Myles Garrett: What would it take?

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

So why not instead go after Trey Hendrickson who Bengals are rumors to cut?  He's one year older, but likely free for the picking.

 

 

2 hours ago, Steve O said:

Make this trade in a second, less than Bennett

1988 1st

1989 1st

1989 2nd

Greg Bell

(All of which ended up with the Rams along with Colts' 1988 1st and 2nd round and 1989 2nd round picks and Owen Gill.)

 

Yeah but didn't have free agency or a cap back then so was much easier to hold a team together.   Also more rounds to the draft.  

 

Wouldn't give up 2 firsts for him, but while that may be what Browns want, not so sure they'll get that either.

Edited Sunday at 05:43 PM by Ed_Formerly_of_Roch

[billsfan89]

13 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Didn’t the Bills add Miller at 33 and not 30? We really can’t use those numbers interchangeably. In theory, you’d have the 3 best years of Garrett as opposed to Von.

 

30 for a defensive linemen is at the end rage of their prime years as they tend to "fall off" around age 32-34. Von was still very good in 2022 he was on pace for 12.5 sacks that year despite only playing 55% of the teams defensive snaps but he got hurt and that's hurt his production never recovered fully (I would say that while Von was abysmal in 2023 he's been a decent player in 2024 still far from what Von was in 2022). The difference would be that while you get a significantly younger player in Garrett you are also giving up draft capital and cap space for a player whose still on the older range of things.  

 

So while there is still a big chasm between 30 and 33 it is still a bit risky to invest the draft and cap capital into an older player like that. Also given how good the Bills have been at drafting I would rather McBeane work the draft more and try and find a few upper mid-level talents like they did with Connor McGovern to plug some holes. 

[FireChans]

21 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Didn’t the Bills add Miller at 33 and not 30? We really can’t use those numbers interchangeably. In theory, you’d have the 3 best years of Garrett as opposed to Von.

The Rams added a 32 year old Von Miller who had 9 sacks in 12 games (4 in the playoffs) by trading for him and not needing to pay him big money. 
 

Beane got outbid on that front.

[The Jokeman]

18 hours ago, Simon said:

 

The problem if you do that is that with Von likely being gone, Epenesa being gone, Smoot on a one year deal and no draft picks before the 4th rnd, you are probably going to find yourself problematically thin at DE next year

We have an extra 2nd in 2025 from the Diggs trade.

[Kirby Jackson]

3 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

30 for a defensive linemen is at the end rage of their prime years as they tend to "fall off" around age 32-34. Von was still very good in 2022 he was on pace for 12.5 sacks that year despite only playing 55% of the teams defensive snaps but he got hurt and that's hurt his production never recovered fully (I would say that while Von was abysmal in 2023 he's been a decent player in 2024 still far from what Von was in 2022). The difference would be that while you get a significantly younger player in Garrett you are also giving up draft capital and cap space for a player whose still on the older range of things.  

 

So while there is still a big chasm between 30 and 33 it is still a bit risky to invest the draft and cap capital into an older player like that. Also given how good the Bills have been at drafting I would rather McBeane work the draft more and try and find a few upper mid-level talents like they did with Connor McGovern to plug some holes. 

It’s much riskier, IMO, to allow Josh Allen to approach the age of 30 with only one other Pro Bowler on the roster. They have exactly 1 AFC Championship appearance, at this point, to show for his career. He’s the best offensive player, and arguably the best player, that’s ever played for the Bills. The Bills need to push their chips in every chance that they get. The goal, at this point, isn’t to develop the Javon Solomon’s of the world. It’s to win a championship. That’s why the Bills are the betting favorites to land Garrett if he moves. 

[billsfan89]

1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:

It’s much riskier, IMO, to allow Josh Allen to approach the age of 30 with only one other Pro Bowler on the roster. They have exactly 1 AFC Championship appearance, at this point, to show for his career. He’s the best offensive player, and arguably the best player, that’s ever played for the Bills. The Bills need to push their chips in every chance that they get. The goal, at this point, isn’t to develop the Javon Solomon’s of the world. It’s to win a championship. That’s why the Bills are the betting favorites to land Garrett if he moves. 

 

"Pro Bowler" is arbitrary and a rather bad metric to determine the quality of a team around Josh Allen. Benford didn't make the Pro-Bowl but he's still a dam good player. I would rather the team have more shots to find cheap good starting caliber players around Josh and on defense than sinking in a lot of picks and cap space that could be used to resign younger developing draft picks like Groot, Shakir, Cook, Benford, and Bernard. I get that the Bills want to "win now" but sometimes making an aggressive move has bad unintended consequences. 

[FireChans]

7 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

"Pro Bowler" is arbitrary and a rather bad metric to determine the quality of a team around Josh Allen. Benford didn't make the Pro-Bowl but he's still a dam good player. I would rather the team have more shots to find cheap good starting caliber players around Josh and on defense than sinking in a lot of picks and cap space that could be used to resign younger developing draft picks like Groot, Shakir, Cook, Benford, and Bernard. I get that the Bills want to "win now" but sometimes making an aggressive move has bad unintended consequences. 

Benford isn’t Myles Garrett. 
 

The time for waiting for guys to develop around Josh has come and gone. We are in “if not now, when?” time.

[Kirby Jackson]

11 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

"Pro Bowler" is arbitrary and a rather bad metric to determine the quality of a team around Josh Allen. Benford didn't make the Pro-Bowl but he's still a dam good player. I would rather the team have more shots to find cheap good starting caliber players around Josh and on defense than sinking in a lot of picks and cap space that could be used to resign younger developing draft picks like Groot, Shakir, Cook, Benford, and Bernard. I get that the Bills want to "win now" but sometimes making an aggressive move has bad unintended consequences. 

Pro Bowler is certainly arbitrary. It isn’t like they had 5 though and we thought that they should have 8. Teams that win 13 or 14 games generally have more than 1 guy, other than the QB, recognized as one of the best at their position. The Ravens have 9 guys I think. Their roster has a lot more high end talent than the Bills.

 

I guess I’m less worried about extending high end role players. That’s what I consider Bernard, Groot, Cook and Shakir. I think Benford has potential to be a star. You can find quality players easily. You’ve listed a bunch. You can’t find HOFers, at positions of need easily. That’s what we are talking about. The quality player approach has had the Bills competitive for years. They haven’t won anything despite a, soon-to-be, MVP QB. I would NEVER not trade for Myles Garrett because I’m worried about money for Bernard or Shakir. 

[Maine-iac]

Chase Young is a free agent next year I think.  Probably about the same cost as AJ, maybe a little more but still under 20.  Probably under 15 and he's good for Groot like production.  Set the edge in the run game and get you 8 to 10 sacks.  Not a little guy.

[billsfan89]

44 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Pro Bowler is certainly arbitrary. It isn’t like they had 5 though and we thought that they should have 8. Teams that win 13 or 14 games generally have more than 1 guy, other than the QB, recognized as one of the best at their position. The Ravens have 9 guys I think. Their roster has a lot more high end talent than the Bills.

 

I guess I’m less worried about extending high end role players. That’s what I consider Bernard, Groot, Cook and Shakir. I think Benford has potential to be a star. You can find quality players easily. You’ve listed a bunch. You can’t find HOFers, at positions of need easily. That’s what we are talking about. The quality player approach has had the Bills competitive for years. They haven’t won anything despite a, soon-to-be, MVP QB. I would NEVER not trade for Myles Garrett because I’m worried about money for Bernard or Shakir. 

 

I think the difference in the way I look at NFL roster is that unlike the other big 4 sports (outside of QB) the need for star players is not as dramatic. The NFL is almost the ultimate "Quantity over Quality" league in that it's almost more about having no weaknesses and some depth as opposed to having 3-4 "star" players on each side of the ball. 

 

I look at KC the gold standard currently and the Brady era Pats the old gold standard and I often saw/see those teams being more so about consistently finding "starting caliber" players in the draft and developing a solid overall team around an elite QB. The Pats from the 2001-2006 run had a few elite defensive players but were mostly a bunch of role players and solid starters sprinkled in around 3-5 elite to very good defensive players (Seymour, Ty Law, and Bruschi types) and an offense that was Tom Brady and decent but not spectacular supporting cast. 

 

I think that the Bills despite clearing out a lot of veterans and trading away Diggs have assembled a very good roster around Josh and they have a chance to build a better team once the dead cap clears and they have a nice complement of draft picks. The Bills have a top 5 offensive line in the league around Josh, a top 5-7 RB core, a top 5 TE combination, and a better than average WR group now that they acquired Cooper. The Bills defensively are a better than average unit who while susceptible to some lapses aren't a bad unit at all. 

 

I get the feeling to add those 1-2 big pieces to get the team "over the top" but that's usually not the most prudent way to build the roster. Draft and develop add some free agency pieces as needed. Trading away a haul of picks for a 30 year old pass rusher on a massive contract is just not seeming like a fantastic move to me as injuries to that one player can derail the resources that could have produced 2-3 starters and 2-3 depth pieces. 

7 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:

Chase Young is a free agent next year I think.  Probably about the same cost as AJ, maybe a little more but still under 20.  Probably under 15 and he's good for Groot like production.  Set the edge in the run game and get you 8 to 10 sacks.  Not a little guy.

 

Chase Young is a free agent and given that he's not really lived up to his draft status and been banged up the Bills could probably add him for sub 10 million. Really reminding me of the Clowney career trajectory where he gets good but not massive 1 year deals for teams looking to patch the edge for a season but no team ever wanting to commit fully. 

[Maine-iac]

5 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

Chase Young is a free agent and given that he's not really lived up to his draft status and been banged up the Bills could probably add him for sub 10 million. Really reminding me of the Clowney career trajectory where he gets good but not massive 1 year deals for teams looking to patch the edge for a season but no team ever wanting to commit fully. 

I know I'm going glass half full here but for the price he's still only going to be 26 and he's played almost every game the last two years.  Given the cost risk (fairly low) and the possibility he might finally be healthy he might be a good signing.   I honestly don't think our edges play that bad.  I really wish we had a DT who played in the backfield more consistently but that's even harder to find (and pay) then an edge rusher.  

[Don Otreply]

3 hours ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

Why? 

Garrett publicly basically said he wants out of Cleveland. Browns are most likely going to blow up the roster as the oline has gotten old quick and they have no QB. 

Very good chance Garrett is traded. 

Probably will take two #1s and a huge contract extension. 

Problem is Bills first round draft picks will be very late round picks. 

Browns won't trade to Cinci. But there is probably a team that is out if the playoffs and has a QB now that might make the move. Maybe a team like Miami, AZ, or the Bears. 

He very likely costs way more than Beane is willing to pay him, that’s why, 

[cle23]

3 hours ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

Why? 

Garrett publicly basically said he wants out of Cleveland. Browns are most likely going to blow up the roster as the oline has gotten old quick and they have no QB. 

Very good chance Garrett is traded. 

Probably will take two #1s and a huge contract extension. 

Problem is Bills first round draft picks will be very late round picks. 

Browns won't trade to Cinci. But there is probably a team that is out if the playoffs and has a QB now that might make the move. Maybe a team like Miami, AZ, or the Bears. 

 

Garrett didn't say he wanted out of Cleveland. He said he wanted to be there his entire career. He did say he didn't want to have a full rebuild. 

 

With a competent QB, Cleveland is still a playoff team. The Watson contract makes that tough, but not impossible.  Cleveland keeps carrying over huge cap numbers every year that help offset his numbers.  If they can land a good rookie QB or even a veteran QB on a cut contract for cheap,  they'll be ok. I hate the long term idea of Cousins, but if you can pay him minimum while Atlanta pays his contract,  you can compete.  Rumors of Minnesota entertaining trading McCarthy too, which could be interesting.  

Edited Sunday at 07:57 PM by cle23

[stuvian]

If we're looking at high mileage vets, we have to look at Cameron Jordan 

[Maine-iac]

Is Bosa (Chargers) a free agent?  He's been injured a lot and probably wants bank, I wouldn't be interested but it's a big name.

[OldTimer1960]

Too much for his age.  He probably has 2 good years left then the inevitable decline.  

[BillsPride12]

28 minutes ago, OldTimer1960 said:

Too much for his age.  He probably has 2 good years left then the inevitable decline.  

Buffalo is in a window where it's completely realistic they could win a Super Bowl in the next 2 years if they added a player the caliber of Myles Garrett

 

The time to swing for the fences is now

[Pete]

What about Von?  He is back, and will be a huge factor in playoffs 

[Kirby Jackson]

1 hour ago, billsfan89 said:

 

I think the difference in the way I look at NFL roster is that unlike the other big 4 sports (outside of QB) the need for star players is not as dramatic. The NFL is almost the ultimate "Quantity over Quality" league in that it's almost more about having no weaknesses and some depth as opposed to having 3-4 "star" players on each side of the ball. 

 

I look at KC the gold standard currently and the Brady era Pats the old gold standard and I often saw/see those teams being more so about consistently finding "starting caliber" players in the draft and developing a solid overall team around an elite QB. The Pats from the 2001-2006 run had a few elite defensive players but were mostly a bunch of role players and solid starters sprinkled in around 3-5 elite to very good defensive players (Seymour, Ty Law, and Bruschi types) and an offense that was Tom Brady and decent but not spectacular supporting cast. 

Both of those teams had HOF TEs and HOF coaches. The Chiefs have a top 5 defensive player and arguably a top 10 defensive player. I actually look at their roster as incredibly top heavy. Kelce and Chris Jones have come up HUGE in the playoffs. Elite players that have dominated. In terms of the Patriots, you named 3 guys on the defensive side and 2 of them are in the HOF. They weren’t very good or even elite. They were HOF good. Those teams had a bunch of HOF players.
 

We have a habit as Bills fans of overrating our talent and underrating other teams talent. In terms of “all-time great” players, the Bills have Josh Allen and 35 year-old Von Miller. They have a lot of quality to very good players. That hasn’t been good enough. The other HOF caliber guy was Diggs and he disappeared in the playoffs for the Bills. The point being the gap from Garrett to Groot (for example) is MASSIVE. They aren’t “kind of alike.” You can find fringe Pro Bow players like Rousseau. When you get a chance to get an all-time great, in his prime, at a position of need, you don’t say “no thanks” because you’re worried about keeping Shakir or Bernard or Groot or Cook. You can find guys like that (or at least close). It’s much more difficult to find HOF guys that can take over games.

 

[billsfan89]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Both of those teams had HOF TEs and HOF coaches. The Chiefs have a top 5 defensive player and arguably a top 10 defensive player. I actually look at their roster as incredibly top heavy. Kelce and Chris Jones have come up HUGE in the playoffs. Elite players that have dominated. In terms of the Patriots, you named 3 guys on the defensive side and 2 of them are in the HOF. They weren’t very good or even elite. They were HOF good. Those teams had a bunch of HOF players.
 

We have a habit as Bills fans of overrating our talent and underrating other teams talent. In terms of “all-time great” players, the Bills have Josh Allen and 35 year-old Von Miller. They have a lot of quality to very good players. That hasn’t been good enough. The other HOF caliber guy was Diggs and he disappeared in the playoffs for the Bills. The point being the gap from Garrett to Groot (for example) is MASSIVE. They aren’t “kind of alike.” You can find fringe Pro Bow players like Rousseau. When you get a chance to get an all-time great, in his prime, at a position of need, you don’t say “no thanks” because you’re worried about keeping Shakir or Bernard or Groot or Cook. You can find guys like that (or at least close). It’s much more difficult to find HOF guys that can take over games.

 

 

I am not saying that great teams don't have elite non-QB players, but rather that you don't always need 10 elite players to win. KC has 2-3 really good defensive players but it's not a star studded roster on defense. On offense Kelce hasn't been a star player for a couple of years and I don't see much elite talent outside of Mankins and Humphries on the offensive line. They just mainly have a lot of solid starting caliber players contributing their roles and executing a system around an electric QB. I think KC stopped having completely stacked star laden rosters after they traded away Tyreke Hill and started paying Mahomes on a big contract. 

 

I also am not so sure a "war daddy" pass rusher whose turning 30 on a massive contract and will cost a ton of valuable draft capital is the missing piece either. As good as Garrett is I think the Bills needs on defense won't fully be solved by adding Garrett. Don't get me wrong Garrett would tremendously help the team but he wouldn't be a panacea either. 

 

I also disagree that finding "good" but not elite players like Groot, Shakir, Bernard, and Cook are players you can rather easily "find". I do agree that they are certainly easier to find than an elite talent like Garrett but I also don't think those types of players don't hold very good value either. I also think the value of finding an elite talent in the draft is so much greater than trading a lot of draft capital for an elite talent so having more picks means a better chance to find those elite players at the beginning of their career. 

 

In the end my philosophy comes down to is Garrett at a cost of a lot of draft and cap capital going to be that last big piece that puts the team over the top? I don't think he will be and I think the long term damage that such a move could yield is not worth the risk.