Hapless Bills Fan

Thanks for the kind words. I believe you have those numbers swapped: Knox had 288 receiving yards in 12 games, and Hollister had 208 receiving yards in 16 games. Knox also had 12 Y/R vs Hollister 8.4 Y/R, which along with the "Yards, Baby!" would seem to have Lofton's words favoring Knox. (Looked at as yds/target, the difference narrows because Hollister caught 8% more of the targets that came his way - 6.5 yds/tgt for Knox vs 5.2 yds/tgt for Hollister) My point is when one looks under the hood, while Hollister had fewer yards overall and fewer yards per game, he was actually ON THE FIELD for offensive snaps a lot less than Knox. I'm not exactly sure how best to normalize this, but Hollister was on the field for approximately 37% of 1024 snaps, or 374 snaps. Knox was on the field for 63% of the snaps in 12 games, or 487 snaps. So if you want to look at it as something like receiving yards generated per offensive snap, neither are great, but Hollister was responsible for 0.56 receiving yards/snap while Knox was responsible for 0.59 receiving yds/snap - very close to the same production per snap, especially considering I believe Hollister was used more as a blocking TE.

If you want to report for a paper that is still trying to maintain journalistic standards, you can't say the stuff Wilson said, even off the "Chronicle" clock in an interview with another media outlet. You are seen as "Aaron Wilson, reporter for the Houston Chronicle. Stuff Wilson said includes: Very fair, especially given: But then he also said stuff like: It would be fair to say those things AS reporting the mindset of Watson's camp, making it very clear that he was explaining their viewpoint. He didn't. They could reasonably be interpreted as his beliefs. But at a place where we don't have the whole story from either side, I would have to agree with the Chronicle executive editor Steve Riley that referring to Buzbee as "ambulance chasing" and to Buzbee and the women involved as "terrorists" went way too far: Wilson was employed by the Chronicle as a reporter, not as an opinion-generator. If so, then since Watson is paying the bills, he needs to get with Hardin and get him on the same page. But, even if Hardin and Watson are on the same page, I think their best leverage at this point is to make Buzbee and the plaintiffs believe that they're perfectly ready to go forward and fight every case tooth and nail, making life as publicly unpleasant for the women as possible in the process. I believe I read that both attorneys have already agreed to handle all 22 cases as "one case" for the purpose of pre-trial motions?

I think Buzbee's idea of the "right number" has escalated substantially. And if he has the ego his affect in the media appears to convey, it probably "cha-chings" upwards almost every time Hardin opens his mouth and says something about Buzbee, the case, or the women involved.

I love the story, but I don't see it happening that way.

Gotcha.

The main difference is Q. Jefferson, who Overthecap incorrectly had listed with 0 dead cap - an obvious mistake since their numbers didn't add up - and does not have on their dead contract list. $1.5M right there. OK, I'm satisfied we more or less understand the discrepencies.

One of the things I like about Beane's roster building is that while publicly expressing great confidence in his players, he's also quietly bringing in players who are either cautionary tales or outright throw-downs to compete. Josh Allen is the undoubted starter and Beane/McDermott have expressed great confidence and belief in him. But then they signed Trubisky for $2.5M, the 2017 #2 pick of the draft, who was a pro-bowl selection and helped his team reach the playoffs his 2nd year, just as Josh did. Maybe it's just me, but I see a cautionary tale there: "Josh, we love you...but don't slack off, because you can go from Hero to Zero in a hurry if you stop Grinding and striving to be better with all your might" Dawson Knox was our 2019 3rd round pick and the Bills have publicly praised his athleticism and potential. He also has had public praise from Josh Allen, and seems to have formed a bond of friendship. But here comes Jake Hollister, who has longer-standing bonds of friendship with Josh, and who. while getting the lower opportunities of an UDFA and lower snaps in the game, showed almost as much productivity as Knox in the passing game in 2020: Hollister played ~37% of the Seasnakes offensive snaps, while Knox played ~63% of the Bills offensive snaps Hollister had a catch % of 62.5%, 5% drops, 0 fumbles vs Knox 54.5%, 9.1% drops, 2 fumbles. I think there might be a message there for Knox: "we love your potential, but you have to Show Up and Show Out" James didn't see a lot of targets for his playing time in Detroit, but he too had a higher catch % and lower drops than Knox the last 2 years, said to block well, and contributed more when he was in Pittsburgh. If the idea is he's a good blocking TE who can actually run routes and gain separation better than Smith, I'm for it. He's a big sucka too - 6'7"

You sir, are also a Bad Man 😅

Ooh, good catch, but still not quite adding up. It's a difference of $1.51M (Spotrac higher), which if we subtract the $0.847 difference in cap liabilities (OTC higher), gives $0.66M difference with Spotrac higher. The actual difference the two sites are reporting is $0.46M Unfortunately if Spotrac itemizes the dead cap, I can't find it to compare with OTC (which does itemize)

Because I'm probably a terminal geek, I actually pulled the Spotrac and OTC numbers over into a spreadsheet and looked for differences. They have about a dozen small differences in the cap hits they report, including the Jamil Douglas/Marquel Lee contracts reported by OTC but not Spotrac, and the subsequent Fromm and Webb (or Bates) contracts included in the top 51 by Spotrac but pushed out of the top 51 on OTC. The sum of these differences is $387,071 higher cap liabilities reported by OTC than Spotrac, the opposite direction of the $0.46M higher cap space reported by OTC. In other words, after accounting for known discrepencies, the actual difference is $0.847. One thing I did notice is that Spotrac still includes the bonuses (and perhaps guaranteed money) paid to players who are "pushed out" of the top 51, while OTC does not appear to do this. I'm not sure which is the correct procedure for the NFL. If I sum those manually, it comes to $1.152M on Spotrac (again, not entirely sure what should or should not be included). And of course, OTC could be including them but not indicating them in the top-51 bookkeeping. But the bottom line is that the discrepancy (outside of Douglas/Lee) is the sum of a number of small differences, so I can't tell you which number is more accurate. My best guess is at this point the Bills have $4.65M in cap remaining, less the difference between -the cap hits Lamp and Obada once known -the cap hits of the next two guys pushed out of the top 51 by their signings

So as of this am, Saturday April 10, we are closer to consensus about the Bills "cap" between OTC and Spotrac OTC: $5.35M cap. Spotrac: $4.89M cap I'm unable to resolve this discrepency. Both of them, at this point, correctly capture Matakevich extension and Sanders void year. Spotrac indicates 4 signings with no contract information: Jamil Douglas, Marquel Lee, Forrest Lamp, and Efe Obada. OTC has information for 2 of them: Jamil Douglas $995k cap hit, Marquel Lee $970k cap hit. These contracts would push Jake Fromm ($870k salary) and Davis Webb ($850k salary) off of the top 51, resulting in a net cap decrease of $245k. In other words, Spotrac should show $4.65M cap I'm still looking for the $0.705M cap discrepancy, as well as for contract info on Obada and on Lamp. Anyone?

Nice job, Thanks! Your avoided chore is our benefit. I cleaned up the extra images and added information about how to obtain a larger image and how to remove extra images, hope that's OK.

I'm trying to figure out where this 300 out of 2,500 comes from. I "get it" that 90-man roster less 7 draft picks and (let's say) 5 UDFA signings = 78 players 78 players x 32 teams = 2496, so easily rounds to 2500 players. But, for example, for the Bills - of the top 51 paid players on their roster, 27 players have workout bonuses (which I understand to usually be payment for OTAs) Assuming a similar number on other teams, that would be 800 players, not 300 players. I suppose there could be language in 500 of those contracts linking the workout bonus to other milestones if OTAs are skipped - but I don't know why clubs would agree to that, if the point of those bonuses is to encourage veteran participation in OTAs and thus the precedent Phase 1 and Phase 2 activities.

The reference that would support your view is this: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SmitLe00/penalties However, it's worth pointing out that Smith drew 0 penalties in 2020. This despite playing >25% of the snaps (up to 41%) in the last 6 games. He also drew no penalties in 2019 after the Cleveland game where McDermott called him out saying "he's got to get locked in" - again, while taking 20% or more (up to 48%) of the snaps in 3 games.

I think the analogy between Smith's role and Star's role has merit, although a difference is that DTs are typically not expected to fill several roles - we don't typically expect a DT to drop back in coverage, for example. But a TE who is a strong contributor is expected to be able to run routes and draw defensive attention to cover him, as well as to block both in line and downfield. I think you'd find it difficult to demonstrate that in fact, it's the same people who point out Star's importance yet diss Smith.

Fair summation I think. We look at DeShaun Watson in a game, standing next to OL and DL and T, and think he looks relatively small and slight. But in real life, he's 6'2, 215, and ripped, and all these successful NFL athletes can project an unreal intensity at times. They are alpha males used to imposing their will on other alpha males. Some switch it on only during the game between the whistles, but I've met former football players who would "switch it on" to get their way over whatever. I'm still trying to figure out if DeShaun's lawyer actually said that. Like, seriously?

Am I the only one who feels the significant long-term impact of this is gonna be the Stink-Eyes experienced around the league from WAGs when their man calls up: "Honey, I'm gonna be about an hour late, I still got some stiff muscles and I need an extra massage to work them loose" Even the ones who don't suspect hanky-panky are gonna be like "how about you schedule that here, so I can serve as a witness, just in case?" Fair. But there are a couple of things: 1) the NFL investigators are not part of a legal process and can not compel witnesses 2) I've heard that part of how these agreements are structured is a significant sum up front, but more paid later after certain conditions are met. Whatever the truth is, Hardy's accuser is said to have gotten paid and the fact is, she failed to show up and testify at the jury trial, rendering the legal enforcability of whatever agreement she reached a moot point.

He'd tell you that himself. It's because while he can run routes, his style would be best described as "lumbering" and he can't separate. He gets to be a target when the other team forgets to cover him, then as he said in an interview, after he catches one they tend to put those plays in the back of the playbook until they fall out of the recent film.

Facetious? If his ball security is questionable, wouldn't you want to ...not pass? Factual: 0 career fumbles. 2 drops on 49 targets in 2 years with Detroit.

Lee Smith has a career catch rate of 83.1%. He says himself that he's never had any trouble catching the football, and most of the "targets" he doesn't catch are balls thrown at his feet to avoid a sack. He also says that his problem as a receiver isn't catching the football, it's that he can't separate.

I appreciate the data. It justifies the shot-across-the-bows towards those of us who feel the family lives and communities a lot of these guys grew up with do have an influence on what they do after they receive those 3-5 years of big checks. OTOH, I think it does have to be pointed out that at least for the guys with "name recognition", athletes (and maybe coaches) associated with the NFL may have a lower arrest rate in part because of the fame involved with the NFL. "I'm Ko Simpson and I'm Worth Millions" does actually influence whether or not they get arrested sometimes So one would have to take that into account somehow. For an anecdotal example, the Kansas State Senate Majority Leader got arrested and charged with DUI, while Britt Reid is still going about his daily life free as a bird.

https://fbschedules.com/spring-2021-college-football-schedule/ for example. https://bigskyconf.com/news/2020/11/3/big-sky-unveils-2021-spring-football-schedule.aspx Special because of Covid? https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-spring-games-2021-schedule-dates-times-tv-channels-for-power-five-conferences/ 🤷‍♂️ You were saying they don't get paid. The point is, the top veterans DO get paid. There's a difference between "don't get paid" and "get paid a large percentage of my total earnings" For some of the top vets who have taken a minimum salary in favor of an increased signing bonus this year, you could make the same argument about the game checks they're going to get this fall, but they're still getting paid. Yes, there are wierdnesses where OTAs are only 10 days out of the weeks of voluntary spring workouts, but the players can't participate in those 10 days unless they've participated in the rest to my understanding. The point is: 1) about 2/3 of the "core" roster players do get paid for OTAs 2) it's actually the players who don't get paid, who most need/want OTAs to give them extra chance Since OTAs aren't padded and no live contact is allowed, I'm not sure why we're discussing hitting. Seems like a "red herring" However when players refer to the difference between being "in shape" vs being "in game shape", I believe having the chance for their bodies to adjust to contact is exactly what they mean.

Harsh, but there is some aspect of "karma's a beeoootch" thing in watching the Texans implode

I don't understand what being "a little to vocal" means with regard to draft position. Explain?