jwws9999 Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 the reason Roscoe has not been more a factor on offense is because our OC, his play design and play calling have been incompetent. The coaches job is to get the ball to your playmakers. Both Roscoe and Evans have been severely under-utilized. don't expect any improvement in 2009, especially with a downgraded OL he's not more of a factor because he's to small and weak to get off the line of scrimmage and get open
Kelly the Dog Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 It seems to me that if you polled all 32 GMs in the league and asked them to name the top three players in the league at all positions, the only Bills that would land at the top of those lists are Roscoe Parrish at PR and Jason Peters at LT. And people here seem to want to get rid of both of them. It's possible the GMs would say Brian Moorman at P and Leodis McKelvin at KR but I'm not sure. They may not list Peters but he is one of the only players we have who are right at the top. Evans is highly regarded but not right at the top. The point is you cant get rid of your best players and get draft picks in return. Especially when you struggle to draft.
Alaska Darin Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 maybe but he has failed as a slot WR. He is expendable, and the Bills FO are doing the right thing in exploring trade possibilities. I know that you have an emotional investment in keeping Parrish because you have defended in keeping him numerous times (same goes with Peters), but I would say that pretty much anyone outside of Bills land knows that this is the right move in exploring trade partners. Right. Because trading a proven player for a 4th round draft choice is brilliant strategy. Care to list the last decade of BILLS' 4th rounders? Only Terrance McGee has contributed more than Parrish. The BILLS aren't in a financial bind. They don't need to trade Parrish and giving up one of the true difference makers on the roster is just the kind of stupidity that has kept this team irrelevant. Unless Parrish is a problem in the locker room he's worth far more as just a punt returner than a friggin' 4th round choice.
Magox Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 Right. Because trading a proven player for a 4th round draft choice is brilliant strategy. Care to list the last decade of BILLS' 4th rounders? Only Terrance McGee has contributed more than Parrish. The BILLS aren't in a financial bind. They don't need to trade Parrish and giving up one of the true difference makers on the roster is just the kind of stupidity that has kept this team irrelevant. Unless Parrish is a problem in the locker room he's worth far more as just a punt returner than a friggin' 4th round choice. First off, who said 4th rounder? Doesn't matter, anyone outside of Buffalo knows that this is the right move. Apparently so does the FO. If you can't see the logic which has been explained over and over then it will never get through. One last time. 1) McKelvin was a NCAA record holder who had 7 PR td's and 1 KR td. In his first year as KR, he was one of the best in the league, so to doubt that he can't do something similar as a PR, is silly. Fred Jackson can do some back up duty as PR, averaged over 16 yards a PR last year. Problem solved! 2)Mcgee KR. One of the best in the league. Anyone who argues this point, is desperately trying to prove their point and can't be taken seriously. Problem solved! 3) Parrish has been pretty much useless as a WR. Now we have the emergence of Steve Johnson who now supplants Roscoe as the #4 WR. So he has very little value here. 4) $2.5 Million is way too much to pay a PR, specially considering we have 2 other good options at this position. 5) Saving $2.5 Million. It's funny when I hear so many people say, "what can we do with that money?" ummm, lots of things. Everything is not black or white. $2.5 Million can go a long way in helping to sign other players. You guys pretend like RW wants to save this money and hide it somewhere so he can keep it all to himself. It just cracks me up sometimes. Has the thought ever occured that maybe that money can help to sign another player? I mean, could that be a possibility?
Leonidas Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 First off, who said 4th rounder? More or less everybody. From what I have heard there is zero chance of us getting more than a third. 1) McKelvin was a NCAA record holder who had 7 PR td's and 1 KR td. In his first year as KR, he was one of the best in the league, so to doubt that he can't do something similar as a PR, is silly. Fred Jackson can do some back up duty as PR, averaged over 16 yards a PR last year. Problem solved! McKelvin is going to get hurt returning punts, then we're going to be seriously hampered at CB. If McKelvin turns into the CB we all hope he will as the #11 overall pick, then you CAN'T have him returning punts because the risk/reward isn't in your favor. And Fred Jackson returning punts? Seriously? He has nowhere near the explosiveness or game-breaking ability that Parrish has. He doesn't have top-end speed, quickness, or elusiveness. No one is kicking away from Fred Jackson. 2)Mcgee KR. One of the best in the league. Anyone who argues this point, is desperately trying to prove their point and can't be taken seriously. Problem solved! Agreed. But McGee is a free agent at the end of the year. And he's also a starter who, if injured, seriously affects our defense (if Parrish gets injured our offense doesn't suffer). 3) Parrish has been pretty much useless as a WR. Now we have the emergence of Steve Johnson who now supplants Roscoe as the #4 WR. So he has very little value here. 4) $2.5 Million is way too much to pay a PR, specially considering we have 2 other good options at this position. 5) Saving $2.5 Million. It's funny when I hear so many people say, "what can we do with that money?" ummm, lots of things. Everything is not black or white. $2.5 Million can go a long way in helping to sign other players. You guys pretend like RW wants to save this money and hide it somewhere so he can keep it all to himself. It just cracks me up sometimes. Has the thought ever occured that maybe that money can help to sign another player? I mean, could that be a possibility? I agree that the coaching has a lot to do with it. I'm not sure that he's been "useless" but as the fourth or fifth target on any pass play do the progressions even get to him? I'm not sure. But I know that Steve Johnson, while being groomed for the #2 (outside, not inside), certainly doesn't have Parrish's speed and quickness. 4) $2.5 Million is way too much to pay a PR, specially considering we have 2 other good options at this position. 5) Saving $2.5 Million. It's funny when I hear so many people say, "what can we do with that money?" ummm, lots of things. Everything is not black or white. $2.5 Million can go a long way in helping to sign other players. You guys pretend like RW wants to save this money and hide it somewhere so he can keep it all to himself. It just cracks me up sometimes. Has the thought ever occured that maybe that money can help to sign another player? I mean, could that be a possibility? Whoa, come on dude, you know better than that. $1M is already guaranteed. You can save $1.5M by cutting him, not $2.5M. We aren't $1M over the cap or anything. I'd rather spend the money on a guy who is a threat to break one every time he touches the ball and provides substantial depth on specials.
Magox Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 More or less everybody. From what I have heard there is zero chance of us getting more than a third. McKelvin is going to get hurt returning punts, then we're going to be seriously hampered at CB. If McKelvin turns into the CB we all hope he will as the #11 overall pick, then you CAN'T have him returning punts because the risk/reward isn't in your favor. And Fred Jackson returning punts? Seriously? He has nowhere near the explosiveness or game-breaking ability that Parrish has. He doesn't have top-end speed, quickness, or elusiveness. No one is kicking away from Fred Jackson. Agreed. But McGee is a free agent at the end of the year. And he's also a starter who, if injured, seriously affects our defense (if Parrish gets injured our offense doesn't suffer). I agree that the coaching has a lot to do with it. I'm not sure that he's been "useless" but as the fourth or fifth target on any pass play do the progressions even get to him? I'm not sure. But I know that Steve Johnson, while being groomed for the #2 (outside, not inside), certainly doesn't have Parrish's speed and quickness. Whoa, come on dude, you know better than that. $1M is already guaranteed. You can save $1.5M by cutting him, not $2.5M. We aren't $1M over the cap or anything. I'd rather spend the money on a guy who is a threat to break one every time he touches the ball and provides substantial depth on specials. I agree that there is little chance that we will get a third. As of right now, the Bills are exploring trade possibilities, and that seems to be the wise thing to do. You are assuming McKelvin is going to get hurt. Wierd how hardly anyone had an issue with Mcgee returning kicks when he was our starting DB. In regards to Freddy Jackson, I didn't suggest that he would be the replacement, what I said was that he could do backup duty, and do it effectively. What I said about Parrish is that he has been pretty much useless as a WR. Now what I'm starting to see gain some traction on TBD, is that the reason why Parrish didn't play well was because of the coaching staff. Good players find ways to make plays. As a WR, he hasn't been able to do that nearly as often as what you'd want out of a 2nd round pick or any pick for that matter. You say he has quickness, that goes without saying, but that hasn't translated on to the field as a wideout too often. I myself wondered why that has been the case, but after 4 years I've come to the conclusion that he is one hell of a punt returner and a below average WR. Josh Reed is our slot WR, so there is little use for Roscoe, specially considering the possible emergence of Steve Johnson, even Grahm mentioned the same thing. He also mentioned that it was logical for the Bills to pursue trade partners for Roscoe. I think anyone without a biased view would probably think the same thing.
Jeffery Lester Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 I am all for keeping Roscoe, and would not except anything less than a 2nd round pick for him. He is the best in the business at returnign punts
Leonidas Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 I agree that there is little chance that we will get a third. As of right now, the Bills are exploring trade possibilities, and that seems to be the wise thing to do. You are assuming McKelvin is going to get hurt. Wierd how hardly anyone had an issue with Mcgee returning kicks when he was our starting DB. In regards to Freddy Jackson, I didn't suggest that he would be the replacement, what I said was that he could do backup duty, and do it effectively. What I said about Parrish is that he has been pretty much useless as a WR. Now what I'm starting to see gain some traction on TBD, is that the reason why Parrish didn't play well was because of the coaching staff. Good players find ways to make plays. As a WR, he hasn't been able to do that nearly as often as what you'd want out of a 2nd round pick or any pick for that matter. You say he has quickness, that goes without saying, but that hasn't translated on to the field as a wideout too often. I myself wondered why that has been the case, but after 4 years I've come to the conclusion that he is one hell of a punt returner and a below average WR. Josh Reed is our slot WR, so there is little use for Roscoe, specially considering the possible emergence of Steve Johnson, even Grahm mentioned the same thing. He also mentioned that it was logical for the Bills to pursue trade partners for Roscoe. I think anyone without a biased view would probably think the same thing. So let's say McKelvin is returning punts and he gets injured. Let's make it like Sehorn, and say it's an ACL injury, he's out the rest of the year. So now you've got Youboty/Florence/Corner starting at CB and Jackson returning punts for the rest of the season? All because you didn't want to pay $1.5M?? Seems incredibly short-sighted. You might be right about him not being a good WR. I'm not necessarily blaming it all the coaching staff, but rather saying it could definitely be part of the equation. But at his salary, being a dynamic returner and decent #4 option on passing downs (getting 10+ plays/game on offense), I think trading him (barring a blockbuster offer) would be a terrible move. And what's this about bias? The only bias I have is for the Buffalo Bills. I'm not Parrish's uncle. I don't have some sort of predisposition to the guy. I just want to win, and I think we have a better chance of doing that with him on the roster than without him.
Kelly the Dog Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 So let's say McKelvin is returning punts and he gets injured. Let's make it like Sehorn, and say it's an ACL injury, he's out the rest of the year. So now you've got Youboty/Florence/Corner starting at CB and Jackson returning punts for the rest of the season? All because you didn't want to pay $1.5M?? Seems incredibly short-sighted. You might be right about him not being a good WR. I'm not necessarily blaming it all the coaching staff, but rather saying it could definitely be part of the equation. But at his salary, being a dynamic returner and decent #4 option on passing downs (getting 10+ plays/game on offense), I think trading him (barring a blockbuster offer) would be a terrible move. And what's this about bias? The only bias I have is for the Buffalo Bills. I'm not Parrish's uncle. I don't have some sort of predisposition to the guy. I just want to win, and I think we have a better chance of doing that with him on the roster than without him. Except Leodis already returns kicks and is fabulous at it, and I don't know anyone who wants to see him stop returning kicks except perhaps you. What he probably can't do is return kicks AND punts AND play full time CB. But that has more to do with wearing him down and beating him up so he can't play CB at a top level than risk of serious injury.
extrahammer Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 Wasn't Roscoe out a few weeks after the season opener? Just because he only returned 1 TD doesn't mean he got every opportunity.
Adam Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 How much should the Bills expect to get for a guy who can give a team good field position often, change the game with a score once in a while - but, the threat is there every time - and, he can be a reciever? If he was a second rounder originally, how much is he worth now? He is worth more as a punt returner than we would get in return
Rockinon Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 It seems to me that if you polled all 32 GMs in the league and asked them to name the top three players in the league at all positions, the only Bills that would land at the top of those lists are Roscoe Parrish at PR and Jason Peters at LT. And people here seem to want to get rid of both of them. It's possible the GMs would say Brian Moorman at P and Leodis McKelvin at KR but I'm not sure. They may not list Peters but he is one of the only players we have who are right at the top. Evans is highly regarded but not right at the top. The point is you cant get rid of your best players and get draft picks in return. Especially when you struggle to draft. Good points. What makes it worse is when all of the Homers start fantasizing about how much we could get for players like this. These guys are among the very best at thier positions and there is no trade scenario that could possibly compensate better than simply keeping them on our team. Here is an idea. Keep your best players and draft someone at a another position that could possibly be the best in thier job. Then instead of losing a good player for someone who may or may not be good, you simply add another player who may or may not be good. Trading your best players is simply retarded.
Leonidas Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 Except Leodis already returns kicks and is fabulous at it, and I don't know anyone who wants to see him stop returning kicks except perhaps you. What he probably can't do is return kicks AND punts AND play full time CB. But that has more to do with wearing him down and beating him up so he can't play CB at a top level than risk of serious injury. Did you read what I've written, or just made your own assumptions about it? Did I say I don't want McKelvin returning kicks anywhere? No. But I don't want him being our starting punt returner. Returning punts is more dangerous than kicks IMO, and if he's going to be a top tier CB we can't risk him being a full-time punt returner. I'd trade Josh Reed before Parrish. For what? A bag of footballs?
Kelly the Dog Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 Did you read what I've written, or just made your own assumptions about it? Did I say I don't want McKelvin returning kicks anywhere? No. But I don't want him being our starting punt returner. Returning punts is more dangerous than kicks, and if he's going to be a top tier CB we can't risk him being a full-time punt returner. Ask Jason Sehorn. Sehorn was a KR and got hurt returning a kick off. I dont know of any correlation with PRs getting hurt more than KRs. I think KRs get knee injuries more often.
Nostradamus Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 How much should the Bills expect to get for a guy who can give a team good field position often, change the game with a score once in a while - but, the threat is there every time - and, he can be a reciever? If he was a second rounder originally, how much is he worth now? With all the needs the Bills have, trading their assets for draft picks is not the way to go. Instead, they should look to package Parrish and a pick for a position player, such as Gonzales or Waters from KC. Maybe Parrish and a 3rd/4th would be enough to get it done?
BuffOrange Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 looks like Tim Graham is as good at talent evaluation as the Bills - so the deal probably gets done and the Bills can grab another slow, backup LB that can only play STs great exchange for one of the few playmakers on the team Sounds about right. If he doesn't have a ridiculous cap # I don't know why we're shopping him. His punt returning alone far exceeds the expected value of a 5th round pick.
Justice Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 I heard Vic Carucci on Sirius Satelite say the Bills are looking for a third round pick for Parrish.
billnutinphoenix Posted April 12, 2009 Posted April 12, 2009 I heard Vic Carucci on Sirius Satelite say the Bills are looking for a third round pick for Parrish. never gonna git it!!!
Recommended Posts