Thurman#1

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.

Everyone should. Those are indeed important. But plenty of other things matter.

Yeah, I'm with you. I see more than 15 guys as "cuttable." More like 19 or 20. And there are always a few surprise cuts above that threshold as well. Also a few surprise FAs that step up and make themselves more valuable than we think.

There absolutely is an argument. Either way. For keeping the picks, we've had 5ths, 6ths and 7ths stick and contribute. But we've also lost some guys worth keeping and developing because of a lack of space. This year there is more space on the roster than usual, the cap-driven massacre was wider than it usually is. Since more guys means a larger likelihood of finding a guy who can contribute, it's certainly a legit argument.

IMO 90% Wilson. But hopefully Fields can take a page from the Jordan Love playbook and use the time on the bench to get a lot better over time. Hopefully for Pittsburgh anyway.

This is always a cool thing. Thanks for doing it. Particularly putting up a prize is service above and beyond. Nice!!

Yeah, potato leek is one of the good ones. Split pea. Lentil. Chicken, if the chunks are big. Life is good when you have one of those things.