Thurman's Helmet Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 Yeah, God forbid the Bills amass the 5th-best winning percentage in the League over the last 7 years. The horror. 307119[/snapback] And ZERO championships. Keep on rooting for mediocrity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 God, I hate Boston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BravinSeattle Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 Still though, this was reported last week to be a rumor behind the scenes so there may be some validity to it. Assume it is. Do we stay at #9 or try and work down for more? I know they would love to have an assortment of second and third rounders, where the value is!!!!Late 307047[/snapback] I keep seeing this pop up on message boards as well along with that Henry to PHI talk for a pick. I can only hope we are able to pull off both of these as well as trade down in the first -- even out of the first. The only guy I'd stay at that pick for is DE Shawn Merriman (Remember Kearse in his prime?), SLB Derrick Johnson (I don't believe the hype - this kid is an impact player) or WR Troy Williamson (A 4.3 version of Eric Moulds). If those guys are gone then the best case scenario as you pointed out, is to trade down. I'd love to have a late 1st , 3 2nds (Ours, Philly's and the team that trades up for our no.9 pick) , a 3rd, 2 4ths (Ours and Washington's), a 5th, 6th and 7th in this draft. Could you imagine that draft??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodnarb Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 That would be dumb. We can't afford to pay a #9 pick. 307050[/snapback] sure we can, cable. in fact, we'd be better off because the rookie pool is a cap within a cap that allows teams that are even right up against the cap to sign their players. we'd have plenty of room to sign the #9. This would be BRILLIANT on the part of the bills for two reasons: 1. Clements will be the #1 FA CB next year. Look at the FA schedule next season: He's going to be the most in demand by a long shot. Franchising him will be risky, and we might only get a #2 in trade. Clements is not just a great cover corner with great ball skills, he's one of the most instinctive punt returners you'll see. He has tons of value that the Bills should cash in when they have the chance. 2. This would allow us to play the draft like a fiddle and get the guys we want, from OLinemen like Spencer or Baas or Jammal Brown to a WR like Mark Clayton or Matt Jones, perhaps even TE HEath Miller in the 2nd round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkady Renko Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 And ZERO championships. Keep on rooting for mediocrity. 307125[/snapback] Better than no playoff appearances in 5 years... Or are the Patriots suddenly in trouble without Ty Law or Lawyer Milloy or Ted Washington... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djfarr00 Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 Better than no playoff appearances in 5 years... Or are the Patriots suddenly in trouble without Ty Law or Lawyer Milloy or Ted Washington... 307183[/snapback] i don't really understand your point. Oakland As trade (live there) trade their best players and have ok seasons. the pats dump the players you mention and still dominate everyone. nc is not a dump player and we certainly don't have a replacement for him... much like the oakland a/s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cåblelady Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 sure we can, cable. in fact, we'd be better off because the rookie pool is a cap within a cap that allows teams that are even right up against the cap to sign their players. we'd have plenty of room to sign the #9. 307165[/snapback] Thanx for the clarification, Sweetie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkady Renko Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 i don't really understand your point. Oakland As trade (live there) trade their best players and have ok seasons. the pats dump the players you mention and still dominate everyone. nc is not a dump player and we certainly don't have a replacement for him... much like the oakland a/s 307201[/snapback] Live there? What Oakland does is not a closely-guarded secret. Didn't someone write a book about it?? They have had great records the past several seasons. I don't see how that is only "ok". They have made the playoffs a few times lately in baseball where there are only four spots per league. The Bills have not gone to any playoff games the last five years in a league where there are six spots in each league. I rather be having okay seasons leading to the playoffs than not sniff them at all. I was mentioning both the Patriots and the A's because they both look closely at the marginal utility left for a player on their team rather than focusing on keeping the most stars on their team. The latter strategy is more likely to lead to success whether that success is dominating a parity-driven league or having consistent success in a league where small-market teams have a distinct disadvantage. Nate Clements is not a dump player? No one is saying he is bad, we are just saying that it may be better to get better value for him now before he leaves for free next year. (Franchise CBs make a lot of money. Didn't Woodson get a 10 mil tender or something?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdelma Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 That's crazy! and who is the starting CB?. The rumor mill sucks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Estro Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 I want Clements locked up. Nate is just coming into his own and last year was a terrific year for him. He deserves a $15 million signing bonus and 6 year $36 million contract. He's got 5 good years ahead of him. The key picks he's shown he has a knack for can single handedly change the outcome of a game. I just don't see why anyone would want a #9 pick in a draft that is seen by many professionals as weak. Draft picks are such a crap roll so why lose a proven Pro Bowl player in Nate for a "chance" at a good player. Dirty Nate a Bill for life!!! Pay the guy his money and preserve a key part of the defense we've come to love! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 No way no how are you getting the #9 pick in the draft for Nate Clements. Unless you give up your 2nd rounder and/or a #1 next year as well.Crack kills 307049[/snapback] Usually I don't mind you Boston fans too much, but you're just incredibly wrong here, so wrong you should be shot. The reason this trade won't happen is because the Bills would never accept JUST the #9 overall pick in a weak draft for a Pro Bowl cornerback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djfarr00 Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 Live there? What Oakland does is not a closely-guarded secret. Didn't someone write a book about it?? They have had great records the past several seasons. I don't see how that is only "ok". They have made the playoffs a few times lately in baseball where there are only four spots per league. The Bills have not gone to any playoff games the last five years in a league where there are six spots in each league. I rather be having okay seasons leading to the playoffs than not sniff them at all. I was mentioning both the Patriots and the A's because they both look closely at the marginal utility left for a player on their team rather than focusing on keeping the most stars on their team. The latter strategy is more likely to lead to success whether that success is dominating a parity-driven league or having consistent success in a league where small-market teams have a distinct disadvantage. Nate Clements is not a dump player? No one is saying he is bad, we are just saying that it may be better to get better value for him now before he leaves for free next year. (Franchise CBs make a lot of money. Didn't Woodson get a 10 mil tender or something?) 307215[/snapback] dude, i really didn't want a lecture. all i meant was that it wasn't a fair or correct analogy to compare the pats getting rid of 3 players to us trading nc. different teams in totally different situations. as far as the a's go, maybe you shouldn't write that book just yet if you're saying that they did a good job / right thing by letting a lot of good players get away as they are entering some of their most productive years. clearly law, malloy, and washington were / are at the end of road AND they had replacements already on the team we don't have a replacement for nate. we have tm, who is a great special teams player, but who couldn't cover a back up receiver on pitts. last year. teams keyed on him every week. it wont be much different this year. we need to start somewhere. might as well be by signing nate, or trading him next year AFTER we get some talent in the secondary i attached live there to let you know that i have a frame of reference to enter the discussion. didn't mean to get you into such a fit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 Usually I don't mind you Boston fans too much, but you're just incredibly wrong here, so wrong you should be shot. As if being a Boston fan wasn't ENOUGH of a reason to be shot! The reason this trade won't happen is because the Bills would never accept JUST the #9 overall pick in a weak draft for a Pro Bowl cornerback. The other reason it might not get done is because of the reasons I mentioned earlier. The FA CB class is weak next year, which would make Nate the top CB available. The Bills can get a year out of him for a decent salary, franchise him, and trade him for MORE than just the (value of the) 9th overall pick, in what should be a stronger draft (but as per usual, not for CB's). For me it would take a lot more from the Skins to pry Nate away this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 I see that some want to trade Clements, so who is going to take his place? You are taking away a guy who is supposedly at the top of his position in the league and definitely replacing him with someone inferior. On top of that you get rush sacks or coverage sacks, and this team still doesn't have much of a pass rush. So you need a strong secondary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts