JohnC Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 2 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: That’s true of all teams though. No one is a better example than next week’s opponent. They ALWAYS just kick the van down the road. Every team has bad contracts. The Bills don’t (and really didn’t) have a bunch of contracts out of whack. When the money is going to your best players at the most important positions (QB, pass rush, LT, impact skill player, shutdown CB) you are in okay shape. My main issue with Whaley in terms of contracts was that the Dareus contract wasn’t protected against another failed test. The Bills has to account for that and didn’t. I agree with your post. Let me add that although you may not agree the Watkins trade was as much about what he was going to cost in the near future. He was a player although very talented the staff didn't want to invest in because he was not their "type" of player. In my view Whaley would have been more amenable to signing him to a grand contract simply based on his talent. Not was not the case with this new regime.
Kirby Jackson Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 1 minute ago, JohnC said: I agree with your post. Let me add that although you may not agree the Watkins trade was as much about what he was going to cost in the near future. He was a player although very talented the staff didn't want to invest in because he was not their "type" of player. In my view Whaley would have been more amenable to signing him to a grand contract simply based on his talent. Not was not the case with this new regime. I don’t necessarily disagree but wasn’t it Whaley when they didn’t pick up the 5th year option?
Kirby Jackson Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 2 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: I don’t necessarily disagree but wasn’t it Whaley when they didn’t pick up the 5th year option? Nevermind I just checked and it was in May.
JohnC Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: I don’t necessarily disagree but wasn’t it Whaley when they didn’t pick up the 5th year option? That's a good question. I'm not sure if McDermott was on board or not at the time. I thought he was on board and the open option issue was there for him to make a final determination. However, I'm not sure. My thinking is that McDermott was instrumental in the decision because the Matthew fallback receiver deal was shortly made.
CommonCents Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 McD was on board in January, the Bills didn't decline Sammy's option until the beginning of March.
CommonCents Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 May 2nd, not March. Sorry it wouldn't let me edit.
Real McClappy Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 26 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: We have already established that we disagree in Matthews but do you think it’s wise to give you number 3 WR $8M+? That’s what it will take and then Benjamin is a FA after next year. He’s probably going to be over $10M. That’s feels like a terrible use of cap space. I’d rather give $2M-$3M to Thompson and draft another. Roll with Benjamin-Zay-Rookie-Thompson and Reilly/Dupre. And when KB plays like a WR #2 due to lack of targets will you say he's a number #3 WR for the Bills? A guy that has just under 3K receiving yards (Matthews) in 42 games is a borderline #1 WR , top notch #2 WR all day in the NFL. You make it sound like we are in cap hell and paying this huge salary on a franchise QB when we are not. We do disagree on Jordan but that is fine. McD and Beane were willing to bring him in for a reason. You can tell his on field play and leadership qualities are why they brought him in. If he's a 1 year rental WR we will all see I guess. I will be fine with whatever the FO decides now that KB was brought in.
WideRightRevenge Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 45 minutes ago, Real McCoy said: I agree KW will most likely retire. Out of that list I think Gaines and JMatt should be resigned. I'm not sure on KW retiring .. if he likes the McD kool aid and he can see the light at the end of the playoff / competitive team rainbow .. maybe he sticks but at a reduced price (he is obviously WALL of FAME material) and I'd like to see him experience the resurgence if his body can hold up. Other than that on the list many are expendable .. but I'd prefer to see Matthews but I'd rather save Money for '18 or restructure Benjamin ... and keep Gaines & Wright ... Joe Webb goes as we will draft another QB and Nate ain't going anywhere.
Kirby Jackson Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 3 minutes ago, Real McCoy said: And when KB plays like a WR #2 due to lack of targets will you say he's a number #3 WR for the Bills? A guy that has just under 3K receiving yards (Matthews) in 42 games is a borderline #1 WR , top notch #2 WR all day in the NFL. You make it sound like we are in cap hell and paying this huge salary on a franchise QB when we are not. We do disagree on Jordan but that is fine. McD and Beane were willing to bring him in for a reason. You can tell his on field play and leadership qualities are why they brought him in. If he's a 1 year rental WR we will all see I guess. I will be fine with whatever the FO decides now that KB was brought in. No, Benjamin was brought here, by the guys that drafted him because clearly they aren’t happy with the WRs. You don’t give up a 3rd if you like the way that the unit is playing. I think that Benjamin is a borderline #1 but certainly our #1. He’s a pretty good football player. I still dont get “top notch #2” when he was 4 on his previous depth chart and is now probably 3 here? Emmanuel Sanders is a top notch #2. Personally I don’t think Matthews is good at all but that’s besides the point of this. It’s more about cap allocation. I don’t see the Bills paying roughly $20M a year to Benjamin and Matthews. It’s one or the other and Benjamin is a guy that they scouted and drafted.
Real McClappy Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 1 minute ago, WideRightRevenge said: I'm not sure on KW retiring .. if he likes the McD kool aid and he can see the light at the end of the playoff / competitive team rainbow .. maybe he sticks but at a reduced price (he is obviously WALL of FAME material) and I'd like to see him experience the resurgence if his body can hold up. Other than that on the list many are expendable .. but I'd prefer to see Matthews but I'd rather save Money for '18 or restructure Benjamin ... and keep Gaines & Wright ... Joe Webb goes as we will draft another QB and Nate ain't going anywhere. KB can be resigned with all that dead cap $ Dareus is holding down. I'm not sure what kind of contract Beane would offer KW is all so I think he could retire. If it's a team friendly deal maybe? KW being a wall member is a topic of it's own, a good one at that right there with Fred Jackson IMO.
wppete Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 Only guys I hope stay on this list are: Jordan Matthews EJ Gaines Mike Tolbert hope they let the rest walk.
Real McClappy Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 11 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: No, Benjamin was brought here, by the guys that drafted him because clearly they aren’t happy with the WRs. You don’t give up a 3rd if you like the way that the unit is playing. I think that Benjamin is a borderline #1 but certainly our #1. He’s a pretty good football player. I still dont get “top notch #2” when he was 4 on his previous depth chart and is now probably 3 here? Emmanuel Sanders is a top notch #2. Personally I don’t think Matthews is good at all but that’s besides the point of this. It’s more about cap allocation. I don’t see the Bills paying roughly $20M a year to Benjamin and Matthews. It’s one or the other and Benjamin is a guy that they scouted and drafted. Sanders has averaged about 140 targets the prior 3 years with Denver and hitting Denver for a 10mill cap hit this year and 11mill next. Sanders has 25 catches this year, do you see a problem? Matthews is on pace for like 60 here in Buffalo. With that, there really is no reason to give him a "Woods" type contract. There is no reason to pay any high tier WR here in Buffalo if we will not throw them the friggin ball. I will agree with you then as I don't want to turn this into a QB thread.
Wayne Cubed Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 Just now, Real McCoy said: Sanders has averaged about 140 targets the prior 3 years with Denver and hitting Denver for a 10mill cap hit this year and 11mill next. Sanders has 25 catches this year, do you see a problem? Matthews is on pace for like 60 here in Buffalo. With that, there really is no reason to give him a "Woods" type contract. There is no reason to pay any high tier WR here in Buffalo if we will not throw them the friggin ball. I will agree with you then as I don't want to turn this into a QB thread. Well of course there is no reason to give home a “Woods type contract” but you can bet both he and his agent will be asking for at least that based on previous production. The Woods contract will be the starting point for Matthews, at least. And there is a reason to pay a WR if they intend on drafting a QB, they just won’t be paying for both KB and Matthews when they can draft one and go cheap for 4 years. 1
Real McClappy Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 3 minutes ago, Wayne Cubed said: Well of course there is no reason to give home a “Woods type contract” but you can bet both he and his agent will be asking for at least that based on previous production. The Woods contract will be the starting point for Matthews, at least. And there is a reason to pay a WR if they intend on drafting a QB, they just won’t be paying for both KB and Matthews when they can draft one and go cheap for 4 years. I can agree with that as long as Zay turns into what we all think he should be here. I really have no clue what this FO will do with the QB position next draft. I guess we need to see what the next 8 games brings for us. To the main topic of this thread listed as cap dilemma? Do we even have a cap dilemma? I think we are in great shape actually.
Shaw66 Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 1 hour ago, JohnC said: There shouldn't be much fretting about the cap situation because there is now cap space, and next year with the added high picks there should be a number of cheap draftees who make the roster. What is just as important as the actual cap is the distribution of the cap throughout the roster. Allowing Gilmore to leave, dealing Watkins and trading Dareus are not just player transactions but also cap transactions that create better balance in that area. What seems apparent to me is that this new regime is more strategic in handling the cap than Whaley was. The former GMo seemed to act in a more case by case basis without less consideration for the longer term ramifications. I agree with this. I don't think the point is that it's 21 or a projected 52. The u re in good shape. Getting through 2016 1nd 17 has been the cap problem and they're done with that. I also agree about the balance. I think particularly that these guys don't want to be spending their money outside the hashmarks. That's why Gilmore and Watkins are gone. Dareus is gone because he didn't fit.
WideRightRevenge Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 42 minutes ago, Real McCoy said: KB can be resigned with all that dead cap $ Dareus is holding down. I'm not sure what kind of contract Beane would offer KW is all so I think he could retire. If it's a team friendly deal maybe? KW being a wall member is a topic of it's own, a good one at that right there with Fred Jackson IMO. Agree McCoy ... Freddy and Kyle were cut from the same cloth ... great leaders and motors for the lean years and both should be celebrated for their contributions. 1
Shaw66 Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 26 minutes ago, Real McCoy said: Sanders has averaged about 140 targets the prior 3 years with Denver and hitting Denver for a 10mill cap hit this year and 11mill next. Sanders has 25 catches this year, do you see a problem? Matthews is on pace for like 60 here in Buffalo. With that, there really is no reason to give him a "Woods" type contract. There is no reason to pay any high tier WR here in Buffalo if we will not throw them the friggin ball. I will agree with you then as I don't want to turn this into a QB thread. This is interesting. I think in the second half of the season we will see more throwing and if so I will disagree with you. If the offense opens up successfully they'll keep Matthews AND Benjamin.
BarleyNY Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said: I don’t think that accounts for the rollover or increase or obvious cap changes (ie you save $2M by dumping Mills). $52M is the number that I saw not long ago. Now I think that Benjamin obviously takes a piece but the Bills have no cap constraints. You are correct, Kirby. Here is a link to Spotrac. Lots of useful info. Multi-year breakdown tab is a nice snapshot of who is signed for how long at how much. The salary cap tab can be changed to 2018 for a good look there too. http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/yearly/cap/
Kirby Jackson Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 (edited) 42 minutes ago, Real McCoy said: Sanders has averaged about 140 targets the prior 3 years with Denver and hitting Denver for a 10mill cap hit this year and 11mill next. Sanders has 25 catches this year, do you see a problem? Matthews is on pace for like 60 here in Buffalo. With that, there really is no reason to give him a "Woods" type contract. There is no reason to pay any high tier WR here in Buffalo if we will not throw them the friggin ball. I will agree with you then as I don't want to turn this into a QB thread. I do see a problem. I wouldn’t pay a guy getting 12% of the targets $8M. This holds especially true as a possession guy. If 12% of the targets were going to a big play guy that may be different. Matthews has played in 7 of the 8 games and has 28 targets. By comparison Thompson has 15 in 3 games, Clay has 28 in 5 games, Zay 44 in 8 games and Shady 47 in 8 games. Edited November 5, 2017 by Kirby Jackson
The Now Moment Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 Is 33 million before dead cap or after dead cap is taken out? We have 18 million in dead cap next year.
Recommended Posts