negativo Posted December 19, 2014 Author Share Posted December 19, 2014 If we had drafted Mack, we would be 0-14 right now. And I came to that conclusion after a life-sucking analysis of every applicable metric. You're welcome. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Keep in mind, without Sammy we would still have Stevie. Statistics say that would be an even swap, plus a superstar OLB in Mack. I tend to agree that the price of moving up was excessive, but if we were going to do it Mack would have been the better choice...at least as of right now. If somehow Sammy explodes next year into the next Megatron while Mack gets injured, well, things could change. I can only go by what we have to work with here and now. we didn't get very far with Stevie as our #1 WR. I don't think adding Mack would change that. You can base things on stats all you want. Tomorrow night, do me a favor and watch SDs defense and how much effort they put toward coverage on Stevie Johnson. He is the one who will probably benefit from the coverage going elsewhere. The impact of Sammy Watkins on the offense goes far beyond the stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yard Monkey Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Justify that please, because I can far more reasonably say that we'd have 3 fewer wins with Mack than Sammy. Sammy made crucial plays against Miami, Minnesota, and Detroit that delivered wins. Please show me how substituting Mack would've meant (a) also winning those games, and (b) winning two others among: SD Houston NE KC Miami Denver Ok: SD: Mack would have strip sacked Rivers for a turnover in field goal range and defended several passes to Gates preventing an SD TD (Bills win) Houston: Mack would have broken Fitzgerald's leg early in the game "crippling" the Houston offense (Bills win) NE: Mack would have shut down Gronk making the NE offense impotent (Bills win) There are 3 more wins for you. Need I go on? How could you possibly ask for a hypothetical response against actual facts...seriously?? That is one of the more pompous responses I have seen here in a while. Oh, and this is coming from someone that is ok with the Watkins trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Ok: SD: Mack would have strip sacked Rivers for a turnover in field goal range and defended several passes to Gates preventing an SD TD (Bills win) Houston: Mack would have broken Fitzgerald's leg early in the game "crippling" the Houston offense (Bills win) NE: Mack would have shut down Gronk making the NE offense impotent (Bills win) There are 3 more wins for you. Need I go on? How could you possibly ask for a hypothetical response against actual facts...seriously?? That is one of the more pompous responses I have seen here in a while. Oh, and this is coming from someone that is ok with the Watkins trade. Wow, pot calling kettle black maybe? That was the entire point of the response...to say that it's patently absurd to claim that the team would have 2 more wins with Mack than Watkins. Keep up...or in the very least can the insults if you cannot do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max997 Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Sammy's been a solid rookie receiver, but has hardly delivered on Whaley's "generational player" promise or price tag. I felt from the beginning Mack was the true must-have impact player, and he's been all that and more. He's widely considered to be not only the best rookie, but already the best 4-3 LB in the game. Not bashing Sammy, but Mack would have made this defense impenetrable. Maybe Seattle level impenetrable. Raiders' Khalil Mack almost was a Buffalo Bill: http://www.mercuryne...source=infinite Big difference between the two is the production of Watkins and any other receiver is highly dependent on the QB he is playing with so I completely disagree with the statement that he has hardly delivered on Whaley's "generational player" promise or price tag. I like Mack and thought for a second when the Bills were on the clock they may take him instead of Sammy but I dont see anything in that article that talks about how he almost became a Bill other then the title and the fact that he was still on the board when the Bills traded up to 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
section122 Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 *IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENTS* 1. For those who are reading impaired, and feel the need to continue reminding me "how one-sided the votes are", please note that I qualified in my comment that, "If Mack were in red, white and blue instead of silver and black the votes would be flipped." 2. For those who think I'm going to engage in a dispute that involves researching analytics to quantify statistically how many more wins I think the Bills would have with Mack vs Watkins, please note: I'm not diving into a bottomless pit of wasted time and boredom just to satisfy your life-sucking desires. Thank you, and have a great day. For those of you who don't know how to use google translator I have done it for you. Your welcome in advance! *IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENTS* 1. Anyone who disagrees with me and needs to keep reminding me that the numbers show my opinion is in the minority please note that I left myself the out of a statement that can't be proved added way after the votes showed that my opinion was not the popular one. 2. For those of you that think I will attempt to back up my less than popular opinion with facts or anything really. Please note I am not willing to actually defend my outlandish statements just to justify them. I'm right your wrong nana boo boo stick your head in doo doo. Thank you, and have a great day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
It's in My Blood Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 if the rumors are true and Gronks cap $ is too much for NE. it will be moot. please lord make it so!! Cutler to Gronk and Watkins...hmmmm I'd take Sammy over Mack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 that is not true at all. We have Woods Hogan Chandler Jackson Spiller and Boobie DIxon has looked solid. What we don't have is a consistent accurate QB who can see the entire field decent players, but other than Spiller, who has been injured most of the year, none of them are guys the defense has to account for on every play. W/o watkins, we would be looking at 8 in the box all day long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 decent players, but other than Spiller, who has been injured most of the year, none of them are guys the defense has to account for on every play. W/o watkins, we would be looking at 8 in the box all day long. exactly. Woods is a very good #2 IMO but the only guy that scares a DC is Watkins. And Spiller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 exactly. Woods is a very good #2 IMO but the only guy that scares a DC is Watkins. And Spiller. You vastly underrate the pressure Lee Smith puts on a defense. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
negativo Posted December 19, 2014 Author Share Posted December 19, 2014 (edited) For those of you who don't know how to use google translator I have done it for you. Your welcome in advance! *IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENTS* 1. Anyone who disagrees with me and needs to keep reminding me that the numbers show my opinion is in the minority please note that I left myself the out of a statement that can't be proved added way after the votes showed that my opinion was not the popular one. 2. For those of you that think I will attempt to back up my less than popular opinion with facts or anything really. Please note I am not willing to actually defend my outlandish statements just to justify them. I'm right your wrong nana boo boo stick your head in doo doo. Thank you, and have a great day. *More Important Announcement* Outside of "Bills Message Board World" it's hardly an outlandish opinion to suggest Mack has been a better rookie than Watkins, or that the Bills decision to mortgage the house and kids to get Sammie was excessive and foolish. Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America. Edited December 19, 2014 by negativo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 *More Important Announcement* Outside of "Bills Message Board World" it's hardly an outlandish opinion to suggest Mack has been a better rookie than Watkins, or that the Bills decision to mortgage the house and kids to get Sammie was excessive and foolish. Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America. outside of Bills message board world, they think mortgaging the house and kids to get Mack would have been a smart move for a team that has a top defense without him and their best LB stashed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Keep digging the hole deeper. Looks like you lost a vote somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Keep digging the hole deeper. Looks like you lost a vote somewhere. maybe because they pictured Kahlil in red white and blue, and the black had been more slimming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Since Brown has clearly been a stud for us at linebacker this is a no brainer......not to mention we have what should have been the D rookie of the year coming back next year in Kiko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddenboy Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Watkins. My sig to the contrary notwithstanding. We need offense. We need credible offense. We need a unit or two that keeps opposing co-ordinators up at night. An extra linebacker would not have done it. And plus, Kiko !! If we had a real QB, Watkins would be a near lock for ROY. Not that that's the standard, but rather to say we havent seen the best of him, through no fault of his own. Playing through nagging injuries, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not at the table Karlos Posted December 20, 2014 Share Posted December 20, 2014 (edited) As one of the biggest Khalil mack fans I was disappointed when the pick came in as watkins. I have followed mack since he came to UB and every game in the pros. He is an amazing player and I would love for him to be a bill. But we made the correct pick with Sammy. We have a very talented defense and I don't think gym shorts scheme would have used mack to his potential. The offense needs big time play makers and we got one. I don't think you could have put ODB, cooks, or Benjamin on this offense and had the same results. We are a guard and OC away from the perfect situation for a new quarterback. like the steelers when big Ben came in. Edited December 20, 2014 by kr632 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bladiebla Posted December 20, 2014 Share Posted December 20, 2014 Pure clickbait that article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simpleman Posted December 20, 2014 Share Posted December 20, 2014 (edited) Khalil Mack is great, but dont forget, we thought wed have Kiko this year. We just didnt need anymore linebackers no matter how good, we needed offensive weapons. I think Whaley made the correct descision If we are looking back at draft time, we did not know Bradham was about to have a breakout year. If the management didn't feel the need for upgrades at LB, why did they sign Spikes and sign Rivers after Kiko went down? And why did they spend the higher draft pick on Brown. Management felt a real need to get not one, but 3 new linebackers. I would not say getting 3 new linebackers is "not needing anymore linebackers". You may say we needed offensive weapons, but remember that after we drafted Sammy we traded Stevie. And we might have drafted Ebron instead. They thought he was going to be an offensive weapon. They also could have drafted another WR later. I can think of at least 3 other WRs drafted after Sammy that so far have been more effective than Sammy this year. And if we had not traded up, we could have had a 1st round this year to use on a QB prospect to develope for the future. Edited December 20, 2014 by simpleman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted December 20, 2014 Share Posted December 20, 2014 If we are looking back at draft time, we did not know Bradham was about to have a breakout year. If the management didn't feel the need for upgrades at LB, why did they sign Spikes and sign Rivers after Kiko went down? And why did they spend the higher draft pick on Brown. Management felt a real need to get not one, but 3 new linebackers. I would not say getting 3 new linebackers is "not needing anymore linebackers". You may say we needed offensive weapons, but remember that after we drafted Sammy we traded Stevie. And we might have drafted Ebron instead. They thought he was going to be an offensive weapon. They also could have drafted another WR later. I can think of at least 3 other WRs drafted after Sammy that so far have been more effective than Sammy this year. And if we had not traded up, we could have had a 1st round this year to use on a QB prospect to develope for the future. They didn't sign Spikes and Rivers or draft Brown after Kiko went down. They did this before Kiko went down. Also, it's not speculative to say that they'd have drafted Ebron, as Whaley himself said as much. Lastly, which QB do you like in the 2015 1st round that will be there with the 16th overall pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts