Analysis of Bills FA so far (prior to new league year) - Put your links or thoughts here

[HappyDays]

This is by far the best FA period of Beane's tenure.

 

-Improved the interior DT depth with even cheaper options

-Brought on a legitimate TE2 with blocking ability

-Added a physical interior OLman

-Added an impact edge rusher, which immediately improves the biggest weakness on the team

 

He did all of this without giving up any draft picks. Nicely done.

[JaBu]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

I wasn't raising Megatron or Donald to show that you have to draft them.  I was responding to your statement that when you draft stars, you can't afford to pay them when they come off their rookie deals.   If you draft a guy who shows in four years that he's going to the Hall of Fame, you pay him.  

 

And, yes, it does matter whether you draft Megatron or get him in free agency, for several reasons.   First, as I just said, if you have a Megatron or Donald, he's not going to hit free agency.   

 

Second, most of the guys who do make it to free agency may have had some good-looking years, but they are not sure things like the superstars.  Or, they're superstars on their third contract, like JJ Watt.  So, there's risk in the free agent market.   If you pay big time and the guy craps out, it really hurts.  If you draft a sure-fire star and he craps out, he hasn't ruined your cap. 

 

Third, I wrote about this somewhere today.  If you're building for the long term, you're objective is to have the best talent you can have at the lowest price.  Drafting Josh Allen is much better than signing Josh Allen after his fifth year, because over the his career, if you've drafted him, the average cost per year of having him is lower.   It's kind of like buying Apple stock.   Sure, you can buy it today, at full market price, and it's probably going to be a good performer for you.   But some other guy bought it thirty years ago, or even twenty or ten years ago.   Today, both buyers are getting the same good performance out of Apple, but the guy who bought it early, at the lower price, has done better with his money.  

 

There's a lot of good sense built into how McBeane are doing it.   The only real question, I think, is the one that some people raise, which is whether all of this is based too much on averages - it's great to have the best averages over the long term, but averages don't win conference championship games - players do. 

 

Another part of this is that you know the players character and attitude after 4 years. You have a much more informed idea if the guy has just been playing for a contract (Jordan Phillips?) or if his attitude and intensity will remain after he gets paid (Josh, easy example). 

[Shaw66]

1 minute ago, JaBu said:

 

Another part of this is that you know the players character and attitude after 4 years. You have a much more informed idea if the guy has just been playing for a contract (Jordan Phillips?) or if his attitude and intensity will remain after he gets paid (Josh, easy example). 

The Bills are way past that in the draft.  They are sure about character and attitude before they make their selection.  They've been very clear about that. 

[Shaw66]

5 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

This is the opposing view, really well stated.  I will admit to being an adherent to the philosophy you describe, although I've been somewhat won over by McBeane, because I'm homer.  I remember our previous GM saying once you have room for six relatively big contracts.   He said the six contracts are for the QB, left tackle, premier edge, premier corner, and one more somewhere for each of the offense and defense.   It struck me as the right formula.   

 

Problem is that when I looked around, not all the winning franchises were built that way.   Certainly not the Patriots, and I was hard-pressed to find many others. 

 

What you say is a simpler, more flexible version of the same thing - you have to have a few big contracts, because you need a few premier players, not just the QB.  Makes sense to me.

 

Problem is, it's pretty clear that McBeane don't believe that's how you build long-term success.   They seem to be of the view that the way you win is (1) get your QB and (2) fill up your roster with a lot of good players (but not necessarily great).  They think greatness will emerge.  Your view is (1) get your QB, (2) get one or two other elite players at key positions, and (3) fill up your roster with a lot of good players.   The difference between the two approaches is that your step (2) limits the quality of your step (3) by eating $15 million of cap space a year.   I'm not arguing with it - I'm just examining what it means to go one way or the other.   

 

McBeane seem to think that they don't have to acquire elite guys in your step (2), that if they evaluate talent well and are strategic in their drafting, an elite guy or two will emerge from the draft.  So, what we see from Beane is stockpiling draft picks so he can trade up in round one when he sees a guy who is too good to have fallen, and so he can trade up in round 2 for more or less the same reason.   He's done it over and over.   

 

As I said earlier, as we watch this team mature, it will be interesting to see if Beane goes after an elite veteran in free agency here or there.   Hasn't done it yet. 

Hey, @Hapless:   We had this really good discussion a few hours ago, and I ended by saying this:   

Quote

As I said earlier, as we watch this team mature, it will be interesting to see if Beane goes after an elite veteran in free agency here or there.   Hasn't done it yet. 

Well, it only took a half a day to see whether Beane bought your approach to the problem!   Incredible