Clowney and the Texans are still far apart.

[White Linen]

I don't want our FO anywhere near the massive over payment that's about to occur with this player.

[KD in CA]

22 hours ago, Freddie's Dead said:

N'Keal, kids, N'Keal.  Enough with the K'Neal.  How can you love a guy when you can't spell his name correctly?

 

That's what I'd like to ask his mother.

[Richard Noggin]

On 4/15/2019 at 12:04 AM, Tipster19 said:

the Bills would probably have to bungle some of their remaining draft picks 

Bills draft trauma surfacing subconsciously a week before the draft...

[MAJBobby]

On 4/14/2019 at 9:48 PM, Tipster19 said:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/04/14/report-clowney-texans-not-close/

 

As the draft nears there still is anybody’s guess on what the Bills are going to do. I’m torn on what is more important for the Bills, offense or defense. Here’s a basic idea that I would like to see happen. Please feel free to tweak, edit or even disagree all together, your input is welcomed.

 

The Texans’ 1st rd pick is #23. What if the Bills would trade down with them and throw in next year’s 2nd rd pick and if needed maybe a later rd pick (5th rder?) in this year’s draft or next? The Texans and Clowney apparently are very far apart and even if they do resolve it Clowney’s contract would be expensive. Maybe both GMs, Brian Gaine and Brandon Beane can work something out fairly for both clubs.

 

Making a trade like could accomplish a few things for the Bills. First off they obtain a high impact DL who is still young but with NFL experience.

 

Secondly the Bills would be able to kill 2 birds with 1 stone, obtain a big time DL and also draft a high impact offensive rookie. If a trade like this could go down then I would love to see the Bills draft someone like WR K’Neal Harry. 

 

With their 2nd rd pick an OL like Erik McCoy would be a great addition and insurance. This opens up drafting a top talent at the TE position in the 3rd rd or even in a trade up. A RB could be in play as well. In the 3rd and/or 4th rd could still net a good talent for the DL or LB position. 

 

In any event I’m just offering up a rough draft/concept on acquiring big talent on both sides of the ball in the early part of the draft.

 

 

 

 

 

29 sacks in 5 years. Is NOT someone I want to give multiple assets for and a big time contract too 

 

never had had double digit sacks. 

 

9 last year. 9.5 year before. 

Edited April 16, 2019 by MAJBobby

[BrooklynBills]

4 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

 

29 sacks in 5 years. Is NOT someone I want to give multiple assets for and a big time contract too 

 

never had had double digit sacks. 

 

9 last year. 9.5 year before. 

 

Texans have bungled this player's development a bit though and he's been playing out of position most of his time there. IMO he'd be a perfect scheme fit here in McDermott's - a more athletic Greg Hardy(minus the automatic weapons).

 

Plus he can slot inside on 3rd down and would alleviate the need to draft a penetrating DT.

 

We have ample cap space this year and next.

 

A swap of firsts, plus whatever else to even it out still let's you get a premier offensive player in this draft

[njbuff]

2020 2nd round pick is what I would give up for Clowney or Clark.

 

Houston and Seattle have no leverage whatsoever, so a 2nd round pick is a pretty damn good return. 

[GunnerBill]

7 hours ago, BrooklynBills said:

 

Texans have bungled this player's development a bit though and he's been playing out of position most of his time there. IMO he'd be a perfect scheme fit here in McDermott's - a more athletic Greg Hardy(minus the automatic weapons).

 

Plus he can slot inside on 3rd down and would alleviate the need to draft a penetrating DT.

 

We have ample cap space this year and next.

 

A swap of firsts, plus whatever else to even it out still let's you get a premier offensive player in this draft

 

This is definitely true. I think people just looking at Clowney's sack numbers are missing the way he was utilised. He has been pretty outstanding the last two years and I do think he would be a good fit for the Bills' scheme (a better fit than for the Texans' scheme). 

 

My worry is not about the cost in a trade so much as it is the money Clowney will want to re-sign him. I am Clowney > Clark though if all things were equal money wise. I just think a proper evaluation of the tape looking beyond the sack number leads me to that. I like Clark too. He is a good player, but I still think Clowney in a system where he is and out rusher would be double digit sacks every single year. 

 

My preference remains to draft a guy and not trade for a vet. 

Edited April 16, 2019 by GunnerBill

[Alphadawg7]

22 minutes ago, njbuff said:

2020 2nd round pick is what I would give up for Clowney or Clark.

 

Houston and Seattle have no leverage whatsoever, so a 2nd round pick is a pretty damn good return. 

 

This is what puzzles me.  Why do people say they have no leverage?  Thats not really an accurate statement unless there just was no trade market for the players and Bills were only ones willing to talk.  All signs indicate that multiple teams are interested in both players, at least based on "rumors".  So both Seattle and Houston will use that competing interest as leverage to get the best trade value back.  

[njbuff]

Just now, Alphadawg7 said:

 

This is what puzzles me.  Why do people say they have no leverage?  Thats not really an accurate statement unless there just was no trade market for the players and Bills were only ones willing to talk.  All signs indicate that multiple teams are interested in both players, at least based on "rumors".  So both Seattle and Houston will use that competing interest as leverage to get the best trade value back.  

 

I really don't know if these two are in high demand, that's why I say that the teams have no leverage.Plus Seattle just gave big dollars to Wilson and are pressed up against the cap.

 

I am sure Seattle could work out a deal with Clark if they really wanted to, but it would still be a hard press un against their cap, no matter what.

 

Houston and Clownery seem like they will remain worlds apart on a contract....... and that's why I say Houston has no leverage in this case. I don't know Houston's cap situation, but signing Clowney to that mega-deal will not help it.

 

In the end, I think both players stay with their teams, but this speculation is fun.

[GreggTX]

We really need a DT more than a DE, but we definitely would be improved with Clowney. I don't know how much he's worth, but even if we did sign Clowney, we still need a big upgrade ar DT.

Edited April 16, 2019 by GreggTX

[John from Riverside]

Would rather have Clarke then Clowney

[Alphadawg7]

Just now, njbuff said:

 

I really don't know if these two are in high demand, that's why I say that the teams have no leverage.Plus Seattle just gave big dollars to Wilson and are pressed up against the cap.

 

I am sure Seattle could work out a deal with Clark if they really wanted to, but it would still be a hard press un against their cap, no matter what.

 

Houston and Clownery seem like they will remain worlds apart on a contract....... and that's why I say Houston has no leverage in this case. I don't know Houston's cap situation, but signing Clowney to that mega-deal will not help it.

 

In the end, I think both players stay with their teams, but this speculation is fun.

 

I get where you are coming from, and not even saying that its wrong.  I just think that there are multiple teams interested, and rumor reports suggest the same.  I just find it hard to believe that multiple teams wont be interested in these 2 players.  Both of these guys are better than Dee Ford (whose literally cost the Chiefs a SB birth by himself) and he had demand.  I just cant see there not being a trade market for them.  So each teams respective cap issues are not really going to be relevant when teams try and pry these guys away.  

[BADOLBILZ]

21 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

This is definitely true. I think people just looking at Clowney's sack numbers are missing the way he was utilised. He has been pretty outstanding the last two years and I do think he would be a good fit for the Bills' scheme (a better fit than for the Texans' scheme). 

 

My worry is not about the cost in a trade so much as it is the money Clowney will want to re-sign him. I am Clowney > Clark though if all things were equal money wise. I just think a proper evaluation of the tape looking beyond the sack number leads me to that. I like Clark too. He is a good player, but I still think Clowney in a system where he is and out rusher would be double digit sacks every single year. 

 

My preference remains to draft a guy and not trade for a vet. 

 

I tend to agree about your Clark/Clowney comparison.

 

One thing that you have to think about as a team builder.........if you believe in your ability to evaluate.........is already having 3 first rounders to renew over a two year period in 2021-2022.    3 guys that might cost you about $70M per year in cap space if they meet expectations.

 

So do you want to just plug and "pay" a double digit sack guy into the program for the next 4-5 years and try to accelerate your program.......or do you want to draft one at #9........very likely wait 2-3 years to get him up to that kind of speed.....and hopefully get a good year or two of top production from him and then have to sign a 4th 1st rounder to a fat contract over a 3 year span between 2021-2023?

 

Personally I think Clark and Clowney probably won't bring more than a second rounder in trade at this point............the contracts and the influx of pass rush prospects factor in the equation.........but to me the timing of acquiring and paying a vet NOW makes sense.    

[NoSaint]

22 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

He’s never even had double digit sacks.  He’s still living on hype from one tackle in college.  He’s a good player, but he’s not once played to the level people are making him out to be.  I can’t even fathom how you say he’s better than Clark to be honest.  I understand if you like him better as he doesn’t have the off field baggage, but Clark is not only a better player, he’s significantly better.

 

Im all for bringing Clowney to the Bills, not like the dude is a bust, he’s a solid to good player.  But I don’t want to over pay for mediocre to decent production.  

 

Clark on the other hand (in terms of football) is worth the money it would take and has played at that level for multiple years while still being just 25.  Clowney has never played at a level worthy of the contract he wants.  Not once.

 

I don’t know if Clark or Clowney will be of interest to Beane, but I do know this...only one is worth giving up both draft capital and paying the huge contract size...and it’s not Clowney. 

 

If Beane can Jedi mind trick Houston to trading us Clowney relatively cheap, then I don’t hate it.  But if we gave up important draft capital for a guy whose never had double digit sacks despite playing next to Watt most his career and then payed him a gazillion dollars on top of that, then I would be pretty disappointed.

If you wipe clowneys first year Clark has 6 more sacks but Clowney has 29 more tackles for loss. And has played on and off the ball a bunch. More tackles, more pass breakups. It’s not like he’s a slouch or mediocre. 

[Alphadawg7]

1 minute ago, NoSaint said:

If you wipe clowneys first year Clark has 6 more sacks but Clowney has 29 more tackles for loss. And has played on and off the ball a bunch. More tackles, more pass breakups. It’s not like he’s a slouch or mediocre. 

 

Totally agree with you on that.  I just feel like Clark has been more consistent and explosive.  

 

I have no issues getting Clowney, its just when you start weighing the cost of the draft picks and the contract size, it gets more risky when you are spending so much betting on a guy to be better than he has been.  So thats just what I am more comfortable with Clark.  

 

But dont get me wrong, I would be excited to still get Clowney

[NoSaint]

18 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

I tend to agree about your Clark/Clowney comparison.

 

One thing that you have to think about as a team builder.........if you believe in your ability to evaluate.........is already having 3 first rounders to renew over a two year period in 2021-2022.    3 guys that might cost you about $70M per year in cap space if they meet expectations.

 

So do you want to just plug and "pay" a double digit sack guy into the program for the next 4-5 years and try to accelerate your program.......or do you want to draft one at #9........very likely wait 2-3 years to get him up to that kind of speed.....and hopefully get a good year or two of top production from him and then have to sign a 4th 1st rounder to a fat contract over a 3 year span between 2021-2023?

 

Personally I think Clark and Clowney probably won't bring more than a second rounder in trade at this point............the contracts and the influx of pass rush prospects factor in the equation.........but to me the timing of acquiring and paying a vet NOW makes sense.    

 

We are very precisely in the window where we should add 1-2 splashy moves at game breaking positions that would normally seem silly but today are practical for being an instant contender. A high end pash rusher is a great example. Then hopefully josh Allen’s pay raise is absorbed as he transitions off the team but by then Allen is good enough to carry extra 

[The Senator]

On 4/15/2019 at 1:37 AM, Freddie's Dead said:

N'Keal, kids, N'Keal.  Enough with the K'Neal.  How can you love a guy when you can't spell his name correctly?

 

I have a hard time myself with kids that are cursed with unusual names by their parents.

 

Is it N’Keal, K’Neal, or Captain Tenille?

 

Remember Peerless Price?  His momma named him after a laundry truck that happened to drive by.

 

Anyway, I’d prefer the Bills go O-line/D-line, or D-line/O-line,  in rounds 1/2, and wait for Kelvin Harmon in round 3.

 

JMO

 

[Mat68]

23 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

He’s never even had double digit sacks.  He’s still living on hype from one tackle in college.  He’s a good player, but he’s not once played to the level people are making him out to be.  I can’t even fathom how you say he’s better than Clark to be honest.  I understand if you like him better as he doesn’t have the off field baggage, but Clark is not only a better player, he’s significantly better.

 

Im all for bringing Clowney to the Bills, not like the dude is a bust, he’s a solid to good player.  But I don’t want to over pay for mediocre to decent production.  

 

Clark on the other hand (in terms of football) is worth the money it would take and has played at that level for multiple years while still being just 25.  Clowney has never played at a level worthy of the contract he wants.  Not once.

 

I don’t know if Clark or Clowney will be of interest to Beane, but I do know this...only one is worth giving up both draft capital and paying the huge contract size...and it’s not Clowney. 

 

If Beane can Jedi mind trick Houston to trading us Clowney relatively cheap, then I don’t hate it.  But if we gave up important draft capital for a guy whose never had double digit sacks despite playing next to Watt most his career and then payed him a gazillion dollars on top of that, then I would be pretty disappointed.

Hes a legitimate impact defender.  He lives in the backfield whether its run or pass.  There is more to defense than accumulating sacks.  Over the past year and 1/2 alot of Watts sacks are do to Clowney.  I think you put him on the most favorable matchup on third down and he gets well over double digits.  

[aristocrat]

Second rounder next year and shaq. 

[Alphadawg7]

15 minutes ago, Mat68 said:

Hes a legitimate impact defender.  He lives in the backfield whether its run or pass.  There is more to defense than accumulating sacks.  Over the past year and 1/2 alot of Watts sacks are do to Clowney.  I think you put him on the most favorable matchup on third down and he gets well over double digits.  

 

Im not calling him a bust, said repeatedly he's a good player and I fully agree with you that there is more than "sacks".  But IMO Clark has been better and more consistent.  I just dont want to over pay for Clowney is all.  He's been good but not Elite...so paying elite money and premium picks for him seems too rich.  I dont want this to be another Sammy Watkins where we have to constantly make up reasons why he is one the highest paid and doesn't have the production to match.  

 

Now, if we can get Clowney for LESS than we can get Clark, I am all for it.  For instance I am all for swapping first round picks with Houston and even throwing in a day 3 pick or 2020 pick.  Where as I think its going to take a lot more to get Clark as Seattle wants to accumulate multiple picks in this draft. 

 

All my Clowney points are in direct comparison to Clark and the expected trade value of each.  I just dont want to pay premium draft capital and big dollars to a guy whose production you have to explain for not being higher.  But if the biggest cost to us is a swap of firsts, then I am all for trading for Clowney.

 

And despite my criticisms of his resume, I do still think Clowney is a good player and I would be quite excited to get him.  But I am being extra critical in comparison to Clark who I think has just been more consistently disruptive.  

Edited April 17, 2019 by Alphadawg7