OCinBuffalo Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 (edited) 4-3? Now it's dead as door nail. It's over. You were never right about the Watkins trade(just like you'll never be right about many things....fracking comes to mind). Lay. It. Down. First let me define the premise(read: nonsense) properly. This should take care of any "but I didn't mean/say that" excuses: Drafting Sammy Watkins, and giving away next year's 1st and 4th(note the proper use of math, logic, the dictionary, and grammar in saying that precisely, and therefore: correctly) to Cleveland, removes(d) the option for the Bills to draft a franchise QB in the first round of 2015's draft. This premise was as nonsensical on the DAY of the 2014 draft as it is today. Yet, on WGR and elsewhere, this nonsense has been said, over and over, by people who seem to struggle in their understanding of the Bills, the AFC East, the draft and the NFL as a whole. Need proof? As of now, the Bills most likely outcome to this season is 8-8. (I know, not a record anyone wants to hear, but this is about math). Please click here: http://www.sportsclu...st/Buffalo.html See the first "What if" chart, find the column labeled "Count", and understand that the largest count, out of 212k simulations is: 8 wins. Are we good? Let's move on then. As many of our informed posters KNEW on draft day, as Whaley said on draft day, our 2015 pick was never going to be in the top 5, and had a very low propensity to be in the top 10. This directly contributed to the decision to make the trade for Watkins. Why is this key fact so important? Answer: because the top 10 is where your franchise QBs are MOST LIKELY to come from, by a lot. And remember the premise: we're supposed to get a FRANCHISE QB with the 1st we gave up. Yes, I am aware of Russel Wilson, and Colin Kapernick. In response, I will remind the strugglers that Wilson was drafted with a 3, Kap with a 2, and we have given NEITHER of those picks to Cleveland for Sammy Watkins. In all cases, the most likely place to get a "franchise QB" remains the top 10. And, let's not forget the cause that is Sammy Watkins, and his now obvious effect...on the value of the draft picks we gave away for him = it drops every week. Given what we've seen of Sammy, it should be obvious that he himself may be a major contributor to keeping us out of the top 15, never mind 10. The Buffalo Bills have always had a minimal chance of drafting in the top 10 in 2015. The defense was simply too good. The O skill players were too good. The O, even in shambles, statistically had more chances to score, with shorter fields to manage, and too many weapons. This is why the premise above has always been statistically absurd. We have 9 games left, and only winning 4 of them, against our remaining schedule, I submit as a VERY pessimistic assessment. But, that's fine, it makes my point. Even with a pessimistic outlook going forward: we were never going to get the QB we wanted with the draft picks we lost. Now, we have a real, not simulated, record of 4-3. We cannot lose those 4 wins. If we assume 8-8, find the chart at the very bottom of the link, find 8 wins in the 1st column, look across to see the mode at 8 is 26, find the column heading 17-->as of today, we are most likely to draft at 16. (The reverse order of the chart) Which QB, who is better than EJ, would we have been able to draft at 16 in 2015? Answer: nobody. We already drafted a QB at 16, didn't we? This premise has always relied on the magical thinking that a franchise QB was going to get past the top 5, never mind down to 16, and that is why it's absurd. The Bills were never a top 5 team, very unlkely to be a top 10 team, and now, by the most likely #s, we aren't even a top 15 team. Now.....enough with this ridiculous crap. It was never right, and with each passing day, it gets more absurd. Every win makes me smile for lots of reasons. The tiniest reason I smile? It continues to prove the silliness of the premise above, and those who said/keep saying it. Edited October 22, 2014 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manther Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 Totally agree then and now. The trade was very calculated what the FO thought was lower risk for very high reward! Agreed then and now too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 Love the EJs just a rookie thing you have there, Hurt last year,benched this year. will this be his his theme song? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 I never understood that talk and I still dont...... Franchise QBs dont grow on trees......and for that matter you can take a QB NUMBER 1 overall in a draft and it seems like the odds are they will not be a franchise QB....... Sam Bradford? Alex Smith? These guys could possibly be available to us next year and they were NUMBER 1 OVERALL PICKS...... Then we have a player like Sammy Watkins......I just love this kid. We can wait till 2016 to start thinking about another QB in the first round Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 22, 2014 Author Share Posted October 22, 2014 Love the EJs just a rookie thing you have there, Hurt last year,benched this year. will this be his his theme song? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgiLWNgpXiQ This is your response in a thread about the Watkins trade BS being over? My avatar? (And, no, I'm not going to change it, for reasons that would involve highjacking my own thread. So, no.) But, I will ask you this: Have you considered that bringing up EJ, in this thread, which is about Sammy vs. Magical Franchise QB, who "would have been there at 16", is hilariously ironic? EJ was drafted at 16. So....we should be upset at losing a chance to draft a QB at 16, to replace the QB we drafted at 16. Right. What is this? Your 3am free association time? I'm up because of ze Germans. I have a reasonable excuse. What's yours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QCity Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 If you have a mid-range 1st round pick (say 16) you can trade up into the top 10 somewhat easily (package 1st and 2nd like St Louis gave us). Without that 1st rounder, it's almost impossible to get into the top 10 without trading your entire draft away for the next 2 years. And forget about getting into the top 5. Just delete this post, it sounds like a drunken rant to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 22, 2014 Author Share Posted October 22, 2014 (edited) Let me put this another way. Drafting a QB at 16, to replace the one you drafted at 16 is EXACTLY the type of wheel-spinning GM move that has been made since Butler, and prior to Buddy/Whaley. "These are the moves of the football team Bills, a 12 year mission to explore mediocrity, to seek out mediocre players to replace mediocre players, to boldy keep our team out of the playoffs longer than no one expected before." If you have a mid-range 1st round pick (say 16) you can trade up into the top 10 somewhat easily (package 1st and 2nd like St Louis gave us). Without that 1st rounder, it's almost impossible to get into the top 10 without trading your entire draft away for the next 2 years. And forget about getting into the top 5. Just delete this post, it sounds like a drunken rant to be honest. Yeah, you're the one saying somebody is going to trade away a guy like any of the QBs that have been taken in the top 10, the last 10 years, for a 16 and....what? Do you remember how the Rams got those extra picks they gave us? Does the RG3 trade come to mind? Do you remember the terms of that trade? You're telling me that a 16, any 16, could be used to move up to the top 5/10 for a franchise QB? With what? Seriously WTF. Re-read/re-think...re-something. But...yeah, I'm the one who is drunk? Yeah, that's what it is. No. I'm the one who is trying to shake you loose of this delusion. EDIT: Once again we see the effect that Madden has had on people's football "knowledge". "Most important position on my team, guy who's going to be the face of my franchise for the next 10 years? Nah I don't need him that badly. Sure you can take my #5 overall for your #16, a 2nd round pick, and why don't you throw in next year's 4th? No problem? Great! I'll draw up the papers right now!" When I say delusion? The above dialogue illustrates it. Those words have never been said, aren't currently said, and never will be said by any GM in the league. It's delusional to believe that they will be. Not even Mike "Trade my whole draft for Ricky Williams" Ditka is that stupid. Edited October 22, 2014 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QCity Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 Yeah, you're the one saying somebody is going to trade away a guy like any of the QBs that have been taken in the top 10, the last 10 years, for a 16 and....what? Do you remember how the Rams got those extra picks they gave us? Does the RG3 trade come to mind? Do you remember the terms of that trade? You're telling me that a 16, any 16, could be used to move up to the top 5/10 for a franchise QB? With what? Seriously WTF. Re-read/re-think...re-something. But...yeah, I'm the one who is drunk? Yeah, that's what it is. No. I'm the one who is trying to shake you loose of this delusion. Perhaps you should reread my post. I said it's easily possible to move up into the top 10 from 16. Possibly top 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 22, 2014 Author Share Posted October 22, 2014 (edited) Perhaps you should reread my post. I said it's easily possible to move up into the top 10 from 16. Possibly top 5. Perhaps you should read your own post: you brought up the Rams. Perhaps you should read about the NFL draft with regard to franchise QBs. That you even think somebody would trade away a chance at a franchise QB for a 16, without asking for a hell of a lot more, is patently retarded. I probably should just stop right here, because now you're in firmly in Obtuseville. However, I will try to help you: Not only is it highly improbable to get a "no doubt about it guy" by trading up, because the #1 reason a team is drafting high in the first place is: bad QB; it's impossible to get him without trading away a hell of a lot more than we did for Watkins. Ask the Redskins how that's working out. /facepalm So now the circle of idiocy is complete: by trading up to get Watkins, we traded away a chance to make an RG3 trade? Oh whatever will I do? I won't be able to sleep for weeks, knowing that we lost the chance to give away 2 1sts and 2 2nds on a half-assed QB who can't read defenses. Meanwhile, we got a proven gamer in Watkins, proven BEFORE the draft, whose good attitude is only out-paced by his speed/ability? Look: it's as I said, this whole premise is silly. And, for you, this is like gravity. Gravity existed for billions of years before it was "discovered". At some point, you are going to discover the reality about this trade as well. So, at least you have something to look forward to. Edited October 22, 2014 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Doug Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 2 Watkins trade threads = IN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 22, 2014 Author Share Posted October 22, 2014 2 Watkins trade threads = IN No. This one is specific to the nonsense premise that we lost a chance to draft a 1st round QB, and apparently, has also become a training resource called "Understanding how the NFL Draft works: Franchise QBs" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 (edited) Ok..... the original premise is sound. That to be in position to get a can't miss Quarterback you need to be in the top 5 and we were never likely to be in the top 5 this year. However, how many Quarterbacks have been taken even in the top 10 over the past two drafts? 1. So given that there does seem to be a bit more reluctance from teams to pull the trigger early on Quarterbacks you might well, even drafting at 16 for example, be in a position where you have your pick of all the Quarterbacks.... or all but 1 of the Quarterbacks. However, I would suggest that what the Bills should be looking for in the draft if they think a Quarterback is needed (depends what they really deep down believe about EJ) is a guy to come in and sit for a year - whether behind Orton, or behind another vet who they bring in (Bradford etc). I know that was their plan with EJ. They just didn't plan for that pesky mat (and Kolb is hopeless anyway). You can get that kind of developmental guy in round 2 or if they are more of a project maybe even later. Kaepernick was still quite a project when taken in the 2nd nd they worked with him for over a year before putting him in. Edited October 22, 2014 by GunnerBill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 No. This one is specific to the nonsense premise that we lost a chance to draft a 1st round QB, and apparently, has also become a training resource called "Understanding how the NFL Draft works: Franchise QBs" OC, your thread is about this one specific premise. Do you mind if I broaden it just a bit? The possibility of injury makes the trade one that is dangerous. If Watkins goes down, we are a team with qb issues, without Watkins, and no first round pick in 2015. I hate trades like this but Watkins DOES look fantastic. He has a very unique style. I think that Fear The Losing sums it up well in another thread. The Bills need to make the playoffs this year, next year or both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 I never understood that talk and I still dont...... Franchise QBs dont grow on trees......and for that matter you can take a QB NUMBER 1 overall in a draft and it seems like the odds are they will not be a franchise QB....... Sam Bradford? Alex Smith? These guys could possibly be available to us next year and they were NUMBER 1 OVERALL PICKS...... I agree with your points, but Alex just signed an extension worth $17 mil / yr for I think three more years, and I don't want Bradford. The guy is Mr. Glass from Unbreakable. Playing hindsight, we should have lured Alex Smith two years ago by paying him more than KC. He was excited about Andy Reid, but he was only paid $12 mil / yr for two years. We could have offered $14 mil and more guaranteed and would have our franchise guy. Then we have a player like Sammy Watkins......I just love this kid. We can wait till 2016 to start thinking about another QB in the first round Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xsoldier54 Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 4-3? Now it's dead as door nail. It's over. You were never right about the Watkins trade(just like you'll never be right about many things....fracking comes to mind). Lay. It. Down. First let me define the premise(read: nonsense) properly. This should take care of any "but I didn't mean/say that" excuses: Drafting Sammy Watkins, and giving away next year's 1st and 4th(note the proper use of math, logic, the dictionary, and grammar in saying that precisely, and therefore: correctly) to Cleveland, removes(d) the option for the Bills to draft a franchise QB in the first round of 2015's draft. This premise was as nonsensical on the DAY of the 2014 draft as it is today. Yet, on WGR and elsewhere, this nonsense has been said, over and over, by people who seem to struggle in their understanding of the Bills, the AFC East, the draft and the NFL as a whole. Need proof? As of now, the Bills most likely outcome to this season is 8-8. (I know, not a record anyone wants to hear, but this is about math). Please click here: http://www.sportsclu...st/Buffalo.html See the first "What if" chart, find the column labeled "Count", and understand that the largest count, out of 212k simulations is: 8 wins. Are we good? Let's move on then. As many of our informed posters KNEW on draft day, as Whaley said on draft day, our 2015 pick was never going to be in the top 5, and had a very low propensity to be in the top 10. This directly contributed to the decision to make the trade for Watkins. Why is this key fact so important? Answer: because the top 10 is where your franchise QBs are MOST LIKELY to come from, by a lot. And remember the premise: we're supposed to get a FRANCHISE QB with the 1st we gave up. Yes, I am aware of Russel Wilson, and Colin Kapernick. In response, I will remind the strugglers that Wilson was drafted with a 3, Kap with a 2, and we have given NEITHER of those picks to Cleveland for Sammy Watkins. In all cases, the most likely place to get a "franchise QB" remains the top 10. And, let's not forget the cause that is Sammy Watkins, and his now obvious effect...on the value of the draft picks we gave away for him = it drops every week. Given what we've seen of Sammy, it should be obvious that he himself may be a major contributor to keeping us out of the top 15, never mind 10. The Buffalo Bills have always had a minimal chance of drafting in the top 10 in 2015. The defense was simply too good. The O skill players were too good. The O, even in shambles, statistically had more chances to score, with shorter fields to manage, and too many weapons. This is why the premise above has always been statistically absurd. We have 9 games left, and only winning 4 of them, against our remaining schedule, I submit as a VERY pessimistic assessment. But, that's fine, it makes my point. Even with a pessimistic outlook going forward: we were never going to get the QB we wanted with the draft picks we lost. Now, we have a real, not simulated, record of 4-3. We cannot lose those 4 wins. If we assume 8-8, find the chart at the very bottom of the link, find 8 wins in the 1st column, look across to see the mode at 8 is 26, find the column heading 17-->as of today, we are most likely to draft at 16. (The reverse order of the chart) Which QB, who is better than EJ, would we have been able to draft at 16 in 2015? Answer: nobody. We already drafted a QB at 16, didn't we? This premise has always relied on the magical thinking that a franchise QB was going to get past the top 5, never mind down to 16, and that is why it's absurd. The Bills were never a top 5 team, very unlkely to be a top 10 team, and now, by the most likely #s, we aren't even a top 15 team. Now.....enough with this ridiculous crap. It was never right, and with each passing day, it gets more absurd. Every win makes me smile for lots of reasons. The tiniest reason I smile? It continues to prove the silliness of the premise above, and those who said/keep saying it. Oh I see the math. 2+2=Douchebag. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finn Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 "Drafting Sammy Watkins, and giving away next year's 1st and 4th(note the proper use of math, logic, the dictionary, and grammar in saying that precisely, and therefore: correctly." You're using the colon incorrectly, bub. I only correct people who are being deliberately obnoxious about other people's grammar. The "Oxford comma" is also questionable to some, and you didn't insert a space between the "4th" and the parentheses, which is another error. In short, why don't you stick to substance, and, while you're at it, tone down the self-righteousness, prickly, self-satisfied tone. Resolve your insecurities elsewhere. As for the substance of your comment, Whaley's move was definitely debatable at the time and probably will remain so for another year or two, maybe more. It is hardly "nonsensical" to challenge it as wrong-headed or reckless, especially in light of E.J.'s face plant this year. Since you have your dictionary handy, I suggest you look up the word. As Inigo Montoya would say, I don't think that word means what you think it means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 The fly in the ointment is that Bills won two games with Orton as the QB, who wasn't in the plans back in may. . At that point, it was a much higher risk with the motley crew at QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casey D Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 If you have a mid-range 1st round pick (say 16) you can trade up into the top 10 somewhat easily (package 1st and 2nd like St Louis gave us). Without that 1st rounder, it's almost impossible to get into the top 10 without trading your entire draft away for the next 2 years. And forget about getting into the top 5. Just delete this post, it sounds like a drunken rant to be honest. What QB in the 2015 is the sure thing, we could get him with a top 5 pick guy? With the rare exception of a P. Manning or Luck, when is there ever such a guy? RG III? I mean the best QBs today, such as Rogers, Brady,Brees etc etc were not top 5 guys. The closest you might find is E. Manning and P. Rivers (6th), who over their careers have been good but not great overall. How nice it would be if it were as easy as you suggest that 2015 is the one year where we would have found our guy but for the Watkins trade in the first round--presumably, according to you, by giving away lots of picks in 2016. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 #1- lots of good QB's have been picked after the 16th overall slot. Rodgers, brady, bress, Wilson, flacco, romo, foles, Dalton and kaepernick all say hi. #2- Sammy will need to become a pro bowl player in order to justify two #1's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 Love the EJs just a rookie thing you have there, Hurt last year,benched this year. will this be his his theme song? Yeah I'm pretty sure people will still call him "basically a rookie" next year. I'd bet a month's worth of chicken wings on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts