Shaw66

Wow. There's an idea. If he could handle the edge, that would be something.

I agree with this. I think you have to get up to 15 or so to get a special player. The Bills were going to get a good player, no doubt, but not a guy who was likely to be an impact player from day one. Where'd they get Ford - at 30? Why'd they trade up to get Edmunds? Because he wouldn't last into the 20s. It didn't seem likely that the Bills had enough capital to trade up into the mid-teens or better. So I wasn't expecting a star player in the draft. Diggs will be better out of the gate, no question.

Especially because McBeane claim to be build-through-the-draft guys, I hear you. But one of the things about Beane is he's fearless about Monday morning quarterbacking. When he sees something that he thinks works, especially something where's there agreement in the room from the coaches and the scouts, he goes and gets it. He made this deal quickly, in part because, I'm sure Minnie was telling him he was on the clock. I think it's fair to assume the Bills had done their homework on Diggs. They certainly scouted him for the game last season, and they also knew he was likely to be on the block or released this season, given his troubles with the Vikings. For Beane, if it's a guy he wants, he clearly would prefer to overpay than to miss the opportunity. Maybe lightning is going to strike and the Vikings will find a star late in the draft with one of the Bills' picks. If that happens, it's nice for the Vikings, but the question always is "are you happy with what you got?" If you're happy, the price is less important. McDermott is fretting that he gave up the pick that landed Mahomes in the KC. He got White and he got the ammunition that got him Allen. If you get a guy you like, you don't look back.

Well, I'm no capologist at all, but in terms of talent on the roster the Bills are getting to the point where next season we're going to start seeing guys cut as cap casualties, or free agents allowed to sign elsewhere. We already saw Philips and Shaq go, and that's going to become the norm. That's what happened in New England for years. Having said that, I have no idea if the Bills are done yet. Maybe with big signings as you say, and all that will be left will be the $2-3 million one-year deals that dribble in over the next few months.

Thanks to all who replied. And I know that Beane said they don't have enough room on the roster for seven draft picks to make it, but he was talking about the roster. And I'm not arguing that they paid too much for Diggs. I agree that a guy like Diggs is potentially valuable enough that the stuff you throw in on the back end of the trade isn't too important. If Diggs works out, the positives on the team will way outweigh whatever a couple of sixth round picks will do for you. But those picks DO matter. You need new players every year, and the best of the crop go in the draft. That was point. And Alpha, the math isn't wrong. Overall, on average, each team needs 10 or 15 new guys each season for the season, not camp. That's 10 or 15 guys coming out of college. More some years, fewer others, but on average you need a bunch. Most of them may never get beyond the practice squad, but you need them. And if year after year your opponents are drafting more and you're signing more undrafted free agents, over time, they're going to have better talent than you. It's simple logic. But as I said, I don't think there's much point in arguing about whether throwing in one or two of those picks worth it. To suggest the Bills overpaid because they added those picks doesn't make a ton of sense. The deal is pretty much Diggs for a first and change.

Frankly, I think this notion that the Bills don't need those later round picks is wrong-headed. Those picks are valuable, and to say that guys drafted in the later rounds wouldn't make this roster misperceives what happens on a typical NFL roster. With the roster plus practice squad plus a few free agents you pick up over the course of the season, you need about 70 players a year. Even if players had an average career of 7 years (they don't), you need 10 new players a year. And, no, it isn't relevant that some of the new players you pick up from other teams. Every team needs 10 new players, because 10 of your players are retiring every year. We don't notice many of them, because they are guys who were on the practice squad, or special teams for a year or two, but one way or another, 10 or more players are leaving the league each year. So you need 10 new players every year. If you're perfect in the draft, you get seven, and you still need three rookie free agents. If you have fewer than seven picks, you need more rookie free agents. If you're less than perfect, you need more rookie free agents. There's a rookie pool coming into the league every year. If you have fewer draft picks, you have to take more rookie free agents, which means that other teams are getting to pick players who, although they may end up having short careers, still are better than the ones who will be left when you go after the rookie free agents. So those picks the Bills just traded DO have value. Maybe not much trade value, but they are help your team maintain a certain level of talent. They don't all make, but some do. I'm not saying the Bills made a bad deal; in fact, I like it for the reason I gave in a posts somewhere: the Bills improved three positions by getting one guy. But don't think that Beane thinks those picks he traded were worthless. He'd love to have those picks, because he finds players in those rounds. It's just that he'd love to have Diggs more.

Maybe it's just me, but almost as soon as it's done I stop thinking about trade values and all that. Whether this was a good deal for one side or the other will be clear in three years. In the meantime, what matters is how the Bills look going forward from here. For starters, think about the fact that as a rookie in 2018, Josh Allen was throwing to Zay Jones, Kelvin Benjamin, Robert Foster and Charles Clay. In 2020, he's going to be throwing to Stefon Diggs, John Brown, Cole Beasley and whichever TE emerges. (Frankly, with Diggs on board, I'm not sure it matters who the tight end is; if he knows how to run routes, he is going to get open.) Bills probably still need help at linebacker, on the edge and on the offensive line, as well as a running back. They will pick up that help in the remainder of free agency and in the draft. I think the opportunity to get Diggs was too big to pass up, for one reason: there are very few players you can get who make your team better at three positions. The Bills now have a considerably better #1 than they had a year ago (Diggs), a considerably better #2 than they had a year ago (Brown) and a considerably slot receiver than they had a year ago (Beasley). There aren't any positions where you can get that ripple effect. One acquisition to improve three positions makes Diggs worth paying for.

Great article. Thanks. Pretty exciting to contemplate.

I think he was a lousy receiver. He caught only the easiest balls, and he didn't open easily. And he wasn't so explosive that he could have an impact on screens, rubs, etc. He did his job as well as he could, but he had plenty of opportunity to be an impact player and couldn't do it. He wasn't the future.

Oh, I didn't mean I didn't love the story. I'd have loved having that kind of interaction with a HoF player. Passed Jim Brown at Ralph Wilson Stadium and always regret not just stopping and introducing him to my son. And to be fair, sure Bettis would have said nice things to any fan, but these sounded like they were sincere.

Well, that all sounds great and I agree with all his conclusions, but ... 1. I'm a Bills fan, so of course I agree, 2. If you're an ex-NFL star who owns a restaurant, you've probably figured out it's not good for business to tell customers that their team sucks.

I agree with this, and I think Beane does too. The only reservation is that Beane doesn't want to buy thoroughbreds in free agency. He wants them in the draft, and after Allen and Edmunds, he doesn't care much which position the thoroughbred plays. Last year it was Oliver. Tougher this year, picking at 22. That's why some may be right and he'll trade up. But if he can't do that and he can get a couple of mustangs with the first and second picks, and a couple more in free agency, Bills will be in good shape. I think Beane is good for a mustang a year in free agency. A Hyde (I know, he wasn't Beane's), a Morse. I'm assuming we'll see another one or two of those this year. Not a Clwoney, not a Cooper. Beane wants to get his thoroughbreds in the draft, so he can have them for a long time. I don't know if Beane ever will be that guy who thinks he is one player away and makes a big splash in free agency to get him. If he is that kind of guy, I think he's still a year away from doing it. I have no idea who Beane will get, but he's convinced me after two years that he's going to keep building talent.

Here's what I think Beane would say to you: You don't understand or you haven't been listening. The Bills are about continuous improvement. They want better players at every position every year. They want intense competition in camp at every position every year. To have that competition, the Bills need to take 90 guys to camp. If they don't re-sign their players, the Crooms and Crofts and Fosters, and if they don't sign free agents who either will make it or not, like Norman, they won't have 90 players in camp and they won't have competition. Competition at positions makes players out of some guys you wouldn't expect. So some of the guys you don't like will improve from last year and contribute in 2020. We don't know which ones will improve and contribute and which ones will lose out to newcomers. That's what camp is for. When the free agent market opens, we will get some good players. You may not be impressed by the names, but we know what we need and what we're looking for. Same thing for the draft. If Croom and Croft are still around in September, it will be because they're good and can contribute. Beyond that, you overemphasize the value of marquee talent. Winning football is about good football players doing their jobs, and only to a lesser extent is about great players. The Patriots have had great teams for 20 years, and they haven't done it by chasing after great players. They do it with good football players who are smart and do their jobs. That's what the Bills are trying to do. At the end of free agency and the draft, you will probably be disappointed. You won't like the names. The Bills management will not be disappointed. They are going to get the guys they want, and they are going to work those guys into the roster in a way that makes the Bills a better team. That's exactly what's been happening for two full seasons now, and it's going to continue. You seem to have missed that point.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and there are plenty of reasons why the 2020 Bills could fail to improve. Injuries, as you say, are one. But the analysis here is weak, if not flat out wrong. We don't know how far Allen will go, but the odds are very good that we haven't seen the best version yet of Allen. He came out of a backwater college and got very little college-level QB training, so he was behind most highly touted QBs. He's had two years to learn and he's made substantial progress. It is much more likely than not that he will be better than last season. TE room has potential, which means it's likely to improve. It's not like there's no potential there. No backup at running back is simply naive. Do you think the Bills RB room today is the RB room that will open the season? Of course not. It will be better come September. The Bills don't have a "big hole" at CB2. They could improve over Wallace, but he did just fine last season. Bills had the third best passer defensive passer rating in the league last season; it's impossible to do that with a "big hole" at corner back. There should be no "no regression at player performance." No one on the offensive line is at the typical downside of his career, and they should be better with a year's experience together. No reason to expect regression from Allen, Singletary, Brown, Beasley, the tight ends, the returners at Dline or anyone in the defensive backfield. I'm not saying that the Bills are a lock to be better. They should be better. But most of the reasons you give for why they wouldn't be better are unlikely and unsupported by any evidence.

Plus, as I said in the continuity thread that Inigo started, when you have continuity and roster stability, new additions get up to speed much faster than when the whole roster is learning a new system. So, to pick an example, if the Bills insert a better talent at left guard between Morse and Dawkins, that new talent blends in and plays at a high level much more quickly than if the center and tackle were new, too. I have no doubt that the oline will be better. Ford will be better because he isn't a rookie any longer, Ford and Dawkins and Feliciano and Spain will be better because they have a full year into the system, and one or two of them will lose their jobs to players who are more talented. Allen and Singletary will be the two biggest beneficiaries.

Responding to this and other similar comments: You're ignoring what McBeane have told us for years now. They are never satisfied with the level of talent anywhere. They want and will bring in competition. Last year they had to bring in all those free agent offensive linemen to create the competition they wanted. This year they already have their depth, and they'll be looking to bring in at least a couple of guys who will challenge for starting jobs. I'm expecting one good free agent lineman and one good rookie. Morse is guy whose job is most secure, Dawkins second. The next three or four are going to be fighting for playing time.

Inigo - Thanks for the post. It states clearly and concisely the importance of continuity. It was stated another way by McDermott a couple of months ago when he said he'd be happy if he just had everyone back, with no changes. What he meant was his team would be better in 2020 just by bringing everyone back. There's one other point in the continuity concept. The Bills AREN'T going to have everyone back - there will be some changes, and those changes will upgrade the talent. The Bills won't start the same five offensive linemen - one or two of last year's starters are going to lose their jobs to better players. Levi Wallace already has to worry about Josh Norman, and we haven't gotten to free agency and the draft yet. Some wideouts are in trouble. The only possible declines in talent across the starting 22 are the replacements for Shaq, Alexander and Philips. One of the most interesting things I heard McD talking about a couple of years ago was when he explained that when you get to this point, where you have continuity and a stable roster, the newcomers get up to speed very quickly. The veterans around them pull the newcomers up the learning curve, so that even though it took the vets three years to get to where they are now, the newcomers don't need that much time. The point is that newcomers don't break the continuity. A couple of years ago, a lot of people joked about and doubted the process. The rest of the NFL isn't laughing now.

Here you.

Illegal forward pass in the end zone. Safety. Player's intention is irrelevant. Player's lack of knowledge of the rules is irrelevant. Guy running free downfield, in celebration drops the ball and raises his arms before crossing the goal line. It's a fumble, intention doesn't matter. Before the rule change, guy doesn't touch the kickoff and it's rolling freely in the end zone. Kicking team recovers. Touchdown, intention doesn't matter. Quarterback under pressure throws deep up the left sideline. About the time the QB releases the ball, the receiver, having misread the defense breaks off the route and crosses the field. Intentional grounding, intention doesn't matter. Yes, even "intentional" grounding, intention doesn't matter.

Solid, steady, sustainable growth. Not much to complain about. Sure, some people will complain about this move or that move. But the name of the game is winning and being a position to win more, and that describes what McBeane have done.

True, but he has a name, and that name played some outstanding football in the system the Bills run on defense, so it isn't nuts. He may very well prove to be more than a warm body. All we can do is wait and see. Mostly, I'm amused that people get so upset about these signings. It's the kind of guys Beane signs all the time. People should be used to it by now. People went nuts when he signed Gore. Gore was Singletary's mentor. He was worth it for that reason alone.

You may be right. All I was doing was responding to a whining poster who said there is no logic behind the signing. There's plenty of logic behind the signing. And there's no risk. If what you say turns out to be correct, the Bills will cut him and will have lost nothing. If he turns out to be someone who can contribute, then the Bills got a cornerback. Those are the two likeliest outcomes, so that suggests it's a good signing. No downside, possible upside. How about Kevin Johnson, to name one right of the top, at the same position.

Good luck with that approach. Guys near their career best regularly get deals that aren't team friendly. But I get your point. Before I began listening to Beane talk about his philosophy, I didn't see much point in signing guys on the back end of their careers, like Norman. But Beane has a very clear philosophy. Free agency is primarily for filling gaps. Beane signed about ten free agent offensive linemen last year, and except for Morse, they all were journeymen at best. Day after day, it was another ho hum guy. And a bunch of them got cut. With only a few exceptions, like Morse, he isn't going after guys coming off their rookie contracts and moving into their career best form. That's not who he signs. By and large, Beane wants to get his best players out of the draft. So, as I said, I get it, and I generally agreed with you. But Beane's the GM of the team I root for, and he's doing it a different way. So I roll with it. Chances are there will be ten corners in camp, and Norman may not make it. If he makes it, it will have proved to be a good signing. If he doesn't, well that's the way McBeane want it to work.

No, you just ignore the logical arguments. You say the last three or four years of data show he was really bad. I posted data that showed he had the same number of interceptions in his first four years as in his last four, and he had about the same number of passes defended. That's a logical argument suggesting he has not been "really really bad on the field." But you ignore it and get all defensive. Plus, you and others ignore that this isn't a guy the Bills have signed to be a shut-down corner who plays the other teams' #1 guys. This is a guy they've signed at least for depth and to have a shot at getting some substantial playing time. This is a guy who has shown that he can play well in the defensive backfield scheme that McDermott teaches. Those are logical arguments that make the signing look like it makes sense. You don't like Norman. That's fine. We're all entitled to our opinions. That doesn't justify your getting all high and mighty and suggesting that there is no conceivable logic to the move. There's plenty of logic. You're either incapable of understanding it or unwilling to recognize it.

I really appreciate it when people put PFF in the title of the thread. That means I can ignore. Football Outsiders has the Bills more efficient than Jacksonville. You guys have a good time here; I'm not interested in Jacksonville.