RB and WR markets are actually insane.

[MJS]

2 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Better than paying Gabe Davis worked out for the Jags.

Davis wasn't paid big money. Too much for what he was worth, but not some massive contract.

[FireChans]

5 minutes ago, MJS said:

Davis wasn't paid big money. Too much for what he was worth, but not some massive contract.

He was paid more than what some folks think James Cook is worth.

 

His contract was a top 5 RB contract.

Edited 17 hours ago by FireChans

[Einstein]

2 hours ago, FireChans said:

 

I suggest the Bills SHOULD meet Cook in the middle if he would take $15M AAV.  We don't have a WR worth $30M. We aren't sure we ever will, and we aren't sure that we would pay them even if we did.

 

Over time i have come to this conclusion as well. 

When I go back and watch games, its remarkable how often he saved a drive. And as you noted, its not like we cant afford him because we are paying an elite WR.

[MJS]

1 minute ago, FireChans said:

He was paid more than what some folks think James Cook is worth.

 

His contract was a top 5 RB contract.

And the Bills refused to pay Davis as well. That's a good thing.

[FireChans]

1 minute ago, MJS said:

And the Bills refused to pay Davis as well. That's a good thing.

If Gabe wasn't paid big money, paying Cook that money isn't big money either.

[boater]

When you have a whale of a contract like Josh Allen's ($55mil AAV) on your roster, you are limited in the number of other big contracts you can dish out. Beane has said as much. 

 

If the QB was Fitzpatrick or some other JAG QB, I suspect Beane would invest more in the RB position--because he would have the money to do so. But the QB is soaking up $55mil a year and options are constrained.

 

Cook might get $10mil from a team in 2026 and that team will not be the Bills.

[FireChans]

26 minutes ago, Mikey152 said:

I think James Cook is what makes this a hard decision.

 

On one hand, I’d say that his relatively light load in college and the NFL makes him a decent investment as far as availability goes.

 

conversely, that same low usage also speaks to whether or not he offers enough value above replacement to deserve the contract he is looking for.

 

i think it is a rare case among running backs where fans/the bills don’t want to pay him not because there is concern he will wear down, but more so because his production is likely replaceable for less money.

 

to put it plainly, I think most people on this board feel like ray davis plus a 30 mil receiver like DK is better than Palmer + Cook. 
 

im not saying that was an option, but as far as allocating resources are concerned, There seems to be a disconnect between James Cooks production and his impact (relative to someone else getting his snaps)

I think at this point, the Bills are not going to chase a $30M WR like DK while Josh is here.

 

I would have less of a problem with an elite WR making elite money, but I think where the rubber meets the road is the "middle class" of WR's, that are also inflated relative to value.

 

The 32nd highest paid WR is making $11M AAV. That's 4% of the cap.

 

I can't easily pull the numbers, but in 2018, it was definitely less. John Brown was making like 2%. 

 

Personally, I would rather have Cook + OL and no Palmer. Just draft guys at WRs.  FA WRs aren't worth it.  See: Samuel, Curtis.

Edited 17 hours ago by FireChans

[BarleyNY]

3 hours ago, FireChans said:

There's some market inefficiencies to take advantage of here.

 

First, let's set the stage:

 

In 2018, the salary cap was 177M. In 2025, its 279M.

 

In 2018, one of the best RB's of his era, Todd Gurley, who was second in MVP voting signed a massive extension.

 

That extension was 4 years for 57M.  An AAV of of $14M. 21M guaranteed at signing (with more guarantees later if he made the team). A record setting contract.

 

Those numbers, TODAY, would make him the 4th highest paid running back in the league. So when we are talking about a Cook extension, and how that fits in the salary cap, just remember, he is asking for a little more than 2018 Todd Gurley money with a $100M more in salary cap space.

 

Now, of course, other contracts have been inflated. QBs make more than ever. WR's make more than ever.

 

Odell Beckham set the WR market in 2018. He signed a 5 year, 95M deal, with 18M AAV and 41M in GTD.

 

in 2025, that would make him tied for the 20th highest paid WR, right next to Christian Kirk (who inked his deal in 2022). The guarantees are even close, with Kirk getting $37M over 4 years of his deal.

 

So what conclusions can we draw from this?

 

Nothing that we didn't already know. The NFL at large has decided that running backs aren't valuable and that WR's are crazy valuable.

 

However, I would argue that this points to a strategy to take advantage of NFL decision-making at large. In a league where there is 1 winner and 31 losers, you don't want to follow the pack. 

 

I suggest the Bills SHOULD meet Cook in the middle if he would take $15M AAV.  We don't have a WR worth $30M. We aren't sure we ever will, and we aren't sure that we would pay them even if we did.

 

I would also suggest the Bills should NEVER pay a WR anything ever. There is no point in playing in a market where JAGs or good players are having their value this inflated. I don't know where the WR carousel ends, but I don't want to be on it when it does. 

 

 

 

The first issue is that you are ignoring supply and demand. Teams generally field 3 WRs and one RB per play. There are not 96 (32x3) quality starting WRs for teams to field, thus the price for them goes up as teams bid to acquire even enough starting caliber WRs to fill out their lineups. OTOH the supply of RBs that are starting caliber or who can be effective in a platoon is in excess of their demand. The Cook specific discussion should be had in one of the existing threads. 

 

[Simon]

22 minutes ago, Einstein said:

Over time i have come to this conclusion as well. 

When I go back and watch games, its remarkable how often he saved a drive. And as you noted, its not like we cant afford him because we are paying an elite WR.

 

He's been genuinely outstanding with the ball in his hands for the last year and a half.

But all you really need to know is that when it came time for what was literally the biggest, most important possession of the entire season, the coaching staff was more comfortable with James Cook on the bench. 🤔

That is not the kind of reality we can just readily dismiss.

[FireChans]

4 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

 

The first issue is that you are ignoring supply and demand. Teams generally field 3 WRs and one RB per play. There are not 96 (32x3) quality starting WRs for teams to field, thus the price for them goes up as teams bid to acquire even enough starting caliber WRs to fill out their lineups. OTOH the supply of RBs that are starting caliber or who can be effective in a platoon is in excess of their demand. The Cook specific discussion should be had in one of the existing threads. 

 

That's not what I'm ignoring.

 

It's why I'm trying to avoid.

 

Paying a premium for a JAG because you need a WR in free agency. Overpaying for a Gabe Davis or a Curtis Samuel or a Christian Kirk or a Josh Palmer because of the market forces at WR feels like a mistake. 

[Einstein]

5 minutes ago, Simon said:

the coaching staff was more comfortable with James Cook on the bench. 🤔

That's a great point that I had repressed.

And its even more shocking considering Cook did this just a couple drives before that.
 

 

[FireChans]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

 

What you aren't accounting for is that James Cook is not an every down RB like Todd Gurley was.

 

If he were an 825 snap RB like Gurley in 2018 instead of the 485 snap guy like Cook in 2024 then there *might* be an argument to be made.

 

But in the same way that if your aunt had balls she'd be your uncle sorta *might*.

 

Because that's not who Cook can be at this point.

 

Here are the numbers:

 

Gurley had exactly 1.7x the usage.

 

The cap has gone up 1.58x since 2018.

 

So $14M would be worth $8.25M of 2018 cap dollars at the mere 48% of snaps that Cook played.

 

The snaps matter.   Being able to keep Gurley in on the most important down was a huge benefit to the offense.   He caught a bunch of passes at about a 10 yard per clip rate and was a tremendous pass blocker.

 

That $8.25M figure that Gurley's snap adjusted contract would equate to is $13M today.

 

So basically.........at $15M you would be paying Cook considerably more than 1st team All-Pro Gurley was earning on a per snap/adjusted cap basis.

 

And that deal turned out to be a big failure for the Rams.

 

You can hope to keep getting a rookie and cheap vet to handle the other 50% of snaps but if you are going to do that........let "everybody eat" at RB instead of paying one 8-10x more than the other two.

 

 

Fair points.

 

The snaps/dolllars amount makes Khalil Shakir's 13M AAV deal comparable to the tops in the league though.

 

 

[BarleyNY]

20 minutes ago, FireChans said:

That's not what I'm ignoring.

 

It's why I'm trying to avoid.

 

Paying a premium for a JAG because you need a WR in free agency. Overpaying for a Gabe Davis or a Curtis Samuel or a Christian Kirk or a Josh Palmer because of the market forces at WR feels like a mistake. 

 

You can’t ignore the market. That doesn’t mean that you can’t take advantage of inefficiencies though. I’m certainly not saying that. I think we agree that we overpaid for Palmer. The fact that we signed him day 1 of free agency should tell us that was likely the case. I agree that we should avoid moves like that.

 

Elijah Moore OTOH is a move I like a lot. Not because I think he’ll be an elite WR, but because we got him cheap and he has a chance to be far more productive than his contract would indicate. A major part of why we got that deal is because of Allen. Moore is willing to take less money to play with Allen so he has a better shot at a big payday next offseason. That’s the leverage we have and we should be taking better advantage of it.

 

Look at the trade deals the Patriots got on players when Brady was there. We should be going harder after quality players at discount rates when available too. We haven’t taken advantage of that either. 

 

As for the RB market, there are only a few players worth a big premium and we don’t have one of those. There’s no reason to overpay at that position unless we can get a Barkley or Henry type talent. 

[FireChans]

22 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

 

You can’t ignore the market. That doesn’t mean that you can’t take advantage of inefficiencies though. I’m certainly not saying that. I think we agree that we overpaid for Palmer. The fact that we signed him day 1 of free agency should tell us that was likely the case. I agree that we should avoid moves like that.

 

Elijah Moore OTOH is a move I like a lot. Not because I think he’ll be an elite WR, but because we got him cheap and he has a chance to be far more productive than his contract would indicate. A major part of why we got that deal is because of Allen. Moore is willing to take less money to play with Allen so he has a better shot at a big payday next offseason. That’s the leverage we have and we should be taking better advantage of it.

 

Look at the trade deals the Patriots got on players when Brady was there. We should be going harder after quality players at discount rates when available too. We haven’t taken advantage of that either. 

 

As for the RB market, there are only a few players worth a big premium and we don’t have one of those. There’s no reason to overpay at that position unless we can get a Barkley or Henry type talent. 

It’s funny you mention Barkley, 

 

the folks around here largely saw Saquon as a massive overpay by the Iggles last year.

 

 

 

But that’s my point.

 

Saquon for his dollar to impact amount was under valued last offseason. A guy like Gabe Davis was overvalued. Target guys like #1 and avoid guys like number #2. Let the Jags of the world overpay for middling WR talent while we target the underpays.

 

If you say Cook isn't that guy, so be it. 

 

Maybe overpay a Jahmyr Gibbs or Bjian as the next "guy."

Edited 16 hours ago by FireChans

[BADOLBILZ]

18 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Fair points.

 

The snaps/dolllars amount makes Khalil Shakir's 13M AAV deal comparable to the tops in the league though.

 

 

 

WRT the value of receivers:

 

The quality of your top receiving options has been a much greater indicator of whether you can reach a SB than your offensive or defensive rank over the last decade.

 

This past season was the first time in Mahomes career as a starter that he didn't have TWO of the top 32 receiving yardage leaders in the NFL on his team.

 

Josh Allen has only had that situation once.......in 2020 with Diggs and Beasley at the top of their games........and of course was beaten by a team with prime Hill/Kelce.

 

Mahomes was subsequently beaten in the SB this season by a team with two of the top 32.   Brown and Smith.

 

It's usually the case that the two teams in the SB have two very impactful WR's or an elite WR/TE combo.

 

What the Bills are trying to do with "everybody eats" is already an outlier.

 

Chiefs, Bengals, Ravens have all thrown a lot of talent and/or money at the receiving positions.   

 

 

 

[FireChans]

1 minute ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

WRT the value of receivers:

 

The quality of your top receiving options has been a much greater indicator of whether you can reach a SB than your offensive or defensive rank over the last decade.

 

This past season was the first time in Mahomes career as a starter that he didn't have TWO of the top 32 receiving yardage leaders in the NFL on his team.

 

Josh Allen has only had that situation once.......in 2020 with Diggs and Beasley at the top of their games........and of course was beaten by a team with prime Hill/Kelce.

 

Mahomes was subsequently beaten in the SB this season by a team with two of the top 32.   Brown and Smith.

 

It's usually the case that the two teams in the SB have two very impactful WR's or an elite WR/TE combo.

 

What the Bills are trying to do with "everybody eats" is already an outlier.

 

Chiefs, Bengals, Ravens have all thrown a lot of talent and/or money at the receiving positions.   

 

 

 

Oh I'm not arguing about talent or the need for quality pass catches. I agree with trying early and often to get them.

 

The problem I have is that Josh Palmer or Curtis Samuel have next to no chance to be in the top 32 of receiving options in 2025. Just like the story we were sold on having 5 #3 and #4 WR's with Mack, Claypool and MVS was last year.

 

So I don't want to play in a market where we are dedicating 17M AAV (Samuel + Palmer) for what? Maybe ~700 yards and a handful of TDs?

 

On the contrary, I would try to almost exclusively acquire WR talent from the draft. Maybe trade. Never FA.

 

The WR position is a marquee position. The great ones are rarely hitting the market.  There are a LARGE amount of overpaid bust FA WR signings. And IMO for a lot of them, the juice isn't worth the squeeze.

[BarleyNY]

14 minutes ago, FireChans said:

It’s funny you mention Barkley, 

 

the folks around here largely saw Saquon as a massive overpay by the Iggles last year.

 

 

 

But that’s my point.

 

Saquon for his dollar to impact amount was under valued last offseason. A guy like Gabe Davis was overvalued. Target guys like #1 and avoid guys like number #2. Let the Jags of the world overpay for middling WR talent while we target the underpays.

 

If you say Cook isn't that guy, so be it. 

 

Maybe overpay a Jahmyr Gibbs or Bjian as the next "guy."

 

I think pretty much everyone thought the Jags way overpaid for Davis last year. I literally laughed out loud about it when I saw the numbers. It would help the discussion if you looked at the actual market and not just a single outlier. 

[FireChans]

1 minute ago, BarleyNY said:

 

I think pretty much everyone thought the Jags way overpaid for Davis last year. I literally laughed out loud about it when I saw the numbers. It would help the discussion if you looked at the actual market and not just a single outlier. 

?????

 

Calvin Ridley got $23M AAV that offseason.

 

Darnell Mooney got virtually the exact same contract Gabe did last offseason, coming off back to back 400 yard seasons.

 

"single outlier?" 

 

Bah

[Doc Brown]

3 hours ago, FireChans said:

Better than paying Gabe Davis worked out for the Jags.

Right but Gurley signed his 4 year $60m contract after finishing 2nd in the MVP voting.  It's why I would never give a RB a top of the market 2nd contract unless it was just a one or two year extension.

 

Also, the fact that teams are willing to take a chance in free agency on players like Gabe Davis only enhances the argument that quality outside WR's are much harder to find than running backs.

Edited 14 hours ago by Doc Brown

[fergie's ire]

Part of the problem is the "wins against replacement" idea with running backs.  How much more does a top RB get you than a good RB.  Cook played in 16 games for 1009 yards which is about 63 yards per game.  In the game where he did not play, Davis had 97 yards, and, while the Jets defense was not as good as most thought it would be, it is still pretty decent.  One game is the smallest of sample sizes and I am not saying Davis would average 97, but how far would he be from Cook's 63?  Now, Cook had quite a few runs of over 40 yards and that explosiveness is something we may not see from Davis.  That threat is certainly worth something....but how much?