Moneyball?
#1
Posted 17 March 2013 - 03:19 PM
LV
#2
Posted 17 March 2013 - 03:23 PM
LVBillsBackr, on 17 March 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:
LV
We can't say they look smart -or stupid - yet because they haven't given us much to go on. Bills fans can be rightfully skeptical given past results.
#3
Posted 17 March 2013 - 03:31 PM
#4
Posted 17 March 2013 - 03:33 PM
#5
Posted 17 March 2013 - 03:50 PM
Meathead, on 17 March 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:
Ding!!!!!
#6
Posted 17 March 2013 - 03:57 PM
Meathead, on 17 March 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:
Agreed. This is one year i am not in panic mode due to the lack of action. I want to see how the entire offseason plays out.
#7
Posted 17 March 2013 - 04:20 PM
Meathead, on 17 March 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:
#8
Posted 17 March 2013 - 10:01 PM
LVBillsBackr, on 17 March 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:
LV
Analytics?.....perhaps technically yes. Moneyball......definitely no.
Analytics literally means "the science of logical analysis".
It doesn't take a whole lot of numbers apart from the cap figures.....nor a whole lot of logical deduction to see that we have "X" dollars that we can spend........and "Y" number of holes that we need to fill with decent players. If we sign player "S" to a contract that costs most of "X"......we have no money left to sign "Y-1".
The "moneyball" concept that you are referring to simply means "value for money".
The cap naturally enforces the "value for money" concept in the NFL.
#9
Posted 17 March 2013 - 10:19 PM
#10
Posted 17 March 2013 - 11:20 PM
Oh, so now that they spent so much on one pass rusher last year they decided to be more careful this year. Not really seeing how that builds a competitive team.
As far as the "moneyball" idea goes. The Bills would be wise to understand its the stars in the NFL that people come to the stadium to see, and not a bunch of scrubs. A perfect example of that is when there was a strike, and basically nobody wants to shell out big buck on Sunday to watch a bunch of no names play pro football.
Not only that, winning in the NFL requires that almost every aspect of a team being top notch, QB, offense, defense, schemes, coaches, front office, owner. The current Buffalo Bills don't excel in any of those areas that I can see, not one!
#12
Posted 18 March 2013 - 06:52 AM
Meathead, on 17 March 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:
The nutshell... Mario exemplifies this. Getting paid like he is Bruce smith, performed, at least thus far, like he is Aaron Schobel.
#13
Posted 18 March 2013 - 07:03 AM
over 20 years of fanhood, on 18 March 2013 - 06:52 AM, said:
The nutshell... Mario exemplifies this. Getting paid like he is Bruce smith, performed, at least thus far, like he is Aaron Schobel.
Yup... He should be sent packing.
#14
Posted 18 March 2013 - 07:18 AM
RuntheDamnBall, on 17 March 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:
#15
Posted 19 March 2013 - 12:01 AM
mrags, on 18 March 2013 - 07:03 AM, said:
Yup... He should be sent packing.
Why should he be sent packing? That pretty dumb. For all the guarenteed money he's owed they be foolish not to get some more production from him.
As for he rest:
"Doesnt Schobels best season in Buffalo = 10 sacks?" ***ehhhhh...Wrong****
"If that is so", ***its not*** .
"However, it was," excuse, excuse, excuse, excuse and excuse.
$100 million should buy more than 10.5 sacks and excuses. But that's not the point, the point is these top free agents in the initial frenzy get way overpaid and they never live up to their deal. Mario got paid more than any DE in the game and is a 5 year pro, his old team has done better without him, his new team did worse with him and the guy is like 15% of the cap.
These high dollar free agents rarely play as well as the big contract expectations established at the signing.
#16
Posted 19 March 2013 - 01:11 AM
FeartheLosing, on 17 March 2013 - 11:20 PM, said:
It's hard enough to pick guys with a track record that succeed on a new team. Let alone people off the street, which evidently, Buddy is targeting.
I'm not crowing about not signing big name FAs, I'm crowing about not signing any FAs. Maybe that will change. I hope so.
#17
Posted 19 March 2013 - 08:05 AM
over 20 years of fanhood, on 19 March 2013 - 12:01 AM, said:
Why should he be sent packing? That pretty dumb. For all the guarenteed money he's owed they be foolish not to get some more production from him.
As for he rest:
"Doesnt Schobels best season in Buffalo = 10 sacks?" ***ehhhhh...Wrong****
"If that is so", ***its not*** .
"However, it was," excuse, excuse, excuse, excuse and excuse.
$100 million should buy more than 10.5 sacks and excuses. But that's not the point, the point is these top free agents in the initial frenzy get way overpaid and they never live up to their deal. Mario got paid more than any DE in the game and is a 5 year pro, his old team has done better without him, his new team did worse with him and the guy is like 15% of the cap.
These high dollar free agents rarely play as well as the big contract expectations established at the signing.
Lets be real here, you were one of the ones hitting F5 like the rest of us when we signed him last year I'm sure. He's easily the best defender on the team without question. As I said, he had 10 sacks while being injured for a good portion of the season and when he had his surgery he played very well.
I've got news for you, he's not the reason the Bills were worse with him. The absolutely horrible defense and inability to stop the run coupled with Chans refusal to run the ball himself is the reason we sucked. That and the fact that the talent in this team completely iverachieced the year before and they were not nearly as good as many here wanted to believe.
The Texas were not better because he was gone. They were better because they Didnt lose 3 QBs on their run to the playoffs. And let's not all forget that they Didnt make the Superbowl here. They made the playoffs. Just like they did last year. One could actually make an argument that IF they had Mario this year they might have had a better chance to stop the Patriots.
It's like your trying to cut off your nose to spite your face here. Your apparently pissed off because you bought one of the crappy Nike Mario Jerseys and he disappointed you or something.
Again, he's easily the best defender on this team. Without question. And you want to let him go. Real smart.
#18
Posted 19 March 2013 - 08:53 AM
#19
Posted 19 March 2013 - 09:13 AM
#20
Posted 19 March 2013 - 10:34 PM
mrags, on 19 March 2013 - 08:05 AM, said:
Lets be real here, you were one of the ones hitting F5 like the rest of us when we signed him last year I'm sure. He's easily the best defender on the team without question. As I said, he had 10 sacks while being injured for a good portion of the season and when he had his surgery he played very well.
I've got news for you, he's not the reason the Bills were worse with him. The absolutely horrible defense and inability to stop the run coupled with Chans refusal to run the ball himself is the reason we sucked. That and the fact that the talent in this team completely iverachieced the year before and they were not nearly as good as many here wanted to believe.
The Texas were not better because he was gone. They were better because they Didnt lose 3 QBs on their run to the playoffs. And let's not all forget that they Didnt make the Superbowl here. They made the playoffs. Just like they did last year. One could actually make an argument that IF they had Mario this year they might have had a better chance to stop the Patriots.
It's like your trying to cut off your nose to spite your face here. Your apparently pissed off because you bought one of the crappy Nike Mario Jerseys and he disappointed you or something.
Again, he's easily the best defender on this team. Without question. And you want to let him go. Real smart.
Mario is definitely not part of the problem and he's definitely part of the solution.
It's gonna be something to see a real defensive coordinator utilize his talents instead of a lame brain like Wanny.
IMO, we haven't seen anywhere near what Mario's capable of and I thought under the circumstances that his play last year was fine.











