For the last time:We're not trading Willis

[Albany,n.y.]

Bills: They can't trade their starting RB without a replacement. Earth to those who feel "offended" by Willis-they are not trading him just to replace him with an unknown quantity. The likely scenario is they draft a RB with the HOPE he can eventually replace Willis and if he isn't then they'll deal with the RB situation in 2008. Those of you "offendees" who think we're going to go after RESTRICTED free agents like Michael Turner, wake up-we're not giving SD our 1st round pick & SD won't take anything less from us & will match any offer even if it means trading him to a team that you think will trade for Willis.

 

Willis: It makes no sense for him to force a trade coming off a subpar season. Nobody will trade for him without a new contract & any new contract will be well under the value he thinks he can command with a good season. He & his agent know better than to sign a new contract at the lowest point of his salary potential.

 

Another NFL team: No team will give us a 2 or 3 to rent Willis for a year & he's not signing a new deal until AFTER 2007-See Willis above.

 

So, if it's not a good deal for the current team, the player or another team, why would the Bills trade Willis McGahee? Because he offended you?

[Mikie2times]

Bills: They can't trade their starting RB without a replacement. Earth to those who feel "offended" by Willis-they are not trading him just to replace him with an unknown quantity. The likely scenario is they draft a RB with the HOPE he can eventually replace Willis and if he isn't then they'll deal with the RB situation in 2008. Those of you "offendees" who think we're going to go after RESTRICTED free agents like Michael Turner, wake up-we're not giving SD our 1st round pick & SD won't take anything less from us & will match any offer even if it means trading him to a team that you think will trade for Willis.

 

Willis: It makes no sense for him to force a trade coming off a subpar season. Nobody will trade for him without a new contract & any new contract will be well under the value he thinks he can command with a good season. He & his agent know better than to sign a new contract at the lowest point of his salary potential.

 

Another NFL team: No team will give us a 2 or 3 to rent Willis for a year & he's not signing a new deal until AFTER 2007-See Willis above.

 

So, if it's not a good deal for the current team, the player or another team, why would the Bills trade Willis McGahee? Because he offended you?

The only way possible we trade him is if we draft Lynch. If we knew we wanted Lynch and he was available when we picked, we would most likely draft him and then trade Willis. Look at it from the Bills and McGahee's perspective. You just drafted a player’s successor during a contract year. It would be a major blow to McGahee’s next contract. Fuming would be an understatement to describe how McGahee would feel. Concerned he would go in a Travis Henry like catatonic state; Levy decides to trade him while he still has a small amount of value left. They would start Lynch, because if they didn't think he was an immediate starter they had no business drafting him. To me if we draft Lynch it's more plausible we trade Willis then keep him.

 

Having said all this I think it’s unlikely we draft Lynch.

[reddogblitz]

I agree. Trading Willis now is DUMB. I don't get all of the discontent with the guy. I watched almost every Bills game this year and I think the guy is amazing. Sure he didn't get the 4th and 1 against NE and a few others. But go back and watch some of his runs. He consistently gets 5,6 or more yards are runs that look he'll get 0 but someway somehow get s a good gain. A "subpar" running back would have run for around 600 this year. 990s not bad when you played part of the year with broken ribs and no blocking.

 

He's a hores's ass, so what. A lot of good atheles are. Michael Jordan had gambling issues but everyone loved him anyway. Wilt Chamberlin brags to having had sex with 100,000 women. Does anyone know how many children out of wedlock BB King has? Which, he supports them all by the way. 18 or 19. Gonna trade all your BB King CDs for a bag of peanuts?

 

Trading Willis for a 4th or 5th rounder would be just plain dumb. If we do trade him, he'll be amazing for whoever we trade him too. Then you can complain that we shouldn't have traded a superstar.

 

We got bigger problems than RB, like OL and run defense. Let's work on that.

[JimBob2232]

Agree with all. Only issue I have is that willis is no better than a rookie RB IMO. IF we can trade him for a 2nd round pick, and take a RB there, I wouldnt be against it. But i dont think we can for the reasons stated here.

[Dibs]

Bills: They can't trade their starting RB without a replacement. Earth to those who feel "offended" by Willis-they are not trading him just to replace him with an unknown quantity. The likely scenario is they draft a RB with the HOPE he can eventually replace Willis and if he isn't then they'll deal with the RB situation in 2008. Those of you "offendees" who think we're going to go after RESTRICTED free agents like Michael Turner, wake up-we're not giving SD our 1st round pick & SD won't take anything less from us & will match any offer even if it means trading him to a team that you think will trade for Willis.

 

Willis: It makes no sense for him to force a trade coming off a subpar season. Nobody will trade for him without a new contract & any new contract will be well under the value he thinks he can command with a good season. He & his agent know better than to sign a new contract at the lowest point of his salary potential.

 

Another NFL team: No team will give us a 2 or 3 to rent Willis for a year & he's not signing a new deal until AFTER 2007-See Willis above.

 

So, if it's not a good deal for the current team, the player or another team, why would the Bills trade Willis McGahee? Because he offended you?

Good post.

I've been toying with creating a thread saying the exact same thing for days now.

One additional point to yours.......

Most would consider our biggest need to be OG(the rest would say DT)......either way, OG is a very big need for us.

What is it that OGs do?

 

If we improve the interior of the OL, it is only logical that WM has a much better season in 2007. Then, he will be a FA & we can do with him as we like. We can tag him & trade him. If he shows he can be really productive behind a good OL, we can re-sign him. Basically, we could well have a hot commodity with some form of controlling power.

Who would want to give much for him at the moment?

 

It all comes back to.....FIX THE OL

[Max997]

Bills: They can't trade their starting RB without a replacement. Earth to those who feel "offended" by Willis-they are not trading him just to replace him with an unknown quantity. The likely scenario is they draft a RB with the HOPE he can eventually replace Willis and if he isn't then they'll deal with the RB situation in 2008. Those of you "offendees" who think we're going to go after RESTRICTED free agents like Michael Turner, wake up-we're not giving SD our 1st round pick & SD won't take anything less from us & will match any offer even if it means trading him to a team that you think will trade for Willis.

 

Willis: It makes no sense for him to force a trade coming off a subpar season. Nobody will trade for him without a new contract & any new contract will be well under the value he thinks he can command with a good season. He & his agent know better than to sign a new contract at the lowest point of his salary potential.

 

Another NFL team: No team will give us a 2 or 3 to rent Willis for a year & he's not signing a new deal until AFTER 2007-See Willis above.

 

So, if it's not a good deal for the current team, the player or another team, why would the Bills trade Willis McGahee? Because he offended you?

 

 

I agree the Bills wouldnt trade McGahee until they have a replacement but dont act like it would be hard to replace him, RB is the easiest and quickest impact position for a rookie to play and any halfway decent back could put up the same or better numbers Willis did with the same number of touches

 

I could care less what the guy said, he just isnt as good as advertised and doesnt play hard on every play, thats more then enough of a reason to replace him

[JimBob2232]

I agree the Bills wouldnt trade McGahee until they have a replacement but dont act like it would be hard to replace him, RB is the easiest and quickest impact position for a rookie to play and any halfway decent back could put up the same or better numbers Willis did with the same number of touches

 

I could care less what the guy said, he just isnt as good as advertised and doesnt play hard on every play, thats more then enough of a reason to replace him

 

Seriously. Name a team with (clearly) a worse running back than mcgahee.

 

Possibilites

Jets

Browns

....crickets...crickets...I cant think of any more.

 

While there are clearly very good backs in the league, there are a glut of average backs. He has no leverage here. This is ridiculous.

[Dibs]

I agree the Bills wouldnt trade McGahee until they have a replacement but dont act like it would be hard to replace him, RB is the easiest and quickest impact position for a rookie to play and any halfway decent back could put up the same or better numbers Willis did with the same number of touches....

I'd think there is a lot of truth in what you say here....but.....it's not to say that simply spending your 1st round pick on a RB will mean you have said 'halfway decent back'.

 

Here is a list going back to 1995 of all 1st round RBs.....BUSTS IN BOLD

 

#1 Ki-Jana Carter

#2 Ronnie Brown

#4 Edgerrin James

#4 Cedric Benson

#5 Curtis Enis

#5 Ricky Williams?????

#5 Jamal Lewis

#5 LaDainian Tomlinson

#5 Cadillac Williams?????

#6 Lawrence Phillips

#7 Thomas Jones

#8 Tim Biakabutuka

#9 Fred Taylor

#11 Ron Dayne

#12 Warrick Dunn

#14 Eddie George

#16 William Green

#17 Tyrone Wheatley

#18 Napoleon Kaufman

#18 Robert Edwards

#18 T.J. Duckett

#19 James Stewart

#19 Shaun Alexander

#21 Rashaan Salaam

#23 Antowain Smith

#23 Deuce McAllister

#23 Willis McGahee?????

#24 Steven Jackson

#26 Chris Perry

#27 Michael Bennett

#27 Larry Johnson

#29 John Avery

#30 Kevin Jones

#31 Trung Canidate

 

That's 34 RBs with 20 definitely BUSTS.....with another 3 ?????.

 

That's 16 RBs within the top 14(where we are looking).....with 7 busts & 2 ?????.

 

As you can see, spending your 1st pick on a RB when you already have one is excessive luxury since MOST end up being BUSTS.

[beerme1]

RB may be the easiest position in the modern era to replace. Ther are lots of fast guys that can dance. Probably many more that dance north and south as opposed to Willis' east and west dance.

And I believe it is the most likely position to find a diamond in the rough. And I think we have had that happen here, dont you?

[Albany,n.y.]

If it was that simple to draft a RB in the second round & plug him in with enough confidence in him before you even get him in camp to dump Willis, then you must think that there are no busts or mediocre RBs that high in the draft.

The bottom line is, you don't really know what you have in a draft choice until you get him into camp & the exhibition games and see how he plays against NFL caliber players. Not every 2nd rounder turns into Thurman Thomas. Last year Tennessee picked LenDale White at pick 45 in the 2nd (ahead of Maurice Jones-Drew) and I haven't seen anything to indicate he could have been their #1 back. Even Drew succeeded as a #2 RB. In 2005 at pick 44 Arizona got a dud in JJ Arrington. For 2004, the 3 backs taken Tatum Bell, Julius Jones and Greg Jones are a big dropoff in talent from Willis. In 2003 (after 1st rounders Willis & Larry Johnson), no RBs were taken in the 2nd and the 3rd rounders were Musa Smith, B.J. Askew, Chris Brown & Justin Fargas.

By now you should be seeing the picture: you just don't give up a proven starter & dial up his replacement in the 2nd round. There are a lot of busts & below average RBs that get taken in the 2nd (and 3rd) round . Choosing a RB at pick 12 to trade Willis for a 2 or 3 is even more insane.

 

Edit: I type slowly & wrote this before the 1st round busts were listed. That post shows even more that you just don't dial up a RB and get a starter.

[Albany,n.y.]

RB may be the easiest position in the modern era to replace. Ther are lots of fast guys that can dance. Probably many more that dance north and south as opposed to Willis' east and west dance.

And I believe it is the most likely position to find a diamond in the rough. And I think we have had that happen here, dont you?

Then in the 7 rounds of the draft, lets draft 3 or 4 RBs & we'll probably get a good starter out of one of them, while our D will get a lot worse than this year after losing Clements & London F-B.

[beerme1]

Albany, I type fast and often mispell.

But you are talking about a proven RB who is average.

I personally am more than willing to roll the dice and potentially land a stud vs average.

 

Holy chit he's average. He is not a stud. Had he continued to use the stiff arm that exhibated two years agao, I believe he would be great! But he wont/cant whatever. The dude is average and is quickly becoming a cancer.

And we as fans deserve more than the crap we are getting from the likes of him and his Drew. I hope Marv agrees.

[JimBob2232]

I'd think there is a lot of truth in what you say here....but.....it's not to say that simply spending your 1st round pick on a RB will mean you have said 'halfway decent back'.

 

Here is a list going back to 1995 of all 1st round RBs.....BUSTS IN BOLD

 

#1 Ki-Jana Carter

#4 Cedric Benson - Calling him a bust after 2 years is a bit of a stretch.

#5 Curtis Enis

#6 Lawrence Phillips - Who didnt see this one coming?

#7 Thomas Jones - Has run for over 2500 yards the last 2 years. How is he a bust?

#8 Tim Biakabutuka

#11 Ron Dayne

#16 William Green

#17 Tyrone Wheatley - Had one 1000 yard season. Often split time with Kaufman

#18 Napoleon Kaufman - Had one 1000 yard season. Often split time with Wheatley

#18 Robert Edwards - 1100 yards rookie year, then had a career ending injury (practially)

#18 T.J. Duckett - 11 Touchdowns in 2003

#19 James Stewart - 2 1000 yard seasons

#21 Rashaan Salaam - 1000 yards and 10 TDs rookie year

#23 Antowain Smith - 2 1000 yard seasons, scored 13 TDs in 2001

#26 Chris Perry

#27 Michael Bennett - Nearly 1300 yards in 2002

#29 John Avery

#30 Kevin Jones - 1100 yards his rookie year

#31 Trung Canidate

 

Not sure what you consider a bust, but of the 20 "Busts" you mention 10 of them have had 1000 yard seasons, one is only 2 years into his career, at least two had career ending injuries. I see 9 guys i would label as "Busts". And even then, Chris Perry and Ron Dayne are questionable IMO. Point remains, there are a few elite backs, most of the rest of the RBs are the same. They are pretty much a dime a dozen and any can have just as good a year as the next guy.

[Dibs]

Not sure what you consider a bust, but of the 20 "Busts" you mention 10 of them have had 1000 yard seasons, one is only 2 years into his career, at least two had career ending injuries. I see 9 guys i would label as "Busts". And even then, Chris Perry and Ron Dayne are questionable IMO. Point remains, there are a few elite backs, most of the rest of the RBs are the same. They are pretty much a dime a dozen and any can have just as good a year as the next guy.

I'm not sure what you want from your 'replacement 1st round RB'. I want better production than we got from WM.....NEXT SEASON!!!!.....which I believe we will easily get from WM if we FIX THE OL & address our biggest area of need the OGs.

 

Benson.....we are talking about slotting in a RB who can get the job done. He may turn his career around but for our purposes he would basically leave us with A.Thomas as a leading back.

 

Thomas Jones is a bust for similar reasons to Benson...373, 380, 511 yards in first 3 seasons then the Cardinals gave up & said goodbye. Again, that is not what we want from our 1st round pick that should be spent on areas of need.

 

Tyrone Wheatley 245, 400, 583....see above

 

Napoleon Kaufman...see above

 

Robert Edwards & Ki-Jana Carter injury is all part of not making it.....RB is an injury prone position, the change up from College to pros may well be the reason for so many early RB injuries.....maybe not but one certainly can't count these guys as non-busts.

 

T.J. Duckett 507, 779, 509, 380....bye bye, new team. See above yet again.

 

James Stewart...see above

 

Rashaan Salaam 1000 yards rookie season followed by 496 then 112. Is that what you want?

 

Antowain Smith Obviously he wasn't good enough for us....

 

Michael Bennett Nearly 1300 yards in 2002????? Nearly 700 in 2001 & nearly 450 in 2003.....280 in 2004

Kevin Jones - 1100 yards his rookie year......& nothing since.

 

Thankyou for making me justify my list.

Simply, none of those guys achieved consistently what WM has done for us behind a garbage line......from their rookie years.

 

That's not to say WM is great.....it is simply saying that 1st round RBs.....like ALL 1st round picks.....are at best a 50-50 proposition.

[keepthefaith]

Albany, I type fast and often mispell.

But you are talking about a proven RB who is average.

I personally am more than willing to roll the dice and potentially land a stud vs average.

 

Holy chit he's average. He is not a stud. Had he continued to use the stiff arm that exhibated two years agao, I believe he would be great! But he wont/cant whatever. The dude is average and is quickly becoming a cancer.

And we as fans deserve more than the crap we are getting from the likes of him and his Drew. I hope Marv agrees.

 

OK. I've bashed Willis plenty on this board but look at it this way. Maybe Willis has bottomed out right now. Coming off an uninspiring year, he has said a bunch of stupid stuff to media people that ask him baited questions. He's fathered apparently at least 3 kids. Maybe as of now he starts to get a clue. Maybe the Bills recognize where he stands right now and get him some mentoring. Give him a little advice. Willis figures out what to say and what not to say in public. He realizes that having 3 baby mommas each reaching into one of his pockets is painful. He doesn't like the public critism directed his way. Maybe somebody reminds him that at his position, even if he is healthy and productive, he has 5-7 good years left in his football career. He realizes, Holy schitt, he better get going. Suddenly he commits himself in the off season to improvement. He attends the optional activities in Buffalo. He stays in town more to study film. Meets with coaches. He works on his footspeed and footwork with a good trainer. Maybe he gets a new contract, maybe he doesn't. The Bills make some off-season upgrades on the O-line. Either way, he feels he has something to prove next year. He shows up at training camp ready to go. He gives maximum effort on each play in each game. He plays smarter. He has the kind of year people hope for.

 

Pipe dream? Maybe not. Guys do grow up during their NFL careers. Not all, but why not Willis? He might take that step this next year.

[BoondckCL]

Not sure what you consider a bust, but of the 20 "Busts" you mention 10 of them have had 1000 yard seasons, one is only 2 years into his career, at least two had career ending injuries. I see 9 guys i would label as "Busts". And even then, Chris Perry and Ron Dayne are questionable IMO. Point remains, there are a few elite backs, most of the rest of the RBs are the same. They are pretty much a dime a dozen and any can have just as good a year as the next guy.

 

I think you are forgetting two things. Cedric Benson is on a team compeating for the Super Bowl, and Antwain Smith has won two. Busts? I don't think so.

 

 

Sorry Dibs, usually agree with a lot that you say, but on this I can't say I am completely sold.

[Dibs]

I think you are forgetting two things. Cedric Benson is on a team compeating for the Super Bowl, and Antwain Smith has won two. Busts? I don't think so.

Sorry Dibs, usually agree with a lot that you say, but on this I can't say I am completely sold.

I agree with the assessment you guys have of these players.......just not in the context we are looking at.

 

We are looking to replace our perennial 1000yard(pretty much) rusher who has run behind bad OLs with a 1st round draft pick.

By "Bust" in this instance I meant not good enough to be an improvement on WM.

 

Benson.....272yards as a rookie followed by 647 is not going to be an improvement on WM.

A.Smith.....looks decent enough at times but is obviously not consistent enough.

 

Neither RB.....in the short nor long term would have me or many others happy with spending our 1st round pick when we had a serviceable(though flawed) RB signed on the roster who was producing better with more consistancy.

[Pyrite Gal]

Many posters who try to justify (or argue for or whatever language you want to use) trading WM for a draft choice (likely folks seem to think he would comman a 3rd plus or minus one round seems to be the general consensus) seem to be treating the idea that RB is the easiest position to fill in the draft with the idea that drafting a starting RB is easy to do.

 

The two are very different things and though the first is true (its easier to find a stud RB in the draft than it is to find a stud QB, SB or any other position is something I agree with). However, just because this is true simply does not mean that finding a stud RB in the draft is an easy thing to do.

 

Basically many fans simply overvalue the draft. They seem to remember the Peyton Mannings and forget the Ryan Leafs. Last year's Bills draft is an interesting example. The general consensus is that the pundits deserve to eat crow for badmouthing the Levy led draft (I agree). However. remember that this is true even though the actual results produced by the 3 picks this Marv led team made on the 1st day simply were quite unproductive as rookies.

 

Whitner started out with great plaudits winning rookie of the month plaudits and finished second on the Bills with over 100 tackles, but even with this he is a controversial choice for many and due to injury and the death of his mother, the Bears simply got very limited production from 2 of their 3 choices in a draft which turned out to be very solid for this team because a bunch of second day choices stood up.

 

Likewise trading WM even if you got a second for him is such a speculative maneuver that really it would be no surprise if he turned out to be one of 2 of 3 first day Bills choices that gave little to the Bills if the 07 crew produces like the 06 draftees.

 

A few fans may care so much about WM's attitude towards women and his crack financial management advice that they would prefer a speculative draft choice to an NFL vet, but it seems doubtful that Marv or Ralph whose football work is tied to the Bills and whose football careers are probably countable on one hand (or at most two if they are very very very lucky will be willing to roll the dice and depend on s draft choice becoming our starting RB.

 

The concept that anyone commited to winning football is going to depend so much on a rookie RB is simply foolish.

[beerme1]

He gives maximum effort on each play in each game. He plays smarter. He has the kind of year people hope for.

 

Pipe dream? Maybe not. Guys do grow up during their NFL careers. Not all, but why not Willis? He might take that step this next year.

 

I'll except that and say if he is out to prove something in a money year it should only benefit us.

[Gordio]

Many posters who try to justify (or argue for or whatever language you want to use) trading WM for a draft choice (likely folks seem to think he would comman a 3rd plus or minus one round seems to be the general consensus) seem to be treating the idea that RB is the easiest position to fill in the draft with the idea that drafting a starting RB is easy to do.

 

The two are very different things and though the first is true (its easier to find a stud RB in the draft than it is to find a stud QB, SB or any other position is something I agree with). However, just because this is true simply does not mean that finding a stud RB in the draft is an easy thing to do.

 

Basically many fans simply overvalue the draft. They seem to remember the Peyton Mannings and forget the Ryan Leafs. Last year's Bills draft is an interesting example. The general consensus is that the pundits deserve to eat crow for badmouthing the Levy led draft (I agree). However. remember that this is true even though the actual results produced by the 3 picks this Marv led team made on the 1st day simply were quite unproductive as rookies.

 

Whitner started out with great plaudits winning rookie of the month plaudits and finished second on the Bills with over 100 tackles, but even with this he is a controversial choice for many and due to injury and the death of his mother, the Bears simply got very limited production from 2 of their 3 choices in a draft which turned out to be very solid for this team because a bunch of second day choices stood up.

 

Likewise trading WM even if you got a second for him is such a speculative maneuver that really it would be no surprise if he turned out to be one of 2 of 3 first day Bills choices that gave little to the Bills if the 07 crew produces like the 06 draftees.

 

A few fans may care so much about WM's attitude towards women and his crack financial management advice that they would prefer a speculative draft choice to an NFL vet, but it seems doubtful that Marv or Ralph whose football work is tied to the Bills and whose football careers are probably countable on one hand (or at most two if they are very very very lucky will be willing to roll the dice and depend on s draft choice becoming our starting RB.

 

The concept that anyone commited to winning football is going to depend so much on a rookie RB is simply foolish.

 

 

Could you try to shorten your posts. You have alot of good points but for Christ's sakes I get a headache everytime I read them from start to finish.