Will DeAndre Hopkins be available this offseason?

[BillsFanForever19]

22 minutes ago, 2020 Our Year For Sure said:

If the contract is an issue then they shouldn't have signed Poyer, they shouldn't have signed Klein, and if they had to make a cut or two then so be it.

 

They've put trash talent around Josh Allen. It is more important to surround that young man with talent than it is to have the perfect defense that lets us down against KC/CIN anyway. 

 

The rules are set up for offense to win out and the Bills struggle against it rather than embracing it even while having the best quarterback in the world.

 

Klein, Phillips, Rapp, Lawson, Dodson, Matakevitch, Jackson, and Lewis costs combined equate to significantly less than just Hopkins' contract. And you can't just have holes all over your Defense to add 1 player. 

 

We had 24 FA's going into this year while being 18.5 over the cap and having 6 Draft Picks. Those holes needed to be filled. You can't get Hopkins and then half a roster and be good. That's not how personnel works.

 

9 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said:

the dream is still alive
 

Diggs

Hopkins

Davis

JSN / Flowers / Addison / Hyatt

 

Harty

Sherfield

Shakir

 

Hopkins saying he'd like to be here changes nothing when it comes to Beane's stance on being able to fiscally do it.

 

And again, if we were able to get Hopkins, we wouldn't be drafting any of those top WR's. Likewise, if we drafted one of those guys, we won't be trading for Hopkins.

 

Diggs + Hopkins + a top Draft pick doesn't make sense. If we had Diggs, Hopkins, and Davis - the top picks would be used elsewhere.

Edited April 17, 2023 by BillsFanForever19

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

1 minute ago, Virgil said:

Good thing there’s an ignore feature.  Don’t let me get in your way 

Likewise. Thanks for playing.

3 minutes ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

Klein, Phillips, Rapp, Lawson, Dodson, Matakevitch, Jackson, and Lewis costs combined equate to significantly less than just Hopkins' contract. And you can't just have holes all over your Defense to add 1 player. 

 

We had 24 FA's going into this year while being 18.5 over the cap and having 6 Draft Picks. Those holes needed to be filled. You can't get Hopkins and then half a roster and be good. That's not how personnel works.

 

Hopkins saying he'd like to be here changes nothing when it comes to Beane's stance on being able to fiscally do it.

 

And again, if we were able to get Hopkins, we wouldn't be drafting any of those top WR's. Likewise, if we drafted one of those guys, we won't be trading for Hopkins. 

The situation is not as dire as you're making it out to be. The Bills have been in contact with the Cardinals because they know it's possible to make it work. The cap tends to be flexible. Someone upthread said we can get him for a cap number of 4m this year. I don't know all the details because I find that part boring but there tends to be ways of making it work. For years the Saints were "over the cap" and still would go ahead and make significant additions.

[BillsFanForever19]

10 minutes ago, 2020 Our Year For Sure said:

Likewise. Thanks for playing.

The situation is not as dire as you're making it out to be. The Bills have been in contact with the Cardinals because they know it's possible to make it work. The cap tends to be flexible. Someone upthread said we can get him for a cap number of 4m this year. I don't know all the details because I find that part boring but there tends to be ways of making it work. For years the Saints were "over the cap" and still would go ahead and make significant additions.

 

They WERE in contact. Since then Beane has downplayed their involvement, Tim Graham followed up with a report a few hours after that saying we wouldn't be trading for him "barring significant changes", and a couple days ago Adam Schefter outwardly said on NFL Live "No, the Bills are not trading for Hopkins".

 

As for dropping his number, it is possible. But it includes adding 3 dummy years to his contract. Meaning we would be taking cap hits for 3 years after his contract ended with us. Which is not Beane's MO.

 

And yes, we can come up with money. But we've already done a TON of that, freeing up 43.5 million. After starting at -18.5 over, that came to around 25 million dollars - of which we had to use all of it to fill our holes. Right now, we have enough to sign our Draft Picks and that's it. 

 

Coming up with enough to cover a massive Hopkins contract, which goes beyond this season (and we're over the cap next year as well) isn't as simple as you like to think it is.

Edited April 17, 2023 by BillsFanForever19

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

2 minutes ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

They WERE in contact. Since then Beane has downplayed their involvement, Tim Graham followed up with a report a few hours after that saying we wouldn't be trading for him "barring significant changes", and a couple days ago Adam Schefter outwardly said on NFL Live "No, the Bills are not trading for Hopkins".

 

As for dropping his number, it is possible. But it includes adding 3 dummy years to his contract. Meaning we would be taking cap hits for 3 years after his contract ended with us. Which is not Beane's MO.

 

And yes, we can come up with money. But we've already done a TON of that, freeing up 43.5 million. After starting at -18.5 over, that came to around 25 million dollars - of which we had to use all of it to fill our holes. Right now, we have enough to sign our Draft Picks and that's it. 

 

Coming up with enough to cover a massive Hopkins contract, which goes beyond this season (and we're over the cap next year as well) isn't as simple as you like to think it is.

So add the dummy years, the cap is going to be rising extravagantly. 

 

There are reports they're not trading for him but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be.

 

At the same time I would not be the least bit surprised to learn that he prefers to play for the defending World Champions and their future HOF offensive coach.

[Warriorspikes51]

3 minutes ago, 2020 Our Year For Sure said:

So add the dummy years, the cap is going to be rising extravagantly. 

 

There are reports they're not trading for him but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be.

 

At the same time I would not be the least bit surprised to learn that he prefers to play for the defending World Champions and their future HOF offensive coach.

based on the video of him, the Bills are his preferred destination. His reaction to the Chiefs wasn’t quite as good….that’s what I saw anyway

 

yes I would add the dummy years. Including adding 1 actual year to a reworked deal so he’s here for 3 seasons.

 

The Bills can still free up 15-20 million in space if they want to make those moves

Edited April 17, 2023 by Warriorspikes51

[HappyDays]

5 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

Diggs + Hopkins + a top Draft pick doesn't make sense. If we had Diggs, Hopkins, and Davis - the top picks would be used elsewhere.

 

Or if we take say Hyatt or Addison in the 1st round and also obtain Hopkins, we could immediately trade Davis for maybe a 3rd round pick. Davis's presence on the roster shouldn't stop the Bills from doing anything at the position, even multiple high value investments. Replacing Davis and getting value for him now before he inevitably walks next offseason is arguably the best possible outcome.

 

Edited April 17, 2023 by HappyDays

[papazoid]

but, but, but....Tim Graham said:

@ByTimGraham

Barring a significant development, the Bills are not trading for DeAndre Hopkins.

12:34 AM · Mar 28, 2023

 

would dhop clearly making his preferred destination(s) known qualify as a "significant development" ?

 

would dhop getting CUT be a significant development ?

 

would AZ lowering their asking price be a significant development ?

 

would tim graham being used like a tool by Beane to spread info to improve our chances be a significant development ? 

 

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

12 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

Klein, Phillips, Rapp, Lawson, Dodson, Matakevitch, Jackson, and Lewis costs combined equate to significantly less than just Hopkins' contract. And you can't just have holes all over your Defense to add 1 player. 

 

We had 24 FA's going into this year while being 18.5 over the cap and having 6 Draft Picks. Those holes needed to be filled. You can't get Hopkins and then half a roster and be good. That's not how personnel works.

 

 

Hopkins saying he'd like to be here changes nothing when it comes to Beane's stance on being able to fiscally do it.

 

And again, if we were able to get Hopkins, we wouldn't be drafting any of those top WR's. Likewise, if we drafted one of those guys, we won't be trading for Hopkins.

 

Diggs + Hopkins + a top Draft pick doesn't make sense. If we had Diggs, Hopkins, and Davis - the top picks would be used elsewhere.

 

Even without Hopkins, not sure WR is a bigger hole right now overall than MLB unless as some comments have been made they plan to play with Rapp and Johnson both on the field and just on LB, Milano.

 

12 hours ago, 2020 Our Year For Sure said:

Likewise. Thanks for playing.

The situation is not as dire as you're making it out to be. The Bills have been in contact with the Cardinals because they know it's possible to make it work. The cap tends to be flexible. Someone upthread said we can get him for a cap number of 4m this year. I don't know all the details because I find that part boring but there tends to be ways of making it work. For years the Saints were "over the cap" and still would go ahead and make significant additions.

 

Yes they can make the numbers work out if they want to.  But it's a question of how much they want kick down the road for a player who last season was suspended BTW so has to be some concern as to if he'll be a repeat offender.  Add to that they've already kicked a number of other contracts down the road too.

 

But you lead with they shouldn't have signed all these other mid tier players, but as BillsFan stated, they had 24 FA so need to sign someone.  Adding instead 24 FA rookies or even half than number isn't going to make this team better overall as taking on the Hopkins contract even close to the existing numbers likely would require that.

 

Plus we also don't know what KC is actually asking.  Can't recall who it was, but 4 or 5 weeks ago, maybe it was even before free agency started some other WR was traded and the comment was based on that, the Cardinals price also will go down.  But maybe the Cardinals don't see it that way.

[Bruffalo]

Get it done Beane.  Then you and McD can continue your fetish for high defensive draft picks and nobody will be unreasonably angry with you. 

[Gregg]

10 more days until the draft. I suppose if this happens (I doubt it will) then it will happen on the weekend of the draft.

[BillsShredder83]

17 hours ago, KDIGGZ said:

I trust this source

 

 

 

 

It's blank, I'm assuming you're joking unless a link got taken down maybe

[K D]

10 minutes ago, BillsShredder83 said:

It's blank, I'm assuming you're joking unless a link got taken down maybe

The tweet must have been deleted. It was Hopkins tweeting "DeAndre Hopkins is not looking for a raise" to dispel the rumor that he wanted MORE money. I'm guessing he still expects his full current salary though

[JohnBonhamRocks]

13 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

Klein, Phillips, Rapp, Lawson, Dodson, Matakevitch, Jackson, and Lewis costs combined equate to significantly less than just Hopkins' contract. And you can't just have holes all over your Defense to add 1 player. 

 

We had 24 FA's going into this year while being 18.5 over the cap and having 6 Draft Picks. Those holes needed to be filled. You can't get Hopkins and then half a roster and be good. That's not how personnel works.

 

 

Hopkins saying he'd like to be here changes nothing when it comes to Beane's stance on being able to fiscally do it.

 

And again, if we were able to get Hopkins, we wouldn't be drafting any of those top WR's. Likewise, if we drafted one of those guys, we won't be trading for Hopkins.

 

Diggs + Hopkins + a top Draft pick doesn't make sense. If we had Diggs, Hopkins, and Davis - the top picks would be used elsewhere.

Only reason I push back on this is we have seen Beane double dip in the draft positionally at times. Drafting a top WR would still make sense because of Diggs’ and Hopkins’ age and Davis having 1 year left. 

[BillsFan2313]

19 hours ago, benderbender said:

Do we really want DeAndre? Or are we just scared of what other team will get him?

 

[BillsFanForever19]

17 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

Or if we take say Hyatt or Addison in the 1st round and also obtain Hopkins, we could immediately trade Davis for maybe a 3rd round pick. Davis's presence on the roster shouldn't stop the Bills from doing anything at the position, even multiple high value investments. Replacing Davis and getting value for him now before he inevitably walks next offseason is arguably the best possible outcome.

 

There's just no way. Even if Beane were as down on Davis as members of this board are (which he isn't), he wouldn't Draft someone in the 1st Round and then acquire DeAndre Hopkins. With Diggs and Hopkins under contract for at least 2 years - that 1st Round Pick would have a ceiling of 3rd WR for years to come (4th this season bc Davis won't be traded). With the holes and upgrades we need across multiple positions, he wouldn't spend a 1st Round pick on someone that would be behind 2-3 players.

 

It's all the rage to say trade so and so before they become a FA (like Edmunds last year, Oliver and Davis this year, etc) and we lose them and get nothing in return. But that's what happens, league wide. It's not like every year you see a rash of teams trading away people with 1 year left on their deal.

 

It's very rare and only really happens when it's a Superstar who they know they absolutely can't afford to pay their named price tag ahead of time. And even then, it generally requires being traded to somewhere that has been agreed upon with a long term contract extension worked out ahead of time (ie AJ Brown and Tyreek Hill).

 

Teams aren't interested in trading picks for a guy who may or may not be there after a year. And Beane likes Davis. He's talked about wanting to extend him and at the very least, surely wants to get that last year of him on his super cheap Rookie deal. That's the whole point of Draft picks. At the very least, you have them for 4 full years cheap. You don't trade them away after 3 because you may not be able to re-sign them. 

Edited April 17, 2023 by BillsFanForever19

[BillsFanForever19]

10 hours ago, papazoid said:

but, but, but....Tim Graham said:

@ByTimGraham

Barring a significant development, the Bills are not trading for DeAndre Hopkins.

12:34 AM · Mar 28, 2023

 

would dhop clearly making his preferred destination(s) known qualify as a "significant development" ?

 

No, it's not. Beane isn't going to say "He really likes us?! Well that changes everything, I don't care about the cost anymore!"

 

It's nice to know Hopkins would like to be a Bill. But it changes absolutely nothing when it comes to whether or not Beane believes he can afford to do it. And I'm sure him wanting to be here isn't news to Beane.

 

10 hours ago, papazoid said:

would dhop getting CUT be a significant development ?

 

Well considering the tweet is about us trading for him, yes, him being cut would be a significant development. Probably our best bet to land him. But even then, he'd have to want to be here badly enough to accept less than what is out there on the market for him. And even then, less may still be too much for us given our cap situation this year and next year.

 

10 hours ago, papazoid said:

would AZ lowering their asking price be a significant development ?

 

Yes, it would be. But I still think making a contract work for him and us is the biggest hurdle. Even if they're willing to give him away, Beane may have determined that we can't afford the contract.

 

And they'd not only have to drop their price, but drop it significantly. The current reported price is a "Christian McCaffrey type trade package". I'm sure our price is close to nothing because we have to take on the massive contract of a 31 Year Old WR. 

 

10 hours ago, papazoid said:

would tim graham being used like a tool by Beane to spread info to improve our chances be a significant development ? 

 

I'm not saying it's impossible that that's the case. But the idea that we've never been out and the tweet was posturing is best case scenario for hopeful fans wanting this to get done.

 

Just as likely, if not more, is that it's just fact. We made a call, looked into it, found it untenable, and let the feverous fans know - unless major changes occur it just ain't happening and we are out.

 

Juxtaposed with Beane's unnecessarily in depth downplay of how involved we were and the latest info on the situation from Adam Schefter - I tend to feel that the tweet was just fact and not posturing.

Edited April 17, 2023 by BillsFanForever19

[Warriorspikes51]

Hey Mr. Timmy Graham......is this enough of a "significant development" for your liking sir?   Hahahahahahaha

By the way, OBJ never actually said he wanted to be a Buffalo Bill to Von.  Von was just being hopeful recruiting him 

Edited April 18, 2023 by Warriorspikes51

[Alphadawg7]

20 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

There's just no way. Even if Beane were as down on Davis as members of this board are (which he isn't), he wouldn't Draft someone in the 1st Round and then acquire DeAndre Hopkins. With Diggs and Hopkins under contract for at least 2 years - that 1st Round Pick would have a ceiling of 3rd WR for years to come (4th this season bc Davis won't be traded). With the holes and upgrades we need across multiple positions, he wouldn't spend a 1st Round pick on someone that would be behind 2-3 players.

 

It's all the rage to say trade so and so before they become a FA (like Edmunds last year, Oliver and Davis this year, etc) and we lose them and get nothing in return. But that's what happens, league wide. It's not like every year you see a rash of teams trading away people with 1 year left on their deal.

 

It's very rare and only really happens when it's a Superstar who they know they absolutely can't afford to pay their named price tag ahead of time. And even then, it generally requires being traded to somewhere that has been agreed upon with a long term contract extension worked out ahead of time (ie AJ Brown and Tyreek Hill).

 

Teams aren't interested in trading picks for a guy who may or may not be there after a year. And Beane likes Davis. He's talked about wanting to extend him and at the very least, surely wants to get that last year of him on his super cheap Rookie deal. That's the whole point of Draft picks. At the very least, you have them for 4 full years cheap. You don't trade them away after 3 because you may not be able to re-sign them. 

 

While I do not expect us to both trade for Hopkins and draft a 1st round WR, I think your "why" here is incorrect.  It would be absolutely ideal to trade for Hopkins and also draft a first round WR.  Hopkins is more of a 2 year plan if we trade for him, and Diggs is only 6 months younger.  Those guys are not here for "years to come", in fact, I don't expect Diggs to be here more than 2 to 3 more years between age and contract size, and I would think the same for Hopkins.  Any young WR we took now would be groomed to take over as WR1 in the next 2-3 seasons, which is about the time WR's really start reaching their peak most often anyway.  

 

However, there is no way we trade for Hopkins and draft a WR in round 1 because we can't afford to invest that much into the position right now.  We have too many other needs to do both.  

 

If there is any chance we are still considering a Hopkins trade, I have a feeling Beane wants to see how the draft falls first.  If the reports are true that they love Addison, I have no doubt they would prefer to make a trade that landed them him with his rookie price for 5 years than make a big trade for Hopkins costing them money and draft capital for say 2 years.  Not to mention the increased risks with injury as players age.  

 

If the board falls in a way where Beane misses out on one of the WR's he covets, then I think he might take another look at Hopkins potentially and see if he can get a deal there he is comfortable with.  

[OldTimer1960]

15 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

While I do not expect us to both trade for Hopkins and draft a 1st round WR, I think your "why" here is incorrect.  It would be absolutely ideal to trade for Hopkins and also draft a first round WR.  Hopkins is more of a 2 year plan if we trade for him, and Diggs is only 6 months younger.  Those guys are not here for "years to come", in fact, I don't expect Diggs to be here more than 2 to 3 more years between age and contract size, and I would think the same for Hopkins.  Any young WR we took now would be groomed to take over as WR1 in the next 2-3 seasons, which is about the time WR's really start reaching their peak most often anyway.  

 

However, there is no way we trade for Hopkins and draft a WR in round 1 because we can't afford to invest that much into the position right now.  We have too many other needs to do both.  

 

If there is any chance we are still considering a Hopkins trade, I have a feeling Beane wants to see how the draft falls first.  If the reports are true that they love Addison, I have no doubt they would prefer to make a trade that landed them him with his rookie price for 5 years than make a big trade for Hopkins costing them money and draft capital for say 2 years.  Not to mention the increased risks with injury as players age.  

 

If the board falls in a way where Beane misses out on one of the WR's he covets, then I think he might take another look at Hopkins potentially and see if he can get a deal there he is comfortable with.  

The question (as it has always been): how would they fit $35M over next 2 years under cap for an aging, recently injured, recently suspended for ‘roids superstar.

 

Diggs’ cap hit next year is (I think) $28M which is untenable.  They will either have to extend him or cut him.   Neither good options and trade for Hopkins just compounds the cap issue.

Edited April 18, 2023 by OldTimer1960

[Warriorspikes51]