Bills trade Sammy Watkins to Rams for CB Gaines, 2nd rd pick

[3rdand12]

Right- short of catching the DB tying his shoes at the line instead of covering WR2, if Sammy is single Sammy should be first read and a hard read to pass up for most offenses.

I'd love to see Thomas step up- but if simply penciling in what you can count on, we have to be ranked pretty low at this point. A few wild cards in there though that could hopefully make me look silly later.

I am sure your points are quite relative. I never discount them .

But i am thinking some of the options as to how they run the Offense.

I like O Leary more than popular opinion. But if Clay goes down ( and he well might ) Bills are in a tough spot.

Unless they have WRs they can pull in tight to block. lets keep in mind the WCO principles we have heard bandied about. timing routes are really on the receiver fooling his coverage mostly.

My point might be, the receiving core in Dennison's mind is adequate to accomplish consistent execution.

Soon enough we will see where this hullaballoo is taking the Bills..

I am one of the few perhaps that have faith Bills are still playing the game to win.

No offense but settling for the 3rd best anything is terrible.

best , is an opinion keep in mind. Especially evaluating QBs !!

[SWATeam]

OMg, this is quite possibly the strangest conversation that I've ever gotten into here. You are the first person that I've heard of satisfied with his targets. If you agree that he wasn't targeted enough than he was right when he spoke up. He needed the ball more. Just for fun here you go:

 

Watkins has been targeted 7.46 times per game in his career. He averages 8.91 yards per target.

 

Mike Evans was targeted 10.81 times per game last year. He averaged 7.64 yards per target.

 

If Watkins received the same amount of targets as Evans he'd would have averaged an additional 29.8 yards per game or another 478 yards per season. At the same 173 targets Watkins season numbers (based on career averages) would be 1,541 yards. Don't throw him the ball more though...

And if we had a Jameis to target Watkins maybe we hold on to him.

 

Lets acquire picks, and cap flexibility, and do everything we can to get our QB. This doesn't mean tanking, just being smart with our draft picks, and cap situation, allowing for maximum flexibility. I think this is the plan. Not spend huge money, if he even re-signs, on an immensely talented WR that will probably be underutilized.

 

If this extra 2nd gives us the necessary ammunition to go up and get our guy in the draft, or if not having another giant contract on the books allows us to go after one of the FA QB's like Cousins, is this still a bad trade?

[BringBackOrton]

And if we had a Jameis to target Watkins maybe we hold on to him.

 

Lets acquire picks, and cap flexibility, and do everything we can to get our QB. This doesn't mean tanking, just being smart with our draft picks, and cap situation, allowing for maximum flexibility. I think this is the plan. Not spend huge money, if he even re-signs, on an immensely talented WR that will probably be underutilized.

 

If this extra 2nd gives us the necessary ammunition to go up and get our guy in the draft, or if not having another giant contract on the books allows us to go after one of the FA QB's like Cousins, is this still a bad trade?

I think everyone is arguing that this is probably not the case in both respects.

 

I don't see how Sammy's hypothetical contract doesn't allow us to sign Cousins. I don't see how having 3 1sts, 2 seconds, and 3 3rds in the next two years would need another second to trade up to get a QB.

Edited August 12, 2017 by jmc12290

[3rdand12]

One thing understated here.

Bills have gained some pretty decent leverage for trading.

Beane is thankfully, a rather confident young GM. He is trusting his staff to do 2 things very well.

Scout for trades using picks as a resource.
Evaluate thoroughly the upcoming talent crop and then make good picks. Both for quality players and managing Draft day.

Dude is betting on himself, as is McDermott.

I find this to be the most exciting season i have had in years.

I liked Marrone hire but not him bringing along College Coaches. and that went sour for me.
Rex was exciting and fun. Till he was undressed as a viable Head Coach. which was all too quickly,

The years before Pegula ar not worth mentioning any more for me

 

looking forward to watch this thing grow
Go Bills !

[DriveFor1Outta5]

Yea okay, He's been hampered by halfrod for too long.

 

https://youtube.com/watch?v=wzrwEpKYHWk

Who do you think Jared Goff is?

[Kirby Jackson]

And if we had a Jameis to target Watkins maybe we hold on to him.

 

Lets acquire picks, and cap flexibility, and do everything we can to get our QB. This doesn't mean tanking, just being smart with our draft picks, and cap situation, allowing for maximum flexibility. I think this is the plan. Not spend huge money, if he even re-signs, on an immensely talented WR that will probably be underutilized.

 

If this extra 2nd gives us the necessary ammunition to go up and get our guy in the draft, or if not having another giant contract on the books allows us to go after one of the FA QB's like Cousins, is this still a bad trade?

Use Deandre Hopkins and his 160 targets from Brock Osweiler. At that many targets Watkins would be at 1,427 yards.

 

The root of this conversation is that the poster was mad that he asked to be thrown the ball more. Every great receiver wants the ball more. He is right on a per target basis but hasn't been targeted like other great receivers. The QB argument is a lazy one because I just gave you Hopkins. Allen Robinson is right there as well. It is not QB dependent.

Edited August 12, 2017 by Kirby Jackson

[Boatdrinks]

And if we had a Jameis to target Watkins maybe we hold on to him.

 

Lets acquire picks, and cap flexibility, and do everything we can to get our QB. This doesn't mean tanking, just being smart with our draft picks, and cap situation, allowing for maximum flexibility. I think this is the plan. Not spend huge money, if he even re-signs, on an immensely talented WR that will probably be underutilized.

 

If this extra 2nd gives us the necessary ammunition to go up and get our guy in the draft, or if not having another giant contract on the books allows us to go after one of the FA QB's like Cousins, is this still a bad trade?

Well, short of Brees( injury situation) there is little history pointing to FA as a way to get a franchise QB. I don't want to see them go that route. There are other ways to obtain an extra 2nd, and it's unlikely that's the pot sweetener that pushes a move up partner over the edge. A better argument could be made for an actual tank- finishing in the best possible draft position to either draft a QB or be close enough to move into a top spot. The amount of spots is a bigger factor than price paid. Teams don't want to move beyond a certain number of picks. Assuming SW will be underutilized due to a persistent QB problem is a big leap. A FO is going to think they will find their guy, not assume they won't have one. The likelihood of the poor ROI for Watkins with only a 2nd rounder to show for it makes the trade a bad one.

[SWATeam]

Use Deandre Hopkins and his 160 targets from Brock Osweiler. At that many targets Watkins would be at 1,427 yards.

 

The root of this conversation is that the poster was mad that he asked to be thrown the ball more. Every great receiver wants the ball more. He is rite on a per target basis but hasn't been targeted like other great receivers. The QB argument is a lazy one because I just gave you Hopkins. Allen Robinson is right there as well. It is not QB dependent.

But are those teams with poor QB's and elite WR's competing for championships? I don't see it as the smartest way to allocate resources in building a team.

 

My stance is to find your QB before paying a huge contract to an elite WR. Accumulating picks, and having maximum cap flexibility, is a good way to increase the odds of finding that guy. Then build around him.

[Kirby Jackson]

But are those teams with poor QB's and elite WR's competing for championships? I don't see it as the smartest way to allocate resources in building a team.

 

My stance is to find your QB before paying a huge contract to an elite WR. Accumulating picks, and having maximum cap flexibility, is a good way to increase the odds of finding that guy. Then build around him.

I'd maybe be on board if he didn't just turn 24. His timeline matches up with your team's. Watkins should be one of the guys that you are paying while all of these young guys are on rookie deals. What's a better use of money for a young QB than a 25 year-old star receiver?

 

The teams that have poor QBs and good WR feed the good WR. Those teams that have good QBs and good WR feed the good WR. That's been the point. Sammy, when healthy, didn't see the ball like other top wideouts. That 9 game stretch that we always reference he averaged 8.67 targets a game and 100 yards per game. When he saw the ball like the other great players he was great. We will see it again even with Goff.

Edited August 12, 2017 by Kirby Jackson

[Boatdrinks]

But are those teams with poor QB's and elite WR's competing for championships? I don't see it as the smartest way to allocate resources in building a team.

 

My stance is to find your QB before paying a huge contract to an elite WR. Accumulating picks, and having maximum cap flexibility, is a good way to increase the odds of finding that guy. Then build around him.

Why is cap flexibility a big factor under this CBA, when most top QB s are drafted by their teams, not acquired as free agents? How could possibly having to pay market rate for a Watkins if he produces in 2017 and 2018 hamper the team's ability to find their franchise QB ? If somewhere down the road, the QB earns a huge deal ( a good problem to have) you deal with it then. That is a long way off for this team. Edited August 12, 2017 by Boatdrinks

[Kirby Jackson]

Why is cap flexibility a big factor under this CBA, when most top QB s are drafted by their teams, not acquired as free agents? How could possibly having to pay market rate for a Watkins if he produces in 2017 and 2018 hamper the team's ability to find their franchise QB ? If somewhere down the road, the QB earns a huge deal ( a good problem to have) you deal with it then. That is a long way off for this team.

Exactly

[BringBackOrton]

But are those teams with poor QB's and elite WR's competing for championships? I don't see it as the smartest way to allocate resources in building a team.

 

My stance is to find your QB before paying a huge contract to an elite WR. Accumulating picks, and having maximum cap flexibility, is a good way to increase the odds of finding that guy. Then build around him.

What was your stance on the Sammy selection in 2014?

[Kemp2Warlick]

Ian Rapoport‏Verified account @RapSheet 29m29 minutes ago

More

Interesting note from @NFLResearch on new #Rams WR Sammy Watkins... look at his 1st 3 seasons compared to Julio Jones. Had same injury, too:

[SWATeam]

I'd maybe be on board if he didn't just turn 24. His timeline matches up with your team's. Watkins should be one of the guys that you are paying while all of these young guys are on rookie deals. What's a better use of money for a young QB than a 25 year-old star receiver?

 

The teams that have poor QBs and good WR feed the good WR. Those teams that have good QBs and good WR feed the good WR. That's been the point. Sammy, when healthy, didn't see the ball like other top wideouts. That 9 game stretch that we always reference he averaged 8.67 targets a game and 100 yards per game. When he saw the ball like the other great players he was great. We will see it again even with Goff.

Yes, but do they win? That's been my point. My point has nothing to do with Sammy. I love Sammy. He's an AMAZING talent.

 

I just don't think it's smart to invest a large amount of the cap in a number one receiver without a franchise QB in place. Especially on a run first team. What if you could use the money saved on Sammy to sign a FA QB that comes available? Or use the acquired picks to move around and draft your guy? The more cap space you have, and the more draft picks you have, the more ammunition you have to land a guy in FA or the draft.

 

It's a general philosophy. Position ourselves to have the flexibility to capitalize on opportunities to land our guy. It is all that really matters.

 

We have been signing good players to big contracts for years. We extend Dareus, Glenn, and Hughes. We sign Mario, Shady and Clay. We give up draft assets to move up in the draft. And we don't win.

 

How is NE able to let so many good players go instead of signing them to big contracts? Because, to an extent, it doesn't really matter. Find your QB and the rest is gravy.

 

How do you improve your odds of finding a QB? Collect draft picks and carefully manage the cap to allow for maximum flexibility.

[Kirby Jackson]

Yes, but do they win? That's been my point. My point has nothing to do with Sammy. I love Sammy. He's an AMAZING talent.

 

I just don't think it's smart to invest a large amount of the cap in a number one receiver without a franchise QB in place. Especially on a run first team. What if you could use the money saved on Sammy to sign a FA QB that comes available? Or use the acquired picks to move around and draft your guy? The more cap space you have, and the more draft picks you have, the more ammunition you have to land a guy in FA or the draft.

 

It's a general philosophy. Position ourselves to have the flexibility to capitalize on opportunities to land our guy. It is all that really matters.

 

We have been signing good players to big contracts for years. We extend Dareus, Glenn, and Hughes. We sign Mario, Shady and Clay. We give up draft assets to move up in the draft. And we don't win.

 

How is NE able to let so many good players go instead of signing them to big contracts? Because, to an extent, it doesn't really matter. Find your QB and the rest is gravy.

 

How do you improve your odds of finding a QB? Collect draft picks and carefully manage the cap to allow for maximum flexibility.

Except, the Bills have loads of cap space and will have a very high percentage of players on rookie deals.

 

Accumulating picks is all fine and good if you have a trade partner. If the Jets, 49ers and Browns are 1,2,3 you might be looking at QB 4. It doesn't matter how many picks you have.

 

In terms of a FA QB that's always an option. The irony is a lot of people in Washington have the same concerns about Cousins that we do about TT, he's not good enough. I suppose Jimmy G is an option. If we are concerned about cap management I'm not sure that $20M plus and $50m guaranteed is a good investment on a guy with 2 more starts than me. Who is the mythical FA QB? Maybe they are going to try to trade for a guy?

 

Either way paying Watkins, even has the highest paid receiver in the league, would have minimal impact on our cap situation. We are going to have something like 30 guys on the roster on rookie deals in 2018.

 

To the other point the teams with good QBs and good WRs win. You don't need to not have a good wr because you don't like the QB. You can have a good WR regardless of who is under center. You always need top end talent.

Edited August 12, 2017 by Kirby Jackson

[SWATeam]

What was your stance on the Sammy selection in 2014?

I liked it. I absolutely loved Sammy coming out of Clemson. Thought he could be the best WR in football and had HOF talent. Still do. Also, still had hope for EJ. Made sense that Watkins could help EJ develop. And we were in "win now" mode with our D and the signing of Mario.

 

In retrospect, the trade up obviously didn't work out.

[BringBackOrton]

I liked it. I absolutely loved Sammy coming out of Clemson. Thought he could be the best WR in football and had HOF talent. Still do. Also, still had hope for EJ. Made sense that Watkins could help EJ develop. And we were in "win now" mode with our D and the signing of Mario.

 

In retrospect, the trade up obviously didn't work out.

Not sure how you could believe Sammy's talent was worth 2 firsts and a fourth 3 years ago, and now not worth a good contract and a second.

Edited August 12, 2017 by jmc12290

[SWATeam]

Except, the Bills have loads of cap space.

 

Good. The more the better for a new regime trying to build their team.

 

I will trust that they have a plan. They seem well respected. This isn't Buddy and Chan.

[Boatdrinks]

I liked it. I absolutely loved Sammy coming out of Clemson. Thought he could be the best WR in football and had HOF talent. Still do. Also, still had hope for EJ. Made sense that Watkins could help EJ develop. And we were in "win now" mode with our D and the signing of Mario.

 

In retrospect, the trade up obviously didn't work out.

Well that trade was bad at the time. The price was just too high for a non QB. That cost is paid, however and the only way it approaches value was if SW was a top WR and on the Bills for a long time. It was worth more to see if he could be that player now that he's healthy. But keeping SW and not needing to give him a new deal until after 2018was in no way a hindrance to obtaining a franchise QB.

[Kirby Jackson]

Good. The more the better for a new regime trying to build their team.

 

I will trust that they have a plan. They seem well respected. This isn't Buddy and Chan.

They don't plan to be active in FA though (their words not mine). The money needs to go somewhere. If you have 30 guys on rookie deals (or whatever it will be) you will need to spend a lot elsewhere (especially if you aren't paying a QB).

 

I'm just not ready to blindly follow these guys. They haven't accomplished anything yet. I've loved some things (the way they worked the draft) and hated others (the way that they bungled this). "A plan" and "a good plan" aren't necessarily the same. We will see how it plays out.