Grantland predicts Bills to be a cellar dweller in 2015

[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.