Offseason Trade Prediction: We acquire Saquan

[GunnerBill]

14 minutes ago, streetkings01 said:

 

Fits our scheme? We don’t even have an OC so we don’t currently have a scheme.

 

We run the E-P until we don't. If we hire a stretch zone guy the running back is the last of our problems. 

[Charles Romes]

Saquon can’t even run anymore, as far as I can tell. 

[BADOLBILZ]

11 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

"None" is obviously not correct on leverage.  Players are widely known for preferring longer deals and loathing to play on a 1 yr contract, even if it's a lucrative 1 year contract.  I would assume that holds for Barkley who is historically not durable.  It would be in his interest to negotiate a longer deal even if the AAV is lower, provided the up front and guaranteed money is at least as good. 

 

But they certainly have a lot less leverage when he can just sit there until he likes what he sees and collect $8M

 

 

Well when I say "none" with regard to leverage...........I am taking into account that if he were a street free agent who played like he did last year he wouldn't even have his pick of "futures" contracts.    He was THAT bad.   And the Giants are on the hook for $7.22M for him next year...........not an unguaranteed league minimum deal.

 

Obviously.........it should be off the table to pay him anything close to $7M per year on a long term deal at this point.  Guaranteeing another cent over the $7.22M would be hard to justify.

 

He has "proven" by his work in 2022 that he might not even be good enough to devote a roster spot in 2023,  let alone long term money.

 

A new deal right now should be a total non-starter from the Giants perspective..........and not in the best interest of Barkley and his agent unless they actually think he's going to flame out of the league next season.  

 

So if you want to say that "in the land of make believe this is a chance" then that's your choice.   It's a ridiculous take though. 

10 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

We run the E-P until we don't. If we hire a stretch zone guy the running back is the last of our problems. 

 

 

Yeah a couple more weeks of outside zone and Daboll wouldn't have had a new HC job and might not even have stayed in Buffalo.

 

The OL just could not execute it............it's a big ask athletically...........they weren't up to making that outside step and still getting into their blocks quickly.

 

So it would require another set of changes on the OL.

 

If they did that they'd be lucky to afford the best oft-injured outside zone runner available........Raheem Mostert.

[njbuff]

There are some good backs in this year's draft.

 

The Bills can get their hands on a good one in the mid rounds.

 

Why waste time with Barkley.

 

Financially it isn't worthwhile for the Bills.

 

I don't say this to bash the OP as he seems like a cool dude, but I don't think Barkley is realistic for many reasons. 

 

If the Bills were to make a splash in this offseason, I say go after Godwin or Chark and trade for Mack and try to juggle contracts to fill out the cap, then worry about the draft.

Edited January 29, 2022 by njbuff

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Well when I say "none" with regard to leverage...........I am taking into account that if he were a street free agent who played like he did last year he wouldn't even have his pick of "futures" contracts.    He was THAT bad.   And the Giants are on the hook for $7.22M for him next year...........not an unguaranteed league minimum deal.

 

Obviously.........it should be off the table to pay him anything close to $7M per year on a long term deal at this point.  Guaranteeing another cent over the $7.22M would be hard to justify.

 

He has "proven" by his work in 2022 that he might not even be good enough to devote a roster spot in 2023,  let alone long term money.

 

A new deal right now should be a total non-starter from the Giants perspective..........and not in the best interest of Barkley and his agent unless they actually think he's going to flame out of the league next season.  

 

So if you want to say that "in the land of make believe this is a chance" then that's your choice.   It's a ridiculous take though. 

 

I'll respond because I've been thinking about this and don't mind typing it into words, even though it seems unlikely to result in meaningful discourse here.

 

I'm not arguing for us to trade for Barkley, in case that got confused.  I don't see that as a good use of Bills trade capitol or cap $$

 

There's leverage on both sides.  That's all I'm saying.  The Giants leverage is that it's better for Barkley's career prospects long-term to play with a better team this year or make himself more tradeable if he wants out.  Barkley's leverage is that if they want his help in making him more tradeable or dropping their cap, there needs to be something in it for him.

Yeah, if Barkley wants to be paid close to $7M/yr on a new deal, he doesn't have leverage for that.

 

 

 

 

[Alphadawg7]

Poll is close, nearly split right now.  

 

68 against, 62 for in various trade scenarios. 

[Alphadawg7]

46 minutes ago, njbuff said:

There are some good backs in this year's draft.

 

The Bills can get their hands on a good one in the mid rounds.

 

Why waste time with Barkley.

 

Financially it isn't worthwhile for the Bills.

 

I don't say this to bash the OP as he seems like a cool dude, but I don't think Barkley is realistic for many reasons. 

 

If the Bills were to make a splash in this offseason, I say go after Godwin or Chark and trade for Mack and try to juggle contracts to fill out the cap, then worry about the draft.

 
Draft for sure could be where add a playmaker at RB too.  No argument here.

 

But Mack would cost $17M against the cap in the best case scenario.  I don’t think it’s plausible.  
 

Bucs also said their top priority will be Godwin.  Now no guarantee he wants to go back without a QB to there, but he will not be cheap, and can’t see us paying Godwin what he will get elsewhere when we already have Diggs and Davis.  We won’t have the cap space for that, he’s going to be in double digits annually and Allens new contract kicks in next year.

 

So I think both have almost no plausible path to get here.  I say almost cuz Beane is a wizard, so you never know, but I seems highly unlikely to me.

Edited January 29, 2022 by Alphadawg7

[TampaBillsJunkie]

The fact is that we need a RB who can make plays when we need him. When teams decide to stop the run, this guy still gets his yards.  Taylor, Henry. No matter what you do, you can not stop them. Merely slow down the pain they bring to a defense.  I thought Moss would make people make business decisions. Well after this year, its the FO, not. the opposing defenders making them.  We don't need the superstar, but we need the dependable "I can pick up those yards at will" guy.

[Mikey]

Couple reasons why I don’t want Saquon Barkley on Buffalo Bills is that he’s adverse to blocking and he’s not a drop the head grind guy. Sure. The guy is strong and fast with great size but doesn’t play up to his size, in my opinion. The guy is also injury prone. Perhaps the injury problems are linked to the way he works out and that can be fixed but being adverse to blocking are an issue. I didn’t understand how NY Giants choose him 2nd overall.

[John from Riverside]

Personally I dont see it but I participated.  Moss and a 4th.

 

The injuries of course concern me BUT we would have motor

[streetkings01]

1 hour ago, Charles Romes said:

Saquon can’t even run anymore, as far as I can tell. 

Comeback player of the year 2022 in Buffalo? 🤦🏽‍♂️

[purple haze]

1 hour ago, streetkings01 said:

Gabe is our #2

I never said he wasn’t.  However, don’t the Bills run 3 and 4 receiver sets?
 

 Bease isn’t guaranteed to come back.  McKenzie is a FA.   Need a guy who can take short passes the distance.  The receivers I mentioned can do that.  And they’re contracts will just be coming up when Diggs probable extension is up.  Stay ready you don’t have to get ready.  Keep Allen’s weapons stocked.  Period.  

[streetkings01]

3 minutes ago, purple haze said:

I never said he wasn’t.  However, don’t the Bills run 3 and 4 receiver sets?
 

 Bease isn’t guaranteed to come back.  McKenzie is a FA.   Need a guy who can take short passes the distance.  The receivers I mentioned can do that.  And they’re contracts will just be coming up when Diggs probable extension is up.  Stay ready you don’t have to get ready.  Keep Allen’s weapons stocked.  Period.  

Who spends a 1st round pick on a #3 or #4 WR? That’s not smart drafting. Our top 3 receiving targets going into 2022 are Diggs, Davis and Knox……this offense needs oline(C, OG) upgrades and a game breaker at the RB position not wasting a 1st round pick on a WR that’ll see 3-4 targets per game.

Edited January 29, 2022 by streetkings01

[purple haze]

Just now, streetkings01 said:

Who spends a 1st round pick on a #3 or #4 WR? That’s not smart drafting.

A #3 for the Bills is a starter in their offense.   And the answer is a team that could use high end talent to go along with their high end QB.

[Big Blitz]

No.

 

Draft one or trade for Kamara 

[streetkings01]

1 minute ago, purple haze said:

A #3 for the Bills is a starter in their offense.   And the answer is a team that could use high end talent to go along with their high end QB.

The #3 target in this offense is Knox. There’s a reason the emergence of Knox caused the regression of Beasley. 1st round pick should be #1 pass rusher, or #2 CB, or #3 interior lineman or #4 homerun threat RB…..in that order. We can find a #3/slot WR on the cheap anywhere, why waste a 1st round pick on one?

Sleeper 1st round pick…….stud do it all LB.

[Big Turk]

No.  Your options are ridiculous. This is real life. Maybe those might work in Madden but nobody is making those deals.

Edited January 29, 2022 by Big Turk

[Alphadawg7]

12 minutes ago, streetkings01 said:

Who spends a 1st round pick on a #3 or #4 WR? That’s not smart drafting. Our top 3 receiving targets going into 2022 are Diggs, Davis and Knox……this offense needs oline(C, OG) upgrades and a game breaker at the RB position not wasting a 1st round pick on a WR that’ll see 3-4 targets per game.

Plus Beane already said he expects to have Cole back.  He’s only gone if there is a trade that make sense.  

[Turbo44]

Just now, Alphadawg7 said:

Plus Beane already said he expects to have Cole back.  He’s only gone if there is a trade that make sense.  

Not sure Cole is back? Beane’s statement wasn’t exactly a ringing endorsement, “Cole’s under contract so I expect him back.” My guess is he takes a pay cut to stay (possibly by adding a voidable year to his contract) or he’s cut. 

[streetkings01]

Just now, ScottLaw said:

How do you figure a first round WR is a waste on this team that is pass centric with an incredible QB, a WR in Diggs who’s contract is up in two years and the most likely departure of 3 of their 5 starting WRs this past season? 
 

 

A 1st round WR is a waste if he isn’t a better receiving threat than Knox or Davis. If he’s on par with them then we wasted a 1st round pick on a part time player. Drafting a WR in the 1st round only makes sense if he’s a can’t miss Randy Moss type guy.