Question for Pat....Op....etc

[Devin]

1. Would you have Signed Dockery?

2. Would you have re-signed Fletcher?

3. Would you have re-signed Nate?

4. Would you have signed Whittle?

5. Would you have signed Walker?

6. Would you have traded McGahee? (considering his actions and what we got for him?)

7. Would you trade TKO? (considering his request)


Just curious your answers....not "what you would do"....etc.

[OpIv37]

1. Would you have Signed Dockery?

2. Would you have re-signed Fletcher?

3. Would you have re-signed Nate?

4. Would you have signed Whittle?

5. Would you have signed Walker?

6. Would you have traded McGahee? (considering his actions and what we got for him?)

7. Would you trade TKO? (considering his request)


Just curious your answers....not "what you would do"....etc.

1. Yes

2. This is a tough one- if TKO REALLY requested a trade in February and his departure was seen as imminent, it might have been worth re-signing him to a two-year deal. If the intent is to keep TKO, then no, I probably would not have re-signed him.

3. No- I would have signed Nick Harper.

4. Yes- depth move.

5. Yes, although I would have preferred that he got less money, but the entire FA market is over-inflated this year.

6. Yes- I don't really view McGahee as a loss because his attitude and production were both piss-poor. I consider it a position that could have been upgraded but wasn't (although RB's who can start from Day 1 are available in the draft, so I don't see this as a glaring hole just yet).

7. Absolutely not. We're short on LB's and short on experience on D. He can suck it up for a year. To motivate him, I might even find a way to restructure his contract so he gets the same amount this year but gets to stay for a decent amount next year if certain incentives are reached this year.

[justasportsfan]

To motivate him, I might even find a way to restructure his contract so he gets the same amount this year but gets to stay for a decent amount next year if certain incentives are reached this year.


haha! You honestly think he'd rather sign for another year here instead of signing with someone to multiple years ? You're dreaming.

[FlyingDutchman]

1. Yes

2. This is a tough one- if TKO REALLY requested a trade in February and his departure was seen as imminent, it might have been worth re-signing him to a two-year deal. If the intent is to keep TKO, then no, I probably would not have re-signed him.

3. No- I would have signed Nick Harper.

4. Yes- depth move.

5. Yes, although I would have preferred that he got less money, but the entire FA market is over-inflated this year.

6. Yes- I don't really view McGahee as a loss because his attitude and production were both piss-poor. I consider it a position that could have been upgraded but wasn't (although RB's who can start from Day 1 are available in the draft, so I don't see this as a glaring hole just yet).

7. Absolutely not. We're short on LB's and short on experience on D. He can suck it up for a year. To motivate him, I might even find a way to restructure his contract so he gets the same amount this year but gets to stay for a decent amount next year if certain incentives are reached this year.

so you just agreed with everything except paying an overrated player the highest paid contract for a defensive player in history, and simply assuming nick harper would sign with us, and you wouldnt trade a guy who makes 4.5 and may not be worth 450k after all is said and done. we're a small market team. we cant take those chances. i hate to see TKO go to, but you seem to agree with a lot of the moves so why so negative about the FO all the time?

[YardRat]

You left out...

8. Would you have resigned Kelsay?

9. Would you have resigned K.Thomas?

10. Would you have resigned A.Thomas?

[patmoran2006]

1. Would you have Signed Dockery?
Absolutely.

2. Would you have re-signed Fletcher?
Yes, instead of Kelsay. and they got about the same $.

3. Would you have re-signed Nate?
Not a chance

4. Would you have signed Whittle?
yes, ONLY cause his SB was only 40 grand and we have too much youth at guard.

5. Would you have signed Walker?
Never in a million years. His money (and it was the same) woulda went to Travis Henry and with A-Train we have a punnishing backfield. Henry is also an underated pass catcher. I was confident enough in Pennington at RT. I dont trust any Raider linemen.

6. Would you have traded McGahee? (considering his actions and what we got for him?)
yes. I did and still think it was the right trade.

7. Would you trade TKO? (considering his request)
Yes, but its irrelevant here because I just stated I'd have brought back Fletcher and I would've given Cato June the similar deal TB did. IF FLetcher was gone (and he is) then I wouldnt trade him.


Just curious your answers....not "what you would do"....etc.
my answers/opinions are in bold. To take it a small step further, if those were the moves that the Bills made and I got to play GM, then i'd be looking at a DL like Okoye or Carriker with my first draft pick, and I'd be looking to get into the late first round to take Bowe/Meacham or Sidney Rice so Evans can have a real #2 WR. And with my 2nd third rounder I'd be looking at the best LB available to combine with Ellison for quality depth(we have ZERO depth at LB )

as for FA, I would not have spent much more than the Bills and their "cash to cap".. Henry takes out Walker, FLetcher takes out Kelsay--- the only additional signing I have on there is June.

I woulda hoped for two other moves and neither are by any means unrealistic Snyder-style spending.

Signing Nick Harper to play corner and let Youboty groom. Harper is a cover two guy.

Signing Justin Griffith to play fullback.
(June, Harper and Griffith-going by the exact deals they got- would've counted for roughly $7 million against the cap this year- leaving us with over 12 million) and maybe at most $10 million over the "cash to crap" philosophy.

[patmoran2006]

You left out...

8. Would you have resigned Kelsay?
No

9. Would you have resigned K.Thomas?
No.. I sign Nick Harper.

10. Would you have resigned A.Thomas?
yes I would've

[HHURRICANE]

1. Would you have Signed Dockery? ABSOLUTELY

2. Would you have re-signed Fletcher? NO

3. Would you have re-signed Nate? NO

4. Would you have signed Whittle? YES, HE WAS CHEAP

5. Would you have signed Walker? NO

6. Would you have traded McGahee? (considering his actions and what we got for him?) NO

7. Would you trade TKO? (considering his request) ABSOLUTELY


Just curious your answers....not "what you would do"....etc.

[Devin]

my answers/opinions are in bold. To take it a small step further, if those were the moves that the Bills made and I got to play GM, then i'd be looking at a DL like Okoye or Carriker with my first draft pick, and I'd be looking to get into the late first round to take Bowe/Meacham or Sidney Rice so Evans can have a real #2 WR. And with my 2nd third rounder I'd be looking at the best LB available to combine with Ellison for quality depth(we have ZERO depth at LB )

as for FA, I would not have spent much more than the Bills and their "cash to cap".. Henry takes out Walker, FLetcher takes out Kelsay--- the only additional signing I have on there is June.

I woulda hoped for two other moves and neither are by any means unrealistic Snyder-style spending.

Signing Nick Harper to play corner and let Youboty groom. Harper is a cover two guy.

Signing Justin Griffith to play fullback.
(June, Harper and Griffith-going by the exact deals they got- would've counted for roughly $7 million against the cap this year- leaving us with over 12 million) and maybe at most $10 million over the "cash to crap" philosophy.

Wow.

Harper is debatable. You are making a bold assumption he would want to come here, much less for a one year deal/short term.....with his last shot at a deal. I'd just as soon see what AY has an let him take his lumps. Time to see if that 1st round grade was right.

I didnt look at the signing bonus or yearly salaries but both you and Op said youd keep fletcher. Where is your explanation on how or why he would take a 2 year/or less deal or smaller offer to stay here? And if you decided to keep him you would sign him to the same deal he got via the redskins?

Walker I have mixed feelings on. He was terrible in Oakland and probably **** his pants when he heard our offer. But im not completley dissapointed. Time will tell.

Op said hed have kept TKO......even though TKO wants out. Assuming TKO would renegotiate and that for whatever reason Fletcher would decide to take a 2 year deal. Pat said hed have let him go because he also would have retained Fletcher (or kept him in the event Fletch was gone) or because Cato June would magically want to come here. A quote from the only NFL scout I know:



june was london fletcher part 2.

only... he wasn't as durable
and he's not as fast
and he doesn't make as many tackles
and he doesn't play the pass very well.
and he's worse then london vs the run

hrm... come to think about it, he's a poor man's london fletcher.

No thanks.

So It appears both are content to have a high-priced pissed off LB on the squad. While I dont want to move Spikes if he wants to leave he wants to leave. Get value while you can.

Pat assumes that for whatever reason the RB we completley screwed over (Henry) would want to come back here and that solves our RB problems.

:bf1:

[The Answer]

1. Would you have Signed Dockery?

2. Would you have re-signed Fletcher?

3. Would you have re-signed Nate?

4. Would you have signed Whittle?

5. Would you have signed Walker?

6. Would you have traded McGahee? (considering his actions and what we got for him?)

7. Would you trade TKO? (considering his request)


Just curious your answers....not "what you would do"....etc.

1)Yes but not for that money (Hutchison was signed last year for the same and is a far better player)

2)No - he wasn't an attacking linebacker, and his tackle total is misleading considering the pourous run defenses we've had since he's been here for the most part.

3) Yes - but not for the money he got. Overrated but was the best player on the defense.

4) Yes - it was a solid move

5) No - he played on the Oakland Raiders and their line is hideous, moreso than Buffalo if you can believe that.

6) Yes - Next Question

7) Yes - shell of his former self and it would have been a steal had we not thrown Holcomb in.

~The Answer

[OpIv37]

so you just agreed with everything except paying an overrated player the highest paid contract for a defensive player in history, and simply assuming nick harper would sign with us, and you wouldnt trade a guy who makes 4.5 and may not be worth 450k after all is said and done. we're a small market team. we cant take those chances. i hate to see TKO go to, but you seem to agree with a lot of the moves so why so negative about the FO all the time?

I'm negative about the team cuz we still aren't winning. And we sure as hell aren't going to win by not replacing any of our defensive starters that we lost. It seems like this organization never learned it's lesson from losing Pat Williams. It's not so much the moves that the FO made as much as it is the ones they didn't make.

[Ebenezer]

1. Yes
2. No
3. No
4. No
5. Yes
6. Yes
7. Considering his request - Yes

[Ebenezer]

I'm negative about the team cuz we still aren't winning.

would you be so negative if they weren't winning but doing moves that you completely agreed with?? sometimes things just don't work.

[jamze132]

I think we should lock up Tim Anderson longterm so he doesn't get away!

[OpIv37]

would you be so negative if they weren't winning but doing moves that you completely agreed with?? sometimes things just don't work.

like I said- what we didn't do.

This team still has a ton of holes. I feel a little better now that something was done about the DL but it wasn't a huge upgrade and now we have a GLARING weakness at LB. We didn't bring in a CB to replace Nate. We didn't do anything about TE, FB or #2 WR, so on a lot of positions, we're going in there with the same crap that we had last year. So far this off-season:

OL- Upgraded
DL- mildly upgraded
LB- Severely downgraded
CB- Downgraded

Everything else is the same. That's not nearly enough to turn a 7-9 team into a winner.

[Mr. Pink]

1. Would you have Signed Dockery?

Most likely yes.

2. Would you have re-signed Fletcher?

If the numbers and terms were right, yes. To the deal he got from Washington, no.

3. Would you have re-signed Nate?

Not a chance.

4. Would you have signed Whittle?

Depth is always important.

5. Would you have signed Walker?

He couldn't pay me to play from my team.

6. Would you have traded McGahee? (considering his actions and what we got for him?)

With what our backfield looks like now without him? no. With a viable replacement, yes.

7. Would you trade TKO? (considering his request)

I woulda straight out cut him before last season.

[BAM]

Who cares what they think? :beers:

[EDS]

1. Would you have Signed Dockery?

2. Would you have re-signed Fletcher?

3. Would you have re-signed Nate?

4. Would you have signed Whittle?

5. Would you have signed Walker?

6. Would you have traded McGahee? (considering his actions and what we got for him?)

7. Would you trade TKO? (considering his request)


Just curious your answers....not "what you would do"....etc.

1. Yes, but would have rather had Steinbach or Dielman.
2. Yes.
3. Yes - as a back-up.
4. I would have tried, but the price was high. Depth is now a concern.
5. No way. I would have rather resigned Gandy.
6. Yes.
7. No. There is still a chance he can return to something close to his former form and if he does he makes the entire Bills defense so much better. If he doesn't, so what, he is gone in a year so no long term salary cap issues.

[Devin]

1. Yes, but would have rather had Steinbach or Dielman.
2. Yes.
3. Yes - as a back-up.
4. I would have tried, but the price was high. Depth is now a concern.
5. No way. I would have rather resigned Gandy.
6. Yes.
7. No. There is still a chance he can return to something close to his former form and if he does he makes the entire Bills defense so much better. If he doesn't, so what, he is gone in a year so no long term salary cap issues.

:roflmao:

Whoa are you serious or kidding?

[Statman]

1. Would you have Signed Dockery?

2. Would you have re-signed Fletcher?

3. Would you have re-signed Nate?

4. Would you have signed Whittle?

5. Would you have signed Walker?

6. Would you have traded McGahee? (considering his actions and what we got for him?)

7. Would you trade TKO? (considering his request)


Just curious your answers....not "what you would do"....etc.

Your question is actually somewhat of a trick question. With solid management in past years much of the above would have been moot.

This is what happens when you team slides into the status of a "Detroit Lions" or "Cleveland Browns," which we've done.

Problems arise. You must pay more for average talent. Players want to leave and are dissatisfied. Many players won't come here. Etc.

You actually have to respect Spikes' request. When he came here he came b/c he wanted to win. He, and all of you, bought into Donahoe's hype and BS about how he was building a winner. Naturally it couldn't be the same with Levy and Jauron, eh.

But we aren't winning, so I respect Spikes for wanting out in at least keeping with his personal philosophy. I think we're seeing that money doesn't always matter to players such as Spikes when contrasted with winning. I fault Spikes for not correctly reading the tea leaves on this team.

Let me ask you Devin:

Would you have traded up at the expense of a mid-2nd and high-3rd round picks to draft McCargo?

Would you have paid nearly $20M last year for Tripplett?

Would you have drafted Youboty?

Would you have signed Peerless Price to the contract he got when you could have landed him for veteran minimum?

Would you have signed Robert Royal as the most expensive TE in Bills history?

Which of the players that we have signed to date do you believe will make an actual impact for this team, and I mean "impact," not merely provide halfway acceptible play from time to time, and why?

[Statman]

A lot of it also depends upon what we do in the draft. If we end up with Willis, then Q #2 becomes moot for example.

[Statman]

Also, one more question:

Darwin Walker plays the same position as Tripplett and McCargo. Can you explain that, meaning the logic of that move?

[OpIv37]

Also, one more question:

Darwin Walker plays the same position as Tripplett and McCargo. Can you explain that, meaning the logic of that move?

Tripplett, McCargo and Walker can switch off next to Tim Anderson, because the true key to Buffalo's success is having Anderson on the field as much as possible.

Seriously, though, someone will have to switch- it's the only way it works.

[Dr. Lecter]

McCargo has gaiend weight and is switching positions.

[EDS]

:roflmao:

Whoa are you serious or kidding?

I think I accidently reversed 3 and 4. So I would have tried to resign Nate but not for that money and would have signed Whittle for a back-up role.

[Devin]

Let me ask you Devin:

Would you have traded up at the expense of a mid-2nd and high-3rd round picks to draft McCargo?

Would you have paid nearly $20M last year for Tripplett?

Would you have drafted Youboty?

Would you have signed Peerless Price to the contract he got when you could have landed him for veteran minimum?

Would you have signed Robert Royal as the most expensive TE in Bills history?

Which of the players that we have signed to date do you believe will make an actual impact for this team, and I mean "impact," not merely provide halfway acceptible play from time to time, and why?

1. Yes. Last years draft saw a dropoff after Ngata and Bunkley, and after McCargo it was pretty bleak. After his pro-day McCargo had leapt into the high 2nd round, and in some mocks low first round area. As poorly as Bunkley played last year, and as little as McCargo did id have to see another season before I judged the actual pick. As has been stated numerous times DT's take a while to develop often 2-4 seasons.

2. No. I dont mind the signing per say but I feel about Triplett the way I do about Walker. While I dont mind the player necessarrily both got whay more then their efforts in the NFL thus far have shown.

3. Yes. Youboty had a 1st round grade and while your question isnt based on value of the pick, at the time everyone knew Nate was leaving. Do I wish we had a vet on the roster capable of playing the right side. Yes. DO I regret drafting Youboty? No. I want to see him play first.

4. No. Price is one of those WR's whose good for a great play or a key play every now and again but even those are few and far between.

5. No. Although I do believe he will be more productive this season hopefully not having to make sure the right side of our line doesnt collapse.....although with Walker there that remains to be seen. Again I dont mind the player per say but the money paid was to much.

I assume you mean from Marvs tenure....Dockery. Not because of him being the biggest name we signed but simply I think pairing he and Peters is going to be very productive and mark a noticable difference all around in the passing/running game.

[Statman]

Good answers, thanks!

I therefore assume that you're not nearly fully content with our current team's decisions and that we could be doing and have done quite a bit more.

Follow-ups on some:

If Royal does what you say it will have been unprecedented.

Yes, our left side of the line will be good, but what about RB, right side line play, and other weapons besides Losman and Evans as seemingly the only two things that opponents need to game plan against. Evans will see quite a few more double teams this year.

Given Youboty's day one draft status, one has to question and perhaps even suggest that it's likely that he simply is not what they thought he was when they drafted him or he'd have seen a lot more field time, particularly towards the end of the season. To me it's a flag that he wasn't.

[Dr. Lecter]

I think Youboty's status is more indicative of a young player, who came out early and missed the most important instructional time of camp. I doubt he was ready last year. Once the regular season starts, most time is spent preparing for opponents not getting players ready with basic skills and instructions.

Why is his lack of PT at the end of the season a signal, but their apparent confidence in him now not a sign?

As for RB, that is relatively easy to fix in the draft. RB is the easiest position to transition to the NFL from college.

[Statman]

It's always a laundry list of "ifs" and excuses for the Bills.

[Dr. Lecter]

I would not say always.

I would have prefferred to have seen a temp fix (i.e. Harper) signed for this season. There are two things about the offseason I am not fond of:

1. Trading Spikes. (Getting a player helps, but I am still not sure of the move)
2. Not replacing Nate, especially with McGee back there. Youboty and Thomas need to step up.

[patmoran2006]

All I know is we better have one sick, ridiculous pass rush or our secondary is going to be getting lit up early and often, when teams lose patience running for 6 yards per carry on us, that is.

Our defense is bad.. really bad.. and no 1-2 rookies are going to make it different. TOO many, far too many young and raw players with no vet leadership to make it click. This defense is at least a few years away from being real good, even if they got Patrick WIllis.

meanwhile, the best way to combat that is to have an explosive offense that can lay 24 on anyteam in the league.

Im dead serious.. If I'm Marv Levy, I'd highly consider trying to turn my offense very Colts'-like for the next few years.

Lynch at 12 and the best WR at #2 will make this offense click TOMMOROW..

DO the best you can on defense, take your lumps and spend some loot ona couple of vets next offseason to go along with your really young core. Aint no rookies going to make this defense better in '07, but I think the opposite with the offense.

[Statman]

I'm thinkin' that Willis would help and make an impact immediately. Otherwise not a bad plan except I'd still go OL in round 2 and go WR w/ one of our 3rds. There's a broad second tier of those.

[Devin]

Good answers, thanks!

I therefore assume that you're not nearly fully content with our current team's decisions and that we could be doing and have done quite a bit more.

Follow-ups on some:

If Royal does what you say it will have been unprecedented.

Yes, our left side of the line will be good, but what about RB, right side line play, and other weapons besides Losman and Evans as seemingly the only two things that opponents need to game plan against. Evans will see quite a few more double teams this year.

Given Youboty's day one draft status, one has to question and perhaps even suggest that it's likely that he simply is not what they thought he was when they drafted him or he'd have seen a lot more field time, particularly towards the end of the season. To me it's a flag that he wasn't.

I dont deny we have a ton of holes, and yes im being optimistic at best when I say Robert Royal and production in the same sentence. I guess as much as I love this team, football, the draft....etc quite simply I believe and hope each year the FO is doing everything it can. I trust Marv.

I certainly would have liked to have seen a few other moves made, but I wont complain. They came right out the gate and got a guy I never in a million years gotten. Did they over-pay? Of course they did. But id much rather pay and get Dockery then have Gandy or some other scrub there.

I understand your points, and agree with some. I suppose at the end of the day I was happy with this off season. I believe last offseason was the worst.


I'm thinkin' that Willis would help and make an impact immediately. Otherwise not a bad plan except I'd still go OL in round 2 and go WR w/ one of our 3rds. There's a broad second tier of those.

A guy I like is Manuel Ramirez that big OG Marv had his eye on. STRONG.

But yes I agree I think its a mistake to take Lynch, and id absolutley love to get Willis here. I think bringing Willis in fills two holes. By moving Crowell to TKO's spot and Willis in the middle then Ellison to wqeakside we have a pretty young athletic group. Obviously i dont know what the end result will be but im a fan of Ellisons so I maybe the wrong person to ask. I think he will end up playing well on the weakside.

Im not opposed to skipping RB all together.

[Statman]

I'm in agreement with your analysis on the LBs.

As to Marv, no, I don't trust him for football things. Let me ask you, we have essentially acquired four players in free agency worth mentioning; Langston Walker, Jason Whittle, Derrick Dockery, and Darwin Walker.

Langston Walker has been in the league for five seasons and started only one of them and he was horrible in that one this past year and a major component to one of the if not the worst line in the entire league. What do you see in him that in your mind qualifies your trust in the FO here?

Darwin Walker is 30 this season and only a short-term fix at best. His sack stats were not against good QBs on good teams. 3 vs. Bledsoe, 1 vs. Gradkowski, 1 vs. Eli Manning, and 1 on Romo. The Eagles' D last season was not much better than ours and a virtual carbon copy. Neither was good. Again, what do you see in Marv to validate that trust, again, in the absence of a good offseason last year as you yourself said? IMO Walker is just like Kelsay. He will step up in big games against teams that we should beat anyway. Who cares if we pulverize them or merely win as a win is a win. Beating up the dregs doesn't count for anything in this league, especially when you can't beat any good teams.

Whittle is a backup and we didn't pay a lot for him.

Which leaves Dockery. Let's be honest here, he's good but far from great or first tier. Overpaying a player does not improve him. Financial status is different than talent/skill level. Dockery is known for blocking in the short running game, which we definitely need. But no one has said that he's a great pass blocker, which we also need, clearly as we gave up a greater attempt to sack ratio than just about every team in the league last season and we have a mobile QB. So again, how do you justify your "trust" and faith in Marv and the "new" front office, which quite frankly isn't so new.

Modrak and Guy are Donahoe hires and they're responsible for most of the past garbage, yet here they are, leading the charge again.

Anyway, I just don't see it. The NFL is a good ole boy network. Far more qualified people may be out there to run teams or even coach, but unless they check the boxes on the way up, what happens is that a limited number of people are merely circulated throughout the system, which to me at least translates to the necessity that a bunch of teams will be bad each season as a direct result of skimping on paying for good GMs and Coaches or not taking chances on younger ones or "less experienced" ones. Experience only means something if it's successful. It means little to get Mularkey back because he now has more experience. The man's a dolt, period. Experience means nothing in his case and in the case of many others.

I don't know enough about Lynch, but taking Peterson if he's there is the mistake. If we were to take Peterson and he were to get hurt again, just like he has every season, then it might hurl this team to places we've never been before.

I'm in favor of a trade down if Willis is not there. We need more picks. Then again, we needed more picks last year two and we lost one in the deal to get McCargo. Wise?

As to the front office "doing everything it can," that's a loaded statement. A one-armed man may be doing all that he can too working for Fed Ex on the loading dock, but that does not mean that his productivity will ever match a beefcake with two good arms.

It's not the front office's desires and intentions that I question, it's their competencies. I just don't think that they're all that good in evaluating talent, particularly free agent talent, and I think in the two free agency periods that they've been here they've also only revealed that they're entirely out of touch with market values for players. So far I do believe that the facts warrant such criticism. I mean what moron of a GM would have paid Price more than a dime over veteran minimum after his recent performances? Other players brought on got far more than they'd have gotten from any other team.

[Statman]

As well Devin, and this doesn't necessarily apply to you, but it's easy to "rah-rah" for no apparent reason. It's much more difficult as a fan of a team to objectively evaluate and look at your own team's moves and decisions.

If our moves were made by say Cleveland, we'd all be laughing over here just like a good chunk of the league is laughing at us now. Words only go so far.

At the beginning of WWI our boys were all of the mindset that, very similarly, that once we got over there (Europe) that the war would be over within weeks. Yet that clearly did not happen with enormous losses and the war continuing on well beyond their expectatoins.