DCOrange

Not sure if anyone pointed it out and it doesn’t matter much anyways, but the blurb you’re referring to is from Rotoworld which puts everything in the context of fantasy. They were just providing fantasy analysis based on Joe’s assertion that Brown is gone.

Would be awesome to see him return to San Fran, which just so happens to be the most RB friendly system in the league.

I'd be pretty surprised if we get more speed at WR. Diggs, Beasley, and Davis will all almost certainly be back. I'm kinda hoping neither Brown or McKenzie return, but in that event, it's hard to imagine that their replacements would be faster than they already are, and even if they are, they probably won't have as large a role as a healthy Brown as the Bills give Davis more chances. I do expect TE and OLine to be priorities on the offensive side though as well as the front 7 defensively.

He's a solid starter, is super young, and has great athletic traits. I definitely do not view him as a pro bowl caliber player yet (yes, I know he's made a couple of them but I don't think they were deserved). Milano is the better player of the two IMO. Having said that, it seems like Beane ultimately has to choose between the two of them and I expect him to choose Edmunds both due to what they already invested in him as well as his age and athletic traits. It makes me nervous because I expect Edmunds will be paid like he's a top 5 linebacker and if he doesn't improve, that's really poor value during a time that we need to be careful with our money. To some of the other points in this thread: as a Bills/Bucs fan, I would say White is significantly better than Edmunds. That isn't really a knock on Edmunds...White is just really good already and still improving. The Bucs have IMO the best LB duo in the league with him and David (who's in the conversation for #1 LB in the league). Re: playing Edmunds outside, I do wish we'd at least situationally use him that way. He had some nice flashes of being an edge rusher in college and he definitely has the athletic traits to be able to contribute there as well. We don't really have the LBs behind him to be able to play him that way though (and I imagine that is by design).

I have a hard time believing this report is accurate. Just seems too good to be true IMO.

Depending on the quality of the picks and the starters, that feels light. I think most teams would be all over that. If for example, for the Jets, that means #2 pick, a future 1st, 2 future 2nds, Tarell Basham, and Folorunso Fatukasi, they'd probably say yes in a heartbeat. If the defensive players are Quinnen Williams and Marcus Maye instead, maybe not. Or if it's a team like Washington offering #19 and a future 1st, the 2nds, one of their DTs, and one other defensive player (obviously not Chase Young), I think they'd do it a heartbeat and be thankful Houston came down from the original reported asking price.

I think a 2nd is much too high as well. I don't think it would necessarily take a mega-deal but obviously depends on the player (and probably the team that acquires him). I think it's possible at this stage of his career that if traded to a contender, he'd restructure his deal to spread the money out for 2 or 3 years instead of just 1 and make it like a 2/$20 or 3/$30 kinda thing instead of just a 1/$17. Obviously we don't know that for sure, but like I said, if all it costs is a late 4th, I'm in. He's probably better than any of the options in free agency and I think I'd rather pay his 1/$17 mil than giving someone like Ngakoue a 4/$60-80 mil deal anyways. I think Watt would open things up for Oliver in a way that maybe none of the other options out there would. Watt is double-teamed at a higher percentage than any other player in the league and that's even with Houston still having Whitney Mercilus lined up on the other side of the line. I think he'd do wonders for Oliver provided he makes it through the season healthy.

I would happily trade a 4th for Watt and could be convinced to maybe offer more than that. The Athletic is saying Houston is aiming for a 2nd + maybe a later pick for him.

I disagree, but I understand most NFL front offices won't view it that way.

Theoretically Carolina could have offered Teddy. Doesn't sound like they did though. If they truly view Goff as the difference between the #8 pick in the draft and future late 1sts, Detroit hired the wrong people. Likewise if their new GM is banking on the Rams having injuries derail their next two years to make the value close. They had the #8 pick there for the taking. It would pretty much take a worst case scenario for the Rams picks to ultimately equal that (if you discount them for being future picks like NFL teams do). Edit: I'm not even saying it's necessarily wrong to take a worse offer to leave on good terms with one of their best ever players. But that's the way it should be framed if journalists are being honest about it.

An interesting wrinkle to this that nobody seems to be talking about: Detroit’s GM turned down a better offer from Carolina (a top 10 pick) to do his old team a favor (he was just hired away from the Rams a few weeks ago). Maybe he ultimately just wanted to do Stafford a solid and was okay with the Rams package but it’s clearly worse than the #8 overall pick in this years draft. This was not a case of Detroit getting the best value they could for their asset and it just so happened to benefit the GM’s old bosses.

Poor OLine, poor RBs, and poor defenses. Other than that though, he was set up well for success.

We’ll have to agree to disagree. They knew what they had in Goff, and it was a guy that could succeed if his first read was correct. If anything didn’t go according to plan, it was a lost down. Even before Goff was resigned, all the talk was that it was McVay and the supporting cast making it all work. They ultimately chose Goff at the expense of the supporting cast. Teams need to think more rationally about the QB position. If you’re paying a guy like they’re a top 5 QB when they aren’t actually capable of leading the team themselves, you’re probably not going to be a real contender. The Rams kept themselves afloat by trading all of their first round picks to and carefully structuring the other contracts to try to keep the deck stacked for Goff as much as possible but it still wasn’t enough. Had they traded Goff earlier, they could have gotten at least a first round pick if not multiple firsts, kept the elite run game, elite OLine, continued building up an elite defense, and continue taking more shots at finding a good enough QB on a rookie deal. Cleveland is one of those teams that are now about to be in the same situation that the Rams were in not too long ago. They should talk to Houston about what they’d need to add to Baker in order to do a Baker-Watson swap. Otherwise I think Cleveland will likely plateau like the Rams had these past few years (though to be fair, I do think Baker is a better QB than Goff).

Giving Goff that contract was a major mistake too. They should have traded him on his rookie deal when they could have gotten good value from him. Most teams have no capability to think rationally about the QB position.

Those GMs should probably not be GMs. Goff is precisely the type of QB teams should constantly be trying to replace IMO. A talented passer but he just doesn’t have it between the ears at all. If a play doesn’t play out exactly as expected, he’s screwed.

It’s interesting that Detroit supposedly turned down a better offer from Washington. I’m surprised this Goff-Stafford swap actually happened, but value wise, I think this was in line with what was expected. Don’t think this changes the price for Watson at all. Decent return for Detroit, but Goff’s contract is pretty bad and those 1sts are years down the road and likely in the late 20s to 30s...not super valuable chips. If a team like New England had offered #15, they probably should have taken that instead but it sounds like they just wanted to get Stafford to his top choice, which was LA.

I’m not really a fan of any of the TE options in free agency. Maybe you sir back and see who doesn’t get a deal and bring one of them in super cheap, but I think a trade is probably the best way to upgrade at TE this offseason. I’d be going for Cam Brate or OJ Howard from Tampa.

There's a 0% chance we cut Beasley after the year he just had. Certainly not to replace him in the slot with McKenzie.

The Combine times aren't perfect either. With Reagor for example, if you put his combine run under the microscope, he actually ran a 4.40 but their timing system didn't work properly.

I just don't think he's good at anything outside of the gadget stuff. A guy like Toney or Moore can replace that production while also being a dependable WR and maybe even be able to line up in the backfield from time to time.

I would guess he's closer to a 4.5 than a 4.3. I do like him a lot though (depending on what the doctors think of his medicals). I'm really hoping to upgrade McKenzie this offseason and this is one of the guys that could do that. Kadarius Toney is probably the best option in that regard but I'm not confident he'll be available at #30.

They aren't looking to rebuild. They're looking to upgrade at QB so that they can be Super Bowl contenders next year.

Jackson isn't a free agent. Some of the options (ignoring whether or not we can afford them): Shaq Barrett (almost certainly staying in Tampa) Yannick Ngakoue Carl Lawson Jadeveon Clowney Melvin Ingram Bud Dupree Leonard Floyd Trey Hendrickson Matt Judon Haasan Riddick Romeo Okwara

Milano is going to be tough to replace, but I think we pretty much have to try. I'm not necessarily convinced that Edmunds is or will be a better player than Milano, but we can probably only afford to pay one of them and Edmunds is understandably the one they're going to be willing to bet on. We're going to need to find a diamond in the rough.

Our reported interest in pretty much every significant free agent RB does make me wonder. I hope we ultimately just sign a cheap RB this offseason that can catch the ball and call it a day personally. Yeah, I mentioned it last year as well, but I think a trade for a vet TE makes the most sense for us and I would continue to look to the Bucs, who have two TEs on their roster for next year that would be upgrades over Knox and they'll likely try to keep Gronk as well.