Which former Bill will have the best year?

[Pyrite Gal]

It's a waste of a first round pick either way.  Unless, of course, you consider one good year of quarterbacking to be a first round pick well spent.

 

I like Marv's approach to rebuilding this team: sign younger players, even guys with question marks about whether they're the real thing.  If a given player does prove himself here, he'll be young enough to contribute for a long time.  The farther away you are from contending, the younger your roster should be.

707704[/snapback]

 

I think in retrospect that it was well worth the future 2003 #1 in exchange for one very good year from Bledsoe (;ike him or not he deserved getting the reserve Pro Bowl accolade that year and if you think he did not simply name the AGC QNs who deserved it more or if you want to insist that he was a bad player who in no way was in the top 1/3 of AFC QNs that year, then simply name 5 pr 6 QBs who were better that year.

 

There are several reasons why I think that acquiring him was well worth a first round 2003 choice:

 

1, The big reasons is actually an off the field one, but this is reality within which our wonderful fantasy and enterainment world of football exists within. The reality was that we were coming off a 3-13 season afet a bruising and controversial QB controversy between DF and RJ. The primary thing the acquisition of Bledsoe did for our franchise was restore the excitment of the faithful. This was seen in about 10-20K fams turning out to the welcome Drew bash at the Ralph and season ticket sale spiking for an outrageously bad team. His presence was a singular infusion when this team needed it badly and making this trade for Bledsoe rather than going with the likes of Chris Chandler or Rodney Peete or AVP would have been a kiler for this franchise.

 

2. Ignoring realiy and sticking yo on the field stuff, I think it is only realistic to acknowledge that it was the fact we were missing a 1st round choice in 2003 which made it a huge priority for us to find a replacement choice somehow someway. One can argue that if we had simply not traded thic pick for Bledsoe we could have used it for WM whom we chose (or likely it would have been a top 10 or really a top 5 pick so maybe we trade down to get him, pick some other cadillac player or some other woulda, coulda, scenari. It gets pretty crazy pretty quick with all these hypotheticals, so i will only go a little ways there.

 

I think it is fair to say that part of the reason TD had the balls and took the risk of tagging PP and holding out for a 1st was to replace the one shipped for Bledsoe. I really view the trade more as getting Bledsoe in 2002 for nothing that year, and abquisition of the pick which became WM as more righting the natural order, than an addition most logically considered as totally removed from the Bledsoe situation.

 

However, you want to caluclate the moves which made this possible, before the trade we had AVP at QN and a first round choice in 2003. By the time the 2003 sraft rolled around we had Bledsoe at QB with a very good season in 2002 and a horrid season in 3004 and atill had a 2003 1st round draft pick.

 

If we had not made the trade, I think it is likely the Bills would have finished 2002 more like the 3-13 team they were in 2001 and less like th ,500 team they were with Bledsoe at QB in 2002.

 

3, In addition, i think fans simply value the draft too highly. Was Drew worth a trade of a draft pick that would have been Peyton Manning? No. Was Drew worth a trade of a draft pick who would have been Ruan Leaf> Yep! Even for one who calculates a very good year by Drew and a horrid year by DB as a wash, this is far better than the bust years put bup by Leaf.

 

It is easy to see trading away the first as a bad deal if one looks through the rose colored glasses of assuming that every 1st round pick is going to perform like Peyton Manning. However, the reality is that the draft is simply a crapshoot even in the 1st round I have yet to see TDs estimate that 50% of 1st round are disappoinments (and really busts if you want to consider the careers of stars like Mike Williams and Joey Harrington.

 

Many people seem to make the mistake of assuming that since good players are usally the ones drafted and good players have to come from somewhere that this means that most draft choices or certainly 1st rounders should be good players.

 

However, folks choose to ignore the fact that your team is competing aginst 31 other teams in this gigantic restraint of trade and the free market knowm as the draft. The nunbers are that even if all 8 or so of the average # of players drafted by a team in a given year make the squad they are a small % of the players on the roster that year. Rven if you want to accumulate the number of draftees still over 3 years only 24 or so of the players om average were drafted by that team which is still less than half the totals roster of a team. When you add into that a significant number of those 24 have actually been cut, traded or were injured and are off the roster by that 3rd year, it is clear that while the draft is an important part of team building it is not the only important part and actually is likely less important than other methods of player acquisition unless you were incredibly good (and actually incredibly lucky with the draft.

 

Folks can attempt to point to SB winning teams and try to prove the import of the draft this way and actually the case is one which can be made because of the case of the Pats dominating winning recently. it has been BBs way to accumulate tons of draft picks and thus a significant number of his players are ones he drafted.

 

However, even this episodic rather than systematic case is not proof of the whole (as most teams are not NE) and one needs to also take into account that their rate of cutting draftees is also actually likely far higher than the norm as they have more dradtees to keep and cut.

 

Actually, as NE signed almost a 1/3 of their SB winning players after the June 1st cuts in their first SB winning season there is probably as strong an episodic case to be made that signing FAs is the key to winning as drafting. Actually, I think the two keys to their first two SB wins were:

 

1. Blledsoe getting his lung collapsed by a Jet hit so that Brady got a chance to run this team before the season was over as they were already 0-2 under Bledsoe, and

 

2. After BB totally screwed up renegotiations with Milloy and he had to be cut, many stars openly called out BB. It was the injury to Colvin among others which forced the team to make a gut check and remain a TEAM.

 

BB is a great coach and clearly he owes the SB wins to his own skills. However, his skills though necessary to the outcome was not sufficient and I do not think this team would have won their 1st 2 SBs if key players had not gotten hurt when they did.

 

Overall, trading a first for Bledsoe was not a big deal given the iffyness of 1sts and actually part of the trade being a wash at worst for the Bills is that they replaced the lost first with a pick for trading PP (who actually easily could have walked for nothing if TD had not been so ballsy with the tagging and also had a good relationship with PP whom he got to shut up so he could deal).

 

The mistake with Bledsoe was extending this inadequate player after his horrid 2003 and then making it worse by cutting this inadequate player and handing the job to even a less productive player.

 

I think trading a mere future #1 for Bledsoe was a fair price to pay for him given our needs at QB and to rejuvenate hope amongst the fans after a 3-13 season. In reality, the cost for Bledsoe to the team became nothing when we reacquired the mere 1st and turned it into WM.

[Orton's Arm]

The Bledsoe trade was a success for the following reasons:

 

1. Most important, it generated excitement and ticket sales for 2002.

 

2. Trading away Bledsoe motivated TD to re-acquire his first round pick by doing the Peerless deal.

 

3. Fans tend to overestimate the value of draft picks. Roughly half of first round picks turn out to be busts.

 

Even allowing for the role the draft played in New England's Super Bowl success, that team also needed other things to go their way (luck, free agent signings, etc).  Almost 1/3 of New England's first Super Bowl winning team was signed through June 1st cuts.

I agree there was a lot of excitement when Bledsoe was first brought in. Even in the late '90s, Bills fans were used to having quality football teams that could often make the playoffs, and that could come close to winning playoff games. (Think Music City Miracle, or the close Dolphins game the year before.)

 

But Butler's teams were built largely through the draft, so players tended to last longer. TD's teams achieved success largely through high profile free agent signings or trades. With a Butler team, an 8-8 season could be a building block to 10-6. Younger players would mature, things would come together. Naturally, most fans assumed that when TD's team went 8-8, it might well be on its way to something better. Instead, those high profile free agents faded quickly, Bledsoe's weaknesses were exposed halfway through the 2002 season, and the team went 6-10 in 2003. And that was with additional high profile free agent signings leading into the 2003 season.

 

While many of New England's players were indeed obtained through free agency, not all players are created equal. Tom Brady was obtained via the draft. Replace Brady with Gus Frerotte, and I don't seen New England winning any Super Bowl trophies. Other core players, such as Matt Light, were also draft picks.

 

Then there's Pittsburgh: since 2000, it's drafted the following guys in the first round:

 

Casey Hampton, NT

Kendall Simmons, G (starter)

Troy Polamalu, SS

Ben Rothlisberger, QB

Heath Miller, TE

 

Having a core of young, quality player such as those will give the Steelers a solid foundation for many years to come.

 

To make a long response short:

 

1. The excitement the Bledsoe deal created was based on a mirage.

2. TD should have been motivated to hold onto or franchise/trade away his young, promising players even without the Bledsoe trade.

3. Every Super Bowl champion I'm aware of has built a solid core for itself through the draft. Fans tend to undervalue the draft, while placing too much emphasis on big name free agent signings.

[Adam]

I know what the question means, but I'm pulling for Jim Kelly to be the former Bill to have a great year. He's been through so much over the last few years.

[Dibs]

I'm surprised 1/3 of us think Bledsoe is going to have the best year. People don't really think T.O. will make that much of a difference do they?

I just can't get past the comparison with his first year in Buffalo & his first in Dallas. Since I'm bored....here are the stats.

 

BUFFALO 2002

16 GAMES

COMP 375 ATT 610 YDS 4359 TD 24 INT 15 QBR 86.0

 

GAMES 1-8

COMP 203 ATT 318 YDS 2500 TD 16 INT 6 QBR 97.0

 

GAMES 9-16

COMP 172 ATT 292 YDS 1859 TD 8 INT 9 QBR 74.0

 

DALLAS 2005

16 GAMES

COMP 300 ATT 499 YDS 3639 TD 23 INT 17 QBR 83.7

 

GAMES 1-8

COMP 156 ATT 244 YDS 2019 TD 13 INT 6 QBR 97.4

 

GAMES 9-16

COMP 144 ATT 255 YDS 1620 TD 10 INT 11 QBR 70.7

 

In reference to the Bledsoe trade, I believe it was the huge numbers he put up in the first half of his first year here which enabled PP to achieve his stats thus getting us WM. We traded a #1 pick for Bledsoe but because we had him, we got another #1 pick back.

[Orton's Arm]

I just can't get past the comparison with his first year in Buffalo & his first in Dallas.  Since I'm bored....here are the stats.

I agree: Bledsoe provided half a year of good football to both the Cowboys and the Bills. While you may well be right about Bledsoe helping us get a first rounder for Peerless, I can't really see this whole situation as a reflection of TD's intelligence or skill. You don't part with a first round pick hoping that a) your #2 WR has a monster year, b) that some other team falls in love with him, and offers you a first round pick for the guy, and c) that said WR then proceeds to go downhill. If TD was this eager to obtain high draft picks for players on their way out the door anyway, he could have traded away Antoine Winfield.

 

The only justifiable reason for trading for Bledsoe was to solidify the quarterback position for at least the next several years. As your post made clear, Bledsoe only gave us a half season of good play. Those eight games were great while they lasted, but they weren't worth a first round pick.

[Dan]

What I don't get about Bledsoe is he's so easy to figure out. If you rush him up the middle and knock him down early, he gets flustered and he becomes average. However, if you put a big line in front of him and slow down that rush, he can pick apart any defense. So, are good offensive lines that hard to build; or are the Pats, Bills, and Cowboys (perhaps - jury's still out on this one for me) just not smart enough to see this?

[Dibs]

What I don't get about Bledsoe is he's so easy to figure out.  If you rush him up the middle and knock him down early, he gets flustered and he becomes average.  However, if you put a big line in front of him and slow down that rush, he can pick apart any defense. So, are good offensive lines that hard to build; or are the Pats, Bills, and Cowboys (perhaps - jury's still out on this one for me) just not smart enough to see this?

710343[/snapback]

I think that they are that hard to build....if you want to build a good D as well....& have good skills players. Look at the Chiefs...they have had an awesome O-Line for years(which I am jealous of) but there D is constantly below average to average & their WRs tend to be only a decent helpers for their TE. The running game is always great but how could it not be?

The only sure way to win it all is to have a great team & some luck. I know that's not an intelligent comment but I honestly feel there is more than one road to the SB. Consistency is the key.

[Dan]

Absolutely. It's a team effort with a healthy dose of luck. Injuries, ref calls, ball bounces - you can't coach or plan for any of that.

[Steven in MD]

A better question is which former Bill will have a better year than his replacement?