Buffalo Bills Buffalo Bills 2016-17: Part VII (7-9) – The Tyrod Decision & Free Agency

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[Zman5778]

If Peppers gets to 10 and we don't run up to the podium and gleefully pull a Tim Murray............I might lead the torch-carrying mob to OBD myself.

 

[26CornerBlitz]

If Peppers gets to 10 and we don't run up to the podium and gleefully pull a Tim Murray............I might lead the torch-carrying mob to OBD myself.

If I had a choice, I'd take either of Hooker or Adams before Peppers. Peppers hasn't made many impact plays on defense.

 

[Zman5778]

If I had a choice, I'd take either of Hooker or Adams before Peppers. Peppers hasn't made many impact plays on defense.

Frankly, I'm good with any one of those 3. Instant upgrade to what is currently our weakest position.

I do not want us to use a pick on QB in round 1 in this draft. In any way, shape or form.

 

[brian_griffin]

Separate thought here. Probably not original, but perhaps some of it is. Could put this in the Bills thread or the Murray thread.

We on this board as well as the Buffalo and national media / talking heads, continue to debate the quality of decisions and current situations as regards both the GMs and coaches of the Bills and Sabres.

The common approach is to look at what is wrong / went wrong.
Some times, but not always, credit is given for what is right / went right.
After that, some people (e.g., Sullivan) go back to the negative and play shoulda coulda woulda. Most of which is irrelevant.
I believe much of this approach pointless because it doesn't get to the root.

I have a slightly different thought (I hope). A work colleague of mine (former attache for an US Army General) once said it's easy to make perfect decisions with perfect data. The challenge is to make good decisions with imperfect data. (He likely paraphrased or quoted someone else, but his comment was based on his military training, as applied to the business we were in.)

The extension to that (paraphrasing from Peter Drucker), is that knowing the majority of decisions will be made with imperfect data, how do you risk-position to limit the downside risk of an erroneous decision. (The inference being bad decisions WILL be made, they just can't be too frequent or too crippling, which implies bad information/decision processes and/or insufficient risk mitigation.)

Thinking / questioning in this manner has the added benefit of reducing the credit given to "good luck" by questioning whether the good outcome was a result of better information, better decision processes, or better risk positioning to leverage upside, or truly luck.

Perhaps we should evaluate the current upper management situation of each Buffalo club in that way. Specifically:

1. Is there systemic evidence wrong decisions are made based on available good data?

2. Is there systemic evidence decisions (good or bad) are made on incomplete / hasty data? (Where waiting was appropriate.)

3. Is there systemic evidence decisions (good or bad) are knowingly made hastily, but there is insufficient risk adjustment?

Another thought... I don't follow baseball, but my understanding is Theo Epstein is a metrics fanatic, and baseball lends itself very well to metrics (which we've discussed previously). Any baseball fans out there know if there's any documented evidence on Theo Epstein as pertains to his decision processes and/or risk positioning?

Thoughts?

 

[Jim Bob]

Given Rex's love for Clemson players since his son plays there, it would be so ironic if Watson were the pick there.

If they are going to let Taylor walk, it won't shock me if they take Watson or Kizer.

But, this could be EJ all over again. This appears to be a bad year to need to take a QB.

 

[26CornerBlitz]

JIM SZOKE: "HE HAS THE TRAITS YOU LOOK FOR" (7:09)

Panthers radio analyst Jim Szoke called into the John Murphy Show to discuss head coaching candidate Sean McDermott. Szoke talked about what he thinks makes McDermott qualified and what he's done in Carolina in recent years.

 

[Jim Bob]

Separate thought here. Probably not original, but perhaps some of it is. Could put this in the Bills thread or the Murray thread.

Another thought... I don't follow baseball, but my understanding is Theo Epstein is a metrics fanatic, and baseball lends itself very well to metrics (which we've discussed previously). Any baseball fans out there know if there's any documented evidence on Theo Epstein as pertains to his decision processes and/or risk positioning?

Thoughts?

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2015/11...-must-choose-the-risk-youre-comfortable-with/

Epstein admits the difficult part is weighing the downside of every potential move, but he can’t be afraid.

“You always worry about too big a percentage of your payroll tied up in any one or two players,†Epstein said in an interview on the Spiegel and Goff Show on Wednesday morning. “And obviously with pitching, there’s more attrition with pitching than there is in any one area. So it’s obviously a concern. But every possible move has risk and has reward, and there’s no button that you can press that makes you better in a really impactful way without some meaningful downside. Sometimes the downside is paralyzing your payroll in future years in a way that’s really hard for you to come to terms with or hard for you to fathom or a way that might be unacceptable in the end and you walk away from it. Or it might come from giving up a huge chunk of your young player inventory or your farm system or you’re ruining all that depth and then you’re in a position where you don’t have that talent you want coming in future years or it might take away from your big league club in order to add a different piece.

“There’s a cost to every addition, and you have to come to terms with that and you just have to pick and choose the risk you’re comfortable with and know that you’re going to have sleepless nights no matter what. You’re going to have sleepless nights in April after you sign that free agent and he goes out and debuts and you want to make sure he’s healthy and good and adjusts well. But you also have sleepless nights when you give up really good players and watch them (play well) for another organization. That’s just the cost of doing business. You have to just accept that and focus on what it means for your club and your organization going forward.â€

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/theo-epsteins-curse-breakers/

Those kinds of distinctions particularly help put Epstein’s accomplishment in perspective. As one of the first wave of young, Ivy League-educated, statistically savvy general managers, Epstein was able to reverse Boston’s curse by building what was effectively the prototypical early-sabermetric ballclub: patience and power at the plate, and power pitching on the mound. If the ball was ever put in play, you took your chances with the most adequate defense you could cobble together while still propping up your on-base percentage and slugging average. The 2004 Red Sox were one of the first teams to win with that formula, but Epstein’s 2016 champion Cubs show how much the winning equation has changed as sabermetrics has matured. Now, the value of dynamic free-swingers like Javier Baez has been rediscovered, as has the importance of defense. The secret to breaking Chicago’s curse was very different than the one that broke Boston’s hex 12 years earlier.

And if Epstein ever molds another champion elsewhere, it’s a good bet that team will look different than either the ‘04 Sox or the ‘16 Cubs. Another good bet: It will probably set another prototype for subsequent teams to follow, whether they’re trying to end a championship drought or not.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/...ein-success/zzwKa5GtkM7SACUChRaZPI/story.html

What are the defining traits of Epstein as a leader? A survey of several people who have worked with him yielded a number of characteristics.

■ Intelligence and curiosity: “He has intellectual gifts that allow him to see through complicated issues more quickly than most but also make adjustments more quickly than most,†said former Red Sox GM Ben Cherington, now with the Blue Jays.

“Just as important, he’s got an intuitive sense for people and a sense of humor that allows others to see him as human despite those intellectual gifts.

It’s a rare combination.â€

Epstein does not suffer fools, and he will cut colleagues to the quick at times, but he also is willing to laugh at himself, creating a sense of humility and engendering trust and loyalty from those who work with him.


Baseball operations colleagues likewise feel that he deflects credit to his co-workers in a way that builds a team-first ethos, a notion that came across in his comments Wednesday night.

“What makes a great organization is 1,000 small sacrifices when no one is looking,†Epstein told MLB Network. “Driving the extra mile to get a last look at a player, showing up early to do work with a minor leaguer to help him work on his weakness, an R&D guy pulling an all-nighter because he’s got an idea and wants to see it through, the coaches working with players, the manager, and the togetherness in the front office.

“I get to see those little sacrifices. That’s what makes a great organization.â€

■ Clarity of vision: Epstein proclaimed that he’d build a scouting and player development machine with the Red Sox, turning a team that for decades had traded much of its best young talent into one focused on building around it. He did that.

With the Cubs, he made clear that there were no shortcuts and that sustained success would come only with a rebuild from the ground up. That long view of the five-year process held true.

■ Boldness and creativity: He is not afraid of altering a status quo that isn’t working. The most dramatic examples came with the four-team deal in the moments before the 2004 trade deadline that saw the Sox part with franchise icon Nomar Garciaparra and the three-team trade that sent Manny Ramirez packing and brought Jason Bay in 2008. Epstein was willing to rock the boat and make moves that would be heavily scrutinized if it meant, in his eyes, a better team.

■ Attention to detail: When Epstein took over the Cubs after the 2011 season, he conducted a series of all-day organizational forums on specific areas — one on pitching, one on offensive philosophy, one on baserunning — that involved front-office members, player development staff, and scouts.

One session included an animated debate about whether players should make their baserunning turns by hitting the bag with their right or left foot. After a discussion that included coaches running the bases to test the theories, the Cubs defined their process: They would be a right-footed organization when turning the bases.

Kris Bryant’s flawless right-footed turns contributed to a pair of key runs in the Cubs’ Game 7 win.

The willingness to oversee a lively debate on such a detail — the significance of which might have been hard to see at the time — is a hallmark of how Epstein operates.

■ Competitiveness: Epstein’s own work ethic and almost maniacal competitiveness — cultivated not just in his passion for the success of his team but also in front-office basketball games and even boxing matches — rubs off on those around him.

“He’s been focused on pursuing this career from the time he was 14, 15 years old,†said Red Sox president Sam Kennedy, who grew up with Epstein in Brookline. “He’s always known exactly what he’s wanted to do.

“Even though he’s had so much success, I don’t think he’s ever taken it for granted. He’s one of the most competitive people I know. He works as hard as anybody. He loves it. He’s passionate about it. He’s all-in on the career. It’s not really a career choice. It’s a lifestyle choice for him.â€

■ Empowerment and delegation: Many are the stories of interns recounting the ways in which Epstein engaged them and made them feel like part of the established staff. He encourages brainstorms and creative ideas in others, particularly on trades and potential buy-low opportunities, to create idea factories. That approach drove his employees to work hard in a way that contributed to their professional growth.

He’s also not shy about entrusting significant responsibilities to others. For instance, Epstein revealed in the hours after the Cubs won that he wouldn’t be shy about ceding key responsibilities to GM Jed Hoyer in the coming days.

“Jed’s in charge. I’m going on a bender!†Epstein said implishly to MLB Network, referring to Hoyer as “Alexander Haig.†“I might come back. I might not!â€

http://www.slate.com/articles/sport...ox_now_he_s_rescuing_the_cubs_here_s_how.html

Epstein has taken two very difficult jobs and made them look easy. When you add up his accomplishments, you get a lot of common-sense decision-making yoked to a strong perception of who’s valuable and who’s not. He isn’t an innovator like Branch Rickey or Billy Beane; he’s just very, very good at his job. The Red Sox and the Cubs hadn’t had anyone in his class prior to his arrival. When he arrived in Boston and Chicago, he put good players in place and they did the rest. Maybe breaking a curse is just that simple.

Here are a few decent articles about the two different historic rebuilds that he oversaw.

I think Epstein is great at seeing the way to build the next great roster as opposed to trying to copy the model that worked last season.

In pro sports, you get all sorts of people that try and copy the template that worked last year instead of trying to predict the template that will work next year or three years down the road.

Epstein is also good at maximizing his resources and then using them to his advantage. Just look at how he got the assets to make the Chapman trade this past season.

And nobody cares that he spent that many good young assets for a rental player that went right back to the Yankees because they are still drunk from celebrating the Cubs winning the World Series.

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

If Peppers gets to 10 and we don't run up to the podium and gleefully pull a Tim Murray............I might lead the torch-carrying mob to OBD myself.

I'm a big Michigan fan and I wouldn't take peppers. He's too high in that mock as it is.

 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[is the answer jesus]

Given Rex's love for Clemson players since his son plays there, it would be so ironic if Watson were the pick there.

If they are going to let Taylor walk, it won't shock me if they take Watson or Kizer.

But, this could be EJ all over again. This appears to be a bad year to need to take a QB.

If they draft Watson I'm officially done with this team. He's terrible. Kizer would be a much better pick, but I'd still prefer they go DB with that pick.

 

[dma0034]

I'd like Mike Williams.... just not sure about WRs named Mike Williams

 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[NotABadPeriod]

I'd like Mike Williams.... just not sure about WRs named Mike Williams

How about OTs named Mike Williams?

 

[kirby11]

I'd like Mike Williams.... just not sure about WRs named Mike Williams

If Kyle and Aaron retire we obviously need to restock the Williams pipeline

 

[kirby11]

Also based on the endless love affair with EJ, Watson 100% strikes me as a Whaley type player.
I'd much rather keep Tyrod and maybe take a qb late than reach for a not great qb prospect.
But, bills.

 

[dkollidas]

Drafting a quarterback is always a crapshoot.

2005 people said there wasn't one worth taking in the 1st round and that San Francisco was only taking one bc they had to. They took Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers fell to 24th.

Derek Carr is basically a top-10 QB in the league. He was a 2nd round pick that no one thought was worthy of a 1st round pick.

2011 had Cam Newton to first overall. Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert and Christian Ponder all also went in the first round. Andy Dalton, the 2nd best QB of that class, went after those three guys in the 2nd round.

Robert Griffin III was touted as a generational type player, taken in the top-5 of his draft, and is now on his 2nd team while the guy picked in the 4th round that year by the same team (Kirk Cousins), will likely be franchise tagged and threw for over 4,500 yds this season.

I'll never be mad at the team for taking a quarterback in the first round. If you like the guy you take a shot. Quarterback to me is the hardest position to hit on in all of sports. But also the most important position in all of sports. If you have a great one, your team will be great, if you have a bad one, your team will he bad. And if you have a mediocre one, your team can be good if you have literally every other position on your team in good condition.

It's a league where Below average guys who are "game managers" can make $15M-$18M per year in a league where the best players on the defensive side of the ball make $18M-$20M per year. It is hands down the most important position in football, and to say because this class doesn't have a "good grade of quarterbacks", doesn't mean there aren't guys who won't be good NFL quarterbacks.

I also believe a lot of Buffalo fans have some EJ phobia. I'm pretty sure that Nix was adamant on taking a quarterback that year, as he was the GM, and that Whaley was allowed to pick which guy he wanted (basically trying to give Whaley a guy for him to groom as Nix left the organization). Nix did come out and say they were going to take one as well, which basically pinned them in a corner. And honestly, of that entire class, you could argue EJ is probably the best of the group (I know it's a terrible group, but he and Glennon probably take the cake).

 

[Jim Bob]

Also based on the endless love affair with EJ, Watson 100% strikes me as a Whaley type player.
I'd much rather keep Tyrod and maybe take a qb late than reach for a not great qb prospect.
But, bills.

Step 1: Hire Frank Reich
Step 2: Draft Chad Kelly in the 4th
Step 3: Profit

 

[Jim Bob]

Drafting a quarterback is always a crapshoot.

2005 people said there wasn't one worth taking in the 1st round and that San Francisco was only taking one bc they had to. They took Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers fell to 24th.

Nobody said there were no 1st round QBs that year and everyone was shocked that Rodgers wasn't a top 5 pick.

Derek Carr is basically a top-10 QB in the league. He was a 2nd round pick that no one thought was worthy of a 1st round pick.

I still think too many decision makers were scared off because of how his brother did. It's logic I don't subscribe to, but I think that was a factor.

2011 had Cam Newton to first overall. Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert and Christian Ponder all also went in the first round. Andy Dalton, the 2nd best QB of that class, went after those three guys in the 2nd round.

That was a super scary QB class.

Robert Griffin III was touted as a generational type player, taken in the top-5 of his draft, and is now on his 2nd team while the guy picked in the 4th round that year by the same team (Kirk Cousins), will likely be franchise tagged and threw for over 4,500 yds this season.

That whole situation was just weird because he was OROTY over Andrew Luck, got hurt late in his rookie year, and things fell off the rails from there.

And that is the second time that Washington took a high 1st round QB and a late round QB and the late round QB did more with the team.

In 1994, they drafted Heath Shuler 3rd overall and Gus Frerotte in the 7th round (197th overall).

Shuler was a complete bust and Frerotte was named to the Pro Bowl twice in Washington.

I'll never be mad at the team for taking a quarterback in the first round. If you like the guy you take a shot. Quarterback to me is the hardest position to hit on in all of sports. But also the most important position in all of sports. If you have a great one, your team will be great, if you have a bad one, your team will he bad. And if you have a mediocre one, your team can be good if you have literally every other position on your team in good condition.

It's a league where Below average guys who are "game managers" can make $15M-$18M per year in a league where the best players on the defensive side of the ball make $18M-$20M per year. It is hands down the most important position in football, and to say because this class doesn't have a "good grade of quarterbacks", doesn't mean there aren't guys who won't be good NFL quarterbacks.

I also believe a lot of Buffalo fans have some EJ phobia. I'm pretty sure that Nix was adamant on taking a quarterback that year, as he was the GM, and that Whaley was allowed to pick which guy he wanted (basically trying to give Whaley a guy for him to groom as Nix left the organization). Nix did come out and say they were going to take one as well, which basically pinned them in a corner. And honestly, of that entire class, you could argue EJ is probably the best of the group (I know it's a terrible group, but he and Glennon probably take the cake).

You have to know when to take a shot at a first round QB.

Some years are better than others. But usually, you get only 1 or 2 quality starters in a draft.

I wouldn't take a 1st round QB this year. In fact, I'd trade back and use the extra pick to take a QB with a mid-round pick.

Even though the optics wouldn't be great, I think Kelly is worth the roll of the dice if he's there in the 4th or 5th round.

 

[Jim Bob]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...anahan-thinks-denver-is-the-best-job-opening/

Falcons offensive coordinator Kyle Shanahan is a candidate for most of the NFL’s six head-coaching vacancies, but there’s reportedly one he prefers over the others, and that’s the one his dad once had.

The Denver job is the one Shanahan has his eyes on, according to Mike Garafolo of NFL Network. Shanahan’s father, Mike Shanahan, coached the Broncos to two Super Bowl titles.

If Broncos G.M. John Elway wants to keep the Broncos on the same course set by the recently retired head coach Gary Kubiak, Shanahan would make a lot of sense: Shanahan’s first coordinator job was under Kubiak in Houston, and Shanahan would likely be open to keeping a lot of Kubiak’s assistants, which Elway said he hoped the next head coach would do.

Shanahan is set to interview with Elway on Saturday. Shanahan has also drawn interest from the 49ers, Jaguars and Rams.

 

[Jim Bob]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...lynn-set-to-interview-with-bills-on-thursday/

The Bills have plenty of information about Anthony Lynn after he spent the last two years in the organization and closed out the 2016 season as their interim head coach, all of which makes him a candidate for the permanent head coaching position.

It doesn’t get him a pass on the formal interview process, however. Per John Wawrow of the Associated Press, Lynn will have that interview on Thursday.

It’s the second interview of the coaching search season for Lynn. He spoke to the 49ers on Wednesday, which was the same day that the Bills interviewed Panthers defensive coordinator Sean McDermott for their opening.

Early word in Buffalo was that Lynn was the odds-on favorite to get the job, something that General Manager Doug Whaley said wasn’t the case in a Monday press conference. In addition to the 49ers, Lynn has also drawn interest from the Jaguars and Rams.

 

[Icicle]

People were low on EJ because it was clear he was getting carried in college and when push came to shove, he missed his passes or choked out. Just look at his college 'reels'. There's nothing special there. The writing was on the wall. He's done exactly the same in pro.

They need to stop worrying about these guys' athleticism and throwing metrics and more on their in-game character and footwork.

And if they aren't confident in their ability to do that, they shouldn't be drafting QB above round 2. It guts the depth of the team too much when they do.

When we're a team that falls apart because 2 guys get injured because there's no depth, we don't have the luxury to be shooting for the moon. QB has been a problem over the years, but it hasn't been THE problem. Have we been able to say over the last two decades that we have a great O-line? Who do you expect to excel with that?

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

People were low on EJ because it was clear he was getting carried in college and when push came to shove, he missed his passes or choked out. Just look at his college 'reels'. There's nothing special there. The writing was on the wall. He's done exactly the same in pro.

They need to stop worrying about these guys' athleticism and throwing metrics and more on their in-game character and footwork.

And if they aren't confident in their ability to do that, they shouldn't be drafting QB above round 2. It guts the depth of the team too much when they do.

When we're a team that falls apart because 2 guys get injured because there's no depth, we don't have the luxury to be shooting for the moon. QB has been a problem over the years, but it hasn't been THE problem. Have we been able to say over the last two decades that we have a great O-line? Who do you expect to excel with that?

Raiders riding into the playoffs comfortably with a below average D and the worst yards per play in the league. You can be deficient and win, with the Bills run game you need average QB play to win.

If QB is a problem then it is THE problem. Minor improvements in QB translate to greater on field improvements than any other position. Dollar for dollar improvements are worth more when they are at QB.

 

[Myllz]

People were low on EJ because it was clear he was getting carried in college and when push came to shove, he missed his passes or choked out. Just look at his college 'reels'. There's nothing special there. The writing was on the wall. He's done exactly the same in pro.

They need to stop worrying about these guys' athleticism and throwing metrics and more on their in-game character and footwork.

And if they aren't confident in their ability to do that, they shouldn't be drafting QB above round 2. It guts the depth of the team too much when they do.

When we're a team that falls apart because 2 guys get injured because there's no depth, we don't have the luxury to be shooting for the moon. QB has been a problem over the years, but it hasn't been THE problem. Have we been able to say over the last two decades that we have a great O-line? Who do you expect to excel with that?

QB has absolutely been the problem over the years. They haven't had a QB that can reliably make throws on a consistent basis since Bledsoe's first year. If anything you have it backwards. The offensive line could use some work but it's good enough to support a good QB. The Seahawks probably have the worst offensive line in the league, but Wilson makes the offense work anyway. Buffalo has a much better line compared to Seattle, so that's not an issue. They need a consistent starter at QB, and that's been THE need for decades.

 

[Jim Bob]

Raiders riding into the playoffs comfortably with a below average D and the worst yards per play in the league. You can be deficient and win, with the Bills run game you need average QB play to win.

If QB is a problem then it is THE problem. Minor improvements in QB translate to greater on field improvements than any other position. Dollar for dollar improvements are worth more when they are at QB.

For me, it comes down to the whole risk assessment to me.

There is a huge amount of risk with a high 1st round QB.

For me, it will be interesting to watch how Cleveland and their new analytics heavy FO approaches the QB position, especially this year with the 1st overall pick.

If it was me, I would try and trade back this year and continue to try and have 2 1sts every draft until there is an Andrew Luck/Peyton Manning no doubt franchise QB at the top of the draft and then you move everything to get that QB.

In the meantime, take shots in the 3rd to 4th round and try and catch lightning in a bottle ala Russell Wilson, Dak Prescott, Tom Brady, Kirk Cousins, and the like.

Taking shots at 1st round guys that aren't can't miss is a 50-50 shot at best and I think you are better off taking other positions in that situation.