Foles makes the Bills better. I do not disagree with that. While Tyrod has shown as times the makings of a decent QB (not great), the ceiling of the Bills with him as QB, I think, is barely making playoffs.
My disagreement with your post is regarding "Why not offer a 1st and 3rd and just be done with it? Foles is an enormous upgrade to Taylor. Overvaluing draft picks won't get them anywhere."
-I do not think any team can ever be competitive by undervaluing draft picks. Giving up a 1st and a 3rd for Nick Foles and his cap hit is a vast over-payment for essentially a couple year rental IMO.
-If you draft a QB in the first you have the QB under contract for 5 years (assuming 1st round pick) for about 7-8 m year (based on Forbes reporting on Mitch Trubisky's contract in 2017).
-Also, if a team trusts their coaching staff and scouting team, they also have the opportunity to mold the QB to fit their system better.
-Finally, I do NOT think that the Bills are only a QB away from being competitive (defined as playoff contender and having a good (read: more than just plain luck) chance of winning a game or two in the playoffs). Furthermore, I think they can use the picks that they have to gather the extra pieces.
Overall, if Bills can get Foles for a 2nd rounder, I think that is a good trade for them and they should make that trade. That is good value. I disagree that a 1st an a 3rd rounder for the services of Foles is a good trade.
Desperation virtually never pays off.
That's a pretty fair take. Thanks for taking the time to write up your thoughts.
While you have some solid reasoning, I disagree on two points: 1) I believe that the Bills are a solid team with talent at multiple positions. Their defense is much improved recently, and aside from quarterback, they don't have too many gaping holes in the roster. Sure, they could improve, but I think they're on the right track, considering they made the playoffs for the first time in what seems like forever. A good quarterback who can sustain drives would mask some of their other issues.
2) I believe that the draft is highly overrated (despite spending most of my time in the draft subforum). Hit rates aren't fantastic, first of all. Second, a normal draft is seven slots, while the training camp roster is ninety players -- obviously, there's a greater ratio of free agents, trades, and undrafted free agents that go into roster building. There's no guarantee that the guy they take in the first round is going to amount to anything at all, anyway. Third, no rookie quarterback has ever started the Super Bowl, let alone won the game. That puts them at least two years out from true contention if they take a rookie. Fans and the staff have had a taste of success; do they really want to start over?
What happens if their picks look like their 2016 draft, which is only two years ago? Their first round pick has been largely invisible due to injury, they got a decent rotational DT in the third, and the rest of the players are no longer on the roster, including their second pick (41 overall). Sure, you can say it was a different GM, but that same story is repeated all over the entire league. Sometimes you find a string of impactful players, but other times you end up with virtually nothing. Why not roll with the proven commodity?
Winning solves virtually everything. No one cares now that we surrendered a first round pick for Belichick. The same would be true if the Bills acquired Foles and he played at a high level for the next 5 - 7 years. Now, as to the compensation itself, perhaps they can get by with only a first, instead of a first and a third. My point is more that if they like him enough to offer a second, then don't skimp on the offer. Just get it done and don't get greedy just because draft picks are looked at as such valuable commodities.
All they really represent are hope. Better to have a quarterback.
