Seattle listening to offers on DK Metcalf

[LABILLBACKER]

7 minutes ago, MikePJ76 said:

They both cost a lot.  Good players cost a lot. 

 

If you make one of these moves and lose two or three picks plus two or three players you might have extended you are really altering your team and your plan.

 

It's very risky.  

 

The bills would be giving Seattle a player with two or years left on a rookie contract, a first and a fourth round pick for Metcalfs giant cap number and a four. 

 

GB would be giving a wr with an expiring contract and a locker room risk and  a first round pick.

 

Buffalo's deal would be better honestly no matter if its kincaid or coleman.  I wonder if Buffalo would not have to give the 4th to them.  Since kincaid or coleman is great for their books that should allow buffalo to keep their four.

 

Kincaid/Coleman and 30 for Metcalf and 137.   That fourt rounder from Seattle would be them essentially paying buffalo for the cap space they are getting by moving metcalf.

 

The bills are getting two fifth round comp picks so if they could get that kind of a deal its a no brainer and they would still have 9 picks or so.

I personally could care less which player between Coleman or Kincaid gets thrown in to sweeten the pot. Unfortunately I don't see either panning out.

[BrooklynBills]

The Bills 1st is later than 23 and they don't have a WR as valuable to offer as Doubs.

 

Trading Kincaid saves just $270K on the cap. Trading Coleman costs you an additional $900K. Those aren't realistic trade candidates for a team that is going to have to work to get under the cap IMO.

[MikePJ76]

5 minutes ago, BuffaloMatt said:

I'm not the smartest guy out there but our defene is a glarring issue and really needs to be the focus on all levels- DL, DE, LB, CB S. 

Yes it does.  The Line needs to be rebuilt.

 

Right now Buffalo has 10 picks.

30, 56, 62, 107, 130, 170, 173, 176, 203, 205

 

if they made a deal like we mentioned in the other threads they would/could have.

 

56  62, 130, 137, 170, 173, 176, 203 and 205.

 

They would  still have good picks to use on the defensive line.  56 and 62 can still get them two defensive lineman or a DL and Corner or safety.  

 

 

[BuffaloMatt]

11 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:

I would agree if we were guaranteed landing either Garrett or Crosby.  But those scenarios are not a given.  Then factor in Beane has kinda sucked drafting defensive players. It's basically pick your poison.  Keep trying unsuccessfully to build a D that can stop KC?....or increase your scoring level from 30 to 35? Choose, but you can't have both.

It's not only KC, Rams had their way with us (any good offense did too) and Eagles aren't getting any worse. 

Edited 5 hours ago by BuffaloMatt

[msw2112]

DK would be a great addition to the Bills for this upcoming season.  The problem arises when he's up for renewal and wants $30M and the Bills need that money for DL, CB, etc.  I assume this is the reason Seattle is shopping him.

[HappyDays]

29 minutes ago, BuffaloMatt said:

It's funny that scoring 30 points a game is not enough. . .. losing in Divisional and AFC Championship b/c you allow 30+.  Defense needs to be a priority, more than enough points 

 

Yeah it sucks that we need to score 35+ points to beat KC in the playoffs, but that is the simple reality. We've had four chances against them and they've never punted more than twice. The last two times our offense had the ball last and couldn't close out the game. So I've given up all hope of changing that game script. The correct strategy is to try and win within that game script.

 

Anyways we would still have two 2nd rounders in a deep DL class so it's not like trading for Metcalf would preclude us from rebuilding the defense.

[Doc Brown]

27 minutes ago, BuffaloMatt said:

It's funny that scoring 30 points a game is not enough. . .. losing in Divisional and AFC Championship b/c you allow 30+.  Defense needs to be a priority, more than enough points 

True but a lot of what allowed us to get to that average will revert back to the mean (turnovers).  We forced the second most and gave up the fewest.  We were only 10th in yards gained so we weren't some kind of historic offensive juggernaut last year. 

[SoonerBillsFan]

2 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Yeah it sucks that we need to score 35+ points to beat KC in the playoffs, but that is the simple . We've had four chances against them and they've never punted more than twice. The last two times our offense had the ball last and couldn't close out the game. So I've given up all hope of changing that game script. The correct strategy is to try and win within that game script.

 

Anyways we would still have two 2nd rounders in a deep DL class so it's not like trading for Metcalf would preclude us from rebuilding the defense.

I agree with all of that AND folks are forgetting this thing called Free Agency that is coming up to upgrade our Defense.

[HappyDays]

4 minutes ago, msw2112 said:

The problem arises when he's up for renewal and wants $30M and the Bills need that money for DL, CB, etc

 

I just don't understand this thinking. We're saying no to an elite player that is a perfect fit with Allen, in favor of spending more resources on the side of the ball that literally never shows up in the playoffs?

[BillsSbSoon]

4 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I just don't understand this thinking. We're saying no to an elite player that is a perfect fit with Allen, in favor of spending more resources on the side of the ball that literally never shows up in the playoffs?

Bingo. Everyone is so concerned about the defense when it literally disappears every playoffs. I’d just like to stockpile more weapons for Josh at this point but that idea hasn’t gotten through to McDermott and beane yet 

[billsfan89]

3 minutes ago, BillsSbSoon said:

Bingo. Everyone is so concerned about the defense when it literally disappears every playoffs. I’d just like to stockpile more weapons for Josh at this point but that idea hasn’t gotten through to McDermott and beane yet 

 

The Bills cleared a lot of their books the past season eating 74 million in dead money and they are in the bottom 5 in the NFL in future void years. They also have down the road several big contracts moving off the books. Von, Milano, Knox, D.Jones, and AJE all either expire after 2025 or they become easier to cut with smaller dead cap hits after this season. So it isn't like the Bills are in all that bad of a spot to not take on one bigger contract if it get Josh a WR1 for the next 2-3 seasons or more. 

[Warriorspikes51]

38 minutes ago, BrooklynBills said:

The Bills 1st is later than 23 and they don't have a WR as valuable to offer as Doubs.

 

Trading Kincaid saves just $270K on the cap. Trading Coleman costs you an additional $900K. Those aren't realistic trade candidates for a team that is going to have to work to get under the cap IMO.

 

Yea, we probably aren't even interested or won't go above a 2nd haha 

Edited 5 hours ago by Warriorspikes51

[MikePJ76]

1 minute ago, BillsSbSoon said:

Bingo. Everyone is so concerned about the defense when it literally disappears every playoffs. I’d just like to stockpile more weapons for Josh at this point but that idea hasn’t gotten through to McDermott and beane yet 

I don't understand the comment about McDermott and Beane.

 

The defense is the priority this year.  They literally do not even have the numbers on the defense right now.  They need players on defense desperately.  They are short on the defensive line and in the secondary.   This offseason is about the defense, if a WR like metcalf drops into their lap they can alter the plan because he is worth it.

 

This idea that we are a wr away from a championship is last years Fallacy.  

 

The defense looked pretty damn good against Denver and Baltimore and that is with an average group on the defensive line and an average group of Safeties.  Imagine if those units were upgraded with playmakers.

[jahnyc]

Seems that a big requirement in our offense, particularly on early downs, is for the WRs to block (I assume this is why Cooper was not on the field all that much after he was acquired and separate from his wrist injury).  If Metcalf would be close to an every down WR because he also blocks, bring him here.

[Mango]

2 hours ago, ddaryl said:

why would Seattle want to offload Metcalf. Is there some news I missed ?

 

1 hour ago, stuvian said:

That signals the Seahawks forfeiting the season IMO 

 

1 hour ago, thenorthremembers said:

 

He is in the final year of his deal.  Maybe they think they can get younger at the position, save $18 million on the cap, and improve other positions. 

 

1 hour ago, ddaryl said:

I see they are 13 million over the cap.... with Geno at QB that's crazy. 

 

My quick $0.02 is that they know they need a QB. I don't think they are tanking, but they are in QB purgatory and pushing the cap. Without a QB they won't get over the hump. Like the Bills did with Allen, sell off whatever pieces you need in order to give you the ammo to move up in the draft. 

Similarly I think the same about Pittsburgh. Let this roster take one more bite at the apple. If they can't get across the finish line you sell anybody to get the capital to draft a QB. My hot take is I don't think you have to replace the staff. I think this requires a temporary change in FO philosophy but the staff can stay in place. 

[GETTOTHE50]

Doubs is a journeyman receiver. Seattle would have to get a haul back from a rival like GB. They have playoff history. 
 

just give them our first and whatever for him please.

[Warriorspikes51]

5 minutes ago, GETTOTHE50 said:

Doubs is a journeyman receiver. Seattle would have to get a haul back from a rival like GB. They have playoff history. 
 

just give them our first and whatever for him please.

 

what?  He's 24 ???

[mannc]

2 hours ago, Sweats said:

Well, if we couldn't keep Cooper involved in our O, how would Metcalf even play out?!?

News flash: Cooper is five years older than Metcalf, and he was injured.

[Einstein's Dog]

57 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

I have no qualms about trading for DK, although I think Garrett or Crosby does more for this team if we can only pick one.  It was always a long shot for us to get DK, assuming we even tried, but if we were gonna make a big trade for someone at WR he did seem like the only possible target.  

 

But…if the Packers are gonna offer what is being stated is on the table, he’s gonna be a Packer, we won’t be able to compete with that offer and doubt anyone else will either.  A quality first plus a talented young WR isn’t likely being beaten by anyone.  

I agree with a lot of what you're saying here - Garrett or Crosby first.  But it seems like those could be drifting away.  Cleveland not dealing and the Raiders potentially adding Stafford to at least appear competitive to keep Crosby.

 

Where I differ is on being able to compete with the Pack.  Doubs is a troubled WR that I think Green Bay is hoping to unload and make it look like a deal sweetener.  Much in the same way I think Beane would dangle J Cook.  I think Kincaid and Coleman are in the Shakir category of highly coachable, team oriented, culture players that are here for the long haul.  Cook is questionable in that regard IMO and could be trade bait in any of the major moves.

[GETTOTHE50]

5 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said:

 

what?  He's 24 ???

I’m projecting