Greg Rousseau Extended (4 years / 80M / 54M Guaranteed)

[appoo]

1 hour ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

Not super happy.   This makes me think Beane thinks we're close on defense and that no big (risky) moves are coming.  I really hope I'm wrong.  I like Groot.  Not at this salary.  I'd let him go and spend assets on Garrett.  

GR is one of the best run defending DEs in the league while a good but not great pass rusher (who might yet still get to great).  
 

The bills lowered their cap number and kept him.

 

in a world where beane traded him for draft picks, how would this game out in the bills being better both when combining both onfield impact and cap health? There’s not a player the Bills could get in the draft that would be even close to as good as GR in run defending - or likely pass rusher considering where they draft

[EasternOHBillsFan]

6 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

They probably either believe that because they aren't SB contender, or they're glad we did it to ensure we don't become one.

 

We basically have had a swinging door of players along our D-Line... not fair to single our Groot. We get an opposite number at DE and a beefy DT and we are good to go. I hope we get Garrett so you have to eat this remark...

[MasterStrategist]

Already posted my thoughts on Groot extension- which I'm a huge fan of. 

 

Two examples of extending young players, with high priced GTD $:

1. Extending the Player X who has "hit his ceiling or close to".  Less risky, usually more costly, and value gets diminished to an extent.  Already in tier 2/borderline elite or elite status.

 

2.  Extending Player Y who has shown elite potential/untapped ceiling, still ascending.  These deals you "pay for the come", and while greater risk, can return extreme high "value".  Ascending into Tier 2, or shown to be there, albeit not consistently.

 

Groot fits mold 2, IMO.  Like I said before, Spencer Brown and Groot are almost 2 peas in a pod. We saw what happened with Spencer this year, he's going to be a Tier 1/elite RT in the next year or so.  Groot is on a similar trajectory - at least to be a dependable Tier 2 player overall- excellent against the run, 10-12 sack potential.

 

Off topic/related to future:

1.  Bernard, Shakir, Benford (who I'd put as most established) all in same boat.  Cook as well, he's going to be putting up way bigger #s next year IMO- we need 1 consistent explosive WR ro take this offense to another level.

 

2.  Need to fix CB2 and S- these are bigger issues than DL, IMO

 

[NoSaint]

3 minutes ago, khlax3 said:

I am really not understanding the hate on this deal. It feel like people are living in the mid 2000s cap era . We have him locked up for 5 more years until his age 29 season for an average of 18.6 million a year. Within the next year or two the top tier guys are going to be in the 35-40 million a year range with the current and future cap. Most of these guys will also be in their late 20s or early 30s. Having a guy like up for his prime at half that number seems pretty good

he’s roughly average to slightly below for a primary pass rusher. 
 

a veteran roster can only pay so many of “those guys” and still have the elite guys getting 35-40M

 

put another way, would you rather cycle guys like Josh sweat/floyd/etc… on short deals and add a $30m guy, or are we better with groot/shakir? 
 

personally I think having a couple true cornerstones and cycling lower tier vets and draft picks is my preferred but see miller, vonn for how it can go wrong 

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, BullBuchanan said:

I agree that stopping the run is important, but finding those guys is a lot easier, and historically a  lot cheaper, than finding guys that can sack the QB. I really like having a guy like Rousseau on a rookie deal or somewhere around $10M/yr. The opportunity cost of paying him pass rusher money is that now you have to pray you find an all-pro EDGE in the draft when you're going to be at a disadvantage. I would have rather went after a guy like Garret and then drafted a Rousseau replacement which would have been far easier.

 

Dont get me wrong, if I had to choose between Garrett and Groot, I am all in on Garrett too and then looking to the draft.  So no disagreement from me.  But, I also don't think Groot's deal prevents us making a run at either Garrett or Hendrickson.  Whether or not either gets traded or either would trade them to a perennial top 3 team in their own conference is another story.  

 

And I also think Groot is worth a lot more than $10M a year, and at $20M in todays market, thats a bargain IMHO.  I think Groot is going to be even better once we improve elsewhere on the DL too.  I mean as much as everyone wants Hendrickson, he didn't break out as a sack machine until he was in the league a little while.  

 

[streetkings01]

Ain’t my money plus the cap goes every year…..I’m just happy he’s still a Buffalo Bills for the next 5 seasons!

[L Ron Burgundy]

31 minutes ago, appoo said:

GR is one of the best run defending DEs in the league while a good but not great pass rusher (who might yet still get to great).  
 

The bills lowered their cap number and kept him.

 

in a world where beane traded him for draft picks, how would this game out in the bills being better both when combining both onfield impact and cap health? There’s not a player the Bills could get in the draft that would be even close to as good as GR in run defending - or likely pass rusher considering where they draft

I like Groot. I think he's good not great.  We could get someone in the draft with his impact,  but it's tough,  very unlikely. 

 

I get our cap may be reduced this year but Beane is likely looking at the whole picture.   My worry is just like I said.  That instead of going aggressive and landing an elite player we're going to go conservative and keep building in the draft.

 

I'm not pissed or going crazy, just concerned.   I trust Beane overall.  But his DL drafting is suspect.  Elite talent is available.   That doesn't always happen.  

[khlax3]

17 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

he’s roughly average to slightly below for a primary pass rusher. 
 

a veteran roster can only pay so many of “those guys” and still have the elite guys getting 35-40M

 

put another way, would you rather cycle guys like Josh sweat/floyd/etc… on short deals and add a $30m guy, or are we better with groot/shakir? 
 

personally I think having a couple true cornerstones and cycling lower tier vets and draft picks is my preferred but see miller, vonn for how it can go wrong 

That’s where we disagree. I feel he is already an above average defensive end that is 24 years old and ascending. He played 1 year in college. 
 

Hendrickson in is first 4 years before signing his deal with cincy had 20 sacks. Groot in his first 4 years has 25. He is an elite run defender gets a lot of pressure. 

[L Ron Burgundy]

1 hour ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

 

This deal is going to increase our cap space for this year. If anything I think it makes a FA splash more likely

I hope you're right and I'm wrong.   3 elite players available.   I really hope we get one, I feel like 1 of the 3 should be easy even if it's DK who I think is cheapest of them.  Then use draft capital on defense maybe?   We'll see.

[BADOLBILZ]

2 hours ago, Magox said:

There is more of an urgency to win it all than ever before.  Allen in the next few years will be declining from a physical standpoint, (I don’t believe overall but physically).

 

I am convinced that after seeing how the Eagles are paying all their players and some with over $350M in their voided year contracts which is $200M more than the next highest team that Pegula will more all in than he has in the past.

 

We will know in the not so distant future if what I believe will play out.  

 

 

Yeah, I am naturally skeptical of sports ownership and said owner's not holding up their end of the bargain by putting the best product on the field they can.  And no question in my mind that Terry Pegula has yo-yo'd financially with the Sabres.........but he's also intimately involved in personnel decisions there so it's not necessarily even just a reflection of being cheap.   He didn't give Kevyn Adams full control when he hired him.

 

The Pegula's turned over Bills ops entirely to McDermott to get him to sign on the dotted line and I haven't seen any instance that indicates that he's ever told McBeane no on something they wanted to do.

 

I've heard numerous times that Pegula regrets giving up "full" control to McBeane but it sure seems he's been true to his word and allowed them to do as they see fit.  

 

And in return they got Terry P a franchise QB, they've won consistently, increased the value of his asset many times over etc.. so he is probably able to overcome any "feels" about lacking control by knowing it's worked.

 

I just don't think it's a given that Beane wants to operate like the Eagles do but I get why fans are trying to put the onus on ownership.  

[Magox]

11 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Yeah, I am naturally skeptical of sports ownership and said owner's not holding up their end of the bargain by putting the best product on the field they can.  And no question in my mind that Terry Pegula has yo-yo'd financially with the Sabres.........but he's also intimately involved in personnel decisions there so it's not necessarily even just a reflection of being cheap.   He didn't give Kevyn Adams full control when he hired him.

 

The Pegula's turned over Bills ops entirely to McDermott to get him to sign on the dotted line and I haven't seen any instance that indicates that he's ever told McBeane no on something they wanted to do.

 

I've heard numerous times that Pegula regrets giving up "full" control to McBeane but it sure seems he's been true to his word and allowed them to do as they see fit.  

 

And in return they got Terry P a franchise QB, they've won consistently, increased the value of his asset many times over etc.. so he is probably able to overcome any "feels" about lacking control by knowing it's worked.

 

I just don't think it's a given that Beane wants to operate like the Eagles do but I get why fans are trying to put the onus on ownership.  

Because in order to spend like the Eagles, the up front real cash expenditures are huge and I don’t believe Beane could just spend his money in such a fashion without consulting the boss 

Edited Sunday at 02:10 AM by Magox

[Low Positive]

27 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Yeah, I am naturally skeptical of sports ownership and said owner's not holding up their end of the bargain by putting the best product on the field they can.  And no question in my mind that Terry Pegula has yo-yo'd financially with the Sabres.........but he's also intimately involved in personnel decisions there so it's not necessarily even just a reflection of being cheap.   He didn't give Kevyn Adams full control when he hired him.

 

The Pegula's turned over Bills ops entirely to McDermott to get him to sign on the dotted line and I haven't seen any instance that indicates that he's ever told McBeane no on something they wanted to do.

 

I've heard numerous times that Pegula regrets giving up "full" control to McBeane but it sure seems he's been true to his word and allowed them to do as they see fit.  

 

And in return they got Terry P a franchise QB, they've won consistently, increased the value of his asset many times over etc.. so he is probably able to overcome any "feels" about lacking control by knowing it's worked.

 

I just don't think it's a given that Beane wants to operate like the Eagles do but I get why fans are trying to put the onus on ownership.  

I've thought a lot about this. I came to the conclusion that it's much harder to build a hockey team than an NFL team. In hockey, there is nothing as golden as hitting on a QB. It's more like a baseball team, only as good as it's middle relief. Also, having to draft prospects at 18 and letting them develop for years in the Juniors and Minors elongates the process and produces a lot of draft misses. Players in the NHL also have extensive no-trade clauses that keep bad teams bad. Not that these are excuses, but they do explain how Pegula can be a good NFL owner and a really bad NHL owner. 

[DCofNC]

Well, hope y’all enjoyed Free agency this year, that’s a wrap!

[Low Positive]

The level of misunderstanding of the NFL salary cap by posters with thousands of posts on this board is surprising. 

[Julio Hopkins]

1 hour ago, khlax3 said:

That’s where we disagree. I feel he is already an above average defensive end that is 24 years old and ascending. He played 1 year in college. 
 

Hendrickson in is first 4 years before signing his deal with cincy had 20 sacks. Groot in his first 4 years has 25. He is an elite run defender gets a lot of pressure. 

 

Hendrickson was mostly a bench guy before his final season on New Orleans, he had 1,549 snaps his first four years.  Rousseau has been a starter the past three with 2,671 total snaps since being drafted.  I'm not sure if that's a good comparison.  

Edited Sunday at 02:58 AM by Julio Hopkins

[Doc Brown]

8 minutes ago, DCofNC said:

Well, hope y’all enjoyed Free agency this year, that’s a wrap!

We're officially on Ty Johnson/Mack Hollins watch.

[Doc Brown]

29 minutes ago, Low Positive said:

I've thought a lot about this. I came to the conclusion that it's much harder to build a hockey team than an NFL team. In hockey, there is nothing as golden as hitting on a QB. It's more like a baseball team, only as good as it's middle relief. Also, having to draft prospects at 18 and letting them develop for years in the Juniors and Minors elongates the process and produces a lot of draft misses. Players in the NHL also have extensive no-trade clauses that keep bad teams bad. Not that these are excuses, but they do explain how Pegula can be a good NFL owner and a really bad NHL owner. 

An argument made can be an elite goalie in hockey.  Hasek nearly won us a cup in '99 with a ridiculous .939 save %. 

[BADOLBILZ]

59 minutes ago, Magox said:

Because in order to spend like the Eagles, the up front real cash expenditures are huge and I don’t believe Beane could just spend his money in such a fashion without consulting the boss 

 

 

Because you don't think that the $100M+ Beane has guaranteed in the last week was done without consulting the boss?   My points stand.

[Low Positive]

1 minute ago, Doc Brown said:

An argument made can be an elite goalie in hockey.  Hasek nearly won us a cup in '99 with a ridiculous .939 save %. 

That was the past. Goaltenders are the RBs of the NHL. Very important but undervalued. Also, Goalies take FOREVER to develop. 

[BADOLBILZ]

48 minutes ago, Low Positive said:

I've thought a lot about this. I came to the conclusion that it's much harder to build a hockey team than an NFL team. In hockey, there is nothing as golden as hitting on a QB. It's more like a baseball team, only as good as it's middle relief. Also, having to draft prospects at 18 and letting them develop for years in the Juniors and Minors elongates the process and produces a lot of draft misses. Players in the NHL also have extensive no-trade clauses that keep bad teams bad. Not that these are excuses, but they do explain how Pegula can be a good NFL owner and a really bad NHL owner. 

 

 

I don't feel that way.   The Sabres have just been incompetently managed.   Not needing something as rare as an elite QB makes it easier.   They've had numerous players who have proven capable of leading teams to Stanley Cup championships and it hasn't mattered.   Pegula has been a complete disaster as an NHL owner.   He was trending that way as an NFL owner until he turned ops over to football people completely.