GunnerBill

Agree. That is where I think the run comes. I am not sure there is going to be a huge run between the top 10 and Dallas at #24. In fact I can see only one going in that spell. But from Dallas at #24 to the middle of round two.... that could be a serious run.

First choices: 1. Kamren Curl 2. Darnell Mooney Backup otions: 1. Julian Blackmon 2. DJ Chark They will need a vet 1T as well but I haven't really looked in depth at that market.

My take on what Beane should now do is absolutely 100% stand pat at #28. Do not trade up. Take the best wide receiver available unless someone unexpected has fallen to there. Then at the end of the 2nd there is potentially room to move back. I have found in a lot of the sims I have done that is the spot where I end up feeling like there is much of a muchness talent wise. If they were to say slide back 10 spots with the Giants (I understand we have some connections there) in exchange for the Giants 4th rounder (might have to throw in one of our 6ths just to even the value out) then we could package that extra 4th with one our 5ths to get back into the bottom end of round 3. So we'd end up with: #28 Two 3rds (one early, one late) Two 4ths Two 5ths Two 6ths One 7th

Edmunds missed 2 games. But he did still play 92% of defensive snaps for the Bears so if that was what knocked him down that feels like an incredibly high threshold. And yea, if it was that Jimmy G (also a 4th) being a pick ahead after playing far less is odd.

Because it would appear based on the 9ers also having the Jimmy G pick that was equally predicted as a third knocked down (see they were affected too) that time missed has taken both Edmunds and Garropolo out of the 3rd round range they were in by contract value and reduced them to round 4. And it has happened within weeks of the season ending. This coming Sunday will be 4 weeks on from the Superbowl.

The difference is Tre just looked tentative like he was scared to commit. Von could barely move.

The news is public today but I wonder when teams were told and whether this played any part in Beane's decision to trade Bates for a 5th? It only saved $1.4m of cap and he spent more than that on Edwards (who he could have let walk and paid nothing). I wonder if he knew he didn't have a third and thought three 5ths and two 4ths would give him enough firepower to get back into the top 100. The two 4ths and the 5th from the Bears OR our first 4th and the three 5ths both get us back into the last half dozen picks or so of round 3.

I mean it is not a conspiracy it is the rules.

Yea looking at previous years and the fact the other pick that was bumped down from an expected 3rd was the Jimmy G pick it must be playing time related. Where picks originally slot is based on market value so fluctuates year to year (the percentile of the total market the deal falls into). I thought they set the numbers on that but then bounced people down based on hires. But last year doesn't look consistent with that. @HappyDays must be right it is about missed playing time.

No I wouldn't say that. I don't think it will make much difference how much incentive he does or doesn't have though. I think he is done.

I don't think he is as good as some Bills fans think he is. Correct. He was the Bills best corner down the stretch but not by a lot. Benford was pretty good he just didn't have the ball production.

3rd - Demeco Ryans 4th - Jimmy Garoppolo The some lower value guys

There is no set limit but there are parameters. I am pretty certain that has knocked us out.

We were the lowest 3rd and a minority coach got hired.

ERFA this was a no brainer.

We lost our 3rd to the Rams because Raheem Morris was hired as a Head Coach by the Falcons. FFS. Jax's 3rd is Jawann Taylor San Fran's 3rd is Demeco Ryans Philly's 3rd is Javon Hargrave Yep. That is a big mistake by Beane.

Nor do I but they have been more cautious on can kicking so far this year in their moves than I'd have been.

He does have a "chance" to earn more but its all theoretical. I think there is little to no chance he even musters 6 sacks IMO. The first two incentives are in play and possibly the final one if the team succeeds. He left money on the table. The Bills didn't have a lot of leverage so one assumes there was some willingness on Von's side. At the moment as we stand today he has left more money on the table with the pay cut ($8.8m) than he would have if the Bills had just cut him ($6.5m). If he gets at least 4 sacks he is basically even ($200k up), he needs at least 6 sacks to actually end up in profit on the deal as against being cut. And as you say he needs a lot more than that to be in profit as against the original contract. Personally I'd still have cut him. But I can live with him back on this deal and as a rotational piece.

It could. That it wasn't would indicate to me the Bills don't see him as a long term answer and so kicking the can too hard isn't their preference.

I am not against drafting a 3T. I just don't think you can spend #28 on one in a position where our best defensive player last year plays. You can take one later.

That is the modern NFL. DTs don't play 80/90% of the snaps anymore.

I don't necessarily think you should just have two day 3 rookie deals at safety. We tried that with Hamlin and Johnson two years ago and they were bad. But I think there'd have been a vet out there after the dust settled who'd have signed for last year's Taylor Rapp deal - 1 year; $1.7m. I don't like this deal. People keep saying Rapp "came on down the stretch". I don't know what they were seeing that I wasn't. I suspect it is just "he had that pick to seal the Miami game" rather than any substantial evaluation of the film. This is cheap as a deal if they want him to be a starter. But I really hope that isn't the plan so much as it is an "if all else fails".

I am saying Benford too. I don't think he will be CB2. He might start the season in that role but I expect him to be the consensus best corner on this team by mid season. It was closer than most imagine last year already. He just doesn't have the splashy ball production that Douglas had as a result of Zach Wilson.

Yea the oddity there is why open his practice window if they just intended to let him revert to IR at the end of it? To trigger his window there had to be at least some thought that they might activate him to the 53 at some point. Otherwise they could have just left him on IR all year, not triggered the window and it would not have led to him being poachable. My guess has always been he had a little niggling setback in his 3 week practice window so they decided to shut him down, but it is possible that they intended to activate him and then injuries at other positions meant they suddenly needed the roster spots elsewhere and therefore just let it lapse and revert to IR. I do think Shorter has a good shot to the 53. If he wins a gunner job he doesn't need to be more than a wildcard at WR he would be in.

I've set my position out on Trubisky above. If he is your starter he is one of the worst QBs in the league. But he has some skills that make him suited to being a serviceable backup. Kyle Allen has the worst pocket presence I have ever seen. He bails clean pockets at a ridiculous rate and has no ability to read a field at all. He is just a big guy with a reasonable arm. I said that before last season as well. We legit had one of the worst backup situations in football last year. And Blaine Gabbert is, and always has been, a tunrover machine. Even last year in KC he threw 35 passes and 3 interceptions. I am not here to tell you Mitch Trubisky is great. Backup Quarterbacks aren't great. But he is a lot better than Allen and Gabbert.