Jump to content

meistersinger

Community Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    12

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by meistersinger

    Previously the "Convince me Allen won't suck" thread, now the... "you're welcome" thread

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    Part of the issue when discussing Allen versus the others is who is more ready today.  I expect that if all 4 guys are starting on opening day in 2018, Allen will look the worst of the lot, because he is simply not as polished.  But the Bills are looking further ahead - who will be the best QB on opening day of 2020?  There is no way of knowing for sure, of course, and it's possible they liked both Darnold and Mayfield better than Allen (we'll never know).  But it is very very possible that Allen will be the guy with the best long term future.  If Allen is the best long term guy, then I am thrilled with the pick.  If Rosen or Jackson or Rudolph has a better career than Allen then I will say we blew it.

     

    Would Allen have been there at 12?

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    As for the first part of the question, I do not believe Allen would have been there at 12 if we just stayed put.  It's possible Rosen might have been, since Arizona might have traded up and taken Allen leaving Rosen.  It's also possible that teams like New England or New Orleans might have traded up to 10 or 11, but couldn't put together enough to get to 7, so as the guy keeps falling, more teams are now willing to pay the smaller price it takes to move up and get him.  Or possibly Miami liked Allen but didn't like Rosen - if Miami offered their 1 and 2 to TB, both picks being better than our 1 and 2, we would obviously have to beat that price to make the deal.  Maybe Miami didn't make that offer but TB told us they did - then Beane got snookered.  Or maybe TB heard that this was the offer we gave to Denver, so if we were willing to give up that much for Allen to Denver, why not give the same thing to TB for Allen?

     

    Did we overpay by giving up 2 second rounders?  I think that is a yes, but some times you have to do that.  A lot depends on how enthusiastic they were for Allen.

     

    These were the possible options the Bills could have offered: (point values come from a commonly referenced trade chart)

    Both firsts - Pick 12 for 1200 points, pick 22 for 780 points, total of 1980

    1 first plus 2 seconds - Pick 12 for 1200, pick 53 for 370, pick 56 for 340 - total of 1910

    1 first plus 1 second plus 1 third - Pick 12 for 1200, pick 53 for 370, pick 65 for 265 - total of 1835

    1 first plus 1 second - Pick 12 for 1200, pick 53 for 270 - total of 1570 - this would have been fair value at this point.

     

    Here are the points needed for various picks

    4 - 1800 points

    5 - 1700 points

    6 - 1600 points

    7 - 1500 points

     

    It has been reported that the Bills had an agreement with both the Browns and the Broncos for a deal - at a minimum, that would have required at least our first pick in each of the first, second and third rounds to get Cleveland to say yes.  I doubt Cleveland would have considered any deal that did not include both firsts - they already have a huge pile of picks, so no need to stockpile more in the later rounds.  

     

    Basically, I think Beane had arrived at the conclusion that he would be willing to give up 1 first and both seconds to Denver in order to get Allen.  Once he decided he would give up that much for Allen, don't think of it as trading for a "pick" but trading for a "player".  Presumably, we would not have given up that much for any other elite player on the board like Chubb or Barkley, even though the point value would have been the same.  The Bills need for a QB, coupled with the Bills determination that they liked Allen a lot more than Rosen, forced them to pay up.  And it's possible they liked Allen better than any QB, including Mayfield and Darnold - neither of whom are sure-fire can't-miss prospects either.  So if they were really getting the best QB in a QB rich draft, then that would be a small price to pay.

     

     

    • Like (+1) 1

    For those who promised to not watch the game

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    44 minutes ago, Dan said:

    I didn't watch.  I might later on a replay.  But, if the league is going to allow the refs to continually give that one team every break possible, just so they can be the greatest dynasty of ever... Then I have zero interest in watching them play.   ...other than when they play the Bills.

    I didn't watch either.  I feel exactly the same as you.

    I didn't expect officiating favoritism in the SB, there's too much interest there.  And I don;t think the league much cares who wins, just who gets in.  They think Brady is ratings gold.  Maybe he is in general.  But after the proven cheating, coupled with the sometimes ridiculous officiating, I just don't care any more.

     

    • Like (+1) 1

    [POLL] Are you going to watch the Super Bowl?

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    10 hours ago, stevestojan said:

    If you didn’t watch (which unless you were working I can’t think of a reason not to watch the SB) you missed one of the best ones of all time. 

     

    Doesn't matter to me.  I am sick and tired of the league favoring the Patriots.  The only way to put a stop to it is to not reward the league with my eyeballs when the Patriots are playing.  I didn't read a single article about the SB before the game or watch a minute of any pregame hype.  No squares, no prop bets, nothing.

    I've moved on from hating the Patriots to simply not caring.  I feel the same way about Professional Wrestling except I never cared about that.

     

×
×
  • Create New...