Alphadawg7

At this price...this is a win. I was leary about paying him what I thought he could command, was worried it might hit the $25M+ range after Crosby's deal upped the market. This is a great move IMHO by Beane, and can't wait to see him with some help added on the DL this year which IMHO is a given that is coming in some fashion...FA, Trade, Draft or some combo of those.

I think Beane takes more slack than he should on drafting, in fact, I would argue he has been one of the better GMs in the league, and the stats support that. However, I thought for sure BTJ would be our guy if he got to 20 last year or lower. Now, I don't know that Beane didn't try, I mean he could have and gotten rebuffed. But, I don't think he did because in all his talk before the draft, during the draft, and after the draft it seemed pretty clear they entered that draft with the mindset to pick at 28 or trade back, with trading back probably the preferred choice given who they expected to be on the board and for the purpose or recouping the 3rd rounder we used on Rasul. And Beane said as much in terms of wanting to get that 3rd back. And look, I get it, it was a major turnover year getting rid of a lot of age while we had $31M in dead cap alone from Diggs. Trying to get as many picks as he can while trying to restock with youth isn't necessarily a wrong choice. And it was considered a deep draft at WR, so also get that. However, I do feel like BTJ was almost as good as the top 3 who all went top 10. He was right there, and I feel like getting him when he got that close should have trumped getting another late 3rd. Again, he could have called and got rebuffed...we may never know unless he publicly says he didn't attempt to move up or did. But, I don't think he did to be honest, and I do think not trying was a mistake because BTJ was just too good a prospect. I had BTJ and Ladd as the 4 and 5 guys in the draft at WR, but Ladd didn't make a lot of sense in terms of type we needed heading into the draft, so for me BTJ was a no brainer. I felt the same way when DK was in the draft too, like he should be our guy in the first...then in the 2nd...then in a trade up when he was still on the board. So for me, if he really didn't try to get BTJ in a draft where we lost Diggs and Davis, then I think I can mark that one down as a mistake in my book by Beane even though I really do think Beane is a great GM.

I guarantee Beane has looked into Hendrickson, especially given the reported interest in Myles. I say that because he would be just as good a get as Myles, but would be cheaper to acquire and a more absorbable cap hit upon extension. But, it’s a big question mark whether or not Bengals would send him to an AFC contender though. So not sure how “gettable” he is for us specifically. My thought is make sure we make the best offer and put Cincy in position to have to decide on taking a lesser offer or our best offer.

Are you really complaining we scored an avg of 28 against 2 of the best defenses in the AFC in the playoffs? And no 29 was the magic number vs KC. They hadn’t scored 30 the entire season. But refs and our defense helped make sure they did nullifying what should have been a win for us with 29. Same Chiefs team was down 34-0 at one point the next game.

But, no one on that defense was a difference maker. There were no elite players on that team...their best defender that was the only real difference maker (Tre) tore his ACL on Thanksgiving. Its not about defensive rankings...its about having guys who can make the plays when they need to. Chiefs didn't field the top defense in the league each of the last 3 years, but they had guys like Chris Jones make huge plays to close out games, including beating us at home and preventing a TD to a wide open Aiyuk by blowing up the OL and getting to Brock on down and goal to help seal that SB win. And here...we give up 35 PPG to the Chiefs in our 4 playoff losses, while those same Chief teams lost the next game 3 of those times averaging just 17 PPG in those 3 games. So what that tells me is that our scheme is part of the problem, KC just has their kryptonite against our defense (we were the only team to allow them to score over 30 this year, again a week before they were down 34-0 at one point in the SB). If you want to over come that, you better have some players who can succeed on some plays despite the scheme struggles.

I like this, good value on both sides IMHO. I think its a fair deal and once we upgrade the beef in front of him he will be even better. Durability will be a concern, but its not like he is hurt all the time either.

I was being realistic about the stat lines more than just adding magic numbers in if that makes sense. We have scored more points over the last 5 years than any team in league and in 2024 we were 16th in nfl history in PPG even though Allen sat week 17, and several weeks we took the 4th quarter off or even most the 2nd half in quite a few games as we were blowing them out. So just adding a new WR first off means they are taking the snaps and production away from someone else. So it’s not just 10 more TDS, they are replacing production that was already in this offense and spread around and instead getting enough targets to do it themselves. To add 10 more TDs overall to this offense that was already one of the greatest in terms of points in history is no small feat. Especially when that would mean we again had a lot of blow out wins where we took the foot off the gas late in games if we are scoring that many points again. The offense only gets so many opportunities. Bengals with both Chase and Higgins don’t score as much as we do. Neither do the Eagles, the SB champs who have Saquan and two stud WRs. So that was where I was coming from, the realism of what those stats would mean. And adding more pressures, sacks, and TFLs would lead to more 3rd down stops and points to get the ball back in Allen’s hands more, which also helps the offense. All good, just explaining how I interpreted the poll

He’s 4 years older with a history of neck injuries…he’s not getting the Crosby deal IMHO

Well my main point was that those 10 TD's for example are going to be scored by this offense no matter what. Doesn't mattter if its a top 5 WR getting them or if its spread around other guys, or its Allen or Cook running them in, etc. We score those TD's already, you are more just changing whose stat sheet records them, not generating an additional 10 TD's we were not previously already scoring. But on defense, adding more negative plays such as sacks, TFL's and also pressures (which wasn't initially included but comes with sacks and TFL's increasing) will reduce opponents scoring, increase the effectiveness of the rest of the defense as QB's tend to make more mistakes under more pressure or the threat of pressure. And by default that also gives our offense more scoring opportunities by getting off the filed on 3rd down more times rather than allowing extended drives, especially given our defense was amongst the bottom of the league in 3rd conversions and first downs allowed. So the defensive guy in this scenario does more for this team...both defensively and offensively by giving the offense more TOP through getting off the field more, and with more TOP they have more opportunities to score. And IMHO the debate really isn't even close in this case as to which player benefits the teams overall success more.

Someone on our team will already account for the 1000 yards and 10 TD's...we have the highest scoring offense in the NFL the past 5 years, 16th most PPG in NFL history in 2024. But no one on our team is getting us those sacks and TFL's. We need that more than anything. 4 highest scoring teams in NFL history did not win the SB. 1 and 2 got shut down, even one blown out, in the SB by conservative offenses with strong defenses. 3 and 4 didn't even reach the SB. Only 3 teams in the top 10 scoring won a SB. Mahomes best season as a QB and offense they didn't even reach the SB. Yet the went to 3 straight with a medicore offense and won 2. So history and statistics say otherwise that more scoring is the easier path over improving the defense.

Hopefully we go sign Punt God back...oh wait... Too soon?

Yeah, I have a hard time seeing them get a first. The only thing that had me concerned was like a week or so ago, believe even in this thread, there was allegedly buzz Packers were prepared to offer their first and Doubs or Wicks which in my mind no one is gonna match or beat. But the reality is these guys don'g get traded for as much as people think they will most of the time. Look at all the Myles proposals...all these people keep foolishly throwing in guys like Groot, Milano, or Cook into our trade offer totally oblivious to the concept that there is 0% chance Browns want salary back, espeically high priced ones or ones where they are due big contracts. Their cap is crushed for 3 years, with the first 2 years being the worst, with just the Watson contract alone. Browns won't be able to build a competitve roster in a division with Lamar and Burrow plus the Steelers for at least 2 to 3 seasons at the absolute earliest. They are going to just lose and increase their draft capital while shedding the cap hell they are in to build as much young talent as possible. Browns most likely will carry near or above $100M in dead cap the next 2 seasons between Watson and trading Myles. Yet people keep proposing deals with Cook and Rousseau both due big deals during that time...guys who are not even probably worth the money they will demand by the way and they wouldn't likely keep My guess if DK gets moved, because he needs a new deal on top of it, the top end of the trade comp is likely get a 2nd and some change...either a player or another day 3 pick. But, if the Packers rumor is true of their first and a WR, I can't see us, or anyone, competing with a better offer. And all it takes is one team to really covet a player for a team to get more than expected.

Hahaha...touche....yes I concede much better. I almost used this one but was worried the poster would think it was directed at them rather than the tweet lol

He wont be underrated on draft night IMHO and he is on my short list of WR's I want on day 3 in the draft this year. But I think he is going to go earlier than people are mocking today. He is the kind of guy GM's don't want to see people talking about because they don't want his stock to improve. If the Bills want him they not sure how they get him as I do not think he will get to our pick in the 4th. And with his size and speed and after BTJ rookie season, it wouldn't surprise me if he was gone before the 4th especially if buzz picks up.

They were saying a first earlier in this thread plus Doubs or Wicks...that is the offer I was saying I doubt we would be able to best if that turned into a real offer. If its a 2nd and Doubs we can be more competitive and get in the mix.

What? At no point was Keon the end all be all final WR piece. We lost 2 starters in Diggs and Davis in one offseason, you think drafting a WR in consecutive drafts means we missed on the first one? LOL...we were always going to be adding another WR this year...always. We only had one last year (Shakir) and added around him with some lower cost vets and a rookie because we had $31M in dead cap invested already at WR from the Diggs trade. I honestly don't get how people come to these kinds of conclusions. Cooper and Hollins are FA's...we still need to add more WR's, and we will. It literally has nothing to do with Keon.

Yeah...wouldn't advise that lol unless you want to waste your first round pick. While a good get he would be for us, that doesn't mean it translates to fantasy dominance either. I mean he isn't going to explode in terms of fantasy numbers with Allen. Not in this offense, and that is not Allens strong suit either.

If he comes cheap to be part of the rotation here on a contender, I would be fine kicking the tires. Anything other than that is a hard pass.

Lol, come on lets not get crazy. Thats an insult to Megatron. DK is not in Megatrons class, not by a mile. I would love to land DK...but come on, Megatron has a strong case for top 10 all time and DK isn't even top 10 in todays league.

Agree, if Kincaid gets the deal done, do it. But, I am doubtful they would want Kincaid, they already have Fant who they don't utilize as much as they should. So I am skeptical a 2nd TE is going to move the needle much over better draft comp or other offers for them even if they feel Kincaid is a better receiving threat. Also, if the Packers really are going to offer their 1st and a young WR as had been rumored for a week or so, I am skeptical we would put out an offer that could best that offer IMHO.

Bingo

Go get DK and right the wrong I was screaming about on draft day where at both our picks I was pounding the table for DK and then continued to pound the table to trade back into round 2 for DK after they took Ford. I still am in the camp of if it can only be one...Myles or DK...then go get Myles. But I am also in the camp of go get one of them at least...and please let the football gods let us get both!

Ha, nice wishful thinking...never going to happen.

Pass. Next