Byrd Skipping mandatory mini-camp

[NoSaint]

 

 

My crticism of Byrd as a player is strictly limited to his performance. I fully recognize his value in the locker room as a "football character" guy (I did that just for you). As I've said on numerous occasions here, he's one of the best in the game and the Bills' decision to tag him reflects that. I don't agree with the idea of paying him whatever he's asking though, considering the dynamics involved with building the team into a contender. We are just NOT a good FS away from the Lombardi. I'm surprised more don't seem to want to acknowledge that. No, top safety money is NOT Mario money. But a FS is NOT a DE in this league, either.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

 

 

No matter what we give him, it won't make him any better or worse than he is as a player. The money really is immaterial from a performance standpoint.

 

Not from a team structure standpoint, though. And that can't be readily dismissed.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

I get all of what your saying, and don't wildly disagree. It's clear a safety is less impactful and that's why we're discussing 8m instead of 16m. That is a pretty huge gap - ground beef to steak in our day to day budgets.

 

While I don't think we are just a Free Safety away, it'd be nice not to be all the parts PLUS a free safety away. The only way you get to be one piece away is to make real efforts to get your pieces signed. Ultimately, I think we are quibbling over a few hundred thousand a year in the debate between you and I - not some of these extreme 6m vs 10m arguments that have occurred. I'd say agree to disagree but I think we're closer to agree to just agree

[RuntheDamnBall]

While I don't think we are just a Free Safety away, it'd be nice not to be all the parts PLUS a free safety away. The only way you get to be one piece away is to make real efforts to get your pieces signed. Ultimately, I think we are quibbling over a few hundred thousand a year in the debate between you and I - not some of these extreme 6m vs 10m arguments that have occurred. I'd say agree to disagree but I think we're closer to agree to just agree

Bingo.

[RuntheDamnBall]

What if he has the most yards from scrimmage in the NFL this season ??

Then I would franchise him, which nets him 8,219,000 in this year's dollars, maybe more next season, and see that he can do it again. Injury risks are too high to be getting into mega-years contracts.

 

AP is making way too much frickin' money, even for the best RB in the league. He is far and away the best, but I don't think he's going to see the end of that contract. Minny having given him mad money does not mean that another team will pony up north of $10MM for Spiller.

[uncle flap]

What if he has the most yards from scrimmage in the NFL this season ??

 

Then I would franchise him, which nets him 8,219,000 in this year's dollars, maybe more next season, and see that he can do it again. Injury risks are too high to be getting into mega-years contracts.

 

AP is making way too much frickin' money, even for the best RB in the league. He is far and away the best, but I don't think he's going to see the end of that contract. Minny having given him mad money does not mean that another team will pony up north of $10MM for Spiller.

 

He's still under contract for next year. And the year after that. So he'll be 29 when his contract is up.

 

I'm not advocating anything, but a better question to ask is, "how many seasons do you expect him to be one of the league leaders once he turns thirty?"

 

Most RBs hit a wall around then, or at least begin to decline. So do you want to be throwing all that money at him just for another year or two of production?

 

And before someone says, "Well, just extend him early," let me ask: Why would he agree to that when there could be a substantially better opportunity down the road?

 

Again, we don't have to speculate about Spiller now, because he is under contract til 2016. Too much can change between now and then. He could blow out his knee. The Bills could become a powerhouse and maybe he would be willing to take a hometown discount. Who knows? But to think that Byrd's contract will have any bearing on re-signing Spiller in 3 years makes no sense.

 

While I do agree that you need to take future cap hits into consideration when making deals to a degree, I don't think we need to pay as much attention to particular players as much as pure dollars.

 

For example, it'd be prudent to save some space for Wood, but if he's injured again, that money could be used on a sturdier replacement, or even elsewhere if they draft a center or maybe someone already under contract steps up. See? There's too much at play to speculate even to next year, much less 3 years down the road.

[RuntheDamnBall]

 

He's still under contract for next year. And the year after that. So he'll be 29 when his contract is up.

 

I'm not advocating anything, but a better question to ask is, "how many seasons do you expect him to be one of the league leaders once he turns thirty?"

 

Most RBs hit a wall around then, or at least begin to decline. So do you want to be throwing all that money at him just for another year or two of production?

 

And before someone says, "Well, just extend him early," let me ask: Why would he agree to that when there could be a substantially better opportunity down the road?

 

Again, we don't have to speculate about Spiller now, because he is under contract til 2016. Too much can change between now and then. He could blow out his knee. The Bills could become a powerhouse and maybe he would be willing to take a hometown discount. Who knows? But to think that Byrd's contract will have any bearing on re-signing Spiller in 3 years makes no sense.

 

While I do agree that you need to take future cap hits into consideration when making deals to a degree, I don't think we need to pay as much attention to particular players as much as pure dollars.

 

For example, it'd be prudent to save some space for Wood, but if he's injured again, that money could be used on a sturdier replacement, or even elsewhere if they draft a center or maybe someone already under contract steps up. See? There's too much at play to speculate even to next year, much less 3 years down the road.

Yeah, I pretty much agree with you - I wasn't aware Spiller was under contract for that long, but I think regardless, you have to look at each contract scenario relative to what's available and what might come available in the short term. And this means Spiller is not a problem to worry about unless he is putting up insane production for a playoff team, IMO (a la Peterson). Obviously, long-term considerations need to be made, and you have to see if you think talent on your roster can step up, but I think it's hard to argue the following:

 

1) Byrd is the best FS the Bills have.

2) A FS of his caliber is highly unlikely to come available on the market this year or next.

3) A FS of his caliber likely does not exist on this team, and if one does, there will be a learning curve. Whether that is mitigated by the fact that there is a new system for everyone to learn, I don't know.

4) Byrd is among the best playmakers with ball skills on this defense. That will be tough to replace.

5) Whether he is elite or not, he has gotten attention and respect from the rest of the league, which is saying something considering these are the Bills we're talking about.

6) He is a high-character player and we can count on there not being constant contract distractions once a deal is consummated.

7) It would be better to have Byrd in camp rather than not. In terms of wins for this year, that might even be worth an extra million dollars. I know that few think the playoffs are within reach, but should they have any chance, those chances are better with Byrd. And with playoff appearances comes more money for everybody.

8) As a player who is now one of the respected veterans on the team, his leadership comes at a premium and will help with a new staff.

[uncle flap]

Yeah, I pretty much agree with you - I wasn't aware Spiller was under contract for that long, but I think regardless, you have to look at each contract scenario relative to what's available and what might come available in the short term. And this means Spiller is not a problem to worry about unless he is putting up insane production for a playoff team, IMO (a la Peterson). Obviously, long-term considerations need to be made, and you have to see if you think talent on your roster can step up, but I think it's hard to argue the following:

 

1) Byrd is the best FS the Bills have.

2) A FS of his caliber is highly unlikely to come available on the market this year or next.

3) A FS of his caliber likely does not exist on this team, and if one does, there will be a learning curve. Whether that is mitigated by the fact that there is a new system for everyone to learn, I don't know.

4) Byrd is among the best playmakers with ball skills on this defense. That will be tough to replace.

5) Whether he is elite or not, he has gotten attention and respect from the rest of the league, which is saying something considering these are the Bills we're talking about.

6) He is a high-character player and we can count on there not being constant contract distractions once a deal is consummated.

7) It would be better to have Byrd in camp rather than not. In terms of wins for this year, that might even be worth an extra million dollars. I know that few think the playoffs are within reach, but should they have any chance, those chances are better with Byrd. And with playoff appearances comes more money for everybody.

8) As a player who is now one of the respected veterans on the team, his leadership comes at a premium and will help with a new staff.

 

Agreed.

 

I expect the Bills to sign him. If like Kelso hinted is true, and that the negotiations started $2 mil apart, I don't see why they can't work out a deal for around $8 mil.

 

It seems pricey for a safety, but as others have mentioned, give it a few years and it won't seem that outrageous. Plus, they've got the money this year and there's not much else out there to spend it on.

 

Because much of this year's cap space is from last year's rollover, and they can't roll the same money over again, it's a "use it or lose it" scenario. Not spending $ 8 mil on Byrd this year doesn't give the Bills an extra $8 mil next year. I'm too lazy to check now, but I'm pretty sure they can only rollover la max of around $3 mil either way.

[mitchmurraydowntown]

 

Yeah, I pretty much agree with you - I wasn't aware Spiller was under contract for that long, but I think regardless, you have to look at each contract scenario relative to what's available and what might come available in the short term. And this means Spiller is not a problem to worry about unless he is putting up insane production for a playoff team, IMO (a la Peterson). Obviously, long-term considerations need to be made, and you have to see if you think talent on your roster can step up, but I think it's hard to argue the following:

 

1) Byrd is the best FS the Bills have.

2) A FS of his caliber is highly unlikely to come available on the market this year or next.

3) A FS of his caliber likely does not exist on this team, and if one does, there will be a learning curve. Whether that is mitigated by the fact that there is a new system for everyone to learn, I don't know.

4) Byrd is among the best playmakers with ball skills on this defense. That will be tough to replace.

5) Whether he is elite or not, he has gotten attention and respect from the rest of the league, which is saying something considering these are the Bills we're talking about.

6) He is a high-character player and we can count on there not being constant contract distractions once a deal is consummated.

7) It would be better to have Byrd in camp rather than not. In terms of wins for this year, that might even be worth an extra million dollars. I know that few think the playoffs are within reach, but should they have any chance, those chances are better with Byrd. And with playoff appearances comes more money for everybody.

8) As a player who is now one of the respected veterans on the team, his leadership comes at a premium and will help with a new staff.

 

Maybe we should set a precedence here & just lay down when someone wants to be paid the highest amounts in their respective position, there's a way to fail pretty quick based on limited resources.

[NoSaint]

 

 

Agreed.

 

I expect the Bills to sign him. If like Kelso hinted is true, and that the negotiations started $2 mil apart, I don't see why they can't work out a deal for around $8 mil.

 

It seems pricey for a safety, but as others have mentioned, give it a few years and it won't seem that outrageous. Plus, they've got the money this year and there's not much else out there to spend it on.

 

Because much of this year's cap space is from last year's rollover, and they can't roll the same money over again, it's a "use it or lose it" scenario. Not spending $ 8 mil on Byrd this year doesn't give the Bills an extra $8 mil next year. I'm too lazy to check now, but I'm pretty sure they can only rollover la max of around $3 mil either way.

 

Yup. Right now we need to front load some extensions. The cap MUST be spent this year, or its wasted - which would be an absolute travesty given fitzs June 1 designation.

 

If we assume a rough ballpark of 5 years 40m with goldson as atleast a benchmark to work off of for napkin math

 

They could let Byrd eat up 15m of his projected 40 or so million in cap hits this year leaving only 25 to account for over the following 4 years.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

I'd love to get others' perspectives on this because I thought Byrd was excellent against the run last year after it was a problem for him early in his career. It seemed he was consistent with his tackling while also flashing the ability to fly up to the line and make a stop. He forced 4 fumbles. He's become more than a good-but-not-great coverage safety with a knack for INTs. The Bills in my humble opinion were unable to take full advantage of Byrd's skillset. A safety who forces fumbles who's as good against the run as he would ideally be used aggressively on a good percentage of snaps, even at the sacrifice of his ballhawking ability. It's true the Bills did cheat their safeties up at times but Byrd was still hamstrung by deep coverage responsibility most of the time. George Wilson had 28 more tackles than Byrd despite being the inferior run defender, because he was incompetent in coverage.

 

Because we couldn't allow a good run defender to be aggressive vs. the run often, I think there's still upside for him to be an even better, more valuable player than he was in his strong 2012 season. He'll never be an elite coverage safety due to his physical limitations, so we gotta take full advantage of his versatility or we're not getting the most out of him. I think if Byrd plays 2013 in our new scheme we'll look back on it as the best season of his career so far.

 

I'm thinking 8.3M-8.5M per year would be in the neighborhood of my upward limit.

[Doc]

Just pay him $6.9M this year and $8.3M next year and let him go. You get 2 hopefully all-pro seasons out of him for just $14.2M and train his replacement.

[NoSaint]

Just pay him $6.9M this year and $8.3M next year and let him go. You get 2 hopefully all-pro seasons out of him for just $14.2M and train his replacement.

 

I don't think any plan reads "get two all pro seasons and let him walk" but I wouldn't be surprised if its tag this year and seriously negotiate under the tag next year.

[mitchmurraydowntown]

Just pay him $6.9M this year and $8.3M next year and let him go. You get 2 hopefully all-pro seasons out of him for just $14.2M and train his replacement.

 

Letting him go involves us only getting a 3rd round pick after year 2, which we should focus on better than that. I wouldn't pay him more than the $6.9 M now & look for huge value after this season (like a Revis deal).

[RuntheDamnBall]

Maybe we should set a precedence here & just lay down when someone wants to be paid the highest amounts in their respective position, there's a way to fail pretty quick based on limited resources.

Just like they laid down with regard to Levitre, amirite? Please see my earlier post. I am not arguing that they should lay down when just any player wants to be highest paid. News flash: they all want to be highest paid. It's this contract, at this time, relative to who's out there under contract and who would potentially be available to the Bills. If you can't get that that's what I'm saying, I can't help you.

 

Letting him go involves us only getting a 3rd round pick after year 2, which we should focus on better than that. I wouldn't pay him more than the $6.9 M now & look for huge value after this season (like a Revis deal).

He ain't getting a Revis deal - in draft picks coming back or on a contract. CBs are more valued than safeties. Ronnie Lott in his prime would not have netted more than a single first rounder in trade.

[ganesh]

According to Premium Stats on ProFootballFocus.com, the Bills ranked ninth in pass coverage last season:

[list=1]
[*]Seattle Seahawks
[*]Green Bay Packers
[*]Chicago Bears
[*]San Francisco 49ers
[*]Denver Broncos
[*]New England Patriots
[*]Cleveland Browns
[*]Cincinnati Bengals
[*]Buffalo Bills
[/list]

We'll be fine in pass defense. Byrd doesn't fit as well into Pettine's Big Nickel scheme, so the Bills won't overpay. Byrd is smaller and slower than Meeks, Duke Williams, and Bryan Scott, who'll all see increased time in this scheme, in addition to Searcy, Silva, and Aaron Williams. They'd like to have Byrd at the right price, but they won't overpay.

 

Good summary of our Safety picture: here

 

If that is the case, why would the Bills Tag him ? Wouldn't they have traded him at the Draft time and collected additional picks for a team sorely lacking in talent in multiple positions ? It just doesn't add up.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

 

 

If that is the case, why would the Bills Tag him ? Wouldn't they have traded him at the Draft time and collected additional picks for a team sorely lacking in talent in multiple positions ? It just doesn't add up.

 

Gotta respectfully disagree with Astro's view that Byrd isn't a scheme fit.

 

K-9 has done a great job recently of establishing Byrd's limitations in coverage- he is a good cover safety who lacks the physical tools to be an elite cover safety. He is not the pure centerfielder type the Bills have forced him to try to be, and ideally he wouldn't be doing that on virtually every single play.

 

We have needed him to constantly handle deep coverage responsibility because he played opposite Donte Whitner, Bryan Scott and George Wilson.

 

Byrd played CB at Oregon. It is presumable that he has the ability to play man coverage once in awhile. This is something we have had him do very little of (if at all), and justifiably so. In a cover-1 for example why put Byrd in man coverage and leave your back seven on an island with only George Wilson over the top?

 

Even so, because he presumably can man up on occasion and with how he played the run last year, plus his lack of high end speed, Byrd belongs in a sort of FS/SS hybrid role in my opinion. Sometimes play center field, sometimes come into the box and play the run, sometimes play man, blitz, get INTs, force fumbles, the whole shebang. In order to move him around like this however, you need a SS who can hack it in coverage. Enter Duke Williams- the big SS who can hit, but also can run and cover. I don't see his selection as trying to replace Byrd, but rather allowing us to use Byrd better than we've been able to before.

 

Like John Malkovich, I say "pay that man...pay that man his money." Pay him based on what he did in a pure centerfielder role that didn't take full advantage of his versatility, and it's possible Byrd makes even more impact moving forward, and makes this decision look easy in hindsight.

 

We don't know how much each side is offering but this is why I'd be willing to make him the highest paid safety. There's still potential to get more out of him.

Edited June 21, 2013 by J-Gun Boone

[Doc]

I don't think any plan reads "get two all pro seasons and let him walk" but I wouldn't be surprised if its tag this year and seriously negotiate under the tag next year.

Ideally the Bills would want to get a long-term deal done, but on their terms. I don't see it happening this year or next year either, unless Byrd and Parker cave, which I don't see happening or unless another team offers a high draft pick. So he likely plays 2 years, hopefully cranks both years, and then walks because a deal still won't get done and it would cost too much to franchise him a third time.

Letting him go involves us only getting a 3rd round pick after year 2, which we should focus on better than that. I wouldn't pay him more than the $6.9 M now & look for huge value after this season (like a Revis deal).

The best I'd hope for is a second rounder. I doubt anyone offers a first, much less more than that.

[peterlaw]

 

Ideally the Bills would want to get a long-term deal done, but on their terms. I don't see it happening this year or next year either, unless Byrd and Parker cave, which I don't see happening or unless another team offers a high draft pick. So he likely plays 2 years, hopefully cranks both years, and then walks because a deal still won't get done and it would cost too much to franchise him a third time.

 

The best I'd hope for is a second rounder. I doubt anyone offers a first, much less more than that.

 

I wouldn't let him go for a second rounder. After all Byrd is an elite player. The rules are now that you can't franchise tag a player more than 2 years. If necessary let him sit out the season. My main motivations here are to do the right thing for the Bills (keep a good player for reasonable money) and to get a win against Parker. As Mario would say we want to kill 'em or hurt 'em (but not in a literal sense) !

[NoSaint]

 

 

I wouldn't let him go for a second rounder. After all Byrd is an elite player. The rules are now that you can't franchise tag a player more than 2 years. If necessary let him sit out the season. My main motivations here are to do the right thing for the Bills (keep a good player for reasonable money) and to get a win against Parker. As Mario would say we want to kill 'em or hurt 'em (but not in a literal sense) !

 

By the third time you'd actually be paying him 10m and it would've been cheaper to just give him goldsons contract and have the 5 year stability without distraction.

[thebandit27]

Yeah, I pretty much agree with you - I wasn't aware Spiller was under contract for that long, but I think regardless, you have to look at each contract scenario relative to what's available and what might come available in the short term. And this means Spiller is not a problem to worry about unless he is putting up insane production for a playoff team, IMO (a la Peterson). Obviously, long-term considerations need to be made, and you have to see if you think talent on your roster can step up, but I think it's hard to argue the following:

 

1) Byrd is the best FS the Bills have.

2) A FS of his caliber is highly unlikely to come available on the market this year or next.

3) A FS of his caliber likely does not exist on this team, and if one does, there will be a learning curve. Whether that is mitigated by the fact that there is a new system for everyone to learn, I don't know.

4) Byrd is among the best playmakers with ball skills on this defense. That will be tough to replace.

5) Whether he is elite or not, he has gotten attention and respect from the rest of the league, which is saying something considering these are the Bills we're talking about.

6) He is a high-character player and we can count on there not being constant contract distractions once a deal is consummated.

7) It would be better to have Byrd in camp rather than not. In terms of wins for this year, that might even be worth an extra million dollars. I know that few think the playoffs are within reach, but should they have any chance, those chances are better with Byrd. And with playoff appearances comes more money for everybody.

8) As a player who is now one of the respected veterans on the team, his leadership comes at a premium and will help with a new staff.

 

That's the only part of your post that I don't agree with.

 

Maybe we should set a precedence here & just lay down when someone wants to be paid the highest amounts in their respective position, there's a way to fail pretty quick based on limited resources.

 

I think that's an over-dramatization regarding the situation. It's a contract negotiation with one of your best players...it's not like this is Chris Hairston we're talking about.

 

I'd love to get others' perspectives on this because I thought Byrd was excellent against the run last year after it was a problem for him early in his career. It seemed he was consistent with his tackling while also flashing the ability to fly up to the line and make a stop. He forced 4 fumbles. He's become more than a good-but-not-great coverage safety with a knack for INTs. The Bills in my humble opinion were unable to take full advantage of Byrd's skillset. A safety who forces fumbles who's as good against the run as he would ideally be used aggressively on a good percentage of snaps, even at the sacrifice of his ballhawking ability. It's true the Bills did cheat their safeties up at times but Byrd was still hamstrung by deep coverage responsibility most of the time. George Wilson had 28 more tackles than Byrd despite being the inferior run defender, because he was incompetent in coverage.

 

Because we couldn't allow a good run defender to be aggressive vs. the run often, I think there's still upside for him to be an even better, more valuable player than he was in his strong 2012 season. He'll never be an elite coverage safety due to his physical limitations, so we gotta take full advantage of his versatility or we're not getting the most out of him. I think if Byrd plays 2013 in our new scheme we'll look back on it as the best season of his career so far.

 

I'm thinking 8.3M-8.5M per year would be in the neighborhood of my upward limit.

 

He definitely got better against the run, but he's nowhere near excellent in that regard in my opinion. His play vs. the run--particularly in games against Tennesee, SF, and NE, was very poor. Now, I believe that Wanny's scheme asked the safeties to do too much to support the run, but nevertheless, Byrd was a liability in a few different situations in those games.

 

That said, your point about his opportunistic ball skills--both in the run and pass game--is not lost on me. He has a Peanut Tillman-like knack for forcing turnover opportunities, and that needs to be considered.

 

I'm still south of the $8M/year line though.

 

Just pay him $6.9M this year and $8.3M next year and let him go. You get 2 hopefully all-pro seasons out of him for just $14.2M and train his replacement.

 

Sure does sound reasonable from the team's perspective...I think you'd have a less-than-thrilled player on your hands though. The long-term stability tends to breed a happier, more focused professional.

[Doc]

Sure does sound reasonable from the team's perspective...I think you'd have a less-than-thrilled player on your hands though. The long-term stability tends to breed a happier, more focused professional.

Sure he might be disgruntled, but he'll have numerous reasons to still want to play at a high level.