Diggs traded to Texans for picks

[Niagara Bill]

Please get the carpenter to fix the swinging door. Diggs could not even listen to the last instructions given to him by his ex team mates. 

 

 

 

[Matt_In_NH]

4 hours ago, Mango said:

They were always voidable. All Houston did was move the very small amount of bonus money he had left on his contract to 2024.

 

Otherwise he was cutable almost any time with next to zero cap ramification.
 

The Houston restructure is a giant nothing burger.
 

 

Yes and no, it benefits Diggs not Houston from what I can tell by guaranteeing he can be a UFA.  I guess they could tag him.   Houston could have had the option to continue with Diggs or take a small dead cap, now its a one year deal.  To trade a potential high second next year on a rental seems a bit odd even with the 5 and  6 going back.

[BarleyNY]

9 minutes ago, Matt_In_NH said:

Yes and no, it benefits Diggs not Houston from what I can tell by guaranteeing he can be a UFA.  I guess they could tag him.   Houston could have had the option to continue with Diggs or take a small dead cap, now its a one year deal.  To trade a potential high second next year on a rental seems a bit odd even with the 5 and  6 going back.

 

Diggs gets more money this year and gets to choose where he plays next year. Seems like a good deal for him and pretty straightforward. 

[wettlaufer]

13 hours ago, Coach Tuesday said:

Who is his agent holy moly.  Got Diggs and his impossible to trade contract traded to his preferred destination, got him more guaranteed $$ for 2024, and got him the opportunity to get himself a new deal in 2025.

 

That is superb representation right there.

 

Wow.

You got the reward right. The risk is a bad injury this year. Stef loses a lot of money that way.

[eme123]

48 minutes ago, Pine Barrens Mafia said:

Men lie, women lie, numbers don't. And Diggs has some ***** numbers after week 6 last year 

The only number that matters is the score at the end. There are 53 guys that contribute to that. Since you asked here is the oh so important 2023 receiving stats. 
Diggs  107rec  1183yds  8td

Davis    45rec   746yds  7td

Kincaid  73rec   673yds  2td

Shakir    39rec   611yds   2td

Cook      44rec   445yds  4td

 

Pick and choose games all you want. The fact is the Bills are weaker on the fire power end of things without Diggs. 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

5 minutes ago, eme123 said:

The only number that matters is the score at the end. There are 53 guys that contribute to that. Since you asked here is the oh so important 2023 receiving stats. 
Diggs  107rec  1183yds  8td

Davis    45rec   746yds  7td

Kincaid  73rec   673yds  2td

Shakir    39rec   611yds   2td

Cook      44rec   445yds  4td

 

Pick and choose games all you want. The fact is the Bills are weaker on the fire power end of things without Diggs. 

Now do that with weeks 1-6 removed

 

Go on. I know you can

 

[Beck Water]

20 hours ago, eball said:

 

Boom goes the dynamite.

 

 

FWIW I was watching "Tim Graham and Friends" podcast last night, and he recounted talking to Devin McCourty (now an analyst with NBC) prior to the Miami game.

 

McCourty, of course, watched 3 years of film with the goal of stopping Diggs 2 (or more) times a season.

According to Graham, McCourty said "it looks like they're trying to prove they can win without him" (Diggs)

[Matt_In_NH]

32 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

 

Diggs gets more money this year and gets to choose where he plays next year. Seems like a good deal for him and pretty straightforward. 

I think it is clear Diggs was orchestrating all of this behind the scenes.

[BananaB]

1 hour ago, 97bills said:

Diggs is just another big mouth T.O cry baby, that will play on 5 teams before it’s done.. and got completely shut down every year against sneed.. I say see you brother 🫡 

He’s worse because he lets his bro do his talking for him 

[BarleyNY]

Just now, Matt_In_NH said:

I think it is clear Diggs was orchestrating all of this behind the scenes.

Obviously. This isn’t something that just popped up either. The contract was part of the whole deal. This isn’t unusual in the NFL today. Look at the Jeudy trade from Denver to Cleveland. So many people asked why the Browns extended him so soon after trading for him. Isn’t it obvious that it was part of the package deal to acquire him? This is how it works now when the player has leverage. 

[eball]

4 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

FWIW I was watching "Tim Graham and Friends" podcast last night, and he recounted talking to Devin McCourty (now an analyst with NBC) prior to the Miami game.

 

McCourty, of course, watched 3 years of film with the goal of stopping Diggs 2 (or more) times a season.

According to Graham, McCourty said "it looks like they're trying to prove they can win without him" (Diggs)

 

Yes, I read that article also.  It is patently clear that the Bills were planning to move on from Diggs...Beane just had to wait for the right deal to come along.

 

[PBF81]

6 hours ago, DrMaxPower said:

Not sure why you keep trotting out this 'Diggs' numbers were down because he was in the slot' narrative.

 

Slot is easier. They put him there because he couldn't get off a jam to save his life.

 

That's the point of contention.  It's also not what I observed.  It also doesn't fit the particulars of team offensive play under Brady.  It's a chicken/egg thing.

 

Well get more clarity on that this season.  

 

 

Edited April 5 by PBF81

[Warriorspikes51]

1 hour ago, 97bills said:

Diggs is just another big mouth T.O cry baby, that will play on 5 teams before it’s done.. and got completely shut down every year against sneed.. I say see you brother 🫡 

Except, T.O.  was one of the best WR's ever.   

[Beck Water]

16 minutes ago, eme123 said:

The only number that matters is the score at the end. There are 53 guys that contribute to that. Since you asked here is the oh so important 2023 receiving stats. 
Diggs  107rec  1183yds  8td

Davis    45rec   746yds  7td

Kincaid  73rec   673yds  2td

Shakir    39rec   611yds   2td

Cook      44rec   445yds  4td

 

Pick and choose games all you want. The fact is the Bills are weaker on the fire power end of things without Diggs. 

 

You have a point that the score at the end is the only thing that matters.

 

From that POV, at the point in the season where Dorsey got fired after the Week 10 loss to Denver, the Bills were 5-5

At the end of the season, they were 11-6.

That means the score at the end says they went 6-1 after Brady took over.

 

[PBF81]

2 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

You have a point that the score at the end is the only thing that matters.

 

From that POV, at the point in the season where Dorsey got fired after the Week 10 loss to Denver, the Bills were 5-5

At the end of the season, they were 11-6.

That means the score at the end says they went 6-1 after Brady took over.

 

 

Yes, that's how narratives work. 

 

At the same time, it's not Brady's work that put up two defensive TDs in those games in weak scoring games to prevent that from being 4-3.  Playing the Chargers and their 24th ranked with another relatively weak offensive showing, with them playing without their best the players, Herbert, Allen, and Bosa, in yet another squeaker won in the last seconds, prevented that from sliding to 3-4.

 

That's additional information that someone analyzing the situation would consider valuable.  Most want the most simplistic views possible.  

 

There's plenty of data and info it there to be able to reasonably come to the conclusion that Brady's in over his head and under McD's thumb in that way.  

 

No need to argue it.  I'll play the fool for now.  Just saying that there's plenty of info at anyone's disposal to put together a more accurate assessment.  People at large prefer the emotional approach however.  Which is fine.  Again, nothing we say here changes anything.  Some simply see beyond the superficial.  

 

 

[Beck Water]

7 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

Obviously. This isn’t something that just popped up either. The contract was part of the whole deal. This isn’t unusual in the NFL today. Look at the Jeudy trade from Denver to Cleveland. So many people asked why the Browns extended him so soon after trading for him. Isn’t it obvious that it was part of the package deal to acquire him? This is how it works now when the player has leverage. 

 

It's very much not uncommon for a traded player to re-work his contract just after a trade, sure.  Sometimes it's for the benefit of the trade partner, sometimes it's to reconcile the traded player to the trade, like the Bills did with McCoy. 

 

Diggs re-work was 100% in Diggs' interest, of course.  I'm just wondering exactly what leverage Diggs had, to accomplish that?

 

There's an enormous divide between some on-line pundits (Steven A Smith, McAfee, some of the Speak crew) who perceive Diggs as going to Denver to be a #1 WR

 

And tape gurus like Cosell who say "he's not a #1 WR at this point in his career".

 

The contract re-work says that Houston votes with the former.

 

So then we have tid-bits like Josh Norman saying "Diggs is taking himself out" - was it Diggs choice that he had lower snap counts towards the end of the season (of course pay no attention to stuff like "Sherfield had more", the only game that was true was vs. Dallas where the Bills only passed 15 times and the game plan was clearly to run over Dallas)

 

Or Devin McCourty saying "it looks like the Bills are trying to win without him" (meaning from his perception, the Bills game plan was 'taking Diggs out')

 

Is Cosell mis-perceiving a game plan that moved away from Diggs, for Diggs skills declining?  That seems possible, but unlikely to me.

[The Jokeman]

56 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

 

Diggs gets more money this year and gets to choose where he plays next year. Seems like a good deal for him and pretty straightforward. 

The only issue is his going to a new team, a new offense, a new QB, new guys to compete with for targets. Ideally he comes in and is the alpha dog he's been most of his career and has another top 5 season to allow him to find a bigger deal or sign wherever he wants next year. Yet what happens if the pasture isn't green on this side or he gets hurt? He's betting on himself which I'd say usually a good thing based on his history yet way his season ended last season and all new things coming up in 2024 he might end up making a mistake. As the saying goes, only time will tell. 

[mjt328]

After a couple days to sit on this, maybe the trade makes more sense than our initial reaction.

 

Something that really burned me yesterday was a conversation between Kay Adams and Desean Jackson.  The former receiver suggested that Diggs wanted out of Buffalo, because he believed we "couldn't beat Kansas City."  That prompted me to look-up Diggs stats in each of the postseason games we've been eliminated in:

- 2020 (Chiefs):  6 rec, 77 yards, 0 touchdowns

- 2021 (Chiefs):  3 rec, 7 yards, 0 touchdowns

- 2022 (Bengals):  4 rec, 35 yards, 0 touchdowns

- 2023 (Chiefs):  3 rec, 21 yards, 0 touchdowns

 

This included a HUGE drop in the 4th Quarter against the Chiefs, which almost certainly would have been a 70 yard touchdown.

 

Bottom line.  I loved Diggs being here.  But the guy totally disappeared in our biggest games, and was a non-factor the second half of last season.  The pick we get is based on the Vikings record (not the Texans).  They have no quarterback right now, and will likely be among the league's worst teams this year.  It may be closer to a late 1st Rounder than we are considering.  

 

At least we need to give Beane the rest of the offseason to see what he does at the position.

[BarleyNY]

1 minute ago, Beck Water said:

 

It's very much not uncommon for a traded player to re-work his contract just after a trade, sure.  Sometimes it's for the benefit of the trade partner, sometimes it's to reconcile the traded player to the trade, like the Bills did with McCoy. 

 

Diggs re-work was 100% in Diggs' interest, of course.  I'm just wondering exactly what leverage Diggs had, to accomplish that?

 

There's an enormous divide between some on-line pundits (Steven A Smith, McAfee, some of the Speak crew) who perceive Diggs as going to Denver to be a #1 WR

 

And tape gurus like Cosell who say "he's not a #1 WR at this point in his career".

 

The contract re-work says that Houston votes with the former.

 

So then we have tid-bits like Josh Norman saying "Diggs is taking himself out" - was it Diggs choice that he had lower snap counts towards the end of the season (of course pay no attention to stuff like "Sherfield had more", the only game that was true was vs. Dallas where the Bills only passed 15 times and the game plan was clearly to run over Dallas)

 

Or Devin McCourty saying "it looks like the Bills are trying to win without him" (meaning from his perception, the Bills game plan was 'taking Diggs out')

 

Is Cosell mis-perceiving a game plan that moved away from Diggs, for Diggs skills declining?  That seems possible, but unlikely to me.

 

Diggs’ leverage was choosing the Texans. That’s particularly important with a player who has forced his way out of two teams when he had several seasons left on each of his contracts. 

[Bills Fan in MD]

51 minutes ago, eme123 said:

The only number that matters is the score at the end. There are 53 guys that contribute to that. Since you asked here is the oh so important 2023 receiving stats. 
Diggs  107rec  1183yds  8td

Davis    45rec   746yds  7td

Kincaid  73rec   673yds  2td

Shakir    39rec   611yds   2td

Cook      44rec   445yds  4td

 

Pick and choose games all you want. The fact is the Bills are weaker on the fire power end of things without Diggs. 

The Bills are going to get blown out this Sunday.

[BarleyNY]

4 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

The only issue is his going to a new team, a new offense, a new QB, new guys to compete with for targets. Ideally he comes in and is the alpha dog he's been most of his career and has another top 5 season to allow him to find a bigger deal or sign wherever he wants next year. Yet what happens if the pasture isn't green on this side or he gets hurt? He's betting on himself which I'd say usually a good thing based on his history yet way his season ended last season and all new things coming up in 2024 he might end up making a mistake. As the saying goes, only time will tell. 

 

It isn’t riskier for Diggs to have the one year deal versus the old one. His contract had no guarantees beyond 2024 so 2025 and after would’ve effectively been a team option. Roster bonuses eliminated any injury risk to the Texans of having to keep and pay him. Obviously a multi year contract with guaranteed money beyond 2024 would’ve been better for Diggs, but he got the next best thing. 

[Beck Water]

2 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

Yes, that's how narratives work. 

 

At the same time, it's not Brady's work that put up two defensive TDs in those games in weak scoring games to prevent that from being 4-3.  Playing the Chargers and their 24th ranked with another relatively weak offensive showing, with them playing without their best the players, Herbert, Allen, and Bosa, in yet another squeaker won in the last seconds, prevented that from sliding to 3-4.

 

That's additional information that someone analyzing the situation would consider valuable.  Most want the most simplistic views possible.  

 

There's plenty of data and info it there to be able to reasonably come to the conclusion that Brady's in over his head and under McD's thumb in that way.  

 

No need to argue it.  I'll play the fool for now.  Just saying that there's plenty of info at anyone's disposal to put together a more accurate assessment.  People at large prefer the emotional approach however.  Which is fine.  Again, nothing we say here changes anything.  Some simply see beyond the superficial.  

 

 

 

Many football games turn on a small number of plays, including defensive plays.  Let's take defensive plays out of every game then.

 

There was a lot going on after Brady took over, including an apparent determination to demonstrate that the Bills had a run game beyond Josh Allen

 

No offense (see what I did there?) but your track record doesn't position you as a font of perceptive football wisdom who, unlike the rest of us peons, can see beyond the superficial, overcome any emotion, and provide more accurate assessments.   If people don't choose to engage with you, it's not because you're somehow wiser, it's because it's not satisfying to attempt discussion with someone who will argue vehemently for one POV, flips his stance when it suits him, and postures about how superior he is.

[Augie]

45 minutes ago, Pine Barrens Mafia said:

Now do that with weeks 1-6 removed

 

Go on. I know you can

 

 

I believe Shakir finished the season (last 8-10 games?) with a few more yards than Diggs. The thing that really jumps out is that Shakir did it on 38 targets, while Diggs had 80 targets. 

[Beck Water]

11 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

Bye Felicia.  Still won 6 in a row despite you quitting in games.   

 

Graham is being a little disingenuous here.  The only game I can find where Sherfield played more offensive snaps was Dallas, and that was clearly because the Bills came in with a game plan to run all over Dallas and Sherfield >> Diggs at run blocking.

[Nineforty]

12 hours ago, NoSaint said:

I do think a slight reframing is helpful: 

 

instead of calling it dead money, the bills are accounting for $31m in previously paid dollars that they would need to account for whether they kept him or not.
 

they do however save $22m in future guarantees

Yeah, no. Its dead money. 

[Warriorspikes51]

5 minutes ago, Nineforty said:

Yeah, no. Its dead money. 

 

The $ was already paid.  The move cost an additional 3.2 mil this year against the cap  and freed up around 60 million in future years cap space.  27 next year.

[Beck Water]

13 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

I believe Shakir finished the season (last 8-10 games?) with a few more yards than Diggs. The thing that really jumps out is that Shakir did it on 38 targets, while Diggs had 80 targets. 

 

The first part of this is actually true.  From the game Brady took over (NYJ), Diggs had 349 reg season yards on 63 targets, while Shakir had 363 yds on 24 targets.  That would be the last 7 games.  I look at that because it's an objective break point (changing OCs)

[CaliBills]

I am happy this happened.  

 

It is like the whole argument that Tom Brady was only successful with Belichek as HC.

 

Same with Tyreek Hill (who I do personally believe is much better at making his QB look better than Diggs) but when he left KC, they said who will Holmes throw to other than Kelce.

 

Both QB's went on to win a SB. 

 

Before Diggs got there, Josh was figuring himself out as a QB in the NFL and how he needs/wants to lead.  Diggs helped show Josh somethings, maybe called out Josh on how to work, but also in that Josh learned on what he doesn't want around him and that is a look at me, talk about me, I work the hardest, I. I. I.  type of player as that schtik gets old quickly.  

 

This is going to be a fun year to see Josh's growth as a QB and as a leader overall.  I think its time for him to start holding others accountable, whether it is vocalizing on the sideline or just giving the look (like hey do F'ing better) like Brady/Manning/Rodgers/even Maholmes do.  

Edited April 5 by CaliBills

[Beck Water]

27 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

 

Diggs’ leverage was choosing the Texans. That’s particularly important with a player who has forced his way out of two teams when he had several seasons left on each of his contracts. 

 

Let me re-frame this:

Why do you think it was Diggs who chose the Texans?  Do you believe another team offered more and was rejected? 

 

Which brings up the follow-on question: If that's true, what was the leverage Diggs possessed that allowed him to choose?  Did Diggs have a trade approval clause in his contract?

[Warriorspikes51]

1 minute ago, Beck Water said:

 

Let me re-frame this:

Why do you think it was Diggs who chose the Texans?  Do you believe another team offered more and was rejected? 

 

Which brings up the follow-on question: If that's true, what was the leverage Diggs possessed that allowed him to choose?  Did Diggs have a trade approval clause in his contract?

 

supposedly the Bills allowed him to seek a trade with any team except KC.    He's friends with Joe Mixon (speaks volumes IMO)  and likes Stroud 

[Beck Water]

6 minutes ago, CaliBills said:

I am happy this happened.  

 

I am not happy this happened.  I think the Bills got objectively worse - I think Beane knows it.

 

What may also be true is that it may have needed to happen.  It's possible the relationship between Allen and Diggs was irrevokably broken, and that the reason it looked at times last season as though they just weren't on the same page, is because .... they weren't, and they weren't gonna get there.

 

4 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said:

supposedly the Bills allowed him to seek a trade with any team except KC.    He's friends with Joe Mixon (speaks volumes IMO)  and likes Stroud 

 

A lot of players are allowed to seek trades, but that doesn't mean they'll find one, or that their team will accept what the player finds.

Example, Beasley was "given permission to seek a trade", but he didn't find one and was cut.

Edited April 5 by Beck Water

[PBF81]

28 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Many football games turn on a small number of plays, including defensive plays.  Let's take defensive plays out of every game then.

 

There was a lot going on after Brady took over, including an apparent determination to demonstrate that the Bills had a run game beyond Josh Allen

 

No offense (see what I did there?) but your track record doesn't position you as a font of perceptive football wisdom who, unlike the rest of us peons, can see beyond the superficial, overcome any emotion, and provide more accurate assessments.   If people don't choose to engage with you, it's not because you're somehow wiser, it's because it's not satisfying to attempt discussion with someone who will argue vehemently for one POV, flips his stance when it suits him, and postures about how superior he is.

 

Then why respond.  😉

 

 

[Beck Water]

20 minutes ago, Nineforty said:

Yeah, no. Its dead money. 

 

I mean, it's both.  It's called "dead cap" because it's a charge on the team's cap from a player whose contract is "dead" because the player is gone.

But it's also true that it's there because it represents money previously paid and amortized across the length of the contract.

 

[CaliBills]

4 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

I am not happy this happened.  I think the Bills got objectively worse - I think Beane knows it.

 

What may also be true is that it may have needed to happen.  It's possible the relationship between Allen and Diggs was irrevokably broken, and that the reason it looked at times last season as though they just weren't on the same page, is because .... they weren't, and they weren't gonna get there.

 

The unknown is scary, I get that. But its not like Diggs last half of the year was impressive even with all the targets he was thrown.  

 

Let's wait for the draft and see what happens.  I am personally excited to see how all this plays out.

Last year we didn't resign Edmunds, people worried about starting MLB and talked about how the team did nothing, yet Barnard and Milano were our best unit before injuries took place.  

 

I defer to Beane to make a decision that is best for the team and we will have a #1 WR by the start of training camp.  

 

(Note: Even if the new WR1 and Allen aren't on the same page really, it will be better than Diggs and Allen not on the same page because Allen and the new WR1 will actually work on it)

 

 

Edited April 5 by CaliBills

[Beck Water]

Just now, PBF81 said:

Then why respond.  😉

 

I think the reason for my response is clear to the astute reader - Mr " I'll play the fool for now.  Just saying that there's plenty of info at anyone's disposal to put together a more accurate assessment.  People at large prefer the emotional approach however.  Which is fine.  Again, nothing we say here changes anything.  Some simply see beyond the superficial."

[eme123]

1 hour ago, Pine Barrens Mafia said:

Now do that with weeks 1-6 removed

 

Go on. I know you can

 

Spoiler: He got old and useless in 7 days time. Remarkable. 

[PBF81]

2 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

I think the reason for my response is clear to the astute reader - Mr " I'll play the fool for now.  Just saying that there's plenty of info at anyone's disposal to put together a more accurate assessment.  People at large prefer the emotional approach however.  Which is fine.  Again, nothing we say here changes anything.  Some simply see beyond the superficial."

 

LOL

 

Let's see what everyone's take is re: Brady at seasons end. 

 

Why so vindictive?  I know I'm probably the only one stepping out with that.  Is there another?  LOL. What, you really think that people don't think that's a foolish take right now?  Of course they do.  

 

You've been on my pant leg for a couple of weeks now.  Go find someone's lawn to piss on for a while.  

 

 

[Beck Water]

2 minutes ago, CaliBills said:

The unknown is scary, I get that. But its not like Diggs last half of the year was impressive even with all the targets he was thrown.  

 

Let's wait for the draft and see what happens.  I am personally excited to see how all this plays out.

Last year we didn't resign Edmunds, people worried about starting MLB and talked about how the team did nothing, yet Barnard and Milano were our best unit before injuries took place.  

 

I defer to Beane to make a decision that is best for the team and we will have a #1 WR by the start of training camp.  

 

(Note: Even if the new WR1 and Allen aren't on the same page really, it will be better than Diggs and Allen not on the same page because Allen and the new WR1 will actually work on it)

 

I don't like going into the draft with the mandate that we MUST come out with wide receiving firepower.

 

Edmunds who?

 

It's true that I thought the Bills D would not be as good because I, unlike Beane and McDermott, did not perceive that a 3rd round draft pick who played 111 defensive snaps in his rookie season, who looked rather "lost in space" in his only start, and who kind of looks like a twig (relatively speaking), would turn out to be a high-level defensive diagnostician and a hit-stick monster when tackling.

It's also true that Shakir really came on last season and looks fully ready to embrace a larger role, as was also true of Kincaid.  I suppose the difference is that I believe Beane and McDermott generally know what they're doing when it comes to evaluating and developing defensive talent and using what they have.

 

I lack the same faith in their assessment and development of offensive talent.  They had to spend 2 3rd round and a 2nd round pick at RB before getting one who looks pretty good.  Shakir in the the 5th round looks good, but he's not Puka Nacua.  I think they may need to take several shots in a couple drafts to replace Diggs. 

 

At least, that's my concern.

 

 

 

[BarleyNY]

24 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Let me re-frame this:

Why do you think it was Diggs who chose the Texans?  Do you believe another team offered more and was rejected? 

 

Which brings up the follow-on question: If that's true, what was the leverage Diggs possessed that allowed him to choose?  Did Diggs have a trade approval clause in his contract?

 

Firstly, we all have seen how an unhappy Diggs acts toward his team. We saw it in Minnesota and we saw it here. Same guy. Same playbook. So no team was going to trade for him unless their expectation was that he wanted to be there and would be happy there. So Diggs had to sign off on his acceptable teams. The Texans were either that singular team or one on a short list of teams. So he chose the Texans, potentially along with others.

 

At that point it would’ve been up to the team(s) to negotiate with Beane. I highly doubt that it was a coincidence that the Texans traded with Minnesota and acquired the pick they traded for Diggs just prior. That was the compensation that got the deal done. It’s probable that it’s what the Texans had to do to match or beat another offer. 

[CaliBills]

2 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

I don't like going into the draft with the mandate that we MUST come out with wide receiving firepower.

 

Edmunds who?

 

It's true that I thought the Bills D would not be as good because I, unlike Beane and McDermott, did not perceive that a 3rd round draft pick who played 111 defensive snaps in his rookie season, who looked rather "lost in space" in his only start, and who kind of looks like a twig (relatively speaking), would turn out to be a high-level defensive diagnostician and a hit-stick monster when tackling.

It's also true that Shakir really came on last season and looks fully ready to embrace a larger role, as was also true of Kincaid.  I suppose the difference is that I believe Beane and McDermott generally know what they're doing when it comes to evaluating and developing defensive talent and using what they have.

 

I lack the same faith in their assessment and development of offensive talent.  They had to spend 2 3rd round and a 2nd round pick at RB before getting one who looks pretty good.  Shakir in the the 5th round looks good, but he's not Puka Nacua.  I think they may need to take several shots in a couple drafts to replace Diggs. 

 

At least, that's my concern.

 

 

 

 

I get it.  

 

But it isn't like Diggs (and Davis) were helping us get to the SB either.  Drops in at crucial times, taking himself off the field on third downs, going down easy or out of bounds instead of fighting just a little more.  He (Diggs) played for himself while talking about how much he wants to win and that was his excuse to act the way he did (on and off the field).  Even had the Bills fooled that he was that way because he wanted to win soooooo bad.  But as we all have learned, actions speak louder.  And I bet the Bills saw what he did in film reviews etc like standing around when the play is still going on, going down quickly, etc.  Which made the whole "I work so hard and I want to win so bad" seem just like weightless BS.  

A change had to happen.

 

All it takes is an opportunity to present itself and someone to take hold and run with it.