Bills and Khalil Shakir agree to 4-year extension ($60.2 million/$32 million guaranteed)

[GunnerBill]

19 minutes ago, EmotionallyUnstable said:

Even though he will be 30 early next season? Surprises me to think someone would pay that much on the wrong side of 30 for a bigger bodied guy who isn’t exactly a burner: they have a history of not holding up well vs Father Time 

 

Yea. I think he will get a shorter deal but a big one all the same. Certainly upward of $20m.

15 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

2 reasons why I don't think the Shakir deal "killed off" any options or plans for them...

1. It is very clear that extending Shakir was a high priority, and I said it would be during the season and I believe you did too.  This extension was part of their plan from the get go, so getting it done isn't making them change direction in how they intended on addressing the WR group this offseason.  
2. What is really out there in the form of a blockbuster vet WR trade?  The most wishful one has been DK, but he isn't even officially available, its just speculation that Seattle would trade him, and even if they did, its more guess work as to what they would want for him.  So what else is there if not DK?  Hill?  Not going to likely be traded IMHO, but even if he was, they are not sending him to Buffalo and we aren't taking on his salary and baggage he brings.  Adams?  More likely to get cut than traded IMHO.  Deebo?  Not a fit at all for what we need here. 

I think the most realistic plan was either using FA to sign a vet, drafting help, or some combo of both.  And I think their plan is to look at things like bringing back Cooper or signing a vet in FA like Hollywood, Slayton, or even Adams (if he is cut) if they go the vet route in any capacity.  I am not saying they wouldn't have pulled the trigger on a blockbuster WR trade, but I just don't see such a trade out there unless DK is really made available.  And dont get me wrong, would be great if they did land someone like DK, just don't think it was ever realistic.  

 

So for me, I don't think this extension "killed off" anything and was always part of their plan for the offseason. 

 

Whether a blockbuster trade was ever realistically possible is a different question. But it is, in my view, without question less likely after this deal if it was ever possible to start with.

[3rdand12]

1 hour ago, colin said:

 

Lots of players get much more.

 

groot will get like 8-9% of cap, 12+ for garrett, allen will re up for like 20% apy.

 

the model that seems to make the best sense (aside from find a very good quarterback) is to get real game changing talent, particularly at impact positions, and to fill in as much as possible young and cheap w guys on rookie contracts, and use value/middle class free agency to fill in the rest.

 

our real problem as a team (rosterwise) is two fold:

 

one -- not enough game changers.  we are good enough at qb and OL (as a group, not as much about individual super stars, but for me brown and dawkins are a top 3 or 4 tackle duo) and maybe at rb (i think it's more about qb and ol than rb talent, but cook is a legit top 5-10 rb IMO) to basically contend every year, but we don't have real big time impact guys in enough positions.  a great wideout or TE might have caught an additional pass or broken a tackle leading to points to put us over vs kc, for example.

 

two -- we are a heavily middle class team, but without the generally expected benefit of depth, specifically at the positions we tend to get injured at.  our secondary and LBs get injured so much (only two starters on D didn't miss time in the season for injury), and what we end up putting in behind them is just cheeks.  the fact that we have hamlin, douglas, and bernard and rapp (i like him, but he's a middle of the pack starting nfl off ball LB) as starters and the guys behind them are just so awful at times really shows how the roster has not been managed at a championship level (imo, draft picks have fallen short lately, but the real issue is the free agency and the contracts, hurting us in free agency).  our DTs suck as a group, but it almost doesn't matter who we dress because they are at least comparable.  our OL is our second best unit (next to allen obv) but they are deep too, and we could upgrade at LG or roll with what we have and be top 5-10 either way, we are 3 deep at RB, and our top 2 TEs are basically interchangeable, in that if one goes down, the other will roughly replace them.  its silly that we have so much depth where we basically don't need it (OL, and we don't play to our strengths with multiple backs or pass catching TEs on the field) but a below replacement guy on d goes down and we all of a sudden fold like a tent.

We used to need depth on O line , and starters !

 They finally pushed some chips in and focused on protecting Josh long term. Long Live the Josh !

 1 WR and straight to Defense. Draft and FA

[EmotionallyUnstable]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

Yea. I think he will get a shorter deal but a big one all the same. Certainly upward of $20m.

My thinking on this was Mike Evans, a much more decorated receiver of similar age and statue, just got 20 mil/year last offseason. 
 

Rising cap, rookie QB deal for DEN, you never know 

[BullBuchanan]

4 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

You seem to base all of your evaluation on Groot on the Chiefs game.  If you want to do that we should probably cut most of the defense.

 

He was really good throughout the entirety of the season.

 

In terms of all edge rushers in the NFL throughout the year, according to PFF, he had the 3rd most Forced Fumbles, 10th most Stops, 19th most sacks, 18th most hurries, 2nd most QB hits, 3rd most QB pressures and 11th most batted passes all while ranking 25th among players at his position in total snaps.

 

That type of production is the type of production that should earn a contract in the 10th-15th pass rusher range, which is exactly what we're talking about.

 

And then just imagine what will happen for his production when we get someone better than what we had in 2024 on the opposite side of the line?

1. Nope.

2. Yea, he was really "good". We need great. He would have been a backup on the Eagles or Chiefs. That's not good enough if you want to beat those teams.

[SCBills]

2 hours ago, BullBuchanan said:

1. Nope.

2. Yea, he was really "good". We need great. He would have been a backup on the Eagles or Chiefs. That's not good enough if you want to beat those teams.

I think he’s pretty similar to Karlaftis, with a higher second contract ceiling. 
 

Karlaftis just has a Chris Jones to play off of.  

[FireChans]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea. I think he will get a shorter deal but a big one all the same. Certainly upward of $20m.

 

Whether a blockbuster trade was ever realistically possible is a different question. But it is, in my view, without question less likely after this deal if it was ever possible to start with.

Yeah there’s no way any big money is being dedicated to the WR room now.

 

They are gonna double down on Coleman, maybe Mack, Samuel and a rookie/cheaper vet.

[NoSaint]

23 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

Re-signing your own never gets you closer. But Shakir is the only pass catcher we have that is clearly part of the core of the team. If we were dealing with a Ja'Marr Chase situation then it's an easy decision to let him walk, but in an offense where very little money is being spent on skill positions it's a luxury we can afford IMO.

so I get why your head jumped to that “truism” of sorts but it definitely doesn’t match the thought process of my post. 
 

the problem I had is we already spent premium resources on pass catchers that target similar areas and he was the expiring contract that those guys more cheaply replace compared to that extension
 

and it’s absolutely no knock on him - it’s just we have spent consecutive firsts on guys that compete in the same space while already having Knox under contract too… but Keon and Dalton haven’t come in on fire so it’s much harder to see shakir walk so you can spend the money on a deep threat or whatever else 

 

you have to think if you gave beane truth serum that last July his ideal 2025 offseason included letting Shakir walk because Keon/dalton/samuel really covered all the things he brought and he could spend 15m per year elsewhere. They did not answer that convincingly and he played very well - and we see a roster with a little weird blip in its natural progression here.

 

is $15m per for Shakir fair? Surely seems in the ballpark but probably not how our roster intended to move forward to its next phase.

Edited February 27 by NoSaint

[Thrivefourfive]

I think that money waves in front of Coleman as well. Let’s lace it, after his rookie season, Shakir’s contract is looking fat for KC0 right now. So Beane’s saying, Hey! Be a Key. Time to put in the work and that money is there for ya.

[BullBuchanan]

3 hours ago, SCBills said:

I think he’s pretty similar to Karlaftis, with a higher second contract ceiling. 
 

Karlaftis just has a Chris Jones to play off of.  

I won't argue that much, except Karlaftis has the clutch gene. If you put Rousseau on the Chiefs, I don't see them putting Rousseau ahead of him. Karlaftis at the $3.8M he was making this season is phenomenal, but at $22M? It would be a disaster.

You nailed the key though - he has Chris Jones - we don't. That's everything. If you can find that guy, or a combo of players that add up to him in aggregate, sell the farm to go get him instead of paying 2/3 the contract for a guy who is merely "pretty good".

[transplantbillsfan]

7 hours ago, BullBuchanan said:

1. Nope.

2. Yea, he was really "good". We need great. He would have been a backup on the Eagles or Chiefs. That's not good enough if you want to beat those teams.

[Jrb1979]

4 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

You actually think Shakir is a top 3 WR on either of those teams?

 

He's a good player, just like the majority of Bills players. Outside of Allen, none are game breakers. They are mostly really good JAGs. 

[transplantbillsfan]

4 hours ago, Jrb1979 said:

You actually think Shakir is a top 3 WR on either of those teams?

 

He's a good player, just like the majority of Bills players. Outside of Allen, none are game breakers. They are mostly really good JAGs. 

 

Top 3????

 

Yes. Absolutely. Probably top 2 on the Chiefs... maybe the best for that team

 

Your honestly telling me you would take any of Jahon Dotson, JuJu Smith Schuster, Skyy Moore, Justin Watson, 2024 DeAndre Hopkins, Xavier Worthy over Khalil Shakir?

 

There's no point in having a conversation about this if you really would swap Shakir with any of those guys right now.

 

And like I said, I think he’s also a better Wide Receiver than Hollywood Brown.

[Jrb1979]

2 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Top 3????

 

Yes. Absolutely. Probably top 2 on the Chiefs... maybe the best for that team

 

Your honestly telling me you would take any of Jahon Dotson, JuJu Smith Schuster, Skyy Moore, Justin Watson, 2024 DeAndre Hopkins, Xavier Worthy over Khalil Shakir?

 

There's no point in having a conversation about this if you really would swap Shakir with any of those guys right now.

 

And like I said, I think he’s also a better Wide Receiver than Hollywood Brown.

I can get there with the chiefs. 

My point is yes Shakir is a really good WR, I don't think he is game changer like AJ Brown, Chase or Marvin Harrison Jr is. 

 

That IMO is why the Bills struggle in the playoffs at times. It goes for both sides of the ball. They are a team full of good to great players but don't have those game breakers that other teams have. 

[Alphadawg7]

Not sure if anyone follows Shakir on IG, but he is already doing his full offseason training and Dorian is working out with him too.  Paid and still driven to be the best version of himself and great to see another young player in Dorian putting the work in too.  

[Alphadawg7]

20 minutes ago, Jrb1979 said:

I can get there with the chiefs. 

My point is yes Shakir is a really good WR, I don't think he is game changer like AJ Brown, Chase or Marvin Harrison Jr is. 

 

That IMO is why the Bills struggle in the playoffs at times. It goes for both sides of the ball. They are a team full of good to great players but don't have those game breakers that other teams have. 

 

Our issue is not that we are missing an AJ Brown, Chase, or MHJ...Chase cant even make the playoffs with Burrow and Higgins.  AJ Brown didn't get back to the SB until they fixed their defense (which dominated the SB and was the #1 D this year) through the draft and added an elite RB.  MHJ isn't sniffing the playoffs.  Justin Jefferson, DK Metcalf, Hill, etc are not helping their teams get over any humps either.  

 

But...Chiefs are putting up an average of 35 PPG in the postseason against the Bills...despite the Chiefs going on to lose the very next game 3 times and averaging just 17 PPG.  

 

Allens stats against the Chiefs are incredible, as they are overall in the postseason.  We just scored 29 against a team that had never scored 30 once this year and we still lost.  We had the 16th greatest offense in NFL history and set multiple team and individual offensive records.  Still lost to a team that had never scored 30 by allowing 32 points.  

 

Its our defensive efforts against the Chiefs that have lost us games...and its a combo of scheme and lack of difference makers on the defensive side of the ball.  Its why we need to find a real difference maker on defense, someone who can just flip one scoring drive by getting off the field on 3rd down on sheer talent alone regardless of scheme issues.  That alone would reverse our last 3 losses to KC.  

 

 

[transplantbillsfan]

2 hours ago, Jrb1979 said:

I can get there with the chiefs. 

My point is yes Shakir is a really good WR, I don't think he is game changer like AJ Brown, Chase or Marvin Harrison Jr is. 

 

That IMO is why the Bills struggle in the playoffs at times. It goes for both sides of the ball. They are a team full of good to great players but don't have those game breakers that other teams have. 

 

Of course Shakir isn't AJ Brown, Chace, or Davonte Smith.

 

But with this contract he's not being paid like them.

 

In fact, his contract lines up with another former Bill who recently signed a WR contract:

 

Gabe Davis.

 

I'd say Shakir brings a LOT more value than Gabe Davis, which is why this is a fantastic deal.

[Einstein's Dog]

23 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

2 reasons why I don't think the Shakir deal "killed off" any options or plans for them...

1. It is very clear that extending Shakir was a high priority, and I said it would be during the season and I believe you did too.  This extension was part of their plan from the get go, so getting it done isn't making them change direction in how they intended on addressing the WR group this offseason.  
2. What is really out there in the form of a blockbuster vet WR trade?  The most wishful one has been DK, but he isn't even officially available, its just speculation that Seattle would trade him, and even if they did, its more guess work as to what they would want for him.  So what else is there if not DK?  Hill?  Not going to likely be traded IMHO, but even if he was, they are not sending him to Buffalo and we aren't taking on his salary and baggage he brings.  Adams?  More likely to get cut than traded IMHO.  Deebo?  Not a fit at all for what we need here. 

I think the most realistic plan was either using FA to sign a vet, drafting help, or some combo of both.  And I think their plan is to look at things like bringing back Cooper or signing a vet in FA like Hollywood, Slayton, or even Adams (if he is cut) if they go the vet route in any capacity.  I am not saying they wouldn't have pulled the trigger on a blockbuster WR trade, but I just don't see such a trade out there unless DK is really made available.  And dont get me wrong, would be great if they did land someone like DK, just don't think it was ever realistic.  

 

So for me, I don't think this extension "killed off" anything and was always part of their plan for the offseason. 

I'm with you on this one Alpha, I don't think Shakir has changed the plans at all.  This was the plan.  The FO has reasonable numbers for their own first.

 

And while DK seems like a long shot, I think he always was a long shot.  But if the stud DE's don't materialize and Seattle is ready to make a deal, the DK move could still be on the list.

[Alphadawg7]

15 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

I'm with you on this one Alpha, I don't think Shakir has changed the plans at all.  This was the plan.  The FO has reasonable numbers for their own first.

 

And while DK seems like a long shot, I think he always was a long shot.  But if the stud DE's don't materialize and Seattle is ready to make a deal, the DK move could still be on the list.

Thanks and agree with everything you said too

[Bills Don]

Good deal, I think Cook getting 15 a year would be too much. We will see how that shakes out

[transplantbillsfan]

By the way, Greg Tompsett points out that these 4 years are added as new money onto the last year of his rookie deal, when he's slated to make $3.3m due to proven performance escalators.

 

5 year $63.5m deal locks him up through age 30.

 

Even better!

 

@BullBuchanan and @Jrb1979... stop your whining!