Internet Rumors of Zack Moss trade availability from an unverified Twitter account

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, No_Matter_What said:

On a side note, I really hope they hit on Cook so we don't have to go through annual "Let's draft RB XY in the 1st round" mandatory thread

 

Yep. If they let Devin walk, and then spend another day 2 pick on a back next April I don't care if we won the blasting Superbowl I am marching on OBD with my pitchfork!!

 

If you don't think Cook is ever more than a change of pace and receiving back type guy he isn't worth a 2nd round pick. On a passing team that faces 2 high and light boxes a lot a 2nd round pick should be more than capable of the 12-15 carries a game the Bills need from RB1. Not saying he HAS to be that as a rook... but if Devin isn't here next year and he isn't that them the value evlauation is off somewhere IMO.

[machine gun kelly]

It’s an unsubstantiated rumor.  I seriously doubt it.  RB’s get banged up all the time and they know it.  We need depth.

[GunnerBill]

27 minutes ago, machine gun kelly said:

It’s an unsubstantiated rumor.  I seriously doubt it.  RB’s get banged up all the time and they know it.  We need depth.

 

And what are you getting back? A 5th if you are really lucky? Maybe a 6th? Isn't the depth more valuable to a team in a SB window? Like if we expected this to be am 8-9, 9-8 type year and you can get a 5th do it.  But the Bills are trying to win now.

[eball]

26 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And what are you getting back? A 5th if you are really lucky? Maybe a 6th? Isn't the depth more valuable to a team in a SB window? Like if we expected this to be am 8-9, 9-8 type year and you can get a 5th do it.  But the Bills are trying to win now.

 

It is really just people talking about stuff to fill the void.  There is no return for Zack Moss right now that helps Buffalo in the present.

[SectionC3]

26 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And what are you getting back? A 5th if you are really lucky? Maybe a 6th? Isn't the depth more valuable to a team in a SB window? Like if we expected this to be am 8-9, 9-8 type year and you can get a 5th do it.  But the Bills are trying to win now.

I'm thinking the way you are, but I'll add three potential wildcards here.  (I'm not saying either is what the Bills are thinking, the possibilities simply are things that they reasonably could be thinking.)

 

 1.  They don't think Moss will be a regular gamely active and, even if he is, they might not think Moss can hack it in the 12-15 carry per game, pass pro, limited receiving role in the event of injury to Singletary and unreadiness of Cook.  (Doubtful, I know, but it's a possibility.)  

 

2.  They like Blackshear/Johnson, and feel that there either won't be any drop-off between that person and Moss, or that any drop-off is negligible and therefore worth the pick they would acquire in the trade. 

 

3.  They like Blackshear/Johnson on ST, where Moss offers nothing, and they feel they may need one of those two on teams given their plans with the rest of the 53 and the gameday actives.  (Also unlikely, I know, but at least somewhat plausible.) 

 

Assuming, for sake of argument, they're thinking along the lines of my second wildcard, the analysis is whether two years of Moss plus, say, a fifth round pick is worth either one year of Johnson (at probably a slightly higher price), four years of Blackshear (at a marginally lower price), or investment at a different position on this year's 53.  Given how irregularly Moss is likely to be a gameday active this year, I understand kicking the tires on a trade if they think they have a suitable substitute on hand.  

 

(Ultimately, though, I'm with you and I'm not sure that I'd do it given this year's expectations and the risk a trade would entail.)

[machine gun kelly]

57 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And what are you getting back? A 5th if you are really lucky? Maybe a 6th? Isn't the depth more valuable to a team in a SB window? Like if we expected this to be am 8-9, 9-8 type year and you can get a 5th do it.  But the Bills are trying to win now.

I don’t see a world where we wouldn’t have Singletary, Moss, Cook, Taiwan (in name only as he’s a specialist in ST), and Gilliam.  You can call Gilliam a FB, RB, or TE as he’s all of the above.  This will be confirmed at 4 pm today.

[DCbillsfan]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yep. No more day 2 picks at RB. I am fine for them to go the draft, use for 4 years and then don't pay model... but only if they are chucking day 3 picks at the problem. Three day 2 picks is too many when they haven't drafted a single receiver on day 1 or 2 in five years now. They hit on Gabe which is covering themselves... I am optimistic they hit with Shakir too... but good outcomes does not always justify bad process. Draft receivers on day 2 and running backs on day 3. 

IIRC in the past draft, it appeared the Bills were caught off guard in the 2nd round.  Big run on WRs in that round.  Bills traded down a few times and took Cook.  Makes me believe they were eyeing a WR but outmaneuvered.  Beane used a 4th rd to trade up in first rd.  Probably didn't want to give up any more picks at that point in the draft.

[machine gun kelly]

Section, I just read you’re post, and Duke was just released by the Bills as I have on WGR now.  Moss may not be active each game, but he’s in the insurance policy when Motor gets banged up sometime in the year and has to skip 2 games.

 

It just seems given the nature of their positions, RBs and O Lineman get injured a little more as far as the constant contact.

[GunnerBill]

49 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

I'm thinking the way you are, but I'll add three potential wildcards here.  (I'm not saying either is what the Bills are thinking, the possibilities simply are things that they reasonably could be thinking.)

 

 1.  They don't think Moss will be a regular gamely active and, even if he is, they might not think Moss can hack it in the 12-15 carry per game, pass pro, limited receiving role in the event of injury to Singletary and unreadiness of Cook.  (Doubtful, I know, but it's a possibility.)  

 

2.  They like Blackshear/Johnson, and feel that there either won't be any drop-off between that person and Moss, or that any drop-off is negligible and therefore worth the pick they would acquire in the trade. 

 

3.  They like Blackshear/Johnson on ST, where Moss offers nothing, and they feel they may need one of those two on teams given their plans with the rest of the 53 and the gameday actives.  (Also unlikely, I know, but at least somewhat plausible.) 

 

Assuming, for sake of argument, they're thinking along the lines of my second wildcard, the analysis is whether two years of Moss plus, say, a fifth round pick is worth either one year of Johnson (at probably a slightly higher price), four years of Blackshear (at a marginally lower price), or investment at a different position on this year's 53.  Given how irregularly Moss is likely to be a gameday active this year, I understand kicking the tires on a trade if they think they have a suitable substitute on hand.  

 

(Ultimately, though, I'm with you and I'm not sure that I'd do it given this year's expectations and the risk a trade would entail.)

 

Yea I think all that is fair I just think in respect of #1 Moss is the best pass pro back they have and has been a reliable receiver too. That is why he supplanted Motor briefly at the end of his rookie year. 

[machine gun kelly]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea I think all that is fair I just think in respect of #1 Moss is the best pass pro back they have and has been a reliable receiver too. That is why he supplanted Motor briefly at the end of his rookie year. 

Agreed.  That ankle screwed up his 2021 season and he admitted it.  He’s looked sound in the preseason.  Motor is still #1.  I like what Sal has written and stated on WGR that dressing which RB will be game plan specific.  If they feel they need him in a particular red zone scenario to punish through on the goal line, I can see him dressing.  Most of the games it will be motor.

[GunnerBill]

18 minutes ago, DCbillsfan said:

IIRC in the past draft, it appeared the Bills were caught off guard in the 2nd round.  Big run on WRs in that round.  Bills traded down a few times and took Cook.  Makes me believe they were eyeing a WR but outmaneuvered.  Beane used a 4th rd to trade up in first rd.  Probably didn't want to give up any more picks at that point in the draft.

 

You are not wrong. They clearly were not enamoured about what was there at the end of round 2. We know they had 4 guys they liked but reasonable to conclude they had high 3rds on all of them. Two of them we know were James Cook and the safety Bryan Cook who went to Kansas City. Not sure who the other two were but again I think legit to say the true 2nd round talents at WR had gone. The thing is when you laser in on any single pick you can always justify this over that. It is why you have to be a bit stricter with your rules IMO. Like I said they got away with it by nailing the Gabe pick. They might do the same with Shakir but relying on always nailing a day 3 receiver while investing day 2 picks on backs is a dicey way to make a living in the NFL draft in this day in age.

[DJB]

We just released Duke making this run or even less likely. 
 

close it up Mods

[benderbender]

Why all the hand wringing? Everyone keeps parroting RBs are a dime a dozen. We’ll just get a dozen for $2.12 (adjusted for inflation)

and all will be well. 

[SectionC3]

7 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea I think all that is fair I just think in respect of #1 Moss is the best pass pro back they have and has been a reliable receiver too. That is why he supplanted Motor briefly at the end of his rookie year. 

Totally agree with you on pass pro and capability as a receiver. When I thought all of this through I thought of Cook getting blown up on pass pro.  

 

I'm kind of wondering if the Moss conversation is motivated by the Bills' thoughts on the 53 and then on game day actives.  I wonder how much they expect Moss to be active this year.  I also wonder if they're looking for a way to keep 7 WRs.  (With Josh and the structure of our offense, it's a reasonable approach.) 

 

The other layer to this is short yardage.  If Moss isn't a regular active, then who is our short yardage back?  They better not lean on Allen for that as much as they did last year.  At some point that's going to catch up with them.  

[Billsforumsucks]

16 hours ago, ddaryl said:

I will say I thought Duke Johnson looked real good against the Pathers when no other Bills RB playing in the game did

He appears to have good vision 

 

that being said, I'm not convinced the Bils are looking to trade Moss, but it could happen.

That did not age well

[SCBills]

The context I’d give in regards to our WR draft capital investment is that we took Davis (RD4) and Shakir (RD5) in two of the more loaded WR drafts in recent memory.  
 

Both guys had Day 2 grades from a lot of analysts, and in other drafts, maybe go there.  
 

That being said, I do agree that moving forward, it would be nice to spend a Day 1 or 2 pick on a WR for once.. just not sure they’ll need to with Diggs, Davis and Shakir all likely in their long term plans.  
 

Cook is a guy I’m hesitant to throw into the “Running Back” category.  The guy could become a legit WR if he focused on it. 

[Alphadawg7]

15 hours ago, MasterStrategist said:

Random rumor, if this was substantiated by a reliable source...then sure.  Otherwise, it's foolish to trade our best goalline/short yardage/pass protecting back.  

 

Motor deservedly is RB1, but he needs spelled, and heaven forbid an injury....

 

Couple that with Motors last yr under contract, and we at least have a future option if Motor prices himself out of our future plans at RB.

Oh I get it, I wasn’t advocating for it.  I only said it was a possibility earlier in camp if they get more comfortable with Cook as a runner too, not just a pass catcher specialist. 
 

I don’t think Beane would trade him unless he got a strong offer anyway.

[FilthyBeast]

I suppose there's a chance that Moss could still be traded but what real value does he have anyway,  a conditional 7th round pick if the Bills are lucky??

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, SCBills said:

The context I’d give in regards to our WR draft capital investment is that we took Davis (RD4) and Shakir (RD5) in two of the more loaded WR drafts in recent memory.  
 

Both guys had Day 2 grades from a lot of analysts, and in other drafts, maybe go there.  
 

That being said, I do agree that moving forward, it would be nice to spend a Day 1 or 2 pick on a WR for once.. just not sure they’ll need to with Diggs, Davis and Shakir all likely in their long term plans.  
 

Cook is a guy I’m hesitant to throw into the “Running Back” category.  The guy could become a legit WR if he focused on it. 

 

Yea it isn't that they haven't got results from Davis, and I am optimistic Shakir is our long term starting slot receiver. But you can't rely on making a living that way. For those to be the highest drafted receivers in five years of this GM.... well he darn well better have hit on both or your WR room is going to be a problem. WRs in the first three rounds, running backs in the last 4 is a much better sustainable strategy. 

[HappyDays]

On 8/30/2022 at 11:15 AM, GunnerBill said:

For those to be the highest drafted receivers in five years of this GM.... well he darn well better have hit on both or your WR room is going to be a problem.

 

Stefon Diggs is actually the highest drafted WR since Beane took over. We can't ignore the use of a 1st round pick just because it was used unconventionally.

 

And the fact that they hit on their WR picks in Diggs and Davis directly led to their decision making at that position in future drafts. If Davis had played like an ordinary 4th round pick they would have made it a point to try and upgrade him in the draft.

 

Like I see people comparing Beane's draft investment in the DL compared to the WR room. The difference is the DL picks have not hit at anywhere near the same success rate. You don't base your investments on how much you've already invested in certain position groups; you base them on the actual value of a position group at that time.