Grantland predicts Bills to be a cellar dweller in 2015

[Hapless Bills Fan]

i know we are a little obsessed on here and rag on the national writers who are uninformed about every little detail... But I found a lot of inaccuracies in the article. Mostly that they did little to improve the OL. Two new guards and all new coaches?

 

 

Most would describe a 3rd round pick and the FA signing of a guy 31 other teams didn't want "little"

The Bills are banking on that, plus development of the previous draft's 2nd and 7th round "sleeper" pick as being "enough"

 

PS please don't shoot the messenger - I'm just pointing out how we'd probably see it if we were assessing a team we were about to play. "They had one of the worst OLs in football last year and all they did was sign a guy who'd been out of football for 18 months and draft a guard in the 3rd round? Pfui! We will feast on their QB and smother their run game like blankets! BWAHAHAHAHA!

Edited September 7, 2015 by Hopeful

[Dr. K]

I didn't interpret his comment that way. I think it was more just a general statement on how the Bills have been using their 1st round picks. While I think based on what we saw from EJ in preseason it's too early to call him a total bust, I have never like the pick and as of right now, our last 3 picks have amounted to one starter and a backup QB who, IMO, isn't ready to step into the starting role yet.

The first rounder in 2013 got traded down,, which led to EJ PLUS Kiko in the second round with the extra pick. Kiko got traded for McCoy. So out of the 2013, 2014, and 2015 first round picks the Bills got EJ, McCoy, and Watkins.

 

In my opinion the jury is still out on EJ. I suppose you could say it's also out on how the other two will work out, but I don't think on the face of it this was a bad outcome.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

 

This was a weird part for me too. I took it as "all we really have to show for our last 3 first round picks is Sammy, because EJ is a backup/doesn't play." I think that's what he meant, but he worded it terribly.

 

I agree that's what he probably meant, but it's strange reasoning. I mean, if our 2nd round pick from 2014, Kouandjio, is a backup/doesn't play does it mean we effectively spent 2 2nd round picks on Miller?

The first rounder in 2013 got traded down,, which led to EJ PLUS Kiko in the second round with the extra pick. Kiko got traded for McCoy. So out of the 2013, 2014, and 2015 first round picks the Bills got EJ, McCoy, and Watkins.

 

In my opinion the jury is still out on EJ. I suppose you could say it's also out on how the other two will work out, but I don't think on the face of it this was a bad outcome.

 

Good point Dr K.

[The Frankish Reich]

 

So, basically, the difference for the Bills is whether Tyrod Taylor (and his backup) are better than Alex Smith (and his backup) or Mark Sanchez (and his backup)

I'd say that's about right. But there's another possibility: Tyrod is not as good as Alex Smith, or even as good as Sanchez. Letting Cassel go was kind of a big deal since it eliminated the Orton Option -- if Tyrod starts poorly, there's no experienced veteran mediocrity to turn to in the hope of salvaging a playoff run. As I said, I kind of like that -- it's all in on Tyrod, no decent Plan B, swing for the fences.

[FireChan]

 

I agree that's what he probably meant, but it's strange reasoning. I mean, if our 2nd round pick from 2014, Kouandjio, is a backup/doesn't play does it mean we effectively spent 2 2nd round picks on Miller?

No. But it would mean all we have to show for our last 2 second rounders is Darby.

 

He's not saying "spent." I think that's where you're confused.

[Acantha]

The first rounder in 2013 got traded down,, which led to EJ PLUS Kiko in the second round with the extra pick. Kiko got traded for McCoy. So out of the 2013, 2014, and 2015 first round picks the Bills got EJ, McCoy, and Watkins.

 

In my opinion the jury is still out on EJ. I suppose you could say it's also out on how the other two will work out, but I don't think on the face of it this was a bad outcome.

Yes, he could have included the other pick and shown how it included the McCoy trade. Frankly, there's probably very few people outside of Buffalo that remember that scenario.

 

Like I said, I agree that EJ can't be considered a bust yet, but in an article about the Bills record this year, you can only judge by who is on the field. So far, that first round pick has not returned value for the Bills. It doesn't have to mean it never will.

[MattM]

 

 

Most would describe a 3rd round pick and the FA signing of a guy 31 other teams didn't want "little"

The Bills are banking on that, plus development of the previous draft's 2nd and 7th round "sleeper" pick as being "enough"

Except that (a) said vet has made the Pro Bowl and was not signed due to off field issues and not due to his play and (b) he could actually watch Miller play in 3 preseason games and realize that he's an upgrade over our guards last year, but that might take some effort.

[The Frankish Reich]

Yes, he could have included the other pick and shown how it included the McCoy trade. Frankly, there's probably very few people outside of Buffalo that remember that scenario.

 

Like I said, I agree that EJ can't be considered a bust yet, but in an article about the Bills record this year, you can only judge by who is on the field. So far, that first round pick has not returned value for the Bills. It doesn't have to mean it never will.

But I think we have to discount McCoy since, as the free agent market played out, the Bills didn't get any surplus value by trading Kiko for him. Murray signed for the same amount (actually less when you factor in guaranteed money) with Philly.

[Coach Tuesday]

 

Exact quote from article: "the Bills have basically used their last three first-rounders to come away with Watkins and nothing more"

 

He's saying they spent one first on EJ and two on Watkins and only have Watkins. 3 picks, one player. It's a shot at EJ.

[PromoTheRobot]

 

He's saying they spent one first on EJ and two on Watkins and only have Watkins. 3 picks, one player. It's a shot at EJ.

So trading down for the extra pick that netted Kiko, who was flipped for McCoy, is nothing?

[Acantha]

But I think we have to discount McCoy since, as the free agent market played out, the Bills didn't get any surplus value by trading Kiko for him. Murray signed for the same amount (actually less when you factor in guaranteed money) with Philly.

I see where you're coming from, but it's not apples to apples. McCoy wasn't a FA and even if he was, there's a no guarantee he would have come to Buffalo. The fact is, that pick got us McCoy.

So trading down for the extra pick that netted Kiko, who was flipped for McCoy, is nothing?

Again, I don't think he purposefully left that out. My guess is he just didn't do his homework on Kiko's history. It doesn't change the outcome of those 3 picks he did mention.

Edited September 7, 2015 by Acantha

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

I found this article very illogical! They got rid of Fred is a negative and then replaced him with McCoy? Wah

 

He is a numbers guy and yet the Bills DVOA on FO was 9th last year before improving the coaching staff. Last Place?

 

SRS on Football Ref has the Bills as plus 5 pts last year, before improving the OL as we know they have. Done little to improve it? Aaron Kromer, Greg Roman?

 

Their pythagorean record said they underachieved and should have been 10-6 LAST YEAR!

 

I think the floor is pretty high for the Bills for the simple reason their defense is consensus top shelf. If the offense gives them anything more than last year they could do much better than 10-6. Simple regression tells you that the offense should improve.

Edited September 7, 2015 by The Thurmanator

[Dibs]

 

Exact quote from article: "the Bills have basically used their last three first-rounders to come away with Watkins and nothing more"

The part I had in quotations was also an exact quote from the article....and was the part that was originally being discussed (2nd paragraph in Bills section from memory). The part that you quoted means exactly what it says.

 

I think the point that many are missing here is....what does it matter how badly the Bills might have mismanaged in putting the team together? It is the talent on the field that counts towards whether they are good or not....not how many mistakes, cap issues, or wasted draft picks it took to get them on the field.

[Wayne Cubed]

The part I had in quotations was also an exact quote from the article....and was the part that was

I think the point that many are missing here is....what does it matter how badly the Bills might have mismanaged in putting the team together? It is the talent on the field that counts towards whether they are good or not....not how many mistakes, cap issues, or wasted draft picks it took to get them on the field.

Yea, that was the confusing part to me. It came across as "moves I disagree with" and some of these moves didn't even happen this offseason. It doesn't really talk about on the field production and talent except what happened last year under a different coach and a different QB.

[Dark]

My biggest problem with the article is the primary focus on numerous items that don't relate to the product on the field:

 

1. Extending McCoy might be a bad idea and strap the team in the future, but it is hard to argue it is not an upgrade ON THE FIELD.

2. Drafting Watkins at the cost of a 2015 pick might have been the wrong move because of who we missed out on, but ON THE FIELD his is talented and promising.

3. Drafting Manuel might have been a mistake, but he isn't being shoehorned into a starting position he doesn't deserve despite the fact that showed some promised in Year 3. ON THE FIELD, Tyrod is the starter and to ignore Greg Roman's successful past with a similar style QB is intellectually dishonest. Bringing up the EJ pick three years ago has no bearing on this team's upcoming season. In fact, that Tyrod sat on the bench for several years in the NFL suggests his performance may surprise relative to his 2011 college stats.

4. The casual dismissal the "the defense is excellent, but how much better can it get" ignores that the defense is amongst the best defenses of this century for the past two years. ON THE FIELD, the defense will help this team win games.

 

Maybe the Bills will be 4-12, but this article doesn't even try to tackle the actual product ON THE FIELD.

[Dragonborn10]

 

Surprising that on that list the Buffalo Bills are the only team to have a winning record in 2014. A team like Tampa Bay, who's starting a rookie QB and has a suspect defense, isn't on the list. There are some teams that were bottom dwellers in 2014 who could end up being bottom dwellers again. The NY Giants, Atlanta Falcons, St. Louis Rams and Chicago Bears were all pretty bad. What proof is there that they have improved? I think the Bills are an easy/lazy choice for the author as they have been bad previously.

 

NYG, Atlanta, Bears, and Rams all have QB's that have produced in one way or another in the league. The Bills do not.

 

The O-line criticism is somewhat fair. Incognito was out of the league and Miller is a third round pick. To us that is a major upgrade over last year. To everyone else it may seem more of the same.

 

Most people on this board are genuinely worried Wood might be the weak link. I agree Glenn in a contract year is going to be a star. Henderson should be better and there is some depth there if he is not.

 

If Taylor/Manuel don't perform 5-11 or 6-10 is posisble.

 

I just don't see it though. I see 10-6, maybe 11-5 if they beat Indianapolis. They should be able to ball control and hit deep strikes frequently. If I'm Rex I play more conservative on defense. They have the talent to stop them dropping 7 in coverage. They may or may not have the talent to get into a high scoring game.

[Mr. WEO]

 

No I didn't read it here on TBD - so please edit your post. MULTIPLE talking heads on NFLN (not that they are terribly bright either) have said that.

 

AND NOT the BEST at EACH of 21/22 - the best/among the best in TOTAL 21/22, obviously.

 

Just one link easy to Google - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000493967/article/seahawks-jets-and-eagles-among-nfls-most-talented-teams

 

Bills #2.

 

I know what you wrote., and quoted it. Even "among the best 21/22" is a stretch not even supported by Bucky Brooks (8 "blue chips" on the roster).

 

People getting down on a pretty thoughtful commenter like Barnwell and then citing goofballs like Bucky Brooks to knock the Grantland piece are destroying their own arguments.

[rstencel]

Wow made mistake of clicking link and reading that article. Never heard of the site before, and put a block on it so never waste my time going there again.

[hondo in seattle]

come on guys stop bashing the inept media!!!

 

 

/sarc

 

I remember buying some football rag one preseason long ago and thought the articles and predictions were too optimistic - apparently a ploy to get hopeful fans who long for positive news to buy their magazine. I added up all the wins and losses predicted and somehow NFL franchises were going to win about 57% of their collective games. Maybe some contests against the CFL had been scheduled that year.

 

That's when I realized the national media is more interested in making money than saying anything particularly insightful or accurate.

 

I've taken predictions with a huge grain of salt ever since.

Edited September 7, 2015 by hondo in seattle

[Mr. WEO]

Wow made mistake of clicking link and reading that article. Never heard of the site before, and put a block on it so never waste my time going there again.

 

 

Holy cow.....

 

And you have to block yourself from going to certain sites?

[rstencel]

 

 

Holy cow.....

 

And you have to block yourself from going to certain sites?

Don't have to, just hate wasting time going to sites where they write article by reading other peoples articles and rewording or making judgements base on those rather than actually doing there job. When see sites that do that, do what can to keep myself from wasting my time going there again.

[Kelly the Dog]

Don't have to, just hate wasting time going to sites where they write article by reading other peoples articles and rewording or making judgements base on those rather than actually doing there job. When see sites that do that, do what can to keep myself from wasting my time going there again.

Overall that is a pretty good and well respected site.

[The Frankish Reich]

I see where you're coming from, but it's not apples to apples. McCoy wasn't a FA and even if he was, there's a no guarantee he would have come to Buffalo. The fact is, that pick got us McCoy.

Again, I don't think he purposefully left that out. My guess is he just didn't do his homework on Kiko's history. It doesn't change the outcome of those 3 picks he did mention.

But Murray might have. My point is that they wound up paying a free agent salary anyway to a roughly comparable player, so Kiko essentially provided zero trade value.

[Deranged Rhino]

Exactly. I haven't checked the predictions threads lately, but as things stand right now, can anyone argue with this? Which team will be favored as of today:

 

vs. Indy: L (early line is about Indy -3)

vs. Pats: L (the judge just cost us a predicted win)

at Miami: L (home team; otherwise probably about even)

vs. NYG: W

at Tenn: W

vs Cincy: L

Jax in London: W

vs. Miami: W (home team again)

at Jets: W (but this one, right now, would probably be about even with Jets at home)

at Pats: L

at KC: L

vs. Hou: W

at Philly: L

at Wash: W

vs. Dallas: L

vs. Jets: W

 

That's 8-8. That's not my prediction, or Barnwell's, or any other individual's. That's what the betting lines would no doubt show. I don't see any real argument with this. So 10-6? Obviously within reach. That's a few lucky bounces. 6-10? Also obviously realistic. A key injury or two, a few bad bounces. So about all I can say is Barnwell's worst case scenario is a bit low, but his best case scenario seems right on point. To get there the Bills would still need to steal a win or two and avoid losing to a team they should beat. I'm a Bills fan - have been for 45 years - but I live in the real world.

One fair anti-Barnwell point: although his best/worst case scenarios make sense, I'm not sure why a team that fairly projects at 8-8 (the definition of average) is in his lowest tier ("The Cellar Dwellers"). I'm not sure his analysis agrees with his own categorization of the Bills as a 4th tier team ...

 

The Bills will NOT go 0-3 to start the season, I don't care what the lines are. They are better across the board at every position but QB than the P*ts, Dolphins, and Colts. Chances are they're not going to win all three, but there's very little chance they will lose all three. I expect them to stomp the P*ts with or without Br*dy at home, I also think the Dolphins are highly overrated because their head coach has about as much ability to inspire a team as a drunken hobo raging at the moon.

 

Bills start the year 2-1. With this defense, even if the offense is terrible, chances are small they'll lose double digit games making the article's "floor" prediction ridiculous.

 

The biggest change this year, by far IMO, is the offensive staff, especially all important OC and very important OL. We went from very poor to very good. And that's not even wishful thinking as both Roman and Kromer have great reputations (as far as coaching goes).

 

It's an enormous difference from last year's team. Not even counting the players.

 

Oh, and we have better OL (Incognito and Miller over pitiful G plus healthy Glenn) better WR (same top four and added Percy Harvin) better RB (McCoy is one of the best in the league), better TE (Clay is one of best in the league), better FB (Felton is one of best in the league).

 

Kyle Orton was very average last year, which had a lot to do with coaching. We can get 2014 Orton out of 2015 EJ. Taylor is the wildcard obviously but we can get better QB play rather easily this year because of coaching and talent.

 

Yup. Agree with this.

 

But I think we have to discount McCoy since, as the free agent market played out, the Bills didn't get any surplus value by trading Kiko for him. Murray signed for the same amount (actually less when you factor in guaranteed money) with Philly.

 

That's just silly. McCoy is better than Murray, has taken less punishment, and is a more dynamic threat with the ball either as a runner or receiver. A straight up trade for the third best RB in the game today in exchange for a LB who never stepped on the field in '14 is a huge plus -- regardless of how free agency played out.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

Really out on a limb there speculating they're some where between 10-6 and 4-12

[FireChan]

 

The Bills will NOT go 0-3 to start the season, I don't care what the lines are. They are better across the board at every position but QB than the P*ts, Dolphins, and Colts. Chances are they're not going to win all three, but there's very little chance they will lose all three. I expect them to stomp the P*ts with or without Br*dy at home, I also think the Dolphins are highly overrated because their head coach has about as much ability to inspire a team as a drunken hobo raging at the moon.

 

Bills start the year 2-1. With this defense, even if the offense is terrible, chances are small they'll lose double digit games making the article's "floor" prediction ridiculous.

 

 

Yup. Agree with this.

 

 

That's just silly. McCoy is better than Murray, has taken less punishment, and is a more dynamic threat with the ball either as a runner or receiver. A straight up trade for the third best RB in the game today in exchange for a LB who never stepped on the field in '14 is a huge plus -- regardless of how free agency played out.

This team needs to get that damn KC monkey off its back this year.

Edited September 7, 2015 by FireChan

[Acantha]

But Murray might have. My point is that they wound up paying a free agent salary anyway to a roughly comparable player, so Kiko essentially provided zero trade value.

He might have, or he might not have. There's an infinite amount of possible things that could have happened. McCoy IS on the team, and he's here because we traded a first round player for him. Kiko's trade value was getting McCoy on the roster.

[PromoTheRobot]

But Murray might have. My point is that they wound up paying a free agent salary anyway to a roughly comparable player, so Kiko essentially provided zero trade value.

You know what they say about ifs and buts.

[rstencel]

Overall that is a pretty good and well respected site.

 

Shows how sad reporting is overall guess. Tried looking around the site for couple of minutes after reading article, and was setup so horrible from main page, which is another reason don't plan on ever visiting there again and blocked it.

[Deranged Rhino]

He might have, or he might not have. There's an infinite amount of possible things that could have happened. McCoy IS on the team, and he's here because we traded a first round player for him. Kiko's trade value was getting McCoy on the roster.

 

Even if they could have gotten Murray, I take McCoy over Murray EVERY time. And so would any other national "expert" prior to McCoy becoming a Bill.

This team needs to get that damn KC monkey off its back this year.

 

It'll be tough in KC, but I don't think it's an impossibility this year.

[The Frankish Reich]

You know what they say about ifs and buts.

Again, the point isn't whether we would have signed Murray, would have otherwise traded (someone else) for rights to McCoy, etc. The point is about economics: when you trade Player A for Player B, the idea is you're getting Player B for less than what you'd have to pay him (or a similar player) as a free agent. That might have been the case if they hadn't renegotiated/extended McCoy's contract (he was owed $10.25 million in 2015 under his Eagles contract; now he gets $16 million). So allow me to rephrase: if McCoy's free agent/fair market value was 16 million a year, Kiko was worth roughly 6 million in trade value for 2015 alone. But Whaley promptly squandered that "McCoy at sub-market value" acquisition by caving in to his renegotiation demand.

[Acantha]

Again, the point isn't whether we would have signed Murray, would have otherwise traded (someone else) for rights to McCoy, etc. The point is about economics: when you trade Player A for Player B, the idea is you're getting Player B for less than what you'd have to pay him (or a similar player) as a free agent. That might have been the case if they hadn't renegotiated/extended McCoy's contract (he was owed $10.25 million in 2015 under his Eagles contract; now he gets $16 million). So allow me to rephrase: if McCoy's free agent/fair market value was 16 million a year, Kiko was worth roughly 6 million in trade value for 2015 alone. But Whaley promptly squandered that "McCoy at sub-market value" acquisition by caving in to his renegotiation demand.

Getting a player on your roster without having to go through the FA process is part of trade value. Based on your argument, once Kiko signs a new contract, the trade value has to be revisited? What about if Whaley had waited until December to extend Shady? Would that change this whole thing?

 

You're way in the weeds on this one.

[GunnerBill]

Let me tell him there is zero chance and I mean zero chance that this team finishes 4-12. Zero.

 

For me I'd be amazed if this team doesn't win at least 7 games... worst case scenario is 6-10 for me.

Edited September 7, 2015 by GunnerBill

[The Frankish Reich]

On LeSean vs. DeMarco - This is fun, and mostly correct: http://www.phillyvoice.com/demarco-murray-vs-lesean-mccoy-statistical-look/

[Deranged Rhino]

Again, the point isn't whether we would have signed Murray, would have otherwise traded (someone else) for rights to McCoy, etc. The point is about economics: when you trade Player A for Player B, the idea is you're getting Player B for less than what you'd have to pay him (or a similar player) as a free agent. That might have been the case if they hadn't renegotiated/extended McCoy's contract (he was owed $10.25 million in 2015 under his Eagles contract; now he gets $16 million). So allow me to rephrase: if McCoy's free agent/fair market value was 16 million a year, Kiko was worth roughly 6 million in trade value for 2015 alone. But Whaley promptly squandered that "McCoy at sub-market value" acquisition by caving in to his renegotiation demand.

?

 

That's not always the idea in a trade, it's not always to get someone for less contract dollars than you otherwise might have. The point of trades -- all trades for both sides -- is to improve your team either by gaining a bette player or gaining roster/cap flexibility by unloading a piece that no longer fits.

 

McCoy resigning after the trade doesn't change how valuable he is to the Bills. He was/is exponentially more valuable to the 2015 Bills than Kiko.

On LeSean vs. DeMarco - This is fun, and mostly correct: http://www.phillyvoice.com/demarco-murray-vs-lesean-mccoy-statistical-look/

McCoy over Murray every time. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either an eagles fan of a bills hater. The tape doesn't lie.

[The Frankish Reich]

Getting a player on your roster without having to go through the FA process is part of trade value. Based on your argument, once Kiko signs a new contract, the trade value has to be revisited? What about if Whaley had waited until December to extend Shady? Would that change this whole thing?

 

You're way in the weeds on this one.

Why? If you start from the proposition that Kiko is a valuable player, why would you want to trade him for McCoy only to have the rights to pay McCoy what a comparable player -- Murray -- would get as a free agent? Let's make it simple, which is better for the same money, Murray + Kiko, or McCoy + nothing? Whaley got bamboozled on this one, no other fair way of looking at it.

?

 

That's not always the idea in a trade, it's not always to get someone for less contract dollars than you otherwise might have. The point of trades -- all trades for both sides -- is to improve your team either by gaining a bette player or gaining roster/cap flexibility by unloading a piece that no longer fits.

 

McCoy resigning after the trade doesn't change how valuable he is to the Bills. He was/is exponentially more valuable to the 2015 Bills than Kiko.

 

McCoy over Murray every time. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either an eagles fan of a bills hater. The tape doesn't lie.

Did you read the article? I'm not sure how you could and still arrive at the conclusion that everyone would consider LeSean superior. At best you could say that reasonable football minds could differ, but there's no way you can say, objectively, that LeSean is clearly the better choice for the next few years.

[GunnerBill]

Why? If you start from the proposition that Kiko is a valuable player, why would you want to trade him for McCoy only to have the rights to pay McCoy what a comparable player -- Murray -- would get as a free agent? Let's make it simple, which is better for the same money, Murray + Kiko, or McCoy + nothing? Whaley got bamboozled on this one, no other fair way of looking at it.

Did you read the article? I'm not sure how you could and still arrive at the conclusion that everyone would consider LeSean superior. At best you could say that reasonable football minds could differ, but there's no way you can say, objectively, that LeSean is clearly the better choice for the next few years.

 

Murray was not coming to Buffalo.

[Acantha]

Why? If you start from the proposition that Kiko is a valuable player, why would you want to trade him for McCoy only to have the rights to pay McCoy what a comparable player -- Murray -- would get as a free agent? Let's make it simple, which is better for the same money, Murray + Kiko, or McCoy + nothing? Whaley got bamboozled on this one, no other fair way of looking at it.

You keep talking about Murray. He has nothing to do with this conversation. Even if the Bills wanted him there's nothing saying he would come here. Whaley got the player he wanted and gave up a player they didn't need. Say what you want after this, I feel like I'm arguing about the color of ice, and I need to stop.

[Deranged Rhino]

Did you read the article? I'm not sure how you could and still arrive at the conclusion that everyone would consider LeSean superior. At best you could say that reasonable football minds could differ, but there's no way you can say, objectively, that LeSean is clearly the better choice for the next few years.

 

The article is not convincing, not nearly as convincing as watching both guys play for most of their careers. The tape doesn't lie. How many times has Murray finished a full 16 game season?

 

That's right... once. Murray is older, more injury prone, and more of a collision runner than McCoy. I'm not sure how any reasonable person could think objectively Murray is a better fit long term for Buffalo than McCoy when you factor in injuries and skill. McCoy is a different breed of runner.

 

Murray was not coming to Buffalo.

 

That too.

[QB Bills]

You keep talking about Murray. He has nothing to do with this conversation. Even if the Bills wanted him there's nothing saying he would come here. Whaley got the player he wanted and gave up a player they didn't need. Say what you want after this, I feel like I'm arguing about the color of ice, and I need to stop.

They could have and should have gotten McCoy for much less than what they gave up if they really wanted him. Making a trade like that within 20 minutes, as was reported, was just stupid and reckless.