Another Lee Evans thread......

[beerme1]

By being gone Lee Evans opened the field up for our wide outs also. I'm ok with what we did on Sunday you know.

Good luck Lee!

[K-9]

Neither Evans nor Hangman were in the Bills' long-term plans. So they traded Evans and cut Hangman. The money savings was a side benefit but not the major driving force behind moving them.

 

I don't want to digress and make this thread about something else, but Hangman got his ass handed to him by third stringers in camp as well as in preseason games. He was clearly not the same player this year.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[The Senator]

Both players were traded for salary reasons. The organization couldn't trade Evans sooner because there was a lockout, precluding player transactions in general.

Ridiculous. The Bills had already paid Lee Evans his $1.5M roster bonus for 2011. He was due to receive $3.3M in salary which, while not an insignificant amount, had less to do with trading him than his own request to be traded to a contender.

 

The only way at all that money would have factored into the equation would be if the Bills thought, 'Why pay $3.3M to the NFL's #51-ranked WR - a guy who caught 37 passes for 578 yards last season and whose production has steadily declined since signing his $37M extension in 2009 - when we're getting better production from Stevie Johnson and have a slew of younger WRs ready to step up?'

 

Anyone who believes that the player or players replacing Evans on the field is better is way off the mark.

I don't just believe it, I know it to be an incontrovertible statement of fact.

[Magox]

Lee Evans, the greatest decoy that this league has ever seen.....

 

The Legend continues...

Edited September 14, 2011 by Magox

[Dawgg]

Lee Evans has significantly altered the entire dynamic of this division rivalry.

A pretty dramatic statement to make after one game. Lee is a huge addition and will certainly flourish in Baltimore.

 

That said, there were other factors that contributed more to last week's win than the decoy that was Lee Evans.

 

1. Vonta Leach – huge upgrade over last year's fullback Le’Ron McClain. He paved the way and made critical blocks for Rice. I never realized how good he was until I watched yesterday's game. Ray Rice owners will be very happy this year in FF.

 

2. Joe Flacco - he simply gets better and better each year.

[RJ (not THAT RJ)]

no point in arguing facts. The Kool Aid drinkers are going to point to no receptions and say we were lucky to get a fourth round draft choice. On the other hand, the new Buffalo receivers seem (albeit after one game) to be playing quite well, so the decision may have been to lose a long-term very promising receiver or keep a somewhat expensive guy who is only going to be great for a year or two.

Evans fits Baltimore and they will be looking at this like Oakland way back in the sixties looked at the trade for LaMonica.

 

 

hmmmm...he did everything right but catch the ball. I think they call them RECEIVERS for a reason.

 

NFN, but your second comment undercuts your first. They do indeed call them receivers, thus one need not be a "Kool-Aid drinker" to wonder whether a receiver who makes no receptions is all that great.....

[Kelly the Dog]

NFN, but your second comment undercuts your first. They do indeed call them receivers, thus one need not be a "Kool-Aid drinker" to wonder whether a receiver who makes no receptions is all that great.....

When a DB makes no pass defenses and no tackles and no ints in a game, he can have a great game because he forced the other team to go to its lesser receivers and cut off one side of the field so it was more difficult to make plays against it. If he was one on one, and took his man out of the play, it helped his team a ton because they were playing 10 D men against 9 O men (counting the QB out of the equation).

 

It's the same thing on offense and a WR. If a deep threat WR is taking a safety out of the play because he has to respect the deep pass, his offense is playing 9 against 9 instead of 9 against 10. He is widening the field and allowing all of the other WRs more room with less defenders. He is not allowing the safeties to cheat up and clog the run lanes or make tackles closer to the LOS. It's inarguable that it has a big affect on the game, whether he catches one pass or not.

[Hplarrm]

Lee Evans, the greatest decoy that this league has ever seen.....

 

The Legend continues...

To the extent this statement is true it actually is a pretty thourough indictment of the Bills from top to bottom.

 

What does it say about the FO of this team that they would spend such huge salary on a player you deem merely a decoy.

 

Further, what does it say about the Bills coaching that they could not find an effective way to utilize such a decoy.

 

Its great for Evans that he is gone to a team which utilizes him well in the passing game.

 

Its fine for the Bills O as well as we never seem to make good consistent use of Evans (outside of whatever role his decoydom played in Johnson's breakout year last year.

 

On the face of it though it seems pretty ridiculous that the best we could get for a starter WR was a stupid 4th.

[KOKBILLS]

Apologies for starting another Evans thread but I thought it might be worth it since a) I'm probably the only dude on this board who actually watched the entire Balt/Pitt game and b)I'm probably the only guy on this board who hasn't missed a single one of those matchups in years since it's my favorite rivalry right now.

Here's the truth of the matter; Lee Evans has significantly altered the entire dynamic of this division rivalry. And I'd guess that these 2 games (and sometimes 3) are the biggest reason they brought him to Baltimore.

I don't care about math and/or whether he put up a single statistic. This game had Evans fingerprints on it right from the get-go. Do you know why Boldin was singled on the first TD vs a weak corner who'd been out all preseason? Because the Stillers rolled their coverage over at Evans. It's right there on the film if you want to see it. Did you know that Baltimore has repeatedly struggled to get their TE's and RB's involved in the passing game against the Stillers, and for many, many years now? Yet on Sunday they found enough space for these guys to catch about a dozen balls for 150+ yards. There were places all over the field where the Ravens have never been able to find space against Pittsburgh(flats and seams), yet now those places are suddenly vacant of defenders. I don't believe for a second that this is just a co-incidence.

For the first time in years, the Ravens have the ability to stretch the field in a big way. And suddenly they have more space to work with all over the field. If y'all think that Evans isn't a significant factor in this new equation, I'd have to say you're badly mistaken on that point.

 

P.S. This post is not intended to speculate on what Evans' may have done if he was still in Buffalo, or start tangents on why the Bills traded him. Just wanted to bring some light to the ongoing evolution of what I think is a really fascinating matchup. Doug Whaley is taking some grief from his old buddies in Pittsburgh right now because he played a part in altering the balance of power in this rivalry. But don't take any of that guff, Fresh! Give it right back to 'em with both barrels!!!

 

Well of coarse you're 100% right about Evans and his impact on The Ravens Offense Simon...But that still does not help me considering I took him in Fantasy, started him Sunday, and got a great big goose-egg in return for it...Hopefully Teams will realize soon they can't roll Coverage to Lee's side and he'll burn them silly for me...

 

We'll see...

[The Big Cat]

When a DB makes no pass defenses and no tackles and no ints in a game, he can have a great game because he forced the other team to go to its lesser receivers and cut off one side of the field so it was more difficult to make plays against it. If he was one on one, and took his man out of the play, it helped his team a ton because they were playing 10 D men against 9 O men (counting the QB out of the equation).

 

It's the same thing on offense and a WR. If a deep threat WR is taking a safety out of the play because he has to respect the deep pass, his offense is playing 9 against 9 instead of 9 against 10. He is widening the field and allowing all of the other WRs more room with less defenders. He is not allowing the safeties to cheat up and clog the run lanes or make tackles closer to the LOS. It's inarguable that it has a big affect on the game, whether he catches one pass or not.

 

Oh for Pete's sake. YOU'VE MADE YOUR POINT. So riddle me this: how good do you think Lee Evans is? What NFL receivers would you compare him to? Why does he seem to be on an island when it comes to "great receiver who never produces any stats?" How is it that being a deep threat doesn't seem to hamstring the stats of guys like Andre Johnson, Steve Smith, DeSean Jackson, and so on...?

 

PLEASE, tell me. What makes Lee so special that he seems to be the lone exception to the rule as far as NFL starting receivers go. How great can the guy be if he produces no stats yet still has people like you convinced he's "great?"

 

Tell me who he compares to. Please.

[RJ (not THAT RJ)]

When a DB makes no pass defenses and no tackles and no ints in a game, he can have a great game because he forced the other team to go to its lesser receivers and cut off one side of the field so it was more difficult to make plays against it. If he was one on one, and took his man out of the play, it helped his team a ton because they were playing 10 D men against 9 O men (counting the QB out of the equation).

 

It's the same thing on offense and a WR. If a deep threat WR is taking a safety out of the play because he has to respect the deep pass, his offense is playing 9 against 9 instead of 9 against 10. He is widening the field and allowing all of the other WRs more room with less defenders. He is not allowing the safeties to cheat up and clog the run lanes or make tackles closer to the LOS. It's inarguable that it has a big affect on the game, whether he catches one pass or not.

 

 

For the record, Kelly, I get your point, and do not disagree in general, though with The Big Cat I am honestly torn on how one is supposed to evaluate Lee Evans. My main point, which you appear to have missed, is tennesseeboy managing to insult those who did not see the value of Evans as "Kool-Aid drinkers" because they insisted on completion stats, then turning around and insulting you for not understanding how to evaluate a Buffalo receiver who failed to make a catch by asserting that receptions are what matters. Am I the only one who noticed an amusing contradiction there?

[Kelly the Dog]

Oh for Pete's sake. YOU'VE MADE YOUR POINT. So riddle me this: how good do you think Lee Evans is? What NFL receivers would you compare him to? Why does he seem to be on an island when it comes to "great receiver who never produces any stats?" How is it that being a deep threat doesn't seem to hamstring the stats of guys like Andre Johnson, Steve Smith, DeSean Jackson, and so on...?

 

PLEASE, tell me. What makes Lee so special that he seems to be the lone exception to the rule as far as NFL starting receivers go. How great can the guy be if he produces no stats yet still has people like you convinced he's "great?"

 

Tell me who he compares to. Please.

I don't think I have ever said Lee Evans is a great WR. Certainly not in years if i ever did. There are dozens of better WRs in the NFL than Lee Evans. Stevie Johnson was a better WR on the Bills last year. That does not in any way negate the affect the guy can have on a game and on his teammates. You know zero about football if you cannot understand that.

 

Steve Smith and DeSean Jackson ARE the deep threat.

 

There are very few true deep threat WRs in the NFL who draw the double coverage JUST because of their speed and/or their history of scoring on deep passes. You can't just have speed and be a deep threat, you have to do it in real games. There are lots of all around great receivers who get open short and deep and draw coverage like Calvin Johnson and Fitzgerald and many others.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

NFN but Chan Gailey was the OC in KC just 3 years ago under Todd Haley and he knows the Chiefs playbook pretty well, that had to give the Buffalo Bills a huge advantage against the Chiefs. They also may or may not have changed the terminology for the calls, if they didn't its another big reason as to why Buffalo womped them so hard.

 

It remains to be seen if that Buffalo offense can continue to be as productive as it was against the Chiefs. I hope it is, but something tells me it won't be.

What does this (especially the bolded) have to do with the Evans discussion?

 

Bottom line is, Evans will probably win a couple Super Bowls now before this team even sniffs the playoffs, and he will be a big factor in both cases with his presence and lack of presence. Another salary dump from Ralphy, and anyone who says it isn't is either in a coma or is so brainwashed that it isn't funny. It is going to take a little time for Flacco and Evans to get on the same page since they have only been teammates for a couple weeks. Flacco has never had a receiver so fast, so it will take some adjusting on his part too.

The continued insistence of taking a negative viewpoint is alive and well thanks to yourself and your gang.

 

It was stated upthread very adroitly… the same player can have vastly different value to two different teams. Chew on that for awhile. Try to taste it.

 

This appears to be a debate between people who watched the game and people who looked at a stat line in a box score. It's silly.

It's actually a bit more than that, Dave… it's a bit larger.

 

The subtext debate is between those who think the Bills made a good move and those who think the Bills made a bad move.

 

Its great for Evans that he is gone to a team which utilizes him well in the passing game.

 

Its fine for the Bills O as well as we never seem to make good consistent use of Evans (outside of whatever role his decoydom played in Johnson's breakout year last year.

 

On the face of it though it seems pretty ridiculous that the best we could get for a starter WR was a stupid 4th.

I'm glad that you are in the minority of people who understand that he could have greater value to the Ravens than he does the Bills.

 

However as far as the 4th rounder is concerned, I disagree. Randy Moss was traded last year for a 3rd and a 7th. Chad Ochocinco was traded this year for a 5th and a 6th.

 

I don't believe the Bills could have gotten any more than a 4th rounder for him.

 

And keep in mind also, that Chris Hairston and D'Norris Searcy were 4th rounders this year… Marcus Easley last season.

 

The possibility exists to get good football players with your 4th round picks… especially if you have a good scouting department.

 

 

[The Big Cat]

I don't think I have ever said Lee Evans is a great WR. Certainly not in years if i ever did. There are dozens of better WRs in the NFL than Lee Evans. Stevie Johnson was a better WR on the Bills last year. That does not in any way negate the affect the guy can have on a game and on his teammates. You know zero about football if you cannot understand that.

 

Steve Smith and DeSean Jackson ARE the deep threat.

 

There are very few true deep threat WRs in the NFL who draw the double coverage JUST because of their speed and/or their history of scoring on deep passes. You can't just have speed and be a deep threat, you have to do it in real games. There are lots of all around great receivers who get open short and deep and draw coverage like Calvin Johnson and Fitzgerald and many others.

 

Yeah, but Steve Smith and DeSean Jackson also PRODUCE. So if we're both on the same page with regard to him not being among the NFL's elite, then I think you'll join me in saying that to get a fourth rounder for him was greatly beneficial to both Baltimore AND Buffalo. If being a decoy is Lee Evans' main contribution to whatever offensive unit he plays for, I feel comfortable (especially after Sunday's performance) saying (as I have all along) that Chan Gailey is MORE than capable of creating a whole array of of decoys, diversions, schemes, etc. that don't require nor limit his play calling to Evans' singular skill set (going deep).

[NoSaint]

Oh for Pete's sake. YOU'VE MADE YOUR POINT. So riddle me this: how good do you think Lee Evans is? What NFL receivers would you compare him to? Why does he seem to be on an island when it comes to "great receiver who never produces any stats?" How is it that being a deep threat doesn't seem to hamstring the stats of guys like Andre Johnson, Steve Smith, DeSean Jackson, and so on...?

 

PLEASE, tell me. What makes Lee so special that he seems to be the lone exception to the rule as far as NFL starting receivers go. How great can the guy be if he produces no stats yet still has people like you convinced he's "great?"

 

Tell me who he compares to. Please.

 

why is it either great, or bagging groceries?

 

why cant he just be a very talented player that doesnt have the same fight for the ball/skill set as some of those guys, but if not accounted for can put up huge numbers quickly.

 

Yeah, but Steve Smith and DeSean Jackson also PRODUCE. So if we're both on the same page with regard to him not being among the NFL's elite, then I think you'll join me in saying that to get a fourth rounder for him was greatly beneficial to both Baltimore AND Buffalo. If being a decoy is Lee Evans' main contribution to whatever offensive unit he plays for, I feel comfortable (especially after Sunday's performance) saying (as I have all along) that Chan Gailey is MORE than capable of creating a whole array of of decoys, diversions, schemes, etc. that don't require nor limit his play calling to Evans' singular skill set (going deep).

 

 

you act like hes a 22 catch for 300 yards and no tds kind of player. hes not equal in ability to two of the more electrifying players in the league, but hes still.... good? weird.

[BuffaloBillsForever]

Another myth is people think Lee gets double covered all the time. He doesn't really. The standard defense and a common one at that is a zone or 1 on 1 with the CB and a safety playing zone coverage over top. He won't draw that extra man unless the ball is thrown on that fly route down field. This is a standard cover 2 defense which teams use all the time. Teams don't draw up elaborate defenses so they can defend the greatest decoy WR of all time. If they feel their corner can stop him they will let the CB play man or zone with no safety help. This is where Lee might get his 2-3 touches for 60-80 yards where he gets the bulk of those yards in one catch.

Edited September 14, 2011 by BuffaloBillsForever

[Orton's Arm]

Lee Evans, the greatest decoy that this league has ever seen.....

 

The Legend continues...

Before commenting on your conclusion, I'd like to go back to the reason Evans was drafted in the first place.

 

You'll recall that during the first eight games of 2002, the Bills' offense was good. Ridiculously good. These were Bledsoe's first eight games for the Bills! Then in the second half of 2002 the offense declined, but was still respectable. The Bills had Eric Moulds and Peerless Price as their #1 and #2 WRs.

 

After the 2002 season the Bills traded away Peerless Price for a first round pick. But then in 2003 the offense was very disappointing. It languished! Part of that was because of injuries, and part was because defenses continued to use the anti-Bledsoe techniques first pioneered by Belichick in the Bills' 9th game of 2002. Part of the problem was the offensive line. But part of the problem was also the fact that the Bills no longer had a legitimate deep threat to punish teams which blitzed.

 

To solve the latter problem, TD drafted Evans 13th overall in the 2004 draft. It's worth noting here that Evans was intended as a replacement/upgrade for Peerless Price, not Eric Moulds. As a #1 WR, Evans has been disappointing and inadequate. (Just as the Falcons found Peerless unable to fill the #1 role to an even greater degree than has been the case with the Bills and Evans.) What the Bills had with Evans was a very good #2 WR/deep burner. Not a go-to guy or a #1 WR. Had Evans been paired with a bona fide #1 WR, and had the Bills had a reasonably good OL and a competent QB who could also throw the long ball, the results on offense would have been impressive. I realize that's a lot of ifs. Evans is like a puzzle piece which becomes valuable only when neighboring puzzle pieces have been collected and assembled.

 

It's also worth noting that the value of a deep burner like Evans is highly dependent on the quarterback. Bledsoe was slow at getting rid of the football, making him vulnerable to the blitz. On the other hand, he threw a beautiful long bomb. A deep burner like Peerless or Evans could be very useful to a quarterback like him to punish teams for blitzing. At the opposite end of the spectrum was Holcomb: a quarterback with zero arm strength who was very good at getting rid of the ball quickly. Eric Moulds caught a ton of passes with Holcomb under center, while Evans caught next to nothing. But whenever Holcomb was replaced by JP, the opposite would be true. Both Losman and Evans were one trick ponies, with that one trick being the deep passing game. Obviously you can't base a successful offense on just that. But if you want to build a multidimensional offense, it is good to have the deep passing game as one of those dimensions.

 

Back in the '90s the Cowboys' #1 and #2 WRs were Michael Irvin and Alvin Harper. Harper was their deep threat, and caught a lot fewer passes than Irvin. But then came a year when the 49ers had signed Deion Sanders. In the playoff game between the two teams, the Cowboys had expected the 49ers to put Sanders (one of the best CBs ever) on Irvin (one of the best WRs ever). They didn't. Instead the 49ers put Sanders on Harper and double covered Irvin. Having Sanders on Harper meant the Cowboys' deep game was completely taken away. Aikman threw a pass or two in Harper's direction anyway, leading to at least one interception by Sanders. The 49ers ended up winning that playoff game, and later beat the Chargers in the Super Bowl. The 49ers felt that shutting down the Cowboys' deep threat was important enough to use up a CB as valuable as Sanders, and they were right.

 

Evans is a better football player than Harper. But a deep threat #2 WR needs to be surrounded by the right pieces to maximize his value, which had never really been the case for Evans. Nor is this current Bills offense a good fit for him. Fitz's arm strength is mediocre, and he gets rid of the ball quickly to compensate for a questionable OL. A deep burner isn't necessarily all that important to a quarterback like this, for the same reasons that a deep burner wasn't very important to Holcomb during his time here. Had Losman worked out as planned, Evans would have been a much more valuable component of the Bills' offense.

Edited September 14, 2011 by Edwards' Arm

[San Jose Bills Fan]

So as a postscript to Edward's Arm's post above, I would say again (paraphrasing someone else's idea):

 

The same player can have a different value to one team than he does to another team.

[Kelly the Dog]

Another myth is people think Lee gets double covered all the time. He doesn't really. The standard defense and a common one at that is a zone or 1 on 1 with the CB and a safety playing zone coverage over top. He won't draw that extra man unless the ball is thrown on that fly route down field. This is a standard cover 2 defense which teams use all the time. Teams don't draw up elaborate defenses so they can defend the greatest decoy WR of all time. If they feel their corner can stop him they will let the CB play man or zone with no safety help. This is where Lee might get his 2-3 touches for 60-80 yards where he gets the bulk of those yards in one catch.

The myth is really that just because teams don't put two guys right on a player it is not "double coverage". If the safety in your explanation takes a half second look or one step lean toward a deep threat WR but then abandons it, and is a half second late or step behind getting to the other WR that is getting the pass after he reads the QB, it is the equivalent of double coverage. That is what happened all the time last year on the Bills, and what Simon was talking about in the Ravens game.

 

I went through every single TD Stevie Johnson had last year and watched the safeties and on almost every one of them they looked to Evans. Then posted it here. There was not one TD that there were two guys looking to SJ. And there were a few that the safety got there late and could not stop the score because he looked to Evans first. It's a high school thing that is easily seen if you watch the replays a few times for what everyone does and where all the Wrs are.

Edited September 14, 2011 by Kelly the Fair and Balanced Dog

[beerme1]

As Schopp the dope would say, Aye yi yi already.