revisiting 2018 draft possibilities. Did we overpay?

[VW82]

2 minutes ago, Philo said:

 

How do we not expect growing pains when this is done? I have definitely seen strides in Josh's game since the beginning of this season, not to mention his strides last season with a less talented group. The offense is getting there.

 

Yes, exactly. They are ALL still in wait and see mode. I just take issue with you claiming Josh has not shown a single glimpse in his career thus far.

 

Fair enough. Let me define "glimpse" from my POV so we're not stuck discussing two different things. In order to get on my radar as having potential franchise guy stuff, you half to go through a stretch of at least 6-8 games (probably more) where you play consistently well and make enough winning plays to lift your offense into top 10 territory. Even some of those guys wind up not becoming franchise guys, but very few aren't able to do that within their first two years and then suddenly become great down the road.

 

Josh has had his moments (i.e. that first half vs. Vikings last year was crazy) but he's never been able to sustain it for longer than a quarter or two unless he's playing Miami. That's not enough in my book. All the 2018 guys save for Lamar are so up and down.    

[Ethan in Cleveland]

5 hours ago, Virgil said:

He went last for a reason.  Stop with the hindsight.  It was one of the most QB needy drafts in recent memory and everyone passed on him. 
 

Also, Lamar isn’t who he is right now if he’s not playing in that Roman offense.  Right place, right time. 

So if Allen wins it doesn't matter how, but if Lamar wins he has to do it in a non Roman offense and passing the ball??

I thought all that matters was winning? 

 

[Utah John]

There are so many plays where the Bills receivers are all covered, play after play, particularly against man defense.  Beasley and Brown can find holes in zones, but against man to man, they're just some guys going for a jog with a defender right beside them.

 

The point is, Allen doesn't get to make a dozen throws a game because the receivers aren't open.  If he had a target, and he could hit it 8 or 9 times out of 12, that would be another 100 yards a game, easy.  

 

The O line is doing OK, and Allen is being smart with the ball.  It's the receivers who aren't helping him.  

 

I'm happy for Lamar Jackson and Patrick Mahomes, who are both very talented and are doing great.  I don't think either one of them would do any better than Josh Allen has done, playing with this team's personnel and coaches.  

 

As for Mahomes, he's been terrific, but if he hasn't reached his ceiling, he doesn't have one.  I have to figure he's as good as he's going to get.  He'll get more experienced with time but his wheels will wear out.    Jackson, geez who knows.  Can he keep improving?  As a fan, I hope both Mahomes and Jackson get better.  As a Bills fan I wish they both played in the NFC.

5 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Trading away the chance to pick Mahomes in 2017 looks like the biggest draft gaffe in team history.

 

But going up to get Allen was a sound move (and man were they lucky to get a second shot at a potential franchise QB the next year....and I'd rather be lucky than good).

 

The idea that trading up is somehow inherently bad business is just ignorance.

 

Giants traded up for Eli........and the picks they gave up netted a future HOF QB and a DPOY.....should've killed them........but instead the Giants won 2 SB's.

 

Bills didn't trade up for Big Ben.......saved draft capital.........got 15 more years out of contention.

 

Goes for WR's too.........Falcons traded a ransom to move up for Julio Jones and killed the Browns in that deal.

 

Lot's of trade ups turn out one-sided for the team that traded up. 

The Falcons gave up a ransom for Julio Jones.  They had Matt Ryan and they ended up looking brilliant.

 

The Bills gave up a ransom for Sammy Watkins.  Was it Watkins' fault he didn't make the Bills look smart?  Or was it injuries, or Tyrod Taylor?

[nedboy7]

9 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Trading away the chance to pick Mahomes in 2017 looks like the biggest draft gaffe in team history.

 

But going up to get Allen was a sound move (and man were they lucky to get a second shot at a potential franchise QB the next year....and I'd rather be lucky than good).

 

The idea that trading up is somehow inherently bad business is just ignorance.

 

Giants traded up for Eli........and the picks they gave up netted a future HOF QB and a DPOY.....should've killed them........but instead the Giants won 2 SB's.

 

Bills didn't trade up for Big Ben.......saved draft capital.........got 15 more years out of contention.

 

Goes for WR's too.........Falcons traded a ransom to move up for Julio Jones and killed the Browns in that deal.

 

Lot's of trade ups turn out one-sided for the team that traded up. 

Check this article out. I know the consensus  on here is that most expert opinion can’t hold a candle to the wisdom of this board but it has some interesting points. 
 

https://www.vox.com/2015/4/30/8516007/nfl-draft-economics

[Philo]

4 minutes ago, VW82 said:

 

Fair enough. Let me define "glimpse" from my POV so we're not stuck discussing two different things. In order to get on my radar as having potential franchise guy stuff, you half to go through a stretch of at least 6-8 games (probably more) where you play consistently well and make enough winning plays to lift your offense into top 10 territory. Even some of those guys wind up not becoming franchise guys, but very few aren't able to do that within their first two years and then suddenly become great down the road.

 

Josh has had his moments (i.e. that first half vs. Vikings last year was crazy) but he's never been able to sustain it for longer than a quarter or two unless he's playing Miami. That's not enough in my book. All the 2018 guys save for Lamar are so up and down.    

 

Okay, there's our disconnect. About half a season of sustained top level play is much more than a glimpse to me. As you said he has had halves or games of looking really good, but is still inconsistent. I have faith he'll get there. 

[r00tabaga]

2 hours ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

Amanda is hot?

Circa 2002.......absolutely

[Virgil]

18 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

So if Allen wins it doesn't matter how, but if Lamar wins he has to do it in a non Roman offense and passing the ball??

I thought all that matters was winning? 

 

I’ve never been one to say a win is a win.  I’ve been critical of how the Bills have won as I do think it translates to full season success.  
 

For both QBs, they are still figuring things out.   Roman has a system that works very well with a Lamar type.  They were both right place, right time.  
 

But, as we know, the league catches up.   So, if by the end of year 3 Lamar is still doing what he’s doing, then I’d give him the approval.   However, like Vick and other running qbs, that style doesn’t usually last long unless they evolve as a passer.  Right now, a large part of Lamars success is that the linebackers play up for the run.  It’s basically play action every snap.  Teams will take that away or he will take a big hit.  Either way, he will have to grow.   
 

To answer your question, winning now is nice.  What matters the most is determining if we have a franchise QB.  If we went 6-10 this year and next, but Allen proved himself to be the man, I’d take that over scheming our ways to win and having to look for another QB in another year. 

[VW82]

12 minutes ago, Philo said:

 

Okay, there's our disconnect. About half a season of sustained top level play is much more than a glimpse to me. As you said he has had halves or games of looking really good, but is still inconsistent. I have faith he'll get there. 

 

FWIW Baker arguably hit that point in the latter half of 2018. It seems like a really high bar to set but a lot of QBs hit it. That's why it's only a glimpse. 

[BADOLBILZ]

6 minutes ago, nedboy7 said:

Check this article out. I know the consensus  on here is that most expert opinion can’t hold a candle to the wisdom of this board but it has some interesting points. 
 

https://www.vox.com/2015/4/30/8516007/nfl-draft-economics

 

Yeah a lot of conclusions but no one-size-fits-all.

 

Teams that trade down win more?   Well why do you trade down?  Because you don't need a perceived cornerstone prospect.......which means you are likely starting out from a better position.   Right?   Browns tried the Jimmy Johnson method.  They have traded down like crazy in recent years and it's netted tons of picks and mostly garbage.    Patriots trade down and win. 

 

Bottom line is you gotta draft well and trade well and handle FA well.

 

And if you do none of those things well you can still probably field a 7-9 team if you don't try to make any sudden moves on the field(Jauron Ball).

[Philo]

3 minutes ago, VW82 said:

 

FWIW Baker arguably hit that point in the latter half of 2018. It seems like a really high bar to set but a lot of QBs hit it. That's why it's only a glimpse. 

 

True, but he surely came crashing down from there this season. So back to your point from earlier - the 2018 QBs are still "wait and see". 

[In Summary]

5 hours ago, Nextmanup said:

No one should ever trade up, unless you going to get a blue chip franchise QB at the top of the draft.

 

That's my rule at least.

 

McBeane love to trade up all the time and have been burned by it.

 

 

Agree.

 

One counterpoint is that some will say that with 9 draft picks you're not going to be able to sign them all or there are not enough open spots on the team.  However, that assumes a GM is skilled to the point that they know all of their picks are NFL material - which is never the case.  Nobody hits 100%. 

 

Beane has shown he would rather draft one player in the 2nd round rather than 2 players from the 3rd and 5th round respectively (made up example).  Most times, I'd rather have a couple more draftees available to fight it out in camp and show they belong rather than assume I'm definitely going to hit on one player I bundled picks to get.

 

QB is the exception.

 

 

[Augie]

1 hour ago, BuffaninSarasota said:

that's nothing more than your opinion. I think we can all agree Allen has shown marked improvement across a number of categories from year 1 to now. Not bad for a kid who went to that high-octane program at Wyoming ......?

 

On top of that, there has been serious in-season progress. He’s been far more effective in avoiding the hero ball interception for weeks, and he’s cut down on the fumbles more recently. As I’ve said all along, I just want to see progress. The season is far from over, but to this point it’s hard to argue that we have not seen progress. 

[buffaloboyinATL]

In my opinion, if you get a true franchise QB, there is no such thing as over paying.  I am happy with Allen as our guy, so I don’t spend any time worrying about what it cost to get him or who else we could have drafted. There are way to many variables for that exercise to actually work.  

[TigerJ]

I try not to worry too much about past decisions.  In the case of Lamar Jackson, there were reasons why he was not considered among the top 4 QBs in the 2018 draft.  While there is a lot of science that goes into evaluating draft prospects, it is an inexact science at best.  I've said elsewhere I think Jackson has the perfect OC in Greg Roman for his skill set, and Roman has the perfect QB in Lamar Jackson for his offensive scheme. Whether or not Lamar Jackson has any real scheme versatility is unknown, but I couldn't blame a GM for doubting it.  He still doesn't have great mechanics throwing the ball.  It's also unknown whether a different OC would be able to adapt his pet offensive scheme to Lamar Jackson.  Greg Roman doesn't have to change his scheme.  It fits right out of his mind.

 

The other question is about the future.  One reason Baltimore has been so successful is that  Greg Roman's offensive scheme is one of a kind.  Most of the teams that play Baltimore are playing against it for the first time.  Over time, if Baltimore continues to enjoy such spectacular success, defensive coordinators are going to have to devote some serious study and get creative to try and contain it.  Eventually, somebody will figure it out.  Jackson's success will have to come solely from his ability and the ability of his supporting cast.  The novelty of the scheme will cease to be an advantage.

Edited November 20, 2019 by TigerJ

[Da webster guy]

6 hours ago, atlbillsfan1975 said:

Let’s revisit this in 5 years. The style of quarterback Lamar plays has shown it doesn’t have a long shelf life. 

 

Exactly.   Today I would take Lamar, if I had to play it long term I wouldn't.     

 

He sure is exciting to watch though.  Can't wait to face these guys here at home.   We can hang with this team.

[BADOLBILZ]

4 hours ago, VW82 said:

 

Not of being a franchise guy no. Those guys typically have multiple games where they pass for 300+ yards on good efficiency, and their offenses are usually in the top half of the league (top 10 for the best ones) barring extreme circumstances where there's little to no talent around them. That's not us. 

 

Josh has shown glimpses that he can become a good QB IMO, not a great one. Right now he's still arguably below average. I think most non-Bills fans would still have him out of the top 20.  

 

 

I agree with this but even if he's not an elite QB for his first 3-4 years he could still become one.    Key is he has to play well enough to win and comfortably keep his job then at some point elevate.  It was a while ago but Brady was not considered in Manning's category as a QB until 2007 or so.  He was a clutch game manager for a great HC/team.......until he suddenly became a guy who dominated.

[UncleChewy]

https://binged.it/2puR6Bk

[Hapless Bills Fan]

7 hours ago, Pete said:

I love Josh, and I'm happy he is the Bills QB.  That being said, me, and several others lobbied to hold onto all our draft picks, trade back if anything, and stand pat and draft Lamar Jackson.  We got ridiculed by many.

 

Alphadawg created a whole thread, The Case For Lamar Jackson.

 

Let the record state on 3/28/18- I am extremely against trading up into top 6 for QB- and massively overpaying.  The opportunity cost of squandering picks 12, 22, 53, 56, 65, 96 and a 2019 1st(which will be a high draft pick if we sacrifice drafts for a rookie QB).  Impact players that the Bills could miss out on(and whom would instantly upgrade Bills starters) include:

Roquan Smith, Derwin James, Vita Vea, Tremaine Edmunds, Isiah Wynn, Will Hernandez, Billy Price, Frank Ragnow, Denzel Ward, Lamar Jackson, Ronald Jones, Guice,  Vander Esch, James Washington, Cortland Sutton, Mike Hughes, Nick Chubb, Marcus Davenport, Mata’afa, Rashan Evans, Taven Bryan, Harrison Phillips, Josh Jackson, Christian Kirk, Hayden Hurst, Payne, Equanemius, Baker, Sam Hubbard, Ballage, etc.

 

Imagine if we stayed pat(or even better traded back)- the depth we would have on this team. Moral of the story- don't trade up, keep your picks,stockpile draft picks, let the board come to you

 

 

 

We could have 7 of the above and all our draft picks.  Or we can risk it all on a QB ad give all that up.

Please revisit and either give me **** or give me props.  Peace out

 

I think the bottom line is that it matters less if they overpaid or not, than it matters that they decided who they wanted, decided what it would take to get him, and pulled the trigger.

 

The downfall of some previous Bills teams was in sticking too hard to their player evaluation and not going after the players they were rumored to like because they had them lower, even though we needed a QB, a QB is way more important than a WR or whoever, and the guy was there when we picked.

 

They may have got it right with Josh.  They may have got it wrong.  But they took their shot, and I'm happy about that.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

15 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

I agree with this but even if he's not an elite QB for his first 3-4 years he could still become one.    Key is he has to play well enough to win and comfortably keep his job then at some point elevate.  It was a while ago but Brady was not considered in Manning's category as a QB until 2007 or so.  He was a clutch game manager for a great HC/team.......until he suddenly became a guy who dominated.

 

Good points.  Similar points about Wilson - he showed flashes, showed confidence, but he was a <200 ypg passer keeping defenses honest around strong run game his first year.  I remember talk about "has he really shown enough to pay him?" when he was still averaging 217 ypg after his third season.  He took a big step in his 4th year.

 

The ultimate example of a guy who took a long time to develop would probably be Alex Smith.  In his 6th, 7th years after  being drafted he was still this game manager, 200-215 ypg kind of guy.  He still was under Harbaugh his first year, but he took enough of a step that now he was a guy you could win with.  Then a year after moving to Kansas City, he took another big step.  I don't know if you'd call him elite, but he had become a very good quality QB.

[BillsfaninSB]

Will never hold the 2018 draft against Beane. I think he made the right moves with the assets he had at that particular time.  He got a QB that helped make this team more exciting.