hondo in seattle

Here's my context, as I've stated previously... In 2020, Josh passed for 284 yards per game. In 2024, I project Josh to pass for 271 yards per game. Who gets those yards is debatable - which is why I started the thread. But, as a homer, I choose to assume two things (1) Josh will be healthy this year without any nagging elbow or other injuries, and (2) Brady will turn out to be a decent OC - better than what we saw from him last season. To get the yards, I projected both Shakir and Kincaid (by a small amount) to have their best seasons yet. Both improved during the course of the 2023 season, and with Diggs and Davis gone, it seems likely that Shakir and Kincaid will get more targets this year, hence more yards. I did not project career years for MVS, Claypool, Samuel, Cook, or Knox. In fact, I projected Knox to have the worst full-season total of his career. Optimistic? Maybe. Make-believe? Nope.

I think we may miss Morse's leadership and acumen with line calls. I thought physically, however, Morse was just an average center. I'm hoping McGovern can be average too. Weirdly, PFF named McGovern one of the 32 top guards coming into 2024, despite him being a C this year, and despite not grading him highly last season... "McGovern earned a modest 55.4 PFF overall grade in his first season with the Bills in 2023, but that doesn’t tell the whole story. The former Cowboy allowed just 23 pressures across 695 pass-blocking snaps, and his 4.1% pressure rate allowed was a top-20 mark at the position. He was an ever-present figure on the Bills’ offensive line, too, playing 1,135 snaps in the 2023 regular season, the sixth most among guards, and starting every game for the team. His 74.2 pass-blocking grade ranked 11th."

Yards per Route Run is a stat that needs a lot of context. For example, a talented & accurate QB is going to get a lot more balls into the receiver's hands than a crap QB. That helps YPRR. Scheme can help - or hurt - too. For example, if the OC is good at scheming receivers open downfield, that'll help their YPRR. Offensive Lines come into play, too. If the OL sucks and gives up a lot of pressure and sacks, the QB won't complete a lot of passes and the OC will be reluctant to call downfield passes. Both would hurt YPRR. The fact that Diggs' YPRR was 33% better than Samuels' doesn't tell us that Diggs is 33% better. It only tells us that Diggs was 33% more productive with his routes last season. But the two WRs were in very different situations.

This is a good list. Though I'm actually less curious if a WR emerges as a True #1 and more curious if our Top Three WRs will be a credible group who can make this offense hum. And I'll be looking for hints on how Brady modified the offense.

Good comments. I'm not unaware of Hollins' talents. But as I thought this through, I guessed six WRs would make the final 53. It seemed unlikely, however, that all six would get appreciable playing time. One of them was bound to get lost in the depth chart and I guessed it would be Hollins. But you may be right and Brady finds value in getting Hollins onto the field in certain packages/situations. In fact, I think Brady is an even more interesting question mark heading into the season than his WR room. Of course, as soon as one of these guys gets hurt, all our projections turn to garbage.

When we witnessed this live last season, I was really worried. And I was not pleased when the adjective, "interim," was removed from Brady's OC title. But I'm hanging on to some hope that Brady will achieve more aerial success this year with a playbook that he likes and believes in. Supposedly, he's added in new concepts that Dorsey hadn't used. If Brady is no better in 2024 than he was in 2023, we're screwed. But I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.

I was torn with this. 1,000 yards for any of these guys seems like a big feat given their histories. But it's possible that one of them emerges as Josh's favorite target. That guy could break 1,000. As you point out, 59 yards per game is not a huge lift for someone getting targets. I just don't know which guy will emerge as The Guy. Nor am I totally convinced any of them will. For those reasons, I projected a more egalitarian distribution with no thousand-yarder.

I hope you're right about Shakir breaking out and maybe he does. But so far in two seasons, he has 772 yards receiving. I'm already guessing that he'll surpass his two year total in just one season. I just couldn't convince myself he'd have such a huge breakout that he'll surpass 1,000. But I really want to be wrong.

You may be right. Rushing yards did go up under Brady, as I recall, though mostly because Allen ran more. We might see the pass-rush balance swing a bit to the ground game. I projected 271 yards passing/game for a 17 game season. In 2020, Josh passed for 284 yards per game in a 16 game season. I might be an optimistic homer but I don't think I'm entirely and unrealistically crazy.

I expect to be so wrong by the end of the year that I'll be embarrassed by this post. But here goes anyway... My guess for the statistical performances of our top 10 pass catchers this upcoming season: Shakir will be a bigger part of the O this year, so I project a sizeable improvement in his stats. Samuel will be a starter and enjoy one of his better years with Josh throwing to him but not his very best. Kincaid will enjoy a modest improvement over his rookie campaign. A healthy Knox will get some of the TE targets. Coleman will need to learn how to separate against NFL DBs and will be replaced in some packages by Claypool or MVS. Claypool and MVS will both get significant playing time, often at Coleman's expense. Knox won't enjoy a banner year, losing targets to Kincaid, but will produce better than his injury-diminished 2023 season. Cook will get a few less targets than last year simply because there are so many other options. His drops don't help. Davis will contribute more in the passing game than Murray's 119 yards. Hollins makes the 53 but is the forgotten man in the WR room. Josh's 4603 yards will be, by a small margin, his most yards in a season yet (in what will be his 3rd 17-game season). Interested in how other folks project this breaking down.

I agree on the target issue. I think it's possible Samuel surpasses 1,000 yards - but not likely. I don't think it's "likely" that Shakir or anyone else does either. I certainly wouldn't put money on it. With a bunch of new receivers, and Brady adding new concepts to our scheme, it's really hard to guess. I suppose someone will emerge as Josh's favorite and/or the guy best suited to Brady's scheme and playcalling. That person could get 1,000+ yards because we will pass a bunch. But it's hard to say who that'll be. I wouldn't be shocked if Coleman proves to be better than you think and leads the team in receptions and yards. Then again, I wouldn't be shocked if Claypool resuscitates his career and takes targets & receptions away from the slow-of-foot rookie. Brady has said something to the effect that everyone needs to eat. Arguably, we have as many as 6 receivers that need to be fed, 2 TEs, and 2 RBs. Someone's going to go hungry. Brady and Josh will favor someone else and feed them seconds. I won't pretend to know who's going to end up skinny and who's getting fat. This position group excites my curiosity more than any other. And I'm really anxious to see what changes Brady's making to the offense.

I hate when the media calls her "The Billionairre Tennis Star," and things like that. It's as if money bought her the success she's experienced. I think her true story is one of perserverance. She didn't have a lot of success early in her career, wasn't ranked high, suffered some injuries, and contemplated quitting. Now she's top five, and has been as high as #3. It would be cool to see someone so connected with Buffalo and the Bills win Wimbledon. She just won a grass so it's not unrealistic to hope.

Maybe I'm the one with poor recall, but I thought he had a couple of big drops in Super Bowls.

I think you're getting me confused with someone else... You never asked me what I envision for Samuel's targets, yards, etc. It's a good question, though, and I'll give it some thought. And I never laid out the 6-1 finish last year. Though I will add that wins and losses are not a meaningless statistic. What I said is that stats are an ineffective way to measure individual talent. Stats, particularly wins and losses, are a great way to measure team performance. I'm not sure if you're refuting me but I actually agree with everything you say here. My point was that I don't think we can accurately predict Samuel's production with the Bills going forward because he had a low catch percentage in the past. I don't think catch percentage is the most predictive stat. And it neglects the "surrounding talent" which influences even something like this.

No doubt the talent was there. But although he behaved well in his short time with us, I'd worry about the drama.

Elbert Dubinion deserves a mention. For those who aren't old enough to remember, "Golden Wheels" had Jack Kemp throwing to him. Kemp was a good leader and a good guy but I be hard-pressed to call him a good quarterback. In Dubenion's best year, Kemp only completed 44% of his passes. Even by the standards of the day, that was lousy. Kemp ball placement wasn't very precise though he could usually get it somewhere vaguely near a receiver. Yet in 1964, Dubenion came down with 42 receptions and 10 TDs for 1,139 yards in 13 games. He averaged 87 yards per game and 27 yards per catch. With Jack Where-the-Ball-Goes-Nobody-Knows Kemp as his quarterback. Imagine that talent combined with a QB like Josh.

This may not be fair but the first three things I think about when Beebe is mentioned are speed, drops, and chasing down Leon Lett. I like the speed. I like the effort. But the 'drops' part keeps him off my list. I agree that it would be awesome to pair Lofton with Allen.

I'm happy with my books under my rock. I haven't watched Dune 2 yet so maybe that'll restore my faith in Hollywood.

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics. Statistics are not effective measures of individual talent in the NFL. For example, Passer Rating was invented to measure how good QBs are. Josh Allen was 16th in Passer Rating last year. According to statistics, Brady would be a fool to build his offense around such a mediocre QB. RBs are often rated by the yards they gain. In 1971, OJ was ranked 15th in rushing yards. Yet Lou Saban built an offense around him and we know what happened. I'm glad Saban used his football smarts to evaluate Simpson and not a stat sheet. Catch percentage has a lot to do with ball placement. Scheme helps, too: If the OC gets an receiver wide open, he's more likely to make the catch than when a receiver is fighting for a contested ball. If talent was perfectly measured by stats, we would let analytic guys run teams. Yet when the Browns tried that (DePodesta, et al.), they failed. And if Catch Rate is your Be-All/End-All stat, then we should be good with Samuel because his catch rate last year (68.1%) was better than Puka Nacua's (67.1%) and yet Puka - with a better QB - had 1,486 receiving yards. And Samuel had only two drops so it's not like has hands of stone. I'll take the 1,486 yards. Samuel will have the best QB throwing to him that he's ever had so I expect a good year from him. Though, I think Brady intends to spread the ball around far more than Dorsey did. I wouldn't be entirely shocked if none of our receivers broke 1,000. It's going to be an interesting season.

It's hard for me to consider TO when his prime was with another team. Same with Lofton. For me, it's between Reed and Moulds. And even though Reed is a HOFer, I think I'd go with Moulds. Allen-to-Moulds would be a force to be reckoned with. Moulds would end up in the HOF, too, if he stayed healthy and spent his career with Allen.

It was lost on me till I saw the clip. Good job!

Maybe I'm just an old fart. Or maybe I just love books more. But I'm personally not parroting anyone when I complain about Hollywood and it's lack of creativity. I don't like super hero movies. My family drags me into them and I fall asleep from boredom. From my vantage point, there's nothing novel, creative, or interesting about them. I wish Hollywood stopped spending hundreds of millions on silly superhero flicks and used that money instead on original, intelligent, dramatic stories. I rarely like franchises of any kind (though there are exceptions). Once you've seen the premise, it's time to move onto a new story with a new premise. How many times do you want to watch The Bourne Identity? Personally, I was good with once. I can't remember the last movie experience I truly enjoyed. I suppose it was the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Very rarely do I enjoy a movie more than the book(s) it was based on but I thought Jackson did a masterful job bringing Tolkien's imagination to the big screen. Btw, I loved Dune when I was a teen - read it 6 times. Decades of life and thousands of books later, that's still my record. Yet I was not enchanted with the recent Dune movie, sorry - though it was much better than the awful Lynch attempt. I'm somewhat happy there's going to be a Gladiator 2 movie just because I want to see more historical dramas. But why not an original story instead of a sequel to a movie where the main character dies? Because tickets are sold with name recognition - "Gladiator"... Ridley Scott... more big names to come. Original stories are risky and that's why Hollywood hardly makes them anymore. Can you imagine someone trying to get funding for a hokey script about a barroom romance with an unhappy ending based on failed stage play. Casablanca wouldn't get made today. I want Hollywood to make a movie about the Bills Super Bowl season. But I guess we have to win one first.

I don't know if she'd be a good owner or not. But after reading the article she wrote about her mom, as well as some of her interviews, she comes across as a bright woman whose ego is in check and whose heart is in the right place. I don't know anything about her sister (half-sister?) who may possibly be better for the role. What I don't want is a John Y. Brown type owning the Bills and Jessica seems opposite of that. For those who may not know, Brown was the traitorous final owner of the Buffalo Braves and the reason Buffalo doesn't have an NBA team anymore.

I don't agree that McD is shoving anything down Brady's neck. And I'm not: "not looking, or rather, turning the other way." That's simply a silly assertion that adds no value to your argument. But I do agree that the offense did not look good under Brady. The pass attack didn't get more productive - though it did get less self-destructive with fewer picks. Cook didn't run better. We all remember the Dallas game. But as I recall, Cook's YPC was lower under Brady versus Dorsey. And Diggs didn't suddenly get old/lose a step at midseason. He certainly got less productive under Brady and you have to consider the possibility that Brady did a poorer job scheming him open. I recall seeing someone charting receivers by yards of separation. Interestingly, both Davis and Diggs were in the lower half of the league. Lack of talent or poor scheme? Hard to know. But Shakir and Kincaid were in the upper half. Maybe this helps explain why we got rid of who we got rid of and kept who we kept. One thing people don't talk about enough is execution. Yes, an OC needs to scheme up a good game plan and then do a good job calling plays on game day. But he also needs to get the players to execute the plays at a high level. The Pats offense was good at this in their glory years. I'm no expert but when I rewatched some of the games, I didn't think we executed all that well under Dorsey. Receivers sometime ran lazy routes or were inconsistent when/where they made cuts. And clearly the communication between Davis and Allen seemed off at times. If the execution got any better under Brady, I didn't see it. I can't say I was happy when Brady was named the OC going forward. But I am cautiously encouraged that Allen seems excited about the changes Brady (not McD) is making to the offensive scheme.

Sadly, there's a bit of truth in that. But if the OL can protect Josh, and if Brady turns out to be a good OC who knows how to scheme guys open, we'll be fine. We might not have All Pros at the skill positions (outside of our All World QB), but we do have a nice variety of weapons.