A little perspective: what happened the last time we traded

[OCinBuffalo]

The trade went down like this:

To Eagles:

Kelly Holcomb and Takeo Spikes

To Bills:

Darwin Walker and what ended up being a 7th.

 

Result For Bills:

Bills trade Walker to Chicago for their 5th, use their 5th and their extra 3rd(from Baltimore) to get Marcus Stroud. Bills use 7th for Steve Johnson --> who I think is going to be very good.

Result for Eagles:

Spikes and Holcomb both released after the 2008 season. Holcomb did not play, Spikes did little other than get hurt, again.

 

Media(and some posters here) at the time:

"The Bills can't keep recycling players"

"The Bills are giving away their whole team"

"The Bills didn't get value/could have gotten more for Spikes"

"The Bills just traded their best LB, and one of the best players on the team for nothing other than a malcontent DT"

etc. etc. etc.

 

Clearly the media(and some posters here) were astoundingly wrong in their assessment of that trade. Clearly the Bills absolutely owned the Eagles on that trade. Clearly this same front office absolutely owned the Ravens on the McGahee trade. Clearly posters here love to invoke historical statistics and "who did what" divided by "# of championships", etc.

 

So my question is: If you look at this FO objectively(I know that is impossible for some here), and measure them based on their track record of trades they have made so far, how can you automatically assume that they are wrong, when all they have been is 100% right?

 

The historical statistics have our current FO 2, Other guys 0, in trades with existing players, and I would call the Poz trade up an easy win as well. Why should we ignore these stats? What makes you think that the same guys who got us Stroud, Johnson and Poz for McGahee(now backup RB) and Spikes(now playing for SF, what else do you need to know?), have screwed up so MASSIVELY with Peters?

[murra]

We hardly owned them on that trade. In retrospect we were able to use the picks effectively, but I'm passing that off to being lucky, and not correct analysis. Walker never dressed and it allowed our team and front office to be exposed for the clowns that they are.

[PromoTheRobot]

Answer: hatin' is easier.

 

PTR

[San Jose Bills Fan]

That was all Marv Levy's doing wasn't it? Good point though either way.

[LABills08]

The trade went down like this:

To Eagles:

Kelly Holcomb and Takeo Spikes

To Bills:

Darwin Walker and what ended up being a 7th.

 

Result For Bills:

Bills trade Walker to Chicago for their 5th, use their 5th and their extra 3rd(from Baltimore) to get Marcus Stroud. Bills use 7th for Steve Johnson --> who I think is going to be very good.

Result for Eagles:

Spikes and Holcomb both released after the 2008 season. Holcomb did not play, Spikes did little other than get hurt, again.

 

Media(and some posters here) at the time:

"The Bills can't keep recycling players"

"The Bills are giving away their whole team"

"The Bills didn't get value/could have gotten more for Spikes"

"The Bills just traded their best LB, and one of the best players on the team for nothing other than a malcontent DT"

etc. etc. etc.

 

Clearly the media(and some posters here) were astoundingly wrong in their assessment of that trade. Clearly the Bills absolutely owned the Eagles on that trade. Clearly this same front office absolutely owned the Ravens on the McGahee trade. Clearly posters here love to invoke historical statistics and "who did what" divided by "# of championships", etc.

 

So my question is: If you look at this FO objectively(I know that is impossible for some here), and measure them based on their track record of trades they have made so far, how can you automatically assume that they are wrong, when all they have been is 100% right?

 

The historical statistics have our current FO 2, Other guys 0, in trades with existing players, and I would call the Poz trade up an easy win as well. Why should we ignore these stats? What makes you think that the same guys who got us Stroud, Johnson and Poz for McGahee(now backup RB) and Spikes(now playing for SF, what else do you need to know?), have screwed up so MASSIVELY with Peters?

 

 

Decent point. But we still didn't make the playoffs.

[lets_go_bills]

The Eagles got an elite LT who's 26 and only entering his prime.

[Steely Dan]

The trade went down like this:

To Eagles:

Kelly Holcomb and Takeo Spikes

To Bills:

Darwin Walker and what ended up being a 7th.

 

Result For Bills:

Bills trade Walker to Chicago for their 5th, use their 5th and their extra 3rd(from Baltimore) to get Marcus Stroud. Bills use 7th for Steve Johnson --> who I think is going to be very good.

Result for Eagles:

Spikes and Holcomb both released after the 2008 season. Holcomb did not play, Spikes did little other than get hurt, again.

 

Media(and some posters here) at the time:

"The Bills can't keep recycling players"

"The Bills are giving away their whole team"

"The Bills didn't get value/could have gotten more for Spikes"

"The Bills just traded their best LB, and one of the best players on the team for nothing other than a malcontent DT"

etc. etc. etc.

 

Clearly the media(and some posters here) were astoundingly wrong in their assessment of that trade. Clearly the Bills absolutely owned the Eagles on that trade. Clearly this same front office absolutely owned the Ravens on the McGahee trade. Clearly posters here love to invoke historical statistics and "who did what" divided by "# of championships", etc.

 

So my question is: If you look at this FO objectively(I know that is impossible for some here), and measure them based on their track record of trades they have made so far, how can you automatically assume that they are wrong, when all they have been is 100% right?

 

The historical statistics have our current FO 2, Other guys 0, in trades with existing players, and I would call the Poz trade up an easy win as well. Why should we ignore these stats? What makes you think that the same guys who got us Stroud, Johnson and Poz for McGahee(now backup RB) and Spikes(now playing for SF, what else do you need to know?), have screwed up so MASSIVELY with Peters?

 

A lot of people didn't realize that Spikes was going to be cut anyway and the Bills picking anything up for him was a good trade. The McGahee trade was a steal for Buffalo as was the Stroud trade. People keep busting on Russ but he's made a lot of great moves as GM.

[PromoTheRobot]

We hardly owned them on that trade. In retrospect we were able to use the picks effectively, but I'm passing that off to being lucky, and not correct analysis. Walker never dressed and it allowed our team and front office to be exposed for the clowns that they are.

Bills win = luck

Bills lose = incompetence

 

Sort of like you. When you are right about something, you got lucky.

 

PTR

[Ramius]

The trade went down like this:

To Eagles:

Kelly Holcomb and Takeo Spikes

To Bills:

Darwin Walker and what ended up being a 7th.

 

Result For Bills:

Bills trade Walker to Chicago for their 5th, use their 5th and their extra 3rd(from Baltimore) to get Marcus Stroud. Bills use 7th for Steve Johnson --> who I think is going to be very good.

Result for Eagles:

Spikes and Holcomb both released after the 2008 season. Holcomb did not play, Spikes did little other than get hurt, again.

 

Media(and some posters here) at the time:

"The Bills can't keep recycling players"

"The Bills are giving away their whole team"

"The Bills didn't get value/could have gotten more for Spikes"

"The Bills just traded their best LB, and one of the best players on the team for nothing other than a malcontent DT"

etc. etc. etc.

 

Clearly the media(and some posters here) were astoundingly wrong in their assessment of that trade. Clearly the Bills absolutely owned the Eagles on that trade. Clearly this same front office absolutely owned the Ravens on the McGahee trade. Clearly posters here love to invoke historical statistics and "who did what" divided by "# of championships", etc.

 

So my question is: If you look at this FO objectively(I know that is impossible for some here), and measure them based on their track record of trades they have made so far, how can you automatically assume that they are wrong, when all they have been is 100% right?

 

The historical statistics have our current FO 2, Other guys 0, in trades with existing players, and I would call the Poz trade up an easy win as well. Why should we ignore these stats? What makes you think that the same guys who got us Stroud, Johnson and Poz for McGahee(now backup RB) and Spikes(now playing for SF, what else do you need to know?), have screwed up so MASSIVELY with Peters?

 

Good post, and i'd also like to compliment you on your use of the word "rogered." It's a highly amusing word that is extremely underused.

[Cornerville]

The Eagles got an elite LT who's 26 and only entering his prime.

 

 

No...NO!!! He sucks, he is fat, lazy and was NEVER good...didn't you get the memo??

[murra]

Bills win = luck

Bills lose = incompetence

 

Sort of like you. When you are right about something, you got lucky.

 

PTR

 

Way to generalize my entire statement. Speaking of not having a positive attitude, how's that working out for you? Oh wait, you just attempted to put me down because I had a different opinion than you, didn't you?

[Steely Dan]

The Eagles got an elite LT who's 26 and who's play has only been declining. entering his prime.

 

Fixed!

[Jerry Jabber]

We're split here. I'm glad we traded Peters, while there are a bunch that think it was a wrong move & we should of broke the bank on him.

 

Bottom line, the trade is over. Only time will tell if the trade is a good one by many factors. Will Peters be a dominating LT in Philly? If so, how long will he play at that level?

Will Peters hold out in Philly in a few years and pull the same antics with the Eagles as he did with us?

Who will we get with those 3 draft picks?

How well will those draft picks turn out?

Will the 3 draft picks eventually be worth lesser, equal or greater than the play we could have gotten from Peters?

[Steely Dan]

Bills win = luck

Bills lose = incompetence

 

Sort of like you. When you are right about something, you got lucky.

 

PTR

 

 

 

Good post, and i'd also like to compliment you on your use of the word "rogered." It's a highly amusing word that is extremely underused.

 

Rogered over and out!

[OCinBuffalo]

We hardly owned them on that trade. In retrospect we were able to use the picks effectively, but I'm passing that off to being lucky, and not correct analysis. Walker never dressed and it allowed our team and front office to be exposed for the clowns that they are.

So the good results we got were not in fact good results, just lucky results...therefore, according to your logic, the bad results the Eagles got must not be bad results, but merely unlucky results?

 

Dude, we traded them a guy we KNEW was a peg leg and a guy who wasn't worth a bag a balls for a starting DT. In what universe doesn't that qualify and an owning? There's not much "analysis" needed if you can get a team that is as well off as the Eagles to buy your injured/crap with starting talent. If I was the Bills FO, I'd be thinking, "well I screwed em last time, why wouldn't they fall for it again?"

 

Also, then how do you explain the McGahee trade? Lucky as well?

[murra]

So the good results we got were not in fact good results, just lucky results...therefore, according to your logic, the bad results the Eagles got must not be bad results, but merely unlucky results?

 

Dude, we traded them a guy we KNEW was a peg leg and a guy who wasn't worth a bag a balls for a starting DT. In what universe doesn't that qualify and an owning? There's not much "analysis" needed if you can get a team that is as well off as the Eagles to buy your injured/crap with starting talent. If I was the Bills FO, I'd be thinking, "well I screwed em last time, why wouldn't they fall for it again?"

 

Also, then how do you explain the McGahee trade? Lucky as well?

 

I'm not denying we won that trade. I said it was hardly an owning. The starting DT never came here. Therefore it's not an owning. How do you not understand that. I've never called anything luck before (this is the first time I see it as being so), but the Bills F.O. hardly made the trade for a 5th with the intention of using that pick with a trade somehow for Stroud.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

...and I would call the Poz trade up an easy win as well. Why should we ignore these stats? What makes you think that the same guys who got us Stroud, Johnson and Poz for McGahee(now backup RB) and Spikes(now playing for SF, what else do you need to know?), have screwed up so MASSIVELY with Peters?

The outcome of Poszluzny trade, despite the fact that I'm a big fan of his, is not clear. The Bills gave up #43 (470 pts) and #74 (220 pts) for the #34 pick (560 pts) to draft Posz.

 

So we overpaid by 130 pts which is equivalent to the 92nd pick in the draft, a late 3rd rounder.

 

Put differently we traded a high 2nd and a high 3rd for a higher 2nd. We moved up 9 spots and gave up a high 3rd rounder for the privilege. We should have gotten another pick back. The jury is still out on this one.

[Steely Dan]

I'm not denying we won that trade. I said it was hardly an owning. The starting DT never came here. Therefore it's not an owning. How do you not understand that. I've never called anything luck before (this is the first time I see it as being so), but the Bills F.O. hardly made the trade for a 5th with the intention of using that pick with a trade somehow for Stroud.

 

The guy never came here but the Bills managed to get a better pick than they gave up for him. I'd call that a very smart way to make lemonade out of lemons. I think the Bills FO came out looking pretty damn good. Especially when you consider that he only played one season for the Bears. JMO

[murra]

The guy never came here but the Bills managed to get a better pick than they gave up for him. I'd call that a very smart way to make lemonade out of lemons. I think the Bills FO came out looking pretty damn good. Especially when you consider that he only played one season for the Bears. JMO

 

Yeah, it worked out. Not the way the F.O. intended. (is luck really not a factor? really? you're not going to merit chance at all??)

[OCinBuffalo]

I'm not denying we won that trade. I said it was hardly an owning. The starting DT never came here. Therefore it's not an owning. How do you not understand that. I've never called anything luck before (this is the first time I see it as being so), but the Bills F.O. hardly made the trade for a 5th with the intention of using that pick with a trade somehow for Stroud.

And if the world stopped and started at your convenience you would be right, but it doesn't, so you are not.

 

The point is there's no way in hell you can start a "let's trade for Stroud" plan intentionally. Certainly not a year and a half in advance. The point is that you stockpile value in every move you make, and then spend that when and where you can get the best bang for the buck. They used pick after pick, trade after trade to stockpile value, and then spent it immediately when Stroud came available.

 

The end of the argument point is: they could not have acted on Stroud had they not made the moves they made, and that's all that ultimately matters.