TBD Mythbusters Episode 1 - Lee Evans As A Buffalo Bill

[BuffaloBillsForever]

There are a lot of threads discussing Lee. We all know that. Most of the controversy surrounding Lee is that the presence of him alone on the field changes the dynamic of football games even when he produces little to nothing on the football field. The argument is that he makes the WR's around him better.

 

This thread is to conclude whether Lee Evans is a great decoy Wr that truly impacts football games and the players around him - specifically opening things up for other Wr's and making them better.

 

First we need to set a methodology as a group

 

Methodology - Quick example: Look at games where Lee Evans has 4 catches and less. Examine the production of all the other WR's, TE's and RB's in the passing game. Also did this game end up in a win or loss and more importantly if it was a loss by how much? The methodology is the most important. Lots of input is needed.

 

Data Gathering - This is bitchy part, but hopefully someone has time on their hands.

 

Observations - Interpretation of results with group concensus, though it should be fairly obvious either way.

 

Conclusion - To find out if Lee Evans is in fact a legend that can impact games without getting the ball or is this just a myth.

Edited September 15, 2011 by BuffaloBillsForever

[Ramius]

There are a lot of threads discussing Lee. We all know that. Most of the controversy surrounding Lee is that the presence of him alone on the field changes the dynamic of football games even when he produces little to nothing on the football field. The argument is that he makes the WR's around him better.

 

This thread is to conclude whether Lee Evans is a great decoy Wr that truly impacts football games and the players around him - specifically opening things up for other Wr's and making them better.

 

First we need to set a methodology as a group

 

Methodology - Quick example: Look at games where Lee Evans has 4 catches and less. Examine the production of all the other WR's, TE's and RB's in the passing game. Also did this game end up in a win or loss and more importantly if it was a loss by how much? The methodology is the most important. Lots of input is needed.

 

Data Gathering - This is bitchy part, but hopefully someone has time on their hands.

 

Observations - Interpretation of results with group concensus, though it should be fairly obvious either way.

 

Conclusion - To find out if Lee Evans is in fact a legend that can impact games without getting the ball or is this just a myth.

 

What is inarguable is that The Buffalo Bills would be better with Lee Evans than without.

 

Lee Evans was supposedly traded to "free up a roster spot for a promising youngster." Which promising youngster is that? Roosevelt? Aiken? Easley? How are they faring this season? Nelson and Jones don't count because they were on the roster last season along with Lee Evans. So essentially we traded Lee Evans so we'd have room for Ruvell Martin.

[BuffaloBillsForever]

What is inarguable is that The Buffalo Bills would be better with Lee Evans than without.

 

Lee Evans was supposedly traded to "free up a roster spot for a promising youngster." Which promising youngster is that? Roosevelt? Aiken? Easley? How are they faring this season? Nelson and Jones don't count because they were on the roster last season along with Lee Evans. So essentially we traded Lee Evans so we'd have room for Ruvell Martin.

 

You have a point but this offense is going towards a more spread offense, timing, quick passing attack. Perhaps in this regard they are better without Lee Evans who does not take very crisp routes underneath, over the middle and on short curl routes along the sideline. For the curls look at a few interceptions where he doesn't come back to ball, just waits for it to arrive. He can run a fly route with his blazing speed but his underneath stuff is average. Is he really a lot better than what we have now in that type of offense? Not as black and white than what he can do on a fly route.

 

Perhaps the coaches feel the other WR's are better in the short passing game and this is going to be more of their focus?

Edited September 15, 2011 by BuffaloBillsForever

[DC Tom]

There are a lot of threads discussing Lee. We all know that. Most of the controversy surrounding Lee is that the presence of him alone on the field changes the dynamic of football games even when he produces little to nothing on the football field. The argument is that he makes the WR's around him better.

 

This thread is to conclude whether Lee Evans is a great decoy Wr that truly impacts football games and the players around him - specifically opening things up for other Wr's and making them better.

 

First we need to set a methodology as a group

 

Methodology - Quick example: Look at games where Lee Evans has 4 catches and less. Examine the production of all the other WR's, TE's and RB's in the passing game. Also did this game end up in a win or loss and more importantly if it was a loss by how much? The methodology is the most important. Lots of input is needed.

 

Data Gathering - This is bitchy part, but hopefully someone has time on their hands.

 

Observations - Interpretation of results with group concensus, though it should be fairly obvious either way.

 

Conclusion - To find out if Lee Evans is in fact a legend that can impact games without getting the ball or is this just a myth.

 

I don't have time for any of this...but I'll volunteer to wear a beret and tape a scrub brush to my upper lip.

[Slayers]

What is inarguable is that The Buffalo Bills would be better with Lee Evans than without.

 

Lee Evans was supposedly traded to "free up a roster spot for a promising youngster." Which promising youngster is that? Roosevelt? Aiken? Easley? How are they faring this season? Nelson and Jones don't count because they were on the roster last season along with Lee Evans. So essentially we traded Lee Evans so we'd have room for Ruvell Martin.

 

How do you not count Nelson or Jones maybe the trade of Evans was so they could get more time and I also believe that Easley was without heart problems when we traded Lee

[Ramblin' Rob]

mods please close this down! All of this is being discussed in other threads. So sick of it. He is gone, and if he came back next year he would be a number three. He ran poor routs and Stevie was a better deep threat last year. He was a great guy and team mate and I think he will help Baltimore, but rehashing rehashed garbage is not interesting.

[QCity]

What is inarguable is that The Buffalo Bills would be better with Lee Evans than without.

How exactly does a 5'10" one-dimensional deep threat help inside the red zone?

 

Nelson and Jones don't count because they were on the roster last season along with Lee Evans.

This is pretty much dead wrong, they do count and they count plenty. Lee Evans was the sole reason these guys weren't on the field last year, or could only get limited playing time. Did you think we could just demote Evans to 3rd receiver? How well would that go over with him?

 

Evans was a classy guy, but he is so overrated it isn't funny. And I'm sorry Evans fans, but we are in fact, better off without him - regardless of how many catches he has this year in Baltimore.

[muffmonster]

How exactly does a 5'10" one-dimensional deep threat help inside the red zone?

 

 

This is pretty much dead wrong, they do count and they count plenty. Lee Evans was the sole reason these guys weren't on the field last year, or could only get limited playing time. Did you think we could just demote Evans to 3rd receiver? How well would that go over with him?

 

Evans was a classy guy, but he is so overrated it isn't funny. And I'm sorry Evans fans, but we are in fact, better off without him - regardless of how many catches he has this year in Baltimore.

 

So far regular season = 0. That being said Flacco specifically called this out saying that even though Evans had no catches he had an impact by opening up the other receivers.

[Ramius]

How exactly does a 5'10" one-dimensional deep threat help inside the red zone?

 

 

This is pretty much dead wrong, they do count and they count plenty. Lee Evans was the sole reason these guys weren't on the field last year, or could only get limited playing time. Did you think we could just demote Evans to 3rd receiver? How well would that go over with him?

 

Evans was a classy guy, but he is so overrated it isn't funny. And I'm sorry Evans fans, but we are in fact, better off without him - regardless of how many catches he has this year in Baltimore.

 

Lee averaged 54-848-6 during his 7 years in buffalo. I'll gladly take those numbers over the combined career totals of Jones and Nelson, which were 49-569-4 coming this year.

 

I have no qualms with either Nelson or Jones. I think they can develop into good players. I just think it was foolish to deal a good, proven WR before we're sure the potential replacements are as good as them.

[RyanC883]

This is a fantastic idea! I think you should submit it to Mythbusters. Granted, there would be nothing to blow, up, etc. But the results would be interesting.

[bladiebla]

mods please close this down! All of this is being discussed in other threads. So sick of it. He is gone, and if he came back next year he would be a number three. He ran poor routs and Stevie was a better deep threat last year. He was a great guy and team mate and I think he will help Baltimore, but rehashing rehashed garbage is not interesting.

 

 

Mods can we please smack these mod beggers, eurhm, no this doesnt count...

 

Seriously, dude, if you dont like a thread stay away from it. Nobody forces you to read stuff you dont choose to read, title says it all. Respect your fellow posters, let them enjoy what they enjoy posting about and you do the same. In end we'll all profit from diversity in topics.

[Meark]

What is inarguable is that The Buffalo Bills would be better with Lee Evans than without.

 

Lee Evans was supposedly traded to "free up a roster spot for a promising youngster." Which promising youngster is that? Roosevelt? Aiken? Easley? How are they faring this season? Nelson and Jones don't count because they were on the roster last season along with Lee Evans. So essentially we traded Lee Evans so we'd have room for Ruvell Martin.

 

The roster spot was opened up for promising youngsters.. That would be Jones, Nelson and Easley so they get more playing time. Unfortunately Easley is out for the year. I would rather see Nelson out there than Evans.. I much prefer the larger and taller receivers we have now. Lets face it.. The deep ball is not Fitzpatrick's strength so why have a guy that only runs straight down field that we can only connect with like 25% of the time?

 

Seriously.. there is a Lee Evans thread everyday.. Let it go people.. He is no longer on the team so who cares what he produces.

 

Lee averaged 54-848-6 during his 7 years in buffalo. I'll gladly take those numbers over the combined career totals of Jones and Nelson, which were 49-569-4 coming this year.

 

I have no qualms with either Nelson or Jones. I think they can develop into good players. I just think it was foolish to deal a good, proven WR before we're sure the potential replacements are as good as them.

 

This is getting ridiculous.. Lee was a starter last year, Jones and Nelson weren't. There is no comparison. How about we judge at the end of this year and see who has better numbers. At this point both Nelson and Jones are > that Evans!

 

Jones - 2 catches for 3 yards and 1 TD

Nelson - 4 catches for 66 yards 0 TD's

Evans - 0 catches for 0 yards and 0 TD's

Edited September 15, 2011 by markinsd

[bladiebla]

. For the curls look at a few interceptions where he doesn't come back to ball, just waits for it

 

Offtopic, but this was exactly my gripe with Martin in Amsterdam, sensational on deep routes and in the endzone but seemed to have unwillingness to move towards the ball and/or fight for it.

[The Big Cat]

There are a lot of threads discussing Lee. We all know that. Most of the controversy surrounding Lee is that the presence of him alone on the field changes the dynamic of football games even when he produces little to nothing on the football field. The argument is that he makes the WR's around him better.

 

This thread is to conclude whether Lee Evans is a great decoy Wr that truly impacts football games and the players around him - specifically opening things up for other Wr's and making them better.

 

First we need to set a methodology as a group

 

Methodology - Quick example: Look at games where Lee Evans has 4 catches and less. Examine the production of all the other WR's, TE's and RB's in the passing game. Also did this game end up in a win or loss and more importantly if it was a loss by how much? The methodology is the most important. Lots of input is needed.

 

Data Gathering - This is bitchy part, but hopefully someone has time on their hands.

 

Observations - Interpretation of results with group concensus, though it should be fairly obvious either way.

 

Conclusion - To find out if Lee Evans is in fact a legend that can impact games without getting the ball or is this just a myth.

 

4 catches or less would be 76 of his 108 career games...

[Billsrhody]

Lee averaged 54-848-6 during his 7 years in buffalo. I'll gladly take those numbers over the combined career totals of Jones and Nelson, which were 49-569-4 coming this year.

 

I have no qualms with either Nelson or Jones. I think they can develop into good players. I just think it was foolish to deal a good, proven WR before we're sure the potential replacements are as good as them.

 

The idea is that by letting go of evans, one of these guys can step into a starting role and exceed his output. Why dont we give them a full season as starters before comparing their stats to Lee's. By letting go of Lee, you give these guys (both have less than 3 years in the league) a chance to grow and develop.

[Ramblin' Rob]

Mods can we please smack these mod beggers, eurhm, no this doesnt count...

 

Seriously, dude, if you dont like a thread stay away from it. Nobody forces you to read stuff you dont choose to read, title says it all. Respect your fellow posters, let them enjoy what they enjoy posting about and you do the same. In end we'll all profit from diversity in topics.

You are right, I should stay away. However I am right too, all of this is being discussed in other threads, and the mods routinely close such threads. And to your last point, see my first point, this is not diversity.

 

In the end, i was trying to jest a bit, giving the guy a hard time for a rehash.

Edited September 15, 2011 by RichmondRob

[Simon]

The argument is that he makes the WR's around him better.

 

 

I don't want to foul up your experiment or anything, but I feel obligated to point out that in the Ravens game, the primary beneficiaries of the spaces that opened up for the first time in about a dozen games of this rivalry were the TE's and the RB's.

 

Lee Evans was supposedly traded to "free up a roster spot for a promising youngster."

I'm not sure where this supposition came from, but I don't think it is even remotely accurate or honest.

The reason the Bills traded him was that they knew they weren't going to re-sign or extend him next year since he's a one-dimensional receiver in a complex offense. And between Fitz's average arm and an OLine that can't regularly protect 7step drops they knew they weren't going to get a whole lot of production from him this year. So they decided to go ahead and get something out of him now instead of losing him for nothing later.

Basically, they got a little worse in the short term in an effort to get a little better in the long term. Anyone that says it has anything to do with anybody currently on the roster is blowing smoke up yer arse.

[eme123]

Lee Sucks! He's gone. Who cares

[The Big Cat]

Hey, you guys remember Brian Shaw? What's THAT guy up to?

[Ramblin' Rob]

I'm not sure where this supposition came from, but I don't think it is even remotely accurate or honest.

The reason the Bills traded him was that they knew they weren't going to re-sign or extend him next year since he's a one-dimensional receiver in a complex offense. And between Fitz's average arm and an OLine that can't regularly protect 7step drops they knew they weren't going to get a whole lot of production from him this year. So they decided to go ahead and get something out of him now instead of losing him for nothing later.

Basically, they got a little worse in the short term in an effort to get a little better in the long term. Anyone that says it has anything to do with anybody currently on the roster is blowing smoke up yer arse.

 

Buddy said in an interview with a Toronto radio station that the Ravens approached him about the trade and that one of the factors that convinced them to make the trade was the positives of opening up the roster spot for one of their younger guys. It is entirely possible that this, as well as your point is true.