Alphadawg7

I don't disagree with you on the bolded...but I think its fair to say this is also true for all rookie WR's coming into the league where winning a route isn't going to be the same as winning a route in College. Granted, for some this may be an easier transition and some may take more time...but none the less, that is just part of being a rookie. I agree he is never going to be Stefon Diggs as a route runner, but that is because not only is Diggs amongst the best of his era, they are also completely different players. Mike Evans, DeAndre Hopkins, Davante Adams...these guys don't win routes the same way Diggs does either, different style of players. I agree, its not reasonable to expect Keon, or any rookie for that matter, to learn the nuanced skills to consistently get open over night. And the good news is we don't have to lean on him early. As good as Keon's camp has been, Kincaid and Shakirs has been even better with reports consistently coming out that they catch everything and are always open. Samuel as well has nothing but positive buzz coming out. The philosophy of this offense, especially early in the season, is that they won't need to lean heavy on any one person and will spread the targets out. That will take pressure of Keon having to be "the guy" so to speak early. And look at someone like Rashee Rice...he didn't come out the gate as the WR1...he was averaging only 34 yards a game through 5 games before his role started to increase to where he finished as the WR1 by seasons end. I will say this about Keon...I said it leading up to the draft and I have said since we drafted him. I feel like Keon is one of the most ready to play of all the WR's taken this year both mentally and physically. Some are gonna disagree with that, which is fine, but based on what I saw at both his stops in college, how he prepares for the game, his awareness on the field, his basketball background lending to his body control, and his excellent athleticism...I honestly feel like you would be hard pressed to find another WR we could have taken who is more ready to play at Keons spot than Keon. And the coaches and Allen have been echoing the same thing all camp.

Lol...I have never refused to answer any question and have answered that question already many times. I am not asking you to play a game. YOU responded to ME. So again...which WR group do you think is better...the 2023 top 4 guys of Rice, Toney, MVS, Watson...or the 2024 group of Shakir, Samuel, Keon, and Hollins? Which do you think is better and which would you want to see on the field this year for the Bills?

I know you do and are, and hey, he is a rookie, there will be moments other get the best of him and things he needs to work on. But counter point to this: One, the reports you are mentioning are far fewer than the ones where he has been excelling. You can't expect the rookie to be perfect on every play and every route, including against one of the best corners in the league in Chicago game. Second, those reports are not as pessimistic as they seemed either. Lets go through both: Chicago game - I watched the All-22 film on this game, he had a strong game overall. He ran 3 routes - and he ran a lot of clear outs where he did a great job selling the route and pulling the coverage successfully. First target was excellent, his hinge route was perfectly executed and gained 5 yards of separation and allowed for the easy catch and turn up field for a first down. Second target - His only real bad rep of the game, he wasn't able to fight through the contact and make a clean cut. He did however have positives on this play where he bailed out Mitch who foolishly still forced the ball to him and then compounded that with a horrific pass. Coleman had the heads up to make a good defensive play on the ball to save the turnover. How many times have we watched Davis just allow a turnover on plays like this...was good play and awareness by the kid even though he didn't run the route he wanted. Third target - The only reason this wasn't PI was because Mitch threw such a bad pass. Keon gets position on the DB and turns inside, just like the route is designed to do. The DB has one hand on Keons chest and tugs on the jersey with his other hand on the cut. Keon still gets position on him to where if Allen was the QB and throws a good ball its an easy TD or easy PI flag because the defender then came over the back of Keon holding him down from jumping to get to Mitchs bad pass when the ball was still 2 yards from reaching Keon. Keon was good on this route, the DB escaped a flag or a TD because Mitch threw an awful ball. Pittsburgh practice There was one report that came out that said he didn't get separation on his first 2 routes...then the same tweet was updated that on the very next play Keon torched the DB for a TD. Too much is being made of the fact on the first 2 routes he didn't win the routes. He adjusted and then burned them for a TD. I am not saying the kid is a lock...but the facts are that the vast majority of reports coming out have not only been positive, but very positive. He isn't going to win 100% of the time, nobody does. But what you want to see is a lot more positive coming out than negative, and that is certainly true on Keon thus far. And when the games get real come week 1, I am sure there will be even more ups and downs like most rookies experience adjusting to playing real NFL games.

What are you talking about. lol... You still didn't answer my direct question.

The only thing I was certain of was that you would not answer the question.

Fair question...that is because he wasn't one of the top 4 entering the season, I was comparing the top 4 to start our season and who they had last year. I was comparing apples to apples...like maybe MVS, Shavers or Shorter by years end winds up being 3rd or 4th in targets in the WR room, we don't really know. What we know is the top 4 guys are looking like Shakir, Keon, Samuel, and Hollins right now. So was comparing who we are entering the season with to who the Chiefs entered the season with last year as their top 4 guys. But, we can add in Watson and drop Skyy even though Skyy was a 2nd round pick and expected to be the leading WR going into last season. So the question would then be: A - Rice, Watson, MVS and Toney B - Shakir, Keon, Samuel, Hollins IMHO, doesn't change a whole lot especially given Watson has averaged just 206 yards a season for his 5 year career playing with Brady and Mahomes.

Not gonna lie...Milano injury hurts. With so many changes on the defense, his absence sucks. I am much more optimistic about our offense than our defense this season, and that was before the Milano injury. My biggest concern on defense was the injury risk having 2 undersized LB's and not having the depth at certain positions we have had in the past to where additional injuries can be a big problem. Claypool changes nothing IMHO...he was already trending to not making the roster having missed so much time. He was a low risk and high reward kind of pickup, he was never someone they needed to step up. That being said, I do think this team is still a playoff team and can still compete for the divisional title and even a Super Bowl if we can avoid too many significant injuries to key players. Maybe more so than in even past years, how healthy we can stay is going to play a bigger role as we aren't as deep with all the transitions we had to make this year for cap and age reasons.

Wait are you actually saying that the group of Rice, Skyy, Toney, MVS is a better and more talented group than Shakir, Keon, Samuel, and Hollins? Let's do this...rather than be vague...so there is no confusion on what you are implying, just answer the question: Which WR room do you think is better and would take for your top 4? A - The 2023 Chiefs top 4 of Rice, Skyy, Toney, and MVS B - The 2024 Bills top 4 of Shakir, Keon, Samuel, and Hollins Who you taking...A or B?

As far as the double teams go...this is way over exaggerated around here. How much All-22 footage have the people saying this watched to confirm his double team rate? For example, KC Chiefs safety literally stated they didn't double Diggs in our Week 14 win over KC last year. But...besides the point of how much he was really doubled, the idea that double coverage on one players turns lesser palyers into good players is just a false assumption. Yes, it helps when you have someone drawing the best coverage, but the way it is applied here is just over stated. Most teams don't take their DB and shadow a WR all over the field like so many assume. Second, Shakir plays a lot out of the slot, teams are not taking their best outside CB and moving them inside to where the NCB would be normally be playing to just shadow Shakir either. Next, this idea that no one is going to command extra attention with Diggs gone is also an inaccurate assumption. Teams still need to account for Josh as a runner, teams still need to try and counter the size and catch radius of Keon if him and Allen start to have the chemistry they are showing in camp during the season. Teams still need to account for Kincaid and Shakir if they keep ascending this season. There may not be one single guy getting doubled more often, but there will be plenty of plays where the defense will cheat extra attention to someone on this offense still. And the point of the offense is that when that happens, someone else will take advantage and get open and Josh will go there with the ball. That is really the point to the "everyone eats" philosophy they are focused on this year. If he does that, he puts himself in legit WR1 conversation the way St. Brown did in his second season after his late season breakout as a rookie. I think its highly plausible that Kincaid, Shakir, Samuel, and Keon will total similar numbers to the 3500 and 22 TD's marks you just posted. That isn't that hard to do IMHO and no one needs to break a 1000 yards either. If Shakir and Kincaid can get 1900 of that between the two, that means Samuel and Keon only need to put up 1,600 yards combined. That feels very realistic and doable and if either Shakir or Kincaid (or both) break 1,000 yards, then Samuel and Keon need even less yards to hit that target.

Counterpoint: KC's overall WR room was light years worse than our WR room is this year. There was literally no one who should be listed anywhere higher than WR5 on that roster outside of Rice. And it is why they replaced everyone on that roster in the WR room not named Rice. Skyy, Toney, and MVS literally lost multiple football games for the Chiefs last year by being so bad at their jobs. Skyy and Toney wouldn't even make our roster this year...and MVS is doing his best to not make the roster too dropping all kinds of passes in camp, practice, and preseason games.

I get why they did the Diggs extension...but I also think there is some truth to that being a mistake. I think because the market went so WR crazy contract wise that year, they tried to use a contract extension a year early to keep Diggs content, but the real issue wasn't as much the money as it was his frustration not getting over the hump and waning confidence this team could do it before the cap would force changes that were looming between age and the cap. There are players that would have worked well with...but Diggs isn't wired that way IMHO. This last statement is the disconnect between you and the majority of the people who have maybe more optimistic expectations from the changes. You just said this sentence as if it is definitively true were are actually worse. The truth is you don't know that...you know on paper before games played there is less proven production...sure. But you don't actually know if our offense will be better or worse this season with this group compared to last year. There is a lot to say about addition by subtraction...Diggs and Davis were wildly inefficient compared to what this group has the potential to be. Shakir and Kincaid are ascending players, how do you know Shakir won't make a St. Brown like leap this year after St. Brown had a breakout the back half of his rookie year? People still doubted him like they do Shakir going into that 2nd season in terms of the likelihood he would elevate to a top tier WR and for a lot of the same reasons as Shakir too. We know Keon is not who you would have taken and you have your doubts about him, but he has been a star at camp and has legit WR1 potential despite your personal concerns about him. So you don't know what he may end up being by seasons end. Look at what Rashee Rice did last year. If Rashee Rice was in this years draft he would not have gone before Coleman and probably would have gone a round or two later. Yet he emerged as a bonafide WR1 for Mahomes and played a big role in their postseason run to a SB. Point is...no one knows what this group is. To say its worse on paper before the games are played is as meaningless as grading the draft the day after the draft. Nothing means anything until the games are played...and some of us have left room for possibility that this group may prove to be a more effective group overall for Josh and the offense while others want to commit to that not being the case before we know any answers.

Cole Bishop is not only who I thought we would take in the 2nd, but also who I felt was someone we should take. Safety is a big need and concern, you gotta start bringing some young talent in when you jettison your 2 long time anchors back there. Couldn't put that off another year IMHO and there isn't a clear cut WR to take there over Bishop who IMHO was amongst the BPA at our pick. Now, whether or not we should have used one of our other picks on a WR, well that is a fair question. Personally, there was no WR on the board I would have taken over Ray Davis or SVPG when we drafted them. But where the real question will come from IMHO is if we should have taken a WR in the 3rd over Carter as there were guys there that would have made sense at that time. But we also do have needs on the DL as well, so don't fault them for addressing the trenches in the 3rd as its proven time in and time again that the most important areas of the field are winning in the trenches. The Carter pick is the one pick for me that is up for debate (outside the obvious debate if Keon or a different WR should have been our first pick).

Thats just it, I don't think Beane sees it as throwing away a prime year for Josh, nor do I. I think Beane saw an opportunity to clear out stuff that wasn't working (a high target and demanding WR) in a year he was already forced to jettison aging high priced tenured vets and try another direction with a different approach this year. Best case it proves to be the right direction, worst case, he sets the team up to make a major move at the position next year with cap space and draft capital to do it.

You know there is an additional $31M committed to WR than is on the field this year right? Beane does have a plan...it wasn't your plan, but he has a clear plan. He is rebuilding the room/team and philosophy right now while clearing out cap, aging players, and bad energy. He has this team stacked for next offseason in both cap space and draft capital to be aggressive. This world of immediate gratification makes people lose sight about the fact that its not all about one year.

I have followed what you said, and you were wrong about the narrative as literally no one has claimed they were the top 2 guys, and even the guy you were talking to had to spell that out for you. Oh come on...you can't be seriously bringing up Rashee Rice now who was LITERALLY the #1 WR for the Chiefs last year and was 2nd to only Kelce in targets. He had 102 targets to Shakirs 45, that is more than DOUBLE. Yet Shakir had a better catch %, more YPT, more YPC as the FIFTH option...on the same amount of targets Shakir would have projected out to over 1200 yards compared to Rashees 938. LMAO I am not taking anything out of context, you falsified a narrative, made incorrect statements about projections off it and now you want to keep trying to sell it...and all for the purpose of diminishing what they did so you can sell your bias further.

Its not what he said. First he claimed that the "narrative" is that Shakir and Kincaid were the "top 2" options last year with Brady. Literally no one has said that. No one thinks they were the focal point of the final 10 games last year. So that was the first thing that was wrong. Second, he said they were not really that good as the "top 2" options (which they were NOT the top 2 options) and projected their stats out over 17 games saying that what they did LAST year as the TOP TWO options over a 17 game season is NOT good enough. That is a totally false narrative and false projection. The reality is that they were the 5th and 3rd options...and in THOSE roles, Shakir led the team in receiving yards the final 10 games despite getting less than half the targets the actual top option got, led all WR's in the NFL in catch %, and had an incredible YPT while Kincaid put up the 4th most receptions and 10th most yards for a rookie TE in NFL history. The facts are, for the 5th and 3rd options...one being a 2nd year player just finally getting on the field after the idiot OC was fired and the other being a rookie...did QUITE WELL in their REAL roles last year. To manipulate the data to pretend they were the top 2 options to devalue their production last year is disengenuous and all about pushing a bias. The numbers will increase because their roles will increase this year as they will likely be 2 of the primary targets this season and good chance to finish as the 2 most targeted players. And definitely efficiency has a strong chance to decrease some as volume increases, but that is true for every player in the NFL. If Shakir and Kincaid as PRIMARY options this year have around the same production as they had last year when they were NOT the focal points of the offense...then obviously everyone knows that isn't good enough. But that isn't what he said, he incorrectly claimed they already underwhelmed last year as lead options when they were never the lead options.

That does NOT say they were the "top options" like you keep falsely saying. It says they were playing better than the others. Playing better than the other guys does NOT mean they were the focal point of Brady’s offense. AGAIN...they were NOT the top options last year. Again, not our top options last year. What they were last year was the 5th and 3rd options and in THOSE ROLES they put up stats and efficiency that was good to great for their ACTUAL roles. So stop trying to negate that by pretending they were our "top options" last year, because you know they were not...everyone knows that.

Except, that isn't the narrative...where are you coming up with that? You know being the teams top primary receiver is not the same thing as stating someone led the team in receiving during that stretch right? So for example, someone stating Shakir was our leading WR those 10 games does not mean they are saying he was our TOP receiver those 10 games, everyone and their mom knows that was Diggs.

First, I never said anything about salaries. I said 1400 yard receivers which has nothing to do with salaries. Another poster mentioned salaries and I simply corrected your notion about QB's because you only looked at QB's still playing today which eliminates the majority of the SB winners the past 20 years. And just like QB's your anlaysis is wrong...again. You can't look at a list of the top 10 paid TODAY to see how many won the SB the past 20 years as most were not playing yet. The fact I have to tell you that is troubling. The top 10 paid at each position are usually the younger top end players as they reset the market when they get their contracts, meaning they haven't been playing very long. So before you start calling someones argument "bad"...maybe make sure yours even makes sense first

Too bad in 3 of his 4 postseasons here it was the Chiefs who sent us home.

How did anything I say state that it directly did? I said coming into the season having two undersized LBs was an injury concern. One was hurt in his only season starting, the other (Milano) has had on and off injuries again. And doesn’t take a steep jump in logic to understand undersized players playing a violent game at a violent position have a higher injury risk. So really not sure what your objection to my concern is here or how you can even dismiss that it could have been a factor after years of punishment that his smaller frame is having a harder time holding up with the physicality of the game.

I guess you missed that part where Brady retired who had 7.

They were still in the top 20 paid, so that’s a moot point. And neither won any Super Bowls with any high priced WRs.

No it means that teams win Super Bowls, not individuals.

This was a big concern for me coming into the season. Both our key LBs are undersized, so injury risk was something that had me worried because not having both last year was a major reason we lost the KC game. Entering the year already down Milano is no bueno.