thebandit27

Liking what I see from Budda Baker of Washington. Instinctive, active, solid in coverage. Really hope he declares!

^Edited for clarification, but yes.

I think he'll likely split time between the E and T spots.

Different play set, different roles (he can 1-gap or 2-gap depending upon the offensive alignment):

Sure...let's take the following play set as an example: Washington will be an "E" in this set, and his responsibility in this package is to force the tackle to protect inside, clearing room for the nickel blitzer.

Indeed...he's the "E" in Rex's front in his playbook. Marcell is the "N" and Kyle is the "T". Jerry Hughes is the "R" in odd fronts and the "E" in even fronts.

I voted J-Will and Jerel Worthy.

You of all people have no place saying that others don't acknowledge your points, having routinely gloss over anything that doesn't fit your narrative. Why is he "terrible" at YAC? It may have something to do with the fact that he has the highest yards/target of any receiver in the NFL (11.02--nearly a full yard better than any other WR). It's also the same reason that Doug Baldwin has extremely low YAC (he had the 2nd highest yards/target in the league with 10.28)--if they're throwing you deep balls, the YAC opportunities are going to be few and far between; that's intuitively obvious to folks that have watched a set of downs in their lifetime. Meanwhile, and I know this whole idea of context should be ignored in your opinion lest we risk partaking in an actual honest evaluation, the WRs that lead the position in YAC like Julio Jones, Antonio Brown, and Jarvis Landry are on the low-end of yards/target. In fact, Jarvis Landry is dead last in the NFL in yards/target with 7.01. A moderate level of investigation would show you that the reason are more short-area targets. This isn't rocket science. It also feels an awful lot like "lack of YAC" is your crutch to keep this "Sammy's a bust" rant going. Why does it matter whether his yards come before or after the catch if he's producing more yards/target than any other player? In fact, someone who is looking through an honest lens might instead opine that if Sammy was billed as a YAC machine coming out of college, but is shredding teams with his ability as a deep threat, then that would more likely mean that he's got more to his game than some might've thought. As to ignoring his previous 20 games, again I'll point out to you (this has to be at least the 10th time I've said it--so again a little bit of honesty about who's ignoring who might be prudent) that the greatest predictor of WR success across the entire league is targets. When, exactly, did his targets increase? This part is extremely telling: it tells me that you either didn't read my response, didn't understand the content, or chose to ignore it. WR production ebbs and flows for every single receiver. For example, since the marked uptick in Sammy's targets that brought him closer to the norm in that department, he was far more consistent in terms of yardage production than Antonio Brown (so chosen because he is, IMO, the best WR in the game right now). I noted your point and responded to it in my previous post: Yet there you are, ignoring the fact that I addressed the very point you responded to me with in this post. Let me make my position on Watkins clear in one very easily-quoted-and-responded-to-point: WR production is very heavily correlated to targets, and once Sammy started receiving a target ratio similar to other bona fide #1 WRs, he outproduced the rest of the league (aside from Brown). On a per-target basis, he's been nothing short of elite, and we should expect that--should his uptick in targets hold for a full season of play--he'll continue to produce on part with the Browns of the league. Now, if you have anything in your arsenal that contradicts this point, I'll be happy to listen and respond. Until the, the ball's in your court. Be well. By the way, links supporting stats I've quoted for those that care: http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/receiving/sort/receivingTargets http://overthecap.com/yards-per-target-as-a-metric/ http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/yards-after-the-catch/2015/ Oh, and since I forgot to address it before, as to the great defenses he lit up: Sammy faced 3 (and only 3) of the top-10 pass defenses in the league in 2015---those being Houston (3), Dallas (5), and KC (9). His combined stat line in those games: 14 receptions, 351 yards, 3 TDs

Basically a fully-guaranteed 2-year bridge deal worth $37M (or $17.5M per year).

Again: outproduced every receiver not named Antonio Brown over the final 9 games of the 2016 season...even with the injuries that you want to say are limiting him. That's elite whether you like to admit it or not. I know, I know, he only had 100 yards in 5 of those 9 games, and therefore is inconsistent. Guess what: over that same time period, Antonio Brown had 100 yards in 5 of 9 games as well. Brown also scored 7 of his 10 receiving TDs on the season in 4 of those 9 games. Sammy scored 7 of his 9 total receiving TDs on the season in 5 of those 9 games. Brown had fewer than 80 receiving yards 3 times in those 9 games; Sammy had 80 or more receiving yards in 7 of those 9 games. The truth is, on a per-target basis (and the advanced numbers illustrate this rather clearly as I've shown you before), Sammy is as good as there is in the league. You can knock him for not being 100%, and that's relevant. To rail on his production without any recognition of context is the height of silliness. I guess that's why this place is a never-ending source of amusement, right? :cool:

They're going to have to simplify things for him though--he's not Brady. Brady can diagnose matchups like nobody's business, and he can get you out of a bad play at the LOS almost as reliably as Peyton Manning. Jimmy won't have that at his disposal. He'll really need to know where he's going to go with the ball pre-snap and make it happen since opposing DCs are going to come after him.

In most cases, you're correct about it being tougher to step in midseason. In this case, however, EJ got 1/3 of the 1st team reps throughout the offseason, and even got the full-time starters reps for a week leading up to his preseason start. Again though, I'm referring to the sample size more than the situation. It's easier to hide a QB for 2 games than it is to hide him for 10+. As to Foles, average-at-best tends to be what I'm looking for in a backup. If he's better than that, he's a starter most of the time.

It doesn't cost money to cut EJ. Also, there's the Roman factor (i.e. run heavy offense) and the limited sample space as to why EJ may have had "better" numbers last year. Yep--if you like Foles enough to be the backup, then you take whatever you can get.

I don't know that NE's defense is as good as the numbers say; they are well-coached for sure, but I think they're heavily aided by an offense that can (a) put points on the board and (b) play ball control when necessary. NE tends to get the lead early and force teams to be predictable, because Belichick comes into the game wiling to go nuclear in order to stop what opponents do best. As to records, Buffalo basically needs to start out 3-1 if they want to make the playoffs; that gives them the real possibility of winning 2 of the next 3 (@LA, vs. SF, @Mia) to get to 5-2 before the brutal stretch of the schedule. At that point, you're hoping to win 1 of the next 3 (vs. NE, @Sea on MNF, @Cin coming off a bye) to get to 6-4. Assuming you can pull that off, to make the playoffs means winning 4 of the final 6 (vs. Jax, @Oak, vs. Pit, vs. Cle, vs. Mia, @NYJ).

I care as much about his performance in that game as I do about his selection. He played above expectations last year, and has a chance to be the solution at QB for this team if he can improve in a few key areas that have been discussed at length. At this point, anything more than a bridge deal is a serious gamble on the part of the team given the players that will need new deals in the next 2 years (Gilmore, Watkins, Darby).

Moreover Barley, the only way to avoid paying EJ's $1.6M salary is to trade him. The fiscally-prudent maneuver--assuming they sign Foles and are comfortable with him as the backup (both of which are questionable)--would be to hold onto them both, wait for someone's backup to go down, and move EJ for a conditional pick.

Shame...I was holding out hope.

And one of them was a free agent, able to sign for whatever he wants; the other is under contract, so he's unable to hand-pick a new deal right now. I do wish that folks would stop referencing the pro bowl selection as though it's some kind of great feat; he was the 2nd or 3rd alternate who got in because several others couldn't play. Nice feather in the cap, yes; actual negotiating leverage, no. Bottom line: his incentive to sign here was twofold--a chance to start, and a contract that contained a voidable year based upon hitting certain incentives. He hit them, and not he gets a chance at a new deal after the 2016 season. There's nothing wrong with this picture at all. Geez Bill. One of the few good things? It truly has been a long time since we've made the playoffs.

Even without Brady, going 1-3 with Garoppolo, I have them at 11-5, so yes.

No, it's not complex: they don't save any money by cutting EJ, and they clearly aren't going to cut Cardale after they just drafted him. That said, if they feel that they have a better option at backup QB, vis-a-vis Foles, they don't take any additional cap hit to cut EJ. His being here is hardy a lock at this point

No. Fitz was an UFA. He got a new deal. Tyrod is not. That is all.

Nope. i would take what he's shown in the NFL over what EJ has shown...and this is coming from a guy that was an EJ supporter.

This has to be the case IMO.

Not really an issue anymore now that Glenn signed--they have cap room to sign him to a deal as long as it's of the one-year variety.

He's a better backup than what we have right now--I'd sign him.