If AJ Brown finally joins, where does that leave us in the draft?

Obviously acquiring AJ Brown it would factor in to their thinking at WR on some level. But not sure it really changes a whole lot. They have 6 WRs now but Douglas and Chism are both cuttable. So they could roster AJ Brown and one more player. Next year, Boutte and Hollins are FAs. We also don't know what Doubs' contract structure is yet so maybe he's not even a lock to be here next year either despite the flashy contract "up to" value. KWilliams isn't established yet either.

I consider a team's top 3 WRs to be starter level player (along with the top 2 TEs, top 2 RBs, and the FB - even though that means more than 5 skill position starters, I based that off of how significant playing time comes in different formations and the rotational nature of the RB position). On paper right now, I only consider Boutte and Doubs as proven, established players in those starting roles. Hollins/Douglas are short of that for me and while both can play, neither would ideally be in a top 3 WR role IMO. So Brown would give you that third guy this year, but they don't have 3 such players on the team for 2027 right now. So in my view, a receiver they draft could be in line for a starting spot as soon as next year (2027) which is in line with their need at other positions we talk about replacing a year earlier than we anticipate moving on from someone.

So right now I'd say they would take a WR as high as the 1st round if it was BPA. I also wouldn't rule out them taking 2 WRs with "roster lock" type draft picks if the board dictates it. Trade for AJ Brown... and I think they still would take a WR as high as round 1 if it was BPA. I would say the impact is that maybe it lengthens the gap he would have to be BPA by to take him that high. And it probably eliminates the chances they'd take 2 "roster lock" type of WRs too.

Headcase said:

The league would almost certainly veto that trade.

Click to expand...

I think that some would prefer to have a 2027 first to a 2026 first.
=======================
I suspect that many might think that NE's 2027 first is worth about the same as their 2027 first.

RobertWeathers said:

They went to the Super Bowl last year. That means they are a legit contender. Since then they have added better players. There is still the draft with their dozen picks. There are still more players to sign. I fear you are acting like it'll take years to rebuild/build the perfect team. They aren't giving up first rounders here. A 2nd and a 4th is nothing for a WR1.

The time is now.

Click to expand...

The funny thing is, I feel like this team, as it is constituted TODAY is a legit contender - and we're only on Phase 1 of the 5 in building a contending team throughout the pre-season!

1. Free agency
2. Trades
3. Draft
4. Signing other team cuts
5. Practice squad/Shadow roster development

Obviously the Top 3 are where you make the most difference but none of here discount what quality depth means in a Super Bowl run,

So we're just one week in to free agency, and might see some other depth players signed. We have room at WR for both Brown and a rookie on the roster, though with Dobbs signed I don't think they'll pull the trigger on him

Yet can we make the case that they should work a trade that would put them WAY over the top? Yeah. Especially as I think the Bills have done a good job in free agency themselves.

But if they had to start the team they have today - and they're only getting better - there's no team I think they couldn't beat.

News seems to be that Brown is staying put with the Eagles. For now.

DoubleDeluxe said:

Didn’t see a single Louisville game the past of years, so can’t provide any meaningful comments on Bell.
From a measurable standpoint he looks comparable to AJ?

Click to expand...

That's the sense I get as well. Unfortunately I have been so busy that I haven't been able to spend any time on the draft. I'm counting on Mayo and Manx to inform me. This is a weird draft imo. For the most part picking at 31 isn't that big a disadvantage, there appears to be good prospects at positions they need. I won't be surprised if they trade back and maximize its value, as there are always teams that want to jump in front of 33 -35 etc... who will pay a good price to jump back in for a player they need/love.

It leaves us with fewer draft picks and less money available to spend on our better young players in exchange for a declining shiny object who will play on his gimpy knee for a year or two, then wander off to Miami Beach. But addled fanboys will be happy for a few weeks, and that's really all that matters, right?

RobertWeathers said:

They went to the Super Bowl last year. That means they are a legit contender. Since then they have added better players. There is still the draft with their dozen picks. There are still more players to sign. I fear you are acting like it'll take years to rebuild/build the perfect team. They aren't giving up first rounders here. A 2nd and a 4th is nothing for a WR1.

The time is now.

Click to expand...

I was unaware the future had been cancelled.

And again, our serenditpitous participation in this year's Super Bowl has, I think, led many to conclude we are significantly further along in the rebuild (from bottom-of-the-barrel dreck) than we actually are. I am sure that next year's record, against a more representative array of opponents, will demonstrate that this is so.

If we were in a "a player or two away" situation, A J Brown would make sense, but we are not, and so it does not.

Thelonious said:

I was unaware the future had been cancelled.

And again, our serenditpitous participation in this year's Super Bowl has, I think, led many to conclude we are significantly further along in the rebuild (from bottom-of-the-barrel dreck) than we actually are. I am sure that next year's record, against a more representative array of opponents, will demonstrate that this is so.

If we were in a "a player or two away" situation, A J Brown would make sense, but we are not, and so it does not.

Click to expand...

You are as wrong as wrong can be.