James Cook: "Business" man

[Ya Digg?]

1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

That's a really generalized statement.  I'm always on the player's side for the 31 other teams.

You’re right, I meant to say most fans, which I get, most are fans of the team not of the players 

[BillMafia716ix]

I just don’t like how the Bills were so willing to pay a WR who has yet to crack 1,000 yards and only has 7 TD’s in 3 years over James Cook. 

[Pete]

22 minutes ago, BillMafia716ix said:

I just don’t like how the Bills were so willing to pay a WR who has yet to crack 1,000 yards and only has 7 TD’s in 3 years over James Cook. 

Im not sure Cook is a process guy,  Shakir is.  Cook should of manned up and spoke to Beane himself.  Instead he posts on Twitter and gives a cryptic one word answer.  Beane said it was news to him that Cook was going to Hold In.  Bills are locked in, trying to win the Superbowl.  All except one- Business.  Bills dont need the distraction

[Walking Tall]

28 minutes ago, BillMafia716ix said:

I just don’t like how the Bills were so willing to pay a WR who has yet to crack 1,000 yards and only has 7 TD’s in 3 years over James Cook. 

Sorry you missed the Ravens game after that receiver went out followed up by the Texans game when he was out the whole game. You may want to go back and watch those games and then reassess your thinking.

[BillsfaninSB]

23 minutes ago, Walking Tall said:

Sorry you missed the Ravens game after that receiver went out followed up by the Texans game when he was out the whole game. You may want to go back and watch those games and then reassess your thinking.

And Allen looked awful in that Texans game as a result. 

[Fan in San Diego]

Just sign the Cook! We need him for our Super Bowl Run!

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, BillMafia716ix said:

I just don’t like how the Bills were so willing to pay a WR who has yet to crack 1,000 yards and only has 7 TD’s in 3 years over James Cook. 

 

Well this is severely lacking context - First, Shakir missed 2.5 games last year, or he may have broke 1000 yards in his first full year as a starter (1.5 to injury, and week 17 when he, Allen and others sat out).  Not to mention, he led the Bills in receiving ever since Brady took over and made Shakir a starter, including the stretch where Diggs and Davis were still here in 2023.

 

Second, Shakir signed at a discount to his expected FA market, receivers in general (which according to this board are the most important thing) make more money, and Shakir signed at a discount to his projected market.  Cook is asking to be paid well above his position and projected market.  

1. Cook wants elite workhorse RB money despite not being one. 
2. He plays a position where the value is lower than WR both in contract and position
3. Bills have been very willing to pay Cook, and offered him a contract, but Cook wants more money than what makes sense.  

So sorry, this is not the same thing.  If Cook was asking for reasonable money, he would have bene signed already, just like Shakir was.

1 hour ago, Walking Tall said:

Sorry you missed the Ravens game after that receiver went out followed up by the Texans game when he was out the whole game. You may want to go back and watch those games and then reassess your thinking.

 

He also missed week 17 when the Bills held some guys out of a meaningless game with seeding and division wrapped up.

[The Firebaugh Kid]

25 minutes ago, Fan in San Diego said:

Just sign the Cook! We need him for our Super Bowl Run!

Agreed. 
There’s so much to consider now. Because of the way he went about it, now they have to decide if they want to set the precedent that they’re gonna tolerate that kind of thing. 

[DrDawkinstein]

4 minutes ago, The Firebaugh Kid said:

Agreed. 
There’s so much to consider now. Because of the way he went about it, now they have to decide if they want to set the precedent that they’re gonna tolerate that kind of thing. 

 

Whether they sign him or not has nothing to do with anything he's done and if they are going to "tolerate" it. He hasnt done a single thing outside the ordinary for modern NFL contract negotiating. Beane isnt that dumb to cut off his nose to spite his face.

 

If a deal got done today, whether for $10M/yr or $15M/yr, by the end of the Ravens game anything/everything will be long forgotten.

 

Ja'Marr Chase, Tee Higgins, TJ Watt, Myles Garrett all did even more and got their deals. Terry McClaurin has been vocal and is holding in, and will get his deal. Trey Hendrickson and Micah Parsons are far more dramatic in their situations, and will get their deals.

 

And those are just from THIS year.

 

This stuff happens across the league every year. Shame on us fans for giving it so much attention and energy. It matters far less to the players and FOs.

[DrDawkinstein]

42 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Well this is severely lacking context - First, Shakir missed 2.5 games last year, or he may have broke 1000 yards in his first full year as a starter (1.5 to injury, and week 17 when he, Allen and others sat out).  Not to mention, he led the Bills in receiving ever since Brady took over and made Shakir a starter, including the stretch where Diggs and Davis were still here in 2023.

 

Second, Shakir signed at a discount to his expected FA market, receivers in general (which according to this board are the most important thing) make more money, and Shakir signed at a discount to his projected market.  Cook is asking to be paid well above his position and projected market.  

1. Cook wants elite workhorse RB money despite not being one. 
2. He plays a position where the value is lower than WR both in contract and position
3. Bills have been very willing to pay Cook, and offered him a contract, but Cook wants more money than what makes sense.  

So sorry, this is not the same thing.  If Cook was asking for reasonable money, he would have bene signed already, just like Shakir was.

 

He also missed week 17 when the Bills held some guys out of a meaningless game with seeding and division wrapped up.

 

How much has Beane offered? And what is Cook's agent's latest counter?

 

Shakir signed a very team-friendly deal as a 5th round pick. That does not make it "reasonable" just because it makes fans happy.

 

For all we know, Beane is offering $11M and Cook's last ask was $13M. Reasonable.

 

All the reports are that they are very close. So it must be reasonable.

 

A lot of assumptions in this post...

Edited Thursday at 09:09 PM by DrDawkinstein

[Doc Brown]

3 hours ago, BillMafia716ix said:

I just don’t like how the Bills were so willing to pay a WR who has yet to crack 1,000 yards and only has 7 TD’s in 3 years over James Cook. 

Simple.  Shakir's agent and Beane were close in price so the deal was done quickly.  Same with Rousseau, Bernard, and Benford.  All took semi hometown discounts in exchange for financial security.  Beane and the Cook camp obviously weren't close in price.  Plus, it's always trickier with a RB given the shelf life of the position.

[Alphadawg7]

8 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

How much has Beane offered? And what is Cook's agent's latest counter?

 

Shakir signed a very team-friendly deal as a 5th round pick. That does not make it "reasonable" just because it makes fans happy.

 

For all we know, Beane is offering $11M and Cook's last ask was $13M. Reasonable.

 

All the reports are that they are very close. So it must be reasonable.

 

A lot of assumptions in this post...

 

I didn't say Shakirs deal was "reasonable" because it makes "fans happy" - It was reasonable because Shakirs projected market as a FA was much higher than what he signed for.  Those deals are much easier to get done, and yes, being a 5th round pick on a rookie deal brings a lot of injury risk, so there is incentive to sign early at a discount for stability.  But that is beside the point, the point is Shakir's deal was easy to get done because it was a good deal on both sides.  If Shakir was demanding $20M per year, he would still be in limbo the same as Cook.  

 

Point is - Bills have tried to extend Cook, and Cook started asking for $15M, at least publicly.  Beane has stated their have been offers and they are not there yet on both sides.  So the term "reasonable" is in direct reference to what the FO deems reasonable based on how they value him and their forward looking cap plans.  And reports are that they are now closer, if true, that coupled with the Rams deal that just happened, I think we could see this resolved soon.  

 

End of the day, Shakir wasn't demanding more than the FO was offering, so the deal got done.  Its just that simple as to why one was done, and easily, and the other is in a Hold In status. 

[Freak-O]

We want players who really want to be here and play for this team and might be ready to not maximise there pay to do so. We do not want players who want to squeeze every cent out of the club they’re playing for. 

[DaggersEOD]

4 hours ago, BillMafia716ix said:

I just don’t like how the Bills were so willing to pay a WR who has yet to crack 1,000 yards and only has 7 TD’s in 3 years over James Cook. 

It’s not apples to apples. You have to compare their salaries vs their positional peers. 
 

At $13.5M Shakir is the 23rd highest paid at WR.

 

The same salary for Cook would be 6th highest paid RB. 
 

The 23rd highest paid RB makes approx $3.5M which would be a closer comparison if you’re trying to compare the two. 
 

I’m on the fence and will be happy with whatever is decided with him as I see both the great player we want on O and the potential folly of investing salary cap in the RB position. 

[TBBills Fan]

It's just business 

[MasterStrategist]

2 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Well this is severely lacking context - First, Shakir missed 2.5 games last year, or he may have broke 1000 yards in his first full year as a starter (1.5 to injury, and week 17 when he, Allen and others sat out).  Not to mention, he led the Bills in receiving ever since Brady took over and made Shakir a starter, including the stretch where Diggs and Davis were still here in 2023.

 

Second, Shakir signed at a discount to his expected FA market, receivers in general (which according to this board are the most important thing) make more money, and Shakir signed at a discount to his projected market.  Cook is asking to be paid well above his position and projected market.  

1. Cook wants elite workhorse RB money despite not being one. 
2. He plays a position where the value is lower than WR both in contract and position
3. Bills have been very willing to pay Cook, and offered him a contract, but Cook wants more money than what makes sense.  

So sorry, this is not the same thing.  If Cook was asking for reasonable money, he would have bene signed already, just like Shakir was.

 

He also missed week 17 when the Bills held some guys out of a meaningless game with seeding and division wrapped up.

Lets be honest, dont pretend to know what's happening or the hold up.  For all we know, Beane offered what he could "afford" to pay Cook.

 

Bottom line is that Shakir plays a more important position in the modern day NFL.  

 

Its also well known, as Beane said it, that hes never negotiated with Cooks reps before.  So is it Cooks reps or Beane, or both?

 

This may or may not to do with "asking for reasonable" money.  Beane might have a price tag based on what he can afford in 2026+, hes super disciplined with future looking cap forecasts, which i appreciate.  But its not fact of what has been offered or asked for, beyond social media

 

[Billl]

26 minutes ago, Freak-O said:

We want players who really want to be here and play for this team and might be ready to not maximise there pay to do so. We do not want players who want to squeeze every cent out of the club they’re playing for. 

You don’t want guys like Chris Jones, Trey Hendrickson, Micah Parsons, TJ Watt, Jamaar Chase, etc.?

[Alphadawg7]

13 minutes ago, MasterStrategist said:

Lets be honest, dont pretend to know what's happening or the hold up.  For all we know, Beane offered what he could "afford" to pay Cook.

 

Bottom line is that Shakir plays a more important position in the modern day NFL.  

 

Its also well known, as Beane said it, that hes never negotiated with Cooks reps before.  So is it Cooks reps or Beane, or both?

 

This may or may not to do with "asking for reasonable" money.  Beane might have a price tag based on what he can afford in 2026+, hes super disciplined with future looking cap forecasts, which i appreciate.  But its not fact of what has been offered or asked for, beyond social media

 

 

No disrespect, but you just echoed what I said when I said reasonable.  What Beane deems is reasonable based on how he percieves his value, the value of the position, and the cap plans with other contracts and spending moving forward.  I didn't say it was our definition of reasonable.  

 

As I siad, if the contract Cook was seeking was reasonable (to Beane) he would be signed.  The facts are, Cook is asking for more money than Beane was looking to pay - Shakir was not - so Shakir signed, Cook not signed.  This isn't as complicated as its getting made out to be.  

 

Beane is clearly going to have to pay Cook more than he wants - but that amount still needs to be reasonable enough for him to go up in his price and ge the deal done - had they already gotten there the deal would already be signed.  

 

This convo started off someone complaining we paid Shakir already and not Cook.  The massive difference is that Shakirs deal was in line with what Beane felt was good for the team - so its done.  If Shakir and his team sat back and demanded $20M per year (like many were worried would happen around here), I assure you that would not have been a reasonable deal for Beane and Shakir wouldn't have a new deal either.  

[Alphadawg7]

47 minutes ago, Freak-O said:

We want players who really want to be here and play for this team and might be ready to not maximise there pay to do so. We do not want players who want to squeeze every cent out of the club they’re playing for. 

 

Cook proved without a doubt he WANTS to be here when he risked his contract, his future, etc and showed up to camp and practiced despite not having a deal done yet.  If he didn't want to be here, he wouldn't have risked that injury and played hard ball from the get go or asked for a trade.  He was showing his commitment to be here, and it wasn't unnoticed by the team and FO.

 

This idea guys don't want to be here because they are trying to get the best deal they can for their family is always wild to me.  The NFL FO can bail on his contract if they want, they are not fully guaranteed.  He is a RB that even if he is the best at his position, he will earn considerably less than other great players at other positions over their careers because they make less and generally wear down faster.  In fact man teams run them into the ground now and draft a younger one instead of paying them.  

 

Sorry, but this is a short sided take IMO

[MJS]

4 hours ago, BillMafia716ix said:

I just don’t like how the Bills were so willing to pay a WR who has yet to crack 1,000 yards and only has 7 TD’s in 3 years over James Cook. 

Their situations aren't even slightly related. Cook wants to be paid like a top 3 running back. Shakir's contract made him the 27th highest paid receiver.

36 minutes ago, DaggersEOD said:

It’s not apples to apples. You have to compare their salaries vs their positional peers. 
 

At $13.5M Shakir is the 23rd highest paid at WR.

 

The same salary for Cook would be 6th highest paid RB. 
 

The 23rd highest paid RB makes approx $3.5M which would be a closer comparison if you’re trying to compare the two. 
 

I’m on the fence and will be happy with whatever is decided with him as I see both the great player we want on O and the potential folly of investing salary cap in the RB position. 

Cook wants 15 million. That would make him tied for 3rd highest, not 6th. He'd be on par with Henry. And Shakir is the 27th highest paid receiver.