McCoy to packers rumors

[eball]

when r u old thyme tbders gunna let go of the passed the passed is the passed this is a message bored not ur personell good logic sound thinkin good speeling and grammer police interweb chat box county club

I kuddent have sed it bedder myselph

[PromoTheRobot]

Rumblings from a fan huh? Super credible...

The website is called "NFL World" so it has to be legit.

[aristocrat]

Yeah, sending one of the best backs in the league to the team whose first round pick you own makes " perfect sense".

Wow...

Your condescension aside.::

Sending a top-flight RB to a run-first team, who's top RB just went down with a knee injury, coached by his former HC, that is clearly in win-now mode makes perfect sense.

If you're a team that's determined to trade the guy in the first place.

 

Only trade McCoy if you get at least a first and second rounder to start

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Beast]

Would love to see shady in GB....he would make them solid Sb favorites in the NFC

Being a Bills fan and all, I would kind of like to keep McCoy here.

[likei've]

Your condescension aside.::

 

Sending a top-flight RB to a run-first team, who's top RB just went down with a knee injury, coached by his former HC, that is clearly in win-now mode makes perfect sense.

 

If you're a team that's determined to trade the guy in the first place.

You realize that would make them better, right?

 

The one thing we'd never want to do?

 

Doesn't make any amount of sense for the Bills.

[thebandit27]

You realize that would make them better, right?

 

The one thing we'd never want to do?

 

Doesn't make any amount of sense for the Bills.

If you're trying to maximize the return on the player, then yes, it makes sense to trade him to the place where he'd have the highest value.

 

That he makes the trade partner better will necessarily lessen the value of the pick irrespective of who that trade partner is--you realize that, right?

 

Of course, trading your best player doesn't often make sense regardless of how you slice it, but if you're concerned about lessening the value of a pick, then you should be trading him for a player

Only trade McCoy if you get at least a first and second rounder to start Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There no way you believe anyone would trade a 1st and 2nd for a RB--let alone one on the downside of his career

[zevo]

Being a Bills fan and all, I would kind of like to keep McCoy here.

Im on board with trading assets and the pack are my NFC team

[aristocrat]

You realize that would make them better, right?

The one thing we'd never want to do?

Doesn't make any amount of sense for the Bills.

 

If you're trying to maximize the return on the player, then yes, it makes sense to trade him to the place where he'd have the highest value.

That he makes the trade partner better will necessarily lessen the value of the pick irrespective of who that trade partner is--you realize that, right?

Of course, trading your best player doesn't often make sense regardless of how you slice it, but if you're concerned about lessening the value of a pick, then you should be trading him for a player

Only trade McCoy if you get at least a first and second rounder to start Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

There no way you believe anyone would trade a 1st and 2nd for a RB--let alone one on the downside of his career

 

Then don't trade him. My point is trade him if it's out of the park trade.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mead107]

One on game one.

[Doc]

I heard Shady will be divided into 31 pieces and the pieces will be traded to the other teams. It must be true because I saw it on the internet.

[likei've]

If you're trying to maximize the return on the player, then yes, it makes sense to trade him to the place where he'd have the highest value.

 

That he makes the trade partner better will necessarily lessen the value of the pick irrespective of who that trade partner is--you realize that, right?

 

Of course, trading your best player doesn't often make sense regardless of how you slice it, but if you're concerned about lessening the value of a pick, then you should be trading him for a player

 

There no way you believe anyone would trade a 1st and 2nd for a RB--let alone one on the downside of his career

No. We didn't make them better when we traded the first. They picked a player that won't be contributing right away. And if he does, will have significant growing pains.

 

We already own the first round pick. Trading for a two and giving them a significant piece for success would be taking a step back.

 

You'd be hurting the value of your first round pick to earn a second rounder that would inevitably be worse with the new addition.

 

In essence making your first rounder more like a second rounder, and your new shiny second rounder more like a third rounder.

 

So again, makes no sense for the Bills.

Edited August 26, 2017 by likei've

[GG]

Your condescension aside.::

 

Sending a top-flight RB to a run-first team, who's top RB just went down with a knee injury, coached by his former HC, that is clearly in win-now mode makes perfect sense.

 

If you're a team that's determined to trade the guy in the first place.

But if you do that, you almost guarantee that Chiefs win 12 games. No thank you.

[MILFHUNTER#518]

Oh Lord MAKE IT STOP ALREADY!😲😣

[LeGOATski]

Just trade him to STL for all the picks. They love Bills players.

[Coach Tuesday]

But if you do that, you almost guarantee that Chiefs win 12 games. No thank you.

Correct - that would be insanely dumb since we have a vested interest in their failure this year.

 

But why wouldn't the Giants throw us a second or possibly even a late first? Yes it would be expensive for a running back - but having McCoy would put the Giants in the running to win the SB for each of the next three years, plus he'd be extremely marketable in NYC.

[r00tabaga]

If McCoy goes anywhere now, KC would make perfect sense

 

Though I still doubt they move him

When you have KCs first rounder, why in the hell would you try and strengthen their roster?

[thebandit27]

No. We didn't make them better when we traded the first. They picked a player that won't be contributing right away. And if he does, will have significant growing pains.

 

We already own the first round pick. Trading for a two and giving them a significant piece for success would be taking a step back.

 

You'd be hurting the value of your first round pick to earn a second rounder that would inevitably be worse with the new addition.

 

In essence making your first rounder more like a second rounder, and your new shiny second rounder more like a third rounder.

 

So again, makes no sense for the Bills.

No, it doesn't make your first rounder a 2nd rounder in essence.

 

First off, they had the 27th pick in 2017; that's not markedly different than I'd expect them to pick in 2018; the trade was hardly made based on an assumption that KC would go in the tank--it was all about adding draft pick capitol. If you're concerned that shipping them McCoy will push them over the hump to become a Super Bowl winning team, well, suffice to say I disagree

 

Second, a 1st round pick is never essentially a 2nd rounder. First round picks get contracts that include the 5th year option, which is a critical difference, and the reason that teams often trade back into the first round for guys they like.

 

The point here is simple: you are unlikely to get great value for a RB with a big contract who is on the downside of his career. If KC is the team that valued him the most, then that's the team that makes the most sense as a trade partner.

 

It would be decidedly silly to trade him to GB for a 3rd (just as an example) instead of to KC for a 2nd simply because you're worried about losing 3-5 draft slots with your second first-round pick.

[Kirby Jackson]

I'm going to try to take a little different approach and hopefully everyone follows. For the purpose of this exercise I want to make a few assumptions. Let's assume that the Bills with McCoy are 7-9 and 5-11 without. That doesn't seem like too much of a stretch. Also, let's say that they get Adams and the Packers 3rd for him. Let's assume that the Bills re-sign Adams and Matthews.

 

Now, the difference between 7-9 and 5-11 (based on last year), is 4 to 5 draft slots. It was a difference of 387 draft value points (equivalent to pick 51). So the Bills would basically be getting a borderline #1 WR, a 3rd and the equivalent of pick 51 (mid 2nd). More importantly, in a draft where you want to secure a QB you may be able to secure your QB at pick 6 that you couldn't get at pick 10. So you would get to keep the rest of that draft capital instead of having to move up. It makes total sense on a rebuilding team. I don't think that it will ever happen but the logic is there.

 

Does this make sense?

[thebandit27]

When you have KCs first rounder, why in the hell would you try and strengthen their roster?

Geez guys; you aren't trying to strengthen their roster.

 

You folks have missed the point greatly--KC would make a ton of sense as a team that would have the highest level of interest based on:

 

Andy Reid

The loss of their RB1

Being in win-now mode

[likei've]

No, it doesn't make your first rounder a 2nd rounder in essence.

 

First off, they had the 27th pick in 2017; that's not markedly different than I'd expect them to pick in 2018; the trade was hardly made based on an assumption that KC would go in the tank--it was all about adding draft pick capitol. If you're concerned that shipping them McCoy will push them over the hump to become a Super Bowl winning team, well, suffice to say I disagree

 

Second, a 1st round pick is never essentially a 2nd rounder. First round picks get contracts that include the 5th year option, which is a critical difference, and the reason that teams often trade back into the first round for guys they like.

 

The point here is simple: you are unlikely to get great value for a RB with a big contract who is on the downside of his career. If KC is the team that valued him the most, then that's the team that makes the most sense as a trade partner.

 

It would be decidedly silly to trade him to GB for a 3rd (just as an example) instead of to KC for a 2nd simply because you're worried about losing 3-5 draft slots with your second first-round pick.

It would save everyone time if you just admit you're wrong.

 

It would not "make sense" for the Bills to trade McCoy to the Chiefs.