Buddo

Before seeing the embedded draft room piece, it was Shakir, partly because it was a pick that looks like great value. After that, Elam all the way, because the kid gets what he needs to be doing to become better. We might end up with 2 shutdown CBs for a year or two if he progresses, and it looks like he's going to be happy to put the work in.

With the snippet from the pre-draft interview, no wonder Beane told him he knocked it out the park. Seems like he's into the process of his own accord, no surprise they felt good about his 'character'. I think it was interesting that the guys who were just doing a quick review of the tape, were in no doubt Elam was a guy who would fit well for us. Indicates that he was pretty well up on their board, and that Beane was not messing about when he said that need, fit and value, all came together to get the pick done - even at the cost of the 4th rounder.

Somewhat underwhelming, and yet pretty functional. I'm glad they got a quality corner to play opposite Tre. Not only had it become a glaring need, due to Wallace leaving, it's something I would've liked to see happen a year before. I think that a good approach to our needs at CB, is to grab a good one, every few years. You will always have a decent amount of money tied up in the position, as you would want to give out a proper second contract (it means you've got a good player), as we've done with Tre, but you then grab another guy to become your top CB after a few more years. One guy is being paid handsomely, and one is a rookie. And so on. The point about how much of a difference more 'man' looks, might make to giving opposing offences problems, is well made. It allows for more variations in how the D wants to attack. I see the idea behind the LB, being something of a Milano clone (if only), as Milano does seem to miss a game here or there. Having a 'like for like' guy to take over on those odd occasions, is no bad thing, as it keeps the D running the same plays. There's also a chance that he will see the field against some of the more run heavy teams, and still having speed to cover someone, could be a useful attribute. I do like both of the Cook and Shakir picks. Cook not only for his speed, but also his receiving ability. There's no doubt you could split him out wide from time to time. Shakir also has speed, and I see no reason why he couldn't actually play outside, if needed, or wanted. While he was obviously used out of the slot, a lot, his highlight reel, shows a bunch of impressive catches made on the boundaries. People seem to be concerned about not having enough outside WRs, well imho, what we currently have, can be used there in a variety of ways if need be, and actually might be anyway, just to give defenses something different to worry about. Taking the punter in the 6th round, seems somewhat excessive, yet he will almost certainly be a day 1 starter. Haack may well hold well, but he doesn't punt that well, and a better, bigger leg, was a clear need. I think it seems excessive, simply due to how under utilized he's (hopefully) going to be, yet you still want the best one you can get, if you do have to punt. If the plan with the other CB is to turn him into a safety, I think we may have got a nice pick there. Bit of a ball hawk, who can hit pretty well, yet is lacking a bit of speed to run with guys outside. Sounds like a recipe for safety play right there. You could pretty much guarantee that Al Davis would draft the quickest guys around. Seems as though McBeane are intent on drafting the tallest possible Tackles around, either that, or they've got a sideline going in 'Mind your Head' signage. Overall, not a 'sexy' draft, but somewhat like last years, I could come to like it a lot as the years go by.

That was an impressive highlight reel from early in the thread. Not often do you see a WR make so many spectacular catches. I was struck by how well he made adjustments to actually make those catches. With his speed, character, this appears to be a 'steal' where we've got him.

Tbh, part of the reason they didn’t retain Wallace, was money. I believe, based off of comments from Beane, that they probably would have matched the offer. Wallace got, but for thinking they had a deal in place with Mckissic (sp) and needed the money for that. I think that was a contributory factor in why Beane was so pissed at the WCs, because by the time that deal fell through, Wallace had moved on. For $4m per, Wallace would have still been good value, and would have negated the need to get another veteran CB. For sure they probably think they can do better, but I reckon they would have wanted it to be from competition.

It's obviously Cornerback. We have only 1 of 3 starters, definitely (atm) available for the opening game of the new season. Wallace is gone, and Tre White uncertain to be back for the first few games. The need should be obvious to anyone, and hence the fact that it would be the easiest position to draft, to upgrade the team. As The Dean pointed out, that doesn't mean they have to, or even should go, CB in the first, simply that it's the one position of actual need that we have, going into the draft. Think of it this way, if we had to play a game now, which position do we not have covered with known starting ability? We have a solid WR corps, RB is okay, as we've only lost Breida, and replaced him anyway. O-Line has been addressed, with re-signing Bates, and getting Saffold and the guy the other day. A whole bunch of D-Line have been signed, alongside one Von Miller. Safeties, as was. LBers as was,(starters) although depth needed.

The notion that this is a guy with an unlimited ceiling, is already proven wrong, because he cba to put the work in. Talent alone, is not enough to make it, in just about any team sport. How about we just draft one of the plethora of WRs that the FO likes, in one of the say, 1st 4 rounds of the draft, who a) will want to be in Buffalo, and b) will be willing to work his rear off, to be part of the team. Oh, and btw, we already have a 4th round pick who has probably already got his jersey nailed to the wall in Canton, as the first WR to ever score 4 TDs in a playoff game.

My first impression was that it was Jerry Lee Lewis.

There's a thing about being a professional athlete, of any sort, that some of these young guys simply don't get. It's called work. You don't become really good at anything, unless you put the work in - and just about any veteran player would tell you that. Sounds to me as though this kid simply isn't interested in putting any sort of work in, and irrespective of talent, it means he is useless to a team. Now, there might be teams prepared to take a chance on the kid, but the Bills shouldn't be one of them, imho. There is no real reason for us to, tbh. We've already got plenty of talent at WR, and there are boatloads of them coming out every year, including this one. Trying to get an idiot onto the striaght and narrow, is not something we should be wasting time doing, as the risk/reward simply isn't there with an already talented roster.

Chances are yes. But boy would I be green with envy. Even now, I'm still not sure we properly appreciate, just how strong his arm is. Allen has become the prototype for QBs going forward. He ticks all of the 'traditional' boxes now, but the arm strength and rushing ability, just take him way over the top.

Thing is, it was a very good move by the Jest, positioning themselves as perfectly as they could. Trouble is, they then picked the wrong guy.

It's certainly not being badly paid, and considering there are only 64 starting safeties in the league, being 13th and 14th can be argued to be amongst the highest paid, especially as there probably isn't too many actual $ from them being in the top 10. Now, there have been some more sensible noises coming through from Rosenhaus, as regards Poyer wanting to see his career out as a Bill, but for all that he's deserved the money he's got, I'm not so sure he deserves more. A new deal around the same money, seems fair enough to me, as I don't believe he would get that elsewhere in a hurry - even if he hit FA next year. Imho, there seems to be too much ego involved in wanting to get paid. A new contract is one thing, but the push for that appears to be also for a bunch more money as well, and I don't think it's there. I also have the feeling that we have one of the classic NFL situations, where if the player pushes for too much, he ends up with next to nothing. Too often , players don't realize that their best market value, is with the team they are at.

Always thought it was a dangerous investment. Simply because they keep getting stolen. Someone, somewhere, will pretty much always manage to hack digital stuff, and while I'm not 'on the record' about it, I've never been a believer.

Poyer is very good. I don't have a problem with him wanting another deal etc. I do have a problem with the way things are being put out there by his wife. It simply isn't the way you should be doing business. Something they might need to consider, is that if not for the Bills giving him his shot in the first place, he might still be scuttling around the league, chasing vet minimums. Also, when complaining about the likes of Diggs and Miller getting paid, it perhaps needs to be mentioned that Miller will be a 1st ballot HOF guy, whenever he becomes eligible, and Diggs will also get some serious consideration, if he continues as he is. Poyer won't even get close to the HOF, unless he turns in the sort of performance that wins a Superbowl, and gets him more noticed. While currently, Poyer and Hyde get a lot of love as the possibly best safety tandem in the NFL, the point is that it's as a tandem, rather than being specifically mentioned individually. IN the grand pecking order of who gets paid in an NFL team, generally speaking, a Safety is pretty low down on the list. Last year, Poyer was something like 13th on the list of highest paid safeties, with Hyde just behind him - and that is towards the end of his deal. Seems to me that that shows that he got decent terms the last time around. Noticeably, Mathieu was getting about $14million per, but he's been cut, and is yet to sign elsewhere iirc. If Poyer becomes a headache, then the Bills could just cut him (I'm not too bothered about the cap considerations atm), and where is he going to go to get the sort of money he's on now?

While it doesn't really matter, I'm not so sure they just let Levi 'walk'. I think they did it, in part, because they were signing McKissic, and needed the $ for him. If they didn't have a deal with him, I think they may well have brought Levi back, because I think at $4 million per, he's good value, and Beane hinted about that on the Macafee show he did. I don't think re-signing Levi would have changed anything about their strategy much either. He would probably fill the idea of a vet CB, that we seem to think we need, and not make any difference to our draft strategy, which I'm convinced will yield a CB in the first two rounds, depending on who falls where.

When do you think we would be making that offer 'on our terms?' Bates only has to sign the tender, if we had given him the 2nd round one, and that's it for this season. The reasons to give him the 2nd round tender, are imho, twofold. Firstly, you want to keep the player (retrospectively obvious). Secondly, you are protecting your 'investment' by getting a 2nd round pick should someone actually sign him to an offer sheet. The reality being with respect to Bates, that the original round offer doesn't get you any return at all, as he was a UDFA. Personally, I was of the opinion, that we should have tendered him at the 2nd round level, but I was more concerned about 'protecting an asset' than particularly thinking about the implications going forward. i.e. the greater potential to lose him next year when he would have become a FA. For a starting Guard, I thought that the $3.98m was a decent deal, but with Bates, you get the added value of being able to play any position along the line, something that very few seemed to be thinking added any real weight to his value. As things have turned out, Beane looks like he's pulled a masterstroke, assuming Bates continues to play well. 4 years at £4.25m average, is, imho, terrific value for a guy as versatile as Bates, who will be a starter as well. It also represents additional value going forward, because if Saffold is 'one and done', then we have a ready made replacement at LG. I wanted us to retain Bates all along, but the way in which it has panned out, is far better for us long term. Essentially, I was wrong about the 2nd Round tender being the right move, and Beane deserves a good deal of Kudos for having the cohones to see this through (by only putting the lowest tender on him).

He's not likely to be fit though, is he. He's also a FA, if memory serves me correctly. I can't see anyone signing him until he can prove his fitness, and that may well not be, before the season has got well underway.

Well, if the Bears have made it difficult, if not impossible for the Bills to match the offer (guesswork, not known), then at least there will be some money becoming available to address further one of those positions. Tbh, I would expect a vet CB more likely to happen, as I think that's a more pressing need, and you will probably have to give any decent one, a few million, even if they are 'ring chasing'. The FO seem to have done alot of work on the C/G position for the draft, so I wouldn't be surprised to see them use a decent pick on one, and another on a late rounder.

Well, the last part is pretty much true. Not from a coaching grudge aspect, but from stupidity or oversight. One of the things that gets talked about a lot as regards the O-Line, is that they all need to be on the same page. They pretty much weren't, until the last 3rd of the season, when Bates got the start. Then they were, and it made all the difference in the world. The Bills can no longer operate 'under the radar', when it comes to other teams looking at who we have, and what we do. It's a consequence of success. I don't believe that Beane wants Bates to go, but his preferred way of doing things appears to be to let others set the market. With the higher profile that the Bills now enjoy, I think that's going to become a lot less viable, and it will probably start with losing Bates to an offer we will now (possibly) be unable, or unwilling, to match due to cap constraints. Personally, I would have stuck the 2nd round tender on him. With the level of interest he appears to have generated (at least 3 visits to teams), then if we were to lose him, we would be getting something back. Even if it wasn't a 2nd, we could have possibly done a sign and trade deal for a lesser pick. Which would still equate to something for nothing, and while we briefly would have been on the hook for an extra $1.5 million, at least we aren't just being turned over for nothing.

Thanks for that - Beane was excellent, and to be fair McAfee was as well. Very interesting, with plenty of amusing moments. Beane is simply a class act.

Beane may not get everything right, but it's certainly not for trying to do things the right way. He also dishes out the credits where due. Once again, we are lucky to have the Pegulas as owners, who are prepared to invest in the best facilities for the players. Oh, and also not jibing about having to escrow millions in guarantees to the likes of Allen and Miller. My guess would be that the WCs, will hereafter be referred to as 'Team Toilet' by Beane, as he was so obviously pissed at them. An extremely good PC, well worth the listen.

Bates RAS was 9.5, so I doubt his athleticism is a problem scheme wise. Tbh, while I understand the notion that the Cheats are interested from the 'weaken opponent, improve us' viewpoint, Bates RAS and the fact they got to see him close up, makes me think that there's more genuine interest. Belichick often drafts based on physical attributes, that he believes he can mould into his systems, or that fit his systems, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Bates comes into that category. Beane seems to like to let players sniff out the market, and that might well be the thinking with Bates, I just believe it was unnecessary, for the sake of an extra $1.5 million., to not get the additional insurance, or discouragement to other teams, of signing him to an offer sheet, if a 2nd round pick is involved. Still, as others have pointed out, it's early days in the process, and we are yet to hear of any other team making an offer. Time will tell, hopefully not to our detriment.

Still being built to beat the Chiefs, but it also applies to just about any of the other likely suspects, all of whom are going to have 'high powered' QBs. Also, I think there is definitely an emphasis on being better against the run, as that was where we let ourselves down on the season. Biggest difficulties we had, were with teams who were serious about running the football.

This is a fair enough point. The trouble is, that the actions, to an extent, aren't matching the words in respect of the O-Line. For sure, Saffold is an upgrade at Guard, but they have let Feliciano and Williams go, while also possibly letting Bates slip through their fingers. Should Bates get prised away, not only will we need more Guard help, which is probably coming through the draft, but also, we have no backup center, if memory serves me correctly. People seem to be getting a bit salty about the whole thing, but remember, the Bills obviously did want to keep Bates, otherwise they wouldn't have tendered him at all. They also traded for him in the first place, swapping a LBer for him.

Clearly, you have reading comprehension difficulties, of the type that means you don't read the whole thing.