Rochesterfan Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Exactly what I've thought and argued in the Watkins thread. The 5th year option makes him more valuable. Do the Pats give up a 1st if Cook doesn't have the 5th year option? I doubt it. The pats gave up a very late 1st for Cook. The Bills got a 2nd (potentially very high) and a potential starter. Seems about a wash to me. Not sure the 5th year option helps much at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocLawless Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Let's go on record as to our feelings on the deals today. There are no bs in between answers either. It is a yes or a no. If you were the GM and had the exact same deals on the table would you have made the moves? We are not seperating them out either because they are tied together. On record as LOVING this trade. We acquired somewhat similar talent at both positions if you look at the numbers and injury history, lost a locker room cancer/diva (I know, that is merely my opinion, not fact) and gained another 2nd round pick. They have a good collection of draft picks now and I believe they didn't drop off much talent wise. Like the direction of this team. If I am wrong about it, I will eat crow but I think this is the right move. I should mention I also loved the draft moves building the collection of picks for the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thurst44 Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Do I "like" the moves? No. I can't stand them. I have a Watkins jersey and still feel like when he gets it all going in the right direction, he'll be a top 5 receiver (possibly THE best). I was rooting for Darby to be the pick in 2015 before the draft. Do I believe they are trades that make the Bills better overall? Absolutely...or, well, probably, anyway. The players have huge upside and have shown flashes, but the way the team is made up (especially with the focus on the run game), it doesn't put as much of a dent in the team (Darby may just go the way of Kiko & the Byrd) as people may think for the 2017 season. Plus now they have an insane haul of draft picks. If Tyrod collapses, they can target a future stud QB (although not rooting for that as qbs are such a crapshoot). If he improves his throws up the middle (looked pretty solid at that yesterday...granted most of those were to our former WR) and has a top season, well then we have a good problem to have and hopefully are stocking up with the bevy of picks. Frankly it seemed bemusingly Belichick-ian (surprising people traded, draft pick stockpile, team still at relatively similar position for next season. So, which way should I vote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted August 11, 2017 Author Share Posted August 11, 2017 Its 17 million. And its that or extend him. Okay but the point remains. They'd have another year of control plus 2 more years of franchise (if necessary). Any team that was interested in giving up assets (like a 2nd round pick and a player) wants the player for more than a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 (edited) Don't like it. I more or less get the rationale behind them, but the bottom line is both of those guys were good players. I do not know that the incoming guys net us out the same talent (I suspect they don't). Hope I'm wrong! I know both our new guys are pretty good...and I know we got picks. Edited August 11, 2017 by dayman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 The pats gave up a very late 1st for Cook. The Bills got a 2nd (potentially very high) and a potential starter. Seems about a wash to me. Not sure the 5th year option helps much at all. Watkins 5th year option is so high at pick 4 that its basically a franchise tag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Absolutely, however I dont know if I do one without the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 The pats gave up a very late 1st for Cook. The Bills got a 2nd (potentially very high) and a potential starter. Seems about a wash to me. Not sure the 5th year option helps much at all. So the Rams, who have a good defense, and have now added Watkins to Gurley, Woods and an offensive minded coach are a potentially high 2nd pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Okay but the point remains. They'd have another year of control plus 2 more years of franchise (if necessary). Any team that was interested in giving up assets (like a 2nd round pick and a player) wants the player for more than a year. You have "control" - it ties up a ton of cap space and he isn't guaranteed to show up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Watkins 5th year option is so high at pick 4 that its basically a franchise tag. It actually has nothing to do with where they are picked, it's the average of the top 10 at their position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 So the Rams, who have a good defense, and have now added Watkins to Gurley, Woods and an offensive minded coach are a potentially high 2nd pick? sure - their best player on defense hasn't showed up to camp yet, and they may or may not have a QB... Offensive line wasn't particularly great in the past. They're a lot like Buffalo was last year honestly.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigdaddyinOrlando Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Love the moves and find the direction/vision refreshing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 It actually has nothing to do with where they are picked, it's the average of the top 10 at their position. Then it must've gone up with the contract extensions - my bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Out of curiosity, why? 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 sure - their best player on defense hasn't showed up to camp yet, and they may or may not have a QB... Offensive line wasn't particularly great in the past. They're a lot like Buffalo was last year honestly.... Well I guess we shall see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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 (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 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 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue 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. 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 Hey its a new coach - give him a chance... they've been a fisher team for so long we just expect them to be terrible. Personally Goff reminds me of Gabbert, which will not bode well for them though... Prove me wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 On record: No. You traded 2 very promising young players for average at best talent and a 2nd and 3rd round pick. I have seen tanking in the NFL and it is called the Browns. Not only that, if there is going to be a vet cap dump, it's going to be NEXT year. That is two years of floundering for maybe the shot at a magic bullet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rochesterfan Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Watkins 5th year option is so high at pick 4 that its basically a franchise tag. Exactly - an it would potentially have saddled a team if he gets hurt. Again not sure the 5th year option meant you would have gotten more and may not have been able to do anything. Most teams were talking about a third or mid second for Cooks with the 5th year option. Finally got a late first from NE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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