THE ROCKPILE REVIEW - The GM's QB Decision Tree

[transplantbillsfan]

Super interesting clarification of our conundrum... well done, Shaw   

[Thurman#1]

5 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Hi Thurm.  Good to hear from you. 

 

First, I love Patsian and Packian.   Great words!!!

 

Second, you've gotten quite animated about Taylor, when he is at best remotely related to this thread.   But since you're on the subject, I've gotta say that if your cap numbers are correct, and I have no reason to think they aren't, then I agree completely that they need to cut him.   It seems completely clear that he isn't McDermott's guy for the future.  If it' costs $18 million in cap space to keep him and $8 to cut him, cut him or trade him and use the cap room to acquire the QB you want long term, if there is one.    But if all you're acquiring is a guy who's one or two year bridge, and if you have to pay that guy $10 million per, you haven't saved anything.   Taylor can be your bridge at $10 million a year just as easily as some other guy. 

 

But as I said, that's beside the point.   The Patsian/Packsian point is the point.   Dollar cost is clearly a part of the decision tree, but I talked about it more in terms of whether he's worth it rather than the question of institutional stinginess.   We haven't seen this new regime to know whether they'd be willing to open their wallets for a big-time contract, so we don't know.   However, the Patsian/Packian reference doesn't establish anything.   The Packers did write a big check to keep Rodgers - he has the fifth highest average salary among QBs.   Brady is lower, but even he is at $20 million.   We don't know how much the Pats would have paid Brady if he'd insisted on what he's worth.   He willingly gave up dollars to help the Pats acquire other talent.   

 

Not saying the Bills would break the bank for anyone.   Just saying I don't think we know what their attitude is about such things.  

 

 

 

Hey Shaw. Always enjoy your stuff.

 

Yeah, I went off about Taylor. You did bring him up in your OP. I wouldn't have mentioned him if you hadn't. If you mention something in the OP, surely you have to expect that people might want to comment on it, sometimes extensively.

 

And again, it's NOT $18 million in cap to keep Taylor. It's $23 million. $18 million this year and about $5.5 mill next in dead cap when he's gone. One year of Tyrod play for $23 mill. So the other guy would have to cost $15 mill to make it the same cap hit. And Tyrod is not going to be here after that, whereas another guy could stay here as a QB whisperer/mentor. Some guys fit that role, but I don't think Tyrod fits it or would be interested in it. Tyrod isn't a good match for the Bills right now. They want a guy who can throw from the pocket consistently. Keep Tyrod and we'll hear yet more of the "adjust the offense to fit the guy who can't run the kind of offense they want to build" stuff.

 

And I have to disagree with you that we don't know whether this regime is the type to open their wallets. They come from Carolina, a team which handles it's cap money in a very intelligent way, frankly a Patsian way. They don't bring in big-ticket FAs. They bring in small- to middle-size contracts in FA to fill holes and they build through the draft. And in their time here in Buffalo they have been extremely abrupt about radically upgrading this team's cap status. They brought this team from moderately severe cap trouble to a team without a lot of cap money right now, near the middle of the league with around $30 mill, but with no real cap problems going forward. They traded and cut guys who were going to cost a lot in the future. They brought in low- to mid-tier FAs, doing very well with the safeties in particular. They've followed the blueprint. I'd argue we already know what kind of guys they are. They've said they want to build through the draft and they've continued playing the cap game and the FA game exactly the way the Panthers - and the Pats and Steelers and Pack and frankly the best teams year in and year out do it.

 

$18 million in dead cap in 2018 (not yet including Wood) shows the price they were willing to pay to get this team on a good financial footing going forward. They'll be at or very very near the top of the league in dead cap this year because they cleared the decks.

 

The Packers and Pats do write bigger FA checks to keep their own guys that they know fit the system, Brady and Rodgers certainly included. That's part of that FA script that the Pack, the Pats, the Steelers, the Panthers, the Niners, etc. use. You don't sign your own guys indiscriminately, but for guys at important positions in your scheme who play at a high level and already know the system, yeah, you pay the big bucks to bring some guys back. But writing a big check to keep your elite QB is a radically different thing to writing a big check to bring in a new and very expensive FA QB. When have the Pats or Pack done that, even going back 20 or 30 years to the very beginning of free agency? I just don't see it. Could be wrong of course, but I really don't think so. And as I say, I'd love to see them bring in Cousins. I just don't think they will, for these reasons.

Edited January 31, 2018 by Thurman#1

[RochesterRob]

21 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Shaw....with all due respect I think we'd get general consensus on what a 'crazy buyer' would look like.  Especially for a franchise that just got done using two first round picks on a WR who is no longer on the team. I simply cannot see the current leadership giving up their two first rounds picks, and as some have said, one of their seconds, or next years first, for EITHER a free agent or rookie.  I just don't think that's in their DNA right now.

  Agreed.  If the Chief's for Smith want much more than a mid-round pick this year and as much next year the Bills will walk away.  I still think our guys will place Bradford under an electron microscope (if it were possible) to know that Bradford was an option.

[Shaw66]

16 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

Hey Shaw. Always enjoy your stuff.

 

Yeah, I went off about Taylor. You did bring him up in your OP. I wouldn't have mentioned him if you hadn't. If you mention something in the OP, surely you have to expect that people might want to comment on it, sometimes extensively.

 

And again, it's NOT $18 million in cap to keep Taylor. It's $23 million. $18 million this year and about $5.5 mill next in dead cap when he's gone. One year of Tyrod play for $23 mill. So the other guy would have to cost $15 mill to make it the same cap hit. And Tyrod is not going to be here after that, whereas another guy could stay here as a QB whisperer/mentor. Some guys fit that role, but I don't think Tyrod fits it or would be interested in it. Tyrod isn't a good match for the Bills right now. They want a guy who can throw from the pocket consistently. Keep Tyrod and we'll hear yet more of the "adjust the offense to fit the guy who can't run the kind of offense they want to build" stuff.

 

And I have to disagree with you that we don't know whether this regime is the type to open their wallets. They come from Carolina, a team which handles it's cap money in a very intelligent way, frankly a Patsian way. They don't bring in big-ticket FAs. They bring in small- to middle-size contracts in FA to fill holes and they build through the draft. And in their time here in Buffalo they have been extremely abrupt about radically upgrading this team's cap status. They brought this team from moderately severe cap trouble to a team without a lot of cap money right now, near the middle of the league with around $30 mill, but with no real cap problems going forward. They traded and cut guys who were going to cost a lot in the future. They brought in low- to mid-tier FAs, doing very well with the safeties in particular. They've followed the blueprint. I'd argue we already know what kind of guys they are. They've said they want to build through the draft and they've continued playing the cap game and the FA game exactly the way the Panthers - and the Pats and Steelers and Pack and frankly the best teams year in and year out do it.

 

$18 million in dead cap in 2018 (not yet including Wood) shows the price they were willing to pay to get this team on a good financial footing going forward. They'll be at or very very near the top of the league in dead cap this year because they cleared the decks.

 

The Packers and Pats do write bigger FA checks to keep their own guys that they know fit the system, Brady and Rodgers certainly included. That's part of that FA script that the Pack, the Pats, the Steelers, the Panthers, the Niners, etc. use. You don't sign your own guys indiscriminately, but for guys at important positions in your scheme who play at a high level and already know the system, yeah, you pay the big bucks to bring some guys back. But writing a big check to keep your elite QB is a radically different thing to writing a big check to bring in a new and very expensive FA QB. When have the Pats or Pack done that, even going back 20 or 30 years to the very beginning of free agency? I just don't see it. Could be wrong of course, but I really don't think so. And as I say, I'd love to see them bring in Cousins. I just don't think they will, for these reasons.

And Carolina wrote a big check for Cam, while they both were there.   

 

I know all three QBs were already on the team, and that made less risky than a free agent, but the point is that if those teams are McBeane's models, all three have spent big bucks on QBs.   (By the way, as a complete aside, I believe Kraft and Brady have a handshake deal that Brady is going to get paid some big dollars after he retires, doing public appearances or bein a consultant or something.   Wait and see.)    So I'm not going to be surprised if they write a big check for a free agent.  They know what QBs cost. 

 

As for Taylor, I hear you, but I don't think the total dollars are what matter.   It's the 2018 cap hit.   2019 they can afford the hit.   

 

I'm betting the Bills will be serious contenders for Cousins, or maybe Bridgewater or possibly Bradford.   I don't think they'll have any interest in trading up, and I don't think they'll like the uncertainty of pinning the next two or three years on an unproven rookie taken in the first or second round, along with a guy who is placeholder.   I think McBeane are actively building, and they'll want their QB of the future on board in 2018 if they can get him   So I'm expecting they'll write a big check to someone.  

[Sky Diver]

No team is going to let a HOF QB go. The only way to get one is through the draft, and the chances of that happening, even with a high pick are low.

 

Let's work backwards. What is the goal? It should be to win the Super Bowl. Given that assumption, the question is what QB is capable of getting us there.

 

If you think he is in the draft, the question becomes what will it cost to get him. Of course, a QB alone will not get you to the Super Bowl. If the player you want costs too much that you can't assemble the complementary pieces, what do you do? Absorb some losing years while you build around him and hope he develops as planned, or pass and look in free agency?

 

If you are looking in free agency, you obviously want to upgrade the position. Again, you need to look at the cost versus what that cost means as far as sacrificing other positions. You want to pay the least you can so you can build a team while still having a shot at a championship. So, who fits that category. Cousins perhaps, but he won't come cheap so maybe that rules him out. The question then becomes what free agent is better than Taylor. It seems there are a few out there.

 

My best guess? We sign Alex Smith and draft a QB that falls to us in Round 2.

 

Edited January 31, 2018 by Sky Diver

[RochesterRob]

3 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

And Carolina wrote a big check for Cam, while they both were there.   

 

I know all three QBs were already on the team, and that made less risky than a free agent, but the point is that if those teams are McBeane's models, all three have spent big bucks on QBs.   (By the way, as a complete aside, I believe Kraft and Brady have a handshake deal that Brady is going to get paid some big dollars after he retires, doing public appearances or bein a consultant or something.   Wait and see.)    So I'm not going to be surprised if they write a big check for a free agent.  They know what QBs cost. 

 

As for Taylor, I hear you, but I don't think the total dollars are what matter.   It's the 2018 cap hit.   2019 they can afford the hit.   

 

I'm betting the Bills will be serious contenders for Cousins, or maybe Bridgewater or possibly Bradford.   I don't think they'll have any interest in trading up, and I don't think they'll like the uncertainty of pinning the next two or three years on an unproven rookie taken in the first or second round, along with a guy who is placeholder.   I think McBeane are actively building, and they'll want their QB of the future on board in 2018 if they can get him   So I'm expecting they'll write a big check to someone.  

  Yes, I think the guys that evaluate talent for a living versus us keyboard GM's probably look at the top 4 prospects at not quite being a sure thing such as Peyton Manning was.  Guys here that want us to burn three number 1's plus... will be the same guys brandishing torches and pitchforks in three years if "the chosen one" does not pan out.

[Punching Bag]

12 hours ago, Jasovon said:

I have increasingly decided that the QB matters less than the Coach. Look at guys like Bortles and Goff, who did not impress under previous coaches then transform into playoff or even championship calibre starters under a new HC. I believe we have our HC for a long time in McDermott so i'm pretty happy that whoever we have under center (even if it is Taylor for another season) will be successful. 

 

The problem with that theory is none of the offense coaches last year were very impressive and able to take a solid player to being a spectacular one.

I do not see that happening in 2018 either so far.

[LABILLBACKER]

 At least the discussion is about finding a quarterback regardless of whether he's top 5, top 10, or top 20. And we're not talking about drafting two first-round cornerbacks. I hope McD & co make a reasonable trade for Alex Smith.  Extend him to a 2 yr contract.  Yet still draft a qb (Rudolph) or who they feel strong about late 1st or 2nd round. And keep Peterman as qb3 for insurance. 

Edited January 31, 2018 by LABILLBACKER

[RochesterRob]

6 minutes ago, Sky Diver said:

No team is going to let a HOF QB go. The only way to get one is through the draft, and the chances of that happening, even with a high pick are low.

 

Let's work backwards. What is the goal? It should be to win the Super Bowl. Given that assumption, the question is what QB is capable of getting us there.

 

If you think he is in the draft, the question becomes what will it cost to get him. Of course, a QB alone will not get you to the Super Bowl. If the player you want in the draft costs too much that you can't assemble the complementary pieces, what do you do? Absorb some losing years while you build around him and hope he develops as planned, or pass and look in free agency?

 

If you are looking in free agency, you obviously want to upgrade the position. Again, you need to look at the cost versus what that cost means as far as sacrificing other positions. You want to pay the least you can so you can build a team while still have a shot at a championship. So, who fits that category. Cousins perhaps, but he won't come cheap so maybe that rules him out. The question then becomes what free agent is better than Taylor. It seems there are a few out there.

 

My best guess? We sign Alex Smith and draft a QB that falls to us in Round 2.

 

   What is the goal you ask?  Honestly for 2018 it is not what most members here will want to hear.  Making the playoffs was like hitting on Lotto and for me just posting a winning record would be reasonable given the stats we finished with and the roster changes coming.  Setting the foundation this year with the draft along with 2019's prospects will set the table to expect to go at least as far as the divisional round in the playoffs in 2019.

[Sky Diver]

Well if there are modest short term goals, winning a Super Bowl is a long range goal, and you think there is a HOF QB in the draft, you bet the ranch.

 

I don't think that's the Bills' mentality.

Edited January 31, 2018 by Sky Diver
typo

[Shaw66]

26 minutes ago, Sky Diver said:

 

 

 You want to pay the least you can so you can build a team while still having a shot at a championship. So, who fits that category. Cousins perhaps, but he won't come cheap so maybe that rules him out. The question then becomes what free agent is better than Taylor. It seems there are a few out there.

 

My best guess? We sign Alex Smith and draft a QB that falls to us in Round 2.

 

I think this is seriously wrong.  There aren't enough to go around.  When you find one that you think is the right guy, you pay him what it costs, and you don't pass on him because you think it costs too much.  If you cheap out at QB, you get a cheap QB, and he's not taking you anywhere.  

[Sky Diver]

You upgrade the position while not sacrificing building a team. Smith is an upgrade over Taylor and Cousins isn't an elite QB and won't carry a team like a HOF QB. Is Smith good enough to win a SB? Maybe with the right supporting cast.

 

Is there a HOF QB in the draft? It doesn't appear so to me, but who knows.

Edited January 31, 2018 by Sky Diver

[Thurman#1]

39 minutes ago, Sky Diver said:

No team is going to let a HOF QB go. The only way to get one is through the draft, and the chances of that happening, even with a high pick are low.

 

Let's work backwards. What is the goal? It should be to win the Super Bowl. Given that assumption, the question is what QB is capable of getting us there.

 

If you think he is in the draft, the question becomes what will it cost to get him. Of course, a QB alone will not get you to the Super Bowl. If the player you want costs too much that you can't assemble the complementary pieces, what do you do? Absorb some losing years while you build around him and hope he develops as planned, or pass and look in free agency?

 

If you are looking in free agency, you obviously want to upgrade the position. Again, you need to look at the cost versus what that cost means as far as sacrificing other positions. You want to pay the least you can so you can build a team while still having a shot at a championship. So, who fits that category. Cousins perhaps, but he won't come cheap so maybe that rules him out. The question then becomes what free agent is better than Taylor. It seems there are a few out there.

 

My best guess? We sign Alex Smith and draft a QB that falls to us in Round 2.

 

 

 

No team is going to let a HOF QB go?

 

How about Atlanta? They let Brett Favre go. How about San Diego? They let Drew Brees go and he'll almost certainly be an HOFer. How about Indy? They let Manning go well after everyone knew he was going to be an HOFer.

 

To shorten this up, here's a quick list of HOFers I can think of who were let go. Sonny Jurgensen was let go after six or seven years with the Eagles. Unitas was let go at the very beginning of his career. Bobby Layne was let go by two or three teams. Y.A. Tittle, two teams let him go, I think. Steve Young. Kurt Warner. There are probably a couple more but I've said enough.

 

Teams let HOFers go sometimes, often because they misjudge what they have.

 

If I had to guess, I don't think Cousins is going to be an HOFer. But I think he's going to be a consistent top ten QB in the league for the rest of his career. I'd love to get him. But if they don't, they ought to trade up and get the guy they want early if it's possible.

Edited January 31, 2018 by Thurman#1

[Sky Diver]

Flutie came cheap and he did okay. Probably would have taken the Bills to the SB if it weren't for a meddling owner.

3 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

No team is going to let a HOF QB go?

 

How about Atlanta? They let Brett Favre go. How about San Diego? They let Drew Brees go and he'll almost certainly be an HOFer. How about Indy? They let Manning go well after everyone knew he was going to be an HOFer.

 

To shorten this up, here's a quick list of HOFers I can think of who were let go. Sonny Jurgensen was let go after six or seven years with the Eagles. Unitas was let go at the very beginning of his career. Bobby Layne was let go by two or three teams. Y.A. Tittle, two teams let him go, I think. Steve Young. Kurt Warner. There are probably a couple more but I've said enough.

 

Teams let HOFers go sometimes, often because they misjudge what they have.

 

If I had to guess, I don't think Cousins is going to be an HOFer. But I think he's going to be a consistent top ten QB in the league for the rest of his career. I'd love to get him. But if they don't, they ought to trade up and get the guy they want early if it's possible.

They played at a Hall of Fame Level afterward they were trade or became free agents. Anyway, there are always exceptions to the rule.

 

What potential Hall of Fame QB do you see available now?

[Shaw66]

3 minutes ago, Sky Diver said:

You upgrade the position while not sacrificing building a team. Smith is an upgrade over Taylor and Cousins isn't an elite QB and won't carry a team like a HOF QB. Is Smith good enough to win a SB? Maybe with the right supporting cast.

 

Is there a HOF QB in the draft? It doesn't appear so to me, but who knows.

I don't think so.  I don't think Smith is any better Cousins, and I don't think he plays the style that McB wants, although admittedly no one knows for sure what they want.   If you believe they like Peterman's style of play, Cousins is a good Peterman, and Smith is a good Taylor.  

 

Plus, Smith won't want to be someone's bridge to a bright young rookie.   That's what he was in KC this year.   He'll want a quick ride to the top.   If Minnesota really is in the market, Smith is perfect for them, and they're perfect for him.  

 

Plus, Smith costs $20 million for 2018, which means you're eating more cap room than if you just keep Taylor.   Granted, Smith is a better QB, by why spend $20 million to get someone who isn't your future.   

 

I don't see these guys using a bandaid approach.  

[Thurman#1]

45 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

And Carolina wrote a big check for Cam, while they both were there.   

 

I know all three QBs were already on the team, and that made less risky than a free agent, but the point is that if those teams are McBeane's models, all three have spent big bucks on QBs.   (By the way, as a complete aside, I believe Kraft and Brady have a handshake deal that Brady is going to get paid some big dollars after he retires, doing public appearances or bein a consultant or something.   Wait and see.)    So I'm not going to be surprised if they write a big check for a free agent.  They know what QBs cost. 

 

As for Taylor, I hear you, but I don't think the total dollars are what matter.   It's the 2018 cap hit.   2019 they can afford the hit.   

 

I'm betting the Bills will be serious contenders for Cousins, or maybe Bridgewater or possibly Bradford.   I don't think they'll have any interest in trading up, and I don't think they'll like the uncertainty of pinning the next two or three years on an unproven rookie taken in the first or second round, along with a guy who is placeholder.   I think McBeane are actively building, and they'll want their QB of the future on board in 2018 if they can get him   So I'm expecting they'll write a big check to someone.  

 

 

Exactly. Cam, Brady, and Rodgers were already on the team. Again, re-signing your talent, the guys already on your team, even if it's expensive, is part of the model used by Carolina, the Pats, etc. Bringing in high-priced FAs from elsewhere is generally NOT. 

 

Oh, and I would not be a bit surprised if you're right on Kraft and Brady. Should be in some way illegal but the Pats have shown a complete willingness to do their best to skirt the rules.

 

And as for cap dollars, it all matters. All of it, from every year. None of the $23 million it will cost to keep him for this one year will be able to be used on other players. Pretending it's only $18 mill is restricting your focus unnecessarily. The impact of keeping Tyrod Taylor on this roster to play QB the way Tyrod Taylor plays it will be $23 million against the cap. Everyone's aware that's over two years, I said so in every post. But that's how much will come off our cap. $23 million dollars. For one year of play. Tyrod Taylor play.

 

As for Cousins, sure you could be right. I have extreme doubt. It doesn't fit their M.O. But I'd love to be wrong. I'd love to get Bridgewater also if they can't get Cousins.

[Sky Diver]

Taylor is gone. Smith is cheaper than Cousins and I don't think the drop off is that great. Hopefully we strike gold in the 2nd rd or Peterman develops.

[Thurman#1]

16 minutes ago, Sky Diver said:

Flutie came cheap and he did okay. Probably would have taken the Bills to the SB if it weren't for a meddling owner.

They played at a Hall of Fame Level afterward they were trade or became free agents. Anyway, there are always exceptions to the rule.

 

What potential Hall of Fame QB do you see available now?

 

 

I don't know. Nor do the teams. That's the point of my post. But there is still a perfectly reasonable possibility that Bridgewater or Cousins in particular might build HOF careers. Or not. A bunch of Hall of Famers took a bunch of years to reach the HOF level. Could easily be true of some of the FAs now. But what I see in Cousins is a top ten QB right now. I'd grab him if I were the GM, completely aside from any Hall of Fame discussion.

 

And more, Darnold, Rosen, Mayfield and maybe one or two others have skill sets that could take them to the HOF. Not that the odds favor that. But it could happen. They have the potential to be great. Yeah, plenty of people have potential but don't fulfill it. A large majority. But it could happen. And even if it doesn't, if we draft a guy who - as Shaw pointed out in the OP - becomes a career top ten guy but not a HOFer, the team will be in the June Super Bowl discussions if the surrounding personnel are good. That's good enough for me, though certainly I'd rather have an elite guy.

 

And I have to disagree about Flutie. If they'd gotten him a few years earlier when his arm was live, he might indeed have gotten them to a Super Bowl, maybe even a win. But at that point, he was easier and easier to defend as his arm lost power and teams stopped respecting the long ball or even the 20-yard out.

Edited January 31, 2018 by Thurman#1

[Sky Diver]

He was good enough to get them to the AFC Championship.

[Ayjent]

6 hours ago, Jasovon said:

Cousins is a McDermott type of guy and i would absolutely love it. There is a reason that teams like the Steelers never seem to live up to the hype and I think you have hit the nail on the head here with regards to values and effort, Big Ben is a great example of a QB that doesn't give it 100% and takes games for granted. 

 

If you can get a good QB Coach pairing then the sky really is the limit, we have 50% of that. 

Yeah, but you can get someone as good as Cousins for a lot less than Cousins in my opinion.  He is a guy that has been the beneficiary of good coaching, and struggled with consistency before Gruden was there.  I.e.,  I think Gruden is a pretty good coach and the McVay is certainly a good offensive coach as well.  Before that Cousins was...well...okay, but not seen as a franchise guy - a borderline starter.  The reason he may not stay in Washington, because they know that too.  The only one that doesn't seem to know that is Cousins and some delusional fans that think he is a franchise QB and don't watch Washington every week.  Cousins going to a team with a questionable OC or HC that is defensive minded is going to struggle badly and lead to a lot of fans being upset with them spending so much money on him (he is too expensive for what he is, and he can be a turnover machine with the wrong coaching).