Was the trade for Watkins worth it?

[Luxy312]

I've seen articles about the subject, but was not able to find a thread. But the articles raise the question of whether the Bills trade for Sammy Watkins was worth it. They obviously gave their first last year and now the #19 this year. So here's my take on the subject.

I want to first get something very straight. The Bills had only two wide receivers that they would have taken at #9 last year, and that's Sammy Watkins and Mike Evans. There's no way anyone could convince me that Sammy wouldn't have gone early had the Bills not traded up to get him, nor that Tampa Bay had their sites set firmly on Mike Evans.

Given that fact set, the Bills wouldn't have reached for the third best WR on the board in Odell Beckham, Jr. over the unilateral best TE in the draft class. So instead of Sammy Watkins, they would have likely picked Eric Ebron. You might say they would have taken a tackle at that point, but that would be based on hindsight that our offensive line wasn't good last year and that Chris Williams didn't turn out as good as expected.

So what would that have meant for this year assuming everything else is a constant? First, there would be zero reason to go get Clay in free agency. After all, Ebron is your guy of the future. He can't block worth a damn, but he looks like a decent TE at times. So at #19, they probably would have been looking at the 4th or 5th best WR in this years draft class. Best case scenario Green-Beckham slides to them and worst (and more likely) scenario is they have to reach for a Phillip Dorsett or Nelson Agholor. Personally, I would rather have Watkins/Clay than the alternative. The Bills in free agency have effectively rendered the 19th pick useless to them by virtue of the trade last year for Sammy. Thoughts?

[LB3]

Yes

[Kirby Jackson]

It was worth it then and it is worth it now. Watkins was the highest rated player to them last year, the year before that and in all likelihood this year. He will be a great player in this league. Without him my guess is that they would be selecting in the 12-13 range this year. I suppose that Ebron and Parker (if you could get him) would be a nice haul but not sure that it compares to Watkins. Id rather have a dollars than 4 quarters when it comes to assembling a roster.

[thebandit27]

I've seen articles about the subject, but was not able to find a thread. But the articles raise the question of whether the Bills trade for Sammy Watkins was worth it. They obviously gave their first last year and now the #19 this year. So here's my take on the subject.

 

I want to first get something very straight. The Bills had only two wide receivers that they would have taken at #9 last year, and that's Sammy Watkins and Mike Evans. There's no way anyone could convince me that Sammy wouldn't have gone early had the Bills not traded up to get him, nor that Tampa Bay had their sites set firmly on Mike Evans.

 

Given that fact set, the Bills wouldn't have reached for the third best WR on the board in Odell Beckham, Jr. over the unilateral best TE in the draft class. So instead of Sammy Watkins, they would have likely picked Eric Ebron. You might say they would have taken a tackle at that point, but that would be based on hindsight that our offensive line wasn't good last year and that Chris Williams didn't turn out as good as expected.

 

So what would that have meant for this year assuming everything else is a constant? First, there would be zero reason to go get Clay in free agency. After all, Ebron is your guy of the future. He can't block worth a damn, but he looks like a decent TE at times. So at #19, they probably would have been looking at the 4th or 5th best WR in this years draft class. Best case scenario Green-Beckham slides to them and worst (and more likely) scenario is they have to reach for a Phillip Dorsett or Nelson Agholor. Personally, I would rather have Watkins/Clay than the alternative. The Bills in free agency have effectively rendered the 19th pick useless to them by virtue of the trade last year for Sammy. Thoughts?

 

His play lead directly to 3 wins (Miami, Detroit, and Minnesota)...this team could've been 6-10 without him.

 

Yes, it was (and still is) worth it.

[eball]

Watkins/Woods/Harvin/Goodwin/Clay > Woods/Harvin/Goodwin/Hogan/Ebron

 

It ain't close.

[Chuck Wagon]

Here's the real question - If Odell Beckham didn't do what he did, would this still even be a discussion?

 

 

 

I don't hear anyone but the most delusional Browns fans saying they'd trade Watkins for Justin Gilbert and the 19th pick in this draft. Most people seem to be getting hung up on Beckham without realizing no one had him valued at #9 and bringing him up is some serious revisionist history. It's clearly worth it, Sammy came up huge in a couple of wins last year and we haven't had a WR of his caliber since Moulds was in his prime.

[LB3]

Here's the real question - If Odell Beckham didn't do what he did, would this still even be a discussion?

 

 

 

I don't hear anyone but the most delusional Browns fans saying they'd trade Watkins for Justin Gilbert and the 19th pick in this draft. Most people seem to be getting hung up on Beckham without realizing no one had him valued at #9 and bringing him up is some serious revisionist history. It's clearly worth it, Sammy came up huge in a couple of wins last year and we haven't had a WR of his caliber since Moulds was in his prime.

Well OBJ does practice catches one handed. I also believe he was responsible for finding the cure for Ebola.

[Chuck Wagon]

Well OBJ does practice catches one handed. I also believe he was responsible for finding the cure for Ebola.

 

 

I guess I am wrong, genius Chip Kelly knew he'd be the best player in the draft, but instead of trying to move up 10 picks to get him he decided he needed a good strong guy to carry water around practice and took Marcus Smith instead.

[LB3]

 

 

I guess I am wrong, genius Chip Kelly knew he'd be the best player in the draft, but instead of trying to move up 10 picks to get him he decided he needed a good strong guy to carry water around practice and took Marcus Smith instead.

Precisely

[Dorkington]

The only benefit of Ebron + draft pick this year, is that it's cheaper than Watkins and Clay, money wise. So there's the possibility of signing some WR here instead... but, as it is, I'm happy with the Watkins trade for now.

[H2o]

Yes

+1

[San-O]

The Bills went 9-7 based on great D and not their receiving game.

 

They had and still have nobody to really get him the ball.

 

I just don't believe you trade away picks to get a receiver in the NFL when ur O line is a mess and you have no QB.

[YoloinOhio]

It was as it stands right now, imo. Btw Sammy is still only 21 yrs old. Crazy ceiling.

[dollars 2 donuts]

With no franchise QB he was still critical in at least two wins (Lions and Vikings).

 

At times, he was ignored in games where he could have made a difference (home against New England).

 

Without him the Bills don't have the first winning season in a decade.

 

He makes a difference. He makes them better; and hopefully even more so this season.

[Luxy312]

The only benefit of Ebron + draft pick this year, is that it's cheaper than Watkins and Clay, money wise. So there's the possibility of signing some WR here instead... but, as it is, I'm happy with the Watkins trade for now.

 

Exploring that angle a little then, would you rather have Ebron & Crabtree? I can't say I see a FA wideout that pairs better with Ebron than Watkins/Clay. Just curious.

[thebandit27]

The Bills went 9-7 based on great D and not their receiving game.

 

They had and still have nobody to really get him the ball.

 

I just don't believe you trade away picks to get a receiver in the NFL when ur O line is a mess and you have no QB.

 

While I understand what you are trying to convey, let's be clear: you can't win without scoring points, and the offense scored the points, not the defense. In fact, the defense was directly responsible for 2 scores all season: the safety against GB, and the TD against Cleveland.

 

It was hardly a 2000 Ravens scenario, and Watkins was easily the biggest contributor on offense.

[Kirby Jackson]

The Bills went 9-7 based on great D and not their receiving game.

 

They had and still have nobody to really get him the ball.

 

I just don't believe you trade away picks to get a receiver in the NFL when ur O line is a mess and you have no QB.

How was drafting Ebron and having pick 19 (or 12 or whatever it would have been without Watkins) going to fix this?

[John from Riverside]

I've seen articles about the subject, but was not able to find a thread. But the articles raise the question of whether the Bills trade for Sammy Watkins was worth it. They obviously gave their first last year and now the #19 this year. So here's my take on the subject.

 

I want to first get something very straight. The Bills had only two wide receivers that they would have taken at #9 last year, and that's Sammy Watkins and Mike Evans. There's no way anyone could convince me that Sammy wouldn't have gone early had the Bills not traded up to get him, nor that Tampa Bay had their sites set firmly on Mike Evans.

 

Given that fact set, the Bills wouldn't have reached for the third best WR on the board in Odell Beckham, Jr. over the unilateral best TE in the draft class. So instead of Sammy Watkins, they would have likely picked Eric Ebron. You might say they would have taken a tackle at that point, but that would be based on hindsight that our offensive line wasn't good last year and that Chris Williams didn't turn out as good as expected.

 

So what would that have meant for this year assuming everything else is a constant? First, there would be zero reason to go get Clay in free agency. After all, Ebron is your guy of the future. He can't block worth a damn, but he looks like a decent TE at times. So at #19, they probably would have been looking at the 4th or 5th best WR in this years draft class. Best case scenario Green-Beckham slides to them and worst (and more likely) scenario is they have to reach for a Phillip Dorsett or Nelson Agholor. Personally, I would rather have Watkins/Clay than the alternative. The Bills in free agency have effectively rendered the 19th pick useless to them by virtue of the trade last year for Sammy. Thoughts?

A few thoughts

 

- If we take Ebron and have our 1st round pick........we do not make the big play for Clay this year. imo Ebron has shown NOTHING that leads me to believe he is a fit for the offense Roman runs.....he doesnt block....he wasnt a major factor for his team in his first year.....this is not to say that Eric wont BECOME something in the future.....but in his first year he did not show it. Meanwhile.....Watkins was directly responsible for (and with injuries) for at least 3 wins in his rookie year.

 

- As it stand we have a mid round pick.....but a stacked roster. What player at that mid round pick is going to be so good that he is going to be a major factor in his first year? It certainly wont be a QB so what is the point? Meanwhile.....the bills sit with a stacked roster and have the ability to actually draft a QB in the second (if they choose to) with absolutely no expectations of needing to the be the immediate savior...they are gonna get the redshirt year that Manuel SHOULD have gotten (if one is drafted) because the bills stacked the roster with NFL talent and this includes Watkins going into his second year.

 

imo.....the trade was totally worth it......because we dont need that 1st round pick to come in and be the difference between winning and losing this year.

Edited April 29, 2015 by John from Hemet

[JESSEFEFFER]

There are fans of the draft process and those that make their living from just talking and writing about it and I think it's natural to overstate the value of individual draft picks. Make no mistake, there was a time when that was the only way to build a roster so every pick had a value and it was the be all end all of acquring talent. Now, with only 7 rounds, undrafted free agents, restricted free agents and unrestricted free agents, there are other ways to improve a roster. That's the bottom line. Doing whatever it takes to improve one's roster.

 

What is the value of a BLUE CHIP talent to a team? How many players are there in every draft that are consensus Blue Chip Talents? Is there a realistic discount for future picks compared to current ones?

 

He was picked to make EJ better. BS, if EJ is cut then does Sammy have to go too?

 

OBJ had a better year so trading up for Sammy was not necessary. BS, beause you run the draft based on the information you have. Sammy was their #1 prospect so in their mind they were going from 9 to 1. Ebron to Watkins.

 

I suspect that one injury plagued, rookie year in a pitiful offense is not enough time for an elite talent such as Sammy Watkins to show what he ultimately be.

 

Platitude: A bird in hand is worth two in the bush especially when you can go to Wegman's and buy another bird,

 

There is a value to the known, sure commodity and a discount to the unknown, unproven one.

Edited April 30, 2015 by JESSEFEFFER

[BillsVet]

The Bills went 9-7 based on great D and not their receiving game.

 

They had and still have nobody to really get him the ball.

 

I just don't believe you trade away picks to get a receiver in the NFL when ur O line is a mess and you have no QB.

 

I'll never understand how obtaining a talented NFL WR to make up for the QB is viewed as, from a team building perspective, a great move. The idea that drafting Watkins via a trade up to help out Manuel is absurd, but given that EJM was Whaley's pick as well, not surprising.

 

And this was all done in April 2014 when the only QB's on the roster were EJM, Thad Lewis and Jeff Tuel. Then again, Whaley was acting in his own interest and the team president wouldn't oppose a move to improve both of their positions.

 

For the record, no one argues with Watkins' talent. The issue is, when allocating resources, why you'd go after receivers as San-O points out, when your OL and QB aren't good.