Thurman#1

Disagree. It's huge that we don't have to be a Super Bowl competitor this year. McD and Beane are not on a short leash, they just aren't. And yeah, you're right on that second point, that a lot of it will come down to what the teams holding the top seven or so picks decide to do. Should be a really interesting draft. I hate that they moved the draft back last year and haven't corrected things this year. The teams don't need the extra time and we fans will only waste more time and be more annoyed waiting and waiting. I think you're wrong, personally. Not nearly enough warts on Darnold or Rosen as there were for Trubitsky for instance. Go get 'em, Bills. Spend all six picks if you have to. But if they want Mayfield, yeah, maybe wait an extra pick or two and pray. I wouldn't but what do I know?

Damn. Awesome idea. If only someone had thought of it and, you know, signed him to a contract. Right now he's a free agent and I hear the Pats are putting together a package averaging around $25 mill a year making him Brady's long-term successor.

Yes he had great numbers in those games, but again, 10 of the 15 of those games happened in the first year Tyrod played, before teams had fully figured out how to defense him. The six games from the second year, 2016, were against these teams: Indy and the Pats in weeks 1 and 2, and Pitt, Cleveland, and Miami in weeks 13 -16. And those were not exactly a bunch of great pass defenses. They were the 27th, 12th, 16th, 21st and 15th ranked in pass defense, average and below. More, it wasn't as if with Woods and Watkins there Tyrod was throwing to them. In those five 2016 games Woods and Watkins combined had one game over 54 yards, Sammy's very good Miami game. And two TDs between them. It was more about bad defenses than Watkins and Woods being there. Being specific, adding their stats together, Sammy and Woods managed 28 receptions, 388 yards and 2 TDs. Over five games. An average of 5.6 receptions per game, 77 yards and 0.4 TDs per game. Not for one of them. For both of them added together. That's the wildly productive catch machines that Tyrod made of Sammy and Woods in their five games together in 2016. Those total stats you are referring to were mostly built (2/3rds of the games) during that first year. So yeah, the receivers were overall not good. But he was throwing to excellent pass-catching backs and a guy who before he got to Buffalo and caught balls from Tyrod was considered one of the better pass-catching TEs in the league, though strangely his forte was catching balls in the intermediate and long middle and he mostly disappeared the last three years. It's extremely fair to say that not all of this mess that was the passing game was Tyrod's fault. But a lot of it was, and that's why they wanted him gone. I wish him the absolute best, honestly, but I'm really happy he's gone. Now we have to replace him but I'll at least have some hope for the new guy, whoever he is.

Yeah, they might easily really love him in Year One. Which is why I give it till Week 8 before we see the first big wave of "Why doesn't this idiot OC change the playbook to take advantage of Tyrod's strengths" criticism. I honestly hope I'm wrong and that it works out well for all involved, but that's what I would expect.

There's no particular reason to think this is so. With either guy, Sammy or Gilmore. But yes, a pretty similar situation. We would probably like to have re-signed them in ideal circumstances but terrible cap management made it punitive to do so. Gilmore had already performed well and was considered an excellent CB, while Sammy was more considered a guy with the potential to be an excellent WR. Couldn't afford either one, though. And yeah, the Sammy decision was made easier by being able to get the pick and Gaines in exchange. When there is a guy the Bills have problems with it doesn't seem to be real hard to notice. Look at Dareus. Everyone knew about the problems. Strangely, nobody did or does with Sammy or Gilmore except fans.

Heh heh. Seen this before?

Well, of course Leslie Frazier and McDermott aren't ready to develop a rookie QB. They're on the other side of the ball. Daboll did pretty well in Alabama. I don't know if he and Culley are ready to handle this. But nobody can reasonably say they know for sure they aren't. And I'll tell you, you saying "There's no one at the top that's worth trading up for, point blank," is translated as "I don't like these QBs." We heard on and on last year about how nobody was there who was any good, and that it was a bad year for QBs. Oops. You don't have facts here, you have an opinion, the opinion of a poster on the internet. (And yeah, me too. Same deal.) But the experts seem to feel there are some guys up there this year who could easily be worth trading up for.

For the Pats he was. For the Bills, letting him go was forced on them by the awful salary cap situation the last GM left. A salary cap situation which has been greatly improved but is still tight enough this year to make acquiring Sherman unlikely and difficult even if they did want him as a 30 year old CB.

Giving up those picks is not mortgaging the franchise. Not even close. We're likely to be able to do it nearly completely with picks we have this year, with the trades we made exactly to put us in position to trade up and find a QB in this QB-rich draft. If it can't be worked out with only picks from this year, it won't be more than a pick or at absolute most two from next year. That's not mortgaging the franchise. That's paying what a franchise QB is worth. It's not worth any price whatsoever. Just to pick a random number, it's not worth the next six #1 picks, for instance. That would be mortgaging the franchise. What we have to pay will hurt us. But it won't destroy our ability to bring in good players, and pretty quickly. Somewhere between what it will probably cost and my outrageous number here there should be a line. But we're very likely to find a team that will trade down for a reasonable amount. Painful. It's painful to give up picks. But worth the try if there's a QB there they think will be a franchise guy.

Yup, it's so hard to trade up in the first round and teams are realizing it more and more. That's why last year there were two teams trading back out of the first five picks. That's 40%. It's why we traded back from pick 10. It's why the Texans were able to trade up to #12 to get Watson. It's why the Eagles were able to acquire the #14 in the Bradford deal. That's almost 50%, 6 of the top 14 picks, that were traded. Last year as it is getting so hard and teams are realizing yadda yadda yadda. All those factors you're talking about haven't slowed up trades. They haven't even cranked the price up all that much. Twelve of the first 32 picks were traded. Last year. The years people are saying that we should trade down, people always are on here saying "It won't be easy. Everybody wants to trade down, it's hard to find people who want to trade up." And now we want to trade up and we hear the same thing, the other way around. It's a bit hard, but not that hard. There are people who want to trade down. The problem isn't so much going to be finding a partner as it is paying the price. Oh, and your contention that the #18 guy and the #33 guy are equal in talent is simply not something GMs are thinking. If it were, we'd see FOs trading back from around #18 to around #33 all the time and not demanding much in trade. That doesn't happen, and the reason it doesn't happen is the huge amounts of information available on these players and natural human confidence give the GMs the feeling that they can draw distinctions in value here and more, a real confidence that it's possible. Just go back and look at the people in several drafts who were drafted #15 - #25. Now look at the people in the same draft who were drafted #32 - #42. There won't be many drafts where you'd trade the second group for the first.

Trading up for a QB ... IS building through the draft. People want to pretend it's not. It is. It's the best way to build through the draft, provided you get the right guy, of course. The bottom line is that it's this simple. If you don't have a franchise QB, getting one is your number one priority. Same with about 17 other clubs at any given time. So if you have a chance to get one, you take it.

FAs aren't sure things either. Picks are cheaper and you generally get 'em for longer. How good is Ivory these days? I remember really liking him a few years ago, but his last two years he's posted YPCs of 3.8 in 2016 and an awful 3.4 last year. I didn't see much if any of him so I don't know why, but that's a major dropoff from his older figures. On a team that managed 4.2 YPC last year, although Bortles managing more than 6 YPC certainly pumped that up. Didn't they have a pretty decent OL? Were teams keying on the run game?

The reason we have space next year is that we don't really have anywhere close to a team under contract yet. For OL starters under contract for example, they've got Glenn, Wood, Ducasse and Dawkins, backed up by Conor McDermott, De'Ondre Wesley, Aaron Green, Josh James and Adam Redmond. On the DL they have Jerry Hughes, Shaq Lawson, Adolphus Washington, Rickey Hatley and Marquavius Lewis. At LB, Milano, Tanner Vallejo, Nordly Capi, Xavier Woodson-Luster, and nobody else. The 2019 cap numbers would be better referred to as having an "INC" grade right now rather than referring to any specific figures. Yup, lots of space, but also lots of spaces on the roster. Contrast that to what Philly has under contract in 2019 and your draw will drop. They have a terrific team already signed for that year. And yes they could do restructurings, but that's not how fiscally conservative GMs generally operate and so far a fiscally conservative game plan is exactly what they seem to be using. They said the same thing last year, that they could restructure and kick the costs down the road. They didn't do that. It doesn't appear to be their way, for which I'm personally really happy.

Yup, this is a big concern. $25 mill in cap space right now, but if they pay Tyrod's roster bonus on the 16th, that would drop to $19 mill and if Tyrod's on the roster it would drop to around $15 mill available under the cap. And that's not counting the draft picks which will have a pool of around $6 or $7 mill probably, leaving us less than $10 mill. Which is one reason I doubt Tyrod will be here, but that's a matter for another thread. They could trade Cordy Glenn, that would free up a bit of space. Wood's official retirement will save them very little, unfortunately. They'll doubtless cut some other guys but there's not a lot of major savings to be racked up. I don't see us signing any expensive guys this year. They'll be measuring every buck.

Nah, that was actually a pretty good look. Know what a genuinely selfish guy does there? He doesn't even think those things, much less say them out loud. Did we ever hear T.O. saying stuff like that? This is a young kid growing up. And there's no indication whatsoever there that he was dogging it. The concerns about Sammy are production, injuries and the price it would take to bring him in.

Yeah, but they didn't trade for what the pick turns into They traded for the pick. The pick itself. Which has a pretty specific value. Again, it's not an unknown. It's #56. It's 340 points on the chart. How Beane and McDermott use the pick will be a totally different series of decisions. And those will be worthy of praise or censure. But it won't be the trade people will be talking about, it will be the decision on who to draft. Same as if you spend $500 to buy stock in a company that goes bankrupt. It wasn't the $500 in cash that was the problem. Spend that same $500 on Apple's first public offering in 1980 and become a zillionaire. It won't be the brilliant move of how you earned the $500 people will be talking about. If people do mention the trade it'll be a "and coincidentally, the pick which got them [the player] was from the Sammy Watkins trade. An interesting coincidence, yeah?" kind of mention.

No, you're misreading this, and at this point, willfully. He wasn't aiming this at everybody. He aimed it very specifically at the people on twitter attacking him for having injury problems. And yeah, to my eyes it was still a bad look for him. But if posting stupidly or rudely on social media were something only stupid rude arrogant people did, the internet would be a much much nicer place.

Nonsense. Sammy gave everything he had. He had major injury problems throughout his time here and his effectiveness was hurt by that, but you can't find one teammate, coach or person from OBD who will say anything like what you're saying here. It's all fans saying this stuff, the people who don't know.

No, a 2nd round pick is NOT an unknown. This particular one, for instance, is precisely #56. What's unknown is how well or poorly the picks will be used. But that's beside the point. We know the value of the pick. That pick isn't worth any less if they bollix it and pick a bust any more than your $50,000 is worth nothing if somebody cons you out of it or if you buy a lemon of a Porsche with it. That's your problem. The money's still worth $50K. In exactly the same way, that pick will have been worth 340 points on the draft value chart. That was it's value, that's what it was worth in the trade. Gaines this last year plus teh 2018 #56 pick is absolutely better than Sammy this last year.

"To all the people that have a problem with me being injured you guys go out there and play this sport it’s a 100% injury rate,” Watkins wrote. “I’m not first or last person that’s gone be injured difference from me and you guys y’all mad and I’m not get a life and goto work stop worrying about my job because I’m good on this end and forever will be losers most of you just wish to be in this position so continue working y’all little jobs for the rest of y’all lives since everyone once a response here go one have a blessed day.” Watkins later posted, then deleted, a clarification on Twitter: “Message wasn’t for fans for whomever have a problem with athletes being injured.” https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/oct/28/bills-watkins-to-fans-continue-working-yall-little-jobs-for-the-rest-of-yall-lives When you cut out that part it looks far worse than it was. Not a great look. Awkward, looked small, should never have been posted. But also not a big deal.

I'll repeat: "And yeah, it's the 2nd round pick that's the difference. A pick's worth isn't determined by how well it's used. It's determined by what someone would give for it at the time at draft time. Gaines this last year plus a 2nd is absolutely better than Sammy this last year. Who they pick will be a reflection on how talented and lucky our draft team is, not on how much the pick was worth." And the number of snaps Gaines played was mostly due to a knee injury that kept him out three or four games. Would've been nice if he'd stayed healthy, but he played a lot and when he played, he played very well. He forced three fumbles and had an INT. There's a reason he is going to get good enough money that we aren't expecting to be able to get him back. Also worth noting that of the three games in a row in which our defense was absolutely shelled, the Jets, Saints and Chargers games on Nov. 2nd to the 19th, Gaines missed the first two and returned from injury for the 3rd, the Chargers, which was probably his worst game. Was that because he wasn't healthy yet? Dunno, but he started playing much better quite quickly. But again, it's the 2nd round pick that makes this a big win for the Bills.

Yeah, we won it. Absolutely. And yeah, it's the 2nd round pick that's the difference. A pick's worth isn't determined by how well it's used. It's determined by what someone would give for it at the time at draft time. Gaines this last year plus a 2nd is absolutely better than Sammy this last year. The stuff about Sammy being selfish is a dust fleck on a molehill, but he still has serious questions about injuries and just about pure production. Not to mention how much he'll cost. Who they pick will be a reflection on how talented and lucky our draft team is, not on how much the pick was worth.

Huge? No, I think you're right. Big, maybe. People were very unsure whether he might or might not be franchised, which would have been a $15.982 mill hit. You're right that he hasn't done a lot but someone might pay him for potential. That's my guess. I'd love to get him back, but not at the salary I think he's going to manage to get.

Just looking at the first year, Harmon and Pike were not misses. Oh, nor Rolle. For a 7th, Rolle had an excellent career. And how can you list a guy like Richard Harvey as a failure. The guy was drafted in the 11th round and had a pretty solid 11 year career. And the percentages are always going to be lower when you look at someone who was picking in 12 round drafts than for somebody who was picking in 7 round drafts. It's also a lot harder drafting for a team that's doing a lot of winning. There are fewer roster spaces available because the team is already good, and you're drafting much later in the round. It's just harder. Polian was a terrific GM and drafter. It was very impressive there too until he handed the draft over to his son for the last three or so years of the Polian administration there.

Sure, that's what they want. They also want a guy with Allen's arm and Darnold's ability to improvise and Rosen's ability to go through reads and throw from the pocket and Jackson's ability to run. But realistically, what you need to put you in a position where you have a chance to be competitive for a title every year (a chance, not that you'll actually be there every year but a chance) is a guy who's in the top 10 or 12 QBs in the league. That's the kind of guy we have to be thinking we have a reasonable chance at getting. But as for those QBs you're referring to being unicorns, nah. You're referring to the elite guys, IMHO, the top five or six. Rodgers, Brady, Brees, Roethlisberger, Ryan, and maybe one or two more. None of them will get you there with a bad team but all of the can get you close with a team without major weaknesses.