Einstein's Dog

I do not want the FO to draft for need, meaning to exclusively fill the CB position. It may fall as BPA but I hope it doesn't. As I mentioned I hope they operate all along like they will get another vet CB. If the price point isn't reached by the draft, I don't want them panicing. I don't think they will. So, no, I do not want CB in the first regardless of the status of the CBs prior if it's not the BPA on their board. I am hoping the FO ranks several WRs over CBs. If they don't have another vet CB prior to the draft and yet there are still a lot left, I think the FO can wait and get a great deal after the draft. It is a little contrary to what they have done in the past but in this instance I feel it could work.

I don't think you move Edmunds now. And certainly not with the intention of putting in a rookie in his place. I could see getting Anderson in the third as a future replacement for Edmunds (maybe move up in the third). Have Anderson learn for a year and then replace Edmunds. I could see the FO exploring possibilities of moving up by trading Epenesa and/or Moss. The Giants being one suitor that is supposedly looking for some cheap labor. I don't think it's enough juice for 1st round move up, but might do something for the second or third.

The CB vet signing doesn't necessarily have to be done before the draft though. If the large number of FA CBs are still there, no need to rush into a signing. Haden/Gilmore/Fuller/Nelson/Callahan/Rhodes/Jenkins/Sherman - Beane's staring 'em down, he'll get one to break for a $3-4M deal. And if they don't accept it before the draft, the price goes down after the draft - because 5 CB needy teams will have just addressed the position with top 2 round picks. Secondly, the draft is for the future. So the pick may be of small significance to our winning the Super Bowl and more integral to the overall decade of dominance we will be experiencing under the Josh era (and yes, I am hoping a Williams/Burk/Watson type influencer).

I think you forgot Knox. He will get his market share a year early (w some guaranteed cash to sweeten the pot). He's a keeper.

Yes. It has always been the plan. They're taking their time but I strongly believe they are planning on bringing in another CB. And I also believe they will not be drafting for need. BPA at a premium position of use (which will probably exclude DL this year).

To me, it makes drafting a WR even easier. It won't be misconstrued as an attempt to get rid of Diggs. It won't cause any angst in the locker room. It will just make the offense more potent. (disclaimer I am a WR in the 1st diehard advocate).

New thought on the CB strategy - wait out for the price drop, even if it means after the draft. Usually we like to fill holes in FA but this year there may be unique circumstances - a glut of decent FA CBs who don't have a team. Respectable FA CBs left- Fuller/Nelson/Rhodes/Gilmore/Sherman/Callahan/Jenkins/Haden. Seems like the FO can hold out and get one at a price point they have in mind - probably the $3-4M range - which would be getting a better player than Wallace at a lesser price. The price had been coming down, Peterson at $4-5M, but then Miami did something stupid (shocker) and set the market back. So now we're waiting it back out again. So even if we don't pick up a CB prior to the draft, there would be no need to panic and do a for need pick. Still go BPA at premium position of need. Operate as if you have one of the above CBs and draft accordingly.

It may be that they can wait on CB until after the draft. Outside of the two extreme CB fill-ins you mention, there are a lot of veterans still available. Nelson/Fuller/Rhodes/Callahan/Haden/Jenkins/Buoye/Sherman The FO may be waiting to have one of their choices drop into a predetermined Beaner range - say around $3-4M and still be an upgrade over the departed Wallace. The Miami debacle of paying stupid money for a CB, that we roast regularly, probably pushed the time frame of good value for CBs back a little. Just because we don't have one at draft time does not mean we are pigeon-holed into drafting for need. We would not be forced to trade up. God I hope that doesn't happen. The OP is a nightmare to me, trading up in panic mode for a CB. Get the best WR available and keep the first 3-4 rounds for players to be worked into lineup on rookie contracts.

But then you would miss out on the 5th year option. One benefit of the 1st round is the extra year. And if you hit on a WR the 5th year option becomes especially useful. Not just for the 5th year, but as a bargaining tool to extend early and get the player locked down for more years before the contract expires. At the 4th year you can negotiate an extension at the market rate throwing in some guaranteed money and it is an easy sell - ie Josh. If they hit on the raw physically gifted WR that develops with Dorsey/Josh into a top 5ish WR then you may wish you had the 5th year option for him.

I was reading this hoping you weren't getting too sucked in to drafting for need. Need is fluid with available FAs still out there. One aspect of the WR discussion though on the point of slot WR, is that it appears to be the least costly of the WR group. We filled it with FA's around $3M (McKenzie + Crowder). It's the good outside WRs where the market is going nuts. Rather draft the next Mike Williams than the next Beas. I would rather go with a T Burks/C Watson/J Williams than Dotson.

https://heavy.com/sports/buffalo-bills/aj-epenesa-james-bradberry-trade/ And according to the above version of the idea, the Giants would be offsetting some of the cost. In order for the Bills to make everything fit under the salary cap, “They’d need to create a small amount of space through restructures… but not a ton,” Thompsett noted. However, the big question is how much would the Giants would be willing to knock off Bradberry’s contract. Giants Wire’s Dan Benton noted, “The team would eat $11.28 million in dead space if Bradberry were designated a pre-June 1 release and get nothing in return, so there’s at least some financial wiggle room here,” depending on they can get in return.

WR in the First.....the best who is there....J Williams/T Burk/C Watson/Dotson....

You would still have Watkins and Pickens to choose from.

"Comparable at the moment" certainly qualifies as short term reasoning. Intermediate to long term you want to have a WR. Take a shot at a difference making offensive skills player Josh/Dorsey will have for 4-5 years. This conveniently ties in with salary/payments of the WR group - Diggs next year/Davis probably in two years/draftee in 4-5. As for the CB, don't worry they'll get a FA, and draft one also. I just hope not round 1.

Addressing it is different than drafting it, especially when you're talking about a 1st round pick. What our lineup looks like at the moment and basing your draft philosophy on it, is "need based" drafting. You're basing it on the fear of rolling out Dane and Cam. Short term thinking.

https://heavy.com/sports/buffalo-bills/aj-epenesa-james-bradberry-trade/ Not a bad idea

Well calling it "out of fear" is a synonym for saying drafting for need. It will be interesting to see how many peoples draft choice hopes change once we get the FA CB. Yes, take a corner if it's BPA at a premium position of need. But hopefully the BPA will be a WR because that would be the best fit for the long term for the Bills.

Please no to drafting a CB out of fear. Please understand there is a whole contingent of people strongly rooting for a WR in round 1. It would be a like a Will Smith slap to the face if the FO drafts a McDuffie over the likes of J Williams or T Burk. As for RB the discussion should really be about round 3-4 RBs, that's where they should be drafting Singletary's replacement. The FO is 1-1 on 3rd round RBs, try it again. We don't need or want a prima donna. The RB in this offense is not the star or the showcase. Lets hope we get to see how the FO does in their evaluation of the James Cook/ Pierre Strong/Jerome Ford/ Kyrin Williams types.

I think reasonable, dropped, prices will be happening soon too. I should have added Gilmore in the mix too. He got $7M last year and should get less this year. I'd like to see an under $5M signing of one of Gilmore/Rhodes/Nelson or Callahan. Then draft one in rounds 2-4.

And those are the useless ones they leaked. Seems like Peterson went for a reasonable price, $4-5M, but the dorklike Dolphins put a crimp in the Bills value-hunting with the outrageous X Howard signing. May have set our time table back a little. CBs still out there: Rhodes/Nelson/Callahan, then Jenkins/Bouye/Haden/Sherman. Safe to say Beane has a price/value/hierarchy for these CBs.

Yes, Rhodes along w Nelson/Jenkins/Buoye/Callahan/Haden and Sherman. A lot for the FO to work through, talent and cost considerations.

Wow, a lot of CBs still available. I think the FO will be able to get a better vet than Levi for less than $4M now - Nelson/Sherman/Bouye/Rhodes/Haden (although it would be unusual for Pitt to let him go for cap reasons and then the Bills sign him for less than Levi)/and Jenkins. The article did not even include Bryce Callahan. P Peterson just signed for $4-5M, the price is dropping.

I don't think the plan changes. I think the plan remains get a vet CB and draft one. The drafted one should not be 1st round but may be if FO's top tier WRs are all taken. As for the vet CB, i would welcome Bryce Callahan. This is a good CB who isn't getting big money because of injury history. That scenario is a great fit here, have a very good CB for what you hope is at least the early part of the season and then Tre will be back.

I would be disappointed with McDuffie over J Williams or T Burks. Wouldn't mind B Hall or K Walker in the second though.

Seems short-sighted. FA is for the short term needs and the draft is for filling premium positions for the long haul. A first round WR pick would immediately occupy the Sanders spot for the next 3 years at least, that's been at least $6M a year. It also gives Josh/Dorsey some continuity. And has the potential to be a WR1 type player - which is not only expensive to fill but difficult to get. It would make the future a lot brighter. The pick does not have to be a top 10 receiver in the league to make the pick a success. That is a ridiculously high standard, especially in the WR market. If the draftee produce similar numbers to Sanders that would be a win. Also, intent matters. People here are already quoting stats of the poor offensive investment. I would like to see an end put to that.