Myles Garrett requests a trade

[BillsShredder83]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I am not good with the comp pick formula. A 3rd or a 4th maybe?

Thought exercise. Lets say we can guarantee Groot fetches us a 3rd rd comp pick.  Our options basically boil down to:

--Keep our 1st rd'er '26, lose Groots production (playing opposite a truly elite DE)

--Lose '26 1st rd. Keep Groots production. Get 3rd rd comp pick (basically a high 4th rd)

 

Does that change your opinion? IMO there are times a GM should be willing to make a trade off like this, parting ways with some future draft resources (drop from 1st to 3rd), in exchange for some immediate juice up front.  We made that decision with Amari, looking like that did not pay off.  Had that not happened, I think that makes this call a lot easier.  You cant continually make those types of trade offs, or you end up "in debt".  I very well could be prisoner of the moment, but Im leaning towards keeping Groot if this were the case. 

 

Im making either move with the Browns if they only accept one or the other, but if both were acceptable to them, i think i take option #2

[BillsVet]

No one I've seen here is adamantly opposed to acquiring Garrett.  Issue comes down to how does this directly help Josh. 

 

Their offense just played a good KC team and had to grind for every yard and point.  Talent on that side of the ball was maxed out and the QB is paying for it in short yardage and not having open receivers.  

 

But given Beane's comments about Chris Jones and having an elite defender in the recent post-season review PC, I expect they'll be in the running for Garrett. 

 

Without a comparable move to improve the offense it's once again prioritizing the defense over the offense.  Even keeping Cooper, their receivers, WR and TE, aren't championship caliber.   

[NewEra]

3 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I think Rousseau is a decent to good player. The conversation around him, in my opinion, is contract and contract only. You simply cannot pay him $20M a year and I think that’s what he gets. Use him as a chip, because he has some value, to avoid having paying him in the next year. 
 

In terms of Coleman, I’m out. He has a skill that is valuable and you can see the ability after the catch. He caught half of his targets because he’s never open. @GunnerBill said it best that he, “plays to contact.” When the ball is in the air, he isn’t looking for space. He’s looking for contact to shield the defender. He’s boxing out like he did in basketball. There is a time and place for that (ie redzone) but not every throw. IMO, he’s a role player and unlikely to ever be more. The Bills had a desperate need at the top of the WR depth chart and they took a role player after trading down twice. Hopefully he develops because there is some talent but I’m not holding my breath. I’d love to be wrong about him like I was about Hollins.

I agree with everything said about Coleman- but he’s 21 and a hard worker.  There are several players with similar physical attributes that have improved and become stand outs.  He was pretty good before the poyer hit and was never the same for the rest of the seasons. He has an all time QB throwing to him.  I think he’ll be a nice player for us- but never a wr1.  Likely 3 more years of production then take the comp pick.  

3 hours ago, Magox said:

In Happy’s defense, the vast majority of Mahomes passes were first read passes and on those passes Garrett or anyone else wouldn’t have made a difference.   Don’t get me wrong, having someone like him on the field would have helped but not nearly as much as you’d think.   
 

The biggest problem that game were the CB’s and the scheme.   They either played off them too much and gave up easy quick hitters or when they did try press man they were beaten so quickly and badly that Mahomes was able to easily get it to them and then get lots more YAC.

 

As an FYI, I’m definitely open to getting Garrett, but they need to get at a very minimum a corner with decent press man skills.

We don’t know how our defensive scheme would change with Garrett in the game.  Playing off coverage is less likely if we add a bonafide superstar pass rusher imo.  Those quick easy looks might not have been so quick and easy.  

[NewEra]

19 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

No one I've seen here is adamantly opposed to acquiring Garrett.  Issue comes down to how does this directly help Josh. 

 

Their offense just played a good KC team and had to grind for every yard and point.  Talent on that side of the ball was maxed out and the QB is paying for it in short yardage and not having open receivers.  

 

But given Beane's comments about Chris Jones and having an elite defender in the recent post-season review PC, I expect they'll be in the running for Garrett. 

 

Without a comparable move to improve the offense it's once again prioritizing the defense over the offense.  Even keeping Cooper, their receivers, WR and TE, aren't championship caliber.   

We had open guys.  We had drops and Josh made a couple poor decisions.  The offense is not the problem.  The defense that has given up 32.5 ppg in season ending losses has ALWAYS been the problem.  

[SectionC3]

3 minutes ago, NewEra said:

We had open guys.  We had drops and Josh made a couple poor decisions.  The offense is not the problem.  The defense that has given up 32.5 ppg in season ending losses has ALWAYS been the problem.  

This is where I’m at.  Protect Josh and we can get by with the current cast of characters.  The D is the problem.  Pass rush helps at all levels.  And that disruptive presence is what’s missing.  Yes, we need help at CB. But the pass rush would help with that.  

[LEBills]

20 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

No one I've seen here is adamantly opposed to acquiring Garrett.  Issue comes down to how does this directly help Josh. 

 

Their offense just played a good KC team and had to grind for every yard and point.  Talent on that side of the ball was maxed out and the QB is paying for it in short yardage and not having open receivers.  

 

But given Beane's comments about Chris Jones and having an elite defender in the recent post-season review PC, I expect they'll be in the running for Garrett. 

 

Without a comparable move to improve the offense it's once again prioritizing the defense over the offense.  Even keeping Cooper, their receivers, WR and TE, aren't championship caliber.   

I would certainly prioritize adding talent to the offense for Josh. However, Garrett has requested a trade and is one of the best players at his position. Aside from Tee Higgins - which I think depends on how good (and healthy) people think he is - their doesn’t seem to be a similar move to be made at the moment on the offensive side. Maybe a good WR comes available for trade eventually, but it’s just not there right now

[Alphadawg7]

3 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I’d love to be wrong about him like I was about Hollins.

 

👏 Just want to give you some kudos here.  You and I had some long convos and friendly debates about Hollins who you were dead set against, I might even say kind of angry about him really.  Even when we last discussed him during the season you were still pretty set on your initial opinions of Hollins.  And hey, there was nothing wrong with still having the same opinion at that point when the sample size was still relatively small in the first place. 

 

But, what you don't see enough around here is when people have such a strong opinion on someone or a topic, to coming back later once more is known and just saying hey I got that one wrong.  Most the time people try and spin it or try to find some way to deflect or cherry pick something to try and stand by their original stance.  

 

And everyone here gets things wrong, but not many take that ownership when they were so rooted in the initial opinion.  So respect and kudos to you sir

[Billsbuff]

3 hours ago, NewEra said:

We had open guys.  We had drops and Josh made a couple poor decisions.  The offense is not the problem.  The defense that has given up 32.5 ppg in season ending losses has ALWAYS been the problem.  

I read a lot and don't post if ever, but I had to jump in on this thread.

 

I agree with this to an extent and I'll even take it a step further.  The issue with the Bills is that they use their full arsenal of plays and situational tendencies (and answers) a lot throughout the season.  What I mean by that is that by the time they play in very meaningful games, everything they do is on film and everything they like to do when it matters the most is known by the Chiefs, Bengals, etc.  For example, the 4th and 5 play and the corner blitz, Spags knew the Bills were going to condense the formation, use either a 4x1 or 3x1 set and run a variation of the mesh concept, so he sends 6, heavy from the 1 side because that would be the hot generally in a zone look - because Spags knows the Bills aren't going to run a quick out or hook up Samuel.

 

Same thing for the 3rd and 9 play that sealed the game.  Bills are desperate, need to get pressure to get the ball out of Mahomes's hand quick.  So they dial up man cover 1 as they have a bunch this season, and Andy Reid runs a great slice concept for the back out of the backfield.

 

Long story short, when we've had big games the reason we are in them is because of Josh Allen's abilities to win individual plays with his arm, legs, and even mind now.  But we don't have a stud chess piece on the other side of the ball that can go win a play or win the game with one play.  We thought we were getting that with Von, and that hasn't happened.  Garrett gives us a chance to have that chess piece so that no matter what you call - we have a guy that can win the play/game.

 

So until we can be better at situational football (when it matters most), we need better chess pieces.

 

(Disclaimer:  I think we have one of the top 5 head coaches in the game today - not a knock on the job McD does and continues to do.  Just keep some things in the bag, or at least have different answers to the same question.)

Edited 3 hours ago by Billsbuff

[BillsShredder83]

8 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

No one I've seen here is adamantly opposed to acquiring Garrett.  Issue comes down to how does this directly help Josh. 

 

Their offense just played a good KC team and had to grind for every yard and point.  Talent on that side of the ball was maxed out and the QB is paying for it in short yardage and not having open receivers.  

 

But given Beane's comments about Chris Jones and having an elite defender in the recent post-season review PC, I expect they'll be in the running for Garrett. 

 

Without a comparable move to improve the offense it's once again prioritizing the defense over the offense.  Even keeping Cooper, their receivers, WR and TE, aren't championship caliber.   

Anybody feel any of these options (realistically) help put us over the top better than Garrett? Ive been pro-Myles in this thread, but 100% believe we need a legit baller on the outside too... Higgins likely is franchised, so he's out.  Godwin is 30  I believe.

 

I cant see us breaking the bank for any of these guys.  Possibly a short term deal for Cooper if he wants to win, signs 1-2yrs incentive laden deal, and we can see what he can bring to the table fully healthy with a full offseason to integrate into the offense. Cooper is just as good as anyone not named Higgins, and there is familiarity there.  If we're going top tier I think he makes the most sense.

 

Also could be some solid bargain bin shopping: Hollywood

 

FA WR's:

 

Tee Higgins (CIN)

Chris Godwin (TB)

Stefon Diggs (HOU)

Keenan Allen (CHI) 

Amari Cooper (BUF)

KaVontae Turpin (DAL)-- interesting but the mckenzie/saints guy i already forget spooks me

Josh Palmer (LAC)

Darius Slayton (NYG)-- Spotrac projects Slayton's market value to bring him a two-year, $31.720 million contract, an average of $15.9 million annually

Demarcus Robinson (LAR)

Nick Westbrook-Ikhine (TEN)- 9 TD's? only 27yrs old. Very interesting. Only made ~$2m last year

Marquise Brown (KC)- According to Spotrac.com, Brown is projected to be making $8 million next season

Robert Woods (HOU)

Nelson Agholor (BAL)

DeAndre Hopkins (KC)

Dyami Brown (WAS)

Mike Williams (PIT)- expensive AF, hurt

Marquez Valdes-Scantling (NO)

Brandin Cooks (DAL)- old, probably nothing there, but a workout and/or vet minimum deal would intrigue me (only played 10games last year though)

[tigerthelion]

6 minutes ago, Billsbuff said:

I read a lot and don't post if even, but I had to jump in on this thread.

 

I agree with this to an extent and I'll even take it a step further.  The issue with the Bills is that they use their full arsenal of plays and situational tendencies (and answers) a lot throughout the season.  What I mean by that is that by the time they play in very meaningful games, everything they do is on film and everything they like to do when it matters the most is known by the Chiefs, Bengals, etc.  For example, the 4th and 5 play and the corner blitz, Spags knew the Bills were going to condense the formation, use either a 4x1 or 3x1 set and run a variation of the mesh concept, so he sends 6, heavy from the 1 side because that would be the hot generally in a zone look - because Spags knows the Bills aren't going to run a quick out or hook up Samuel.

 

Same thing for the 3rd and 9 play that sealed the game.  Bills are desperate, need to get pressure to get the ball out of Mahomes's hand quick.  So they dial up man cover 1 as they have a bunch this season, and Andy Reid runs a great slice concept for the back out of the backfield.

 

Long story short, when we've had big games the reason we are in them is because of Josh Allen's abilities to win individual plays with his arm, legs, and even mind now.  But we don't have a stud chess piece on the other side of the ball that can go win a play or win the game with one play.  We thought we were getting that with Von, and that hasn't happened.  Garrett gives us a chance to have that chess piece so that no matter what you call - we have a guy that can win the play/game.

 

So until we can be better at situational football (when it matters most), we need better chess pieces.

 

(Disclaimer:  I think we have one of the top 5 head coaches in the game today - not a knock on the job McD does and continues to do.  Just keep some things in the bag, or at least have different answers to the same question.)

That is an bad look for Brady and Babich if true.  If the Bills don't have any more (especially in their offensive arsenal) than that, yikes.  I heard the opposite on here, that they were going vanilla on offense heading into the playoffs.  

[Magox]

30 minutes ago, NewEra said:

I agree with everything said about Coleman- but he’s 21 and a hard worker.  There are several players with similar physical attributes that have improved and become stand outs.  He was pretty good before the poyer hit and was never the same for the rest of the seasons. He has an all time QB throwing to him.  I think he’ll be a nice player for us- but never a wr1.  Likely 3 more years of production then take the comp pick.  

We don’t know how our defensive scheme would change with Garrett in the game.  Playing off coverage is less likely if we add a bonafide superstar pass rusher imo.  Those quick easy looks might not have been so quick and easy.  

 

The problem is that even when we did play press man against KC they burnt us.  I posted videos of that on another thread.  We didn't have the personnel to cover those guys.

[eball]

44 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

No one I've seen here is adamantly opposed to acquiring Garrett.  Issue comes down to how does this directly help Josh. 

 

Their offense just played a good KC team and had to grind for every yard and point.  Talent on that side of the ball was maxed out and the QB is paying for it in short yardage and not having open receivers.  

 

But given Beane's comments about Chris Jones and having an elite defender in the recent post-season review PC, I expect they'll be in the running for Garrett. 

 

Without a comparable move to improve the offense it's once again prioritizing the defense over the offense.  Even keeping Cooper, their receivers, WR and TE, aren't championship caliber.   

 

The Bills' offense is championship caliber.  They basically scored 30+ against anyone they wanted to all year.  The defense failed us again.  I don't care that Josh had the ball in his hands the last two years and couldn't get it done.  Other teams make great plays at key moments too.

 

The best way for the Bills to get over the hump is by acquiring a no-doubt difference-maker on defense that will do what Beane hoped was going to happen when he acquired Von.

 

[Alphadawg7]

33 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

No one I've seen here is adamantly opposed to acquiring Garrett.  Issue comes down to how does this directly help Josh. 

 

The defense getting off the field more often instead of being in the bottom 3 in allowed first downs and bottom 3 on third down stops substantially helps Josh, gives him and the offense more scoring opportunities.  The defense improving and giving up less points means Josh has to do less to get the wins as well, meaning he may be able to come out of games earlier, hand the ball off more late, take less hits.  I am actually surprised this is even a question for some of you.

 

33 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

 

Their offense just played a good KC team and had to grind for every yard and point.  Talent on that side of the ball was maxed out and the QB is paying for it in short yardage and not having open receivers.  

 

Yet we scored 29 points against a tough defense with one of the greatest DC's in the NFL and of his era.  And this is after the refs stole a likely scoring drive away from the Bills but falsely not giving Kincaid the first down on his 2nd down catch that then led to the refs again stealing a first down when Allen clearly got the first on the 4th down sneak.  We were already in FG range at that point had we gotten the first with a chance to go up 2 scores if we end that drive in a TD.

 

33 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

 

But given Beane's comments about Chris Jones and having an elite defender in the recent post-season review PC, I expect they'll be in the running for Garrett. 

 

And he should.

 

33 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

 

Without a comparable move to improve the offense it's once again prioritizing the defense over the offense. 

 

Once again?  Priortizing defense?  

 

The last 3 years, offense has been the priority.  One of our drafts we went all offense except for I believe one draft pick.  4 of our last 6 picks in the first 2 rounds were on offense in the last 3 drafts.  3 of our last 5 first round picks have been used on weapons for Josh.  This isn't 2021, this notion we have been prioritizing the defense over offense the past 3 seasons is just not accurate.  

 

33 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

Even keeping Cooper, their receivers, WR and TE, aren't championship caliber.   

 

Not Championship caliber?  So the 16th greatest offense in NFL history, and the best offense in Bills history is suddenly not Championship Caliber?  The same offense that set NFL records for most wins by 20+, fewest % of negative plays in NFL history, and numerous individual offensive records is not "championship caliber"?   They also just scored 29 against a tough Chiefs defense with the best defensive player in football and the best DC in the NFL, and maybe of his era...and that was despite the refs stealing a scoring drive from us to swing the game in the 4th.

 

The reality is, this game was HEAVILY swung by the refs, not once but twice, stealing a first down from us within 2 plays of each other to give the ball back to the Chiefs when we were already in FG range, up 1.  And had we scored a TD that drive, not only do we take even more time off the clock, we would be up 2 scores instead of the Chiefs getting a stolen possession and driving the field to go up 7 with a TD and 2pt conversion.  Kincaid had the first on the 2nd down catch by a half yard and then Allen again got the first on the 4th down sneak.  

 

That was at least an 11 point swing in the Chiefs favor, and possibly a 15 point swing had we of scored a TD in a game we lost by 3 points.  Otherwise, this non-championship caliber offense as you call it would most likely be playing this Sunday in the Super Bowl.  

[BillsVet]

39 minutes ago, NewEra said:

We had open guys.  We had drops and Josh made a couple poor decisions.  The offense is not the problem.  The defense that has given up 32.5 ppg in season ending losses has ALWAYS been the problem.  

 

We're back to the quality of the WR group again.  What they went into the season at that position was personnel malfeasance and led to Josh being concussed, the injured hand, more short yardage situations requiring QB plunges, and one of the most ineffective games of any NFL QB's career at Houston.  The drops were an issue...again because the talent isn't all that great at WR and TE.  

 

The offense is not good when it needs to out-score an opponent.  You can't expect the defense to keep things down, even with Garrett, given how the game is called now.  It's fools gold to expect that.  

 

I certainly don't hope it happens, but continuing to cheap out and make bad WR/TE picks will lead to an outcome no one wants here.  You can anticipate what I'm talking about.  

 

35 minutes ago, LEBills said:

I would certainly prioritize adding talent to the offense for Josh. However, Garrett has requested a trade and is one of the best players at his position. Aside from Tee Higgins - which I think depends on how good (and healthy) people think he is - their doesn’t seem to be a similar move to be made at the moment on the offensive side. Maybe a good WR comes available for trade eventually, but it’s just not there right now

 

No one saw the Diggs trade coming 5 years ago.  Just because you can't see a forthcoming acquisition doesn't mean it's not possible.  

[BADOLBILZ]

15 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Yet we scored 29 points against a tough defense with one of the greatest DC's in the NFL and of his era. 

 

I think the larger point with regard to the offense was, as @BillsVet stated, that it took a herculean effort to get to those 29 points.  

 

Their expected point total was probably more like 24 or less.......which isn't going to cut it on the road in KC.   Because those 29 included converting 2 of the most harrowing 4th down and goal plays you will ever see.  Cook barely reaching the goal line and Allen squeezing that throw thru to Samuel were conversions of the slimmest margin.   They labored to move the ball in that game and the Ravens game.  It took 4 downs to get 10 yards far too often for an "elite" offense.

 

And the reason, even the Bills stated afterward, is because they can't push the ball downfield.  Too much of their skill talent needs to receive the ball within 10 yards of the LOS to be at their most effective.   Which was the same problem that literally ended their season last year.   Offense, ball in hand with a chance to win it, shut down.

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by BADOLBILZ

[Billsbuff]

28 minutes ago, tigerthelion said:

That is an bad look for Brady and Babich if true.  If the Bills don't have any more (especially in their offensive arsenal) than that, yikes.  I heard the opposite on here, that they were going vanilla on offense heading into the playoffs.  

I don't think its a "bad look" but it is something that needs tweaked.  I do agree that they were vanilla in certain situations heading into the playoffs, but if I'm watching film, I'm trashing the 2nd half of the Jets game.  I'm looking at drives that matter in the 1st Patriots game, like when the Bills trailed and needed points, etc. throughout each film in the season.  Give me all plays on 3rd down when trail or "needing a score" and see how many times we see mesh, mesh rail, mesh stop, etc.  I would say the percentage is pretty high.

 

When we play the Chiefs in the playoffs and it matters (talking about 3rd downs and 4th downs), I always feel like they know what we are going to do schematically before we do it because we subscribe to the theory that less is more.  And while I love that theory, sometimes we need to do more in the regular season, and then do less (highest percentage type stuff) when it matters most.

Edited 5 hours ago by Billsbuff

[BillsVet]

27 minutes ago, eball said:

The Bills' offense is championship caliber.  They basically scored 30+ against anyone they wanted to all year.  The defense failed us again.  I don't care that Josh had the ball in his hands the last two years and couldn't get it done.  Other teams make great plays at key moments too.

 

The best way for the Bills to get over the hump is by acquiring a no-doubt difference-maker on defense that will do what Beane hoped was going to happen when he acquired Von.

 

You are watching another team.  That regular season offense was supplanted by one versus Baltimore and KC.  In the AFC CG,  I saw a team that had 14 third downs and needed to go for it 6 times on 4th down.  

 

Looking back in the 4 losses to KC, the closest they've been to winning was 13 seconds...when they'd out-scored them.  These 3 point losses weren't really that close because they clearly were scraping by hoping to keep the margin within a score.

 

I get that Garrett is an attractive player and people want him.  He still doesn't help improve their offense though, which the later it goes in the playoffs the more their WR/TE issues show up.  Going all in on defense without an offensive acquisition doesn't provide the value some assume.   

Edited 5 hours ago by BillsVet

[LEBills]

14 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

 

We're back to the quality of the WR group again.  What they went into the season at that position was personnel malfeasance and led to Josh being concussed, the injured hand, more short yardage situations requiring QB plunges, and one of the most ineffective games of any NFL QB's career at Houston.  The drops were an issue...again because the talent isn't all that great at WR and TE.  

 

The offense is not good when it needs to out-score an opponent.  You can't expect the defense to keep things down, even with Garrett, given how the game is called now.  It's fools gold to expect that.  

 

I certainly don't hope it happens, but continuing to cheap out and make bad WR/TE picks will lead to an outcome no one wants here.  You can anticipate what I'm talking about.  

 

 

No one saw the Diggs trade coming 5 years ago.  Just because you can't see a forthcoming acquisition doesn't mean it's not possible.  

I think I’d still go with the trade that is known to be available when it’s a player of Garrett’s caliber rather than an unknown. Though if Garret doesn’t work out, I hope the unknown excellent offensive player becomes available to us.

[eball]

5 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

 

You are watching another team.  That regular season offense was supplanted by one versus Baltimore and KC.  In the AFC CG,  I saw a team that had 14 third downs and needed to go for it 6 times on 4th down.  

 

Looking back in the 4 losses to KC, the closest they've been to winning was 13 seconds...when they'd out-scored them.  These 3 point losses weren't really that close because they clearly were scraping by hoping to keep the margin within a score.

 

I get that Garrett is an attractive player and people want him.  He still doesn't help improve their offense though, which the later it goes in the playoffs the more their WR/TE issues show up.  Going all in on defense without an offensive acquisition doesn't provide the value some assume.   

 

I get it.  I'm not saying ignore the offense; we need speed.  But if there is ONE move that gets us closer it is a difference-maker on defense.

 

[Kirby Jackson]

1 hour ago, BillsShredder83 said:

Thought exercise. Lets say we can guarantee Groot fetches us a 3rd rd comp pick.  Our options basically boil down to:

--Keep our 1st rd'er '26, lose Groots production (playing opposite a truly elite DE)

--Lose '26 1st rd. Keep Groots production. Get 3rd rd comp pick (basically a high 4th rd)

 

Does that change your opinion? IMO there are times a GM should be willing to make a trade off like this, parting ways with some future draft resources (drop from 1st to 3rd), in exchange for some immediate juice up front.  We made that decision with Amari, looking like that did not pay off.  Had that not happened, I think that makes this call a lot easier.  You cant continually make those types of trade offs, or you end up "in debt".  I very well could be prisoner of the moment, but Im leaning towards keeping Groot if this were the case. 

 

Im making either move with the Browns if they only accept one or the other, but if both were acceptable to them, i think i take option #2

That’s a fair question. I guess for me, I would defer to the draft value chart to quantify the difference. I’m not going to account for the following years picks diminish or whatever. I’d simply look at what a late 3rd is worth vs. a late first. Here is the draftek 2025 version (there are a bunch of different ones out there): https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp. It looks like it is the equivalent of an early 2nd in difference. I’d trade Rousseau for an early 2nd all day. 
 

I think that the problem with Rousseau is that he a somewhere between pretty good and good. Those guys are really tricky when it comes to FA (think Tremaine Edmunds). What do you do? Ideally, you can keep guys like that at a good price but that isn’t always realistic. If Groot were a $12M a year guy, I’d welcome him across from Garrett. I think that he’s going to be about a $20M a year guy and they can’t have him at that IMO.

54 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

👏 Just want to give you some kudos here.  You and I had some long convos and friendly debates about Hollins who you were dead set against, I might even say kind of angry about him really.  Even when we last discussed him during the season you were still pretty set on your initial opinions of Hollins.  And hey, there was nothing wrong with still having the same opinion at that point when the sample size was still relatively small in the first place. 

 

But, what you don't see enough around here is when people have such a strong opinion on someone or a topic, to coming back later once more is known and just saying hey I got that one wrong.  Most the time people try and spin it or try to find some way to deflect or cherry pick something to try and stand by their original stance.  

 

And everyone here gets things wrong, but not many take that ownership when they were so rooted in the initial opinion.  So respect and kudos to you sir

Lol, thanks. Just to be clear he should be playing nowhere near as often as he is. He is a 4th or 5th WR and special teamer. He does have a little more value than I gave him credit for. He belongs on an NFL roster and has some guts.