Isaiah Simmons might be an answer for the Bills at MLB

[Brand J]

1 hour ago, FireChans said:

Minor quibble is that they DID pick up his option. But obviously, that was because they didn't think Tremaine had earned his extension at what he was looking for from a contract perspective.  Similar to what Oliver is going to do next year.

 

Roquan Smith, who signed a bigger deal than Edmunds, only has a cap hit of $9M this year.  And folks like @Thurman#1 really think we desperately wanted him and just "couldn't afford him" lmao.

They prioritized Dawson Knox over Edmunds as well and they did so without seeing how he’d perform in Dorsey’s offense. Truth is, if they wanted Edmunds they could’ve just worked on a long term extension after or before picking up his option and they likely would’ve had him for far less than what the Bears paid. Despite the gushing you heard from 1BD, they just weren’t absolutely sold on him being a difference maker. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn’t know how player evaluations work. He was a nice player, that’s it. Not someone who’s worth $18M/yr.

[Doc]

1 hour ago, Mynamemike said:

100%.  If we had Von and a healthy Jordan Phillips on that line come playoffs I feel like it’s a different outcome.  
 

I really like the off-season we had, especially offensively. I feel more comfortable with McDermott having to make up for deficits on the defense than I do with Dorsey not having all the weapons at his disposal.  
 

I think if the D can stay a top ten unit which is entirely possible and the offense gets just a little bit more diverse with their game plans then we’re right back in the Super Bowl mix.

 

Don't forget that DaQuon Jones also missed the Bengals game.  When I saw he was inactive, I knew they were in trouble.

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, FireChans said:

Minor quibble is that they DID pick up his option. But obviously, that was because they didn't think Tremaine had earned his extension at what he was looking for from a contract perspective.  Similar to what Oliver is going to do next year.

 

Roquan Smith, who signed a bigger deal than Edmunds, only has a cap hit of $9M this year.  And folks like @Thurman#1 really think we desperately wanted him and just "couldn't afford him" lmao.

 

Yep. There were ways to make it fit. I did a projection somewhere I will try and dig it out. I felt $18m AAV was top end of what they could realistically make fit looking at cap projections going forward, especially with $50m guaranteed, but they could do it. At $18m there was definitely some element of a value judgment. That is hard to deny IMO.

[PrimeTime101]

On 5/6/2023 at 2:48 PM, gjv said:

 Isaiah Simmons has played the majority of his snaps at OLB and CB, but has played 508 snaps at MLB for the Cards. I would assume that's a sufficient sample size of plays at MLB for a reasonable evaluation. The Cardinals have declined his 5th-year option. Simmons' salary for next season is an affordable 1.4 mil with a cap hit of 6.5 mil. Should his 508 snaps at MLB show well, perhaps a trade for Simmons would be the Bill's answer at MLB for next season.?

LOL

[ScorpionZero]

On 5/6/2023 at 2:48 PM, gjv said:

 Isaiah Simmons has played the majority of his snaps at OLB and CB, but has played 508 snaps at MLB for the Cards. I would assume that's a sufficient sample size of plays at MLB for a reasonable evaluation. The Cardinals have declined his 5th-year option. Simmons' salary for next season is an affordable 1.4 mil with a cap hit of 6.5 mil. Should his 508 snaps at MLB show well, perhaps a trade for Simmons would be the Bill's answer at MLB for next season.?

He was always traits over football player, maybe Indy should trade for him, add him to their freaks list 

[newcam2012]

5 hours ago, whorlnut said:

Khalil Mack played at Buffalo. Josh Allen played at Wyoming. Andre Reed played at Kutztown. Where you play in college is irrelevant. 

Not really. The best talent coming out of high school will almost always choose the big powerhouse schools. It's just the way it goes. It will likely be even more true with the new college changes. 

 

Of course, that doesn't mean that NFL players can't come from smaller less known schools. You pointed out some of many. 

 

Similarly, the big names and big schools doesn't equate to a lock as a good player in the NFL.

 

My point is Williams has a lot to prove and his outlook to be a stud ad you claimed are questionable. Some indicators against that are smaller football school, 3rd round pick, on the smaller side. 

 

I'm willing to bet you and many others never even heard of the guy prior to the Bills drafting him. Now, suddenly he's being proclaimed as a stud. Come on man let's wait and see if he even sees the field. 

[Dr. Who]

2 hours ago, newcam2012 said:

Not really. The best talent coming out of high school will almost always choose the big powerhouse schools. It's just the way it goes. It will likely be even more true with the new college changes. 

 

Of course, that doesn't mean that NFL players can't come from smaller less known schools. You pointed out some of many. 

 

Similarly, the big names and big schools doesn't equate to a lock as a good player in the NFL.

 

My point is Williams has a lot to prove and his outlook to be a stud ad you claimed are questionable. Some indicators against that are smaller football school, 3rd round pick, on the smaller side. 

 

I'm willing to bet you and many others never even heard of the guy prior to the Bills drafting him. Now, suddenly he's being proclaimed as a stud. Come on man let's wait and see if he even sees the field. 

I definitely had heard of him. I saw a number of Tulane games because I have a soft spot for the Green Wave. In addition, he was always sticking out as the best available on way too many mock draft simulations that I ran. After a while, I got annoyed and just ignored him, but I guess Beane decided to go ahead and take him anyway. On this board, the selection was initially met with almost universal disdain as a repeat of the Bernard pick. There was a corrective swing of the pendulum. Maybe it's gone too far, but I think he has a chance to develop into a good player. At minimum, I think he sees the field in some capacity.

Edited May 8, 2023 by Dr. Who

[Doc]

1 hour ago, Dr. Who said:

I definitely had heard of him. I saw a number of Tulane games because I have a soft spot for the Green Wave. In addition, he was always sticking out as the best available on way to many mock draft simulations that I ran. After a while, I got annoyed and just ignored him, but I guess Beane decided to go ahead and take him anyway. On this board, the selection was initially met with almost universal disdain as a repeat of the Bernard pick. There was a corrective swing of the pendulum. Maybe it's gone too far, but I think he has a chance to develop into a good player. At minimum, I think he sees the field in some capacity.

 

He's got the raw tools.  Let's see how they develop him. 

[Simon Says]

I don't think he's an improvement  over what the Bills already have and I'm not infatuated with "versatility ". If you want a MLB go GET a MLB, not some hybrid who is not a MLB  

[NewEra]

On 5/8/2023 at 3:11 PM, Herb Nightly said:

I don't think he's an improvement  over what the Bills already have and I'm not infatuated with "versatility ". If you want a MLB go GET a MLB, not some hybrid who is not a MLB  

Depends what you want out of your MLB.  Seems like he fits what they’re looking for.  Fast, sideline to sideline with long arms.  
 

He may never be anything more than depth, but it looks like he and Spector are the best equipped athletes for the job on papa imo.  
 

like many have said- he weighs as much as and has longer arm Fred Warner.  About the same weight and slightly shorter arms than Shaquille Leonard. Weighs 6lbs less then and his arms are 1.5 inches longer than roquon smith.  While also being much faster than Warner and Leonard and same speed as smith.  
 

his size isn’t a problem.  Get stronger and hit the books.  Coaching and heart will determine this kids future imo.  He’s fine physically  

Edited May 10, 2023 by NewEra

[whorlnut]

On 5/8/2023 at 4:13 PM, newcam2012 said:

Not really. The best talent coming out of high school will almost always choose the big powerhouse schools. It's just the way it goes. It will likely be even more true with the new college changes. 

 

Of course, that doesn't mean that NFL players can't come from smaller less known schools. You pointed out some of many. 

 

Similarly, the big names and big schools doesn't equate to a lock as a good player in the NFL.

 

My point is Williams has a lot to prove and his outlook to be a stud ad you claimed are questionable. Some indicators against that are smaller football school, 3rd round pick, on the smaller side. 

 

I'm willing to bet you and many others never even heard of the guy prior to the Bills drafting him. Now, suddenly he's being proclaimed as a stud. Come on man let's wait and see if he even sees the field. 

Wrong. I watched some Tulane games this past fall and he was very noticeable. You lose that bet…

 

Im a Penn state alum and there was moment last year that it looked like we would play Tulane in a New Years 6 bowl so I started watching Tulane to know what they were about. Very impressed by Williams. 

Edited May 10, 2023 by whorlnut

[freddyjj]

On 5/6/2023 at 2:48 PM, gjv said:

 Isaiah Simmons has played the majority of his snaps at OLB and CB, but has played 508 snaps at MLB for the Cards. I would assume that's a sufficient sample size of plays at MLB for a reasonable evaluation. The Cardinals have declined his 5th-year option. Simmons' salary for next season is an affordable 1.4 mil with a cap hit of 6.5 mil. Should his 508 snaps at MLB show well, perhaps a trade for Simmons would be the Bill's answer at MLB for next season.?

It’s like having 3 QBs or 3 Goalies in hockey - means the Cards realize this dude can’t play any position to the level where it makes sense to pay to keep him.   In the games I’ve watched he is more inconsistent than Edmunds was. EZPass for me. 

[Nitro]

I was intrigued in the pre draft broadcasts on the MLB position.  The old model is being changed at the collegiate level.  You are seeing smaller and faster MLB in college football.  This will translate to the pros.  The Jack Campbell model is being phased out.  The Bills may have realized that and McD will alter his defense accordingly.    We will see soon if this happens.

[BADOLBILZ]

1 hour ago, Nitro said:

I was intrigued in the pre draft broadcasts on the MLB position.  The old model is being changed at the collegiate level.  You are seeing smaller and faster MLB in college football.  This will translate to the pros.  The Jack Campbell model is being phased out.  The Bills may have realized that and McD will alter his defense accordingly.    We will see soon if this happens.

 

 

So 43 IS the mic?

 

[newcam2012]

6 hours ago, whorlnut said:

Wrong. I watched some Tulane games this past fall and he was very noticeable. You lose that bet…

 

Im a Penn state alum and there was moment last year that it looked like we would play Tulane in a New Years 6 bowl so I started watching Tulane to know what they were about. Very impressed by Williams. 

Ok. We will see how his game is on the NFL level. 

[Thurman#1]

On 5/8/2023 at 4:49 AM, whorlnut said:

I just really couldn’t care less about MLB. It’s not what wins big games in this league.  Too many older fans still think it’s the “old days”. 

 

 

True. MLBs don't win big games. Nor do OLBs. Or DTs. Or DEs. Or Gs, Ts, RBs, etc. I guess you could maybe say QBs do.

 

But basically, it's not one guy. 

 

It's the team. True that MLBs don't win games. Nor does any one player, really. What MLBs do is contribute to the team, same as they all do.

[Thurman#1]

 

On 5/8/2023 at 4:15 AM, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

@Thurman#1 is one of the most consistently wrong posters I've ever seen on TSW.........he just defends what he thinks is the company line at the moment and opens every other response with a declaration of "nonsense" as if that adds gravity to his woeful takes. 

 

It was simply a juice/squeeze decision.   They clearly could have backloaded his deal with no problem........and they would have if he had Logan Wilson level instincts and adaptability.   Hell they would have picked up his option if he did.   Tremaine is a mediocre processor in a Brian Urlacher-like body and the modest improvements he's made in that regard over time didn't justify the investment.

 

 

Well, I'll have to seriously study this. 

 

Because if anybody knows wrong, it's you. You're an extreme expert on it. And your post here certainly continues the trend.

 

I do indeed use "Nonsense" in some of my posts. A fairly small percentage, but when I do, the reason is really simple, it's because the post I'm responding to is nonsense. It really may be true that an awful lot of those posts are replies to you. That's more about the quality of your posts than anything else.

 

If it irritates you, stop posting nonsense. Like for example this nonsense.

 

Yeah, they clearly could have backloaded the deal. But as usual, you follow that with more nonsense. It's idiocy to think that backloading deals doesn't cause problems. It does. Backloaded or not, you still have to pay down the line. 

 

Our cap problems aren't only for this year. If you think so you're missing the point. Which would fit your usual pattern.

 

The Bills have $3M left in cap this year. The idea that they could just put off the problem is pure dumbage. In next year's cap, 2024, the Bills are already $26M OVER the cap. 

 

The Bears also backloaded the contract, giving him only $2.4M in salary this year. Yet he still has a cap hit this year of $14M. So that would put us $11M under the cap this year and force us to cut several guys or kick a bunch more cans down the road, putting yet more strain on future cap years. Tremaine's 2nd year, due to the backloading, will have a cap hit of $22M in 2024. That would have put us a total of $48M total under the cap in 2024, except that it would have been even worse. We'd have been over the cap about $12M this year, and that would have caused us to cut corners in personnel elsewhere this year or made us pump next year's overage yet higher, forcing re-negotiations and other forms of can-kicking.

 

Sorry, man, as usual, just a stupid idea. So, yeah, nonsense.

 

It ain't rocket science, though it does seem to look that way to some.

 

Beane has said straight out that they wanted him but couldn't afford him. 

 

They couldn't afford Tremaine.

 

 

Edited May 12, 2023 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

 

 

On 5/8/2023 at 2:32 AM, FireChans said:

This is is going to hurt for you to find out. But GM’s don’t trash players that leave in FA lol.

 

They could’ve afforded him. Obviously they didn’t want to do that with their salary cap situation. So they let him go,  because he wasn’t worth it to them lol

 

 

More nonsense. And by the way, why would it hurt me to see that you're wrong again? Doesn't hurt at all. 

 

You're pretending that they only have two options, trashing guys or saying what he said. Pure bunk.

 

This is the go-to argument for anyone who disagrees with Beane, pretend that Beane didn't have a choice except insulting a player or lying. The minute you see this argument you know you're seeing someone backed into a corner.

 

Beane can find a million options between those two. Could've said, "we love him but for our scheme we can't pay an MLB that kind of money." Could've said, "We're changing the scheme a bit and we felt can't value the position as highly." Could've said just, "We wanted to give him a chance tos ee what he could get on the open market." Could've said a million things.

 

Unfortunately for anyone desperately trying to push your narrative, what he said was really really clear. They wanted him back. But they knew his value simply wasn't something they could afford in their current cap situation.

 

Beane is willing to say things that aren't all that complimentary. No, he won't insult or trash people. But he's said things like saying about the tight end room that defenses didn't come into games worrying about how to game-plan our TEs. There are a million ways to professionally say that we could've kept the guy but didn't feel it was the right move for us at this time, and Beane is a terrific communicator and has done this kind of thing again and again. 

[Thurman#1]

On 5/9/2023 at 7:42 AM, NewEra said:

Depends what you want out of your MLB.  Seems like he fits what they’re looking for.  Fast, sideline to sideline with long arms.  
 

He may never be anything more than depth, but it looks like he and Spector are the best equipped athletes for the job on papa imo.  
 

like many have said- he weighs as much as and has longer arm Fred Warner.  About the same weight and slightly shorter arms than Shaquille Leonard. Weighs 6lbs less then and his arms are 1.5 inches longer than roquon smith.  While also being much faster than Warner and Leonard and same speed as smith.  
 

his size isn’t a problem.  Get stronger and hit the books.  Coaching and heart will determine this kids future imo.  He’s fine physically  

 

 

I think this sounds like what they're saying.

 

That they think they have a guy who can handle things at an acceptable level, and maybe even develop beyond that.

 

They might turn out to be very wrong about that. If so, it'll be glaringly obvious before the year is up. But equally, they might turn out to have the right guy on the roster. 

 

I'm not convinced yet. But hoping I will be convinced as time passes.

 

 

Edited May 12, 2023 by Thurman#1

[BADOLBILZ]

31 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

Well, I'll have to seriously study this. 

 

Because if anybody knows wrong, it's you. You're an extreme expert on it. And your post here certainly continues the trend.

 

I do indeed use "Nonsense" in some of my posts. A fairly small percentage, but when I do, the reason is really simple, it's because the post I'm responding to is nonsense. It really may be true that an awful lot of those posts are replies to you. That's more about the quality of your posts than anything else.

 

If it irritates you, stop posting nonsense. Like for example this nonsense.

 

Yeah, they clearly could have backloaded the deal. But as usual, you follow that with more nonsense. It's idiocy to think that backloading deals doesn't cause problems. It does. Backloaded or not, you still have to pay down the line. 

 

Our cap problems aren't only for this year. If you think so you're missing the point. Which would fit your usual pattern.

 

The Bills have $3M left in cap this year. The idea that they could just put off the problem is pure dumbage. In next year's cap, 2024, the Bills are already $26M OVER the cap. 

 

The Bears also backloaded the contract, giving him only $2.4M in salary this year. Yet he still has a cap hit this year of $14M. So that would put us $11M under the cap this year and force us to cut several guys or kick a bunch more cans down the road, putting yet more strain on future cap years. Tremaine's 2nd year, due to the backloading, will have a cap hit of $22M in 2024. That would have put us a total of $48M total under the cap in 2024, except that it would have been even worse. We'd have been over the cap about $12M this year, and that would have caused us to cut corners in personnel elsewhere this year or made us pump next year's overage yet higher, forcing re-negotiations and other forms of can-kicking.

 

Sorry, man, as usual, just a stupid idea. So, yeah, nonsense.

 

It ain't rocket science, though it does seem to look that way to some.

 

Beane has said straight out that they wanted him but couldn't afford him. 

 

They couldn't afford Tremaine.

 

 

 

 

 

 

More nonsense. And by the way, why would it hurt me to see that you're wrong again? Doesn't hurt at all. 

 

You're pretending that they only have two options, trashing guys or saying what he said. Pure bunk.

 

This is the go-to argument for anyone who disagrees with Beane, pretend that Beane didn't have a choice except insulting a player or lying. The minute you see this argument you know you're seeing someone backed into a corner.

 

Beane can find a million options between those two. Could've said, "we love him but for our scheme we can't pay an MLB that kind of money." Could've said, "We're changing the scheme a bit and we felt can't value the position as highly." Could've said just, "We wanted to give him a chance tos ee what he could get on the open market." Could've said a million things.

 

Unfortunately for anyone desperately trying to push your narrative, what he said was really really clear. They wanted him back. But they knew his value simply wasn't something they could afford in their current cap situation.

 

Beane is willing to say things that aren't all that complimentary. No, he won't insult or trash people. But there are a millio

 

 

 

You repeat the same "nonsense" because you don't adapt.   

 

That's why you keep making the same mistakes wrt your rationale as well.

 

As for the math.........why do you keep doing this to yourself?   The Bills signed Von Miller to a 6 year $120M contract last offseason with $51M guaranteed.    His first year cap hit was just $5M.   Year 2?   Only $7.9M.  To say that the Bills couldn't have fit a young player under the cap who might actually play out a 6 year deal is.........what's the word I'm looking for?    Well,  let's just say it's clearly wrong. 

[GunnerBill]

On 5/8/2023 at 9:13 PM, newcam2012 said:

Not really. The best talent coming out of high school will almost always choose the big powerhouse schools. It's just the way it goes. It will likely be even more true with the new college changes. 

 

Of course, that doesn't mean that NFL players can't come from smaller less known schools. You pointed out some of many. 

 

Similarly, the big names and big schools doesn't equate to a lock as a good player in the NFL.

 

My point is Williams has a lot to prove and his outlook to be a stud ad you claimed are questionable. Some indicators against that are smaller football school, 3rd round pick, on the smaller side. 

 

I'm willing to bet you and many others never even heard of the guy prior to the Bills drafting him. Now, suddenly he's being proclaimed as a stud. Come on man let's wait and see if he even sees the field. 

 

Really? He was much discussed on these boards in the run up to the draft, especially in Jan and Feb when we were first talking linebackers. 

 

Now if you had made that point last year about Bernard it would have been true. I'd never heard of him and I spend about 200 hours a year watching draft prospects. 

 

I think Williams can play and will play early in his career. Whether he can play the MIKE in the NFL is a different question. The reason he was a 3rd round pick rather than going earlier, is in my view, because most teams see him as a WILL and you don't spend 1st and 2d round picks on WILL linebackers. So positional value comes into play. 

[Thurman#1]

1 minute ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

 

You repeat the same "nonsense" because you don't adapt.   

 

That's why you keep making the same mistakes wrt your rationale as well.

 

As for the math.........why do you keep doing this to yourself?   The Bills signed Von Miller to a 6 year $120M contract last offseason with $51M guaranteed.    His first year cap hit was just $5M.   Year 2?   Only $7.9M.  To say that the Bills couldn't have fit a young player under the cap who might actually play out a 6 year deal is.........what's the word I'm looking for?    Well,  let's just say it's clearly wrong. 

 

 

Your facts don't show I'm wrong. Not even close. Your assumption that they would, or for that matter could give Tremaine a Von Miller contract just because they gave one to Von Miller is just dumb.

 

Yeah, the Bills signed Von to a very expensive contract, backloaded. And that is a very large part of the reason why they can't continue to do so. Backloading Von's contract means they had to kick a huge can down the road. It means they're going to have to deal with larger and larger cap hits and dead cap numbers for him as the years pass and he gets older. In 2024, when he is 35, his cap hit will be $23M and his dead cap will be $32M. 

 

Beane has made it very clear that he doesn't want to do that regularly. It's inconsistent with his goal of being consistently competitive. He'll give an occasional contract like that every few years for a guy they think could be the one to take us over the top. A Von Miller. But he doesn't make a habit of that, and especially not when they're in an even worse salary cap situation than they were when they gave that contract to Von.

 

Sorry, you're still spouting nonsense. You're an all-in down-the-road can kicker, and Beane isn't. He has to worry about the future, having committed himself to his goal of being consistently competitive.

 

Who's right about what Beane thinks? You? Or Beane? This isn't even a slightly difficult decision to parse. The fact that you continue to fight it says more about you than about the situation.

 

Beane's said it a million times already. You don't want to believe it. It doesn't fit your narrative. But the thing is, your narrative and how well reality fits it simply doesn't have any logical force as far as understanding what Beane is doing and why. You want to understand why Beane does something? That's what you look at. Beane will tell you. He's perfectly comfortable avoiding addressing issues he doesn't want to talk about. Or throwing out cliches, or changing the subject. But he isn't Jerry Jones. If it doesn't hurt him, he'll tell you what he thinks. And it wouldn't have hurt him to say they've got other priorities or they wanted to go in a different direction.

 

He's said this a million times. They wanted him. They couldn't afford him with their cap situation. Again and again, and yet again a few days ago, "Unfortunately the business gets in the way, Tremaine goes and signs an $18M a year deal in Chicago. Happy for him. Sad for us."

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxSPrtM0cwo

 

 

[FireChans]

46 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

 

You repeat the same "nonsense" because you don't adapt.   

 

That's why you keep making the same mistakes wrt your rationale as well.

 

As for the math.........why do you keep doing this to yourself?   The Bills signed Von Miller to a 6 year $120M contract last offseason with $51M guaranteed.    His first year cap hit was just $5M.   Year 2?   Only $7.9M.  To say that the Bills couldn't have fit a young player under the cap who might actually play out a 6 year deal is.........what's the word I'm looking for?    Well,  let's just say it's clearly wrong. 

Nooo the word is nonsense lol

 

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

 

More nonsense. And by the way, why would it hurt me to see that you're wrong again? Doesn't hurt at all. 

 

You're pretending that they only have two options, trashing guys or saying what he said. Pure bunk.

 

This is the go-to argument for anyone who disagrees with Beane, pretend that Beane didn't have a choice except insulting a player or lying. The minute you see this argument you know you're seeing someone backed into a corner.

 

Beane can find a million options between those two. Could've said, "we love him but for our scheme we can't pay an MLB that kind of money." Could've said, "We're changing the scheme a bit and we felt can't value the position as highly." Could've said just, "We wanted to give him a chance tos ee what he could get on the open market." Could've said a million things.

 

Unfortunately for anyone desperately trying to push your narrative, what he said was really really clear. They wanted him back. But they knew his value simply wasn't something they could afford in their current cap situation.

 

Beane is willing to say things that aren't all that complimentary. No, he won't insult or trash people. But he's said things like saying about the tight end room that defenses didn't come into games worrying about how to game-plan our TEs. There are a million ways to professionally say that we could've kept the guy but didn't feel it was the right move for us at this time, and Beane is a terrific communicator and has done this kind of thing again and again. 

If Beane truly thinks we couldn’t “afford” Edmunds with our cap situation, then he’s wrong too lol.

[GunnerBill]

6 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

Sorry, you're still spouting nonsense. You're an all-in down-the-road can kicker, and Beane isn't. He has to worry about the future, having committed himself to his goal of being consistently competitive.

 

 

But in a sense Thurman, that's @BADOLBILZ's point. It is a choice. It wasn't that the Bills couldn't afford Edmunds. It was that they didn't think he was worth the money given the model they are trying to run. But they don't have to run that model, that is a choice. It feels a bit like the 2017 tear down conversation. The Bills didn't have to tear the roster down in 2017. They were not in salary cap hell or whatever it was they spun it as at that time, most of the dead money was caused by moves Beane himself made. It was a choice. It was a right choice in my mind, even at the time, and the results bear that out. But there were other options available. 

[FireChans]

24 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But in a sense Thurman, that's @BADOLBILZ's point. It is a choice. It wasn't that the Bills couldn't afford Edmunds. It was that they didn't think he was worth the money given the model they are trying to run. But they don't have to run that model, that is a choice. It feels a bit like the 2017 tear down conversation. The Bills didn't have to tear the roster down in 2017. They were not in salary cap hell or whatever it was they spun it as at that time, most of the dead money was caused by moves Beane himself made. It was a choice. It was a right choice in my mind, even at the time, and the results bear that out. But there were other options available. 

Also a young "great" player is the exact kind of guy that MOST GM's will kick the can down the road for.

 

The reason why Von's backloaded contract matters is because we won't want to extend him 2-3 years from now to reduce his cap hit.  But for young guys, like Josh, Knox, White etc, you absolutely can, should and like everyone else in the NFL WOULD.

 

Milano is obviously paid less, but he had proven to be a great player in Buffalo and was young enough that Beane was confident when his cap hit creeped up, they would feel comfortable extending him to bring it back down. 

 

Now Tremaine is even younger than Milano, which theoretically makes it even EASIER to do the above.  You give Edmunds a 5-6 year deal, and in year 4 when it starts ballooning, you tack on another 3-4 years and bring it right back down. Beane didn't want to do that.  He easily could have. He CHOSE not to.

 

The Venn Diagram of people who were historically high on Tremaine Edmunds and also believe Beane absolutely loved him but just couldn't keep him is a circle.  And that's the real rub here tbh.

[NewEra]

And just like that, this thread is over.  
 

everyone would be wise to not waste your time entering the merry go round of despair this thread has turned into. 

[PrimeTime101]

2 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

 

You repeat the same "nonsense" because you don't adapt.   

 

That's why you keep making the same mistakes wrt your rationale as well.

 

As for the math.........why do you keep doing this to yourself?   The Bills signed Von Miller to a 6 year $120M contract last offseason with $51M guaranteed.    His first year cap hit was just $5M.   Year 2?   Only $7.9M.  To say that the Bills couldn't have fit a young player under the cap who might actually play out a 6 year deal is.........what's the word I'm looking for?    Well,  let's just say it's clearly wrong. 

Just read below

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Your facts don't show I'm wrong. Not even close. Your assumption that they would, or for that matter could give Tremaine a Von Miller contract just because they gave one to Von Miller is just dumb.

 

Yeah, the Bills signed Von to a very expensive contract, backloaded. And that is a very large part of the reason why they can't continue to do so. Backloading Von's contract means they had to kick a huge can down the road. It means they're going to have to deal with larger and larger cap hits and dead cap numbers for him as the years pass and he gets older. In 2024, when he is 35, his cap hit will be $23M and his dead cap will be $32M. 

 

Beane has made it very clear that he doesn't want to do that regularly. It's inconsistent with his goal of being consistently competitive. He'll give an occasional contract like that every few years for a guy they think could be the one to take us over the top. A Von Miller. But he doesn't make a habit of that, and especially not when they're in an even worse salary cap situation than they were when they gave that contract to Von.

 

Sorry, you're still spouting nonsense. You're an all-in down-the-road can kicker, and Beane isn't. He has to worry about the future, having committed himself to his goal of being consistently competitive.

 

Who's right about what Beane thinks? You? Or Beane? This isn't even a slightly difficult decision to parse. The fact that you continue to fight it says more about you than about the situation.

 

Beane's said it a million times already. You don't want to believe it. It doesn't fit your narrative. But the thing is, your narrative and how well reality fits it simply doesn't have any logical force as far as understanding what Beane is doing and why. You want to understand why Beane does something? That's what you look at. Beane will tell you. He's perfectly comfortable avoiding addressing issues he doesn't want to talk about. Or throwing out cliches, or changing the subject. But he isn't Jerry Jones. If it doesn't hurt him, he'll tell you what he thinks. And it wouldn't have hurt him to say they've got other priorities or they wanted to go in a different direction.

 

He's said this a million times. They wanted him. They couldn't afford him with their cap situation. Again and again, and yet again a few days ago, "Unfortunately the business gets in the way, Tremaine goes and signs an $18M a year deal in Chicago. Happy for him. Sad for us."

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxSPrtM0cwo

 

 

I am going to say this... If they WANTED Edmunds? They would have moved every dime they could to keep them. I personally do not think the value was there for what he got paid for. I will say the exact same thing for Davis NEXT year. IF you guys want to quote what Beane said PROPERLY... This is what he said quote un quote with link.

 

"

"I want to pay them all ... the ones that deserve it and have earned it," Beane said in a press conference. "and there's other guys here that I feel have earned it as well and ... there's guys that have left here since I've been here that I wanted to pay or our organization wanted to pay. But you can't pay them all.

"And that's hard, because I'm a people person. I love these guys and love them to death, but I also have a job to do and I have rules to follow from a cap standpoint and cash. And so unfortunately you have to say goodbye to someone.

https://www.si.com/nfl/bills/news/bills-brandon-beane-we-cant-pay-everyone

 

Now that being said... Beane is never going to come out in a pressor and say "Edmunds would not of been worth what we wanted to pay".  NEVER would any GM go out and say that... and @BADOLBILZ, You need to understand what Beane says is not always face value... There is more behind the scene's then you I or anyone else will ever know.  People need to stop quoting every word a GM says because that becomes Diabolical lol. 

 

I do believe that if they got the right contract numbers for him,, they would have moved heaven and earth to do it... 

 

in short... you are both right and you are both wrong.

 

Pay attention to the steak and not the peas  

***This is where I separate the 2 of you and you go your own way"*** ha ha. 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

@NewEra Keep up the good vibes bro

 

 

peace

4 minutes ago, NewEra said:

And just like that, this thread is over.  
 

everyone would be wise to not waste your time entering the merry go round of despair this thread has turned into. 

Pow.. Bing. Bang. Boom. Now it is  lol

Edited May 12, 2023 by PrimeTime101

[Brand J]

We’re still going back and forth with this? Guys, it’s really simple. If Beane wanted to keep Edmunds he would’ve found a way to make it work. And easily. Let’s say Edmunds had an impact on the field similar to or slightly less than a Micah Parsons. Do you think he’d still be a Bill today? Of course he would! And I suspect the deal would’ve been made before the Dawson Knox extension.

1 hour ago, SUNY_amherst said:

Beane overpaying for Dawson Knox cost us Tremaine Edmunds. He overpaid for Von Miller too but Miller is one of the best pass rushers in the modern NFL so I can't fault him for that.

 

Knox though? Average to below average TE so they had to draft another one. just poor roster management 

I think Knox is a slightly above average TE, not worth $13M/yr.

[GunnerBill]

5 hours ago, JayBaller10 said:

 

I think Knox is a slightly above average TE, not worth $13M/yr.

 

And you are wrong.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

On 5/6/2023 at 2:48 PM, gjv said:

 Isaiah Simmons has played the majority of his snaps at OLB and CB, but has played 508 snaps at MLB for the Cards. I would assume that's a sufficient sample size of plays at MLB for a reasonable evaluation. The Cardinals have declined his 5th-year option. Simmons' salary for next season is an affordable 1.4 mil with a cap hit of 6.5 mil. Should his 508 snaps at MLB show well, perhaps a trade for Simmons would be the Bill's answer at MLB for next season.?

 

We dont need a MLB.

 

We have TWO LBs who cover sideline to sideline

 

 

[BillsFanForever19]

11 minutes ago, Buffalo Barbarian said:

 

We dont need a MLB.

 

We have TWO LBs who cover sideline to sideline

 

Pretty sure the plan is to start whomever wins the battle between Bernard, Klein, Williams, and Dodson.

 

But that the "starter" won't be playing all downs. Because whoever the starter is won't be at the level of Edmunds, we'll probably be cycling in different MLB'ers to keep someone fresh there.

 

Also, I imagine there will be times when Milano is playing the MLB spot with someone like Williams alongside him at the OLB spot. And there will surely be packages with Rapp on the field further up the field.

 

The long and short of it is between the other players we have on the field, 3-4 guys that can be cycled in, the strength of the D-Line and the secondary, and creative scheming - I don't think MLB is remotely as big of a worry to the front office and coaching staff as it is fans.

[Brand J]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And you are wrong.

I was already proven right by this year’s TE deals. The Bills paid Knox $13M/yr last season, 7th highest paid TE in football. This offseason after the season he just had, with what amounts to limited production in regards to the contract, he wouldn’t have received the same coin elsewhere. If Gesicki and Schultz are worth $9M/yr, Knox isn’t worth $13M.

[GunnerBill]

8 hours ago, JayBaller10 said:

I was already proven right by this year’s TE deals. The Bills paid Knox $13M/yr last season, 7th highest paid TE in football. This offseason after the season he just had, with what amounts to limited production in regards to the contract, he wouldn’t have received the same coin elsewhere. If Gesicki and Schultz are worth $9M/yr, Knox isn’t worth $13M.

 

No, you were proven that based on production numbers he likely would not have got that money on the open market this offseason. I agree with that. But the "limited production" was not on Knox. It was on Dorsey and Josh. Knox is a top 10 tight end. He is paid 7th.... and Hock, Fant, Pitts and Engram are all either still on rookie deals or are currently tagged. When those deals work through he will be about 10th. I think that is right. And he can be higher. 

 

I repeat what I have said.... in the area of the field where the Bills use Knox like a top 10 tight end - the redzone - his production is top 5 in every metric. The only issue with the Dawson Knox deal is they paid him that money and then didn't throw him the ball. We know from pressers and from the game scripts it was a frustration for McDermott and Beane. Pressure is on for Dorsey. Especially now he has two big bodies to feed in the middle of the field.

[Brand J]

7 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

No, you were proven that based on production numbers he likely would not have got that money on the open market this offseason. I agree with that. But the "limited production" was not on Knox. It was on Dorsey and Josh. Knox is a top 10 tight end. He is paid 7th.... and Hock, Fant, Pitts and Engram are all either still on rookie deals or are currently tagged. When those deals work through he will be about 10th. I think that is right. And he can be higher. 

 

I repeat what I have said.... in the area of the field where the Bills use Knox like a top 10 tight end - the redzone - his production is top 5 in every metric. The only issue with the Dawson Knox deal is they paid him that money and then didn't throw him the ball. We know from pressers and from the game scripts it was a frustration for McDermott and Beane. Pressure is on for Dorsey. Especially now he has two big bodies to feed in the middle of the field.

And that’s why he’s not worth a contract that pays $13M/yr. I’ve gone on record saying Knox is open more often than not but he’s not getting the ball. That’s not on him, but when you pay a guy that much money and the production isn’t there, the value in the player doesn’t remain the same.
 

Beane went out and drafted Dalton Kincaid because “we didn’t have anybody like that on our roster.” If Knox produced like the 7th highest paid TE in football and was a threat on the field at all times, do you think Kincaid would’ve been the first pick in the draft? Of course not. I think Knox is open because opposing teams know the ball isn’t going his way, but if he became a regular target and had to beat defenders with savvy route running skills and an innate feel of where to be, I don’t think he gets it done consistently, hence my “slightly above average” comment. 

[GunnerBill]

23 minutes ago, JayBaller10 said:

And that’s why he’s not worth a contract that pays $13M/yr. I’ve gone on record saying Knox is open more often than not but he’s not getting the ball. That’s not on him, but when you pay a guy that much money and the production isn’t there, the value in the player doesn’t remain the same.
 

Beane went out and drafted Dalton Kincaid because “we didn’t have anybody like that on our roster.” If Knox produced like the 7th highest paid TE in football and was a threat on the field at all times, do you think Kincaid would’ve been the first pick in the draft? Of course not. I think Knox is open because opposing teams know the ball isn’t going his way, but if he became a regular target and had to beat defenders with savvy route running skills and an innate feel of where to be, I don’t think he gets it done consistently, hence my “slightly above average” comment. 

 

I don't agree. Knox is open 'cos he is good. Teams DO plan against him in the redzone and he still produces. The reason he doesn't produce elsewhere is on Dorsey and Allen. Nobody else.

 

[Brand J]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't agree. Knox is open 'cos he is good. Teams DO plan against him in the redzone and he still produces. The reason he doesn't produce elsewhere is on Dorsey and Allen. Nobody else.

 

If he was as good as you believe Beane wouldn’t have traded up to select another TE. Nothing we’ve seen from Knox so far suggests a large catch radius, sticky hands, savvy route running, and a great feel for how to get open. He’s running uncovered on most of the routes he’s open, not because he flat out beat his defender. Beane just told you why he traded up for Kincaid, a player who has the potential to display those traits I listed above. I’m not saying Knox is a below average player, never have, but I am saying he’s an overpaid player who doesn’t command respect on the field. 

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, JayBaller10 said:

If he was as good as you believe Beane wouldn’t have traded up to select another TE. Nothing we’ve seen from Knox so far suggests a large catch radius, sticky hands, savvy route running, and a great feel for how to get open. He’s running uncovered on most of the routes he’s open, not because he flat out beat his defender. Beane just told you why he traded up for Kincaid, a player who has the potential to display those traits I listed above. I’m not saying Knox is a below average player, never have, but I am saying he’s an overpaid player who doesn’t command respect on the field. 

 

But he does.

 

The reason Beane trade up to take Kincaid is he wanted an additonal weapon. Given Gabe is almost certainly not back after this year and Diggs's age that was a necessity anyway. He hasn't been brough in to play Knox's position.

 

Kincaid is a better route runner and has better hands than Knox, no dispute there. But he isn't really a tight end. Knox is very good. He is held back by the coaching and scheme.

[Brand J]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But he does.

 

The reason Beane trade up to take Kincaid is he wanted an additonal weapon. Given Gabe is almost certainly not back after this year and Diggs's age that was a necessity anyway. He hasn't been brough in to play Knox's position.

 

Kincaid is a better route runner and has better hands than Knox, no dispute there. But he isn't really a tight end. Knox is very good. He is held back by the coaching and scheme.

To a degree, yes, but the picture you paint suggests it’s everyone else’s fault - but Knox - for why he isn’t a huge factor in the passing game. And I’m simply saying he bears some responsibility in that. He doesn’t have those traits I listed, he isn’t someone who’s going to consistently win in his routes, so Beane went out and got a guy he believes who can. 

[GunnerBill]

6 minutes ago, JayBaller10 said:

To a degree, yes, but the picture you paint suggests it’s everyone else’s fault - but Knox - for why he isn’t a huge factor in the passing game. And I’m simply saying he bears some responsibility in that. He doesn’t have those traits I listed, he isn’t someone who’s going to consistently win in his routes, so Beane went out and got a guy he believes who can. 

 

But he does consistently get open. He isn't a big slot.... he isn't Andrews or Kelce... he doesn't have that sort of receiving skill, which Kincaid has the potential to be, but Knox could be as productive as TJ Hockenson. I don't think there is anything Hock has that Knox doesn't. Their skillsets are very similar. 

[Brand J]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But he does consistently get open. He isn't a big slot.... he isn't Andrews or Kelce... he doesn't have that sort of receiving skill, which Kincaid has the potential to be, but Knox could be as productive as TJ Hockenson. I don't think there is anything Hock has that Knox doesn't. Their skillsets are very similar. 

I haven’t studied Hock enough to have an informed opinion there, but I know Knox isn’t consistently open because he’s shaking defenders like a Travis Kelce or catching contested passes like a Mark Andrews. I know that. 

Knox is a very good athlete, but he doesn’t have the movement skills of a premiere pass catching TE, or “big slot.” Nor does he have the hands and savvy. And again, he’s not a bad player, but Beane should’ve waited on that extension.