Rocky Landing

Don't forget that in Allen's rookie season, we had a bottom three OL, probably the worst WR corps in the league, and Late Nate Peterman as the "vet mentor."

God I'm glad we don't have to look at either of those mugs every Sunday for 17 weeks...

All good points, thanks. But, regarding the bolded: Bundling a vet with later picks is exactly what I'm talking about. In fact, that rumor is circulating right now. And is CB not an immediate need? Maybe you're higher on Dane Jackson than I am-- I know a lot of people are-- but I think you'd agree that he's the weak link in the secondary. As far as who that vet would be, we'd all hate to see Davis go. Of course Edmunds has been discussed. I don't know where Moss's ranking was in '21, but in '20 he was the best RB at pass pro in the league. But, if there is any truth to the rumor, then there are names being discussed.

You're right. My math was wrong. (That chart is outdated, anyway) But, I never said top ten, and I didn't say that draft picks were the only assets that Beane would, or should consider. I'm saying if Beane feels there is a CB worth the assets he's willing to spend, and another team is willing, he would pull the trigger. He has before. I was also making the point that we are, like last season, drafting for primarily backup positions. Multiple draft picks are more valuable to a team that has room for them on their roster, right? What good are draft picks if they get poached off the PS? That happened to us twice last season. Yeah, I screwed up the math, but that's really not the point. Trade-ups in the first happen, and Beane has done it three times, plus Diggs. BTW, that trade for Adams was hella steep, but he got 9.5 sacks for Seattle in his first season there.

Beane traded up for Ford, Edmunds, and Josh Allen. He traded a first for Diggs. If he feels the value is there, he'll make the trade-- not "just to take one," but because he sees the value. The top three CBs in the draft are expected to be gone by #25. In 2020, Seattle traded two firsts, and a second for S Jamal Adams from the Jets. Trades in the first round happen every draft, and they often work out. And consider also that CB is one of the few positions that has not been addressed in FA. Peterson re-signed with the Vikes for $4mil. That's what Levi's getting with the Steelers.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/index91c0.html?page_id=6682

First of all, a trade up would include our pick #25. It's not such an outrageous idea-- Beane has done it twice. Secondly, there are other assets besides draft picks. There is a rumor circulating right now that a trade up would include a vet player. Regardless, according to the standard trade value chart, our first, and second round picks would equate to the fourth overall pick. Are you suggesting that we aren't thin at CB? IMO, it is the thinnest position on the team, especially if Tre White misses any time.

Last season-- much like this season-- we were drafting primarily for backup positions, with the only notable exception being our first round pick. There was no room on the 53 for the later round picks, and they ended up on the practice squad as developmental players. The two with the most potential, Rashad Wildgoose, and Jack Anderson, were poached by other teams, rendering them utterly wasted draft picks. IMO, the question is less a matter of there being "reason in trading up," and more a question of "why not trade up?" If there isn't any room for the later round picks on the team (and, I suspect there isn't) then why not use those picks to get a better prospect at CB? Not capitalizing on the value of later round picks seems much crazier to me than trading up for better potential. I do agree that "McDs defense has made many late round or undrafted guys look good." Levi Wallace, and Ike Boettger are perfect examples of that. But, obviously, being a player that other teams don't want as much is not a selling point to them, or anyone else.

My hope for CB is that we are trading up in the first.

But if the Bills move to Toronto, I'm outta here.

just without the limp...

Very good point.

Well, to some degree, it has to depend on the specific situation. I can imagine, for example, your offense finishes regulation with a long TD drive to tie it up, the opposing D is gassed, and the HC figures the best chance is to keep the momentum going, and keep the opposing D on their heels. But, I would think that in most situations, teams will defer 90% of the time.

I would guess Barkley to the PS, assuming the PS rules remain the same as last year.

$22 for the number of allegations. Better than $4 for his jersey number. It will be interesting to see what accommodations the Bills Mafia will make for all the displaced Dawg Pounders who will be jumping over to Buffalo until Cleveland can buy its soul back. https://heavy.com/sports/buffalo-bills/angry-browns-fans-jumping-on-bills-bandwagon-after-watson-trade/

I like Ike.

OK, I should have figured that out. I was a little surprised by the signing myself-- half mil more than we paid Trubisky last year. Definitely one of the better backups out there, though. Tons of experience starting, and has won games. Has a relationship with Diggs, also. If Allen goes down for a few games, Keenum gives us a good chance of staying in it.

Does this mean a positive prognosis for his achilles?

Jones is a RB by designation only. He's a special teams gunner. It's disingenuous to call him a backup. He's also not a lock to make the 53. There will be 90 men to start TC. Whether or not he has enough in the tank to continue to be what he has been remains to be seen. If he does, then I would think that having an elite ST is worth the cost. Field position matters. A lot.

This has really been the core philosophy of Beane's methodology. Fill the holes in FA, and set yourself up for BPA in the draft, and draft for the future. But, there have been a few times when his sights were a little more specific when it came to the first round where he really targeted players-- '18 trading up for Allen, and trading up for Edmunds, and then '20 trading away for Diggs. In all three of those instances, the FA needs for those positions were basically ignored, while they filled the other holes. In this FA period, they have addressed QB, OL, WR, TE, RB, DE, DT, and LB. What's notably absent? Could it be that Beane/McDermott are targeting, a big first-round, trade-up splash drafting of a premier, future HOF punter???

With so many players basically set on this team, I wonder if there wouldn't be sufficient impetus to trade up in either the first, or second round (or both)? We had a very similar situation last season, and we ended up with two draft picks-- a developmental guard, and cornerback-- poached off the practice squad. I don't think anyone expected Anderson, or Wildgoose to make the 53 on draft night, but I do think they were viewed as decent developmental prospects. This team has holes-- but not a ton of them. Personally, I would hope for quality over quantity this draft.

I feel like I've read (maybe in 202?) that Ike Boettger gets reps at center in practice. Does anyone know if this is true?

Perhaps this little anecdotal situation will bring some of the other top-tier WRs back to Earth regarding their upcoming contract expectations. And perhaps this will help assuage Diggs' dissatisfaction with his own situation.

I wonder if (and if so, how much) Beane conferred with Kromer when deciding how to handle the Bates situation, and the rest of the O-line in this offseason?