The Poojer Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 well played rook! i didn't fall for it but very, very, very well played! Myabe Peter King is right...check out these stats and the write up on Donald Jones Lee's Replacement i saw a tweet from tim graham alluding to this...saying that the org. promised lee that they would send him somewhere favorable when they felt the time was right...this could have been the org. honoring that promise while sticking with the best interest of the org. if so...bravo... Just speculation, but perhaps Evans was traded as a favor to him. No matter how much we want to believe otherwise, this team is AT LEAST a year away from being a contender and Evans is near the end of his career. He should do well in Baltimore for a year or two and he wouldn't have had that much impact here when the staff wants to get the young guys game experience. Does this make the Bills better this year? No, but I don't think it is a big downgrade, either and it does get young guys on the field to see what they can produce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Long Beach Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 I don't buy it. First off, TO's little project was James Hardy and look where he is today. Stevie showed a ton of promise his rookie year and was ready to turn the corner. Did taking a seat and watching TO help him? Perhaps, but let's be real here... the best thing for Stevie Johnson was live game action. The moment TO came into the fold, he barely played let alone dressed for games. Evans is a vestige of the past. He's a one-dimensional player (albeit a good one) that has trouble with underneath routes. The Bills have plenty of speed at the position, diminishing the value of Lee's core strength. Time to say goodbye. I don't often agree with you Dawgg, but I think you summed this one up perfectly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wagon Circler Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Yeah, I get it....but this has been the line for the last 16 years. And so now it's our strategy that we are building through the draft? What does that mean? That we weren't really trying too hard in earlier drafts but now we will? This crap is getting old. The future is never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 At the risk of swimming against the current tide of outrage, that's a reasonable take. After all, who knows which one might be the next Steve Johnson. I know people are pissed about the prospects for 2011, but this is not a playoff team with or without Lee Evans. They are looking to the future. Except that it may have been easier for this team to unload Roscoe Parrish than Evans...considering that we already have a replacement for Parrish in Brad Smith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 We are in the second year of the rebuild we should be trying to acquire pieces and develop the young guns on the roster. Its likely we will finish with 6-7 wins and be improved from last season. And while it pains me to say this we are still a year away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Nothing changes until the ownership does. This franchise has been "rebuilding" for more than a decade. Why do we have to jump on the ownership for every front office move. Go yell at Buddy and Chan as this is their choice. Buddy builds his team with "bigger" people. One of the reasons he brought Craig Davis from SD to here. While I think they traded the wrong WR (Parrish instead of Evans), I don't think the owner has anything to do here. As another poster said, this franchise should have had a Buddy kind of GM in 2000...They hoped Donahoe would have been that, but all he waanted was revenge against the Steeler (For kicking him out in favor of the Chin). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanners Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 +1. This ain't baseball. Because of injuries, this is a short term league. The only time you plan for the long haul is when you draft a blue chip qb. Fitz, who I like, is in his prime. The time is now for him. Dawgg, I often disagree with you, but i respect our opinion. I suspect Evans is going to have a big year for the ravens. Flacco has a big arm and good blocking. What do you think? My point is that on a normal team, he's a damn good player. Let me throw this out at you. Among the Bills many stupid moves in the last twelve years, in my opinion the stupidest was not paying Peters. Look at Evans pre and post-Peters. I think it's pretty telling. Flacco has good blocking???? Ha!!! Do you follow the NFL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 If the Bills really wanted to "protect the future", they'd send a cybernetic assassin back in time to kill the mothers or Rob Johnson, JP Losman, and Trent Edwards before any of them were born Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NishP Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 I'm glad someone said that.... And honestly it's really that simple, gotta let our future receivers develop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpcolosi Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 (edited) I posted this in another thread but it got closed... have at it - I completely agree with the early discussion/peter king discussion on donald jones: Like it or not, trading veterans on the downside of their career is the Patriot Way. Now, if we had been winning more, lee might have fetched more than a 4th. But look at what bellicheck has done to build his team (not to mention, he just outright cut, CUT Lawyer Milloy who at that point was a hell of a lot more consistent than lee). You guys can't have your cake and eat it to. Either you get a FO that starts acting like a real FO and trades players trending downward for draft picks while there is still value, or you continue the model of riding them out through their contract and getting nothing. Ya'll can say Nix and Whaley have lost it, but they've done EXACTLY what the Pats would do and have done: trade AWAY - 2010 Moss and a 7th for a 3rd (want to argue Lee is worth more than that? it's the same as a 4th). http://sports.espn.g...tory?id=5653186 trade FOR - 2011 CO 5th and 6th (again want to argue Lee is better than CO? look at the numbers), http://espn.go.com/b...ots-source-says trade FOR/AWAY - 2010 Deion branch 4th round pick (this is about what Lee is worth) http://en.wikipedia....ki/Deion_Branch *** to be noted - they originally sent him for a 1st because 1.) he came from a winning team (always inflates value) 2.) was younger. and this is just the WRs.... This hasn't even touched on the other trades like laurence maroney (under achieving 1st rounder they at least got some value for in getting back a 4th - again coming from a winning team, value always inflated with draft picks). Bottom line - you guys can't have a competent front office and NOT have moves like this. Grow up and get behind the FO. Nix is following a winning model, whether you like it or not. Just look at what winning franchises do long term - trade the vet talent once down hill and let the young guys build up and start rocking out. Love the move = GO BILLLLLS!!!! Edited August 13, 2011 by rpcolosi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defend Greece Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 I believe the real reason the Bills traded Evans was because they have 4 WRs from the class of 2010 that they don't want to cut. While their future is yet to be determined, one of them might just be an important player when the team gets good. By the time the team is good, they realize Evans' contract will be up & they had no intention of giving him another big $ contract. So, to play it safe, it's better to keep Easley, Jones, Nelson & Roosevelt on the roster. With Johnson & Parish that's 6 receivers. Since they don't want 7 receivers on the roster,the oldest guy, Evans, was the odd man out. It's more a classic example of a team knowing they're not winning this year & are investing time, including added playing time, into the future at the WR position. This is all fine and dandy, but if they cut one of them and keep buster I am going to be furious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanners Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 and this is what stands for hope, nowadays. yikes. jw His approach on hope was iffy, but what is your take on the trade? I think it makes a ton of sense. We got some great young receivers. Plus the season hasn't even started yet. The frustration as a fan is that we are always in rebuilding mode. I'm glad to have football back, but concerned that the Bills will be out of playoff contention early in the season. Out of playoff contention because Lee Evans is off the team??? He was key to the playoffs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
folz Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 I can't remember where I saw it but it said something about how Evans doesn't suit Gailey's offense because he isn't comfortable running routes across the middle. And isn't it ironic how for the past few weeks before entering Buffalobills.com there is the page with Stevie catching the ball, was it a sign? I agree with the OP and "Loyal" I wrote a fairly long post about this (with the quotes from Gailey) in the other Lee Evans thread if you care to read it... http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/132896-evans-traded-to-baltimore/page__st__440 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Flacco has good blocking???? Ha!!! Do you follow the NFL? Um, yeah, I do. I will agree that they had a rough year last year, but when healthy, they do have talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloRebound Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Brilliant logic. I have been a big Lee Evans fan forever, and as a fan I am extremely disappointed that we lost him. However, emotions aside, this is a wise move. Evans lacks a vital quality that this team needs at WO, physicality. He is a small player who never beats the jam against our divisional rivals, and never got open underneath. It is what it is now. Completely agree. Evans is a great deep-ball WR and runs some nice sideline routes, but is actually sub-par in the middle of the field and underneath due to his aversion to contact. Don't think it will be that hard to replace his production, and Evans will be better off in a different system. WIsh him well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 (edited) I believe the real reason the Bills traded Evans was because they have 4 WRs from the class of 2010 that they don't want to cut. While their future is yet to be determined, one of them might just be an important player when the team gets good. By the time the team is good, they realize Evans' contract will be up & they had no intention of giving him another big $ contract. So, to play it safe, it's better to keep Easley, Jones, Nelson & Roosevelt on the roster. With Johnson & Parish that's 6 receivers. Since they don't want 7 receivers on the roster,the oldest guy, Evans, was the odd man out. It's more a classic example of a team knowing they're not winning this year & are investing time, including added playing time, into the future at the WR position. Your analysis makes a lot of sense. I have a slightly different twist to the Evans trade. It has little to do with the development of the other receivers so much as taking a broader three to four year perspective on the reshaping of the roster. Buddy Nix and his associates made the decision that Evans wasn't in their long term plans, especially considering when his contract was up. Many critics are making the point that the Bills didn't get much in return on the trade. They didn't get much in return but something is certainly better than nothing. The Bills are probably going to be a 5-6 win team this year, with or without Evans. So with that in mind it is smart to try to get something for him while you can. Is the productivity from Evan's spot going to be greatly reduced with his replacements? Probably not. Is Buster Davis or Easley, combined, going to have similar numbers? Probably so. The routes that Fitz is most comfortable with are of the quick slants type of routes. Those are not the type of routes that Evans thrives at. Nix is receiving a lot of criticism for the Evans trade. That is understandable because there is so little trust for this very flimsy organization. People are simply tired of the mounting losses. But if one stands back and reviews the deal from a strategic long term project it makes a lot of sense. Nix has laid out his approach on how to build a successful franchise. There is nothing novel about it. It is the standard approach other successful organizations take. You do it through the draft. Success is predicated on drafting well. The best way to judge Buddy Nix at this point is not through wins or losses, it is through player development. If last year's draft class in general do well and contribute this year then his plan is working. This year's draft class will be better judged next year. In the grand scheme of things the Evans trade is not such a big deal. What it signals to me is that Nix has a plan and he is sticking to it, no matter how loud the howls are. Isn't it better to have a basic plan and follow it instead of the stupid Donahoe/Jauron/Levy/Brandon ad hoc approach. The upside on this deal is that Evans gets a good opportunity to play for a playoff team. I wish him the best. He is a class person and deserves to be in a better football situation. The following WGR interview with Merrill Hoge on the Howard Simon Show gives a good analysis on the impending Evans trade. I agree with his assessment. While many people are upset with the deal I'm not. http://www.wgr550.com/topic/play_window.php?audioType=Episode&audioId=5422626 Edited August 13, 2011 by JohnC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 We've been rebuilding for 10+ years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete This Account Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 His approach on hope was iffy, but what is your take on the trade? I think it makes a ton of sense. We got some great young receivers. Plus the season hasn't even started yet. Out of playoff contention because Lee Evans is off the team??? He was key to the playoffs? i question the motives for making this deal. and as i wrote, it opens up the Bills to being second-guessed for thinking this offense, which made modest gains last year, can improve without what's been its most consistent threat. jw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuze Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Addendum: As a fan who's had to witness this dreck for the past however many decades, I can tell you I don't give a rat's ass about the future. I care about THIS year. Winning NOW. To paraphrase the old fool's handchosen GM: Show me the damned Baby, Buddy. to me, there is ZERO about what this front office has done that's geared toward winning in the short term. To be honest, there isn't much geared toward long-term winning either. I agree with you six pack. This trade was complete bull ****. Kind of along the lines of Jauron firing the o cord a week before the season starts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5THXIT Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Myabe Peter King is right...check out these stats and the write up on Donald Jones Lee's Replacement Bought it DOOOOHHHH!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts