GunnerBill Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 37 minutes ago, BillsFanForever19 said: The best WR in the Draft last year went in Round 5, while others drafted in the First 2 Rounds were underwhelming. Nacua was the most productive rookie. If you re-drafted the 2023 class I still don't think you'd take him as the first receiver off the board though. I think Addison and Flowers would be the first two. Nacua would go third for me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanForever19 Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 (edited) 19 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: Nacua was the most productive rookie. If you re-drafted the 2023 class I still don't think you'd take him as the first receiver off the board though. I think Addison and Flowers would be the first two. Nacua would go third for me. That's certainly up for debate and there's no telling what the future holds. But he wasn't just the most productive Rookie. He was FAR and AWAY the most productive. Putting up 1486 yards. The next closest Rookie WR (Rashee Rice) put up 936 yards. That's a massive differential. Even if he'd be WR3 in a Re-Draft - the point remains the same. The Draft is a crap shoot. And it's possible to Draft a guy in Round 1 and Round 4 (or a trade up in Round 3) and end up just as well off, if not better, than a Double Down in Round 1 or Round 1 and 2. Especially so when you take into account Option 2 costs us Stefon Diggs, in his scenario. Edited February 22 by BillsFanForever19 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 20 minutes ago, BillsFanForever19 said: That's certainly up for debate and there's no telling what the future holds. But he wasn't just the most productive Rookie. He was FAR and AWAY the most productive. Putting up 1486 yards. The next closest Rookie WR (Rashee Rice) put up 936 yards. That's a massive differential. Even if he'd be WR3 in a Re-Draft - the point remains the same. The Draft is a crap shoot. And it's possible to Draft a guy in Round 1 and Round 4 (or a trade up in Round 3) and end up just as well off, if not better, than a Double Down in Round 1 or Round 1 and 2. Especially so when you take into account Option 2 costs us Stefon Diggs, in his scenario. I'd forgotten Rice. I think he'd still go ahead of Nacua too. I'm not disputing the point that you can find good receivers later. But the draft isn't a total crap shoot and you normally find the best receivers at the top of the class. That isn't to say I disagree with you on Diggs. I don't. While he definitely slowed down the stretch last year he is still a good receiver and I think with an upgrade at the vertical receiver spot opposite him that stops teams shading coverage to Diggs's side and bracketing him he will still put 1,000 yards next year. It also doesn't really help a 2025 re-set. So the argument that it is about taking the pain this year doesn't really work. Diggs will be here in 2024. I am 99.9% sure of it. And he should be too. I think whether he is here BEYOND 2024 is a much better debate. The Cover 1 crew think he will by and large. I am not as convinced. I think it really depends a lot on what happens this year. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T master Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 On 2/3/2024 at 9:08 PM, BillsFanForever19 said: Here we go. It's bad enough the media likes to make something out of nothing every year. Do we really need to do it here every year too? It's nothing. Same as last year. His contract isn't really tradable. Especially with how he played at the end of last year. Why would a team take that on if there's any concern he's falling off? As for what he said, I read it as nothing. I just took it as him looking at how things ended last season and the team being a mess roster wise and not taking for granted that he's safe. Reports are he's not unhappy or looking to move: https://www.sportskeeda.com/nfl/news-is-sean-mcdermott-hot-seat-insider-notes-bills-hc-s-future-stefon-diggs-speculation-seahawks-coaching-search?utm_source=www.sportskeeda.com&utm_medium=native&utm_campaign=ShareArticle This is almost entering the fire McD realm of talking points ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 Why was the Diggs for Stevenson trade proposal thread deleted? I know it was ridiculous, but commentary was entertaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
first_and_ten Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 On 2/7/2024 at 10:22 PM, Buffalo_Stampede said: One thing we don’t talk about is Diggs in elimination games. He sucks. Why is everyone so afraid of the Diggs conversation? Diggs has been a great addition. Yes we’d be better with Justin Jefferson but we don’t have to validate the trade. Diggs was a great WR addition. But I’m not afraid to move on at this point. He’s not helping us win a championship when he disappears every elimination game. Let’s be real. It’s not going to get better as he ages. He’s got zero playoff TDs the last 3 years. Rip the bandaid off. This might happen, but not sure of the salary cap implications if they move on. On 2/7/2024 at 10:35 PM, Shortchaz said: The chiefs disagree It's hard to disagree with you, but if the Bills had a better offense in this playoff game, they win it, in my opinion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 6 hours ago, first_and_ten said: This might happen, but not sure of the salary cap implications if they move on. It hurts their cap in 2024 without really doing anything to improve it in 2025. If this was a take the pain in 2024 because it helps us next year idea, fine. But it doesn't. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warriorspikes51 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 4 hours ago, GunnerBill said: It hurts their cap in 2024 without really doing anything to improve it in 2025. If this was a take the pain in 2024 because it helps us next year idea, fine. But it doesn't. Am I missing something here? It's not like the Bills take on additional $ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheyCallMeAndy Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 Pages: 26 Cryptic Tweets: 0 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 4 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said: Am I missing something here? It's not like the Bills take on additional $ If you cut him today all his guarantees ($31m) accelerate onto this year's cap and he costs you $3.2m more to NOT play for you in 2024 than he would to play for you. That makes no sense paying a 1,000 yard receiver to go away. That would clear Diggs from the cap for 2025 and beyond but makes no sense. If you cut him after the start of the league year as a post 1 June cut it gains you $19m in 2024 space but all the remaining hits accelerate onto the 2025 cap. It would save you $5m of space on the 2025 cap (he's account just for the $22m of dead money and not the entire $27m he is slated to cost next year) but it saves you nothing additional to what cutting him after 2024 would. The problem with scenario 2 is you can't spend that money until after 1 June. So you cut Diggs after the point the chance to replace him is gone. I think by far the most sensible outcome is the Bills do nothing with his contract this spring, do no restructure him or kick the can further and re-visit it next January. At that point cutting him, trading him, or restructuring him should all be on the table depending on where we are with his performance and his level of commitment to the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warriorspikes51 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 (edited) 1 hour ago, GunnerBill said: If you cut him today all his guarantees ($31m) accelerate onto this year's cap and he costs you $3.2m more to NOT play for you in 2024 than he would to play for you. That makes no sense paying a 1,000 yard receiver to go away. That would clear Diggs from the cap for 2025 and beyond but makes no sense. If you cut him after the start of the league year as a post 1 June cut it gains you $19m in 2024 space but all the remaining hits accelerate onto the 2025 cap. It would save you $5m of space on the 2025 cap (he's account just for the $22m of dead money and not the entire $27m he is slated to cost next year) but it saves you nothing additional to what cutting him after 2024 would. The problem with scenario 2 is you can't spend that money until after 1 June. So you cut Diggs after the point the chance to replace him is gone. I think by far the most sensible outcome is the Bills do nothing with his contract this spring, do no restructure him or kick the can further and re-visit it next January. At that point cutting him, trading him, or restructuring him should all be on the table depending on where we are with his performance and his level of commitment to the team. Why was there a cap site that had us saving 9.7 million against the cap this year if he's traded now (before his 3/17 18.5 million payout comes due) If it did cost an additional 3.2 million against the cap for a trade - depending on the return....it's still possible the Bills would move him. Especially IF he has indicated to the front office he wants to be. Pegula would be saving 18.5 million in actual cash I believe? Edited February 26 by Warriorspikes51 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 23 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said: Why was there a cap site that had us saving 9.7 million against the cap this year if he's traded now (before his 3/17 18.5 million payout comes due) If it did cost an additional 3.2 million against the cap for a trade - depending on the return....it's still possible the Bills would move him. Especially IF he has indicated to the front office he wants to be. Pegula would be saving 18.5 million in actual cash I believe? I don't know where you saw those numbers but they are not correct. Any movement of Diggs now escalates his full guarantee onto the 2024 cap and costs us additional money. You are right on the $18.5m actual cash saving if he is traded but Pegula isn't someone who has been bothered by actusl cash thus far. Hence Beane has had the freedom to maximise the cap flexibility. I suppose there is one way that makes sense which is a post 1 June trade player for player for problem children receivers. Say Diggs for AJ Brown straight up if both want out. We could absorb AJ's contract within the $19m cap space we make for Stef. Not totally sure the Eagles can do the same because they only save about $2m in 2024 space from a post 1 June trade of AJ and Stef would still cost $18.5m base even leaving his dead money here. There are ways of resolving that potentially so something like that is feasible but it is a complete long shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warriorspikes51 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 (edited) 3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: I don't know where you saw those numbers but they are not correct. Any movement of Diggs now escalates his full guarantee onto the 2024 cap and costs us additional money. You are right on the $18.5m actual cash saving if he is traded but Pegula isn't someone who has been bothered by actusl cash thus far. Hence Beane has had the freedom to maximise the cap flexibility. I suppose there is one way that makes sense which is a post 1 June trade player for player for problem children receivers. Say Diggs for AJ Brown straight up if both want out. We could absorb AJ's contract within the $19m cap space we make for Stef. Not totally sure the Eagles can do the same because they only save about $2m in 2024 space from a post 1 June trade of AJ and Stef would still cost $18.5m base even leaving his dead money here. There are ways of resolving that potentially so something like that is feasible but it is a complete long shot. I would do that deal. I expect we'd have to add a conditional pick at least since AJ is only 26. AJ is even more unlikely to be dealt though https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/nfl/article-13120191/aj-brown-radio-eagles-jalen-hurts.html Edited February 26 by Warriorspikes51 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 Just now, Warriorspikes51 said: I would do that deal. I expect we'd have to add a conditional pick at least since AJ is only 26. So would I if it were on offer. It is a long shot but that is the only way to me that moving Diggs this year is sensible. This time next year I think it is much more feasible that the Bills and Stef part company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warriorspikes51 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 10 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: So would I if it were on offer. It is a long shot but that is the only way to me that moving Diggs this year is sensible. This time next year I think it is much more feasible that the Bills and Stef part company. I guess we'll know by March 17th. It would be illogical to pay Diggs 18.5 and then trade him post 6/1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warriorspikes51 Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 “Yeah I expect him to be here… nothing has changed from that standpoint” -Brandon Beane when asked about Stefon Diggs and if he expects him to be in Buffalo next season. IMO not exactly a ringing endorsement “nothing has changed” = he hasn’t been traded as of today, but still could be 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Stampede Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 10 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said: “Yeah I expect him to be here… nothing has changed from that standpoint” -Brandon Beane when asked about Stefon Diggs and if he expects him to be in Buffalo next season. IMO not exactly a ringing endorsement “nothing has changed” = he hasn’t been traded as of today, but still could be It’s so weird that everyone tip toes around his future in Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBBills Fan Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 On 2/22/2024 at 5:19 AM, BillsFanForever19 said: That's certainly up for debate and there's no telling what the future holds. But he wasn't just the most productive Rookie. He was FAR and AWAY the most productive. Putting up 1486 yards. The next closest Rookie WR (Rashee Rice) put up 936 yards. That's a massive differential. Even if he'd be WR3 in a Re-Draft - the point remains the same. The Draft is a crap shoot. And it's possible to Draft a guy in Round 1 and Round 4 (or a trade up in Round 3) and end up just as well off, if not better, than a Double Down in Round 1 or Round 1 and 2. Especially so when you take into account Option 2 costs us Stefon Diggs, in his scenario. And just to add to it, if Nacua goes to a different team is he as productive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BananaB Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 13 minutes ago, TBBills Fan said: And just to add to it, if Nacua goes to a different team is he as productive? If he came to this team McD would have him behind Sherfield and Harty. 😂 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBBills Fan Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 6 minutes ago, BananaB said: If he came to this team McD would have him behind Sherfield and Harty. 😂 Lol my point exactly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts