Thurman#1

That's nuts in many ways. But just the financial costs of trading him are enough to rule this out unless he starts making himself absolutely radioactive to force himself out and leaves us no choice. Next year would be the first year it would be reasonable. IMO he's most likely here two years or more.

It'd depend on the price. As a lot of all of this does. My guess is he gets somebody to pay him $3 - 5M, maybe. The guy has had tremendous YPC numbers in all the years except last year when he only had 8 carries. His injuries will push it down of course, but again, I think someone will pay him. And for that money, I'd say no thanks. If we could get him for significantly less, yeah, maybe.

YOU are the one who said this. Changing it now to suddenly $30M is calling your shot and then moving the goal posts closer (an argumentative specialty of yours). Answers in red above. But basically, you claimed to be trying to "clarify" what I meant. And then you threw out misunderstandings and straw men that were either deliberate or show really really pitiful understanding. If you want to know what I said, read what I said. This ain't rocket science. Don't paraphrase me, because you appear to be extremely bad at it. Quote me. That way we all know you're playing it straight. You also put on an absolute clinic in moving the goal posts. The constant mis-statements of what you said and what I said make it increasingly impossible to have a reasonable conversation with you.

I don't think it's fair to say Edwards is the equal of even last year's Poyer and Hyde. Even a step slower dealing with the injuries late in the year, Poyer was starting caliber. Edwards has not even started consistently. Two years ago he played 94% of snaps. The next year right back around his career level of 57%. He has a lot to prove. Poyer and Hyde weren't probably any better athletes than Edwards. It was that they'd both played a lot and developed really good chemistry fairly quickly. Can we count on that happening with Rapp and Edwards? I don't think we can, though it's certainly a possibility. I do agree with you that White was really playing better as time passed. Made it much sadder to see him go down again. I'd argue the order of importance for DL re-signs went Jones, then Floyd close, then Epenesa further behind. Floyd was really good here last year. Even though he did slow up in the end, other than possibly Ed Oliver, Floyd was easily our best pass rusher over the course of the year. We haven't replaced those pressures. We can hope Von replaces them, but it's far from a sure thing. And we've been most successful against Mahomes when we were pressuring him a bit. We did not do that in the playoffs last year. It's hard to sack the guy because he moves so well, but if you keep him moving you stand a much better chance against him. We didn't really do that. We will need to start.

I wouldn't mind him if they like him. Recently I've seen at least two draft sources who wouldn't be surprised if he goes within the top twenty. Neither is predicting him there, but neither would be surprised. A fantastic first step is an awfully good start in a pass rusher's evaluation, and nobody seems to disagree that Robinson has serious giddyup.

Gee. I stand in the shadow of your genius at being able to understand that you shouldn't spend more than you have and that important things tend to cost more. Which is basically what you took hundreds of words to tell us despite the fact that we already know all of it. If you're going to attempt condescension, you ought to have something to say that's not boring and obvious to all. It's a factor. It's an important factor, if you need that word. But others are far more important. I've said this for three straight posts now. But I guess if you want to continue to pretend that I don't think it's a significant factor, or that I don't understand it, fell free to blow some more hot air at the problem in your next post as well. As I actually did say, it falls 1) far below getting the BPA at a position of need, particularly in the early rounds, 2) far below finding guys who fit your scheme, and 3) far below not using high draft picks to bring in backups for guys you're already happy with who are playing well when you've got areas of relative weakness. Another thing you ought to understand if you're going to attempt condescension is what the terms you use mean. You said, "current market value." You even bolded it. I'm sure that felt very macho to you. Did you flex as you bolded it? Thing is, you misused it in a rather stupid way. In the phrase "current market value," you apparently haven't realized that the word "current" means "now." What it does NOT mean is "in the future." The idea that Joe Burrow set the current market value for franchise QBs is idiotic. Joe Burrow set the current market value for Joe Burrow. And a bit more generally for elite to near-elite QBs. But that's not what you referenced. You referenced "franchise QBs." The idea that the 12 or 15 franchise QBs in the league are now worth $50M because Joe Burrow is worth $50M is just dumb. You say it's "beyond a doubt ..." that these guys get contracts over $50M. Here's a clue for you, when you predict events in the future you are guessing. It is absolutely NOT beyond a doubt. IMO for several of those guys it's a very good possibility. And for several more of the names you mentioned much lower. More, it's precisely that guys like Allen, Lawrence and Mahomes, the elite, are NOT getting contracts soon that keeps values down. What is Allen's value? Take a look at his contract. That's his value. That's what value means. The fact that he could get more if he was getting a contract now is beside the point. That's his theoretical value, not his value. He's signed. He ain't getting more until some time in the future they negotiate for it. theoretical value. His value is what his contract says it is. In the future as prices rise, franchise QBs may well become worth that. They are not now, despite the fact that Joe Burrow is. Atlanta was thrilled to bring in a new franchise QB in Kirk Cousins. He got $45M. That's the latest data point for franchise QBs who are non-elite. Again, your exact words were, "Franchise QB's are $50M now. Elite pass rusher, LT are $35M now." Nonsense, particularly when the highest LT contract is $25M now. Saying the market is $35 is complete nonsense. You at least have Burrow to try to make your argument about QBs. Where is your data point to that elite pass rushers and LTs are $35M now? There are none. Not one non-QB has made $35M. Not one. "Let me try to explain it a little more clearly for you," as you so kindly put it. Not one means zero. None. The situation has not yet occurred. If it does, it will be in the FUTURE. Again, "let me try to explain it a little more clearly for you." The future is what happens after now. Later. See? You don't know for sure what will happen in the future till it happens. And in the NOW, three non-QBs have made $30M or more, and none $35M or more. Your guesses about future events are certainly not "current market value." Know who sets the market? The market does. Not some doofus guessing on the internet, whether you or me. In the future, we will see what the market says. At some point it will indeed reach that point. That point is not now.

Wow!!! I have to understand the concept of "current market value"? Wow!! But but but ... those words have more than two syllables, most of 'em. Thank goodness we have real real smart people like you to explain difficult concepts like "current market value." Gosh, you must have a large head!! Thanks for passing on your smartitude!!! Wow!! Gaaaaw-ly, Sarjint! Definitions aside, you absolutely are wildly inflating values. Your exact words were, "Franchise QB's are $50M now. Elite pass rusher, LT are $35M now." Both of those are nonsense. You can't say elite pass rushers are $35M when ABSOLUTELY NONE of the are at that level, including Bosa who just got his contract. Same with LT. ABSOLUTELY NONE of the best LTs in the league are making the money you claimed. The absolute best that could be said about that is that it's pure guesswork. You then go on and say "Justin Jefferson is the next proven WR1 up and he will pass those figures by a lot. The former Vikings GM Jeff Diamond predicts a $34.5M aav." Yeah, um, you didn't say anything about WRs. And the lowest number that I contested was $35M. Now, where I come from, $34.5M is not "passing those figures [$35M] by a lot. Or at all, actually. None of the numbers you mentioned, which presumably you thought were your best examples, did. None. You'd have had an argument if you'd said elite or near-elite QBs were $50M. But you didn't say that. You said "franchise QB," and there are a lot more franchise guys than the four making $50M or more. Those are both pretty much the definition of wildly inflated numbers. Will they reach those eventually ... say some time in the NEAR FUTURE, next year or two? There's a good argument for that. But that's not what you said even in this dumb reply. You said, "CURRENT market value." The sad thing is that all you had to do is say something along the lines of "Franchise QBs, elite pass rushers and LTs are really expensive right now." You'd have been right. But no, you had to pump up your numbers beyond reason. Again, the rising prices of contracts is indeed a factor in draft decisions. Factors with a higher priority would be things like BPA at a position of need, scheme fit, and whether you already have guys you're happy with at the position.

On the contrary, the defense was ripping things up through the first six weeks or so, till the injuries started to land. The Broncos game the defense was in week 10. Newsflash: week 10 is not in the first nine weeks. See how that works? And more, the D was solid in that game. That game was mostly on the offense's turnovers and problems. The Broncos started their first drive on the Buffalo 28, their fourth drive on the Denver 48, their fifth on the Buffalo 31, their 7th on the Buffalo 47, their ninth on the Buffalo 48, their tenth on the Denver 46. It was a terrific job by the defense to hold them to 24 points with drive starts like that. And the 12 men on the field was on the STs, not the defense. That leaves three games that weren't great by your own reckoning, and they were in weeks 5, 7 and 9, mostly after the injuries started hitting. The D was terrific early in the season, before that.

Have not taken a step back? We really have. But, you be you. There's every reason to think we can still compete for a title. But yeah, we took a step back.

Players kept stepping up? I mean, yeah. But it showed up. How did the DBs look against the Chiefs? The LBs? We weren't the same defense as we'd been in the first 6 - 8 games, we just weren't.

Boy, I'm not seeing much of that. Von could replace Floyd's production, it's not outrageous to think that. But it's optimistic. My guess is that's the ceiling, but not the floor. I'd love to be wrong about that, I hope I am. Milano is back. How will he perform, especially early as he finds his feet? Edwards is an upgrade? From Poyer and Hyde? Not seeing that at all. Nor the other side, Rapp. I expect this area to be addressed further, but I question your point about the players we have at safety now. And last year's CBs, Douglas, Tre and Benford, with Taron at slot, look a bit better to me, though I see the chance of this year's group developing further. Tre and Benford vs. Benford and Elam this year looks to me like far from a sure thing to be as good. Could be, but it's nothing we can take for granted. And who's this year's Dane Jackson at backup? It's still early, and we haven't seen the draftees yet.

There are 12 to 15 franchise QBs in the league now and four QBs with contracts over $50M. There's not a single non-QB getting $35M per year by AAV. Not one. And a grand total of THREE non-QBs earning $30M or up. So you're wildly inflating your numbers there. Why push unreasonable narratives? This is one factor that should be looked at with early picks, certainly. But one of many.

Nothing.

While I agree with your thrust, Diggs tied for 8th in TDs, not 4th. And he was 7th in the league in receptions, not 6th. When 7 guys got more TDs than you did, you are either 8th or tied for 8th. Not 4th. I understand what you're doing there. But it's not just misleading but invalid. By that logic, you could say that Quinton Morris was tied for 11th in receiving touchdowns in the league, and that linebacker Terrel Bernard was tied for 12th with his total of zero behind only 11 other totals. Not 11 other players. 11 other totals. That is not how rankings work. If 200 guys got more TDs than you, than you are 201st. If you're desperate, you could say that Quinton Morris had the 11th highest total number of touchdowns. But even that is wildly misleading. The way to say it is that he was tied for 159th in TDs with his total of one TD. More specifically you could say that he's in a 90-way tie for 159th in receiving TDs.

Gunner could indeed be correct here. I'd bet it's a less than 50% bet, myself. Saving $4.9M on the cap in 2025 isn't worth the difference between seeing Diggs play elsewhere vs. Diggs playing here and likely putting up 1000 yards even with a not great year.

When only week 8 on count towards wins and losses, that will matter. Just as reasonable and full of spin to say that he wasn't that productive after the OC who drew up the playbook was replaced by another OC forced to use the original guy's playbook. Diggs was 7th in receptions, 13th in yards and tied for 8th in TDs. 10th in 1st downs. All of those are still very good. Not as good as we're used to from Diggs. But very very good. And again, Josh overthrew an open Diggs on bombs like 6 times last year.

Kumerow was 6'4". Duke Williams was 6'3". He's had a monster. And he's had other guys who can go up and make contested catches, including Davis and Diggs. Height isn't a non-factor. But it shouldn't be in the top three either. Fast, separation and a proven ability to run a varied route tree and to be effective at all levels should be higher priorities.

Indeed. I saw a talking head nicely say the other day, "It depends who you're trading away from." If Latu is still there at #28, IMO you don't trade away from him. Yup. Consistently.

It absolutely would not "compound the problem." Hell, having lots of late picks is not a problem. It's an opportunity. And not an opportunity that will have been a problem even if we draft twelve and lose two to five at cut-down. Even if we flat-out assume Beane does not need eleven, much less twelve draft picks, it's still an opportunity. You can use those picks to trade up strategically in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th rounds as the board becomes clear and you know who's available as your picks approach. That would likely be the route they would go if they do trade back. But even if they did keep all eleven or twelve picks and have to let three or four or even five go around cut-down, it's still an opportunity. Maybe the last guy you pick in the 7th, or your 3rd 6th round pick, turns out to be a Brady, a Jason Kelce, a Latavius Murray, an Adalius Thomas, an Antonio Brown with a better head, or even without a better head and you make a great trade for him in his fourth year, a Shannon Sharpe, a Mailata, an Edelman or a Donald Driver, a Marques Colston, an Adam Timmerman or even a Gary Anderson to kick for you. All those were 6ths or 7ths. And you don't know which will be a huge surprise till you get them into camp. Many late picks means a better chance of finding a guy like that, even if several others get picked up by other teams.

I'm with you most of the way. But I'd add Latu and Verse as guys to take at 28 or maybe even make a small tradeup. This team doesn't have much in the way of a pass rush right now. If they're gone, as they likely will be, I'm also OK with trading back, hopefully getting maybe a 3rd and still having a shot at one of the Xaviers or even Troy Franklin if his fall in the mocks is real (which I'm not really convinced of) in the 40s. Nah, not at all. You have to be a fool to rule us out. We've taken a step back but it could very easily be a small one we can make up as young guys develop during the year. Or not. Anytime we have a healthy Josh Allen we're at least a potential contender.

Taron Johnson? Are you nuts? He's a terrific bargain. Probably will cost significantly less than half of what Johnson will get. Johnson is one of our most important defensive players. Beane has made some questionable moves - everyone does - but overall he's been extremely good.

Yup. I'm sure it's not a cap move, because the cap is not real. They just couldn't calculate well how valuable those draft picks were.

A beautiful thing indeed. I don't think McDermott ever was unwilling to play rookies, even start them. But it was really hard for the rookie to impress him enough to earn that. A guy like Rousseau shows you can play ... if you can play. As a rookie he played 49% of snaps. That's gone up, but not much. 56%, then 60%. Singletary played a higher percentage of snaps as a rookie, 67%, than he ever did again, including his Houston years. His non-rookie high was 65% in his last year in Buffalo. Tre White played 99% as a rookie, and never played quite that much ever again. I think you're right that when things are humming as a system, it's easier for rookies to progress. But in my opinion it's no coincidence that Kincaid played 63% as a rookie, while Dawson Knox as a rookie played 64%. Things don't appear to be changing all that much. Looks - to me anyway - like they just think that they just couldn't keep Torrence off the field, that he was just too good. Anyway, I do agree that the better the system works, the easier it is for younger guys to pick it all up. Marv Levy also allowed a very few rookies to play full-time, but not most. And it did seem to get a little more common later in the Bills run.

I find it really hard to believe that thing about tension between Josh and Palmer, really hard. Why? Because any tension about it could have been shut down. In literally three seconds. Literally. Josh: "Jordan, I'd rather you didn't talk about me." That's it. Done. That's what it would have taken. And yeah, Josh has always been a private person in his private life. He never talked much about his previous girlfriend, etc. It's no surprise he isn't talking about Hailee either. No surprise, and totally reasonable. But he's never been private about his football prep. He's never even appeared that way. No way to prove it either way, of course, but I just don't believe that, I don't. And while I do think there may have been some pressure to do media early, after his third year, he can't have felt any more pressure. He was obviously top five in his third year. But the next offseason or two he still talked a lot about his prep. I'm just not buying this, Beck. You're an excellent poster, but I have to disagree here. I would dearly dearly love to be wrong about this. I so hope that I am. In early years, he would have come out at some point and said something like, "well, I clearly had some problems with the long ball, particularly on go routes this year. I need to do some work this offseason in correcting my fundamentals and in figuring out how to do this in a way that Stefon, the guys and I can have a better shot at completing a few more of these. I'm working on it with ***." Hopefully we hear something like this at some point this offseason.

It doesn't follow. Very fair point. But it does make it seem like that's most likely. Allen has never been shy about telling us what he does in the offseason to get better, or allowing the people he's worked with to talk about it either. Why would he? People love it. And yet, very little lately. He does get criticism. Not much. He's the face of the franchise and their best player, and it's as natural as gravity that guys like that are loved and thus not attacked as much as others. 90% may be high. But not all that high. And while some breadcrumb-reading is going on, it's also things he said, particularly on that Bussin' with the Boys podcast last offseason. In past year in interviews this time of year he'd talk golf and what he was doing to prepare for the season. Lately we heard about golf, but football not nearly so much.