Bills Aren't Necessarily Searching for THE Best QB

[Kelly101]

1 hour ago, jmc12290 said:

Legitimate starters mean guys like Taylor.

 

There's ABSOLUTELY sense in trading up to take which QB you believe has the best chance of franchisedom.  Point blank, period.

How can he be considered Legitimate? 

Bills were 31st ranked in passing, cant be all on everything else.

[Kwai San]

1 hour ago, billspro said:

I do believe Darnold is good enough to warrant moving up to number 1. I would be willing to trade 4 1st round selections for Darnold because I think he is a franchise guy. 

No no and NO

[Punching Bag]

None of these QBs are a Manning but some are 

This article still applies and Johnny Football was a bust.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-draft-10-worst-first-round-quarterbacks-drafted-since-2000/

[Shaw66]

If you're going to analyze it in terms of probabilities, of course, the probabilities are interesting.   If there's a 50% chance that Darnold will be a true franchise, a 40% chance that Mayfield will and a 20% chance that Rudolph will, drafting Mayfield AND Rudolph is slightly more likely to get you a franchise guy, and you can do that burning less draft capital.  

 

The point is, even if we all agreed who the best QB prospect is, it isn't necessarily the case that the smart move is to trade up to draft him.  

[BringBackOrton]

22 minutes ago, Kelly101 said:

How can he be considered Legitimate? 

Bills were 31st ranked in passing, cant be all on everything else.

Taylor is bottom of the barrel but he's still a starter.

[Kwai San]

14 minutes ago, Limeaid said:

None of these QBs are a Manning but some are 

This article still applies and Johnny Football was a bust.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-draft-10-worst-first-round-quarterbacks-drafted-since-2000/

 

I'm no Johnny Football fan AT all - but I say 2 things worked against Johnny......being on the Browns and his perverse affinity for the party life.  Had he kept his head on his shoulders, the bottle from his lips and the nose from the blow - the warning signs were all there for ANYONE who wanted to see them he might have been a decent player.  He was a pretty decent player but he had his demons......AND the Browns.

[BadLandsMeanie]

54 minutes ago, horned dogs said:

No its actually not like that at all. The franchise isn't going out of business if the draft doesn't work out. We will still play again, being wrong or unlucky in the draft isn't a death sentence. It has happened before and your analogy is just more hyperbole.

In my analogy the player isn't the franchise. The player is the general manager. 

Anyway it isn't hyperbole. It is sensible. It may not be the way you or anyone else wants to go. But it is a valid approach.

18 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

If you're going to analyze it in terms of probabilities, of course, the probabilities are interesting.   If there's a 50% chance that Darnold will be a true franchise, a 40% chance that Mayfield will and a 20% chance that Rudolph will, drafting Mayfield AND Rudolph is slightly more likely to get you a franchise guy, and you can do that burning less draft capital.  

 

The point is, even if we all agreed who the best QB prospect is, it isn't necessarily the case that the smart move is to trade up to draft him.  

Exactly.

[gobills1212]

1 hour ago, Batman1876 said:

Or how you end up with Phillip Rivers. 

To an extent, and maybe I misunderstood - but if the idea is to take a qb to appease the team, or fans, or whomever - unless you really like a guy it's more picking from the scraps if he isn't your top guy per se but just someone who fits the need. Tough to do if ur job could depend on it

[BringBackOrton]

22 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

If you're going to analyze it in terms of probabilities, of course, the probabilities are interesting.   If there's a 50% chance that Darnold will be a true franchise, a 40% chance that Mayfield will and a 20% chance that Rudolph will, drafting Mayfield AND Rudolph is slightly more likely to get you a franchise guy, and you can do that burning less draft capital.  

 

The point is, even if we all agreed who the best QB prospect is, it isn't necessarily the case that the smart move is to trade up to draft him.  

Players have ceilings and floors though.  You take the player who has the highest ceiling and most acceptable floor.

[Nihilarian]

28 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  Even '83 was tricky for the guys who actually had to do the picking.  Blackledge was the top rated QB by more than a couple of draft magazines.  Remember that in 1983 there was nothing close to the media coverage that the draft receives today.  You had a few magazines and ESPN where Kiper was still more a curiosity than a revered "expert."  

Back then they had pro football weekly which was a godsend if you loved pro football and nothing else came close. 

 

There were reasons that Kelly and Marino fell in that year's draft. Kelly with his severe shoulder separation and Marino with his reported weed abuse. Both were winners in College though. 

[Shaw66]

15 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

Players have ceilings and floors though.  You take the player who has the highest ceiling and most acceptable floor.

That's my point.   Of course, where anyone's floor is is impossible to determine.  But what I'm saying is that if there are four, for example, above the floor, going after best isn't necessarily the smart move.   

 

It's all unknowable, of course, and Beane's going to do the best he can.   If he trades up, some people will like it and some won't.  In fact, many of those in favor of trading up will be disappointed, because Beane won't take THEIR guy. 

 

SOME of us know what is the right thing to do.   WHO those people are will be known only several years from now.   

[RochesterRob]

11 minutes ago, Nihilarian said:

Back then they had pro football weekly which was a godsend if you loved pro football and nothing else came close. 

 

There were reasons that Kelly and Marino fell in that year's draft. Kelly with his severe shoulder separation and Marino with his reported weed abuse. Both were winners in College though. 

  Yep, PFW was pretty good and I believe there was Smith and Street as well.

[Tyrod's friend]

1 hour ago, BadLandsMeanie said:

You are in Las Vegas at the blackjack tables and based on the cards you have and the ones you have seen out you believe that you have a 60% chance to win and a 40% chance to lose this hand. 

 

Do you bet your entire bankroll, and hitchhike home if you lose?

 

Or do you bet part of your fund and then steadily play the odds using your skill to assure that you have the advantage over time? 

 

Both approaches have merit but the more steady pace evens out the randomness of betting it all on a one shot advantage.

 

I think the player who bets it all on big shots, will eventually wind up hitchhiking home. And the player who consistently and steadily plays his advantage while allowing for losses, will make his living at playing blackjack.

 

I think McBean is the steady player and so I agree with the OP.

 

 

 

I understand Illinois stopped being a part of the lottery system. Although on a longer term, it's proved that lotto benefits the state the variations of returns could have bankrupted the state. I agree in general with your post and the OP but we could soon venture into deep waters.

"Trusting the process" means you have to have enough political capital built up with the ownership and with the fans to suffer setbacks. The Pegulas themselves - with the failures of both franchises - have little left in town. 

Best HC since Marv Levy and the best GM since Polian. Plenty of rope from me.

[OldTimer1960]

1 hour ago, The Wiz said:

I would have to look but I recall someone on WGR said that the reason they traded back last year when they could have grabbed Mahomes was because they were going to address QB in 2018.  I don't know if it was directly from McBeane or just wgr speculation but they acted like it was a "done deal" that they would be trying to draft their future starting QB.

 

 

Unless of course they meant AJ or it was just making it look like they had a plan but they didn't.  Who knows?

Plans have to be reassessed when conditions change.  When they traded back last year, They thought that their own(Bills’) pick would be much earlier than it turns out to be (21).  Further, the 2017 NCAA season was played and the Bills’ opinions of the QBs in this class may have changed (for better or worse).

 

There are other teams that have (had in the Jets’ case) that are also desperate to get a QB prospect and that is driving up the price to move up and also locking up the early picks such that it will be hard to find a trade partner early enough to get one of the best prospects.

 

i am virtually sure that their plan was to use their extra picks to move up for a QB, but competition, changing conditions and opinions may preclude them fro being able to execute that plan.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

2 hours ago, billspro said:

I do believe Darnold is good enough to warrant moving up to number 1. I would be willing to trade 4 1st round selections for Darnold because I think he is a franchise guy. 

 

Hes is clearly the closest to a slam dunk in this class. 

[Lurker]

12 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  Yep, PFW was pretty good and I believe there was Smith and Street as well.

 

Street and Smith was nowhere as near as good as PFW.   It was just a compilation of content from NFL beat reporters (i.e., Larry Felser-types).   PFW, on the other hand, had the all-time GOAT of draftnicks, Joel Buchsbaum--who was nearly on par with scouts/personnel evaluators in terms of the amount of film work he did.    Boy, I miss his draft guide, which I devoured every year around this time...

,

[ColoradoBills]

7 minutes ago, OldTimer1960 said:

Plans have to be reassessed when conditions change.  When they traded back last year, They thought that their own(Bills’) pick would be much earlier than it turns out to be (21).  Further, the 2017 NCAA season was played and the Bills’ opinions of the QBs in this class may have changed (for better or worse).

 

There are other teams that have (had in the Jets’ case) that are also desperate to get a QB prospect and that is driving up the price to move up and also locking up the early picks such that it will be hard to find a trade partner early enough to get one of the best prospects.

 

i am virtually sure that their plan was to use their extra picks to move up for a QB, but competition, changing conditions and opinions may preclude them fro being able to execute that plan.

Yes, yes, yes.

 

If Cousins signed with NYJ and Alex Smith went to CLE or DEN things would be a lot different.

[BadLandsMeanie]

I wish the draftniks would break down the QB by round results more thoughtfully than they do.

For one example is there any difference between results when a team takes a QB at 1 or 2 or 3 because they paid a kings ransom to get there, and those who just were at the that slot based on their record.

 

[Tyrod's friend]

2 hours ago, RochesterRob said:

  2018 - 2 1st's

 

  2019 - 1 1st

 

  2020 - 1 1st

 

  That is what you are talking and no thanks to that.  

On the whole I agree with much of what you've said elsewhere ... but if that was all it took, to get 1 overall, then yes. 

Because if you are right, you are doubly right. You not only get that ONE guy at that ONE position, you also deny him to your divisional opponent and get presumably the next gen for your division at the time the Big Dawg is seeing a setting sun. With another 3 second round picks and coming off the second best 2017 draft, not to mention $100MM in cap space in 2019 ... it's playing chess instead of checkers.

But only, only to take the first QB off the docks. Its too much to pay for a 6' QB that grabs his crotch at #4 or #5. 

Edited March 22, 2018 by Tyrod's friend

[oldmanfan]

8 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

 

Hes is clearly the closest to a slam dunk in this class. 

Because you think so has no relevance to what reality will be.  Clearly???