BarleyNY

No we don’t. His salary guarantees on 3/17, but that wouldn’t have any impact on a trade. It’s not like a team trading for him wouldn’t expect him to play for them this season. The only thing it impacts is releasing him - which I don’t think is happening until next offseason. I think the Bills would be happy to trade Diggs (especially after 6/1), but I don’t think it happens either.

Dunno about that. I don’t think GR has the athletic traits to become a particularly good pass rusher. His lack of bend and flexibility really limits him. He can be a good compliment to a player like Von was expected to be here, but he’s not ever going to be a guy who puts quick pressure on QBs. Not with any consistency at least.

Yup. OTC has it at about $13.4M. I am fine with the Bills picking that up and then either signing him to a reasonable extension or letting him walk. And I’m okay with them not picking it up. It depends on what they want out of the LDE spot. If they want a DE to play the run and contain the QB, then GR is fine. If they want something more out of that spot in the way of pass rush, then they should decline the option and use the money for a replacement that can.

Disagree. It was by far his biggest workload for a season, including college. His touches increased when Brady took over. He looked spent by the playoffs. He wasn’t running the same and he wasn’t catching the ball the same. You can’t give him the kind of workload Brady did for a whole season.

Guessing the Vikings are looking to extend a particular WR who might be concerned about QB play there. This might be creating some urgency for Kwesi and the Vikes.

Constantly? I seem to remember a dime bouncing off of his hands in our 3 point playoff loss to KC. Reasonably, I think Diggs is still a #1 WR on this team and in this league. But I don’t think he’s quite what he was at his peak and he’ll be 31 this November. That’s been the about the time WRs hit their productivity cliffs. The Samuel signing is as much about having a Diggs replacement on the roster as it is filling out the WR corps.

Agree 100%. Cook wore down last season. We absolutely need a complimentary RB who can take a good bit of the load off of him.

I just didn’t want him to go there. Didn’t really care where else he went.

Yeah. This one hurts.

Still need an X. Also DE is a huge need unless you think Epenesa is a quality starter. I sure don’t. Guessing those are our first two picks, in either order.

Thinking we are drafting an X. We can work in the new X in this season as he earns it. Next season Samuel can take over Diggs’ spot. In the near term Shakir, Samuel and Diggs can be on the field together.

Agree. Still need an X. If anything Samuel seems redundant with Diggs. Not that they can’t be in the field together, but they’re a lot alike.

Better than that. Consistently a 600+ yard WR. 27 years old and a known commodity whereas Harty was an upside play.

Solid acquisition. Good player at a position of need. Can flex to RB a la Debo. And a Buckeye. Happy to see this.

I can’t. Beyond it being a massive overpay on Seattle’s part they don’t even have a second round pick this season.

Players have been known to sign with the Dolphins to semi-retire in Miami.

At that price he simply just might’ve wanted to go to Miami. Still, we paid more for a worse player and that’s not good.

Yeah. This is why a vet min (or close) deal makes sense here. Douglas and Benford starting on the outside. Tauron at slot. Cam is pretty much a slot backup. That leaves just Elam backing up the outside. Wallace would help there.

There is no rule against restructuring a contract more than once a season. Nor would players or teams want there to be one. That said, I’ve never seen it done. It would point to incompetence on the part of the team - or perhaps an extreme circumstance. The Bills chose to restructure Allen’s contract to the extent they did for a reason. It is where they want it and I would be shocked if they did it again this season.

Contracts including restructure options at the team’s discretion are much more common these days, but not all contracts have them and some of the ones that do have restrictions. Diggs’ contract probably does, but there’s no way to tell for sure without seeing it.

Armstead would be a great get for Buffalo, but he seems a luxury for this team at this time. And the pantry is still lacking some staples.

Excellent movie, but not one I’d watch too many times.

There’s been some activity and hole plugging - especially depth - but there’s yet to be a single move that improves the team from last season. The Dawkins extension and Jones re-signing are helpful, but those are just keeping status quo.

Sure. But again, there could be a middle ground of taking our medicine for past spending and competing now. I expected the Bills to be limited in free agency, but this is more severe than I was expecting. I thought they’d maximize what they could reasonably do, but it looks like they’re backing off a lot more than that. That all said, free agency only officially opened 3 hours ago so the book isn’t closed. Besides, there’s nothing to do now but see how it all plays out.

You can take your medicine and still spend some cash. I’m not saying we should be wasting cash and cap space at the start of FA. I’m not a proponent of that. It is just that this is a severe decrease. We went from one of the top cash spenders to 17th currently. To me that looks ownership driven. No GM wants to throw on the brakes like that if they don’t have to. They get paid to win and it’s tough to do that without spending. The other possibility is that Beane is paying back/saving up against his spending constraints. He has a budget from Pegula. It is possible that he’s saving toward another spending ramp up. I guess in either case I’m just disappointed because it will be difficult to really compete in the near term if spending is substantially cut.