Jump to content

Bills trade for Nyheim Hines


BLeonard

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, loveorhatembillsfan4life said:

You all told me Moss couldn't be traded. I knew Beane was up to something when he didn't even touch the ball the other night. 

 

Beane is a wizard and this is an Upgrade for us. How much to be seen lol 

 

I thought we were all telling the world that Moss and a 5th was the "It" trade for a player

Turns out we were wrong, Moss and a 6th did it.

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

25 minutes ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

I’m good with this

Me too. It's an upgrade but not really a splash pick up or a needle mover. Moss was a goner and a 6th isn't much. Muddies things up a bit with Cook there. Good insurance policy. Hard not to approve the move but not doing jumping jacks either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

This is completely irrelevant to the trade deadline and trades being made. No IOL or S were available. Doesnt mean you just give up improving your roster overall because your biggest needs cant be addressed.

I just addressed this.  No one but Beane knows who was available, or the price being asked.

Edited by LabattBlue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Shake_My_Head said:

He's much better than Singletary as a receiver (the jury's still out on Cook, who hasn't had enough touches to evaluate).    Hines can also play the slot in a pinch.     As a runner, he looks about the same as Motor, with less yards after contact ability (he's a water bug).   

 

Would have liked to add a bigger back for short yardage situations, but I guess that's Josh's role. 

 

 Not this year. About the same targets and yards. Singletary has a receiving td, Hines doesn't. That 1 td is the biggest difference between the 2 as receivers this year. Their results are nearly identical.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great trade!  Moss is gone -- a player who simply doesn't fit this offense.  In comes another weapon out of the backfield, and a legitimate threat as a PR as well.

 

We all knew this was going to be Motor's last year in Buffalo.  He can exit with a ring, and Hines/Cook will carry the torch just fine.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LabattBlue said:

I just addressed this.  No one but Beane knows who was available, or the price being asked.

 

So you think Beane ignored the IOL and S that were available?

 

I mean, a lot of folks had some good ideas on who was available and most turned out true. It isnt hard to figure out when you look at team standings and player contracts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His contract is what really makes me question this trade. 

 

At the end of the day we gave up basically nothing so whatever. Just don't get the move at all. 

 

So Cook is the lead back next year, can he actually handle that role? Or are we going to have a 2nd round backup RB, $5M pass catching RB, and need to spend ANOTHER draft pick on a RB to be the lead guy?

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LOVEMESOMEBILLS said:

 

 Not this year. About the same targets and yards. Singletary has a receiving td, Hines doesn't. That 1 td is the biggest difference between the 2 as receivers this year. Their results are nearly identical.

 

 

I'm not basing it on stats.  I'm going by video and the eyeball test.

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

3 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

No. They traded a day 3 pick plus a RB picked with a 3rd round pick(who never worked out).  So they traded a 3rd and a 5th for Hines, and then may let Singletary go in the off-season to FA...another 3rd round pick.

 

As for the bolded, no one knows what calls were made, or what the asking price were.  You only know that none were traded.

 

No. They traded a day 3 pick plus a RB picked with a 3rd round pick for Hines who was picked with a 4th rounder.

 

So if you are boiling down players for picks, a 3rd and a 5th for a 4th. Not ideal but this isnt how we should look at player trades so.....

Edited by What a Tuel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, newcam2012 said:

Me too. It's an upgrade but not really a splash pick up or a needle mover. Moss was a goner and a 6th isn't much. Muddies things up a bit with Cook there. Good insurance policy. Hard not to approve the move but not doing jumping jacks either. 

I don’t know why people don’t do a little research. Hines is a very good receiver but also a dynamic punt/kickoff returner. He fills several roles with the Bills.

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

Just now, DrDawkinstein said:

 

So you think Beane ignored the IOL and S that were available?

 

I mean, a lot of folks had some good ideas on who was available and most turned out true. It isnt hard to figure out when you look at team standings and player contracts.

...or he didn't like the asking price, but it doesn't 100% mean none were available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:

 

Yeah I know.. but it would be nice if someone else on the team could as well.. even if just so the opposition has someone else to worry about

 

You could always stick a TE back there if you really wanted

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, LOVEMESOMEBILLS said:

 

 This is what I'm thinking. He replaces Moss as the #3 RB. Who knows though he may get here and with all the weapons we have and Allen as QB maybe he'll show he's better than what he's done this year.

 

 

You are way too focused on this year's stats.  Indys offense has fallen off a cliff.  This is an absolute steal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

McK seems OK as a KR

McK has fumbled a kickoff without being touched. Lots of things happen when he touches the ball. Some of them are good. Some of them are not. They are always of high interest. This is not what I want in my return people. I will sacrifice significant upside to know for certain this offense is getting the ball back. In previous years we needed to steal a TD here and there in returns. This is not that year. Catch the ball, run forward rather than sideways, zero turnovers. That is my goal and if I'm honest zero turnovers comes before running forward. Fair catch everything IDGAF.

  • Agree 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...