Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

His contract is what really makes me question this trade. 

 

At the end of the day we gave up basically nothing so whatever. Just don't get the move at all. 

 

So Cook is the lead back next year, can he actually handle that role? Or are we going to have a 2nd round backup RB, $5M pass catching RB, and need to spend ANOTHER draft pick on a RB to be the lead guy?

  • Agree 2
Posted
Just now, LOVEMESOMEBILLS said:

 

 Not this year. About the same targets and yards. Singletary has a receiving td, Hines doesn't. That 1 td is the biggest difference between the 2 as receivers this year. Their results are nearly identical.

 

 

I'm not basing it on stats.  I'm going by video and the eyeball test.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, LOVEMESOMEBILLS said:

 

 Not this year. About the same targets and yards. Singletary has a receiving td, Hines doesn't. That 1 td is the biggest difference between the 2 as receivers this year. Their results are nearly identical.

 

 

And the Colts OC got fired. 

Posted

Zero in dead cap the next two years if we move on. If he works out, I would imagine they add another year to the deal and a little bit of gtd $$$ to lower the cap figure. 

  • Agree 3
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

No. They traded a day 3 pick plus a RB picked with a 3rd round pick(who never worked out).  So they traded a 3rd and a 5th for Hines, and then may let Singletary go in the off-season to FA...another 3rd round pick.

 

As for the bolded, no one knows what calls were made, or what the asking price were.  You only know that none were traded.

 

No. They traded a day 3 pick plus a RB picked with a 3rd round pick for Hines who was picked with a 4th rounder.

 

So if you are boiling down players for picks, a 3rd and a 5th for a 4th. Not ideal but this isnt how we should look at player trades so.....

Edited by What a Tuel
Posted
1 minute ago, newcam2012 said:

Me too. It's an upgrade but not really a splash pick up or a needle mover. Moss was a goner and a 6th isn't much. Muddies things up a bit with Cook there. Good insurance policy. Hard not to approve the move but not doing jumping jacks either. 

I don’t know why people don’t do a little research. Hines is a very good receiver but also a dynamic punt/kickoff returner. He fills several roles with the Bills.

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
Just now, DrDawkinstein said:

 

So you think Beane ignored the IOL and S that were available?

 

I mean, a lot of folks had some good ideas on who was available and most turned out true. It isnt hard to figure out when you look at team standings and player contracts.

...or he didn't like the asking price, but it doesn't 100% mean none were available.

Posted
13 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

I truly don't think so.

 

I could be wrong but I think this is as much about having a guy who can play in the slot and return punts.

Valid point, I was being a tad sarcastic.

Posted
10 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:

 

Yeah I know.. but it would be nice if someone else on the team could as well.. even if just so the opposition has someone else to worry about

 

You could always stick a TE back there if you really wanted

Posted
11 minutes ago, LOVEMESOMEBILLS said:

 

 This is what I'm thinking. He replaces Moss as the #3 RB. Who knows though he may get here and with all the weapons we have and Allen as QB maybe he'll show he's better than what he's done this year.

 

 

You are way too focused on this year's stats.  Indys offense has fallen off a cliff.  This is an absolute steal.

Posted
Just now, LabattBlue said:

...or he didn't like the asking price, but it doesn't 100% mean none were available.

 

If he didnt like the price then they werent available to us and our "budget". Everything is technically for sale if you are willing to pay. But that is silly.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

McK seems OK as a KR

McK has fumbled a kickoff without being touched. Lots of things happen when he touches the ball. Some of them are good. Some of them are not. They are always of high interest. This is not what I want in my return people. I will sacrifice significant upside to know for certain this offense is getting the ball back. In previous years we needed to steal a TD here and there in returns. This is not that year. Catch the ball, run forward rather than sideways, zero turnovers. That is my goal and if I'm honest zero turnovers comes before running forward. Fair catch everything IDGAF.

  • Agree 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...