Trade for Gabe Davis?!!!

[McKnowledge]

They’re very similar both statistically and in terms of role. They’re high variance boundary deep threats. If you polled Bills fans, I bet you’d find they have very similar feelings about him as Packers fans had about MVS.

I don't see any comparisions.

MVS is a burner with a limited route tree.

Davis is clearly a better route runner with better hands.

With or without Diggs, Gabe Davis has produced.

I think Davis, Watson, and Doubs complement each other well.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I don't see any comparisions.

MVS is a burner with a limited route tree.

Davis is clearly a better route runner with better hands.

With or without Diggs, Gabe Davis has produced.

I think Davis, Watson, and Doubs complement each other well.

If you consider Davis a better wide receiver than MVS you shouldn't believe the Bills would be interested in trading him for a backup running back.

 

[McKnowledge]

If you consider Davis a better wide receiver than MVS you shouldn't believe the Bills would be interested in trading him for a backup running back.

Why is that?

 

[Dantés]

I don't see any comparisions.

MVS is a burner with a limited route tree.

Davis is clearly a better route runner with better hands.

With or without Diggs, Gabe Davis has produced.

I think Davis, Watson, and Doubs complement each other well.

You don't see any comparisons?

Boundary receivers with linear route trees who provide offenses with a vertical dimension. They are both high ADOT players with high variance outcomes. The stats bear it out.

MVS, first three seasons:

38 receptions, 581 yards, 2 touchdowns, 15.3 YPR, 8.0 YPT, 52.1% catch rate
26 receptions, 452 yards, 2 touchdowns, 17.4 YPR, 8.1 YPT, 46.4% catch rate
33 receptions, 690 yards, 6 touchdowns, 20.9 YPR, 11.0 YPT, 52.4% catch rate

Davis, first three seasons:

35 receptions, 599 yards, 7 touchdowns, 17.1 YPR, 9.7 YPT, 56.5% catch rate
35 receptions, 549 yards, 6 touchdowns, 15.7 YPR, 8.7 YPT, 55.6% catch rate
48 receptions, 836 yards, 7 touchdowns, 17.4 YPR, 9.0 YPT, 51.6% catch rate

They're extremely similar. MVS has more pure speed; Davis is better at the LOS and has better hands.

The reason you think they're night and day different is that you watched MVS play and became frustrated with his boom/bust nature as a player, and you haven't had the same experience with Davis. But I guarantee you that Bills fans have.

And if you really believe that Davis is a vastly superior player that MVS, then it should only further support my point in your own mind. If you think Davis is worth 12-15 AAV because he's a tier above MVS at 10 AAV, then he is clearly way more valuable than Dillon.

 

[McKnowledge]

The reason you think they're night and day different is that you watched MVS play and became frustrated with his boom/bust nature as a player, and you haven't had the same experience with Davis. But I guarantee you that Bills fans have.

And if you really believe that Davis is a vastly superior player that MVS, then it should only further support my point in your own mind. If you think Davis is worth 12-15 AAV because he's a tier above MVS at 10 AAV, then he is clearly way more valuable than Dillon.

Sound argument. I chose to skip over the stats.

Can't argue with those numbers.

But Davis clearly has better numbers

I'm also confused as to how MVS entered this discussion. Wasn't brought up in the initial thread post.

Anyways...

The huge extension for Josh Allen kicks in for 2023 season and decisions will need to be made for the roster constructed around the new deal.

Davis could be out. I would imagine Buffalo would want to get compensation in the event they are unable to meet his contract demands.

The argument you made for Davis' perceived inconsistency could be made for Buffalo deciding to move on.

AJ Dillon has underperformed. It would be wise for Green Bay to keep Jones and find another bruiser in the draft. Dillon had four years to assume RB1 and he hasn't...

Both players are without 5th year options.

Maybe a change in scenery can be mutually beneficial.

 

[Dantés]

Sound argument. I chose to skip over the stats.

Can't argue with those numbers.

But Davis clearly has better numbers

I'm also confused as to how MVS entered this discussion. Wasn't brought up in the initial thread post.

Anyways...

The huge extension for Josh Allen kicks in for 2023 season and decisions will need to be made for the roster constructed around the new deal.

Davis could be out. I would imagine Buffalo would want to get compensation in the event they are unable to meet his contract demands.

The argument you made for Davis' perceived inconsistency could be made for Buffalo deciding to move on.

AJ Dillon has underperformed. It would be wise for Green Bay to keep Jones and find another bruiser in the draft. Dillon had four years to assume RB1 and he hasn't...

Both players are without 5th year options.

Maybe a change in scenery can be mutually beneficial.

I brought up MVS originally because he's a comparable player who just signed a contract. So he gives us an idea of the neighborhood value of Gabe Davis. And that value far exceeds even the most generous projections of what Dillon would get.

To put it simply, I think the idea of offering Dillon for Davis is comparable to the idea of offering a 5th round pick for a 3rd round pick.

 

[JPPT1974]

All kinds of help would be needed since the team will possibly be moving on from Aaron Rodgers. That would be meaning to rebuild from the ground up if you know what I mean.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Why is that?

Teams don't trade a starting wide receiver for a backup running back.

The huge extension for Josh Allen kicks in for 2023 season and decisions will need to be made for the roster constructed around the new deal.

Davis could be out. I would imagine Buffalo would want to get compensation in the event they are unable to meet his contract demands.

The Bills don't gain a whole of cap space by moving on from Davis. Therefore I don't expect them to be interested in trading him. They might let him walk away in free agency after next season though.

 

[McKnowledge]

Teams don't trade a starting wide receiver for a backup running back.

So if indeed you view Dillon as a backup RB, then why keep him? He won't get the contract he wants and I don't think he wants to finish his career as RB2.

The pushback I receive is from people placing themselves in the shoes of the Bill's front office.

Why?

Are we not fans of the Green Bay Packers?

Teams don't do this...blah blah blah

The NFL is entering the modern era of free agency where anything can happen, historical records be damned shouldn't matter.

The Bills don't gain a whole of cap space by moving on from Davis. Therefore I don't expect them to be interested in trading him. They might let him walk away in free agency after next season though.

I never stated that the Bills would save cap space...never said that!!!

I never stated that the Packers would save cap space...never said that!!!


In return, Buffalo would get a player that fills a need, Dillon is better than both Singletary and Cook at the moment.

In return, Green Bay would get a player that fills a need, Davis can play X,Y,Z and any other letters anyone wants to come up with.

He would drastically improve the passing game, either buffering Rodgers in his last chapter or providing stability for Love.

After next season, an actual financial commitment would happen. However, for the 2023 season the cap remains relatively the same.

Finally, would Green Bay allow Dillon to leave in free agency for nothing?!!!

Why would Buffalo?

 

[Dantés]

So if indeed you view Dillon as a backup RB, then why keep him? He won't get the contract he wants and I don't think he wants to finish his career as RB2.

The pushback I receive is from people placing themselves in the shoes of the Bill's front office.

Why?

Are we not fans of the Green Bay Packers?

Teams don't do this...blah blah blah

The NFL is entering the modern era of free agency where anything can happen, historical records be damned shouldn't matter.



I never stated that the Bills would save cap space...never said that!!!

I never stated that the Packers would save cap space...never said that!!!


In return, Buffalo would get a player that fills a need, Dillon is better than both Singletary and Cook at the moment.

In return, Green Bay would get a player that fills a need, Davis can play X,Y,Z and any other letters anyone wants to come up with.

He would drastically improve the passing game, either buffering Rodgers in his last chapter or providing stability for Love.

After next season, an actual financial commitment would happen. However, for the 2023 season the cap remains relatively the same.

Finally, would Green Bay allow Dillon to leave in free agency for nothing?!!!

Why would Buffalo?

I don’t see the evidence that Dillon is definitively better than Singletary.

But your last point doesn’t make sense to me.

If your logic is that both teams should be motivated to trade guys in contract years before they walk, why would they make the swap for another player also in a contract year?

 

[Magooch]

The pushback I receive is from people placing themselves in the shoes of the Bill's front office.

Why?

Are we not fans of the Green Bay Packers?

Teams don't do this...blah blah blah

The NFL is entering the modern era of free agency where anything can happen, historical records be damned shouldn't matter.

Of course we are Packers fans but there's got to be some degree of realism, too. And so naturally you have to put yourselves in the Bills' FO shoes. Not much sense in talking about a potential trade if we're only going to look at it from the Packers angle and what benefits us. If that's the case then we might as well talk about swapping Dillon for Diggs. I'm sure the only pushback there would be from those placing themselves in the shoes of the Bills FO, too!

 

[McKnowledge]

If your logic is that both teams should be motivated to trade guys in contract years before they walk, why would they make the swap for another player also in a contract year?

Think of it as a team having more control over the direction of their franchise.

Buffalo has cycled through RBs and the results are hollow wins and tough losses.

The RB is vital to Buffalo and depending on Allen to go Superman every game is not good football.

If willing, Buffalo trades for Dillon, gets a full year of production and evaluation.

They like what they see, they negotiate terms.

They lack high end draft picks, and with Allen's extension kicking in, they cannot keep 2 big contracts for WRs.

Flip side, Green Bay is not paying for 2 sizable deals going to Jones and Dillon.

Bottom line, imagine yourself as a boss...

Would you rather negotiate a deal with someone that is more favorable to the direction of your organization and doesn't pose a threat to the viability of other top producers?

Or do you want to commit to someone that isn't an asset, won't produce consistently, and takes away snaps from a better player while taking a nice chunk of cap space?

 

[Schultz]

Cook will be the lead back over Singletary going forward in Buffalo. IMO.

 

[McKnowledge]

If that's the case then we might as well talk about swapping Dillon for Diggs.

Lol...↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓

Of course we are Packers fans but there's got to be some degree of realism

Anyways...

Not much sense in talking about a potential trade if we're only going to look at it from the Packers angle and what benefits us.

That's the point of negotiations...everything WE (people) do is for own benefit.

Everyday we negotiate, barter, haggle, and/or acquiesce to get what we want.

I do see things from the Bills' perspective, otherwise I wouldn't keep making an argument for this thread.

I think sometimes a team should be proactive and not solely reactive.

Green Bay is NOT going to lure a WR1 in free agency, they will have to trade or develop that role.

Watson and Doubs are nice players with a lot of potential that can possibly fill that role.

Davis is already capable of being WR1.

 

[tynimiller]

If Dillon can get us Davis I say we trade Rodgers to get Burrow.

 

[McKnowledge]

Cook will be the lead back over Singletary going forward in Buffalo. IMO.

He should've been the 2nd half of the season. Why wasn't he?

 

[McKnowledge]

If Dillon can get us Davis I say we trade Rodgers to get Burrow.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[McKnowledge]

Drafting Mayer at 15 checks a lot of boxes

I'm fine with getting the rookie, as long as Green Bay also gets a ready made TE1.

Rookie TEs need to slow cook.

There is no microwave to stardom for rookie TEs.

 

[McKnowledge]

It would be much simpler for the Bills to keep Davis and draft a back.

Keeping Davis requires a financial commitment that I'm unsure they are willing to make.

Keep in thought, this year of all years was there best chance to make and win the Super Bowl.

Next year with Allen's extension kicking in, Von Miller's contract entering Year 2 amongst other deals, decisions will be made with the cap in mind.

 

[McKnowledge]

All kinds of help would be needed since the team will possibly be moving on from Aaron Rodgers. That would be meaning to rebuild from the ground up if you know what I mean.

It would be a rebuild sans Rodgers, but a not long one.

The other teams in our division are not consistently good, especially with QB play.

I'm not sold on Love, but after the dead cap hit of Rodgers leaves the books.

Then in 2024, Packers should franchise tag Love, and go shopping.

 

[OldSchool101]

Anything is possible but I could only see this if there’s an injury in the WR room or RB rooms or both necessitating an offer. Often a trade like this follows some character issues or disgruntled player etc..
That doesn’t fit these guys.

I will also offer that while Dillon is not Aaron Jones, he could be a RB1 on nearly half of the teams NFL rosters and yes, he’d do fine. So essentially this idea that a WR2-3 couldn’t be traded based on production doesn’t hold. Dillon is a slight upgrade over someone like David Montgomery and nobody is calling him a “backup”. Just because he didn’t crack a 1,000 rushing doesn’t mean he’s not a viable RB1. I’m using Montgomery e.g, because he’s an average to lower type RB1 that’s used in both phases and without anyone clearly ahead of him in Chicago. Dillon is also used in a slightly different capacity as a Pseudo FB type, short yardage Bruiser. Notice Dillon’s 1st Downs and TD production in many fewer attempts speaks to that.

Dillon in last 2 seasons
453 targets/attempts
2,092 yards 4.62 per attempt
123 1Downs/1st each 3.68 touches
14 TD’s.

Montgomery in last 2 seasons
517 attempts
2,267 yards 4.38 per attempt
124 1Downs/1st each 4.17 touches
13TD’s

I think we can say Dillon has produced more with less opportunities than Montgomery. If Dillon was a clear #1 choice at RB, I’d argue he’s a middle of the Road RB1 (top 20). Just with Montgomery’s target attempts? Dillon would pace
1,194 All purpose
8TD’s
An impressive 70 1st downs

 

[Dantés]

Keeping Davis requires a financial commitment that I'm unsure they are willing to make.

Keep in thought, this year of all years was there best chance to make and win the Super Bowl.

Next year with Allen's extension kicking in, Von Miller's contract entering Year 2 amongst other deals, decisions will be made with the cap in mind.

Or they could just keep the better and more valuable player this season and then let him walk. I don't see why it would be more attractive to trade for a lesser asset who has the same amount of control. If Dillon was under contract for longer, then maybe I could understand the idea.

 

[Dantés]

Think of it as a team having more control over the direction of their franchise.

Buffalo has cycled through RBs and the results are hollow wins and tough losses.

The RB is vital to Buffalo and depending on Allen to go Superman every game is not good football.

If willing, Buffalo trades for Dillon, gets a full year of production and evaluation.

They like what they see, they negotiate terms.

They lack high end draft picks, and with Allen's extension kicking in, they cannot keep 2 big contracts for WRs.

Flip side, Green Bay is not paying for 2 sizable deals going to Jones and Dillon.

Bottom line, imagine yourself as a boss...

Would you rather negotiate a deal with someone that is more favorable to the direction of your organization and doesn't pose a threat to the viability of other top producers?

Or do you want to commit to someone that isn't an asset, won't produce consistently, and takes away snaps from a better player while taking a nice chunk of cap space?

So is Dillon a great runner who would dramatically upgrade Buffalo's backfield and solve their run game woes, or is he a non-asset that the Packers should get rid of? Which is it?

 

[McKnowledge]

So is Dillon a great runner who would dramatically upgrade Buffalo's backfield and solve their run game woes, or is he a non-asset that the Packers should get rid of? Which is it?

Dillon is a non-asset as long he remains inconsistent in production.

I repeat...Dillon has had four seasons to assume control of the RB1 role, he hasn't...

Having said that, there is enough of a large sample size that shows the promise and potential of Dillon as a viable RB1.

@OldSchool101 expertly illustrates his potential in his post.

I will also offer that while Dillon is not Aaron Jones, he could be a RB1 on nearly half of the teams NFL rosters and yes, he’d do fine.

IMO I think Dillon would dramatically upgrade the Bills' backfield.

I also view him as a non-asset due to the brilliance of Aaron Jones.

We got four years of snaps, carries, and hits out of Dillon.

He'll want money...money we should spend on a big deal.

We could get a viable WR1 at no cost relative to GB cap space.

It isn't about any player discontent or necessarily a fit in their respective offenses.

It's about anticipating a need and proactively doing something about it without facing a financial penalty.

 

[Dantés]

We don’t have to keep going around in circles about this. Suffice it to say, I think you guys are dramatically exaggerating Dillon’s value and ability.