eball Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 18 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: Obviously they did, and if, during that call, Sanders answered with "where do I sign?", there is no trade for Diggs. Totally disagree. Diggs is twice the player Sanders is right now and was always the target. Sanders was just going to be added competition for the room. 4
Mr. WEO Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 26 minutes ago, eball said: Totally disagree. Diggs is twice the player Sanders is right now and was always the target. Sanders was just going to be added competition for the room. You misunderstood my point. They weren't looking to get them both. Sanders's hesitance brought them Diggs. They didn't call Sanders back after that.
Doc Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said: Obviously they did, and if, during that call, Sanders answered with "where do I sign?", there is no trade for Diggs. The Bills contacted Sanders first? And then when he said had to sleep on it the Bills then started talking to the Vikings and traded for him in 30 minutes? LOL. Okay WEO. 1
Mr. WEO Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 2 minutes ago, Doc said: The Bills contacted Sanders first? And then when he said had to sleep on it the Bills then started talking to the Vikings and traded for him in 30 minutes? LOL. Okay WEO. The trade was in play. But they weren't going to get them both. This is clear. They didn't get the answer they were hoping for from Sanders, so they pulled the trigger on the Diggs trade closed the door on Sanders. Boom. This is what happened doc. It's not confusing or mysterious. In the end, both guys and all 3 teams got what they wanted: win-win-win.
Doc Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 Just now, Mr. WEO said: The trade was in play. But they weren't going to get them both. This is clear. They didn't get the answer they were hoping for from Sanders, so they pulled the trigger on the Diggs trade closed the door on Sanders. Boom. This is what happened doc. It's not confusing or mysterious. In the end, both guys and all 3 teams got what they wanted: win-win-win. Glad to see you admit the Diggs trade was "in play." In fact it had been in play since last season, when the Bills inquired about him but the Vikings wanted 2-1st roundes. So Diggs was obviously their plan A all along. And that should be common sense since he's a #1 WR and younger and better than Sanders is at this point. As for the timing, it doesn't tell us why the Bills made the trade for Diggs 30 minutes later. From the article, Sanders didn't have any other offers ("then I kind of waited) when the Bills made theirs, so there was no real urgency to make a move for Diggs.
Andrew Son Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said: You misunderstood my point. They weren't looking to get them both. Sanders's hesitance brought them Diggs. They didn't call Sanders back after that. You don't know that. I mean the Saints already have Micheal Thomas, right?
GunnerBill Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 3 hours ago, Doc said: No, he shouldn't have been surprised that the Bills moved on when he made them wait. It was the first day of the legal tampering period and the Bills were looking to get deals done quickly. It's not a hard concept, especially for a 10 year vet on his 3rd FA go-around. And Diggs was obviously plan A. You don't just put a deal like that together in 30 minutes. He probably would have said "thanks but we got our #1 guy." They tried to trade for Diggs before last season's trade deadline. He was almost certainly plan A. I wouldn't have minded Sanders. He still a decent player, but he doesn't 'move the dial' like Diggs.
CommonCents Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 8 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: They tried to trade for Diggs before last season's trade deadline. He was almost certainly plan A. I wouldn't have minded Sanders. He still a decent player, but he doesn't 'move the dial' like Diggs. Sanders has been a great come back story, I do think his luck runs out soon though.
eball Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said: You misunderstood my point. They weren't looking to get them both. Sanders's hesitance brought them Diggs. They didn't call Sanders back after that. Your point is wrong, in my opinion. They would have been happy to get Sanders also, but he chose to look elsewhere after seeing the room he would be competing with for playing time.
Mr. WEO Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 11 minutes ago, Doc said: Glad to see you admit the Diggs trade was "in play." In fact it had been in play since last season, when the Bills inquired about him but the Vikings wanted 2-1st roundes. So Diggs was obviously their plan A all along. And that should be common sense since he's a #1 WR and younger and better than Sanders is at this point. As for the timing, it doesn't tell us why the Bills made the trade for Diggs 30 minutes later. From the article, Sanders didn't have any other offers ("then I kind of waited) when the Bills made theirs, so there was no real urgency to make a move for Diggs. 7 minutes ago, SWATeam said: You don't know that. I mean the Saints already have Micheal Thomas, right? If Samuel says "I'm in" on that call, they aren't trading for Diggs. If the plan was to have them both, there would have called Samuel back after acquiring Diggs. Samuel didn't say yes. Immediately after (and not before) this, they went forward with the trade for Diggs and they no longer pursued Samuels. How does that not equate to Samuels is the guy they wanted as the Plan A? 1 minute ago, eball said: Your point is wrong, in my opinion. They would have been happy to get Sanders also, but he chose to look elsewhere after seeing the room he would be competing with for playing time. What are you basing this on? Did they call him back?
GunnerBill Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 3 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: If Samuel says "I'm in" on that call, they aren't trading for Diggs. If the plan was to have them both, there would have called Samuel back after acquiring Diggs. Samuel didn't say yes. Immediately after (and not before) this, they went forward with the trade for Diggs and they no longer pursued Samuels. How does that not equate to Samuels is the guy they wanted as the Plan A? What are you basing this on? Did they call him back? I think it is very likely that their plan the day before Free Agency was Sanders as plan A. But long term? They have wanted Diggs for months. He was the plan A+. They just likely thought he wasn't moving. The Athletic article on the trade last week basically said everything moved within a couple of hours. The Bills got a bit lucky that Sanders delayed because a guy they thought was out of reach suddenly became attainable. I agree for what it is worth they would not have signed both.
Mr. WEO Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 5 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: I think it is very likely that their plan the day before Free Agency was Sanders as plan A. But long term? They have wanted Diggs for months. He was the plan A+. They just likely thought he wasn't moving. The Athletic article on the trade last week basically said everything moved within a couple of hours. The Bills got a bit lucky that Sanders delayed because a guy they thought was out of reach suddenly became attainable. I agree for what it is worth they would not have signed both. Do you think if Sanders agreed over the phone to sign they would have given up a 1st and others to get Diggs minutes later?
HappyDays Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 Just now, Mr. WEO said: Do you think if Sanders agreed over the phone to sign they would have given up a 1st and others to get Diggs minutes later? Absolutely. Verbal agreements have been called off for much less. We know they tried trading for AJ Green and Diggs last year. They've been trying to get a 1A receiver for a while. Sanders agreeing in principle to a one year deal wouldn't mean they'd give that up.
Doc Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 5 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: If Samuel says "I'm in" on that call, they aren't trading for Diggs. If the plan was to have them both, there would have called Samuel back after acquiring Diggs. Samuel didn't say yes. Immediately after (and not before) this, they went forward with the trade for Diggs and they no longer pursued Samuels. How does that not equate to Samuels is the guy they wanted as the Plan A? They pursued Diggs first and Diggs is everyone's Plan A over a guy like Sanders. Just because the trade materialized after Sanders said he needed to think about it means little and if they really wanted him, they could have signed him as well.
Mr. WEO Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 Just now, HappyDays said: Absolutely. Verbal agreements have been called off for much less. We know they tried trading for AJ Green and Diggs last year. They've been trying to get a 1A receiver for a while. Sanders agreeing in principle to a one year deal wouldn't mean they'd give that up. Then why didn't they call him back to see what his decision was or to see what it would take to get him on the roster?
GunnerBill Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said: Do you think if Sanders agreed over the phone to sign they would have given up a 1st and others to get Diggs minutes later? No I said that above. They got a little lucky. But if you had said to Brandon Beane the night before "Diggs is available, who do you want, Diggs or Sanders?" He wouldn't have hesitated before saying Diggs. In his mind it was so clear cut he was willing to give up a 1st round pick without even thinking about ringing Sanders back to sweeten the pill on that deal. If we are talking the night before free agency I agree Sanders was plan A. If we are talking in the medium term then Diggs has been plan A since at the very least October.
Mr. WEO Posted April 1, 2020 Posted April 1, 2020 Just now, Doc said: They pursued Diggs first and Diggs is everyone's Plan A over a guy like Sanders. Just because the trade materialized after Sanders said he needed to think about it means little and if they really wanted him, they could have signed him as well. See above--if they did NOT really "want him", why call him first? Why not just make the Diggs trade and forget about "on his last legs" Sanders. It seems clear that, since they did not followup with Sanders after the the trade, then they would have preferred Sanders on the cheap and draft a guy in the 1st. When that didn't happens they wanted, they gave up the first for Diggs...which is a good move at that point. 3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: No I said that above. They got a little lucky. But if you had said to Brandon Beane the night before "Diggs is available, who do you want, Diggs or Sanders?" He wouldn't have hesitated before saying Diggs. In his mind it was so clear cut he was willing to give up a 1st round pick without even thinking about ringing Sanders back to sweeten the pill on that deal. If we are talking the night before free agency I agree Sanders was plan A. If we are talking in the medium term then Diggs has been plan A since at the very least October. Agree. If Sanders says yes, it's him for 2 years and they draft a stud in round 1.
Doc Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said: See above--if they did NOT really "want him", why call him first? Why not just make the Diggs trade and forget about "on his last legs" Sanders. It seems clear that, since they did not followup with Sanders after the the trade, then they would have preferred Sanders on the cheap and draft a guy in the 1st. When that didn't happens they wanted, they gave up the first for Diggs...which is a good move at that point. Obviously they wanted Sanders. He was the best FA WR on the market (which isn't saying much). They wanted Diggs more and had been pursuing him for awhile and they and the Vikings were finally able to agree on a price. What's so hard to understand about this?
HappyDays Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 8 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: Then why didn't they call him back to see what his decision was or to see what it would take to get him on the roster? I think you're reading too much into what Sanders said. All he said is he spoke with the Bills and some kind of offer was made. It's not like they were on the verge of finalizing anything. The Bills had been talking with the Vikings about Diggs throughout the day, and supposedly had spoken with them last year too. The more appropriate interpretation is that they wanted a plan B ready to go in case Diggs fell through and Sanders was the plan B.
Mr. WEO Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 Just now, Doc said: Obviously they wanted Sanders. He was the best FA WR on the market (which isn't saying much). They wanted Diggs more and had been pursuing him for awhile and they and the Vikings were finally able to agree on a price. What's so hard to understand about this? Not hard at all. They offered Sanders, he didn't say yes. They then went with the alternative plan--and pulled the trigger on the trade. Even though the trade was obviously set to go, they did not make it before they called Sanders, and they didn't make any effort to get Sanders after the trade was made. There is no other conclusion that would follow other than A: Sander and keep the #1 B: barring that happening, give top the #1 for Diggs The B happened immediately after A
Recommended Posts