Alex Smith?

[kgun12]

By all indications, KC wants to move on to Patrick Mahomes, so here's the question. Would you trade for Smith this off season? Why or why not and if you would what would you give for him?

He's 33 years old, signed through 2018 at an average salary of $18 million?

I'd go as high as a 3rd, draft our QB of the future next year and let him learn from Smith.

[Skooby]

Guys that play like that will draw more than a 3rd, did you watch the game ?

[kgun12]

Guys that play like that will draw more than a 3rd, did you watch the game ?

So answer the question, would you and what would you give.

[swiper]

By all indications, KC wants to move on to Patrick Mahomes, so here's the question. Would you trade for Smith this off season? Why or why not and if you would what would you give for him?

He's 33 years old, signed through 2018 at an average salary of $18 million?

I'd go as high as a 3rd, draft our QB of the future next year and let him learn from Smith.

Please. There is NO indication they want to move Smith.

And if there ever was (which there wasn't) they'd certainly change their minds after his Thursday performance.

They drafted Mahomes to be a FUTURE QB knowing that Smith won't last forever. THAT is what real NFL teams do. The Chiefs are one. The Bills aren't.

This is one more ridiculous thread to toss on the heap.

[YardRat]

No, I don't think throwing millions at somebody else's QB is the answer...we need to get lucky drafting one of our own and win while he's on his rookie contract. If we had an established rest of the team (defense, offensive line) I might think differently, however.

The bottom line to team success (**cough**Super Bowls**cough**) is building the rest of the team first, than 'hitting' on a QB. It works with young guys, and with the vets.

[sudzy]

Guys that play like that will draw more than a 3rd, did you watch the game ?

He's 33. And one great game does not make a career. I think a 3rd is fair.

[justasportsfan]

One great game does not make him a franchise QB. He's not a QB that has proven to be able to carry the team on his shoulders when need,.on a consistent basis

[Arm of Harm]

The bottom line to team success (**cough**Super Bowls**cough**) is building the rest of the team first, than 'hitting' on a QB. It works with young guys, and with the vets.
I disagree.

Opportunities for drafting franchise QBs are very rare. If you don't already have a franchise QB, and if there's the chance to draft one, you snap him up. Period. Regardless of how good or bad the rest of your team is.

You look at the Oakland Raiders. They were a bad enough team that they had the 5th overall pick (used on Mack). They used their 2nd round pick of that draft on Derek Carr. Now they're a legitimate Super Bowl contender.

Or you look at the Indianapolis Colts. They were a bad enough team that they got the first overall pick, which they used on Peyton Manning. It took them a while to put the right pieces in place around him, but eventually they came away with a Super Bowl win. Also consider the New England Patriots. They went 5-11 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_England_Patriots_seasons) during the 2000 season: a clear indication that not all the pieces were in place. That was Tom Brady's first year with the team, which he spent on the bench watching Bledsoe. In Brady's second year with the team, and his first as starter, the Patriots won the Super Bowl. You look at the Dallas Cowboys. They took Troy Aikman first overall in the 1989 draft, after having gone 3-13 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dallas_Cowboys_seasons) in 1988. They then proceeded to go 1-15 in Aikman's rookie year.

The San Francisco 49ers went 2-14 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_San_Francisco_49ers_seasons) in 1978. They then drafted Joe Montana in 1979. And once again went 2-14 for the 1979 season. Clearly the pieces were not all in place.

[swiper]

He's 33. And one great game does not make a career. I think a 3rd is fair.

Remember the Rob Johnson signing? Oops.

- - - Updated - - -

[WagonCircler]

The San Francisco 49ers went 2-14 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_San_Francisco_49ers_seasons) in 1978. They then drafted Joe Montana in 1979. And once again went 2-14 for the 1979 season. Clearly the pieces were not all in place.

Also, Dallas in 1988 went 3-13, drafted Aikman, and went 1-15 in 1989.

I totally agree about drafting a true franchise QB, but I also believe that a guy like Alex Smith, who has been largely underrated over his career, is worth trading for. He's had some bad injury luck, but let's not forget that he was a first overall pick. A team could win a Super Bowl with him.

To me, if you can grab a guy like that, you go to the Denver model. Build your Defense, which is McDermott's specialty. Except Alex Smith is a far better QB at this point than Peyton was in 2015.

All that said, I think KC would be insane to trade him. And I think they know that.

[Arm of Harm]

Also, Dallas in 1988 went 3-13, drafted Aikman, and went 1-15 in 1989.

I totally agree about drafting a true franchise QB, but I also believe that a guy like Alex Smith, who has been largely underrated over his career, is worth trading for. He's had some bad injury luck, but let's not forget that he was a first overall pick. A team could win a Super Bowl with him.

To me, if you can grab a guy like that, you go to the Denver model. Build your Defense, which is McDermott's specialty. Except Alex Smith is a far better QB at this point than Peyton was in 2015.

All that said, I think KC would be insane to trade him. And I think they know that.

Maybe you could draw a comparison between Alex Smith and Rich Gannon. Gannon had been underrated for most of his career. He had some late career success, and took the Raiders to a Super Bowl appearance.

Alex Smith is also an underrated QB. He's good. But he's 33, so that doesn't give you very many years to work with, before he experiences significant age-related declines in his play. He'd be perfect for a team that has most of the rest of the pieces in place and just needs a quarterback.

The Bills are a rebuilding team. We need time to repair the damage done during the Whaley era. Time to acquire the young player talent Whaley failed to draft. In the rather unlikely event Kansas City was looking to trade Alex Smith, he'd be a very good fit for someone. But not for us. By the time we put the right pieces in place around him, he'd be past his prime.

[Novacane]

Why would we do that? We have Peterman!

[cookie G]

No, I don't think throwing millions at somebody else's QB is the answer...we need to get lucky drafting one of our own and win while he's on his rookie contract. If we had an established rest of the team (defense, offensive line) I might think differently, however.

The bottom line to team success (**cough**Super Bowls**cough**) is building the rest of the team first, than 'hitting' on a QB. It works with young guys, and with the vets.

We never get "built"..and that's the problem.

Damn...the team had the no. 4 defense in the league...a new coach comes in and whines about getting "his" players for the D...and the team spends its top 4 draft picks over 2 years on D. And now 2 of THOSE guys are traded away by the new yucks.

Double damn..the franchise was in a perfect position to draft a guy with a good chance at being a franchise QB...someone who was coveted by teams that know QB's a bit better than Buffalo...

...and we passed him over for a ...cornerback.

Lol...if there is a vicious cycle that needs to be broken for a franchise with a long, long losing streak, it is this one.

[sudzy]

We never get "built"..and that's the problem.

Damn...the team had the no. 4 defense in the league...a new coach comes in and whines about getting "his" players for the D...and the team spends its top 4 draft picks over 2 years on D. And now 2 of THOSE guys are traded away by the new yucks.



That's what happens when you fire HCs every 2-3 years. Then hire a coach with the polar opposite defensive philosophy. How many coaching changes in a row have gone from 4-3 to 3-4? I'm thinking all the way back to Wade.

[swiper]

Let's all remember that both Reid and Smith were available to be had for the right price in 2013. The Bills were in dire need of a coach and a QB that year. KC signed those two. Whaley and Brandon directed OBD to get Doug Marrone (Brandon's Syracuse buddy) and then the Nix/Whaley dynamic duo brought us EJ Manuel. I am STILL mad at them for not getting Reid. Just look at the two teams records since that happened. Buffalo is on it's 3rd coach in that time!!!


Exhibit #1 of the Pegula NFL learning curve (the Pegula NHL learning curve is seperate).

[swiper]

KC Wins:

2013 - 11
2014 - 9
2015 - 11
2016 - 12
2017 - stomped NE

Bills Wins:

2013 - 6
2014 - 9
2015 - 8
2016 - 7

[YardRat]

I disagree.

Eh, maybe not as much as you think, by the next comment...

Opportunities for drafting franchise QBs are very rare. If you don't already have a franchise QB, and if there's the chance to draft one, you snap him up. Period. Regardless of how good or bad the rest of your team is.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating leaving the QB alone until he is the last piece to place...if there is a guy available that you think is 'the' guy, of course you get him at that time.

You look at the Oakland Raiders. They were a bad enough team that they had the 5th overall pick (used on Mack). They used their 2nd round pick of that draft on Derek Carr. Now they're a legitimate Super Bowl contender.


Yeah...look at the Raiders. They went defense first. If they were so sold on Carr as a 'franchise' guy they wouldn't have waited or drafted somebody else at 5. If you truly disagree with me, than you can't support their process.

Or you look at the Indianapolis Colts. They were a bad enough team that they got the first overall pick, which they used on Peyton Manning. It took them a while to put the right pieces in place around him, but eventually they came away with a Super Bowl win. Also consider the New England Patriots. They went 5-11 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_England_Patriots_seasons) during the 2000 season: a clear indication that not all the pieces were in place. That was Tom Brady's first year with the team, which he spent on the bench watching Bledsoe. In Brady's second year with the team, and his first as starter, the Patriots won the Super Bowl. You look at the Dallas Cowboys. They took Troy Aikman first overall in the 1989 draft, after having gone 3-13 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dallas_Cowboys_seasons) in 1988. They then proceeded to go 1-15 in Aikman's rookie year.

The San Francisco 49ers went 2-14 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_San_Francisco_49ers_seasons) in 1978. They then drafted Joe Montana in 1979. And once again went 2-14 for the 1979 season. Clearly the pieces were not all in place.
Manning and Montana are generational talents, teams are going to find one guy like that every 50 years if they are lucky. Look at the history of the teams and the leagues, that's pretty much fact. Getting one of them...or especially a Brady...is the ultimate exception. Even under those circumstances, Peyton never won a championship with Indy until the single season the Colts defense stepped up and dominated in the playoffs. His second ring was with an already-built Broncos. Montana wasn't THE team in San Francisco, just ask Steve Young, or KC fans for that matter.

[Arm of Harm]

if there is a guy available that you think is 'the' guy, of course you get him at that time.

Sounds like we're on the same page.

Yeah...look at the Raiders. They went defense first. If they were so sold on Carr as a 'franchise' guy they wouldn't have waited or drafted somebody else at 5. If you truly disagree with me, than you can't support their process.

If the Raiders had felt there was a 100% chance of Carr being the answer at quarterback, they would have been fools to wait until round 2 to take him. If on the other hand they felt he had a 0% chance of being the answer, then it would have been unwise for them to use a 2nd round pick on him. But what if they thought there was a 20% chance, or 30% chance, of him being the answer? Maybe that's a high enough chance to justify the use of an early 2nd round pick, not high enough to justify a top-5 pick.

Manning and Montana are generational talents, teams are going to find one guy like that every 50 years if they are lucky.

No argument from me. All the more reason to make QB the absolute first priority in the draft. No guarantees of success, but you can at least put yourself in a position to succeed.


Montana wasn't THE team in San Francisco, just ask Steve Young, or KC fans for that matter.
Also true. One could argue that the 49ers of the '80s were one of the three most talented teams in the post-merger era. (The other two being the Steelers of the '70s and the Cowboys of the mid '90s.) Granted, a big part of the 49ers' talent was their talent at the QB position. But they also had a very good OL, a very good defense, and (after drafting Jerry Rice) the best WR ever.

[Night Train]

The "guy" we are going to get is coming in the 2018 draft to compete with Peterman.