Thurman#1

Yup, including 9.5 in 2023. He'll cost more than a camp body. But how much more is unclear.

Yeah, and we'd be right back to the cap situation we were in before last year, where we had to let people go. More of them than Epenesa. Can't see it. We now have $11M under the cap in 2026. After these moves we're probably significantly over in 2026, without even thinking about how to re-sign Watt if we kept him, which we would probably want to do. Fun to think about. Yeah, this is my guess too.

Yes, he did have a harder time this year but again, the finger injuries really contributed. Drop rate isn't perfect either, nothing is. There's always a question about whether something was a drop or a bad throw. It's not always clear. But it's probably the best single stat we've got, certainly better than catch percentage. Except for last year, when again he had hand injuries, he's shown terrific hands, not just good but excellent.

Um, what world? This one. Catch rate isn't a receiver stat. It's a QB and receiver and defender and wind stat. QB misses you by 20 yards, or throws it short right to the DB and your catch rate goes down. It isn't a WR stat. Agreed that was a bad drop in the playoffs. But everybody drops some, and he dropped that because he lost his footing, which was very likely partly due to his injury. He still should have caught it. But everybody has some drops. Kincaid few. He has excellent hands.

That's certainly not all needed. But it would absolutely be nice!! More QB disruption. That's what's needed.

Bad take. He was injured and his hands have been excellent. But whatever. Believe what you want to believe. "Zach Davidson gives us the same threat," though? Sigh. *shakes head*

This'n. Plus, you put on five pounds on a guy his size and it's just not obvious. At this point, he might be having problems, or he might be right on schedule.

Oh, and yeah Singletary was a very good back, in 2021 and always, really. But your contention that he got really good in the last four games of 2021 because they stopped platooning him? Also doesn't make sense. He averaged 4.6 YPC for the season. And considerably less over the last four games. He was still good. But not better, platooned or not. Yes, he got more yards. But not because he was running better. He was just running more, so even though he was getting less per carry he totaled more yards. And again, the Bills got ahead in each game by mostly passing and then turned up the runs later in games to burn clock.

Um, no, I'm not saying that or anything like it Maybe you could actually read my post ... then answer it? That way you could respond to things I actually said? Also didn't say "not fact based." Or anything like it. Again, maybe read and respond to what I actually said. I disagree with some of your facts. One thing you said was that the 2021 Bills changed things around by suddenly stressing the run game the last four games of the season. And as I pointed out, that wasn't true. In three out of those four games they started out stressing the pass much more than the run, got ahead that way and then ran the ball more later to run out the clock. The main problem with your post, though, is the logic. Not the facts, the logic. You claimed that whenever the Bills really stress the run game they play very well. And that this shows that they should and will re-sign James Cook even if he's overpriced. This doesn't follow. The conditional and the conclusion aren't linked. Even if the conditional is 100% factual and true, it doesn't show they should re-sign Cook even if he costs too much. Again, it’s like arguing that oranges are nutritious, healthy and good for you and that therefore you must eat THAT PARTICULAR ORANGE OVER THERE AND NO OTHER, despite the fact that that one particular orange is priced at $500 and has a black spot on it. It doesn’t follow. Even if oranges generally are good, that doesn’t show you need to eat the one orange no matter what. It just doesn’t. Same with your argument. Even if your conditional is 100% true, it doesn’t show we need to re-sign Cook no matter what. There are a ton of different ways to stress the run game. Many of them make economic sense. Such as keeping the OL together which they’ve done such a terrific job with. Or maybe drafting another 3rd round RB next year if Cook keeps insisting on $15M and running him, Ray Davis and Ty Johnson and maybe one more guy fight it out to see who gets to run behind that terrific OL. Oh, and the way you wrote made it seem like you thought I might be the real Thurman Thomas. I’m not. Just a huge Thurman fan. Thurman, by the way, was a terrific pass blocker when called on and played a ton more snaps than Cook ever has. Terrific in short yardage power situations too. I'd love to see them re-sign Cook. At a reasonable price. What he's asking for is not reasonable.

First, your logic in no way follows from evidence to conclusion. Saying we should keep Cook no matter what he costs because the Bills have done well when they run a lot is like saying that eating oranges is really good and healthy for you and therefore you need to buy this particular orange right now despite the $500 price tag and the fact it’s got a huge black spot on it. Doesn’t follow. You’re right, Beane’s not stupid. Not at all. That’s why he refuses to get over-focused on something he wants and greatly overpay for it. Beane has a consistent habit of drawing the line and not going over it. It’s how he does business, and it’s smart. More, you’re very clearly showing how little you let your evidence affect your conclusions. Your prejudices are clearly visible. You say that in 2021 that when they lost to Tampa and then, according to you, they “ran more than any other team becoming the best running team in the league. They did not lose again.” That’s an extremely clear case of letting a pre-judgment deeply twist your conclusions in ways the evidence just doesn’t support. Not even close. (Just as a sidebar, pretending the evidence really does support that turning to the run caused these results, was Cook on the team then? Wait, we got these great run results with Singletary, Moss, Breida and Taiwan Jones? Well then what do we need Cook for?) Anyway, what the facts show is that when they were going according to game plans early, they passed far more often than they ran with the exception of the final game against the hapless Jets.. That’s why they had (reasonably) high run attempts. CAROLINA in the first half, 25 pass attempts, including two sacks along with 9 runs. They started off mostly passing and got way ahead and then started running more. In the first half, Up 17-8 at halftime and 25-8 by the end of the 3rd NEW ENGLAND Don’t need to spend time separating the halves. We threw 47 passes and ran 28 times in this game. ATLANTA In the first half the Bills ran 23 pass attempts including two scrambles and 12 runs (also including the scrambles). Then the second half was mostly runs. NJ JETS In this game, the Bills ran 46 passes and 33 runs. In the first half, 26 pass attempts and 14 runs, but that’s deceptive. We got the ball with 1:39 left in the half at our own 16 and ran 10 pass attempts in a row. Take out that drive and it was 16 passes and 14 runs. But again, overall 46 passes and 33 runs. Pretending that they did really well down the stretch of that season because they ran a lot? Flat-out ridiculous.

All for paying Cook if he accepts reasonable value. If he won't accept $15M per year, thanks for your hard work, James. But in any case, he'll be here this year. The problem is next year.

Nope, he's gone. Wait, we're talking September 2032, right?

Keon and Dalton didn't show up to the playoffs because both were injured pretty badly. Keon had a broken wrist and Dalton couldn't move well with his leg problems. And the idea that Beane signed Amari out of desperation is purely from your own imagination. Maybe it seemed like a good deal, and a good chance to try out a guy who might be terrific, possibly even so terrific that we'd extend his contract or sign him for another year or two. Same with the idea that Amari was responsible for the improvement. Allen started the year with one WR he'd ever worked with before and a bunch of very young guys as the keys. Being surprised it took a few weeks for them all to get on the same page is like being shocked by snow in the wintertime in Buffalo. If Amari was the reason for all that improvement, how come when he was off the field (which was a lot), there was no fall-off in performance? The correct answer? Because it wasn't "the Amari Cooper effect." It was the team starting to work together better. Cooper helped a bit, but the idea that he was the one behind all the improvement is flat-out ridiculous. Wrong question. It just is. The question is this: Is there an NFL team with a weaker passing game than the Bills? The answer is nearly all of them. It's been said before a million times, most recently by Beane, but a million times before that. The goal in football is to have the best team. Not the best wide receiver group.

Diggs improved quite a lot in production when he came to Buffalo. Amari Cooper produced significantly better with Dak than he did in Oakland. Randy Moss was a ton better in NE than with the Raiders, though it did look to me like he was dogging it after a while in the Silver and Black. Welker was massively better when he got with Brady. It happens. But yeah, you're right that you can't assume it will. Sometimes it happens and plenty of other times it doesn't.

It's really not hypocritical. Not at all. Saying you don't have a need at WR and then signing a WR isn't necessarily even contradictory. You can feel that we don't have an absolute need, but that we could get better with the right deal. This is probably the most common situation a GM deals with. You don't have a need but you're willing to get better in the right situation. Then the right deal comes along. That right deal might be picking a guy at the right value for the pick in the draft, or at the right value in an FA contract.