Isaiah Simmons might be an answer for the Bills at MLB

[GunnerBill]

On 5/8/2023 at 9:13 PM, newcam2012 said:

Not really. The best talent coming out of high school will almost always choose the big powerhouse schools. It's just the way it goes. It will likely be even more true with the new college changes. 

 

Of course, that doesn't mean that NFL players can't come from smaller less known schools. You pointed out some of many. 

 

Similarly, the big names and big schools doesn't equate to a lock as a good player in the NFL.

 

My point is Williams has a lot to prove and his outlook to be a stud ad you claimed are questionable. Some indicators against that are smaller football school, 3rd round pick, on the smaller side. 

 

I'm willing to bet you and many others never even heard of the guy prior to the Bills drafting him. Now, suddenly he's being proclaimed as a stud. Come on man let's wait and see if he even sees the field. 

 

Really? He was much discussed on these boards in the run up to the draft, especially in Jan and Feb when we were first talking linebackers. 

 

Now if you had made that point last year about Bernard it would have been true. I'd never heard of him and I spend about 200 hours a year watching draft prospects. 

 

I think Williams can play and will play early in his career. Whether he can play the MIKE in the NFL is a different question. The reason he was a 3rd round pick rather than going earlier, is in my view, because most teams see him as a WILL and you don't spend 1st and 2d round picks on WILL linebackers. So positional value comes into play. 

[Thurman#1]

1 minute ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

 

You repeat the same "nonsense" because you don't adapt.   

 

That's why you keep making the same mistakes wrt your rationale as well.

 

As for the math.........why do you keep doing this to yourself?   The Bills signed Von Miller to a 6 year $120M contract last offseason with $51M guaranteed.    His first year cap hit was just $5M.   Year 2?   Only $7.9M.  To say that the Bills couldn't have fit a young player under the cap who might actually play out a 6 year deal is.........what's the word I'm looking for?    Well,  let's just say it's clearly wrong. 

 

 

Your facts don't show I'm wrong. Not even close. Your assumption that they would, or for that matter could give Tremaine a Von Miller contract just because they gave one to Von Miller is just dumb.

 

Yeah, the Bills signed Von to a very expensive contract, backloaded. And that is a very large part of the reason why they can't continue to do so. Backloading Von's contract means they had to kick a huge can down the road. It means they're going to have to deal with larger and larger cap hits and dead cap numbers for him as the years pass and he gets older. In 2024, when he is 35, his cap hit will be $23M and his dead cap will be $32M. 

 

Beane has made it very clear that he doesn't want to do that regularly. It's inconsistent with his goal of being consistently competitive. He'll give an occasional contract like that every few years for a guy they think could be the one to take us over the top. A Von Miller. But he doesn't make a habit of that, and especially not when they're in an even worse salary cap situation than they were when they gave that contract to Von.

 

Sorry, you're still spouting nonsense. You're an all-in down-the-road can kicker, and Beane isn't. He has to worry about the future, having committed himself to his goal of being consistently competitive.

 

Who's right about what Beane thinks? You? Or Beane? This isn't even a slightly difficult decision to parse. The fact that you continue to fight it says more about you than about the situation.

 

Beane's said it a million times already. You don't want to believe it. It doesn't fit your narrative. But the thing is, your narrative and how well reality fits it simply doesn't have any logical force as far as understanding what Beane is doing and why. You want to understand why Beane does something? That's what you look at. Beane will tell you. He's perfectly comfortable avoiding addressing issues he doesn't want to talk about. Or throwing out cliches, or changing the subject. But he isn't Jerry Jones. If it doesn't hurt him, he'll tell you what he thinks. And it wouldn't have hurt him to say they've got other priorities or they wanted to go in a different direction.

 

He's said this a million times. They wanted him. They couldn't afford him with their cap situation. Again and again, and yet again a few days ago, "Unfortunately the business gets in the way, Tremaine goes and signs an $18M a year deal in Chicago. Happy for him. Sad for us."

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxSPrtM0cwo

 

 

[FireChans]

46 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

 

You repeat the same "nonsense" because you don't adapt.   

 

That's why you keep making the same mistakes wrt your rationale as well.

 

As for the math.........why do you keep doing this to yourself?   The Bills signed Von Miller to a 6 year $120M contract last offseason with $51M guaranteed.    His first year cap hit was just $5M.   Year 2?   Only $7.9M.  To say that the Bills couldn't have fit a young player under the cap who might actually play out a 6 year deal is.........what's the word I'm looking for?    Well,  let's just say it's clearly wrong. 

Nooo the word is nonsense lol

 

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

 

More nonsense. And by the way, why would it hurt me to see that you're wrong again? Doesn't hurt at all. 

 

You're pretending that they only have two options, trashing guys or saying what he said. Pure bunk.

 

This is the go-to argument for anyone who disagrees with Beane, pretend that Beane didn't have a choice except insulting a player or lying. The minute you see this argument you know you're seeing someone backed into a corner.

 

Beane can find a million options between those two. Could've said, "we love him but for our scheme we can't pay an MLB that kind of money." Could've said, "We're changing the scheme a bit and we felt can't value the position as highly." Could've said just, "We wanted to give him a chance tos ee what he could get on the open market." Could've said a million things.

 

Unfortunately for anyone desperately trying to push your narrative, what he said was really really clear. They wanted him back. But they knew his value simply wasn't something they could afford in their current cap situation.

 

Beane is willing to say things that aren't all that complimentary. No, he won't insult or trash people. But he's said things like saying about the tight end room that defenses didn't come into games worrying about how to game-plan our TEs. There are a million ways to professionally say that we could've kept the guy but didn't feel it was the right move for us at this time, and Beane is a terrific communicator and has done this kind of thing again and again. 

If Beane truly thinks we couldn’t “afford” Edmunds with our cap situation, then he’s wrong too lol.

[GunnerBill]

6 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

Sorry, you're still spouting nonsense. You're an all-in down-the-road can kicker, and Beane isn't. He has to worry about the future, having committed himself to his goal of being consistently competitive.

 

 

But in a sense Thurman, that's @BADOLBILZ's point. It is a choice. It wasn't that the Bills couldn't afford Edmunds. It was that they didn't think he was worth the money given the model they are trying to run. But they don't have to run that model, that is a choice. It feels a bit like the 2017 tear down conversation. The Bills didn't have to tear the roster down in 2017. They were not in salary cap hell or whatever it was they spun it as at that time, most of the dead money was caused by moves Beane himself made. It was a choice. It was a right choice in my mind, even at the time, and the results bear that out. But there were other options available. 

[FireChans]

24 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But in a sense Thurman, that's @BADOLBILZ's point. It is a choice. It wasn't that the Bills couldn't afford Edmunds. It was that they didn't think he was worth the money given the model they are trying to run. But they don't have to run that model, that is a choice. It feels a bit like the 2017 tear down conversation. The Bills didn't have to tear the roster down in 2017. They were not in salary cap hell or whatever it was they spun it as at that time, most of the dead money was caused by moves Beane himself made. It was a choice. It was a right choice in my mind, even at the time, and the results bear that out. But there were other options available. 

Also a young "great" player is the exact kind of guy that MOST GM's will kick the can down the road for.

 

The reason why Von's backloaded contract matters is because we won't want to extend him 2-3 years from now to reduce his cap hit.  But for young guys, like Josh, Knox, White etc, you absolutely can, should and like everyone else in the NFL WOULD.

 

Milano is obviously paid less, but he had proven to be a great player in Buffalo and was young enough that Beane was confident when his cap hit creeped up, they would feel comfortable extending him to bring it back down. 

 

Now Tremaine is even younger than Milano, which theoretically makes it even EASIER to do the above.  You give Edmunds a 5-6 year deal, and in year 4 when it starts ballooning, you tack on another 3-4 years and bring it right back down. Beane didn't want to do that.  He easily could have. He CHOSE not to.

 

The Venn Diagram of people who were historically high on Tremaine Edmunds and also believe Beane absolutely loved him but just couldn't keep him is a circle.  And that's the real rub here tbh.

[NewEra]

And just like that, this thread is over.  
 

everyone would be wise to not waste your time entering the merry go round of despair this thread has turned into. 

[PrimeTime101]

2 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

 

You repeat the same "nonsense" because you don't adapt.   

 

That's why you keep making the same mistakes wrt your rationale as well.

 

As for the math.........why do you keep doing this to yourself?   The Bills signed Von Miller to a 6 year $120M contract last offseason with $51M guaranteed.    His first year cap hit was just $5M.   Year 2?   Only $7.9M.  To say that the Bills couldn't have fit a young player under the cap who might actually play out a 6 year deal is.........what's the word I'm looking for?    Well,  let's just say it's clearly wrong. 

Just read below

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Your facts don't show I'm wrong. Not even close. Your assumption that they would, or for that matter could give Tremaine a Von Miller contract just because they gave one to Von Miller is just dumb.

 

Yeah, the Bills signed Von to a very expensive contract, backloaded. And that is a very large part of the reason why they can't continue to do so. Backloading Von's contract means they had to kick a huge can down the road. It means they're going to have to deal with larger and larger cap hits and dead cap numbers for him as the years pass and he gets older. In 2024, when he is 35, his cap hit will be $23M and his dead cap will be $32M. 

 

Beane has made it very clear that he doesn't want to do that regularly. It's inconsistent with his goal of being consistently competitive. He'll give an occasional contract like that every few years for a guy they think could be the one to take us over the top. A Von Miller. But he doesn't make a habit of that, and especially not when they're in an even worse salary cap situation than they were when they gave that contract to Von.

 

Sorry, you're still spouting nonsense. You're an all-in down-the-road can kicker, and Beane isn't. He has to worry about the future, having committed himself to his goal of being consistently competitive.

 

Who's right about what Beane thinks? You? Or Beane? This isn't even a slightly difficult decision to parse. The fact that you continue to fight it says more about you than about the situation.

 

Beane's said it a million times already. You don't want to believe it. It doesn't fit your narrative. But the thing is, your narrative and how well reality fits it simply doesn't have any logical force as far as understanding what Beane is doing and why. You want to understand why Beane does something? That's what you look at. Beane will tell you. He's perfectly comfortable avoiding addressing issues he doesn't want to talk about. Or throwing out cliches, or changing the subject. But he isn't Jerry Jones. If it doesn't hurt him, he'll tell you what he thinks. And it wouldn't have hurt him to say they've got other priorities or they wanted to go in a different direction.

 

He's said this a million times. They wanted him. They couldn't afford him with their cap situation. Again and again, and yet again a few days ago, "Unfortunately the business gets in the way, Tremaine goes and signs an $18M a year deal in Chicago. Happy for him. Sad for us."

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxSPrtM0cwo

 

 

I am going to say this... If they WANTED Edmunds? They would have moved every dime they could to keep them. I personally do not think the value was there for what he got paid for. I will say the exact same thing for Davis NEXT year. IF you guys want to quote what Beane said PROPERLY... This is what he said quote un quote with link.

 

"

"I want to pay them all ... the ones that deserve it and have earned it," Beane said in a press conference. "and there's other guys here that I feel have earned it as well and ... there's guys that have left here since I've been here that I wanted to pay or our organization wanted to pay. But you can't pay them all.

"And that's hard, because I'm a people person. I love these guys and love them to death, but I also have a job to do and I have rules to follow from a cap standpoint and cash. And so unfortunately you have to say goodbye to someone.

https://www.si.com/nfl/bills/news/bills-brandon-beane-we-cant-pay-everyone

 

Now that being said... Beane is never going to come out in a pressor and say "Edmunds would not of been worth what we wanted to pay".  NEVER would any GM go out and say that... and @BADOLBILZ, You need to understand what Beane says is not always face value... There is more behind the scene's then you I or anyone else will ever know.  People need to stop quoting every word a GM says because that becomes Diabolical lol. 

 

I do believe that if they got the right contract numbers for him,, they would have moved heaven and earth to do it... 

 

in short... you are both right and you are both wrong.

 

Pay attention to the steak and not the peas  

***This is where I separate the 2 of you and you go your own way"*** ha ha. 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

@NewEra Keep up the good vibes bro

 

 

peace

4 minutes ago, NewEra said:

And just like that, this thread is over.  
 

everyone would be wise to not waste your time entering the merry go round of despair this thread has turned into. 

Pow.. Bing. Bang. Boom. Now it is  lol

Edited May 12, 2023 by PrimeTime101

[Brand J]

We’re still going back and forth with this? Guys, it’s really simple. If Beane wanted to keep Edmunds he would’ve found a way to make it work. And easily. Let’s say Edmunds had an impact on the field similar to or slightly less than a Micah Parsons. Do you think he’d still be a Bill today? Of course he would! And I suspect the deal would’ve been made before the Dawson Knox extension.

1 hour ago, SUNY_amherst said:

Beane overpaying for Dawson Knox cost us Tremaine Edmunds. He overpaid for Von Miller too but Miller is one of the best pass rushers in the modern NFL so I can't fault him for that.

 

Knox though? Average to below average TE so they had to draft another one. just poor roster management 

I think Knox is a slightly above average TE, not worth $13M/yr.

[GunnerBill]

5 hours ago, JayBaller10 said:

 

I think Knox is a slightly above average TE, not worth $13M/yr.

 

And you are wrong.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

On 5/6/2023 at 2:48 PM, gjv said:

 Isaiah Simmons has played the majority of his snaps at OLB and CB, but has played 508 snaps at MLB for the Cards. I would assume that's a sufficient sample size of plays at MLB for a reasonable evaluation. The Cardinals have declined his 5th-year option. Simmons' salary for next season is an affordable 1.4 mil with a cap hit of 6.5 mil. Should his 508 snaps at MLB show well, perhaps a trade for Simmons would be the Bill's answer at MLB for next season.?

 

We dont need a MLB.

 

We have TWO LBs who cover sideline to sideline

 

 

[BillsFanForever19]

11 minutes ago, Buffalo Barbarian said:

 

We dont need a MLB.

 

We have TWO LBs who cover sideline to sideline

 

Pretty sure the plan is to start whomever wins the battle between Bernard, Klein, Williams, and Dodson.

 

But that the "starter" won't be playing all downs. Because whoever the starter is won't be at the level of Edmunds, we'll probably be cycling in different MLB'ers to keep someone fresh there.

 

Also, I imagine there will be times when Milano is playing the MLB spot with someone like Williams alongside him at the OLB spot. And there will surely be packages with Rapp on the field further up the field.

 

The long and short of it is between the other players we have on the field, 3-4 guys that can be cycled in, the strength of the D-Line and the secondary, and creative scheming - I don't think MLB is remotely as big of a worry to the front office and coaching staff as it is fans.

[Brand J]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And you are wrong.

I was already proven right by this year’s TE deals. The Bills paid Knox $13M/yr last season, 7th highest paid TE in football. This offseason after the season he just had, with what amounts to limited production in regards to the contract, he wouldn’t have received the same coin elsewhere. If Gesicki and Schultz are worth $9M/yr, Knox isn’t worth $13M.

[GunnerBill]

8 hours ago, JayBaller10 said:

I was already proven right by this year’s TE deals. The Bills paid Knox $13M/yr last season, 7th highest paid TE in football. This offseason after the season he just had, with what amounts to limited production in regards to the contract, he wouldn’t have received the same coin elsewhere. If Gesicki and Schultz are worth $9M/yr, Knox isn’t worth $13M.

 

No, you were proven that based on production numbers he likely would not have got that money on the open market this offseason. I agree with that. But the "limited production" was not on Knox. It was on Dorsey and Josh. Knox is a top 10 tight end. He is paid 7th.... and Hock, Fant, Pitts and Engram are all either still on rookie deals or are currently tagged. When those deals work through he will be about 10th. I think that is right. And he can be higher. 

 

I repeat what I have said.... in the area of the field where the Bills use Knox like a top 10 tight end - the redzone - his production is top 5 in every metric. The only issue with the Dawson Knox deal is they paid him that money and then didn't throw him the ball. We know from pressers and from the game scripts it was a frustration for McDermott and Beane. Pressure is on for Dorsey. Especially now he has two big bodies to feed in the middle of the field.

[Brand J]

7 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

No, you were proven that based on production numbers he likely would not have got that money on the open market this offseason. I agree with that. But the "limited production" was not on Knox. It was on Dorsey and Josh. Knox is a top 10 tight end. He is paid 7th.... and Hock, Fant, Pitts and Engram are all either still on rookie deals or are currently tagged. When those deals work through he will be about 10th. I think that is right. And he can be higher. 

 

I repeat what I have said.... in the area of the field where the Bills use Knox like a top 10 tight end - the redzone - his production is top 5 in every metric. The only issue with the Dawson Knox deal is they paid him that money and then didn't throw him the ball. We know from pressers and from the game scripts it was a frustration for McDermott and Beane. Pressure is on for Dorsey. Especially now he has two big bodies to feed in the middle of the field.

And that’s why he’s not worth a contract that pays $13M/yr. I’ve gone on record saying Knox is open more often than not but he’s not getting the ball. That’s not on him, but when you pay a guy that much money and the production isn’t there, the value in the player doesn’t remain the same.
 

Beane went out and drafted Dalton Kincaid because “we didn’t have anybody like that on our roster.” If Knox produced like the 7th highest paid TE in football and was a threat on the field at all times, do you think Kincaid would’ve been the first pick in the draft? Of course not. I think Knox is open because opposing teams know the ball isn’t going his way, but if he became a regular target and had to beat defenders with savvy route running skills and an innate feel of where to be, I don’t think he gets it done consistently, hence my “slightly above average” comment. 

[GunnerBill]

23 minutes ago, JayBaller10 said:

And that’s why he’s not worth a contract that pays $13M/yr. I’ve gone on record saying Knox is open more often than not but he’s not getting the ball. That’s not on him, but when you pay a guy that much money and the production isn’t there, the value in the player doesn’t remain the same.
 

Beane went out and drafted Dalton Kincaid because “we didn’t have anybody like that on our roster.” If Knox produced like the 7th highest paid TE in football and was a threat on the field at all times, do you think Kincaid would’ve been the first pick in the draft? Of course not. I think Knox is open because opposing teams know the ball isn’t going his way, but if he became a regular target and had to beat defenders with savvy route running skills and an innate feel of where to be, I don’t think he gets it done consistently, hence my “slightly above average” comment. 

 

I don't agree. Knox is open 'cos he is good. Teams DO plan against him in the redzone and he still produces. The reason he doesn't produce elsewhere is on Dorsey and Allen. Nobody else.

 

[Brand J]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't agree. Knox is open 'cos he is good. Teams DO plan against him in the redzone and he still produces. The reason he doesn't produce elsewhere is on Dorsey and Allen. Nobody else.

 

If he was as good as you believe Beane wouldn’t have traded up to select another TE. Nothing we’ve seen from Knox so far suggests a large catch radius, sticky hands, savvy route running, and a great feel for how to get open. He’s running uncovered on most of the routes he’s open, not because he flat out beat his defender. Beane just told you why he traded up for Kincaid, a player who has the potential to display those traits I listed above. I’m not saying Knox is a below average player, never have, but I am saying he’s an overpaid player who doesn’t command respect on the field. 

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, JayBaller10 said:

If he was as good as you believe Beane wouldn’t have traded up to select another TE. Nothing we’ve seen from Knox so far suggests a large catch radius, sticky hands, savvy route running, and a great feel for how to get open. He’s running uncovered on most of the routes he’s open, not because he flat out beat his defender. Beane just told you why he traded up for Kincaid, a player who has the potential to display those traits I listed above. I’m not saying Knox is a below average player, never have, but I am saying he’s an overpaid player who doesn’t command respect on the field. 

 

But he does.

 

The reason Beane trade up to take Kincaid is he wanted an additonal weapon. Given Gabe is almost certainly not back after this year and Diggs's age that was a necessity anyway. He hasn't been brough in to play Knox's position.

 

Kincaid is a better route runner and has better hands than Knox, no dispute there. But he isn't really a tight end. Knox is very good. He is held back by the coaching and scheme.

[Brand J]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But he does.

 

The reason Beane trade up to take Kincaid is he wanted an additonal weapon. Given Gabe is almost certainly not back after this year and Diggs's age that was a necessity anyway. He hasn't been brough in to play Knox's position.

 

Kincaid is a better route runner and has better hands than Knox, no dispute there. But he isn't really a tight end. Knox is very good. He is held back by the coaching and scheme.

To a degree, yes, but the picture you paint suggests it’s everyone else’s fault - but Knox - for why he isn’t a huge factor in the passing game. And I’m simply saying he bears some responsibility in that. He doesn’t have those traits I listed, he isn’t someone who’s going to consistently win in his routes, so Beane went out and got a guy he believes who can. 

[GunnerBill]

6 minutes ago, JayBaller10 said:

To a degree, yes, but the picture you paint suggests it’s everyone else’s fault - but Knox - for why he isn’t a huge factor in the passing game. And I’m simply saying he bears some responsibility in that. He doesn’t have those traits I listed, he isn’t someone who’s going to consistently win in his routes, so Beane went out and got a guy he believes who can. 

 

But he does consistently get open. He isn't a big slot.... he isn't Andrews or Kelce... he doesn't have that sort of receiving skill, which Kincaid has the potential to be, but Knox could be as productive as TJ Hockenson. I don't think there is anything Hock has that Knox doesn't. Their skillsets are very similar. 

[Brand J]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But he does consistently get open. He isn't a big slot.... he isn't Andrews or Kelce... he doesn't have that sort of receiving skill, which Kincaid has the potential to be, but Knox could be as productive as TJ Hockenson. I don't think there is anything Hock has that Knox doesn't. Their skillsets are very similar. 

I haven’t studied Hock enough to have an informed opinion there, but I know Knox isn’t consistently open because he’s shaking defenders like a Travis Kelce or catching contested passes like a Mark Andrews. I know that. 

Knox is a very good athlete, but he doesn’t have the movement skills of a premiere pass catching TE, or “big slot.” Nor does he have the hands and savvy. And again, he’s not a bad player, but Beane should’ve waited on that extension.