GunnerBill

They didn't want to lose Kirk. Atlanta just offered more. Still think the rest of the roster is too strong to only win 3 or 4. 6 minimum IMO.

That bottom 5 is the same bottom 5 those of us who talked about this right after the draft had. I don't think it is at all controversial. Most neutral observers would objectively rank those five as the worst 5 receiver groups on paper going into the year.

Okay that isn't how it read to me. I think Worthy will start. The Chiefs will play some 12 and even some 13 but they will play plenty of 11 personnel and Worthy will be one of the three "starting" receivers in that set.

Worthy being a backup is not a fact.

In fairness the NFL HAS changed since Matt Millen was GM of the Lions. Millen was hammered for taking three in consecutive years in the first round AND reaching to do so. Famously in 2005 the top player on Detroit's entire draft board was DeMarcus Ware. When they went on the clock at #10 who was sitting there? Ware. Then they changed their mind in the draft room and thought one more receiver would turn Harrington into a franchise QB. This was all pretty well documented after he left Detroit.

I felt like we were having to play balls out every single week to get over the line. You do that for 17 weeks including running Josh Allen like a battering ram at times the chances you are fully healthy and fresh for the playoffs are reduced. I think the fact our passing game wasn't close to its optimum level was limiting our margin for error. Do I think this receiver group and a passing game similar to what we got down the stretch last year could get us to 11 or 12 wins and the post season? Sure I do. Do I think it is likely to be enough to win a Championship? No. And I get the arguments about drops and miscues but those drops and miscues are part of the evaluation whether we like it or not. If they can clean those up that will help but again one of the ways to limit mistakes is with better players and I don't think the room is upgraded.

I'm not in the market for a mark against our offense or otherwise. I'm interested in whether the talent we have at wide receiver is sufficient to allow the offense to maximise its potential. I'm not persuaded we do. But we have to be more productive as a passing outfit than we were over the stretch run last year to achieve that in 2024.

Look at our passing production in those games. Sure, we can be a run the ball, play good defense (we were actually playing outstanding defense until the injury bug hit again at Miami and in the wildcard round) and run Josh Allen a ton team if we want to and we will win games that way because we are well coached and have a solid roster. But to maximise this team's ceiling you need to take advantage of how special #17 is as a passer and we weren't doing that to its fullest extent down the stretch. I'm not super interested in what could / should they have done differently in the spring. Those debates have been had. Nothing we do or say changes it. Pending a stunning trade from left field we are where we are. The question is whether that is going to be good enough.

The counter argument to that is: 1) The passing offense wasn't good enough once Diggs declined last year so even if from the end of last year you consider it "a wash" that isn't really good enough. So you are relying on a team with an elite QB to win by running the ball and playing good defense. I am not against being a team that wants to run the ball and play good defense but that feels a waste when you have Josh Allen. 2) I don't consider Davis to MVS to be a wash. Gabe averages 160 yards and 4 touchdowns a season more than MVS. And MVS has had Rodgers and Mahomes throwing him the ball. That is a downgrade move. Though MVS is at least a true outside receiver. Samuel's production to this point is lower than both but he HAS been hamstrung by Quarterbacks, that's a fair argument and if you exclude the year he got hurt it is very similar to MVS. The problem with that move, which I do think is at worst a wash talent wise, is that he is not a true outside receiver. He is an inside - outside flex guy, not a guy who is a proven boundary receiver. Personally my best case scenario for the receiving room is Shakir becomes a chain moving weapon from the slot and adds a couple of hundred yards of production, Coleman essentially replaces Gabe as the bigger downfield guy and gets close to his production as a rookie and Samuel is used as a poor man's Stefon Diggs move receiver the way Joe Brady was trying to use Stef at the end of last year. That would give you a serviceable room, but I agree with what someone said earlier... the only route to them being a difference making room is that Keon goes off as a rookie and is already being talked about as a possible top 10 receiver by the end of his first year. That could happen, but the odds are slim IMO. Yes, those all had contractual final say. Terry Pegula told you when he hired Brandon Beane that he was in charge of personnel, the draft and the 53. If McDermott had contractual final say we would know about it. He doesn't and those who have been in that building confirm that Beane runs personnel. He has the final say. While McDermott has more power in the organisation, Beane runs personnel.

6-8. Too good to suck but not good enough to compete.

Josh and Stef had fallen out. Properly fallen out. In the latter part of the 2022 season they were not on speaking terms. They cobbled something together obviously for 2023 and I have no idea what terms they were on by the end of last season. But I don't think Josh needed persuading to let Stef go but it that way.

This is not true btw.

No you are looking at a row of trees and presuming there is a forest beyond.

There is nothing in addition to the arguments I have already made. We all outsmart the pros from time to time. I had a second round grade on Bryce Huff - he went undrafted and now a $17m AAV player. I had a 3rd on Robby Anderson - he went undrafted and became a 1,000 yard receiver. I had a 2nd on Dak Prescott - he went late 4th and became a perennial all pro Quarterback. I could go on. But that doesn't mean if you just slotted me into a spot of any NFL GM I'd outperform them. In face using annecdotal examples to try and prove your point demonstrates the opposite of the analytical prowess you claim. (And the 300 hours was a conservative estimate based on 45 mins per game, 3 games per player, 140 players per year. In reality some players get a lot more than 3 games - I watched 8 Keon Coleman games for example - but 3 games is my minimum for anyone I grade.)

That is a long way of making the same flawed argument.

We have done this argument about 30 pages ago.

Somewhere around 300 is my estimate. I am understanding the context of your argument. It is a bad argument.

I don't see a guy who is going to win their 1 on 1 inside 2 seconds consistently. And when you don't have that the redzone is where it shows up most. Can the big bodies of Coleman and the tight ends make a few contested catch TDs? Sure. But that isn't a way to live sustainably in the NFL over the course of a season.

I think the bottom end of your yardage projections and half the number of touchdowns is a realistic target for him. 700-750 and 4/5 TDs. Anything above that is gravy. My concern on the offense isn't really that they won't be able to move the ball. It is that in those critical gotta have it plays in and around the redzone where scheme matters less and you need a guy to just win his matchup teams will be able to clamp down on them. Which was happening 2nd half of last year with Stef's drop off and I see little evidence that they have done enough to change that.

Nah. I'm sorry. You're wrong. It isn't as simple as you make it appear. And the guys who make the top generally, though not always, get there because they are the best at what they do. It is true in every profession. Is opportunity equal? No. And given the same opportunities at the start of a career could other people end up better? Yes. But the idea that any fan who thinks they are smart know more than the pros? They don't. The reason the NFL draft doesn't play out exactly in order is because of the complexity of the exercise not the failings of the professionals. As I say we have seen teams go down the uber analytical with proven experts who have done it successfully in other sports. It hasn't worked in the NFL. I spend hundreds of hours on the draft every year. Its one of my hobbies. I feel at the end of it like I have a pretty good handle on 140-150 of the guys picked. You don't nail every one and sometimes you completely miss on something but normally when a player over or under performs you have seen why that would happen on tape and the complexity is balancing that element against the reasons it might go the other way. Nobody bats 100 because that is really difficult.

Yes I think Keon's release package is ahead of where Gabe was coming out. But I don't think he converts that into separation consistently because I don't think he is a good route runner and I don't think he is able to dictate to coverage.

Equally though, 2020 apart, the offense has been considerably more healthy in the post season than the defense. Not make excuses for either side. But as I say every time this comes up the reality for why we have failed is a lot more multi-faceted than is sometimes presented.

I agree, I think he will. If we still had prime Diggs and this was an upgrade on Gabe at WR2 I'd be pretty optimistic about this group.

Oh he is definitely more athletic. Less stiff in his movements. Has more fluidity in his hips. Straight line speed they are comparable (I actually think Keon is a shade faster despite the 40, my view on Coleman has not changed from what it was before the infamous 40) but as an overall athlete Coleman has a definite advantage.

I don't see that on his tape personally. And I watched a ton of Keon film. EDIT: he is better than Gabe was coming out off the line but Gabe did improve his release package in the league. He was never great at it but he was definitely better years 3 and 4 than years 1 and 2.