UKBillFan
-
Posts
6,678 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by UKBillFan
-
-
2 minutes ago, Turbo44 said:
Hollins really? Hollins? Come on now. He a special teams player, emergency depth piece.
They'll come in at three then, behind Samuel and Shakir. If the Bills had kept hold of Diggs, or trade for a veteran, it'd be four which is about where I'd expect.
2 minutes ago, Bruffalo said:Diggs was a 5th round pick.
Hill was a 5th round pick.
Higgins was a 2nd.
Metcalf was a 2nd.
There's enough examples of "good" prospects becoming elite that I'm not too concerned with the top of the 2nd vs. the bottom of the first. It's a crapshoot, and doubling up could hedge our bets nicely.
To get a number one the Bills needed to either to trade everything to move up the board or get a veteran. As it, they've done neither... so far. They're going into the season with a lot of decent WR pieces but no elite.
-
1 minute ago, DCOrange said:
I think all of those guys could supplant Hollins pretty quickly in the pecking order. None of them are going to be #1 WRs as rookies though. If we don't trade for a veteran #1 WR (which I don't really expect but it's not impossible), it seems like we're planning to go with a more balanced attack with Kincaid, Samuel, Shakir, and the rookie all being good options.
My concern is good but not great. Someone said it yesterday, but the issue with the Bills is they have one elite player and a lot of good. The quality is not there outside of Josh.
-
1
-
-
Do people honestly think the Bills can draft a WR#1 now? At best, from 33? Franklin, McConkey, Mitchell? If they bring any of those in, they'll be #4 at best, behind Samuel, Hollins and Shakir.
If they want a number one from 2024, they need to trade for it. Not draft.
-
25 minutes ago, Low Positive said:
You could put a prime Ronnie Lott on the Bills and he would make less difference than a solid #2 WR. Remember, we not only lost Diggs. We also lost Gabe Davis. Beane created a huge hole and now he has to fill it.
Samuel is the Davis replacement. That was planned from the off.
The Bills receivers by the end of last year were Diggs, Davis, Shakir, Sherfield and Harty.
We're currently looking at Samuel, Hollins, Shakir, Shorter and Isabella(?)
Add Diggs to that and Isabella would come off the list.
Add Franklin and McConkey and so would Shorter.
Suddenly the Bills would be in a much better position.
If they can draft one of Franklin or McConkey, and add a veteran (Aiyuk/Sutton) to the mix, then they're in decent shape. But I don't think there is anything Beane could have done differently up to now once the decision was made to move Diggs on.
-
Just now, Low Positive said:
Don't. I like close season better. When they are actually playing, is it called "open season?"
No. But I'm not sure it's called on season either? 😄
-
Just now, Warcodered said:
People keep bringing up Cooper DeJean like he's a lock for us, but at the same time they kept talking like he should have been gone throughout the 1st round, so is there a reason he's been falling so much?
Think there's questions surrounding his medical.
-
2 minutes ago, Bruffalo said:
Then trade back into the 2nd and pick up Troy Franklin or McConkey, instantly one of the best WR rooms in the NFL
I assume you mean Franklin or McConkey alongside Aiyuk? Because I don't think a room of Samuel, Hollins, Shakir, Franklin and Shorter is going to worry anyone.
-
Just now, Low Positive said:
Every time I read posts by you I have to remember that "close season" is British for "off-season." But yeah, I agree with your post. They didn;t play this. But the inaction by Beane on this front displays a lack of urgency. I know that you can't draft for need, but at this point Josh is practically throwing the ball to himself, and this is after Beane talked about needed "explosive plays."
I'll try and remember to say off season moving forward!
I think the issue is there hasn't been much movement in the WR market since the end of the season and this draft pool has a lot of reasonable but very few great receivers. Plus the Diggs trade was quite late as well, relatively close to the draft itself. It was a worse scenario to find themselves in and, considering what the Vikings had to give up to move up the board yesterday, I think I'm glad Beane didn't follow suit - especially as the Bills would have had to trade more, having a lower pick to start with.
-
2 minutes ago, Low Positive said:
Aiyuk is asking for a trade because he wants a massive extension. How can the Niners eat part of a contract he doesn't have yet?
Eat part of the current contract, get him off the roster and the Bills then look to re-work after June 1st when there's more cap space available?
Admittedly, I'm just spitballing. It may not be possible and the easier option would be someone like Sutton.
-
Just now, Low Positive said:
I actually think that the Panthers did this because they needed to foster some goodwill with their downtrodden fan base and wanted to give them something to talk about on night one of the draft. Because it is obvious that they could have had Leggett at 33. I also think that the Chiefs could have stayed at 32 and taken Worthy. In both cases Beane got something for nothing. But I still hate what he did in the context of the Diggs trade. If we still had Stef, it would be OK to trade down and take a DB with 33 and get a complementary WR later in round two. But we have a gaping hole at one of the 2-3 positions that actually win football games (QB, pass catchers, pass rush) but it seems like Beane is acting like a grandpa and shaking his cane and yelling "defense wins championships!!!!!!"
Not to derail the thread but I think Diggs was traded because they had hoped to smooth over his relationship with Josh in the close season but hadn't managed to do so. There was too much animosity either one or both ways to get over and the Bills decided to cut him loose rather than try to manage it for another year. It wasn't planned, it wasn't what they wanted to do, and it's left them in a quandary as, as much as people may moan about the likes of Worthy and Legette, neither are championship standard #1 WRs (yet).
My hope is the pooling of picks is part of a plan to throw some at a veteran wide receiver (Aiyuk/Samuel or Sutton seem most likely) to take over that role. Then draft Franklin or McConkey as #4. I think it's the best the Bills can do considering the current situation.
-
1 minute ago, Bruffalo said:
That's way too much to give up. I'm fine with giving up 60 this year and I could be talked into a 2-3rd next year, but they shouldn't give up pick 33.
Fair enough. Was just emphasising the Bills could send two seconds to the 49ers without losing both from this year.
33 for DeJean, then 60 and a 2025 2nd for Aiyuk, with the 49ers eating part of the contract?
-
1
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, SCBills said:
I could be convinced to send them Pick 60 for Aiyuk. Definitely not 33, let alone both.
He's going to command 30M per year. No way I'm trading away heavy pick premium for the right to pay a dude all that.
The Bills could send them 33 or 60 plus a second from 2025 - it'd still leave them with a pick in round two next year. If the 49ers are happy to eat some of his contract as well...
The more time goes on the more I think Diggs' trade was down to desperation to get him out of the building rather than a carefully planned transition. But I imagine, to others, that was obvious from the start.
-
2 minutes ago, section122 said:
We ran 2 community mocks with TSW drafting for the Bills. At both times we came to 28 AD Mitchell was the runaway winner WITH worthy on the board. Nobody on TSW wanted him with Mitchell still available.
Legette finished in 2nd place in both of them however when we removed AD Mitchell in v2.0 the board overwhelmingly voted for trading all the way down to 40!
I really liked Worthy as a prospect but it is clear the Bills didn't. Add me into the group that says if they weren't taking Worthy, it is better to trade down and get some value rather than hold tight and the Chiefs still get Worthy.
Spare me the "they gift wrapped Worthy to the Chiefs" stuff too. There were 27 other teams that also "gift wrapped" if you want to talk about him being available for the Chiefs.
* 28 - Dallas traded back but were originally higher up the board. The only team who were never in a position to possibly draft Worthy - save a trade up - was the 49ers.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:
Aren’t they essentially hurting KC by forcing them to hand over their 3rd round pick to the bills in order to draft a guy they would have gotten anyway??? Asking for a friend.
Though why would the Chiefs trade up unless they feared they wouldn't get him?
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:
FIFY
And it's just getting worse.
But they're tearing apart the league for allowing the Chiefs to draft Worthy.
-
I'd forgotten about how painful GMB is on the morning of day two. They're spending two hours plus on the QBs when there's so much more to talk about.
-
I don't think it can be judged until we see how the rest of the draft, and possibly close season, pans out. For now - despite my emotional reaction at the time when the Chiefs drafted Worthy - I think they're good moves.
-
Just now, GunnerBill said:
And I think you were also meaning across the board, right? As an entertainment product not as "this is a dud for the Bills".
From a personal point of view I think the Bills actually made it interesting with the trade backs. And I feel far better about this compared to at the time, when the Chiefs chose Worthy. It's clear the downside didn't suit the offense the Bills are trying to build and it's highly likely Worthy would have got the Chiefs anyway, dependent how the 49ers valued him compared to Pearsall. The latter is 40kg heavier so it's possible they wanted someone with more bulk from the off, and Worthy would have been passed on. Instead, the Bills get a return to the 3rd round out of it.
I never felt the Bills were in for Legette. My only wish there was we had extracted slightly more from Panthers considering the only reason they'd swap is for the fifth year deal. Otherwise they could have sat at 33 and took him.
Interesting what happens now, and even if I wasn't a Bills fan, I'd say their next move is the most intriguing one. Do they draft, do they trade back or does Beane have a player already in the NFL in mind? Aiyuk? Sutton?
-
1 minute ago, sven233 said:
In theory, this is fine as a concept. Get an established #1. Stockpile picks to still have some semblance of a draft and trade for a WR. But honestly, I don't see Tee Higgins as a #1 and Debo is a little older and has more miles on him than I would like. Ayuk is interesting, but is going to cost a fortune probably in assets and definitely an extension. Is there another guy out there that they could be looking at? There has to be a plan. I refuse to believe Beane got stupid all of a sudden. There has to be something cooking. Not giving up on Beane yet.
With the Bills holding a plethora of picks and Minnesota very few... Jefferson? Though he'd take some very creative accounting when it comes to the cap. And if the Vikings trade him away they may as well aim for the number one pick in 2025.
-
Just now, Jim said:
And the Chiefs third is basically a 4th isn't it? Cuz it's the last *****in' pick of the third round? More genius from BBB.
It's only four down from the pick the Bills sent to the Packers for Douglas (91 to 95). Wouldn't say it's a massive disaster.
-
6 minutes ago, That's No Moon said:
It's not a deep draft at all. That's why they are prioritizing moving their later round picks forward. We aren't selecting additional players this year, we are just getting to pick them sooner. If it were a deep draft they'd be adding selections. Rounds 6 and 7 are basically throw aways this year. There just aren't that many guys with draftable grades this year.
I wouldnt be shocked if they move down again tomorrow. I'm disappointed that they haven't been able to add an additional 3rd and have only been able to do swaps so far. Maybe tomorrow is different but I'd guess it would be another pick swap. Maybe one of the 5s to a 4 now.
Didn't the Bills get the Chiefs 3rd as part of the trade for 28?
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, DapperCam said:
I disagree, the Panthers probably told the Bills who they wanted to take and the Bills weren’t going to take that player anyway.This deal was all about trading draft compensation for the 5th year option. I doubt anybody did any bluffing.
If the fifth year option was that important to the Panthers I wish Beane had turned the screws more than he did in return.
-
1
-
-
Let's be honest - the Bills didn't want either Worthy or Legette, but clearly called the Panthers bluff by saying they'd draft him if the Panthers didn't take 32. Perhaps they even did the same with the Chiefs, as I'm not sure who would have picked Worthy had they stayed at 32.
Right decision? Wrong decision? Goodness knows. I wouldn't be surprised if there's another trade back from 33. My biggest disappointment is Josh is, so far, getting so little support yet will get the blame when the team falls short again.
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Richard Noggin said:
LOVE Bills fans showing their emotions as Beane adds day two and three value instead of reaching for guys he didn't want. Gotta fill out the roster with talent when your QB makes a billion dollars (and you're overpaying an old DE, unfortunately).
It'd be nice to give the QB some help. Like the Chiefs have (again).
-
1
-
The Bills are on the clock: Pick 33
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
I wonder if Kincaid and Shakir need another year but they definitely have promise.