Jump to content

If there was ever a year not to have a first rounder ...


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

 

The key here is for some to realize that a draft pick is currency and it represents more than just a body that can be selected.

That changes the analysis. Maybe you don't see that.

 

 

It's a great point but a lot of fans are simply unable to see that. They need to have a physical body in front of them with a skill set to judge. In an era where rookie salaries have been neutered thus skyrocketing the price for free agents, draft picks have never been more valuable in the history of the NFL. But without a name to attach to them, they are just too easy for the casual fan to marginalize. One of the more moronic phrases that has been parroted this offseason is that "we don't need draft picks because we're trying to win now." There isn't a /wallbash emoticon big enough for idiocy like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

To call this draft board a pipe dream is an understatement. Every player on here right now is projected to go 20 or more picks BEFORE the Bills pick in that respective round. 50th pick for Green-Beckham? HAH. Projected to be a late first round pick (24th on the board I saw). 178th pick for Heuerman? They wouldn't get him for that, the 172nd or the 147th if he goes where he is supposed to at around 130th. Sure some guys will slide out of where they should, but all of them? It's a joke.

there are about 100 sure-fire 1st rounders every year depending on what/who/when you read.

 

for this i used astros fav drafttek board. i had others where maxx fell to us in the 2nd. and laken was there in the 3rd.

 

the point is: however the draft plays out, there will be serious talent available for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not understanding this.

I take it this thread is an attempt to justify the trade for Watkins. That the bottom half of round 1 lacks talent. But the trade supporters keep saying how many games he won for us. So without him wed be drafting higher anyway where the OP puts forth legit 1st round talent will be available Edited by JTSP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't hate the Sammy trade now that I see the pick we gave up was only the 19th overall. Its basically pick 9 and 19 to go up to 4 with a 4th thrown in. But it was a risk a calculated risk but a risk. It seems to have paid off. Although I can't give the front office credit in knowing this would be a weak draft class when they made the trade. Almost impossible to project that in a football draft class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take it this thread is an attempt to justify the trade for Watkins. That the bottom half of round 1 lacks talent. But the trade supporters keep saying how many games he won for us. So without him wed be drafting higher anyway where the OP puts forth legit 1st round talent will be available

without him you'd have Ebron and a first round pick at let's say #10. Let's have it on the table who you would pick at #10 so we have something besides hindsight for you to ramble about. Then we will come back after the season and see just how right you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Make no mistake, that part of the equation was absolutely considered when they made the move for Watkins.

 

Look no further than the combine for an example. There's no comparison in the number of players with off-the-charts athletic ability from 2014 versus 2015...this year is much more like 2013.

So that must mean the second round of last year's draft was loaded with guys who would have been first rounders in other years . . . Oh crap.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Go back to late December. I believe, based on what I've read, that the Pegula's anticipated having Polian in the building and no HC search when the season ended. It didn't happen, that way leaving only Whaley to assist from a personnel perspective as GM in lining up HC interviews. Polian backed out, leaving new owners with no one to advise them on football issues.

 

Whaley did his role then getting HC candidates in front of new owners and then participated in the interviews. The owners made the call and changed the reporting structure to make the GM report to them but now, only the HC reports to ownership. JMO.

 

We really don't know what role Polian was going to have -- the speculation has ranged from "full-blown football czar" to "someone Whaley can talk to." If you listened to Polian's comments, it looks like it started out being more like the latter, but turned into potentially the former when Moron left -- and Polian wanted no part of the heavy lifting to secure a new coach. The fact Pegula hasn't hired anyone else in an advisory position suggests it's not that high of a priority.

 

Any speculation on a "reduced role" for Whaley was just that -- speculation. He clearly impressed the Pegulas during the search process and was the driving force behind bringing in Rex. The reporting structure doesn't concern me -- Pegs just wants a direct line with both of these guys.

 

In sum, I don't believe Rex is "directing" who the Bills target in a vacuum; I think it's finally a healthy environment in which Whaley and Rex are working together to build the type of roster they think will win games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope people realize that draft picks, particularly a first round draft pick, are valuable currency in this league.

 

The fact that there may not be a true first round talent to select with that currency is meaningless. The currency is still valuable currency, and we still incurred a high opportunity cost in making that expenditure on the Watkins deal.

 

Now, if you think that was a good move, that's fine. That's a totally different issue.

 

But please be aware that an expenditure is an expenditure, and it comes with an opportunity cost.

I disagree - the quality of player available this year that could have been selected had the Bills not traded the pick last year is very relevant in deterrmining the opportunity cost. The definition of opportunity cost is the value of opportunity forgone when one makes a certain investment.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah i'm not stressed about not having a 1st rounder. the team got what it really needed - stable deep pocketed ownership and a real NFL coaching staff, two things it hasn't had in 20 years. both of which are way more important than draft choices. all good. Plus they knew this draft was predicted to be low grade when they traded the pick. they already know what next years draft will be like. Scouts and rating agencies have been following the top 50 players since high school for crying out loud...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I would hate to live in your world. You must be a joy at parties.

 

Can you find a post where you said pre-draft that you were all about ODB. If you cant GTFO with your hindsight BS.

My hindsight bs was a response to an earlier post if we would rather have ODB or Kelvin Benjamin plus our first rounder this year. I dont think the Bills had any plans on taking anyone other than Ebron last year if they stayed put. The way that it worked out was just fine with me. I hate not having a first rounder but we got a great player in Watkins and it was just nice to see the Bills do something outside the box of staying put and draft a guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope people realize that draft picks, particularly a first round draft pick, are valuable currency in this league.

 

The fact that there may not be a true first round talent to select with that currency is meaningless. The currency is still valuable currency, and we still incurred a high opportunity cost in making that expenditure on the Watkins deal.

 

Now, if you think that was a good move, that's fine. That's a totally different issue.

 

But please be aware that an expenditure is an expenditure, and it comes with an opportunity cost.

Yeah, I'm so sure we need a lesson from you, or should I say, Mike Schopp, because that is who you are parroting, in opportunity cost. :lol: It's always hilarious for me, and I'm sure the rest of the other consultants, Wall Street people, executives and financial and/or accounting folks on this board, to read posts like this.

 

The simple fact is that cost is never fixed, in any of its definitions. Not even "fixed cost", is truly fixed. It's merely an abstraction.

 

You're(Schopp's) relying on the notion that a 1st rounder has an inherent fixed cost, which it absolutely does not. The market determines the value of any cost, opportunity or otherwise. This year the value of a 1st rounder is a hell of a lot less than last year. PERIOD. Markets set value...always...unless somebody F's with them, which always results in FAIL(and I can prove that at PPP).

 

And, since we are talking opportunity costs here: what would have been the opportunity cost of NOT having Watkins? Answer: we won at least 4 games this year because of him. So, we got real damn close to the playoffs/were relevant in December for the first time in 12 years...and if we didn't have Watkins? It would have cost us all of that. That is the opportunity we capitalized on, meaning, literally, we spent additional capital(1, 1st round pick in 2015) beyond what we were going to spend anyway(our 1st in 2014)on it.

 

One cannot talk about cost, unless we talk about ALL costs. Not understanding this, is why Mike Schopp does what he does, and the rest of us do what we do.

 

And, finally: all this entire point is? Schopp and Bulldog's save ass position. :rolleyes:

 

The ridiculous "we traded away a chance to pick a QB for Watkins" :blink: point they clung to for 8 damn months....was always utter folly. I said it on draft day 2014, and I'm right. There never was a draftable QB we were going to get at our draft spot, period. Only people who self-admittedly "don't know football", like Bulldog and Schopp, clung to this folly.

 

This "1st round has inherent value" BS is their fall-back position now that the QB thing is, finally, dead. And it's as pathetic as it is hilarious. Don't be a dupe, dude..

Come on man, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing at this point, largely over nothing.

 

$50 represents 3.3% of $1,500.

 

Do you actually believe the Bills' 19th overall pick in this year's first round (now the property of Cleveland) is worth 3.3% of what it was last year, because this year's draft is being regarded, by some, as a weak draft?

 

Its value dropped roughly 97% in 1 year because it's a "weak draft" ???

 

Let me make it easy for you: it isn't.

 

The key here is for some to realize that a draft pick is currency and it represents more than just a body that can be selected.

That changes the analysis. Maybe you don't see that.

 

Whatever.

Do you really believe today, that Sammy Watkins was only worth 1 first rounder in 2014?

 

Is there any single indication so far that not only was he worth the cost, but probably more? No. In fact, he now looks to be worth 2 1s and at least a 3. I watched him play live 5 times last year from 10-20th row seats. I spent each game watching nothing but Sammy. He was open 70-80% of the time, because he beat press coverage 90% of the time...as a rookie. Wide open 50% of the time(the Jets away last year is my new favorite Schadenfreude games = the tears and the empty stadium...priceless). The times he wasn't open...he screwed up the rout. It rarely had anything to do with the D. And, that's what you get from a R? This guy has already shown, and shown in a big way. We could be talking Jerry Rice level play.

 

Whaley said Watkins HAD HOF potential going into the draft. Watkins then proved he HAS HOF upside, easily. And, we get 3-4 more years of HOF caliber WR for rookie salary?

 

Only an unmitigated moron, or somebody who "doesn't really know football" would not see the value proposition here.

 

That's the real phrase you/Schopp are looking for, not opportunity cost(but you don't know it, because you don't know it). The value proposition Watkins presented had simply too much upside to pass up. When value outweighs risk by so much? Not moving forward on that value is known, to people who actually do this/use these words in our work, as either:

 

1. Incompetence.

2. Chickenshit.

Edited by OCinBuffalo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...