Einstein's Dog

I think Beane and the FO have done a great job of creating low expectations. They've allowed, even promoted, the lowered expectations behind this cap problem while avoiding the criticism that this is an issue they created. You're right, seems pretty easy at June 1st with the $10M Tre money and a couple restructures (which could potentially include Josh as well) that they would easily have over $15M which seems enough to afford either Metcalf or Aiyuk - who happen to be my top two hopes. Look at the advantages of adding one of Metcalf/Aiyuk Entire offensive playmakers set for years - Josh 4+yrs, Metcalf/Aiyuk new contract 4+, Kincaid 4, K Coleman 4, Samuel 3, Shakir 2, Cook 2, Davis 4,Knox2 All playmakers would be younger than Josh, easy to see Josh as the leader in Phase 2 No worries about players aging out. All players younger than Josh who is 28 (today, Happy Birthday Josh) This addition makes a case for year over year improvement: Metcalf/Aiyul > Diggs, C Samuel/K Coleman > G Davis, Shakir24 > Shakir23, Kincaid24>Kincaid23. It all comes together. It all makes sense. It was Beane's plan all along (the guy is good).

My apologies if I mistook you for other posters. Please do not put much stock in these alleged wise posters who continue to change their cap/salary implications. It is safe to say Beane has a much better grip on what it takes. And a good GM would have positioned himself to meet the requirements (I believe he has). For instance it seems quite safe to say that after June 1st there is the potential for a surge in funds that should be sufficient to bring in a top tier WR (Tre money + potential restructures + potentially another preplanned hit to Josh = > $15M). The article above mentions $13M needed for Metcalf and Aiyuk looks to be about $14M. The acquired WR can then have their contract restructured - much like Diggs had his restructured to a $6M cap hit. Who cares if Beane says he is okay with the WR room? That is just blather, what else is he supposed to say. What matters is if he actually believes it, which is hard to believe any reasonable person would. Only diehard Beane fans can twist the top three WRs of; WR2/3 from Wash, a second round rookie, and last years WR3, as an acceptable WR room. And I agree with you that that is not a rebuild- a rebuild would have been with 2 drafted WRs - right now it's just pathetic. That's not what a good GM does. It's okay to have different hopes/expectations. You can be anxious for camp, I want to see what the first week of June brings.

Fair enough. And for me: 1. The addition of a good WR changes dramatically the entire off-season moves. It ties in everything he has done (and I was rooting for). But it all hinges on his finishing it off. The state of the WR room is hanging in the balance. 2. Now you're adjusting your amateur capology to say you have to cover the salary. Prior it was cap hit. Some internet quote (you put in this thread) said cap hit minus bonus. The linked article said the Steelers would need $13M to cover Metcalf (and that there could be a restructure done with no void years that would reduce his 2024 salary by almost $6M). And you say I'm making assumptions? Whatever, I'm confident Beane knows what it is and has planned for it. Once again, it's his job. And from the tidbits we have seen it is totally reasonable to think it can be done. 3. What about when Beane said "we will never rebuild as long as Josh is my quarterback". That's the Beane I choose to believe.

Once again you're going into the weeds of Beane's job. As an overview though you can see how with a short term boost to around $15M allows Beane to bring on a top WR. And this time your research has you conclude that, in fact, he could afford Metcalf if he had $15M, which would also be enough for Aiyuk and DHop - probably D Adams too. We've seen how with a WR such as Diggs, a high priced WR can be restructured down to a cap hit of only $6M. So it's just a short term boost and we can stop the reduction talks of how much draft picks are etc. Beane is getting $10M Tre money June 1st, all he needs is another $5M to bring a top WR on board. Of course he can get that. It's my contention that he has been planning on this since he moved Diggs out. And while it may have never been done before the meat on the bone with Josh very well could have been his back up plan to make sure he has the funds to make this happen. Seems logical to me, something a smart GM would do. There is speculation (okay, it's me) that Beane made a gentleman's deal with the SF GM for Aiyuk prior to the draft. I do seem to be the only one expecting such a move. My logic has been this: Beane is a great GM, a great GM does not have a pathetic WR room while Josh is in his prime. Therefore this WR room is not done. With the thought that the WR is not done, I've actually been pleased with several developments. I didn't want the Bills trading up for a top 3 WR. I didn't want 2 WRs drafted, that would have meant to me that the FO was going through with a rebuild. I didn't want to get a high priced FA WR, they weren't good enough. The move I have hoping for was to get a good proven WR. Everyone's fine or great if we get a good WR. The difference seems to be if we don't get one. For me, not getting one drastically reduces my opinion of Beane. Terrible off-season out of him. Having a bottom 5 WR group doesn't cut it in my book. This WR move is the lynchpin of the evaluation of his offseason, with it - excellent transition to youth/reload, without it what a disappointment. If Beane doesn't trade for a good WR, the other moves - not moving up, not drafting 2 WRs (like Franklin late), not getting a good better FA WR (like OBJ) - all moves I had rejoiced in - look like mistakes.

I think it would help to take a step back and look at the big picture. It's Beane's job to know the cash requirements of getting a trade WR on board and then what salary he would want to reduce that to. He knew/knows those numbers and has a plan to meet them. That's what a top GM does. Going into the specifics is difficult for us. But it does seem reasonable to think it requires the $10M Tre money. Then I think it would be about only $5Mish more needed to bring a big fish WR in before restructuring. As you mention Aiyuk is $14.5.. And for Metcalf you list his $24.5 cap but aren't subtracting the bonus money (which is what oldmanfan's rules stated). Metcalf had a $30M bonus so even if prorated for $10M, Metcalf could make it for the brief $15M cash on hand. You don't see Josh restructuring again, just because. But I can see this as part of the plan all along.

Appreciate the response, some comments. 1. Top 10? How about we get a top 30 WR? 2. How is Diggs a case in point for you? You mention he is a $6M cap hit, which is exactly what I am talking about. The ability to get an Aiyuk/Metcalf/D Adams/DHop at that price is what I think many don't realize could happen. How does restructuring Diggs to $6M mean that the guys I outlined cap hits would be SO massive? Kind of suggests the opposite to me. The cap hit can be manipulated to future years. 3. It seems like people's bias show through. People that like Beane but don't think a WR addition is happening are making all kinds of excuses. There is this Teflon Beane going on. Several people in this thread said "No One", like they really wouldn't want a good WR? One eluded to reading Shaw's explanation - like adding a good WR would ruin Beane's genius plan to run a bunch of WR2's out there. Others throw their hands up and say "Beane can't do it because of the cap". Like Beane has no influence on the cap. 4. I thought there would be like minded people to me, that believes Beane is a top GM and a top GM will be making a move. What that move is exactly was open for discussion. We haven't been able to get that far. Many feel the need to chime in and reiterate how in their opinion it can't/won't be done. This has been highlighted by the step by step rebuttal of each of what I perceived to be signs ending with what I hope will be a not soon forgotten classic "there is literally a 0% chance". Back to the OP - I am now rooting for one of the younger options Metcalf/Aiyuk. It would make for a Phase 2 for offense. We would have playmakers set for several years and Josh would be the veteran. Look at the years Josh-locked in, Kincaid 4, Coleman 4, new young stud WR Aiyuk/Metcalf 4, Samuel 3, Shakir 2, Cook 2, Davis 4. That offense would have just minor changes for the next 4 years! And that would be a young, potent, talented offense.

Which is why the Bills only drafting one is curious. We had 2 depart. Hopefully they'll keep replenishing regularly now.

Was Ronnie Harmon before your time? Most notable alligator arming in Bills history.

I'm obviously having trouble accepting this. Still in denial. The MVS signing did hurt in terms of the odds of what I want to happen. But it doesn't change my overall feeling that Beane won't let the Bills main components of the WR room be C Samuel/rookie Coleman/Shakir.

Yes, when you trade you have to accept some type of contract (oldmanfan quoted cap hit minus bonus). That is why everyone is thinking June 1st is relevant. I don't mind trading Diggs, I kind of like it, if there is a suitable replacement. C Samuels is not IMO (and many others) a suitable replacement. C Samuels/K Coleman combine to make for a suitable replacement (arguably upgrade) over G Davis. I think Beane is an intelligent GM. An intelligent GM would not move Diggs and Davis without a plan to replenish the WR room. So far the WR room is woefully inadequate, yet would all come together with one trade. I don't know how you can be so sure Aiyuk wasn't part of it - SF just drafted 2 WRs with one in the first round - when they have Deebo/Aiyuk/CMC/Kittle with contracts for Aiyuk + Purdy looming.

This year's group looks in more dire need of a top WR than when they traded for Diggs. People thinking as it stands this is a fine job by Beane start to lose a little credibility in my book. The WR group is just too limited. I can get around the DE problem, but not the WR. And the cap excuse doesn't cut it with me either, that is part of his job. And I feel it can be worked (and actually will). Oldmanfan had asked how one move could mean so much. It is because it is the lynchpin move. An additional top tier WR changes the whole outlook of the WR group. It becomes better than last year IMO. It brings together all the little things Beane did (or didn't do).

Not stupid at all IMO. Tua made it intact through a whole season last year. And by negotiating now, the Fins would be in real trouble without him this season. Tua probably gave the idea of retiring a lot of thought the last two years . And he now knows what priority the Fins have for his well-being when the ran him back out there after being concussed in the Bills game. Another big blow and I could see him calling it quits. It would take money early if I were him. And I would squeeze every dime out of Miami as well.

What would you give up for Aiyuk? You mentioned earlier you would go with a 1st+ for Metcalf. How do you rate my 4 top contenders - Aiyuk/Metcalf/DHop/D Adams?

Are you saying you don't want another WR? That you don't want to add an Aiyuk/Metcalf because it would hurt the strategy as laid out by Shaw? And what exactly was that strategy, not to invest in WRs while we already don't invest in RBs. So where exactly should we put this money?

I think Beane is an excellent GM and it is really the basis for me thinking he has planned to add a prime WR all along. He didn't drop the ball at all when he traded for Diggs - it was a brilliant move that elevated the Bills into contender status for the next 4 years. He should do it again. The graphic above showed how little money the Bills have currently invested in the WR room. And if a similar one was done for RBs the Bills would once again be at the bottom (Cook/Davis/Ty). The Bills should be spending money on playmakers someplace and that would be at WR (sorry Shaw they are not all the same). I think Aiyuk has taken the lead as most likely. The Bills may have a gentlemens agreement with SF. SF double dipped at WR with one in the 1st round.

And you have to figure the Bills RB room is in a similar position - low round 2 Cook, round 4 rookie and bargain basement Ty.

Well, I expect and want Coleman to be good. Coleman is slated to be an important piece even in my world where we trade for a WR. So, I guess if we don't trade for another WR and Hollins gets a 1,000 I'll change my tune and think Beane did a good job and Shaw was right any JAG will do.

Actually I see trading for a WR as a way to develop Coleman. Without a trade we're throwing him in there. I do want to spread the ball around. Having another good WR will help to do that. Having Aiyuk or Metcalf along with Coleman on the field will open things up for Shakir/Kincaid/Samuel underneath.

No, that's not the barometer for Beane's performance. Beane supplies the talent to the coaches. The Bills almost didn't make the playoffs last year and I wasn't blaming Beane.

Managing the cap is part of Beane's job. If he chooses to not get another WR my evaluation of his performance decreases tremendously. He should of had (and I think he did) all of this planned or at least outlined in his head prior to unloading Diggs. The idea floated about now that Beane is ahead of the curve by assembling a room of no-name WRs doesn't come close to cutting it. No, my avenue to thinking Beane is smart is through his thinking ahead when he accumulated draft picks, put aside Tre money, and left some Josh money on the table, and only drafted one WR. That all makes sense when he trades for a good WR. A WR room featuring a rookie, $8M WR2/3, and Shakir is mind-blowingly poor. Getting into the weeds a little bit on the cap piece, the salary can be manipulated once they are brought on board. For instance last years salary of DHop is listed as $1.8M in spotrac. Games can be played with distributing the cost over multiple years. And if we got a WR for multiple years, the offensive playmakers are set. Josh- multiple, Cook 2 yrs more, Kincaid 4yrs, Shakir 2, K Coleman 4, Samuel 3, new WR multiple, backup RB 4. They don't need 2025 cap on offense playmakers. We'll see if Shaw changes his tune once Beane pulls the trigger and gets a real WR in here. Then you can say, even in this youth transition Beane improved the WR room. That's a good GM.

It's the MVS, Hollins part that I do not want to see. For all the talk about interchangeable WRs - it does not include those dregs. Don't need someone to take the volume of Diggs, but instead someone who is good, who helps split the overall target share and who would force the defenses to strategize against, which in turn makes the targets to the remaining players easier. If we get a Metcalf/Aiyuk/D Adams/Dhop the whole defensive strategy changes and Samuel/Shakir/Kincaid group will be free to eat underneath.

I like the Samuel pick in the context of having Samuel and K Coleman take over the expected role of G Davis. I can see that being an improvement. And Samuel could also get snaps for Shakir. The one addition makes a huge difference IMO. It significantly changes my entire evaluation of Beane's off-season moves.

I don't have a problem with moving Diggs- unless the plan was to replace him with C Samuel, then that is a terrible plan. And just because Diggs wasn't good down the stretch doesn't mean you replace them with someone who isn't good. You try to upgrade. It may not be easy to get a good veteran WR, but that is Beane's job! The available WRs are not publicly posted but seems like they would be out there if the offer is right. That's why I'm thinking post June 1st something happens.

Because the downgrade at such an important position is so large. WR1 in particular. You can't seriously tell me you're replacing Diggs with a rookie or an $8M FA Wash WR2/3. It is such a downgrade, that yes, if significantly affects my entire evaluation of Beane's off-season work. And I like Beane, I have thought he was one of the best in the business. The one additional WR keeps him in that realm. That's why I think it is going to happen.

The Bills WR room has been a work in progress for years, but generally I've been able to see the logic in it. It was a good back in the Diggs/Brown/Beasley day, then seemed rational to put in Sanders. Next year it seemed logical to promote G Davis to a bigger role - I was on board with that (although it didn't work). I bought in to the thought that Beasley wasn't physically gifted and his production was scheme related and replaceable with McKenzie/Crowder. This year there the WR room is totally illogical - pathetic - Unless a trade for a good WR takes place. That's why I think it will happen. With a trade, logically you can see Diggs replaced by the new trade, G Davis replaced by a combo of C Samuel/K Coleman, Shakir at #3. I can be on board with that. If the trade doesn't happen, which most people seem to think, this is IMO Beane's worst year - by a lot.