X-Era's Bills Free Agency Scoreboard

[X-Era]

This is the concept. I'm keeping a scoreboard for free agent signings and losses. I'll give my rating from -5 to 5 (-5 being the most negative and 5 being the most positive). I reserve the right to adjust my ratings based on what you all feel but I will give my initial take on each move. When the season starts, we will see where we end up. To me, I want to see this teams overall talent get better so I hope it ends up a big positive number.

Obviously the draftees will make an impact. But for the purposes of this, let's just look at what were doing in the FA phase.

When we lose a player, it most likely means a negative number. If that player is replaced with an equal player, the rating should be equal but opposite. If it's an upgrade, it should be more positive.

I won't give a grade on our own UFA's until they sign elsewhere or re-sign. If we keep a player, we can give it a positive or negative rating based on what they paid, etc...

I also won't judge the UDFA's right away. Let's give them a shot in TC and score them then.

I will update it as we go, can't promise it's everyday.

Should be fun.

Unrestricted free agents
ILB Akin Ayodele: -1, Roster is now set for season, was lost but has not signed elsewhere
OLB Keith Ellison: -1, Roster is now set for season, was lost but has not signed elsewhere
CB Drayton Florence: 0, Changed to 0 because we had him and now still have him... It's a net 0 to the overall talent.
DL John McCargo: -1, Lost to the Buc's. Yes it's not much of a loss but it's a 53 man roster spot that from this years FA at least, has not been filled... Yet.
ILB Paul Posluszny: -2, lost to the Jags. It leaves a hole but the score is offset a bit by the Jags overpaying.
SS Donte Whitner: -2, Lost a starting SS
CB Ashton Youboty: -1, Roster is now set for season, was lost but has not signed elsewhereNewly added free agents
Tyler Thigpen +1, an upgrade to Brohm but really shouldn't be considered a viable starter.
Brad Smith +1, A play maker but situational and not a real need. The contract is reasonable.
Nick Barnett +3, a solid starter who signed for only 4 mill per. Needs to stay healthy.
Lionel Dotson 0, Has never done anything and is probably just camp fodder.
Craig "Buster" Davis +1, If he makes the team, he will get some playing time.
Kirk Morrison +2, a solid backup who may push Davis.
Ruvell Martin 0, Has bounced around an never caught on in the NFL... Also didn't catch on here... he's been cut. And now added back but still not really worth much at this point.
Lee Smith 0, A rookie who has done nothing at this point.
Sam Young +1, A young prospect with some limited experience.Trades
Lee Evans -3, Stupid move that trades a solid starter and potentially puts double-teams on Stevie.Restricted free agents
QB Brian Brohm- not tendered: 0, He wasn't worth squat and were better developing someone else
TE Scott Chandler- tendered: +1, not a horrible backup TE
RB Quinton Ganther- not tendered: 0, not that great and a rook, UDFA, or lower level UFA may be better. Chance to develop a young guy as your 3rd RB makes more sense.Exclusive rights free agents
LS Garrison Sanborn- tendered: +1, He's here, he didn't screw up that I can think of.
TE Jonathan Stupar- not tendered: 0, I'm indifferent.Undrafted Free Agents
Zach Pinalto (TE, North Carolina)- Cut
Sidney Glover (S, West Virginia)- Cut
Reid Forrest (P, Washington State)- Cut
Emmanuel Moody (RB, Florida)- Cut
Vai Taua (RB, Nevada)- Cut
Daniel Aiken (LS, UVA)- Cut
Chris Hazley (K, Virginia Tech)- Cut
Isaiah Thompson (OL, Houston)- Cut
Kamar Aiken (WR, UCF)- PS, not on the roster therefore no value on the field - 0
Doyle Miller (CB, Nevada)- PS, not on the roster therefore no value on the field - 0
Rajiric Coleman (S, Utah State)- Cut
Rob Eddins (DE, Ball State)- Made the team, has potential but is not a starter - 1
Joshua Nesbitt (Georgia Tech)- PS, not on the roster therefore no value on the field - 0
Michael Switzer (OL, Ball State)- Cut
Brad Jefferson (LB, Georgia Tech)- Cut
Brandon Hicks (LB, Florida)- Cut
Loyce Means (CB, Houston)- Cut
T.J Langley (DE, Arkansas Tech)- CutCurrent Score: +1

Note:

9/10/2011- The roster is set and at this point, the Bills have added a net of +1 to the team via the free agency. That equates to adding a marginal backup. On the surface this means this team made virtually no improvements to the overall talent level from this phase. To be a better team on paper, they must get their upgrades from rookies and development of current players.

[YardRat]

IMO the POS score should be +5.

[X-Era]

IMO the POS score should be +5.Theres one vote. I gotta think that's not the norm around here. What do the rest of you think?

[wmoz11]

Cancelling out that idiotic vote with a -5 for Poz.

I'm assuming you will adjust your scores if we sign replacements?

[BertSquirtgum]

I would say it's definitely a positive letting someone else play instead of pos. +2 for letting poz walk at 7 million a year.

[DraftBoy]

Add Nesbitt to the UDFA count.

[X-Era]

I would say it's definitely a positive letting someone else play instead of pos. +2 for letting poz walk at 7 million a year. It should be a bit positive because he isn't worth 7 mill per. But it also has to be negative because of the hole that it leaves.

[chernobylwraiths]

It should be a bit positive because he isn't worth 7 mill per. But it also has to be negative because of the hole that it leaves.

The question is, does it really leave a big hole that a lot of other guys can't fill? I think Poz was a slightly above average LB.

BTW, you have one guy listed as a LS, what is that?

[X-Era]

The question is, does it really leave a big hole that a lot of other guys can't fill? I think Poz was a slightly above average LB.

BTW, you have one guy listed as a LS, what is that?Long Snapper.

Right now we lost a starting MLB there's no way around that. The only way I think you could give a 0 is if we had a starter on the squad to replace him (a push). It can't be a + because of the hole it leaves. But it also can't be a big - because of the huge contract he got.

For it to be a -5 it would be like losing a star with no replacement. For it to be a +5 it would be like gaining a star at a hole.

The - would be offset if they sign a new MLB. How much? Depends on who and how much they pay.

[methos4ever]

I'd put Poz at -1, pending FA replacement.

[BertSquirtgum]

Andra davis is healthy and is probably just as bad as poz, so it should be a push.

[X-Era]

Andra davis is healthy and is probably just as bad as poz, so it should be a pu****** would be if he wasn't already a starter at the other ILB spot in a 3-4.

No way around it, we lost a starting MLB in free agency and have not replaced it from free agency.

[psubills62]

Hard to believe anyone would think losing Poz was a positive or even a push. Davis plays the other ILB position.

Poz was a poor fit for the 3-4, but he was becoming a dang good 4-3 LB. While he didn't do well last year, he was still by far our best LB. I think -2 is just about right.

[X-Era]

Anyone disagree with giving Brad Smith a +1? I mean he won't be a full time starter and we have a good stable of returners. But he's a play maker and could be a Wildcat option. If we end up not addressing other more pressing needs, this may go to a 0 or even a - because it's money spent on a non-need.

One way to consider it a + is that we added someone but also took someone away from a division rival.

What do you think, move this to a +2?

[Mindbender]

Positive one makes sense to me.

[Raptor]

Thigpen-Hit
Poz-Stikeout
DF-Hit
Baybin-Strikeout
Colon-Strikeout
B.Smith-Hit
Clabo-Strikeout
Thigpen-Hit
Clary-Strikeout


So we are just under .500 with a bunch of singles and we are missing on HR's so far

[X-Era]

Thigpen-Hit
Poz-Stikeout
DF-Hit
Baybin-Strikeout
Colon-Strikeout
B.Smith-Hit
Clabo-Strikeout
Thigpen-Hit
Clary-Strikeout


So we are just under .500 with a bunch of singles and we are missing on HR's so farFirst, that's black and white with no scale. Second, I can't give a score for a player we never had and didn't end up with.

[Raptor]

First, that's black and white with no scale. Second, I can't give a score for a player we never had and didn't end up with.

I think a point value should be attached to the FA's we are striking out on. Gives a more real picture of how FA'cy is going for the Bills

Thigpen: 1
Poz: -2
DF: 2
Baybin: -1
Colon: -5
B.Smith: 1
Clabo: -5
Clary: -4

So we are sitting at minus -13 right now

[X-Era]

I think a point value should be attached to the FA's we are striking out on. Gives a more real picture of how FA'cy is going for the Bills

Thigpen: 1
Poz: -2
DF: 2
Baybin: -1
Colon: -5
B.Smith: 1
Clabo: -5
Clary: -4

So we are sitting at minus -13 right nowCan't do it because we can't get the real details. It's gotta be something more tangible.

[Raptor]

Can't do it because we can't get the real details. It's gotta be something more tangible.

Then your system is flawed because its nearly impossible for the Bills to come out with a negative score and doesn't give the whole picture of how FA'cy is going

[X-Era]

Then your system is flawed because its nearly impossible for the Bills to come out with a negative score and doesn't give the whole picture of how FA'cy is goingThey would end up with a negative score if they lost more significant players then they added. They aren't far off from that. And the Pats just added Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth... where would they be right now? +8?

Besides, there is like 500 UFA's... I guess were at -500?

I can't count people who didn't sign.

[DraftBoy]

TJ Langley is a DE from Arkansas Tech.

[X-Era]

TJ Langley is a DE from Arkansas Tech.Sorry, can't read, fixed.

[DraftBoy]

Sorry, can't read, fixed.

No problem, here to help. :up:

[Raptor]

They would end up with a negative score if they lost more significant players then they added. They aren't far off from that. And the Pats just added Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth... where would they be right now? +8?

Except you have assigned them positive points for not bringing back some players a trend the I assume will continue


Besides, there is like 500 UFA's... I guess were at -500?

I can't count people who didn't sign.

Count the ones we are connected too because there is no way missing out on Clabo shouldn't be calculated on a FA'cy scorecard

[Jan Reimers]

Looking at our FA situation right now, I would score things this way:

If we don't replace Poz, -4
If we don't add an OT, -3
If we don't add a TE, -2
Thigpen, +2
Smith, +1

I think we stand at -6 at this point, based on our having plenty of cap room, but not filling three major holes.

[X-Era]

Looking at our FA situation right now, I would score things this way:

If we don't replace Poz, -4
If we don't add an OT, -3
If we don't add a TE, -2
Thigpen, +2
Smith, +1

I think we stand at -6 at this point, based on our having plenty of cap room, but not filling three major holes.In response to you and Raptor. The concept was how free agency has affected the overall talent.

I gave Poz a -2 because I ranked the loss of him as a -3 but added a +1 because the contract was too high.

That number would be offset if they sign someone of equal value to the team. If they sign Burnett, I would give him a +2 or +3 because I don't think he's a star (+5), I don't think he's a top 10 player at his position (+4), I would give him solid starter (+3). A marginal starter would be +2 and a backup would be +1 and a roster filler/camp fodder would be 0.

Where I may be too high right now is giving Drayton a +2. Because he was on the team before FA and is on the team now. That's a 0 really. We won;t end up better as far as overall talent than last year by re-signing Drayton. It's a push. I think I just convinced myself to move it down to 0... It's not a net add.

At OT, we can't do anything with it yet because we haven't added or lost anything in FA yet. Using that approach any RFA that we didn't tender and don't need should also be a 0 because it's no loss but isn't a + until someone is added.

Same with TE.

Thigpen I could see a +2. But we should then change Brohm to -1 because it's the loss of a backup.

Agree on Brad Smith.

So heres the new changes:

Florence= 0
OT= no change yet so 0
RFA's not tendered and cosnidered no loss = 0

This seems to make more sense.

Moved +7 down to +3.

[X-Era]

Except you have assigned them positive points for not bringing back some players a trend the I assume will continue



Count the ones we are connected too because there is no way missing out on Clabo shouldn't be calculated on a FA'cy scorecardI could count them if it was verified. But the truth is we didn't land them and didn't have them so it's a net 0. It was no change. I agree that signing Clabo would be a +4 but we didn't do it.

We can rank the whole roster and it may make sense to do that at some point because I would put our RT position as a +1 at this point... backup's and not even marginal starters.

[Throne Logic]

In response to you and Raptor. The concept was how free agency has affected the overall talent.

I gave Poz a -2 because I ranked the loss of him as a -3 but added a +1 because the contract was too high.

Regardless of who does or doesn't get signed to replace Poz, you should stick with the -3. You already established that you are grading on "overall talent". Talent isn't effected by cost.

I'd also suggest any free agent loss, even the likes of Ellison or McCargo, should represent at least a -1. We still lost an experienced depth player. If we sign a mediocre backup/depth FA, then give them a +1 or a +2. In the end that will balance out more evenly.

I agree with leaving any retained FA's = 0 on the scoreboard.

[X-Era]

Regardless of who does or doesn't get signed to replace Poz, you should stick with the -3. You already established that you are grading on "overall talent". Talent isn't effected by cost.

I'd also suggest any free agent loss, even the likes of Ellison or McCargo, should represent at least a -1. We still lost an experienced depth player. If we sign a mediocre backup/depth FA, then give them a +1 or a +2. In the end that will balance out more evenly.

I agree with leaving any retained FA's = 0 on the scoreboard.Sound reasoning.

My issue with giving Ellison or McCargo a -1 is that I consider them camp fodder. I really don't think either would make the team. And they would go to a 0 or -1 when they actually sign with someone. Until then the possibility exists for us to re-sign them... I didn't assign a score because they haven't been officially lost until they sign somewhere else and not here.

But you convinced me to go with a -1 for both if (when) they sign somewhere else.

On Poz I agree with a -3. Let me go back through and see if we have enough votes to justify it.

[X-Era]

Trevor Harris is not signed, adjusted the score down to +2.

http://blogs.buffalobills.com/2011/07/30/another-qb/

Basically we are almost the same at this point for overall talent.

[X-Era]

Then your system is flawed because its nearly impossible for the Bills to come out with a negative score and doesn't give the whole picture of how FA'cy is goingWhy would we score the Bills on moves they never made? Losing out on FA is bad, I agree. But they end up with a negative score if they lose players and don't get players who are equal or better.

And when our UFA's sign elsewhere, that becomes a negative score for each one.

[YardRat]

Except you have assigned them positive points for not bringing back some players a trend the I assume will continue



Count the ones we are connected too because there is no way missing out on Clabo shouldn't be calculated on a FA'cy scorecard

We have no idea whether or not the interest in Clabo was genuine or not.

[Raptor]

Why would we score the Bills on moves they never made? Losing out on FA is bad, I agree. But they end up with a negative score if they lose players and don't get players who are equal or better.

And when our UFA's sign elsewhere, that becomes a negative score for each one.


Except you gave a B.Brohm a +1

So by your logic and system us not bringing back B.Brohm carries more weight on a FA'cy scorecard than not convincing Clabo to sign here and fill a massive hole on the roster

I assume you are not going to give minus to any of our other UFA's either and only positives because you can easily justify it by the fan mantra of every fan base when they lose a FA "They overpaid" or he was "Overrated"

By that way you can never have a real objective grade to how the period is going for the Bills. How can you not count how we missed out on players that we had interest in from numerous sources?

[Raptor]

We have no idea whether or not the interest in Clabo was genuine or not.


What else do you want?

He said he was, multiple media sources said he was...

Again this system is flawed right now because there is no way the Bills can have a positive FA'cy period score when the team has arguably gotten worse since the start of FA'cy

[X-Era]

What else do you want?

He said he was, multiple media sources said he was...

Again this system is flawed right now because there is no way the Bills can have a positive FA'cy period score when the team has arguably gotten worse since the start of FA'cyAdding Thigpen and Brad Smith are upgrades. Poz was a loss I agree and scored it that way. It's only slightly positive.

[YardRat]

What else do you want?

He said he was, multiple media sources said he was...

Again this system is flawed right now because there is no way the Bills can have a positive FA'cy period score when the team has arguably gotten worse since the start of FA'cy

Just because public mention is made of a team being interested in a specific FA, that doesn't mean that the team is really interested in signing him.

Front offices and agents work together in more ways than just negotiating and signing their own players.

[X-Era]

Nick Barnett added... +3 in my mind.

[Mindbender]

Nick Barnett added... +3 in my mind.

Yup, I'd agree. I could even see the argument for +4 because of his experience in the 3-4.

[X-Era]

Added Buster Davis: +1 and added Donte Whitner going elsewhere: -2

[X-Era]

Updated with the Evans trade. We are basically neutral at this point from FA. We have done little to nothing overall to make this team better as far as overall talent goes.

[X-Era]

John McCargo signed with the Buc's, score updated.

[X-Era]

Considering we sit at 26+ mill under the cap and did nothing so far to significantly improve the overall talent, the score speaks for itself at this point. Moreover, it continues to tell a bigger tale... You get what you pay for.

[X-Era]

Updated with the Morrison signing.

[YardRat]

I think you need to adjust your score and disregard the Evans trade, per the op...

[X-Era]

I think you need to adjust your score and disregard the Evans trade, per the op... I think I get what you're saying.

Maybe this is a better statement:

This area ignores the draft which is a crap shoot and looks at all the other moves in the off-season.The Evans trade still counts

[YardRat]

Well, if you want to change the rules mid-stream, it's your game.

Hit the edit button instead of the quote again?

[X-Era]

Well, if you want to change the rules mid-stream, it's your game.

Hit the edit button instead of the quote again?Yes I did. My mistake. I fixed it.

But anyways, what do you mean? This is supposed to track what we did outside of the draft, in the off-season. Trades and signings all count. What's wrong with that?

[YardRat]

Jesus, #1---Will you please stop editing my posts?

#2--I was merely pointing out that counting the Evans trade doesn't fit in with the parameters you set for yourself in the op...

I'm keeping a scoreboard for free agent signings and losses.

Obviously the draftees will make an impact. But for the purposes of this, let's just look at what were doing in the FA phase.

[X-Era]

Jesus, #1---Will you please stop editing my posts?

#2--I was merely pointing out that counting the Evans trade doesn't fit in with the parameters you set for yourself in the op...

I'm keeping a scoreboard for free agent signings and losses.

Obviously the draftees will make an impact. But for the purposes of this, let's just look at what were doing in the FA phase.
1) Yes... Easy, it was a mistake... relax.

2) The point of this thread was to look at what we did in the off-season, outside the draft.

3) Based on #2, the Evans trade fits. If my wording was bad in the OP, I can fix it.

[X-Era]

Just so were clear, extending a current player does nothing to the current talent level. So it's not recorded and is no change to the total.

[YardRat]

What about Ruvell Martin?

[X-Era]

What about Ruvell Martin?Thank you, my mistake.

[X-Era]

I'm not calling this offseason officially done yet. After week one, players can can sign without a guarantee for this years money.

I think teams may make a move or two after week one.

Thoughts on when this off-season closes? Is it just as easy as when real games start or do we have to consider some rules and when additional FA's may be signed?