No first round pick? Why not trade Sammy?

[SACTOBILLSFAN]

The craziest part of it is, people still doubt Beane. Granted, he hasn't won a ring, but he takes the lowest or second lowest payroll in the MLB and parlays it into the playoffs year in, year out.

I just don't think anyone else has that kind of sack. Certainly not in the NFL.

 

You make an interesting argument for sure.

 

People who doubt Beane are idiots. Getting in the playoffs in baseball is what it's about because once you're in it's a complete dice roll and he constantly puts his team in position to be competitive and make a run at the postseason. The meatballs that doubt him say dumb things like "trading Cespedes was the reason the offense fell apart" and that makes me want to kick puppies. Keane will get his ring because the playoff pixie dust on the other side of the Bay just ran out and the A's are built to continue to sustain success.

 

The entire premise of Moneyball is finding an inefficiency within the player market that the rest of the league doesn't see and exploiting it. In baseball it is easier to apply advanced analytics because the sample sizes are ridiculous each and every season, and while it's a team sport, it relies more on individuals performing separate tasks within the environment of a baseball season. With football there are far less things to exploit because everyone is dependent upon one another. You could have the greatest QB in the world but put him behind the worst offensive line in the league and no level of sabermetrics will show you he's a good QB because he probably put up EJ type stats or was hurt all year. Same with a WR, Larry Fitzgerald is great but he's been catching passes from sad sacks of **** at QB for his entire career save for the Warner years. I like analytics in football for in-game decisions but in terms of roster construction I feel like it's less applicable.

[Uffalo Ills]

 

I think you're kind of proving my point. You wouldn't trade Sammy straight up for Peyton Manning? For Brady? For Kaepernick? For Cam Newton? Maybe for Wilson (I'm sure Seattle would find that amusing).

I'm gonna pass on Kaep...I find that amusing. I get your point: As fans we are obligated to be loyal to our players. I just truely believe that Sammy is better than most of whats out there. Not many rookie wideouts can claim to have directly won 2-3 games (at Min, at Det, etc). without him we'd be 7-9 and none of us would be cheering about all the progress we've made. Without Odell, the giants would still suck...he won close to zero games directly. He made an impact on the box score, but not the win column. that was my unrelated sidenote.

now:

Ej and mariota are similar in how the work in the pocket in my opinion. They overthrow WR's a bit, which is OK in college when the dbs suck at hitting, but isnt good when the wr you are throwing to is playing with broken ribs. plus i think it will be another reach by the team that drafts him so high in the first round, just like drafing ej at #16 was...they also both stare down wrs, watch some film...they are similar

 

People who doubt Beane are idiots. Getting in the playoffs in baseball is what it's about because once you're in it's a complete dice roll and he constantly puts his team in position to be competitive and make a run at the postseason. The meatballs that doubt him say dumb things like "trading Cespedes was the reason the offense fell apart" and that makes me want to kick puppies. Keane will get his ring because the playoff pixie dust on the other side of the Bay just ran out and the A's are built to continue to sustain success.

 

The entire premise of Moneyball is finding an inefficiency within the player market that the rest of the league doesn't see and exploiting it. In baseball it is easier to apply advanced analytics because the sample sizes are ridiculous each and every season, and while it's a team sport, it relies more on individuals performing separate tasks within the environment of a baseball season. With football there are far less things to exploit because everyone is dependent upon one another. You could have the greatest QB in the world but put him behind the worst offensive line in the league and no level of sabermetrics will show you he's a good QB because he probably put up EJ type stats or was hurt all year. Same with a WR, Larry Fitzgerald is great but he's been catching passes from sad sacks of **** at QB for his entire career save for the Warner years. I like analytics in football for in-game decisions but in terms of roster construction I feel like it's less applicable.

You hit the nail on the head....even if I hate the A's to my core.

[Dibs]

I find it fascinating how organizations (and fans) think. A few questions to clarify what I mean:

 

1. If you're the Vikings, would you trade Bridgewater for Sammy? I think we all agree that the answer is "of course not."

 

2. Some fans bemoan the trading up to draft Sammy rather than taking a QB with our initial pick, or even trading down to take a QB later. The same fans agree that Sammy had a very good rookie season (particularly given the fact that he didn't exactly have great QB play feeding him), and that his star is on the rise. Yet they never consider trading Sammy for what we need more: a QB, or the chance to draft a QB.

 

This is what economists call the "endowment effect." You tend to overvalue what you have, and undervalue what you could get.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endowment_effect

 

This is something some great sports GMs like Billy Beane do not run afoul of. Think you need a pitcher to finally make it to a World Series? Go get Lester and Samardzija! That doesn't work? Let Lester go, trade Samardzija, reload with some other players! If you want a QB now your best trade chip is Sammy and it's not even close. So at least consider it ... all you'd be doing is a classic Billy Beane transaction: you traded up to try to get it done in 2014, you came close, but didn't make it. Now you're stuck with no first round pick in 2015? Simply undo that by trading Sammy. No harm done. But it takes guts, which most GMs lack.

 

Like others in this thread, I have no problem with trading Sammy(or Kiko, or Dareus, or whomever) for a legitimate top 10 QB. Hell, throw in 2 of our 1st round picks as well to get one of those. To trade away young established star players for a hit/miss proposition at QB however would most likely end up being a terrible mistake.

 

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.....and a hand in the bush is worth two birds.

[BaaadThingsMan]

No

[machine gun kelly]

I'm just saying think outside the box. Philly never got over losing DeSean Jackson. Sammy for Foles + their 1st? Doesn't sound outrageous. + their 2nd instead? Sounds like a good deal for both. Too much for Foles? Again, who else? Chase Daniel is making Kyle Orton money as Alex Smith's backup. Matt Flynn got two huge deals. QBs are always more valuable than people realize. The Foles for a 5th rounder talk strikes me as ridiculous. And no, I'm not just focused on Foles, it's just an example.

 

Foles is an unrestricted free agent. We don't have to trade for him, we outbid Philly. If they tag him, they would have to pay him probably over $17 mil a year. They won't want to do that. If they offer 10, we come back at 12 mil. Give him a 2 year deal with a nice guaranteed package and keep your emerging talent. Trading Sammy is not wise at all as he will end up someday becoming a top 5 WR. He just needs to get healthy.

[Dibs]

Foles is an unrestricted free agent. We don't have to trade for him, we outbid Philly. If they tag him, they would have to pay him probably over $17 mil a year. They won't want to do that. If they offer 10, we come back at 12 mil. Give him a 2 year deal with a nice guaranteed package and keep your emerging talent. Trading Sammy is not wise at all as he will end up someday becoming a top 5 WR. He just needs to get healthy.

I don't know where you heard that from but Foles is signed through 2015. He isn't a FA.

[Big Hurt]

You would make the worst GM of the history of football. Fans in this area seem to always try to break up the team and reset. Yes, we have a great defense now. But it didn't happen by accident. It was built by drafting and making trades for known great players, while keeping our own star players. It was also done with spending money where makes a great impact. If the system is sound, I believe the defense will still be good. Steelers is a good example. Trading Watkins is so wrong in many ways. It is like Bengals trading AJ Green or Falcons trading Julio Jones for a 1st round pick. The purpose of drafting is to land a player like Green, Jones, and Watkins. Fix what is broken. You are not smart enough to build from scratch all the time. No GM is smart enough. Marv use to say that the most important thing is to sign your own free agents first because you already know them. We should always try to keep our star players. It is not a difficult concepts. Look at how great teams handle their personnel. They build the team around the stars. They don't use their star players as trade baits. When they trade a player, that is when they don't want a player or the player is no good to them. Then they will make another team thinks that the player is still great. That's how you play this mind game. That's how you build a winning program. No offense, if you are the GM of my team, I would want you fired by the end of the day.

[smapdi]

I find it hard to believe anyone would want to even entertain the thought of trading Sammy Watkins. This team hasn't had a legit #1 WR in over a decade; they're not easy to find. He put up nearly a 1000 yards his rookie season while playing almost the entire year with some type of injury. He was also terribly implemented into the offense. There is nothing but great things in his future.

 

 

What do you plan on doing about the WR situation when you trade Sammy?? Robert Woods is a very good WR2 but he can't take on CB1's & double teams. Whomever they bring in at QB is going to need WRs.

 

 

With an OC that actually has a clue, Watkins will be worth every penny. The NFL is a passing league now & a player of Watkins caliber will win you games

[The Frankish Reich]

I find it hard to believe anyone would want to even entertain the thought of trading Sammy Watkins. This team hasn't had a legit #1 WR in over a decade; they're not easy to find. He put up nearly a 1000 yards his rookie season while playing almost the entire year with some type of injury. He was also terribly implemented into the offense. There is nothing but great things in his future.

 

 

What do you plan on doing about the WR situation when you trade Sammy?? Robert Woods is a very good WR2 but he can't take on CB1's & double teams. Whomever they bring in at QB is going to need WRs.

 

 

With an OC that actually has a clue, Watkins will be worth every penny. The NFL is a passing league now & a player of Watkins caliber will win you games

I never suggested dumping Sammy, or trading him for less than fair value. We just saw with the Cardinals what happens when you have a great defense, strong receivers (although Fitzgerald is clearly hurting), but a poor offensive line and no quarterback. And while the Cardinals with Lindley was an extreme, the Cardinals with Stanton or Skelton prove the same point. The Cardinals are going nowhere if Carson Palmer doesn't come back nearly 100% next year. And neither are the Bills.