted March 20, 2018 Author Posted March 20, 2018 1 hour ago, Jauronimo said: I'm going to trade my car for cash then buy lottery tickets with all that sweet house money! Did you inherit your car from someone else? Was it a car you just kinda had thrust upon you? Was it a car that you really weren't all that excited about at all? Do you have a spare car? If you answered "yes" to all of the above, then go right ahead, although again, the lotto ticket analogy is a poor one. Instead, sell the car on Craigslist for whatever cash you can get and utilize that money for a down payment for a new car that will be a massive upgrade on that other car you really didn't invest in at all but also didn't really want
Real McClappy Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 (edited) 6 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said: Yes, I'll live with it, even if it's Allen, who I really don't want, because I'll trust that he's the guy McBeane truly believe in. #processtrusted OK, that's fine and I agree with that 100% as well. For the record I want nothing to do with Josh Allen. Did they really need to jump up to #2 using so much draft stock to do it though when 4 of these guys grade out almost the same? Best case for me, draft our QB somewhere between 12 and 7 and use 22 on a stud LB'er. Edited March 20, 2018 by Real McCoy
Magox Posted March 20, 2018 Posted March 20, 2018 This concept of "house money" is silly. Those are our assets that we traded for and they shouldn't be treated any differently than any other draft assets we own.
Recommended Posts