Myles Garrett requests a trade

[Brand J]

15 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

IMO…no way does Parsons costs more in terms of draft capital than Garrett.  

It wouldn’t surprise me, he’s 4 years younger. Look at Garrett’s pass rusher production his first four years and compare it to Parsons. It’s almost identical. I know Garrett is the bigger, more complete player, but the league values age along with productivity and Parsons hasn’t even signed his second contract yet.

[SoTier]

5 hours ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

This kind of reminds me of when we traded for Diggs. Strong WR class and we traded for a proven WR1.

 

Strong defensive line class, do we trade a bunch of picks for a proven pass rusher?

 

I’m all for it but there’s going to be great defensive line drafted around the picks we trade.

 

Umm ... the Bills draft at #30 in the first round and at #56 and #62.  All the premium DLers will be long gone by then, and the Bills will have to gamble on kids who are projects, and most prospects labeled "projects" don't work out.  I'd prefer to gamble on Garrett working out.

[Sestak4ever]

5 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Umm ... the Bills draft at #30 in the first round and at #56 and #62.  All the premium DLers will be long gone by then, and the Bills will have to gamble on kids who are projects, and most prospects labeled "projects" don't work out.  I'd prefer to gamble on Garrett working out.

I agree. Give me the proven player over a prospect any day. Go Bills!!🏈🍻

[mannc]

6 hours ago, colin said:

 

your comment doesn't match the tweet.

 

chicago gave away

2 firsts plus some extra picks, and got back some picks

 

the extra picks they gave

3rd

6th

 

the picks they got back

2nd worth more than a 3rd

conditional 5th worth less than a 5th, but more than a 6th (based on a comment i read about the conditions, but i don't have the total details)

 

so mack went for less than two first picks.

 

that deal was criticized upfront as being too expensive for the bears because they had to give mack a huge extension (they did get his 5th rookie year tho) and the view is that the cap value of the picks added to his contract exceeded realistic expectations of how much mack could produce.

 

based on the fact that teams now think 2 1sts is too much for a top pass rusher, mack was seen as a rising star and a player his team really needed, and chicago had a lot of sacks but not a lot of pressures (meaning they actually needed pass rush, ironically given their sack numbers), chicago gave less than 2 1sts (as shown above) and that mack was younger with one "cheap" year left, in addition to the fact that the bills are a much much better team than chicago was back then (so the bills picks are expected to be of much less value) I think the bills will off the bat be in a better value position than the chicago trade.

 

so, i think the bills get garrett for less than 2 firsts, less than what chicago paid at that (which was less than 2 firsts) and the bills firsts are worth less than the bears 1st picks, so it will be a much better value proposition.

 

added to all of this, mack was not in his 2nd contract yet, and had no issues with his team.  garrett has privately (badly kept secret) said he wants out, and now has said so publicly,  he also kinda hates the gm, and clevland is in a terrible cap/roster position and needs to rebuild -- they can't get much value out of garrett if the goal is a shot at a chip.  so draft picks are worth more to them than what picks were worth when the raiders traded mack.

 

 

all of this is to say that the bills give up less than what the bears did, and garretts value is higher to the bills (as they are closer to a chip and he represents the maximal spot for value).  rumors around crosby and parsons also increase the supply of tier 1 pass rushers available, both to teams (cowboys and raiders) with new coaches who will get some "free" years to not succeed as much now in order to build for the future.  garrett also will make it hard to trade him to a team with lesser prospects than the bills.

 

aside from phillly sliding in, i don't think the bills really have competition (bengals are cheap, kc has huge contracts coming up, maybe you could say greenbay might be in the hunt but i think the bills are much much closer to a chip).  so you have 2 potential places, 3 pass rushers who might be out there, and the view that the mack trade was too expensive.

 

i think the bills get garett for like a 1 and a 2, or there abouts, meaning prolly less.

 

Some good analysis here...I don't think people recognize how de-valued the Bills' first round picks are.  This year's pick is 30.  In order to move up to 14 (middle of the round) in a normal draft, it would probably cost the Bills an additional future first round pick.  Last year the Bills picked up barely any draft capital to move back from 28 into the second round.  That means the Bills' first round pick this year is not much different from a second.  And I'm pretty sure NFL GM aren't assuming the Bills' first round pick next year will be much better, especially if they get Myles Garrett.  So in other words, 2025 and 2026 first round picks from the Bills are worth about the same as the Cowboys' first round pick this year (11 overall).    

Edited Tuesday at 06:39 PM by mannc

[jkeerie]

I think the key to anything happening with Cleveland even thinking of trading Garrett is money... taking on his contract including his dead cap.  The Watson contract is a killer for them, so they will be looking for contract relief in other areas to off set that. 

[ColoradoBills]

18 minutes ago, jkeerie said:

I think the key to anything happening with Cleveland even thinking of trading Garrett is money... taking on his contract including his dead cap.  The Watson contract is a killer for them, so they will be looking for contract relief in other areas to off set that. 

 

Agree.  The issue is the Browns have too much dead money on ALL their contracts.

There is not one player they can trade or cut to save any cap at all.

 

They really don't want to trade Garrett.  He is pushing for the trade, and it will get interesting as to what ultimately happens.

@mannc had good points about the Bills picks.  I don't see Garrett coming to Buffalo unless HE INSISTS.

[Charles Romes]

18 minutes ago, jkeerie said:

I think the key to anything happening with Cleveland even thinking of trading Garrett is money... taking on his contract including his dead cap.  The Watson contract is a killer for them, so they will be looking for contract relief in other areas to off set that. 

 
It seems teams can avoid massive dead cap hits only where the player agrees to play for less.  I’m wondering if it’s possible that Garrett will agree to lower pay only to facilitate a trade with it being understood that he renegotiates when he gets traded.  There would have to be some rules against this, otherwise everyone would do it for every trade.  Maybe it’s possible if Garrett has to assume the risk of no renegotiation on being traded. 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

51 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Umm ... the Bills draft at #30 in the first round and at #56 and #62.  All the premium DLers will be long gone by then, and the Bills will have to gamble on kids who are projects, and most prospects labeled "projects" don't work out.  I'd prefer to gamble on Garrett working out.

Very deep draft. There will be great DL drafted after pick 29.

 

If you can get Garrett you get him, but it is something to consider.

 

 

[ColoradoBills]

4 minutes ago, Charles Romes said:

 
It seems teams can avoid massive dead cap hits only where the player agrees to play for less.  I’m wondering if it’s possible that Garrett will agree to lower pay only to facilitate a trade with it being understood that he renegotiates when he gets traded.  There would have to be some rules against this, otherwise everyone would do it for every trade.  Maybe it’s possible if Garrett has to assume the risk of no renegotiation on being traded. 

 

It's not so much about Garrett's future cash pay.  The Browns have pushed cap out in void years.  They have to make up the cap and there is no

way around that.  Teams cannot trade dead cap.

[colin]

52 minutes ago, mannc said:

Some good analysis here...I don't think people recognize how de-valued the Bills' first round picks are.  This year's pick is 30.  In order to move up to 14 (middle of the round) in a normal draft, it would probably cost the Bills an additional future first round pick.  Last year the Bills picked up barely any draft capital to move back from 28 into the second round.  That means the Bills' first round pick this year is not much different from a second.  And I'm pretty sure NFL GM aren't assuming the Bills' first round pick next year will be much better, especially if they get Myles Garrett.  So in other words, 2025 and 2026 first round picks from the Bills are worth about the same as the Cowboys' first round pick this year (11 overall).    

 

that's a good point.

 

i'll back off on my prior statement -- given the bills 1sts are a 30 this year and a 32 next year, 2 firsts is not out of the question, and i'd do it!

[mannc]

6 minutes ago, colin said:

 

that's a good point.

 

i'll back off on my prior statement -- given the bills 1sts are a 30 this year and a 32 next year, 2 firsts is not out of the question, and i'd do it!

It sounds like a lot, but as you pointed out, a mediocre Bears team trading two of their first round picks was giving up quite a bit more... 

[Returntoglory]

24 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Very deep draft. There will be great DL drafted after pick 29.

 

If you can get Garrett you get him, but it is something to consider.

 

 

With Beane's draft success...

[TheFunPolice]

I definitely want the Bills to trade for Garrett. 

 

But I also saw the Lions mentioned... can you imagine a DL of Hutch and Garrett?! 

 

 

 

 

[SoTier]

3 hours ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Very deep draft. There will be great DL drafted after pick 29.

 

If you can get Garrett you get him, but it is something to consider.

 

 

 

I'm not opposed to drafting a DLer if the Bills can't get Garrett, but a DLer taken late in round are much more of a gamble ... and it's likely to take him a couple of seasons to become effective. 

 

My point is just that Myles Garrett, who has excelled playing for a dumpster fire team, is not going to be a guy who just takes his pay and goes through the motions as some players who've gotten big days have done.  It doesn't seem to be in his DNA.   I have no doubt that the Garrett who excelled in Cleveland would excel for the Bills, so the only "gamble" would be that he stays healthy ... but any player can be injured.

Edited Tuesday at 10:49 PM by SoTier

[appoo]

3 hours ago, Returntoglory said:

With Beane's draft success...

so great players then

[Returntoglory]

14 minutes ago, appoo said:

so great players then

Let's hope.

[3rdand12]

Parsons had a comment recently speaking of getting in a new DC and player adjustment. Didnt sound too excited.

He's young can play all over the field. Could McBabich change enough to keep him effective ?

 Do you at least call jerry or stephen??

We need plans  A ,B , C and D here  D is the draft I suppose

 Crosby Hendrick Parsons if we cannot land Myles

and any of those will take two to tango and huge Bills commitment financially and draft pick leverage. or loss thereof 

 

 I dont mind drafting a Big Strong like bull kid to stand over center and just lean in  his 1st season. But Bills need guys with impact from this offseason and draft both.

 Go Bills

[SoTier]

1 minute ago, appoo said:

so great players then

 

I think the narrative that Beane misses on his high draft picks is a false narrative.  About half of all first round draft picks are at best "disappointments" if not outright busts.  The #1 overall pick and prospects picked in the Top 10 seldom fail outright, although they might wind up not being nearly as good as some other prospects drafted after them.  The later in the draft a player is taken, the more likely he is to fail.  Since 2020, the Bills have drafted in bottom third of the first and second rounds where it's much harder to find game changing players on either side of the ball.

 

Beane's first and second round draft picks are:

• 2018 - #7 QB Josh Allen,  #16 LB Tremaine Edmunds
• 2019 - #9  DT Ed Oliver, #38 OG Cody Ford
• 2020 -#54 DE AJ Epenesa
• 2021 - #30 DE  Gregory Rousseau, #61 LB Boogie Basham
• 2022 - #23 CB Kaiir Elam, #63 RB James Cook
• 2023 - #25 TE Dalton Kincaid, #59 OG O'Cyrus Torrence
• 2024 - #33 WR Keon Coleman, #60 Cole Bishop

Of the 9 prospects Beane drafted in the first 2 rounds who have had at least 3 years in the league, 6 were hits and 3 were busts.  That's a 67% success rate, including 3 Pro Bowlers (Allen, Edmunds, and Cook).  More importantly, Beane saw the potential in a very raw QB prospect and grabbed him.   Beane detractors consider the Allen pick as "luck" and pointedly ignore the fact that Edmunds made the Pro Bowl twice and became a FA after Buffalo declined to pay him a big second contract.  They also never mention Cook at all.

 

I didn't include the 4 picks from the 2023 and 2024 drafts because rookies and second year players are still learning, and what you see from them may differ from one season to another, so their future prospects aren't set yet.  Numerous rookies who look like stars in their first years crash and burn, and others who don't impress a lot early on turn out to be All Pros and/or HOFers.

• Kincaid looked really good as a rookie, not so good as a sophomore.  
• Torrence started out well but his play declined some as the season wore on.  He played significantly better as a sophomore.
• Keon Coleman started out decently, was injured for a while, and wasn't so good later in the season.
• Cole Bishop missed a considerable amount of the preseason IIRC.  He didn't play well in his few appearances early in the season, but seemed to be a little better later

[Brianmoorman4jesus]

10 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

Watson is a completely different scenario.

 

Myles Garrett is an all time legend now.  
He has 7 straight double digit sacks and 4 straight - 14 sack seasons which has never been done.  He is on a different level than Mack and that means his price tag is higher.
 

https://sports.yahoo.com/myles-garrett-becomes-only-player-in-nfl-history-with-14-plus-sacks-in-4-consecutive-seasons-002328902.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAGREk1q6ev-qwT-deCzIe0zzhebcHM2LruZIGJOIPp0WA3JBREDp80wIp6O4TufeF_uV2OcTt8d4VyfWCW9nnKyMgC5_1X6qiFvgUSyQLqxOup6p3x88HySj-1_UU0pQdn2aGNfM1XHh-QfGyCEAJXuD1eTM2PXqyZPYkNpwUjQC

I’m completely aware of how great Garret is. I’m just being realistic. There are like 5 players in the league that are getting MORE than 1 first round pick and all are QBs. Obviously I’m trying to create a scenario that’s better for the Bills here. I’d offer what I said and see what happens. You aren’t starting with your best offer in a negotiation. I’m sure at the end of the day a team other then us will do it…I’m just saying what I’d try if I was the Bills 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

2 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

I'm not opposed to drafting a DLer if the Bills can't get Garrett, but a DLer taken late in round are much more of a gamble ... and it's likely to take him a couple of seasons to become effective. 

 

My point is just that Myles Garrett, who has excelled playing for a dumpster fire team, is not going to be a guy who just takes his pay and goes through the motions as some players who've gotten big days have done.  It doesn't seem to be in his DNA.   I have no doubt that the Garrett who excelled in Cleveland would excel for the Bills, so the only "gamble" would be that he stays healthy ... but any player can be injured.

Almost half of the top 50 graded players in this draft are defensive lineman.

 

Its a rare class.

Edited Wednesday at 01:20 AM by Buffalo_Stampede