Einstein's Dog

I don't follow you on the Seattle doesn't need an RB thought. K Walker had <600 yds with a 3.7 ypc. He was put on season ending IR in Dec 2024 Their second RB is Zach Chabonnet who had <600 yds with a 4.2 ypc. Then K McIntosh as #3 who had a total of 172 yds Then there is George Holani - who? Seriously Holani has a total of 10 yards! on a 3.3 ypc. Seattle was 30th in rushing yards and 23rd in ypc

I agree with a lot of what you're saying here - Garrett or Crosby first. But it seems like those could be drifting away. Cleveland not dealing and the Raiders potentially adding Stafford to at least appear competitive to keep Crosby. Where I differ is on being able to compete with the Pack. Doubs is a troubled WR that I think Green Bay is hoping to unload and make it look like a deal sweetener. Much in the same way I think Beane would dangle J Cook. I think Kincaid and Coleman are in the Shakir category of highly coachable, team oriented, culture players that are here for the long haul. Cook is questionable in that regard IMO and could be trade bait in any of the major moves.

If Cleveland is holding firm on not trading Garrett and the Raiders reload with Stafford (thereby signaling they aren't tanking and appeasing Crosby), I think the FO pivots and turns to third on the overall list of big moves and goes for DK. It doesn't mean they give up on D line, it just modifies the way they go about it. The big draft capital and money goes to DK and a decent sized FA goes to the D line with a lot of the remaining draft capital going to D.

I'm with you on this one Alpha, I don't think Shakir has changed the plans at all. This was the plan. The FO has reasonable numbers for their own first. And while DK seems like a long shot, I think he always was a long shot. But if the stud DE's don't materialize and Seattle is ready to make a deal, the DK move could still be on the list.

I agree, I think/hope that the FO is trying to get back to the plan of paying franchise QB/LT/DE/WR1. They've got the QB+LT, now need to try again with DE and WR1. A stand out DE will take draft capital and money for a Garrett/Crosby so I don't think the FO would invest both draft + money for the WR also, which IMO makes DK a long shot (which is unfortunate IMO but understandable). With the overall offensive success with a mediocre A Cooper the FO may have revised and lowered their anticipated investment in a top WR. I'm hoping they don't go too cheap, I'd like to see D Adams or C Godwin at the $20M mark. Then there is the drop down to DHop, Slayton or Hollywood Brown.

Wow, to me you're all over the place. You don't like the Shakir deal which I love - yes, Shakir is getting G Davis money but Shakir has incredible hands and was a huge part of this offense. Secondly, you think Cook at $13 per is some sort of deal. Cook should be signing up for D Henry/J Mixon money - $8-9M. Instead Cook took to social media with a $15M claim.

Also, the player involved needs to take the prevailing market rate, for the years extended and in return they get a guarantee early - just like Shakir. In the case of Cook he may have done Beane a favor going to social media, the fans now see why J Cook will not be handled like Shakir. J Cook does not want a reasonable market rate for future years now along with a guarantee. J Cook wants top of the market.

I would like to keep Rousseau. More like give 1st in 25, 1st in 26, 2nd in 25, 4th in 25, along with J Cook + AJE + Elam for Garrett and Newsome and a 3rd and 5th coming back. Something huge like that. I think Maxx is in play, he is just handling it intelligently. He is allowing the Raiders to get good value for him and keep a good relationship with the fans.

But what about when they brought the big fish Von in? I'm talking with the unhurt version right of Von right out of the gate. Didn't he start by making his presence felt in the first game, against the Rams? The Bills were Superbowl favorites. Lets replicate that with Garrett as the new piece.

This is why I would like him in a big package for the Garrett or Crosby. It clouds the value of the trade. You put in J Cook, Elam, and AJE along with draft picks.

I'm thinking more along the lines of a 1st, a 2nd, J Cook and Elam for Garrett and Newsome. Cook's salary is just $5M this year but of course they inherit the whole problem that is brewing. We in turn get the problem that Newsome has salary wise.

I imagine the FO is working as you outline above on an extension for Shakir. And this is being done in the traditional Buffalo way, in private. In contrast to what I imagine is happening with Shakir, now compare that to J Cook. J Cook has taken to social media, and with an outrageous figure. It probably sends a cringing message to the FO of what they will be dealing with in the future. IMO, if I were in the FO I would be including J Cook in a package for either Garrett or Crosby.

Money talks. If Beane's number is higher than the others I'm sure D Adams would easily be able to change his story. It doesn't take Chatgpt to come up with a story line for him taking the money and going to the Bills. As for cost, I think it would be less than the cost of DK or Kupp, - and not involve any draft capital. The downside is, it's not a long term solution - like the DK dream is.

For a WR, I'm with you DK Metcalf is my top choice. However, I really think the defense needs a stud DE like Garrett or Crosby. And if they trade for one of the DE's I don't think the FO would do another big trade for DK. I would love to see it, but it really seems like a long shot. Of the FA WRs I like D Adams best. Adams looked better to me than A Cooper.

I think Von needs a restructure or out. Jones can go. Maybe Martin. Tradeable Edwards, AJE and J Cook

I think the path might be trade + pay a DE (Garrett/Crosby) and add D Adams. Then the Bills have put money in the traditional premium spots - QB/LT/WR1/DE and still have draft picks to draft/develop the rest of the team. I would keep Milano, Knox, and Jones. Von probably wouldn't make it. AJE and J Cook might be able to be used in trading for a Garrett/Crosby.

It seems like it has been something the FO has operated on - the don't pay RBs so they can allocate to other areas. Paying for an RB deviates from what many of us considered to be a smart philosophy. The allocation of funds could come down to something like which would you rather have - D Adams + (R Davis/T Johnson/Rookie) or J Cook and some mid-level WR like D Brown or D Slayton

Just saw a blurb on the Bills being the betting favorite to land D Adams (per Sportsbetting.ag) with 3/1 odds. I like it!

Teams can have a well salaried QB, WR, and DE. Many do. The Bills were going in that direction with Josh/Diggs and Von. Now they can try again with Josh/DK and a DE (Garrett/Crosby/Mack). It is a good way to run an organization because those are premium positions. And yes, you may have to sacrifice Cook to do it.

Disagree - pay a WR, draft the RB. WRs are harder to hit. And it's hard to totally miss on an RB, seems pretty easy to get a Singletary type.

I'd like a boundary WR - I think T Higgins will be too expensive at around $27M+. So I go with one of these Beane can get at a decent value: D Adams - not a FA yet, but will be. C Godwin - off an injury so there is some risk. DHop A Cooper K Allen Would love to see a trade for DK Metcalf, or C Kupp either.

I'm with you, it's how the money is allocated. Don't pay the RB big bucks - go with Ty, R Davis and Rookie. Instead get a good boundary WR - DK Metcalf may be too much but high on the list, then there is C Kupp, D Adams, K Allen, or maybe A Cooper or DHop. And of course on D get that top tier DLman- Garrett/Crosby/Hendrikson/Mack.

The article doesn't give him credit for Josh. And he pre-disses Beane's potential splash move of Garrett with "lazy GMing". And the poster you responded to seems completely convinced that McD wouldn't/couldn't have drafted Lamar and then added D Henry. Because anti-McBeaners only deal in the presumed failure.

I saw that too, but they conveniently left out the Josh Allen pick. So, if the scouts didn't want Josh but Beane did it on his own, I'd be reluctant to give it up if I were Beane. The one thing that bothered me in their analysis is calling trading for Myles Garrett "lazy GMing". Please that would be a masterful coup. A GM's job is not just drafting it's assembling a team. And Von Miller IMO, didn't backfire, it just didn't work. Von got injured, always a risk, but prior to the injury the Bills were the superbowl favorites. If we're favorites again with an addition of Garrett, "lazy GMing" or not, I'll take it.

Yes, and that's the advantage of being able to draft and extend. But if Beane doesn't want to do a new contract and just wanted Cook for his $5M year, there looks like there could be some trouble. Yes, the team could hold his feet to the fire but it looks like they would have a malcontent on their hands. If they don't want to pay an RB big bucks I can see trying to move him now.