BillsFanForever19

OR you can get Tre's number down in a non-guaranteed extension AND save 9m by Trading or Releasing Douglas as his money is also not guaranteed. Tre's number, even in a non-guaranteed extension is still going to be high. I get it. You don't like the idea of moving on from Douglas. Let me ask you this - would you rather move on from White?

Specifically the "Which WRs Hurt Themselves the Most at the Combine" and "Best WR Fits for the Buffalo Bills" sections had me like

He's just hoping. If he's heard it - it's not from anyone legitimate. What sense would it make for us to pay the insane cost to move up to 9 now when we don't even know if the player or players we'd be interested would even be on the board then?

Unlikely. And if we were going to do that, it wouldn't be until Draft Day when we know whomever we would want is on the board. That said, we didn't even bother interviewing Malik Nabers or Rome Odunze at the Combine. So I don't think we're interested in giving up a King's Ransom for one of them vs. what it would cost to move up a few slots or even nothing at all for one of the next group of guys.

I mean, unless they're super casual fans. It was pretty obvious to me before I clicked it what it was about. DE Josh Allen is a Free Agent and a Superstar. Our Josh Allen is locked up long term. So the annoyed logic about the title doesn't really compute for me.

The hype on him following the Combine is at a level where I've seen him discussed as high as Round 2. His ascension being compared to a Cole Strange like prospect that gets Drafted shockingly high. If he were available close to the pick we acquired for moving Bates, sure. But a Day 2 Pick for a starting Center a year from now with the things we have to get done in this Draft is a little rich for my blood. https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/college/uw/2024/03/03/wisconsins-tanor-bortolini-delivers-eye-popping-results-at-nfl-combine/72834346007/

Why do you hate it? Because he's 1 year older than your standard Senior having spent 5 years in College or the 1 season of production? That's what makes him in play for us, honestly. If he had come out after Year 3 at age 21 instead of Year 5 at 23 and had a big multiyear resume of production - he'd be a sure fire Top 10 pick. The NFL is littered with guys who had 1 year of production or guys who had very little production in College and flourished because of their traits and scheme fit. Picking where we are, you're not going to find a WR with his speed, build, and playmaking ability without a couple questions marks. And in my opinion, the Pros outweigh the Cons.

Agreed. I always saw the options as: a.) We keep them both. Restructure to Morse and pay cut to Bates. b.) We keep Morse on a restructure, but move on from Bates in his out year. c.) We keep Bates, cut Morse. I never saw a scenario where we moved on from both and started from scratch. I saw options A & B as the most likely, but wouldn't have had an issue with C either. But then, as i've said, I listened to Beane at the Combine say multiple times unprompted "last year was the best OL I've had since I've been here". In hearing that, it was pretty clear to me he wasn't going to replace people on the Starting 5 and mess with the continuity. And now they've moved on from Bates. If you're someone who's hoping for an Outright cut of Morse at 8.5m saved v. a restructuring that can save us 5m - you're pounding the table for something I see as EXTREMELY unlikely. If he were to have no possibility of saving money any other way than a release or he performed poorly last season, it would be a no brainer. But those things don't apply and if they had - we'd have kept Bates. The Chiefs aren't exactly following suit. There's a major difference between cutting a player and saving 3.49m before the decline hits based solely on age and the Tyreek Hill and L'Jarius Sneed situations. In Tyreek Hill, they wanted him back. They just weren't interested in paying him the $120m contract he would get in Miami. The same goes for Sneed. They have a number they're willing to pay and have made it known that if they can't agree on that number - they'll move him the same way. Those aren't comparable situations to cutting someone under contract for a differential of 3.49m. Nor is the situation of the Chiefs or the Patriots where they are/were when they did these things v. where The Bills are now. The Chiefs and the Pats at the time of doing some of these moves had won Lombardi's already. When you've gotten a Championship or multiple already, it's easier to be a little more risk taking with the moves you make at certain spots. There's a built in equity when it comes to a Dynasty taking risks that doesn't apply here. If we choose to jump the gun Belichick style at a position, betting on the decline coming before it happens, and the OL takes a step back and/or the new guy and Josh have bad snaps due to unfamiliarity - it's a lot worse in the situation we're in than a team that has hoisted the trophy already.

I don't get why people in here are annoyed by the title. Our Josh isn't a FA - so why would he be tagged?

Or you can do a short term non-guaranteed extension with some void years in the interim and save $5.01m I'm not saying there's no logic in some of the things you're saying. But releasing him isn't the only way we can save cap space with Morse. And ultimately, I believe it's way more likely keeping the continuity of what Beane loved last season is going to outweigh the $3.49m in savings from not having him vs. having him.

I mean, a high 5th isn't nothing. What are people expecting to get for a backup Lineman? A Day 2 pick?

Hamlin or Neal would yield us nothing. Diggs isn't going anywhere. Every idea you've come up with as to why it may happen has been refuted by both Diggs and Beane publicly. And that doesn't even take simple logic into the equation. No one would take on Knox's contract for what he provides - let alone give us compensation to do so. He'll be cut after this year. Poyer is another that no one is going to take on his contract and give us something for. He'll be cut or he'll be here. Douglas *might* get us something in return. But we may end up just having to cut him, if we were to choose to move on. Honestly, looking at the roster right now, I don't really see anyone else that we could get something for that we'd want to move on from. I don't see it. We'd sooner get out from under his deal and use that 9m to get *actual* Safeties. And more because Safeties are cheap AF. I don't think Douglas would be interested either. His agent definitely wouldn't be. He's either going to be a Starting CB here being paid Starting CB money or he's going to get it elsewhere next year.

"Bulletin Board Material" motivation is so overplayed by fans and media. The Kansas City Chiefs and Patrick Mahomes specifically were going to bring the same level of play and commitment to excellence to us en route to the Super Bowl either way.

Sure, he gave him something to clap back on. That's about it. I have to agree that the idea that Patrick Mahomes was inspired to play better against us than he would have already is kind of a silly idea. Patrick Mahomes was going to bring the same game to our doorstep no matter what anyone said.

He's 9m on the books if he isn't extended. Tre is 16.4. Even with a restructure of Tre, that's a LOT of money to be paying for CB. Doubly so when you have a VERY good ascending CB who's development is paramount (as he is the present and the future at CB) in Benford that you also want to keep on the field. It's not possible to start all 3. I'm not even taking into account the 1st Rounder we hope will turn things around after he is fully healthy and the firing of the DB's coach that butted heads with him. Or the situation we're in capwise v. The holes we have to replace. We can lose one of White or Douglas and still be good at CB. Meanwhile, we need starters at WR, DE, DT (of which we have a grand total of 1 on the roster), and S (probably both). You're entitled to your opinion. But my opinion has always been that it would be Douglas and Benford with Elam as the first man up on the Outside with Johnson as the Nickel or White/Benford/Johnson/Elam as our top 4 guys. And in watching and listening to Beane talk, it's my belief that Douglas. You can disagree, but to me it's fairly obvious something has to give at CB for the sake of the rest of the roster.

From the sounds of it from Ian Rappaport, Thomas and Worthy will be WR4 and WR5. My guess is neither reach 28. I think we'll be safe to sit close to 28 or move up 2-3 slots give or take to land Legette or Mitchell. After Higgins, Pittman, and Evans were retained and WR's leapt off the screen during The Combine - I suspect we're probably looking closer to WR6 or WR7 in the area we're in than WR4 or WR5, as I expected before. Thomas will probably cost too much, unless Worthy really does hop him, as Rappaport implied could be a reality after talking to execs. Maybe then Thomas as WR5 would be worth a bigger package than I expect Beane to offer. But my gut and bets are with that it will be either Xavier Legette or Adonai Mitchell, with a smaller trade up if WR6 comes off the board prior to Pick 27.

And "I enjoyed getting to know him last season". Everything was past tense. He shifted to "we're looking into a lot of different things" rather than discussing Douglas specifically like asked. His tone when discussing that there was nothing there to discuss and no current plans. Everything looked and felt very different than how he usually talks about players he has plans for. Combined with his talking up of Tre White and his return. The idea that we were going to extend Douglas on a Starting CB's contract (which it would have to be bc his agent surely knows he can get one elsewhere in a year), keep Tre and continue paying him a large number, and have Christian Benford at the same time never made sense to me. Why would we pay a lot to keep 3 starting CB's, when we have to find money, have a bunch of starting holes elsewhere, and you can easily get out from either Douglas or White? I always assumed White was the odd man out. But I agreed with @GunnerBill upon re-watching it myself that it was a telling exchange.

Also the formula of how many qualified players you lose versus how many qualified players you sign.

He played very well for us last season. If you've got a decent to good Left Tackle, you hold on to them until the wheels fall off. Pro Bowl Starting Left Tackles don't fall from trees. Past Drafts are LITTERED with 1st or 2nd Round OT Draft Picks that were busts for their teams. We had one of our own with Cody Ford in recent memory. The idea of Trading him, especially this season is a laughable one. Much like I've mentioned with the idea of moving on from Morse this year, Beane on multiple occasions raved, unprompted, about how the OL last season was the best he's had since he's been here, at the Combine. I don't see us changing the Starting 5 anywhere in 2024. And Dion Dawkins is the most important piece on our Line. He'll be extended this Offseason or next Offseason.

We're not getting a 3rd for him. We paid a 3rd for Douglas last season, but we also got a 5th in return. And that was Midseason. I like Douglas too and I figured Tre was the odd man out. But listening to Beane talk about him at the presser, it does seem to me that Douglas isn't long for the team and Tre is staying. My guess is he or his agent aren't interested in not testing the market next season and/or we're not interested in doing something long term with Tre and Benford here. Maybe a late 4th or another high 5th? Hard to move guys on 1 year deals. Yeah, you probably use the old Jimmy Johnson one. The modern Rich Hill model reflects current deals more accurately.

For the chart or confirmation that it's 143? Here's the chart. Chicago only has 1 pick in Round 5: https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart-Rich-Hill.asp

Current Draft Capital, including forecasted Comp pick for Edmunds, and their Modern Trade Chart Value: Round 1 - 28 (209) Round 2 - 60 (88) Round 3 - 99 (36) Round 4 - 129 (18) Round 5 - 143 (14) Round 5 - 159 (10) Round 5 - 162 (10) Round 6 - 192 (6) Round 6 - 198 (5) Round 6 - 206 (4) Round 7 - 246 (1) Lots of capital for movement around, especially on Day 3. No chance we use all of these picks.

Every pick has value in moving up. According to the modern Draft Trade Chart, it's worth 14 points compared to 10 points each for each of our 2 other 5ths. We used a 4th to move up 2 slots in Round 1 to get Kincaid last season. In a vacuum, you could say it's not all that important. But that pick could be the deciding factor in a deal that could yield us a difference maker that fits what we're looking for or not.

Absolutely. There's been multiple posts saying they wished for more. The 9th Pick in the 5th Round for Bates is a really good haul in my eyes. As for Center, I'd expect we worry about that after this season. Either with a younger FA or a Draft Pick. Like I said before, Beane on multiple occasions raved about the performance of the Starting OL last season. Calling it the best it's been since he's been here. I really don't see him saying that and then messing with the continuity by replacing pieces there. I think hoping that Morse is let go this season is futile. Especially after trading away Bates too.

It's Pick 9 in the 5th, so it's a high 5th - way closer to a 4th than a 6th (especially when you consider comps). Getting a high 4th for a guy who's been mainly a Backup would have been a big ask.