Big Blitz Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 (edited) Beane used the word "signability" twice when asked twice about what went into his thinking on trading Sammy. Sammy wasn't resigning here or we didn't think he would be worth the money some team will throw at him. Jordan Matthews ain't chopped liver people. Our WR corps is still 10 times better then last year. AND we now bc it's the Rams and that 2nd round pick is likely to be in the 33-39 range will have FOUR picks in the top 40. And if it unravels badly for us and KC (who I think is heading toward 6-10) we could have TWO picks in the TOP 15. So yes. I'm good.Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk He actually said he hadn't had a conversation with him about his future in Buffalo and if he wanted to be here. So following what you think happened, Beane made the decision that he didn't want to be here without actually asking the player. Genius. Not buying that at all. As a GM no way in hell he admits they did and Sammy told him "no." They have had to be talking extension and know exactly what Sammy wants. Don't believe everything these people say. Read between the lines and think. Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk Edited August 11, 2017 by Big Blitz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Not buying that at all.As a GM no way in hell he admits they did and Sammy told him "no." They have had to be talking extension and know exactly what Sammy wants.To believe every thing these people say. Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk Huh? But you just said you believed what he said about "signability", so that was true but his conversation with Watkins wasn't. I'm glad you can tell when Beane is lying or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusher Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 I'm on record as neutral to ok with the Darby trade, but I think trading Sammy was a huge mistake. I think his value is much higher than what he's shown so far...some his fault, but alot is on the QB as well. This trade will make us look worse than trading Lynch if he stays healthy, and this move hurts the offense for the foreseeable future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 (edited) These trades were made with St. Louis and Philly. And you can quote me on that Edited August 11, 2017 by Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSOL Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Until the Bills actually start winning and Fielding a competitive team that's fun to watch and get excited about, I hate EVERY move they make. So I do not like the trade. We traded away an exciting player that we as bills fans were looking forward to watching play this year. A bright spot on the team. For futures... On a fan base that's been suffering for going on two decades. Now we aren't really going to be able to evaluate whether this was a good move or not for 3 more years. If it was a good move, McD will be a winning coach with a good team. If it's a bad move, McD will be gone and we will be hitting the reset button AGAIN. But right now I'm having flashbacks of Marshawn Lynch. I hope we aren't watching Sammy getting Superbowl MVP awards on the way to a hall of fame career for some other team, while we are searching for yet another new head coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figster Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Just thinking about the history of it. You spend two first-round picks and a fourth on a player you let walk for player drafted in the sixth round plus a second round pick next year. Then trade a player you spent a second on for another second-round draftee plus a future third...but you let another first round pick walk in the off-season because hey, you've got that second-rounder you just traded waiting in the wings. And that's just today's roster bull **** from this franchise...we have four players from the first three rounds of each draft from 2005-2015, and the litany of players from those drafts who have been wasted, traded, let go, or just never panned out is ridiculous. This trade may or may not be bad in and of itself, but it's the most recent cherry topping the **** sundae that is this franchise. After the 1st preseason game I was thinking to myself despite the loss I Liked how the 1st teamers looked and especially liked how fast Taylor was going through his progressions and finding has favorite target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Beane used the word "signability" twice when asked twice about what went into his thinking on trading Sammy. Sammy wasn't resigning here or we didn't think he would be worth the money some team will throw at him. Jordan Matthews ain't chopped liver people. Our WR corps is still 10 times better then last year. AND we now bc it's the Rams and that 2nd round pick is likely to be in the 33-39 range will have FOUR picks in the top 40 (we weren't making the playoffs with or without Sammy imo and believe we're a bottom 10 team). And if it unravels badly for us and KC (who I think is heading toward 6-10) we could have TWO picks in the TOP 15. So yes. I'm good.Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk If signability was a concern why didn't they exercise the option???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Not buying that at all.As a GM no way in hell he admits they did and Sammy told him "no." They have had to be talking extension and know exactly what Sammy wants.To believe every thing these people say. Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk Huh? But you just said you believed what he said about "signability", so that was true but his conversation with Watkins wasn't. I'm glad you can tell when Beane is lying or not. Why did he keep referring to signability? What was he implying? Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsfansinceday1 Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Yes. We traded explosiveness and scheme misfit for reliability and scheme fit. At the very least it is a neutral trade, but I believe it works in our favor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 I'm on record as neutral to ok with the Darby trade, but I think trading Sammy was a huge mistake. I think his value is much higher than what he's shown so far...some his fault, but alot is on the QB as well. This trade will make us look worse than trading Lynch if he stays healthy, and this move hurts the offense for the foreseeable future. Nailed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figster Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 (edited) Nailed it. yup, for the most part Edited August 11, 2017 by Figster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Why did he keep referring to signability?What was he implying?Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk Who knows. Why did he say that signing Anquan Boldin was a sign they aren't throwing in the towel for the season? I mean trading away your number 1 receiver seems like you are to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimer1960 Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 I like the trades long term (only the draft picks). Mathews is one year here and gone as a FA and Gaines is of no consequence. This year is going to be very painful to watch - think nearly 2016 Browns bad. Sadly, the thing that could screw everything up for next year would be Tyrod sandlotting his way to 5 or 6 wins thus keeping us out of reach of a good QB prospect next year. Who knows. Why did he say that signing Anquan Boldin was a sign they aren't throwing in the towel for the season? I mean trading away your number 1 receiver seems like you are to me. Watkins will be a FA next year and they did not expect that they would be willing to pay enough to keep him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 (edited) If signability was a concern why didn't they exercise the option???? Because they didnt value him at $14M/yr. Would be my only guess. "Signability" could mean a lot of things. How willing the player is to re-sign with the team in general. If the team values the player at his market value. And all the shades in between. Edited August 11, 2017 by DrDareustein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 I guess we just can't have nice things. Because they didnt value him at $14M/yr. Would be my only guess. So then trade him for more than what they got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 I like the trades long term (only the draft picks). Mathews is one year here and gone as a FA and Gaines is of no consequence. This year is going to be very painful to watch - think nearly 2016 Browns bad. Sadly, the thing that could screw everything up for next year would be Tyrod sandlotting his way to 5 or 6 wins thus keeping us out of reach of a good QB prospect next year. Watkins will be a FA next year and they did not expect that they would be willing to pay enough to keep him. So franchise tag him. What is so wrong with keeping good young players? They now have to find another #1 receiver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonborn10 Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 I like the moves. Darby was terrible last year. Watkins was a camp hold-out nightmare waiting to happen. My only pause is how these picks will be used. They should draft at least five players, and maybe shop one of those picks for a 2019 pick come draft time. If they use them to move up and come away with only 3 or 4 players I will be pissed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 I guess we just can't have nice things. So then trade him for more than what they got. Just magically like that? He has a ton of talent, but is a risky high-price re-sign next season. Any team getting him might get just a 1-year rental. Knocks the trade value of any talent down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meathead Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 as of right now they got more value than they gave up but if sammy turns in the the healthy beast we all expected to see someday, then it will have been a foolish move only time will tell. roll the dice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 (edited) No way of knowing until we see how things pan out and how we use these extra picks...honestly pointless right now to discuss Edited August 11, 2017 by matter2003 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts