1B4IDie
-
Posts
5,818 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by 1B4IDie
-
-
Good news if it’s just a break. Hopefully that is accurate and he is ready to line up in the off-season.
-
40 minutes ago, wppete said:
Sam Darnold didn’t look good vs Ohio St at the Cotton Bowl.
and all season.
He is a product of draft culture. They need to hype the draft early and often.
If anyone bothered to watch him play you see a kid that needs a lot of work to make it in the NFL.
I hope Beane and team can see through the hype.
-
2
-
-
Vea is one of those beasts that shoot up the draft charts as you get closer to the draft. Especially if they perform well in the combine. Not to many human beings that are that size with athleticism.
That being said, come McShay, you big dummy. If you don’t put QB next to one of the Bills draft picks in the 1st round you’re not paying attention
-
2
-
-
I figured theyd just wrap his hand up in a club and send him out there to collect tackles.
I havent seen any update anywhere.
-
I love how everyone knew you discount future draft picks during the Sammy Watkins trade and now completely forgot that future draft picks lose value in a trade discussion during the 2017 trade down.
"What do you mean you discount future picks?"
The Bills did not get as much in the trade down as compared to historical trade downs made by actual NFL GMs.
The chart is not a "point system" to judge trades. It is a way the actual GMs in actual NFL teams can have conversations and asses relative value of the draft picks.
Actual GMs use some type of chart to asess relative value evidence by the fact that most trades line right up with numbers in the chart.
-
I know how to do math.Every draft pundit said the Bills did better in value than any other trade last night. You have a different opinion. Everyone vs you.
It is funny how the pundits knew how to discount future picks during the Sammy Watkins trade but forgot on the White trade.
One last thing - the "discount future picks by a round" thing drives me crazy. Coaches/GMs do that for 2 reasons: 1.) They can never be 100% certain they'll be around to make future picks, so those inherently have less value to them, and 2.) That's how everyone else does it, and most NFL people haven't had an original thought since kindergarten. But as fans, we have much higher job security - unless the team moves or I die, I can guarantee that I'll still be a fan in 2018. The chances of the team moving by then are remote, and if I die, I won't really care about the Bills one way or another. So there's no reason for a fan (or an owner!) to discount the value of a future pick. When next year rolls around, that first-rounder will fall in the first round, not the second. Draft picks aren't subject to inflation the way money is. I like to think of it this way: would you rather have:
It does matter as a fan.
Do you want the Bills to win more games or less in 2017?
I'd like the Bills to make the playoffs in 2017.
How does that 2018 1st round pick help the Bills win more games in 2017?
It should be discounted by fans because the time to value on wins, which is what Fans should care most about, is delayed.
-
Instead of simply looking up a word you didn't know, you claimed it doesn't exist. That is a pretty strong indicator of your level of debate.
That is embarrassing
Yeah, that's exactly what we've been trying to tell you.
No you're trying to tell me that I told you the chart is infallible. I never said that. You've taken your scarecrow argument back around full circle.
There are examples of worse trades and examples of better trades. But they are all eventually determined by the actual value of players that each team acquired, which generally isn't known until the players get on the field. They can not be fairly judged based on chart values, because each one is based on a hundred variables independent of the nominal pick.
You think a player we could have gotten at #10 is worth more than the one we got at #27 plus the ones we'll get in the 3rd round and next year's 1st round? Fine. I disagree, but everyone is entitled to an opinion. I just don't think basing your opinion on a static chart value holds much merit when we see the true values of draft trades fluctuate so wildly compared to the chart values.
Incorrect. We're not debating the success of the players in the trade. We are discussing the value that the Bills organization received for a #10 overall pick as compared to historical NFL trades and trades in the 2017 NFL draft.
The Bills as compared to relative NFL trades did not get as much value as other NFL franchises have received for their picks.
I hope White and the 3rd round pick this year and the 2018 1st round pick are Hall of Famers.
I believe that the Bills should have gotten one more crack at a Hall of Famer based on the relative value of the #10 overall pick and the #27 overall pick over time.
-
I've shown many times that it is true.Not true at all, and has been shown here many times.
You would need to remove any standard discount on future picks in order for the numbers to work. Which shows the Bills didn't value their #10 in alignment with historical NFL trades by actual NFL GMs.
They gave Andy Reid a deal he couldn't refuse and the Bills didn't get as much in return as other GMs get in return for their draft picks.
-
Infallible? Now not only are you making a scarecrow argument, you're inventing new nonsense words.Thanks. Wasn't sure if you'd be able to follow.
You and the Bears GM can justify that trade based on the chart, but the actual value favors the 49ers immensely. They gave up literally nothing and got several high picks in return. Your infallible, all-knowing chart does not apply in every situation, alas.
The numbers on the chart don't matter. Real NFL GMs use the chart to determine relative value.
The actual value is irrelevant. The Delta in the value from one pick to the next is important.
The reason why actual NFL GMs still use the chart today is so that you and the other GM can agree on the relative value of the draft picks.
It is not "infallible" it is a guideline.
In some cases, for example when there are multiple suitors for a pick the trade may be closer to the guideline like with the Bears.
In other cases when a GM is on the Hot Seat and the new HC is involved with a trade with their mentor they may decrease the relative value of the draft picks in order to get a deal done and look like they're doing something.
The Bills did not get enough in return on allowing the Chiefs to move up 17 spots as compared to the history of actual NFL trades made by actual NFL GMs.
-
We also lost the trade value points too. So we didn't even get that.Here's another way: the Chiefs, who have a far better record than the Bills over the last decade, were willing to spend four picks to ensure themselves a succession plan at the most important position. The Chiefs now have an established, experienced starter and a high-ceiling prospect to groom at the QB position. The Bills have a low-upside starter, TJ Yates, and Cardale Jones. But hey, at least we beat them in trade value points.
-
It was a bad night for the Bills. They got too cute instead of just taking game changing talent like Lattimore they got the 7th best CB to start in 2017 and the Chiefs pick in the 20s in 2018. This is how you go 7-9 forever.
Not; you let Gilmore walk over $2 million and spend the 10th pick to replace him is the definition of being stupid. If you value CB that much keep your guy and draft a player for another position, not replace him. It's called spinning the wheels
They did just that.
They used the #10 overall pick to draft the 7th ranked DB in the 2017 draft to replace Gilmore.
7-9 forever.
-
"Everyone knows" Really?Run the numbers on how many future #1 overall picks you would have to trade to get this year's #1 overall pick using the "1-round deduction" for future drafts. Never gonna happen. These are guidelines, not straight math.
Also, everyone already knows the Bears got fleeced hard, so the fact that the numbers line up almost exactly should tell you how inaccurate they are.
This is your statement: Actual NFL GMs used the chart to conduct an actual NFL trade.
However "Everyone" (non NFL GMs) know the Bears got fleeced, therefore the chart that is used to conduct the trade is inaccurate.
That is a spectacular post you got there budy. Really amazing logic.
-
You are wrong. The delta is 400 on the chart and the Bears gave up about exactly 400I could be wrong but doesn't the Bears/49ers trade blow the trade value chart away?
You're a clown.But it's math! Whaley sucks. Ralph is cheap!!!!
-
It's pretty standard.I had never heard that. May I ask where you learned that?
I've always read that next year's draft picks are valued roughly the same as this year's. Even the draft value chart I have says that right on the top -
It is math. It is not some type of opinion you can debate.SMH. If you really think that GMs in 2017 use the same value chart they did back in the 80s and 90s then I don't know what to tell you. I'm not saying it doesn't factor in, but things have evolved a bit since then.
Run the actual numbers in the 2016 draft.
Run the actual numbers in the 9ers trade.
Oh - wow actual GMs in 2017 use the chart. shocker!
-
Go run the numbers on NFL trades.That may be how you do it but it doesn't make any sense in real life. This isn't time value of money. For a team that's competing in 2017, yes, that matters. For a rebuilding team, you could argue that 2018 first round pick might be more valuable.
Discounting future picks is how it is done on real NFL trades by actual NFL teams and actual NFL GMs.
Fans like you can justify your team making poortrade value trades.
That doesn't change the fact that actual NFL GMs actually discount the value of future picks.
-
bills advantage in the draft value chart
#10 - 1300
#27 - 680 (2017)
#91 - 136 (2017)
#27 - 680 (2018)
TOTAL - 1500
You're doing it wrong. You need to discount the 2018 #27 by a round.
#10 - 1300
#27 - 680 (2017)
#91 - 136 (2017)
#27 - 310 (2018)
TOTAL - 1126
Bills should have gotten a 2018 2nd of 2018 3rd to balance.
-
Huge cut there and the big whifferIf Whaley drafts a QB he buys himself 3 years while that QB develops. So you are wrong. It would not be to his benefit to keep Tyrod
Whaley drafting a QB will not buy Whaley any more years.
Why wouldn't the Bills move on to a different GM if they draft a QB in 2017?
-
Does he even have a choice? I thought the NFL required players to be available to the media.
You always have a choice.
The NFL may make the choice to fine in response.
Money well spent by Tyrod. The Buffalo Bills media is ready to eat its young right now. There is no sense in saying two words to those hacks. (except our AP reporter of course)
I think the Bills told Taylor's agent renegotiate that contract or he can walk.
What team will give him $27.5 M next season?
If he played like Dak , heck yes
I think you'd be surprised.
There are no real Free Agent options for QB year over year.
A team with a strong defense would love to have Tyrod at QB. He doesn't turn the ball over and gives the team a chance to win.
Tyrod definitely will have a lot of interested team in his services.
If Tyrod is willing to sign an incentive based contract and take a nice $12 - $20M signing bonus he will have a job in an instant.
The Texans with a healthy JJ Watt would easily pay up for Tyrod Taylor in 2017. They're built to win now and just need a QB to not screw up.
"Tyrod throws deep to Hopkins! Touchdown Texans."
Well worth $20M for them.
-
Remember all those playoff scenarios a couple weeks back. Anyone know how close we were to having all the help we need actually happen this week? Despite our 2 losses.
The good news is the Bills were 1-5 in the division and 6-4 out of the division.
The Bills know the enemy that they have to focus on in 2017.
If the Bills went 4-2 in the division in 2017 they would be in the playoffs.
-
The Bears are in desperate need of a QB now with Hoyer probably done for the year and Cuntlers return unknown. Send them EJ and a pick for Alshon Jeffery. Git r done DW!!
Their season is over.
They'd be din starting Bubba Gump at QB so they can get a better pick at this point in time.
-
...I looked, and looked, and looked all throughout the Fish/Titans box score and just couldn't find Mario's name (aside from the fact he started the game).
Sacks: 0
Solo Tackles: 0
Assisted Tackles: 0
Yeah, it was Rex's D alright.
Shouldn't it be "Mario ruined Rex' D" ?
Alexander is the sack leader in the NFL and Zack Brown is the tackle leader in the NFL.
If this continues through 2016 it seems like an open and shut case.
-
http://nysportsbiz.com/2016/10/02/bills-wr-sammy-watkins/
Not that we really expected any good news coming from this but it looks like Sammy will be flying to North Carolina this week to find out if he will need a second surgery or not. If he does, his 2016 campaign is over.
He flew to Carolina Sunday October 9th at 11am.
My brother was on his flight.
-
Saw Goff play a bit this preseason and he does look awful. That's gotta suck to draft a guy #1 overall and know you could've had a Dak Prescott for nothing. Even Cardale Jones and the kid from Michigan (that lit up the Bills scrubs) look more like future NFL QB's.
Goff also looked awful in college. So I'm not sure how he was supposed to look better as the competition get tougher.
-
The Bills haven't been bottom feeders for the last 16years?It's amazing how all these hack writers and pundits that predicted the Bills would be bottom feeders for the last 10 years have been so wrong...
For the record I see 10-6 maybe 11-5. If Rex goes 8-8 and loses to Jenny Garofalo he is done.
News to me.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Other Team Cuts You Want
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
It would be very symmetrical if Kilo were on the Bills and Shady on the Eagles in 2019.
Not that Kiko would be a great fit but just a poetic ending.