SouthNYfan Posted May 13, 2018 Share Posted May 13, 2018 5 minutes ago, IgotBILLStopay said: Thank you for taking the time to respond. But there are some problems with that analysis. I am sure the Bills were high on several players other than Phillips who went between 53 and 96. And you forgot #96 in your comparison of scenarios. The correct comparison is to keep Philips at 96 and leave 53, 56 and 65 open. Your cap calculations are not right. Cap in early years on rookie deals is less than later years. Also the replacement first round quarterback will have an extra year on the rookie deal which itself is worth at least 10 mill. That itself will dwarf any cap ramifications regarding rookie deals. Everyone knows first round rookie deals are the best value for money in the NFL. Are you really arguing that Tre (and I love having him) is worth more than a first round CB replacement with an extra year plus #53 plus #56 plus #65? If so, great. Regardless, I do hope Tre goes to every Pro Bowl in the next 10 years and leads to the promised land. But at this point, as an armchair GM, which side of the trade do you see value? The more I analyze, the more surprising Dorsey's pick of a CB at 4 is. My only point is that the trade I suggested is not really as bad a trade from the Bills point of view as you made it sound, no? No to everything you said. My cap #s are 100% correct. They are total salary, not year by year. YOU are incorrect. Rookie deals are mostly backloaded, look at white. His cap hits are: $1.8 yr 1 $2.3 yr 2 $2.7 yr 3 $3.2 yr 4 I'm not sure why you think they are up front, they aren't. We are you talking about saving $$ on the QB? If we took Allen at #4 then he costs more than taking him at #7. That's just a fact. My assessment of your scenario assumes we take Allen @4 and edmunds @12 then a CB who is inferior and costs more than White @22 who was taken later and I'm sure wont be as good. Phillips had a second round grade from the bills, so they would most likely take him in there. Yes, that adds #96 to the mix somewhere, but you need to replace White, which is why I took the cb at #22. The trade your suggested is absolutely terrible for the bills. It costs them +$20 million over 4 years in salary for Allen, edmunds, Phillips and the #22 over Allen, Edmunds, Phillips, white... And it downgrades white (a top10 cb) to an unknown, most likely worse, more expensive cb Alexander. You are only adding a second and a third round pick, since they would take Phillips in the second. I'm not sure why you think this would have been a good trade. You've been shown multiple ways it's worse. Allen Edmunds Phillips White $20+ mil in cap space over 4 years MUCH BETTER than Allen Edmunds Phillips Alexander #65 #96 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgotBILLStopay Posted May 13, 2018 Author Share Posted May 13, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, SouthNYfan said: No to everything you said. My cap #s are 100% correct. They are total salary, not year by year. YOU are incorrect. Rookie deals are mostly backloaded, look at white. His cap hits are: $1.8 yr 1 $2.3 yr 2 $2.7 yr 3 $3.2 yr 4 I'm not sure why you think they are up front, they aren't. We are you talking about saving $$ on the QB? If we took Allen at #4 then he costs more than taking him at #7. That's just a fact. My assessment of your scenario assumes we take Allen @4 and edmunds @12 then a CB who is inferior and costs more than White @22 who was taken later and I'm sure wont be as good. Phillips had a second round grade from the bills, so they would most likely take him in there. Yes, that adds #96 to the mix somewhere, but you need to replace White, which is why I took the cb at #22. The trade your suggested is absolutely terrible for the bills. It costs them +$20 million over 4 years in salary for Allen, edmunds, Phillips and the #22 over Allen, Edmunds, Phillips, white... And it downgrades white (a top10 cb) to an unknown, most likely worse, more expensive cb Alexander. You are only adding a second and a third round pick, since they would take Phillips in the second. I'm not sure why you think this would have been a good trade. You've been shown multiple ways it's worse. Allen Edmunds Phillips White $20+ mil in cap space over 4 years MUCH BETTER than Allen Edmunds Phillips Alexander #65 #96 So I said rookie deals use less cap in early years and more cap in later years. Quote You give me this Rookie deals are mostly backloaded, look at white. His cap hits are: $1.8 yr 1 $2.3 yr 2 $2.7 yr 3 $3.2 yr 4 I'm not sure why you think they are up front, they aren't. You disagree with me but How is it different from what I said? I was only trying to point out that your estimate of 4.8 million per year is likely 3.2 million this year. Next year on we have so much cap space that 3-5 million will not be an issue. Not to mention you will save another 10+ million in year 4 on the rookie CB relative to White. Also getting Kirk with a second round salary will be way cheaper than Dez Bryant, no? Bottomline - the whole rookie scale is the best value for money deal in the NFL. if you are arguing draft capital is more expensive cap wise relative to keeping players - that just wont cut it. The difference in salary between picks 4 and 7 and 12 and 14 and even assuming we get Philips at 53 instead of 96 are far smaller relative to the long term cap savings. If cap savings are your argument, the suggested trade which nets more draft capital is way way more cap friendly than not doing the trade. Quote Allen Edmunds Phillips White $20+ mil in cap space over 4 years MUCH BETTER than Allen Edmunds Phillips Alexander #65 #96 Even conceding that in the alternate scenario Bills will take Phillips at 53 instead of 96, which is by no means a given - see previous post about BIlls interest in Kirk - What happened to #56? Dont we get that too under the suggested plan? Edited May 13, 2018 by IgotBILLStopay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthNYfan Posted May 13, 2018 Share Posted May 13, 2018 7 minutes ago, IgotBILLStopay said: So I said rookie deals use less cap in early years and more cap in later years. You disagree with me but How is it different from what I said? I was only trying to point out that your estimate of 4.8 million per year is likely 3.2 million this year. Next year on we have so much cap space that 3-5 million will not be an issue. Not to mention you will save another 10+ million in year 4 on the rookie CB relative to White. Also getting Kirk with a second round salary will be way cheaper than Dez Bryant, no? Bottomline - the whole rookie scale is the best value for money deal in the NFL. if you are arguing draft capital is more expensive cap wise relative to keeping players - that just wont cut it. The difference in salary between picks 4 and 7 and 12 and 14 and even assuming we get Philips at 53 instead of 96 are far smaller relative to the long term cap savings. If cap savings are your argument, the suggested trade which nets more draft capital is way way more cap friendly than not doing the trade. Even conceding that in the alternate scenario Bills will take Phillips at 53 instead of 96, which is by no means a given - see previous post about BIlls interest in Kirk - What happened to #56? Dont we get that too under the suggested plan? I misread your original sentence. The point still stands that even if you remove the cap considerations, your trade basically means: White For #22 #56 #65 That's basically what you're proposing since we would probably be taking Phillips at #53. White For #22 #56 #65 White is a TOP 10 CORNER As a rookie It's an almost certainty that any cb, taken with one of those 3 picks, that we got would be a downgrade. So again, the trade is bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgotBILLStopay Posted May 13, 2018 Author Share Posted May 13, 2018 Alrighty then let's agree to disagree for now and hope that Tre makes the next 10 pro bowls and leads us to a SB win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrod's friend Posted May 13, 2018 Share Posted May 13, 2018 On 5/10/2018 at 6:32 AM, Commonsense said: The Ward pick pushed Nelson and Chubb down and saved the Bills a bunch of draft capital. Your scenario would screw that all up. If Ward didn’t go 4 we most likely severely overpay for 5. 4. Chubb 7. Allen 16. Edmunds Is that what you’re thinking? It wasn’t possible even if they traded Tre for 4. Not to point this at Commonsense (I realize that he's not making a proposal of the Bills taking Ward at 4) ... and this is just fun BS, but ... If the Bills are drafting at #4, anybody that starts a line of reasoning that they select anyone other than the guy they were going to move up to 5 to get anyways is WTF off track.The Bills take Allen at 4. There is absolutely no logic - other than a poster values Chubb/Ward or anyone more than the QB we targeted at 5 - for anyone other than Allen at 4. Now beyond that, the trade still then leaves you with a full allotment of picks. They traded up to get Trumaine, so likely the 12th pick, which you still own, is the choice at 12, because he's still there. Ultimately, if you've traded Tre White to the Browns at 4 - you no longer will have to trade #65 (which ultimately goes in the Trumaine pick), the #53 and #56 pick which are part of the move up to get #7. And you've retained the #12 AND the #22 pick (which you would have used to move up to get Trumaine). The series of events that presumably transpire after moving Tre White to get the 4th pick in the draft leave you with every player THIS ORGANIZATION TARGETED AND wanted anyway, and every pick you had in the draft. That's almost laughably a Buffalo-sided trade. Every freaking day. Every freaking day and twice on Sunday. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussie Joe Posted May 13, 2018 Share Posted May 13, 2018 Just for some fun here is what I think they could have done with the extra picks...( after assuming they get Allen at 4 and Edmunds at 12).. Alexander was already gone when they were on the clock at 22. Lets assume they don't trade up for him... Obviously they now need a CB to replace Tre, but I'm not sure of the value here at 22... there are a lot of CB's that will be available in the 2nd round, and I don't think that Mike Hughes who went at 30 is that much better than the others... Quality Guards however are in short supply and there are a couple available here.. lets say they take Wynn at 22 ( although I did like Hernandez as well who went at 34)... At 53 Beane is starting to sweat now about getting a CB to replace Tre.. He has his pick of the 2nd round litter here.... I'll say Duke Dawson who they had in for a pre draft visit gets the nod... 56 is WR time ... I'll go with DJ Chark who has the zip that they are lacking... Now that they have addressed two major needs in the 2nd, I think at 65 they pick Phillips.... We now know in hindsight that this would have turned out to be a reach, however McDermott seems to be in love and he has "The Process" stamped all over him... Still cant believe they got him at the bottom of the 3rd... This would have then freed up 96 to make another selection....This is tough for me to decide on as a lot of players I liked were still there in the 4th round and they overlooked them with their pick then... I'll say they go Dorian O'Daniel at LB who I'm pretty sure they had in for a pre visit and who the Chiefs picked at 100.... So under this scenario the question then becomes - Tre versus Wynn, Dawson, Chark and O'Daniel 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgotBILLStopay Posted May 14, 2018 Author Share Posted May 14, 2018 15 hours ago, Aussie Joe said: Just for some fun here is what I think they could have done with the extra picks...( after assuming they get Allen at 4 and Edmunds at 12).. Alexander was already gone when they were on the clock at 22. Lets assume they don't trade up for him... Obviously they now need a CB to replace Tre, but I'm not sure of the value here at 22... there are a lot of CB's that will be available in the 2nd round, and I don't think that Mike Hughes who went at 30 is that much better than the others... Quality Guards however are in short supply and there are a couple available here.. lets say they take Wynn at 22 ( although I did like Hernandez as well who went at 34)... At 53 Beane is starting to sweat now about getting a CB to replace Tre.. He has his pick of the 2nd round litter here.... I'll say Duke Dawson who they had in for a pre draft visit gets the nod... 56 is WR time ... I'll go with DJ Chark who has the zip that they are lacking... Now that they have addressed two major needs in the 2nd, I think at 65 they pick Phillips.... We now know in hindsight that this would have turned out to be a reach, however McDermott seems to be in love and he has "The Process" stamped all over him... Still cant believe they got him at the bottom of the 3rd... This would have then freed up 96 to make another selection....This is tough for me to decide on as a lot of players I liked were still there in the 4th round and they overlooked them with their pick then... I'll say they go Dorian O'Daniel at LB who I'm pretty sure they had in for a pre visit and who the Chiefs picked at 100.... So under this scenario the question then becomes - Tre versus Wynn, Dawson, Chark and O'Daniel Great job thinking through each pick possibility. Much as I like Tre that would have been the dream draft to beat every other dream draft. You right Wynn in round 1 makes more sense than CB at 22 given how the draft played out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thandGoal Posted May 14, 2018 Share Posted May 14, 2018 where do people think up these idiotic posts??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted May 14, 2018 Share Posted May 14, 2018 19 hours ago, SouthNYfan said: I misread your original sentence. The point still stands that even if you remove the cap considerations, your trade basically means: White For #22 #56 #65 That's basically what you're proposing since we would probably be taking Phillips at #53. White For #22 #56 #65 White is a TOP 10 CORNER As a rookie It's an almost certainty that any cb, taken with one of those 3 picks, that we got would be a downgrade. So again, the trade is bad. If you're nixing 53 on the assumption that we'd have taken Phillips there shouldn't you add 96 to our take? That would be White for 22, 56, 65, & 96. I probably keep White anyway because "a bird in the hand" but it's not a ridiculous proposition. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthNYfan Posted May 14, 2018 Share Posted May 14, 2018 1 hour ago, Rob's House said: If you're nixing 53 on the assumption that we'd have taken Phillips there shouldn't you add 96 to our take? That would be White for 22, 56, 65, & 96. I probably keep White anyway because "a bird in the hand" but it's not a ridiculous proposition. Yeah you do add 96 I think we said that earlier It's a lot of #s lol You do have to assume one of the picks, prob #22, is a CB to replace White. So really it's white for #56, #65, #96. That's why I think it's a bad deal, esp as you said, a "bird in the hand" with White, who is a known top10 cb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgotBILLStopay Posted May 14, 2018 Author Share Posted May 14, 2018 Quote So really it's white for #56, #65, #96. Now you missed #22. LOL. It is really White for #22, #56, #65 and #96 with the assumption that the Bills go for Phillips at #53 instead of a later pick. Sorry couldnt resist making that correction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts