Shaw66

I didn't intend this thread to be a general QB discussion but seeing people valuing one QB or another made me to look at the Parcells QB requirements. Three year starter, graduate, over 60% completions, 30 starts, 23 wins, 2-1 td to Int ratio. Mayfield and Rudolph.

That's my point. Of course, where anyone's floor is is impossible to determine. But what I'm saying is that if there are four, for example, above the floor, going after best isn't necessarily the smart move. It's all unknowable, of course, and Beane's going to do the best he can. If he trades up, some people will like it and some won't. In fact, many of those in favor of trading up will be disappointed, because Beane won't take THEIR guy. SOME of us know what is the right thing to do. WHO those people are will be known only several years from now.

If you're going to analyze it in terms of probabilities, of course, the probabilities are interesting. If there's a 50% chance that Darnold will be a true franchise, a 40% chance that Mayfield will and a 20% chance that Rudolph will, drafting Mayfield AND Rudolph is slightly more likely to get you a franchise guy, and you can do that burning less draft capital. The point is, even if we all agreed who the best QB prospect is, it isn't necessarily the case that the smart move is to trade up to draft him.

That's true. And that's where Meanie's Las Vegas analogy begins to make some sense. When do you go all in? And it's more complicated than that. Just because you know there's a 50% chance you're getting Manning doesn't mean you trade your entire draft for the next three seasons to get him. There's a limit to how much draft capital you ought to spend to take that chance. So, for example, it was a less difficult decision for the Jets to move to 3 than it was for the Bills. But the point is still the same - if you need a quarterback, and if you see more than one that look like good bets, it isn't necessarily the case that you should spend what itakes to bet on the one you think is better. I'm not saying it's easy to decide. Just saying it isn't even obvious what the objective is.

A couple of people say Darnold is THE franchise QB in the draft, head and shoulders above the others. Okay, let's suppose after all their analysis the Bills conclude Darnold is the next Peyton Manning and Rosen is the next Drew Brees. Manning went number 1, Drew Brees went 32nd. Do you trade all the way to top of the draft to get Darnold or play your cards to preserve draft capital and take Rosen? I think if those were the facts, you take Rosen, but I think it's an interesting question.

I was thinking about the challenge of deciding on who's the best QB in the draft when it occurred to me that isn't necessarily the objective. I mean, sure, you always want to take the best player available, and sure, the Bills will rank the QB prospects 1 to 20 or whatever. But what matters most when you take a QB is to get one who's going to be a really good NFL QB. If you could choose among Manning, Rivers and Roethlisberger, what history tells us is that one may have better career than the others, but if you got one you were in good shape. The same may be true this year. Everyone seems to have a favorite, be it Rosen, Darnold, Mayfield or Allen. Which one of those you get is less important than if you get one of the guys in that group (or outside that group, for that matter) who turns out to be successful. Why does this matter? Because it informs the Bills in deciding whether and how far to trade up. If they think five QBs in this class are likely to have significant success, then they probably can sit at 12 and get a good QB. If they think it's only four look likely, then they can sit at 12 but have to be prepared to deal quickly once a couple of guys fall off the board. If they think it's three, they'd better start lining up a trade partner in the top 5 or better. If they think it's two or only one, then maybe they have to move to plan B. The point is, there's no sense in trading up if you think there are five legitimate starters in the class. Yes, you can trade up and get a better starter, but but the cost is prohibitive. I'll be surprised if the Bills trade up before round 1 begins. I think they go into round 1 knowing the general outlines of deals they'd make with two or three teams, and then they wait to see how the first couple of picks go.

Be strong, Zay. Come back even better.

Funny, but London Fletcher had 96, 78 and 63 tackles playing 16 games a season when he was Dansby's age. If the Bills find a rookie MLB, who better to teach him?

I've been saying this for years. I'd love to be on the inside to see and hear what these guys are thinking about. In GM, about the Giants' GM Ernie Accorsi, they recount his scouting trip to Happy Valley. Watching the game, Accorsi commented about how well coached Posluzny was, noting that his first step, either right or left, forward or back, always was with the correct leg in the correct direction. I mean, really, who on this board watches that stuff? Tiny details, observed and collected. People don't believe it when Beane says he really hasn't begun his evaluation of the QBs in the draft, but I do. If they're collecting that kind of data about prospects, it's completely believable that (1) they haven't completed collecting and assimilating the data and (2) Beane hasn't had time yet to begin studying it. As the Bills continue to sign free agents over the past day or two, it's clear that his focus is still elsewhere. Listening to McBeane, it's clear they've learned a process with the Panthers (and the Eagles, in McD's case), and they follow the process. They have to consider pros and cons, compare apples and oranges, collect information from agents, other GMs, other coaches, wondering all the time how reliable that information is. Precision is necessary to get it right, and almost all aspects of the process are imprecise. The Kevin Costner film Draft Day is typical Hollywood fare, but it captures the uncertainty and the tension as Costner decides what to do about HIS quarterback situation. Since they'e arrived, I've been impressed. They're not going to get 'em all correct, but they sure seem to be on the right path. Watching the draft will be fun.

Got one of those. How about a pants sized qb? Right. And by the way, Beane said to Peter King that he told the owners that getting the payroll under control was a two-year project. So after this year, Williams almost certainly will retire, and the only holdover big contracts (McCoy and Clay) can both be terminated with minimal cap consequence. It's a total rebuild.

Can't you guys concentrate on football?

Eric Wood money! That's probably it. So it wasn't a slip that revealed that more is coming. Thanks.

It isn't BS. In one sense, of course, he has an opinion on all of them. He has SOME impression about them, he's SOME information about them. But it's completely clear in the context of the press conference (where he said the exact same thing) and the interview, is that what he means is that he hasn't spent enough time to be in position to make an informed decision about which, if any, of these guys he'd want and at what price. The fact that YOU may think that YOU have enough information to make the decision and therefore Beane must, too, simply means that you don't understand how much information is actually required or that you or your staff have done an enormous amount of research, including interviews with coaches, dozens of hours of film study, etc.

King has interesting stuff in his interview with Beane. Most interesting to me is that he decided to completely clean up the salary structure and get positioned the way he thinks they should be. Result? Bills currently have $36 million in dead cap, which is almost twice the next highest dead cap in the league, and Beane said when he's done this year he expects it to be closer to $45 million. Hughes - $6.8 million dead cap McCoy - $5 million dead cap Clay - $9 million dead cap (I think). Sounds like Beane tipped his hand. Someone else is moving out. Yeah, it's an interesting comparison in styles. Based on the draft chart, the Jets overpaid to move up. They must be very sure about a couple of guys, because they can't be assured that one guy will drop to them. Now that we've had a year watching and listening to Beane, it's clear that his overriding principle is maintain the discipline. It's the same thing we've heard from McDermott, and it's why they like working with each other. Last season when the Bills were collapsing, McDermott kept saying "it's a process, stay with the process," and things turned out okay. I mean, I thought there was no way in the world the Bills were going to the playoffs after those three losses, and he's saying "relax, a week at a time, we're not done." Beane is the same. He essentially is saying that he works as hard as he can to make every decision the right decision. It's not about outcomes, it's about the process. Follow the process and the outcomes take care of themselves. In other words, he's saying "sure, I want a better quarterback, but I'm not going to overspend. I'll get the quarterback when the right opportunity presents itself." It's for the fans, because we want results now, but he's learned that if you just keep making good decisions, eventually it comes together. Interesting to watch.

Interesting to read Peter King's comments about the Bills. In his interview with King, Beane made it clear that one objective, maybe his primary objective, was cleaning out the high salaries and getting cap management under control. I've always wondered about this, and he says that attacking the salaries was always part of his plan. I'd guess that means when he interviewed with the Bills he told them he was going to do some major surgery. And he says he wanted to take as much of the pain as he could this year. That's what we've seen. The Bills dead cap money is at $36 million, and Beane says when he's done he expects it'll be $45 million (Shady, Jerry, are you listening?). Remember a few weeks ago when McDermott said "we're not as close as some people think," meaning don't get too carried away because we made the playoffs? Well, hearing Beane say what he says about the salary cap is confirmation. These guys are taking the train off one track and putting it on another, and what they're telling us is not to expect the train to go anywhere until we get it on the new track. What does that tell us about QB? Not much. I think all we know is what we've always known, which is that Beane will NOT overspend. He's all about maintaining discipline and trusting the process. I like this.

I think you and I get into these semantic discussions from time to time. We see it the same way but talk about what the words mean. There's no pro football dictionary that I'm aware of that defines total rebuild. You're taking it literally - if it's total EVERY veteran/star must go. I'd guess that if you look back over the years at situations where the press called a team's transformation a total rebuild you'd fine that in every case, some of the veterans remained. That is, total doesn't really mean total. In this case, a year after the new regime arrived, the entired defensive backfield, essentially all the linebackers and all but three of the defensive linemen are gone (with questions remaining about two of those). Three of five offensive linemen, all the wideouts and the QB are gone. Point is, that I'd think this is about as close to a total rebuild as actually happens in the NFL. The one exception that you raise that maybe makes it not total is Kyle. McD loves Kyle and he had a need at tackle. I might agree with you that in a total rebuild, there's no room for that sentimentality. Between the salary cap and the draft, there rarely is enough draft capital to do a total rebuild in one year. If you dumped EVERYONE who was any good at all for the old the regime, you'd have too little talent left to compete the following year. You'd have what I guess would be a total rebuild and a tank simultaneously.

I agree. What goes on is so much more complicated than we understand, and what they evaluate is so much beyond what we do that what we think is just interesting opinions. Uninformed opinions, compared to what the pro front office people actually do. Here's a point I've discussed nowhere, at least not recently. (I've been away from the board for a day, so maybe it's somewhere). Do you know how much dead cap space the Bills have? $35 million, twice as much as the second worst dead cap space. All the important components of that total are Dareus, Taylor and Glenn. I find that fact interesting. It means this really is a total rebuild. McCoy, Hughes, Williams, Incognito is about all that are left. A total rebuild takes time. And it's done through the draft. What does that mean? It means Beane's not going to be in a hurry to package a lot of picks to move up, because picks is all he has to rebuild with. He can't sign anyone else in free agency without cutting or trading more of his core of players. He COULD trade up, but that means that he's building in free agency next year. He's said repeatedly he likes building through the draft, not free agency. And, of course, one has to ask whether, given the dead cap problem, it made sense to dump Dareus. I'm sure their answer would be that they'd seen enough of Dareus to conclude that he probably never would conform to their program. McCarron? I don't think McCarron has a future, but what do I know? I don't know anything that Saban told Daboll about McCarron. I don't know what the Bills' film review tells them about McCarron. I just don't know. I loved the title on a thread today, something about this being a good QB year because of the NUMBER of prospects, not because any are clearly great. I don't know what the Bills think about these guys. So for me to get upset about the Bills trading up further or not trading up, etc. etc. doesn't make any sense to me. All we can do and wait and see what the people who know a lot more that we know decide to do.

I think that thinking is backwards. That means you bow to the pressure and draft someone just because you need a starter. What if, as I said, they don't like whats left after 10 picks? What if all that's left doesn't look like a starter in year one? That ,ears they have to go with McCarron. Maybe they like him. I don't. If they don't like him, Foles is their option. I mean, I don't know, but they're thinking about stuff like this at OBD. If theyre thinking about it, it could happen.

Maybe you're right. McD has guaranteed money. But I just don't think they want him as their starter. I think he's too flawed.

As the first ten picks unfold, if the Bills don't like what they see left on the board, Beane and the Eagles might agree on price for Foles. It might squeeze the Bills on the cap, but maybe that's when they deal Hughes for another pick. I doubt the Bills want to go into 2018 with McCarron starting.

Right. Fans want a top pick so they believe it's Beane's plan to get one. Beane is just dealing when sees an opportunity. When the Colts called and asked if he would outbid the offer they had, Beane rightly said no. He Wil Wait and see what opportunities come to him that make sense.

Will the Jets cut Bridgewater?

You think Beane is snoozing? He knows exactly what he's doing. Look at what the Jets paid to move from 6 to 3. Now imagine what the Colts were asking from the Bills. Should have gotten Cousins.

A lot of Bills fans love Glenn. Let's face it: he was a second round pick who became expendable because the Bills got another second pick and who got traded essentially for a second round pick. That's who he is. Bengals will be satisfied they got him.

Oh, THAT was the playoff game he lost. That was a travesty.