WR trade candidates, who do you want?

[HappyDays]

1 minute ago, JROC INTEL said:

You say Hopkins won’t be available, but what if they have an agreement set for the June 1st date beforehand? Do you think that’s a possibility? Hopkins would still be my choice. 
 

 

It's possible. I think the new regime in Tennessee will want to evaluate Levis though before holding a fire sale. The reason I think Metcalf makes sense is Seattle already knows they need a new QB in 2025. This is just a transition year for them. They need to do what the Bills did in 2017 and set themselves up as well as possible to get a QB next year.

[Einstein's Dog]

31 minutes ago, BigAl2526 said:

I'm not expecting a trade, so I am not into trying to speculate on what would be a good one.  I don't think Beane is interested either in spending a lot of future draft capital or in doing heavy duty contract renegotiations to fit a high priced trade acquisition under the cap.  A value acquisition is not going to make an appreciable difference.  in the passing offense.   Beane is hoping for some development and upside surprise in the receivers Buffalo has now, and is planning on having the ability to make major roster changes next off season if necessary.

You don't think a value WR acquisition would make a difference?  I have to strongly disagree, it's what the team is missing.  

 

A quality WR would allow the other players to do better.  

[Logic]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Not so much at WR.

 

Skepticism should be the order of the day there. 

 

 

The crazy thing is that it seemed like everyone was in agreement at the end of last season that the Bills needed to put more weapons around Josh Allen.

Fans, play-by-play guys, analysts, Bills beat reporters, national reporters, everyone. We could all see that "Josh is asked to do too much" had been an ongoing problem for two seasons. Even those of us who were slowest and most hesitant to reach this conclusion (a group in which I somewhat include myself) could finally see and agree with what seemed obvious: the Bills needed to get better at WR and surround Josh Allen with more talent.

And then what happened? Diggs got traded, Davis walked, and the Bills did nothing but add an average wide receiver and a bunch of also-ran JAGs in free agency and draft a guy in round two. That's it. They didn't double down on receiver in a loaded class, they didn't trade for one of the many veterans available, they didn't trade up for a slam dunk WR1 type. And at the end of the day, they appear to be entering 2024 with LESS talent around Josh Allen. They not only didn't IMPROVE the talent level around him, they actively got WORSE!

And yet somehow, invariably, many Bills fans seem okay with it. They seem to have developed amnesia about the conclusion (Josh needs weapons) with which we all agreed when the offseason began. They seem pathologically unwilling and/or unable to admit that the Bills seem to ONCE AGAIN be planning to ask Josh to carry the team on his back with a below average WR corps. It is deja vu all over again. It's like this front office never learns. It's absolutely maddening.

[Aussie Joe]

4 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

It's possible. I think the new regime in Tennessee will want to evaluate Levis though before holding a fire sale. The reason I think Metcalf makes sense is Seattle already knows they need a new QB in 2025. This is just a transition year for them. They need to do what the Bills did in 2017 and set themselves up as well as possible to get a QB next year.

So Metcalf would cost the Bills $13m to trade for this year I believe … once they get him on the roster they could sign a new deal  and reduce out his number in 2024 …don’t know Seattle’s cap situation and whether they might eat part of his deal? Thoughts?

[billsfan89]

I don't think a big WR trade is happening prior to the season unless something "stupidly good" falls into their laps which isn't happening. First off the fact that this team only drafted one WR means they probably like the options they have with Shakir, Samuel, Shorter and Hollins and felt that they were only in true need of one more WR. They are kicking the tires on Claypool, Hamler and Isabella as well. I simply think they likely want to see what they have before they go "all in" on a WR trade that may or may not be needed.

 

I think one of the reasons they traded one of their 5th round picks for Chicago's 4th in 2025 was to have additional ammo for a trade should they need it. I think it is very very likely that the Bills if the offense needs it make a deal for a WR in season. For one they can see just exactly what type of WR the offense needs and the cap math is a lot easier in season. 

 

I know fans can see the 10 million coming from Tre and think that the Bills can just use that in any trade they do make but the Bills right now on Spotrac are only listed at about 2.1 million in cap space for the top 51. I am not sure if that includes the rookie pool but generously assuming it does then the Bills will have about 12 million in space to play with. But they probably have to peel off 1 million for PS players and they typically like to have about 4 million for in season emergencies. So that 12 million gets knocked down to 7 million quickly and if the rookie pool is not factored into the current equation that's about another 2 million to factor in and that knocks you down to about 5 million in true money you have to actually use on an acquisition. 

 

Prior to the season starting 5 million in cap space is not a lot even if you want to back load a deal (and the Bills typically don't like to borrow from Peter to pay Paul frequently) but once you hit the trade deadline the Bills having 5 million to absorb in a trade becomes a lot easier to do without sacrificing as much short term. 

 

TLDR: Given the Bills somewhat tight cap situation and the fact that they only drafted one WR they probably like what they have for now and will make any major moves at WR around the trade deadline as it will be easier to absorb a bigger contract in season with their limited cap space. 

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, Einstein's Dog said:

You don't think a value WR acquisition would make a difference?  I have to strongly disagree, it's what the team is missing.  

 

A quality WR would allow the other players to do better.  

 

A value acquisition is not one of the guys you listed. He means like trading for a Nelson Agholor or a Treylon Burks or something. He isn't saying a trade for a top WR wouldn't make a difference. He is saying the Bills are not looking for that (I agree with him) regardless of whether we think they should be (and I do). 

[Jerboski]

If you can DK for decent value I don’t see why we wouldn’t 

[BullBuchanan]

None. We're broke and none of the players above represent value.

[Aussie Joe]

12 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

 

I know fans can see the 10 million coming from Tre and think that the Bills can just use that in any trade they do make but the Bills right now on Spotrac are only listed at about 2.1 million in cap space for the top 51. I am not sure if that includes the rookie pool but generously assuming it does then the Bills will have about 12 million in space to play with. But they probably have to peel off 1 million for PS players and they typically like to have about 4 million for in season emergencies. So that 12 million gets knocked down to 7 million quickly and if the rookie pool is not factored into the current equation that's about another 2 million to factor in and that knocks you down to about 5 million in true money you have to actually use on an acquisition. 

 

 

A cap hit of $5m in 2024 is achievable if the acquisition signs a new deal

[Einstein's Dog]

10 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:

So Metcalf would cost the Bills $13m to trade for this year I believe … once they get him on the roster they could sign a new deal  and reduce out his number in 2024 …don’t know Seattle’s cap situation and whether they might eat part of his deal? Thoughts?

Wow, now you're really pushing it - $13M for DK Metcalf is already a bargain.  That's one of the reasons he would cost significant draft capital.

 

And yes, pretty much during the trade they will renegotiate the contract.  And Metcalf's cap hit will be pretty much anything they want it to be - but of course the lower they go the more is pushed into future years.

[Aussie Joe]

Just now, Einstein's Dog said:

Wow, now you're really pushing it - $13M for DK Metcalf is already a bargain.  That's one of the reasons he would cost significant draft capital.

 

And yes, pretty much during the trade they will renegotiate the contract.  And Metcalf's cap hit will be pretty much anything they want it to be - but of course the lower they go the more is pushed into future years.

Pushing it ? I don’t see how it can work otherwise … they need to have the space available first to get him on the roster before reworking his deal …

 

Obviously you would need to up the trade compensation to entice Seattle to do the deal…

[That's No Moon]

4 hours ago, ganesh said:

None of the above.  I think the Bills are investing in Youth at the WR position with Kincaid, Coleman, Shakir,  Samuel and Claypool. I doubt they are going after a veteran WR...may be they will look for one with speed..but other than that this WR group is set for the next 2 years.

 

 

If they are relying on Claypool to be anything other than a bum they are going to be disappointed.

[Einstein's Dog]

1 minute ago, Aussie Joe said:

Pushing it ? I don’t see how it can work otherwise … they need to have the space available first to get him on the roster before reworking his deal …

 

Obviously you would need to up the trade compensation to entice Seattle to do the deal…

I said pushing it because Seattle will already be taking a dead cap hit.  Trading out Metcalf w a $13M salary is desirable for the Bills.

 

The Bills won't need any more available space once they have the $10M after June 1st plus the $3+ they already have.  Then after (or almost simultaneously) the restructure occurs - an extension that includes guarantees and a signing bonus.  They could bring Metcalf's salary down to something like $5M and have all the rest into the future - like Tenn did with DHops.

[Aussie Joe]

5 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

I said pushing it because Seattle will already be taking a dead cap hit.  Trading out Metcalf w a $13M salary is desirable for the Bills.

 

The Bills won't need any more available space once they have the $10M after June 1st plus the $3+ they already have.  Then after (or almost simultaneously) the restructure occurs - an extension that includes guarantees and a signing bonus.  They could bring Metcalf's salary down to something like $5M and have all the rest into the future - like Tenn did with DHops.

Get it done … what are you trading for him?

[Warriorspikes51]

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

It feels like a trade HAS to be coming. We have $10.2M more in cap space coming up after June 1. I know Beane likes to have a small cushion for in-season moves but he is not going to leave that much available cap space.

 

And Beane has been seemingly deliberate with how blatantly he's ignored the #2 outside WR. If I've said it once I've said it 100 times - Mack Hollins will not be our #2 outside WR. I just don't believe Beane would let that happen.

 

So reading the tea leaves I believe a plan is already in place and will come to fruition at the right time. Of the available names, Metcalf makes the most sense for someone we could trade for and have the trading team retain some of the cap hit so we could get him on the roster and then immediately extend him. Hopkins probably won't be available until the trade deadline. Aiyuk I believe we would not be able to afford to even place him on the roster to then extend him because his 5th year option is fully guaranteed.

 

Metcalf would be an absolute home run acquisition.

 

He's still 26 and IMO capable of being a Top 10 WR with Josh Allen.  Possibly even Top 5

He is the player out of those maybe available that brings massive size and speed.   

DK 

Keon

Samuel
Shakir

That is better than last season's WR group.  Great mix of physical attributes and skillsets as well

If DK gets traded and it's not to Buffalo......huge failure. 

Edited May 13 by Warriorspikes51

[Einstein's Dog]

5 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:

Get it done … what are you trading for him?

The extra second and extra fourth look good to me.

 

Don't know if that would do it but if it doesn't I would have to remind them that D Adams is available.

 

What do you think?

[Aussie Joe]

Just now, Einstein's Dog said:

The extra second and extra fourth look good to me.

 

Don't know if that would do it but if it doesn't I would have to remind them that D Adams is available.

 

What do you think?

Sounds good to me,,. Maybe the 2nd might get it done 

[Warriorspikes51]

6 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:

Get it done … what are you trading for him?

 

I'd offer our 2025 1st + 4th.   We'd still have two 2nd's
 

If they counter asking for more, I'd be OK with giving a 1st & 2nd

 

Worth it IMO 

1 minute ago, Einstein's Dog said:

The extra second and extra fourth look good to me.

 

Don't know if that would do it but if it doesn't I would have to remind them that D Adams is available.

 

What do you think?

 

Adams is 30 or 31.  DK is 26. 

[HappyDays]

43 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

I don't think a big WR trade is happening prior to the season unless something "stupidly good" falls into their laps which isn't happening. First off the fact that this team only drafted one WR means they probably like the options they have with Shakir, Samuel, Shorter and Hollins and felt that they were only in true need of one more WR. They are kicking the tires on Claypool, Hamler and Isabella as well. I simply think they likely want to see what they have before they go "all in" on a WR trade that may or may not be needed.

 

I think one of the reasons they traded one of their 5th round picks for Chicago's 4th in 2025 was to have additional ammo for a trade should they need it. I think it is very very likely that the Bills if the offense needs it make a deal for a WR in season. For one they can see just exactly what type of WR the offense needs and the cap math is a lot easier in season. 

 

I know fans can see the 10 million coming from Tre and think that the Bills can just use that in any trade they do make but the Bills right now on Spotrac are only listed at about 2.1 million in cap space for the top 51. I am not sure if that includes the rookie pool but generously assuming it does then the Bills will have about 12 million in space to play with. But they probably have to peel off 1 million for PS players and they typically like to have about 4 million for in season emergencies. So that 12 million gets knocked down to 7 million quickly and if the rookie pool is not factored into the current equation that's about another 2 million to factor in and that knocks you down to about 5 million in true money you have to actually use on an acquisition. 

 

Prior to the season starting 5 million in cap space is not a lot even if you want to back load a deal (and the Bills typically don't like to borrow from Peter to pay Paul frequently) but once you hit the trade deadline the Bills having 5 million to absorb in a trade becomes a lot easier to do without sacrificing as much short term. 

 

TLDR: Given the Bills somewhat tight cap situation and the fact that they only drafted one WR they probably like what they have for now and will make any major moves at WR around the trade deadline as it will be easier to absorb a bigger contract in season with their limited cap space. 

 

Waiting until the trade deadline certainly makes sense. Perhaps the plan is to see if Claypool or Hamler can turn their careers around and negate the need for a trade. Of course that's an unlikely outcome but the plan makes sense if we absolutely have to wait until further into the season to be able to afford a new WR. Might as well take a flyer while still knowing in the back of our mind that the season doesn't hinge on one of those flyers working out.

 

I just find it really unlikely Plan A is Mack Hollins as the #2 outside WR, or Coleman as the presumed #1 for that matter, for the entire season. Hollins was seen as a Trent Sherfield caliber signing. Coleman is a rookie and the team historically never goes into a season with the rookie penciled in as the surefire starter. The lack of investment at the position makes me more confident an investment is coming, if not right away then at some point in the season.

 

Edited May 13 by HappyDays

[Warriorspikes51]

3 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

The extra second and extra fourth look good to me.

 

Don't know if that would do it but if it doesn't I would have to remind them that D Adams is available.

 

What do you think?

 

It seems reasonable to suspect Beane acquired those picks specifically looking to make a deal like this