PDA

View Full Version : Interesting take from Seahawks message board


cocamide
10-05-2010, 05:11 PM
The other factor is his character. Randy Moss, a Hall of Famer, was traded for a 4th rounder due to character concerns. Santonio Holmes, was traded for a 5th rounder for character concerns. These guys are Pro Bowl talents at their positions. Lynch is no where near as talented, has the same character issues, and yet we trade higher compensation for him?

http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=20730&start=140

I thought we could get a third rounder for Lynch, but when you think about the trades for these two players, a third rounder might never have been a possibility. A 4th and a conditional is sounding a little better to me now.
BILLSROCK1212
10-05-2010, 05:14 PM
http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=20730&start=140

I thought we could get a third rounder for Lynch, but when you think about the trades for these two players, a third rounder might never have been a possibility. A 4th and a conditional is sounding a little better to me now.
very good point, that dawned on me as well...it was a solid move and when you think how the seahawks used those picks to trade for marshawn, we can in turn use them to trade for another established player if we see that as the best option...solid move, not amazing, but solid

i'm just surprised the packers didn't feel the need to put a better offer on the table considering it's super bowl or bust for them
better days
10-05-2010, 05:14 PM
The BIG difference is the Bills could have received a 3rd rnd comp pick for Lynch. The Raiders could not get that for Moss.
YardRat
10-05-2010, 05:14 PM
Jesus...Even our thugs can't be the best at being thugs.
X-Era
10-05-2010, 05:15 PM
http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=20730&start=140

I thought we could get a third rounder for Lynch, but when you think about the trades for these two players, a third rounder might never have been a possibility. A 4th and a conditional is sounding a little better to me now.Very nice perspective. I actually feel a bit better now.
RockStar36
10-05-2010, 05:21 PM
The BIG difference is the Bills could have received a 3rd rnd comp pick for Lynch. The Raiders could not get that for Moss.

In how many years?
Mr. Pink
10-05-2010, 05:22 PM
In how many years?


And if they didn't sign any FAs worth jack.

Don't forget that part too.
cocamide
10-05-2010, 05:24 PM
The BIG difference is the Bills could have received a 3rd rnd comp pick for Lynch. The Raiders could not get that for Moss.

I'm not so sure about this. I'm not a draft expert, but I don't see how having Lynch leave for free agency would grant us a third round compensatory pick. Can someone explain this to me? I understand that there are compensatory picks when you lose more free agents than you gain, but Lynch alone wouldn't grant us a third rounder.

That being said, we needed to move Lynch. Our backfield was way too crowded and it was impossible to establish any sort of rhythm back there.
better days
10-05-2010, 05:25 PM
In how many years?

The draft after he left in FA, so the Bills could have had Lynch for this year & next, then received a 3rd.

Unless the 2012 pick from Seattle is at least a 3rd the Bills got taken IMO.
better days
10-05-2010, 05:29 PM
I'm not so sure about this. I'm not a draft expert, but I don't see how having Lynch leave for free agency would grant us a third round compensatory pick. Can someone explain this to me? I understand that there are compensatory picks when you lose more free agents than you gain, but Lynch alone wouldn't grant us a third rounder.

That being said, we needed to move Lynch. Our backfield was way too crowded and it was impossible to establish any sort of rhythm back there.

If a 1st rnd pick leaves in FA & the team does not sign another FA of equal or greater value they receive a 3rd rnd pick.
Ebenezer
10-05-2010, 05:32 PM
Very nice perspective. I actually feel a bit better now.
The only people who think that the Bills could have gotten better than they did are Bills fans...perspective folks...I know, it hurts.
Buddo
10-05-2010, 05:36 PM
Way too many things that can't be foreseen, to assume we would have got a compensatory pick of a 3rd rounder in 2012.

The comparison between Holmes and Lynch is valid, as they both have 'served time' as it were. The one with Moss doesn't really, as I don't believe he's been suspended for anything. Sure there would have been concerns about 'attitude', but not about doing something stupid to get himself suspended (again in the case of Lynch and Holmes).

Current values for RBs aren't especially high, especially when you consider that Maroney went to the Broncos for an exchange of picks - the Pats 6th rounder for the broncos 4th.
dannyek71
10-05-2010, 05:42 PM
http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=20730&start=140

I thought we could get a third rounder for Lynch, but when you think about the trades for these two players, a third rounder might never have been a possibility. A 4th and a conditional is sounding a little better to me now.

That's what inflation over the years does for you.
Yasgur's Farm
10-05-2010, 06:29 PM
The BIG difference is the Bills could have received a 3rd rnd comp pick for Lynch. The Raiders could not get that for Moss.As others have stated...
1) In how many years?
2) Only if we don't sign any free agents
and I'll add...
3) The best we could get would be a 3rd rounder AT THE END OF THE 3RD ROUND! I'll take the lowly Seatle 4th + the conditional!
trapezeus
10-05-2010, 06:31 PM
i love the trade....that could be like a 3rd rounder based on the seahawks end of season results. they aren't a whole lot better than us.

and like i said somewhere else, let's all remain beastmode fans. the better he does, the better the conditional pick in 2012 becomes.
Oaf
10-05-2010, 06:39 PM
we can in turn use them to trade for another established player if we see that as the best option


Haha, you wish.
cordog
10-05-2010, 06:47 PM
If a 1st rnd pick leaves in FA & the team does not sign another FA of equal or greater value they receive a 3rd rnd pick.


Funny that you know this but officals from 32 teams aren't privy to the fomula that calculates compensatory picks. Nice try though
Dr. Pepper
10-05-2010, 07:11 PM
The draft after he left in FA, so the Bills could have had Lynch for this year & next, then received a 3rd.

Unless the 2012 pick from Seattle is at least a 3rd the Bills got taken IMO.

LOL at you wanting lynch this year and next, with jackson and spiller both on the roster.
Joe Fo Sho
10-05-2010, 07:28 PM
http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=20730&start=140

I thought we could get a third rounder for Lynch, but when you think about the trades for these two players, a third rounder might never have been a possibility. A 4th and a conditional is sounding a little better to me now.

The Moss and Holmes trades were friggin steals...

You can argue the Holmes trade wasn't a steal, but only time will tell. Hard to argue the Moss trade though.
Beebe's Kid
10-05-2010, 07:45 PM
The Moss and Holmes trades were friggin steals...

You can argue the Holmes trade wasn't a steal, but only time will tell. Hard to argue the Moss trade though.

This...

Character issues are debatable. When you read the shock value headline that "breaks" the story...sure the guy is an animal...if you somehow scrape up the back page column about the resolution, then they weren't that bad. Perspective, people.

The only people that think Lynch is a bad guy are the Bills fans that wanted him out of town because he had a grill and dread locks...not very Buffalo.

I hope he never beats the Bills, but I do hope he runs wild in Seattle. I think Lynch was a Manny kind of guy, just not as nuts. His teammates sure liked him, but they don't know him like the fans do.

Laid back California attitude doesn't really translate to tight-ass East Coast.

I also think it's funny to take that off of a message board...if you looked here you'd think that we've never had a good player, and that there are no players worthy of coming to Buffalo. You would have to dig for quite a while to find a positive word about anybody.
better days
10-05-2010, 08:15 PM
LOL at you wanting lynch this year and next, with jackson and spiller both on the roster.

Hell yeah I would. Spiller can be used in numerous ways for one. For another Jackson is an old RB with limited skills. For another just look at all the injuries so far this year to RB's................just hope & pray Fred & CJ stay healthy.
better days
10-05-2010, 08:24 PM
Funny that you know this but officals from 32 teams aren't privy to the fomula that calculates compensatory picks. Nice try though

It can get complicated if other players are signed & lost but that is basicly what the deal with comp picks is about.

So a team such as the Bills will get something if they lose a high draft pick to FA. A 1st rnd pick would bring a 3rd comp pick because the 3rd is the highest rnd for comp picks.
cocamide
10-05-2010, 08:31 PM
It can get complicated if other players are signed & lost but that is basicly what the deal with comp picks is about.

So a team such as the Bills will get something if they lose a high draft pick to FA. A 1st rnd pick would bring a 3rd comp pick because the 3rd is the highest rnd for comp picks.
If what you say is true, then should we keep McCargo around so that we can get a 3rd rounder when he becomes a free agent?
better days
10-05-2010, 08:34 PM
As others have stated...
1) In how many years?
2) Only if we don't sign any free agents
and I'll add...
3) The best we could get would be a 3rd rounder AT THE END OF THE 3RD ROUND! I'll take the lowly Seatle 4th + the conditional!

1) Answered already.

2) Well this is where it gets complicated. If the Bills lost no other FA & signed FA of equal value they might get nothing or a lower pick than 3rd.

3) This is the big question. WHAT is the conditional pick?

If it is a 6th that could become a 5th BIG DEAL. If it is a 6th that could REASONABLY become a 3rd that is another story.

I think this trade depends on that unknown conditional pick. Would you really rather have Seattles 4th next year & say a 6th rnd in 20012 than have Lynch until that time & then a 3rd comp pick?
cordog
10-05-2010, 08:34 PM
It can get complicated if other players are signed & lost but that is basicly what the deal with comp picks is about.

So a team such as the Bills will get something if they lose a high draft pick to FA. A 1st rnd pick would bring a 3rd comp pick because the 3rd is the highest rnd for comp picks.

No its not

Compensatory free agents are determined by a formula based on salary, playing time and postseason honors. Not every free agent lost or signed by a team is covered by this formula, which the NFL Management Council developed.
better days
10-05-2010, 08:39 PM
If what you say is true, then should we keep McCargo around so that we can get a 3rd rounder when he becomes a free agent?

Yeah the problem with that is he would have to be signed by another team to a contract that meets the level of the comp pick.

If Lynch were in that situation he would get that contract. McCargo VERY DOUBTFUL.
better days
10-05-2010, 08:43 PM
No its not

Compensatory free agents are determined by a formula based on salary, playing time and postseason honors. Not every free agent lost or signed by a team is covered by this formula, which the NFL Management Council developed.

Agreed it is not meant to cover BUSTS. It is meant to cover high rnd picks that play well however. If a player such as Jason Peters were to become a FA the Bills would not have received a comp pick for him because they did not draft him.
cocamide
10-05-2010, 08:51 PM
Agreed it is not meant to cover BUSTS. It is meant to cover high rnd picks that play well however. If a player such as Jason Peters were to become a FA the Bills would not have received a comp pick for him because they did not draft him.

I don't think that's right at all.
better days
10-05-2010, 09:00 PM
I don't think that's right at all.

What? That the Bills would not have gotten a comp for Peters?

I could be wrong, they might have received a lower rnd pick but I don't think so.

When FA started the idea of the comp pick was to compensate teams that lost good players they had drafted to free agency.
Stewie
10-05-2010, 09:07 PM
The draft after he left in FA, so the Bills could have had Lynch for this year & next, then received a 3rd.

Unless the 2012 pick from Seattle is at least a 3rd the Bills got taken IMO.

Next years third is worth this year's fourth, so says the standard trading rules.

A third in two years, which is the earliest we'd get any comp picks, is worth a 5th this year.

So, according to your own logic, Buffalo came out ahead.
Ebenezer
10-05-2010, 09:10 PM
Cordog has it absolutely correct.
better days
10-05-2010, 09:15 PM
Next years third is worth this year's fourth, so says the standard trading rules.

A third in two years, which is the earliest we'd get any comp picks, is worth a 5th this year.

So, according to your own logic, Buffalo came out ahead.

Yeah I have heard about those rules. I don't get it myself, someone needs to explain to me why this is true. It seems very short sighted to me.
Stewie
10-05-2010, 09:59 PM
Yeah I have heard about those rules. I don't get it myself, someone needs to explain to me why this is true. It seems very short sighted to me.
Time value of the pick.. you get an extra year with your player, this year, than you do with next years player. Same concept as time value of money. $1 is worth more to you now than the same amount in one year, cause you have an entire extra year to do something with it. So in finance, you discount the value of future money, to reflect that lost time... same with draft picks or anything else you might trade.
WeAreArthurMoates
10-05-2010, 10:15 PM
Hell yeah I would. Spiller can be used in numerous ways for one. For another Jackson is an old RB with limited skills. For another just look at all the injuries so far this year to RB's................just hope & pray Fred & CJ stay healthy.

Jackson still has at least 2 good years left, the same time Marshawn would be here but limited skills, come on brah. Freddy route running is superiour to Lynch as well as his hands.
better days
10-06-2010, 12:48 AM
Time value of the pick.. you get an extra year with your player, this year, than you do with next years player. Same concept as time value of money. $1 is worth more to you now than the same amount in one year, cause you have an entire extra year to do something with it. So in finance, you discount the value of future money, to reflect that lost time... same with draft picks or anything else you might trade.

You don't get him for an extra year, just a year sooner. I would rather wait that time to draft a most likely better player myself.
better days
10-06-2010, 12:53 AM
Jackson still has at least 2 good years left, the same time Marshawn would be here but limited skills, come on brah. Freddy route running is superiour to Lynch as well as his hands.

No question receiving is one of Freds strengths, but he is not the banger Lynch is, nor does he have his speed.
Stewie
10-06-2010, 07:44 AM
You don't get him for an extra year, just a year sooner. I would rather wait that time to draft a most likely better player myself.
In the Not for Long league, a year sooner is an extra year. Unless you expect to remain employed in perpetuity... also, there is no evidence to support you're "likely" to get a better player at say pick number 125 than you are at say 85.
airdog32
10-06-2010, 08:01 AM
Hell yeah I would. Spiller can be used in numerous ways for one. For another Jackson is an old RB with limited skills. For another just look at all the injuries so far this year to RB's................just hope & pray Fred & CJ stay healthy.
It's not like a running game is carring us this give us a chance estalishing a clear #1 or a solid 2 way split with both getting equal touches. Reality is Lynch did want to be here and we were going to lose him anyhow so any compansation is good, and for trying to move at the draft I am sure OBD made attempts but it was not what they were looking for!