Shaw66

Yes, you're right. The other exception is guy's catching for his last contract or two. Shady probably could have gotten more money elsewhere, but in his position, why not sign on with KC and Tampa?

I like it. Nice job. An interesting perspective on one of the most memorable games in Bills' history, and on the drought. Interesting that it was written just as the new era was beginning. Thanks for posting it.

Yes, that's another factor. Some guys don't care so much about the actual money, but the money is like a report card with all A's on it. For some guys, that's important. For a guy like Brady, it wasn't. For some guys, just winning is important. For some guys, his legacy with the team is important. There are a lot of factors that can affect the decision, depending on the guy. That was really my point - it doesn't make sense to assume that the decision will be driven by money. It may be, but maybe not.

I don't think this is a valid assumption. I think we view contract negotiations from our perspective, which is that we always could use more money to retire on. In Poyer's case, at the end of this season he will have earned 38 million dollars, and he has another contract to go. 38 million after tax is 20 million, and even if Poyers's wife is spending a million dollars a year, they already have 10 million dollars in the bank. I think at that point in their careers, a lot of players recognize that getting top dollar on their final big contract is less important than getting good money and playing where they'd like to play. I'm not saying that this is how Poyer is thinking about it, but I do think that it's not uncommon for players in his position to recognize that they're already financially secure and to decide on their next contract based on a variety of parameters, not just money.

And that would be "Goodbye, Jordan."

Tight ends are great, but they aren't the foundation of a top-level passing attack. Kelce has a lot of skills, physical and mental, but his greatest skill is, I think, his ability to understand what the defense is doing, and understand where and how he needs to attack it. But that's only really valuable when the offense otherwise creates the opportunities that he's so good at identifying and attacking. And the offense created those opportunities because of Hill. Without Hill on the field, Kelce becomes just another good player the defense has to deal with. And without Hill on the field, one thing the defense can do to check Kelce is to double team, or at least chip him. I mean, if Diggs suddenly retired, would you think that the very best imaginable version of Dawson Knox would carry the Bills offense? Kelce is better, but he's not going to carry the Chiefs offense, either.

That would suggest Edmunds should get $10 million a year for four years, with $20 million guaranteed. Very few people here would argue with that. I doubt Edmunds will settle for that. I'd guess that someone will offer $15 a year and $30 guaranteed. If the Bills sign him for Milano money, they will be on the lookout for someone better.

Oh, absolutely. As I said, there are maybe ten great players in the league, guys every other team worries about, every game. KC had two of them - Mahomes and Hill. Now they have only one, and the Dolphins have only one (and it remains to be seen how much difference Hill can make from his position). Much better for the Bills. I think the Bills like their young guys. Some of the reports coming out of college were that Hamlin is a really smart player, special even. Remember how good Jim Leonhard was, with below-par NFL physical talent. I also think Taron Johnson may become a safety, and maybe White.

As I've said often, the Bills have something in mind for Bernard. They didn't draft him to play special teams. Unless they think he's a generational player. I think they want him to be a defensive starter; I just don't know where or how. Or in three years they want him to take Frazier's job, a la Kellen Moore.

Interesting comment. I, for one and I think for most of us, haven't really gotten used to be a fan of a top team. One personnel characteristic of top teams is they seem to be able make surprising moves in free agency. For me, Miller came out of nowhere, but in retrospect I shouldn't have been so surprised. Every off-season, some of the best teams get better. Similarly, surprising draft moves happen to with the best teams. What's probably in the Bills' future is a player-for picks move, a player the fans love but that the Bills think they can afford to move. Like an Oliver, for example. Or, supposing Bernard really flashes this summer, a Milano. We'd howl, but if the Bills got a second-round pick, or even packaged another pick with a player and got a first round pick, now come draft time, the Bills have options. If their trade partner also happens to have a lousy season, the new pick becomes even more valuable, and the new pick is ammunition to be packaged with the Bills' first pick, and suddenly the Bills are sitting at 10 or 12 or 15. As I've been saying, I think if you want to be a long-term Buffalo Bill, you have to be either a core player or willing to take less money to stay in Buffalo. The only exceptions are the Milanos, whom the Bills value enough to match the market, but even those guys are at risk. Very few guys are indispensable.

It's just so hard to make those decisions. I don't think either Oliver or Knox has shown himself to be a "must have" guy. They're both nice fits and not easy to replace, but "nice fit and not easy to replace" includes several guys, most notably and top of mind, Poyer. For me the question is whether the guy is must-have guy for the next six-to-eight years. Those are the guys you pay whatever it takes. Right now, Poyer, Knox, and Oliver don't fit into that category. I always say tight end just isn't that important a position. If you have a true stud, like Kelce or Kittle, okay, that's great, he becomes a core player and you do whatever it takes to keep him. Anyone less than that, well, yes, if you've got a good one that's nice, but you always can plug that hole with someone if you lose him. I think Knox is in the that category. I recently watched his highlights, and I've got to say, he makes some really tough catches, and I like his mobility. I just think that the Bills should break the bank on him only if he's essentially the number 2 receiver, behind Diggs, like Kelce as #2 behind Hill. Knox isn't the #2 receiver yet. Oliver, nice player, but to be a core player and make the big bucks, he's got to be Kyle. He hasn't shown that, and I doubt he will. So, for me, the question for Beane on those guys is simple: Do I have enough money (cap room) to pay his market value? If not, then the only way you keep those guys is if they are willing to take less than market value to stay with the Bills. If I had to guess, Knox will be willing to give some discount; I don't know about Oliver. One thing that might help close the gap for Oliver is the return of Lawson and Phillips. All three were on the roster together in 2019, and there's little doubt that the two returnees will be telling Oliver that they came back for things other than money. Phillips and Lawson have each been paid between $20 and $30 million in their careers, and Lawson for sure took less money to come back to Buffalo than he could have gotten elsewhere, and probably Phillips, too. Oliver will be at $20 million at the end of year five, so he'll be looking at the same kind of money-vs-culture choice that the other two just made. Once Oliver realizes that he isn't getting Aaron Donald money, he may very well decide that there are worse things than being paid very nicely to be on a winning team with a rotating defensive line. A team that gives him a mega-contract will be looking for him to play, and have an impact, on 70% of the defensive snaps. And I've already concluded Poyer is gone unless he agrees to less than he can get elsewhere.

I'm sure there's some truth in this, but I don't know how much. Bills play a lot of different zones, but in several Johnson just drops like he's the third linebacker, I think, so at least in those cases, Edmunds a classic MLB in a 4-3 playing zone. When they're in Tampa 2, Edmunds drops deep, again the classic role. When they're in man, Johnson and Milano are hooked up with receivers, and I think Edmunds is still a pretty classic MLB. I'm not sure Johnson's presence changes Edmunds role all that much. But your point helps point that Edmunds' role is different, at least in the fact that Johnson does take on different assignments than if he were in the 4-3. I keep saying, look for more classic 4-3 this year with Bernard the third linebacker, and with Johnson playing some safety or relieving the second corner. I think we're going to see some more funky stuff from the defense this year. They have ideas about how they're going to use Bernard, ideas that we won't see until the season starts.

I agree with your analysis of the problem, but I'm not sure the Bills agree the negative outweighs the positive. I've said over and over, I don't know if it does, and I don't there's any way for us to know, because there aren't any meaningful stats to measure the positives. But I agree that if he's valuable as I describe it, it still doesn't help when you're facing elite offenses. I'm sure KC any longer is the example, but more or less wherever Hill is able to attack the weakness in the middle. When it's Cooper Kupp and OBJ coming at you, they're going to attack that weakness. If McDermott Frazier don't have that answer, then I agree that Edmunds' value is less. What I'm hoping is that Edmunds is just obviously better this season (although I don't know that would mean he's improved - playing MLB in this scheme will get easier if the Dline plays the way McDermott envisions it). If that happens, the question becomes moot and the Bills will write a big check. Beyond that, I expect that the Bills' pass defense in those game-end situations will be better because McDermott will create better solutions. You know that problem number for the Bills' head coaches was "How do we succeed in those 13-second situations? We must succeed." And some of that solution will be how to tighten up the middle.

Thanks for this. It's the 20,000 foot view, but it's correct. Obviously, they needed a cornerback in the short-term, between the White injury and Levi likely to (and eventually did) leave. What the Bills identified early as problem number 1 was better Dline play. The back seven are holding up very well, thank you very much, but if you want the defense to really hum, you need dlinemen in the QB's face. QB's need to feel threatened every time they're about to take a snap. When that happens, the defensive backfield will really take off. Exit Hughes and Addison, nearing the ends of their useful careers, enter Von Miller. Settle and Jones arrive, Shaq and Phillips return. And then there are the youngsters, who should improve. All in all, if you wanted the team to get better, the way to do it was to make the Dline first-rate. Back seven is already very good, assuming White is back, and Elam should be a big plus. Passing game should continue to be good. Allen alone makes it good, and Diggs means that the Bills can keep putting other guys through the 2 and 3 spots and doesn't really much matter. Yes, get a really stud #2 and wow!, but that's more of a luxury than a necessity. Defense is designed to have disruptive Dline, and it's always been underpowered. Running game simply isn't a priority. The Bills obviously have been happy so long as they have effective running. They haven't been built to have a dominant running game, because with Allen, they aren't going to take the ball out of his hands. What did the Bills do to help the running game? They drafted a pass-catching running back. Dominant run game simply isn't a priority. Oline is always a priority, but given that running isn't a priority, what's needed on the line are guys who can protect Allen. If Kromer can mold that, anything he can do in the run game is a plus, but again not a necessity. If Saffold makes a real change in the run game, great! In any case the needs presented by the Dline were more urgent and more directly related to greater success. The Bills certainly seem to have addressed that about as well as they could. And they got a corner and Cook. They got a legitimate backup quarterback. They got a quality offensive lineman. They got a receiver who's likely to contribute. Pretty tough to quibble about things the Bills MIGHT have done. What they did - get Miller without getting in the way of addressing other needs, has got to be viewed as a successful off-season for a team with high expectations.

Right. It's also why he could do it as a rookie. I think Hyde is the brains of the operation.

Yeah, except now the Bills get him twice a year. The bad news is that there are a few great players in the league, and they're going to give you trouble. Hill is one. Donald is one I'd guess that there are about ten all told. The really good news is that two of the ten are named Allen and Miller.

I don't know, but I think it's different from the offense. The defense doesn't call plays; it calls schemes, and the defenders have varying responsibilities within the scheme, depending on what the offense is showing. That is, the players, individually or in groups, modify their responsibilities depending on what they see. That's why we always see the safeties repositioning themselves or others. It's why you see a linebacker or safety tapping a down-four lineman and repositioning him. At it's simplest level, look at when the play call puts the DBs in man to man. It may be that given what the offense is about to run, zone would be better, but the defense never flips to zone. One, it would be too hard to get the change made and be sure everyone got it. Also, it's very hard to understand what the offensive play call is just by how the offense lines up. The defense already has changed personnel to match the offensive personnel. But more importantly, if you audible the defense, the offensive play would change, too. If the offense comes out and sees man, they all know their assignments. If the defense switches to zone, the assignments change. I think that's why McDermott loves to rely on disguise. His philosophy is to gain an advantage by making it difficult for the offense to understand what they're looking at until after the snap. For McDermott, it's all about that instantaneous edge he gets from disguise - there's a second where the defense knows where it's going and the offense doesn't, and in that second the offense sometimes makes a bad decision, a mistake, or just delays so that the offensive execution is off.

He is one of the most unimpressive hitters I've ever seen at middle linebacker. He gets there and tries to hold on until the hitters arrive, or he watches as someone else makes the tackle. In his defense, tall guys often are not big hitters, because they don't naturally get low enough to pop tacklers easily. But it's more than that. Some guys love to hit; Edmunds doesn't.

Maybe you haven't read all that I've written here, so I'll say it once more. Marino's point, and one that I think has at least some validity, is that the thing that makes him special is invisible - it doesn't show up in any of the stats that are traditionally compiled and are publicly available, although I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the team analytics people do quantify it. The point is that the combination of Edmunds' size, length, speed, and quickness allows him to cover a defensive zone larger than the zone covered by any other middle linebacker in the game. He doesn't shut down that zone, to be sure, but he's good enough to cause offenses not to attack to the Bills disadvantage. What that means, in turn, is that each of six pass defenders can concentrate on zones that are smaller than the zones other pass defenders in the league cover. That, in essence, makes six players on the team better than they would be on any other team. As I say, there are no stats that proves that, but multiple coaches and players around the league have said that he makes it very difficult to throw into the middle. They are aware of him, and apparently they reshape their offensive approach in response to his presence. If that is true, and I can't prove it to you, it would help explain why the Bills pass defense is so good consistently. If it is true, the Bills may be more than willing to live with Edmunds' shortcomings, when measured against traditional linebacker play, because they're getting better overall defensive play out of the team with Edmunds on the field. And if it's true, it is true only because Edmunds is a unique physical talent, even though he may not have the particular physical skills that make him a great traditional linebacker, the kind of skills you and I think we can see on the field. I think Dramond Green is a Hall of Fame player, even though he has no Hall of Fame stats over his career. He makes a substantial, almost irreplaceable contribution to his team, and they do not play nearly as well without him. Your analysis would say he's not a great shooter, he not a great scorer, he's not a great rebounder, how can he be a great player? My answer is that some players are great in non-traditional ways.

There are no guys in the league, so far as I know, that combine his size, including his wingspan, and his speed and his quickness. He is quite unusual in that regard. In fact, i think he is unique in that regard.

Right. Edmunds is very unusual. He isn't simply an excellent athlete with poor instincts. He's an exceptional athlete. That doesn't change what Happy Days said about him, because it is true that he underperforms his abilities, at least with respect to the traditional measures. He's an interesting case.

Thanks. I'm a firm believer that we don't know very much. I think McDermott is way, way ahead of us. What that means for Edmunds, I don't know. As for your other point, I think Firechans may be right, but gives all the wrong examples. He cites a lot of players for whom there really wasn't much hope. The question being debated about those guys was more like "can this guy be serviceable," not "can this guy become a key player." I mean, everyone knew after a year that Manuel wasn't a Hall of Famer - the question was whether he could play well enough to make the Bills competitive. Maybin, certainly. I don't even know who Brandon Reily was. No one was arguing that McKelvin was or would become a top-five cornerback. Edmunds is different. The Edmunds discussion is more like the Fitzpatrick discussion, or the Tyrod discussion. Or Stevie Johnson, or maybe, as he says, Whitner. Those were guys about whom the question was "could this guy be the future?" But even they were different from Edmunds. Edmunds is a stand-alone physical talent who brings Hall of Fame raw measurables to the field. Edmunds is one of those guys about whom I always say it's better to give up on too late, than too early. Some of the best values to be had are first and second round picks whose first team has given up on. Why? Because those are the guys with special physical gifts, and special physical gifts rarely are found in the fifth round (Kyle was one of the exceptions). Edmunds will still be 24 when he finishes this season. That's really young. On the other hand, he will have finished five seasons. How long should the Bills wait on him? I don't know. All things considered, maybe the smart move next spring would be to tag him for a year. $15 million to get another year to watch him develop, and another year to develop the backup plan, may not be the worst move in the world.

I think you're right about this. They've never said it like this, but I think in so many words Beane and McDermott have said "you have your core guys, and you have everyone else." The core guys are excellent players in their own right, and they are the character leaders on the team. They are long-term leaders. You have to work your way into being a core player, and when you're there, you get a contract that says that by Bills' standards, you're elite. So, who's established himself as a core player? Josh, Diggs, White. (Miller, but he's unusual. Core players are long-term leaders. Miller is a short-term leader with great talent, so he's gotten paid like a core player, but he's not a guy the team is building its future on.) Kyle Williams was a core player. The Bills will pay their core players whatever they have to pay them to keep them. (Remember a few years ago when Beane said he hoped Josh would force him to write a big check? That's how you know the guy is a core player. Diggs, White, and Miller each forced Beane to write a big check.) Then you've got guys who are the model McDermott players, the guys McDermott will keep for as long as they're useful but who are expendable. These are guys that Beane will not overpay - he won't write a big check, because he knows he can't afford to pay a lot for every guy he likes. Hyde, Poyer, Morse, Milano, Johnson, Singletary, Knox. Even some lesser guys, like Neal and McKenzie. McDermott loves them, knows he needs guys like that on his team, but he's ready to move on from them if need be. Shaq Lawson and Jordan Phillips were and are in that category - the Bills actually did, reluctantly, move on from them, but the Bills were happy to bring them back at the right price. (Belichick has always had this discipline in New England. I was flabbergasted when Belichick let Lawyer Milloy go, but he was just the first of many talented guys the Patriots let walk.) Dawkins is, I think, on the bubble. It wouldn't surprise me if one day he gets paid like a true core player, but he isn't there yet. Hyde may be a bubble player, too - McDermott may become attached to him like he was attached to Williams, but I doubt it. Then, you've got the guys that McBeane soon will declare on. Edmunds, Oliver. Rousseau and Spencer Brown and a few others are a few years away. I think that's really what we're talking about here. Is Edmunds a guy who, even with the apparent flaws that people keep pointing out, is a core guy? Is he a guy on whom McDermott wants to build his defense for the next ten years? As someone mentioned, McBeane haven't been effusive in their praise for Edmunds over the past year, so that would suggest no. They didn't extend him promptly, like they did with White, Josh, and Diggs, although, as I said, there could be cap management reasons for that - Edmunds and Josh came up in the same year, and extending two core players in the same year might not have been the best cap strategy. So, there's some evidence that they've already decided he isn't a core guy. Drafting Bernard in the third round might suggest that the Bills already have begun the process of moving on, although it isn't easy to see how Bernard will be part of a new-look defense. And we don't know Edmunds' appetite for accepting a right-sized contract. If the Bills say to Edmunds, "you're not a core player, and we aren't breaking the bank for you, but you are a key player who we want to keep (a Hyde or a Milano)," how will Edmunds respond? I don't exactly know what contract parameters look like, but let's say someone will guarantee him $70 million and the Bills will guarantee $50 million. Will he take the lesser amount because, like Hyde and others he values the winning culture and the opportunity to grow as a player? If he has that mentality, great. If he wants the biggest payday and the Bills don't see him as a core player, he'll be gone. Exactly.

I really don't know where the Bills are going with Edmunds, but continuing to read an interesting collection of posts from smart people suggests to me that they will move on from Edmunds unless he has a big year. I would add to your list that for all his size and speed, he is not an impressive hitter. He rarely blows up anyone. Marino's point, and the argument I've been fleshing out, is all of those complaints add up to the same thing: he isn't a great, traditional linebacker. His value, if Marino is correct, is invisible. His value, if Marino is correct comes from things that the opponent doesn't do when he's on the field. It's like how a shut down corner usually has very few interceptions. Why? Because the offense doesn't throw in his direction. The value of the guy is not found in a traditional measure of quality corner play; the shut down corner's value is that he takes away more than 1/11 of the field, which means the other ten each have less than 1/11th to defend. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

When the mod's away, the clods will play.