Einstein's Dog

I can understand the moving Diggs if you think it is a re-tool/rebuild year. Then take a big gulp of medicine and get a couple WRs. But I think you are in the minority to want that. Especially when the option is to contend for the title. Diggs/highly drafted rookie/Samuel/Shakir/Kincaid gives us a shot this year! And if the rookie works out, the future would be extremely bright.

A Rodgers was a franchise QB while he was at Green Bay. There were more than just the Jets interested in his services, it was the Jets that were the highest bidders. He got more than Brady on the open market. Point is, it's a team sport. Good QBs can be on non-contenders. The idea of moving Diggs this offseason after moving on from Davis would not be smart. Replace Davis and worry about Diggs next year is just such a smarter strategy. The cap hit is less, and the progression makes more sense. Lets see how our first rookie does before penciling in major minutes for two unknowns.

But it's hard to see the Bills listed as a contender if their starting WRs are penciled in as: WR1 rookie, WR2 - Samuel, WR3- Shakir.

Kind of circular out of you. A HOF QB is a franchise QB. That franchise QB was put in a rebuild type situation with rookie WRs (and no D Adams) - the result was not pretty. This, obviously, is a possibility, and it's up to the FO to make sure it doesn't happen. So lets please stop with the "all you need is Josh" nonsense. It's a team sport. Lets try and remember Josh pre-Diggs.

The 28th spot for the majority of us is being reserved for the Gabe Davis replacement. So with that in mind, how are we going to be better this year if we move Diggs? And I don't remember Brady in a year when the Pats* started two rookie WRs.

On the flip side, the last year at Green Bay, A Rodgers did not make the playoffs- they were rebuilding.

From a Diggs contract perspective, from what we see from spotrac, this is not a good year to move him. And there doesn't have to ever be year of total rebuild with Josh. Draft a WR this year and have him grow and be groomed to take over. Constantly contending should be the plan with a franchise QB like Josh.

C'mon, a penciled in starting WR duo of Samuel and Shakir would have to be in consideration for the worst WR duo in the league. That's unfair to Josh and Bills fans across the nation,.

If there are enough players that you value more-or-less the same, it might be best to try and move down. For instance if X Legette/ K Coleman are rated the same (and even A Mitchell who they may not rate as high as outsiders due to attitude/work ethic/team culture) getting another pick may be worth the small difference in their preference of those players.

If Beane takes the hit on Diggs this year then the Bills as a team will be worse for it this year. They will have another hole to fill.

Pretty small sample size. If Diggs is moved this year we would have to call it a rebuild year with a goal of sneaking into the playoffs.

I think that's what Diggs is preparing for, something to possibly happen to him because his employer asked him to take a pay cut and he wouldn't do it. Diggs isn't saying he wants out, he is saying he is not going to give up the contracted money. But saying no to your employer can make you uneasy. By most accounts it seems a toothless threat. If the spotrac numbers are to be believed the Bills lose way more than they gain by cutting Diggs loose or trading him (caveat - spotrac doesn't know all the details of the contracts). So yeah, Diggs may be poking Beane, but you know, maybe Beane deserved it. If Beane crafted the contract the way it's reported by spotrac (when there are ways to structure deals that have tradeable pieces in them), that's on Beane. And as Diggs showed, he has been living up to WR1 #s the last 4 years.

The "Ready for watever" would be a reasonable tweet if you think Beane approached Diggs for a pay cut and Diggs turned him down.

What I don't get is why did "Ready for watever" trigger the blow up? I viewed it as Diggs thinking a variety of things could happen to him, probably because he did not take a pay cut that was probably offered - like Von or Knox. Since he didn't take the pay cut, he doesn't know what will happen with him and the 3/17 date has meaning. The followup "Well" also makes sense.

I agree Diggs likes his social media. But the quote "Ready for watever" does not indicate to me that Diggs wants out. "Ready for watever" seems to me to be subtle acceptance that he might get shipped out. He was probably approached by Beane to take a pay cut and told Beane to get lost. Diggs certainly knows about the 17th date and its implications. He's probably heard through his agent that there is talk of trading him. Diggs knows this is a business. He didn't do the Von and Knox reduction and he is at risk for the wrath of Beane in that regard. It doesn't mean Diggs wanted out, it just means he wants his money.

It could make a Legette/K Campbell/T Franklin in the second more likely too though.

The FO is acting like it wants to keep the culture it has developed over the years. It is making a concerted effort to get a lot of the prior backups signed because of the large turnover due to our purging of the old (Hyde/Poyer/Tre/Morse). I don't know that we prioritized the signing of Ty, probably just gave him a fair market rate offer they he accepted. If you're thinking the Bills are going to significantly improve the roster through Free Agent acquisitions, I think you are going to be disappointed.

But once it gets 4 to 5 WRs off the board the FO may have a specific target. A large preference. For example you're putting Franklin and Coleman in the same category as A Mitchell - I don't see it that way. If 5 WRs are off the board and the FO has A Mitchell as the last of the top tier guys, I can see a small move up to ensure grabbing him. Or similarly if A Mitchell is also gone, they may then feel the urge to move up a little for X Legette (who for some reason you don't have in that class).

I think the strategy is continue to invest in the DL until you get a dominant one. And then continue to invest in it to keep it. It's a good strategy. A good DL is one of the most important pieces of a good team. Hopefully the investment in the offense comes through a first round pick at WR. I would like to see the FO resist their urge to give money to some middling vet WR, like J Reynolds or the like. Those vets will just impede the playing time of our rookie WR and block the development of Shakir.

One reason I've found to be positive and excited is I think this move can be an indicator that the FO is not only going to go WR in the first, but they are doing so with the intention of playing this WR early. They brought in a non-threatening veteran backup WR to possibly help our new #1 pick. This isn't a D Mooney or C Samuel where the issue can get murky. We'll be going Diggs/rookie/Shakir/Kincaid/ and Cook with some Knox as the main components. That seems potent to me, not only next season but the future seems bright - only Diggs to deal with on the horizon in this scenario as long as the rookie pans out. Who will be the lucky rookie WR that gets this gig? Thomas/A Mitchell/X Legette? The draft is going to be must see TV.

But Muppy - I'm hoping we don't pay out for a retread WR and instead draft a WR high and play him quickly. I don't want an M Thomas or OBJ taking the snaps away from B Thomas/A Mitchell/X Legette. It's not what this regime is known for, but they have adjusted their thinking in the past. Get the highly touted WR and play him immediately.

I think the excitement of this pick up is that it might signal the intention of the FO to fast track the WR they pick in the 1st round to play. This guy is very little competition to our rookie WR picked in the 1st round. That's exciting to me. I hope it is Thomas/Mitchell/or Legettte. Whoever they decide, draft him, and use him immediately.

I think we should expect a small move up. They've done it the last couple of years now. And if going WR you have to think after 4 go and the draft gets into the 20s the FO will get nervous - and rightfully so. And as you mention the possibility of KC moving up (or Carolina) needs to be considered.

Lately I've been 50/50 with the FO. Didn't see it as necessary for Elam, loved it for Kincaid (and ancient history but loved it for J Allen). I'll be on board this year for a move up if they go WR, I'd be excited.

I could see the Bills viewing a tier at Thomas/Mitchell/Coleman/Franklin. And if the draft gets into the 20s with two of those 4 gone, Beane may rightfully get nervous. He may have to move up a bit. GunnerBilll's outline of teams doesn't look like it would make Beane (or me) comfortable. You would have Cowboys/Tampa ahead and KC and Car poised to make a move up and snipe us.