Jump to content

For all who want to trade up so bad


Recommended Posts

On 3/18/2018 at 9:53 AM, RPbillsfan said:

The majority of posters seem to want to employ a strategy of trading most of our picks for the right to draft "a franchise QB".

 

The Jets just made a move that almost ensures additional years of losing football with a young QB playing short handed with a weak roster and all the expectations in the world.  No offensive weapons to use, poor offensive line, holes all over the front 7 on defense.

 

The Bills are now in a position to do the opposite, draft to fill the roster with young cost-controlled players to add to the talent base they have.

 

Six picks in the first 96. Chance to get QB, LB, CB, DT, OL and WR.  Why would you choose the pathway the Jets are taking which pretty much ensures competition with the Dolphins for last place in the AFC East.

 

Love to read your thoughts on this.

I know, trading a ton of picks for a QB did the Rams and Eagle so much damage they may never recover.

 

OH wait, the Rams made the playoff last year and the Eagles won the Super Bowl.  Oh, wait, sorry guess it didn't hurt them. 

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/18/2018 at 8:05 AM, Mr. WEO said:

 

They have had years of losing football because they have had bad QBs (minus the Fitz year, ironically).  So if they turn out to draft a significant upgrade at QB, they are doomed to lose more games than if they did not?

 

 

Really?? The Giants are the only team? 

 

Really?? It was the qb all along?  No other position contributes to wins?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KRT88 said:

I know, trading a ton of picks for a QB did the Rams and Eagle so much damage they may never recover.

 

OH wait, the Rams made the playoff last year and the Eagles won the Super Bowl.  Oh, wait, sorry guess it didn't hurt them. 

Agreed. I respect the OP opinions though, despite undermining the importance of a good QB (let’s go jacksonvill jaguars strategy, NOT). Just ask Brian Daboll, his offenses really did good when he had QBs he didn’t want under center (sarcasm). 

Edited by BillsMafioso
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mrags said:

Because the most important player on a franchise is their franchise QB. Hell, it’s generally the only position in sports where the term “franchise” is labeled when you have one. Some may consider LT added into that. But nobody is talking about their “franchise” RB, or “franchise” WR. Quarterback is the only position in all of sports that gets that title. And it’s the hardest one to find and by far the most important. 

 There is no position on any team sport played on this planet that is even close to being as important as the quarterback is to football. The closest, maybe, and it’s not even that close, is the starting pitcher in baseball. But they change every game and get relieved every game. So, I guess what I’m saying is, I agree with you. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12. Mason Rudolph QB Oklahoma St, some say his supporting cast made him look good, well we brought them along also. LOL :P

22. Leighton Vander Esch ILB Boise St

53. James Daniels C, Iowa

56. James Washington WR Oklahoma St

65. Kevin Toliver CB LSU

96. Marcel Ateman WR, Oklahoma St

121. BJ Hill DT, NC State

166. Dorian O;Daniel OLB Clemson

187.  Colby Gossett G Appalachian ST

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Buffalo Ballin said:

Tell that to Andrew Luck.

 

you mean the team that finished 2-14 one year  that drafted andrew luck , then proceeded to finish 11-5 the next year?

 

Then that same qb misses the whole season and voila 4-12.  

 

A good qb makes every position on offense and potentially on defense better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, terrytate said:

 

you mean the team that finished 2-14 one year  that drafted andrew luck , then proceeded to finish 11-5 the next year?

 

Then that same qb misses the whole season and voila 4-12.  

 

A good qb makes every position on offense and potentially on defense better. 

No. That's not what I meant. I'm talking about right now. Luck got injured because of a crap team. They didn't have a RB, O-Line, Defense, WR, none of that. Having a star QB cover up those holes, but he doesn't fill the void. Get it together, man.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with OP's concept.

 

The Jet's imbalanced their roster investment to fill one position.

 

Converse approach: I think the Bills can get a serviceable future QB at pick 12, and fill the rest of their skilled roster needs with remaining draft picks.

 

Also, next year the Bills are out of contractual hell with regard to the salary cap. That will bring in 2019 free agents.

 

It's a good time to be a Bills fan.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎3‎/‎29‎/‎2018 at 10:31 PM, OCinBuffalo said:

I am sick of seeing this used as an argument. Why? It is statistical garbage. It pretends to prove a causal relationship based on probability, when all it does is prove: intent. If I pick a random place to stand outside once an hour, and change every hour, or, I intentionally stand in the street all day, my "chances" of getting hit by a car go up. Well, no ****, Sherlock! 

 

The point isn't that it is random or chance. The point is that there is a proven relationship that the consensus top picks are successful more often than the unconventional ones like Wilson or Brady.

 

In other words while the speculators get it wrong a lot, they do not get it wrong so often that we should ignore the top rated QBs to go dumpster diving in the 5th round because...brady.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/18/2018 at 7:08 AM, xRUSHx said:

I am worried about Arz.jumping us for Rudolph or Miami grabbing him. He is a big pocket QB with success and a very good college record. IMO he is who they are targeting.  I would love to get Darnold, Rosen or Mayfield but would be fine if they end up with a boat load of picks and Rudolph at12.

 

How is AZ going to jump us when they have way less ammunition?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, What a Tuel said:

 

My biggest fear is wasting draft picks to defend pick 12 instead of moving up.

We can't assume a move up is possible. Whether due to a lack of a team willing to move down to 12 or if the player is even available at a reachable spot. There are too many variables at this point. Any team in close proximity to the Bills pick at 12 is a minimal threat of beating the Bills to a deal. The Bills could probably give a better offer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've begun to think recently that all this "moving up" stuff is just smokescreen.  I'm beginning to think they like McCarron and are ready to ride with him (at least for this year).  I think this because I looked at our roster and, reality, we have a lot of holes to fill.  I'm beginning to think they moved up to twelve for a specific player (not a QB). 

 

With six picks in the first three rounds, we can immediately fill (or at least try) to fill all these holes.

 

But nothing McBeane does surprises me anymore.

 

If we move up, it will be for Rosen.  I'm sure of that.

 

We shall see.  But don't be surprised if we stand pat and just draft six players in the first three rounds.

Edited by {::'KayCeeS::}
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/30/2018 at 11:32 PM, What a Tuel said:

 

The point isn't that it is random or chance. The point is that there is a proven relationship that the consensus top picks are successful more often than the unconventional ones like Wilson or Brady.

 

In other words while the speculators get it wrong a lot, they do not get it wrong so often that we should ignore the top rated QBs to go dumpster diving in the 5th round because...brady.

 

No. There isn't. Again: intent destroys any notion of "causality" or "relationship" or whatever. The fact that each player, once picked, is no longer available after each pick destroys the chances of every other team making that pick. Nothing is proven, except a tautology: drafting QB1s, before others get a chance to draft them, is more likely to happen...the higher you are in the draft. No kidding. Contrapositive: a team is less likely to draft a QB1, the lower they are in the first round. Duh! Why? Because all of the QB1s are already drafted.

 

Teams intend to draft QB high, and that has worked 19/33 times. Then, the crap chart starts adding other stats, that have no causal relationship, or even a correlative one, to the draft statistic, which itself proves nothing more than the obvious.

 

Teams intend to draft RBs, Gs, WRs, and DBs, in the 2nd round. Does drafting those players in those spots, and not in the 1st, 3rd, or 4th cause them to be make the Pro Bowl? How about win the SB? 

Edited by OCinBuffalo
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/18/2018 at 9:53 AM, RPbillsfan said:

The majority of posters seem to want to employ a strategy of trading most of our picks for the right to draft "a franchise QB".

 

The Jets just made a move that almost ensures additional years of losing football with a young QB playing short handed with a weak roster and all the expectations in the world.  No offensive weapons to use, poor offensive line, holes all over the front 7 on defense.

 

The Bills are now in a position to do the opposite, draft to fill the roster with young cost-controlled players to add to the talent base they have.

 

Six picks in the first 96. Chance to get QB, LB, CB, DT, OL and WR.  Why would you choose the pathway the Jets are taking which pretty much ensures competition with the Dolphins for last place in the AFC East.

 

Love to read your thoughts on this.

 So pretty much, you want us to take a draft strategy from the Browns' playbook and go winless because were don't have a QB and passed on all the really good ones? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...