Drunken Pygmy Goat

They already have one, possibly two. Hopefully Lawson steps up and becomes a third.

I wouldn't go that far. Not yet, at least. And I believe the pick was pushed hard by Rex. Remember the "Sack Lawson" comment, and of course, the Clemson helmet? Not trying to make excuses for the guy here (I think), but he's had to learn 2 very different defenses in his first 2 years in the NFL, and he missed valuable PT as a rookie due to injury. I think he fully understands what he needs to do, and Beane made that very clear. And so far, it seems that he got the message loud and clear. Let it play out before calling him a "waste".

Yes. Hughes had a lot of pressures last year, that resulted in hurried throws. He's a proven player, Lawson is not. No way I trade Jerry before Shaw right now, even given his age and salary.

2020 if they pick up the 5th year option. He needs a "big" year to warrant that, and the increase in salary that comes with it. If he doesn't look better this year, but does look better in 2019, his FA value will not be as great. He (and his agent) knows this.

Good point. But I don't think it will be so much about the numbers, as it will being efficient and making plays when called upon, especially over the next year or two.

He's missed 7 games in 3 years with the Bills. Since becoming a starter in Miami, he's never missed more than 3 starts in a season. Of course the knee issue is worrisome, but it hasn't been as big an issue as it's often made out to be IMO. It'd be nice to see him start all 16, but that shouldn't be expected. When he starts missing huge chunks of a season, I'll worry more. And yeah, he's no Gronk. He's not going to make too many highly contested catches that bigger, faster TEs tend to make more often, but he's been a reliable option in the passing game throughout his career, and has made several big plays for the Bills. He also hasn't had the best of QBs throwing him the ball in his career either.

I don't think WR/pass catchers is as much of an issue as it's made out to be by most, but there's certainly a lot of question marks there. Most of my questions have to do with who will be WRs 3-5, and not so much the health of Benjamin and Clay. Everyone knows that Clay has chronic knee issues, and the Bills have done a good job of limiting him during the week. In 3 years with the Bills, he's missed 7 of 48 starts, not quite as bad as people might think. Nick O'Leary has really come along as a solid #2 with reliable hands, so missing Clay for a couple games isn't going to kill the offense. Benjamin had the non-contact injury in 2015, and was injured last year after taking a shot to the knee. Both kind of flukey, although you could argue that his legs are are greater targets due to his size and lack of elusiveness. Hitting him with passes in stride can alleviate that some. Zay...huge question mark, but he's shown to be reliable at ECU. Hopefully he's learned a lot since then... As for Shady, he's a threat any time he touches the ball, but I think he sees less targets in this offense. He'll be tasked with staying in to help block more often, IMO, especially if the offensive line has its struggles (which most people expect). And Ivory is a capable receiving option out of the backfield to consider. With that being said, as of right now, the group is probably bottom 5, until they prove otherwise. Part of their production will be based on the play of their QB(s?), which will be based on how well the line holds up. But one thing to consider is that WRs in this offense are much more interchangeable than in other offenses, and an injury or two may not hurt quite as much as they might in WC or AC based offenses. Losing Benjamin and/or Clay obviously wouldn't be good, especially for long periods, but this scheme isn't as "skill-set dependent", and it would give other guys down the depth chart a chance to prove themselves. I will say this though...if the Bills fail to win 10 games (which I don't believe they will), it won't be so as much due to the WRs as it will the QB and O-line. I think there will be too many growing pains there. I see a 6-9 win team, with a win total on the higher end being reliant on a much improved defense. A drop... it happens. You highlighted one play. He's made plenty of catches, many of which were not so easy. Clay is the least of my worries.

I'll take whatever the OP is having

Gotta love this young man's character and attitude. People make the KW comparison due to his size and position, but his character is on the same level. I love reading these kind of articles. Maybe they're "fluffy", but there's a lot of good stuff in there. McDermott is a high character guy, and wants those type of players. I think we're going to be reading a lot more fluffy articles with similar content as a result. When the Panthers drafted Star and Kawaan, it changed their defense. Granted Short is a much better pass rusher at DT than Phillips, but their run defense and scoring defense improved considerably. Hopefully adding Star and Harrison has a similar effect, with Edmunds being our "Kuechly".

I bet there were a few (the loudest ones), but I always believed that Taylor was going to start in Cleveland regardless of who they drafted, including Darnold. There were no Lucks or Mannings in the draft for them at #1 for anyone to really think that starting the rookie from day one would be a no-brainer. People ragged on Taylor for his downside, but I think most rational people see the total package and what he does bring to the table. That includes almost 3 full years as a starting, serviceable NFL QB.

Hopefully we didn't...but it was time.

JMO, but I believe that a big part of Taylor's conservativeness throwing the football at times was coached into him by Rex. That team was supposed to be all about defense and running the football, and not giving opponents a chance by turning the ball over to them. Taylor just needed to be "Alex Smith". Unfortunately, only one of those facets worked out in the Bills' favor, and Taylor was going to have to do much more in order to keep up with opponents. I'm sure some of the conservativeness was on him, though. Not trying to absolve him or anything, just what I've always thought. If you channel your inner Rex (try not to barf), it would make sense to teach that into your QB, when you're expecting a top defense and rushing attack, especially after you've already witnessed what a turnover-happy QB can do to your defensively strong, good rushing team, in Mark Sanchez. Greg Roman certainly wasn't known for being very creative in the passing game, and IIRC Sanjay Lal was "in charge" of that aspect. Many of the passing concepts were based on flooding the field, essentially cutting it in half. Again, jmo on that. Taylor certainly wasn't great at anticipating routes, or throwing accurately for YAC, especially at the intermediate level. I liked what he brought to the team, on and off the field, but he clearly wasn't going to win any championships, and that's why you play. The Browns would be stupid to not start him, as they're not winning any championships any time soon anyways...

Star, Edmunds, Richie I'm not worried about the price (not my money), so I voted for Star for what he should bring to our run defense. As a whole, this defense is very "bend, don't break", but so many drives were kept alive by running the ball. Run D was terrible last season, and adding Star should yield longer 2nd and 3rd downs, which should result in shorter drives by opposing offenses. And if that happens, he'll be worth the salary. Edmunds for best draft aquisition, but only because Allen is more of a gamble, IMO. Obviously, if Allen pans out, it'll far outweigh any and all other draft aquisitions, but Edmunds seems like more of a "sure thing" than Allen, and his skill set is a great fit for this defense. With what should be a better front 4 and rotation, Edmunds should flourish, and they'll be able to better mix up their blitzes. Biggest loss is Richie, for his road grading. Many of Shady's best runs were sprung from a big block by Richie, and he moved well for an OL. That being said, he's getting up there, and his time in Buffalo was going to come to an end pretty soon anyways, but he was one of the best guards in the league, and while Vlad played his best ball since being a rookie, he did so on the right side, and is definitely not the same caliber OL as Richie was.

Admirable alireration ability

If course they matter. We all know that. OL is a major question mark this year.

It's also something that prevents NFL teams from drafting you. What a goofy statement!

Cancelling XM NOW!!!

I disagree. I saw Ducasse play better towards the end of the year. A bit shaky at first, but seemed to get comfortable over the last 5-6 weeks. I'm not saying he's great or anything, but overall he looked like an average, decent starting NFL guard. People can "break down" a guy's play, and paint a certain picture, based on a few plays. IIRC, most of us here were very critical of the Bills signing him, and probably had a "bad vibe" from the start, hardly giving him a chance. I'm sure many fans focused on him a lot with that in mind, and any poor game, or play, was going to be heavily scrutinized. We love vindication on this board... Every guy misses blocks here and there. Everyone on this board is signing praises for Dion Dawkins, but there were a couple of games last year where he looked far worse than Ducasse. But he was a rookie, though, filling in at T, so fans chalk it up to that and give him a pass. There were several instances last year where, if not for Taylor's elusiveness, he would have given up sacks. Many of us would have a much different view of him if the Bills had a QB that doesn't escape pressure as well as TT (as they will this year...). Now I'm not saying I don't see the promise of DD, just trying to put judging players into perspective. Last year, PFF gave Vlad a better grade than Dawkins. Again, I get that DD was a rookie T and Vlad an 8 year vet G, but some people speak as if he was a turnstile, when DD was probably closer to that than Vlad was. Maybe I'm crazy, but I know what my eyes witnessed, and it wasn't more liability than asset. And if I'm going look for the words of outsiders as vindication, I'd rather use the words of unbiased people that are paid to judge NFL players for a living, than people on a MB that already have a negative view of a player and need to find someone to point a finger at. Ducasse may not have had a great career for a 2nd round OL, but 2017 was his best since his rookie season. Whether or not his play will be on the same level or, close to it, going forward remains to be seen. I do agree with your last comment.

Not the end all, be all, but PFF had Vlad ranked 24 out of 64 last season. Not great, but far from miserable. He does have experience at LG as well.

Ducasse was far from "miserable". The more playing time he got, the better he played. Groy did play very well in place of Wood, but I think this staff will prefer to keep him as a swing backup, mainly due to his versatility. If a guard goes down, he could fill in there, as well as at center. I guess it will come down to how well Bondine looks at center in camp, but he doesn't have the versatility that Groy does (as far as I know). Vlad, I believe, is a lock for LG. I don't know why people are still ragging on him. He played pretty well last year, although on the right side.

Or it could be a good one... One thing is for sure, the Bills needed help on the inside, and weren't very good against the run last year. When we look back on his signing in a couple years, hopefully we don't look at his stat sheet as much as we'll look at the run defense as a whole. I don't need to see big numbers from him in the tackle and sack department to "justify" his contract. I want to see improvement against the run, and fewer tackles by the safeties.

Good point about systems, in relation to continuity, although I don't think that's where it only matters. Maybe "continuity" was the wrong word for me to use, or is too vague. IMO, there's some value in familiarity with the players next to you, with any unit of a team (but especially on the lines). Knowing certain tendencies, and strengths and weaknesses of those players has to have some type of effect on how you play, in your approach, regardless of scheme. As far as how good or bad they'll be, you're right. We're all just guessing really at this point. There's so many question marks on offense this year that we cannot say anything with any certainty. But looking at things logically, it's probably safe to say or expect that there will be some noticeable growing pains in a few areas. Personally, I don't think WR Will be as big an issue as it looks to be on paper, but we'll see. Of course, their play is dependent on the QB and offensive line, and while the WR group certainly is not loaded with top talent, I think the players we have will be fine for this offense.

*Winner

Biggest issue IMO isn't the talent, it's the lack of continuity. Wood, Incognito and Glenn (to a lesser extent), and even Miller and Mills, had many games under their belt, playing next to each other. That's an important factor in how well a line plays, because each guy is in tune with the guy next to him, and what they do well and don't do well. It's about chemistry, and it's something that can only be replicated through time and experience. This year, with a few new faces taking over starting positions, it will take some time for guys to gel, and build chemistry with the players next to them. Also, our QBs are young and inexperienced, and calling out adjusted protections at the line is a factor that gets overlooked when we "judge" the offensive line. Basically what I'm saying is, I believe the line will be fine, but will likely be shaky and inconsistent early on, and aside from the QB position, could be the major reason why the Bills take a bit of a step back this year, record wise. I don't see a 2-4 win team, like some "pundits" have said, but a 6-8 win team. Rome wasn't built in a day, and I've accepted the idea of a "down" year, compared to a team that essentially overachieved and ended the drought. I believe the defense will keep them in games, but this year will be more about building a foundation on offense with a new OC, and players gaining valuable experience that will prove to be imperative to success in the upcoming seasons. Also, I think Ducasse is still being unfairly criticized by some people. He was pretty good last year, especially later in the season. I believe he was a top 30(?) rated guard in the league last year (by PFF's metrics FWIW). Not sure how he'll look with more down blocking than last year, and switching from RG to LG, but I think we should wait and see.

Sure it does (I assume you meant "having a poor offense", and Chicago defense at 8th). You just have to look at it from a different angle. Generally, the defensive PPG rankings are a good reflection of the quality of play on that side of the ball, but part of the numbers being what they are has to do with other facets of the team, and other factors. Having a poor offense means that opponents probably don't have to pass quite as much, or take many risks, in order to beat you, because you aren't scoring much yourself. They get the lead, and run to victory. That "shortens" games, and typically keeps the score lower, as teams average 1-2 less possessions per game. That helps the defensive PPG, to some extent.