firemedic Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 how hard is to prepare for the opponents best offensive player being out? They would waste their time preparing for Sammy instead of the guy they'll actually be putting in.......not telling just makes it harder on the opponent.
bananathumb Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 That was one mofo drafting job, Doug.
gordong Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 Your no good if you can play??? can't......thanks for pointing that out
nucci Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 They would waste their time preparing for Sammy instead of the guy they'll actually be putting in.......not telling just makes it harder on the opponent. and since he's been injured all year and didn't practice all week, they probably were prepared for him not to play. How much of a difference do you think this would have made?
BUFFALOTONE Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 I'm flattered that I'm the "stats guy". I'm happy not to cherry pick: Sammy lead the NFL in yards/target for the entire 2015 season. No big deal though, right? Why can't he do what through the whole year? Produce pro bowl numbers? Um, he did. He had what amounted to a nearly statistically identical season to Amari Cooper in 3 fewer games (with 35 fewer targets)...Cooper made the pro bowl by the way. How many wins did it translate to? Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know wins and losses were a WR stat. Since that's the case, who's the better WR: Sammy or Odell Beckham, Jr? Sammy by a significant margin, right? Or is that a total BS argument? Where are you getting this info? He wasn't even a top 20 WR last year. Not just the last 9 games Bandit. http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/receiving/sort/receivingYards/year/2015/seasontype/2 Too much to type to counter your argument so just click the link.....I promise its not Peter Pan.
Jauronimo Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 (edited) Where are you getting this info? He wasn't even a top 20 WR last year. Not just the last 9 games Bandit. http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/receiving/sort/receivingYards/year/2015/seasontype/2 Too much to type to counter your argument so just click the link.....I promise its not Peter Pan. Is yards the only measure of a receiver? I'm just throwing it out there, but maybe there are other meaningful metrics and statistics worth considering in evaluating the performance of a WR?? Edited September 30, 2016 by Jauronimo
gordong Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 Gordong....more like ding dong. #amiright? your right....
davspo Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 Those two statements, served up back-to-back, are simply astonishing. What do you consider a bust? I'd be flabbergasted if there's anyone on the football-watching planet that considers a 2nd-year player amassing over 1,000 yards and 9 TDs in 13 games "bust" status. That's without the added context that he played for the team that attempted the fewest passes in the NFL, and lead the league in yards/target. You can say that you're disappointed with his production given how much they gave up to get him, and I'd at least understand that. The bold statement, however, does not hold water in any way, shape, or form. You must be on the field to perform. He cannot stay on the field. Pretty simple really. If people want to stick there head in the sand and proclaim that he is the "all that" so be it. Hardly the numbers of a number one receiver let alone "elite". Go ahead insert excuse here! 2016 Buffalo Bills 2 6 63 10.5 31.5 19 0 0 0 4 0 2015 Buffalo Bills 13 60 1,047 17.5 80.5 63 9 18 7 41 0 2014 Buffalo Bills 16 65 982 15.1 61.4 84 6 14 4 47 1
BUFFALOTONE Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 Is yards the only measure of a receiver? I'm just throwing it out there, but maybe there are other meaningful metrics and statistics worth considering in evaluating the performance of a WR?? Sure, catches, targets, YAC etc. He sure can draw a double team....but so do the other 20 guys above him and they seem to produce as well. Look, I like the kid but there is too many excuses being made. For those who say he's not injury prone than how would you define this?
Norwood for Wall of Fame Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 Your no good if you can play??? He meant your no good if you can spel
Jauronimo Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 Sure, catches, targets, YAC etc. He sure can draw a double team....but so do the other 20 guys above him and they seem to produce as well. Look, I like the kid but there is too many excuses being made. For those who say he's not injury prone than how would you define this? I see a guy who is 12th in yards per game, first in yards per target, fourteenth in TDs, 22nd in yards, and 47th in targets. The numbers speak for themselves.
BUFFALOTONE Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 I see a guy who is 12th in yards per game, first in yards per target, fourteenth in TDs, 22nd in yards, and 47th in targets. The numbers speak for themselves. You classify those as elite numbers? Those are great for a #2.
Wooderson Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 and since he's been injured all year and didn't practice all week, they probably were prepared for him not to play. How much of a difference do you think this would have made? Agreed. Like Belichick isn't preparing for everything anyways.
bobobonators Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 Its no wonder the news on networks is always negative. Why? Nobody gives a sh*t about positive news. Meanwhile, sammy cant play and the thread blows up. Did Sammy play last week? Had Sammy really done anything this season? No news here.
Jauronimo Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 You classify those as elite numbers? Those are great for a #2. I never said elite, sparky. If those numbers are more in line with a #2 WR then I guess only 10 teams or so have #1 WRs. Is this thread a competition that I'm not aware of? Because it appears that I'm in the midst of a race to be crowned the most obnoxious and misinformed wingnut on this site.
Mike in Horseheads Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 Can we just get rid of him, seriously. And I wasted $80 on a Watkins Jersey. What a joke. What size I'll give you $20 for it.
DDD Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 Sammy Watkins...the Buffalo Bills' Tim Connolly.
Maury Ballstein Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 What size I'll give you $20 for it. I'll give you 25.00 and throw in an Ej Jersey.
thebandit27 Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 Where are you getting this info? He wasn't even a top 20 WR last year. Not just the last 9 games Bandit. http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/receiving/sort/receivingYards/year/2015/seasontype/2 Too much to type to counter your argument so just click the link.....I promise its not Peter Pan. This stuff isn't hard to figure out. 1st in yards/target: http://overthecap.com/yards-per-target-as-a-metric/ Compare his 2015 numbers to Cooper, who made the pro bowl: http://www.espn.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/16725/sammy-watkins http://www.espn.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/2976499/amari-cooper Virtually the same numbers in fewer games. You're claiming I cherry pick, yet here's Sammy putting up equal numbers over the whole season to a guy that made the pro bowl. You must be on the field to perform. He cannot stay on the field. Pretty simple really. If people want to stick there head in the sand and proclaim that he is the "all that" so be it. Hardly the numbers of a number one receiver let alone "elite". Go ahead insert excuse here! 2016 Buffalo Bills 2 6 63 10.5 31.5 19 0 0 0 4 0 2015 Buffalo Bills 13 60 1,047 17.5 80.5 63 9 18 7 41 0 2014 Buffalo Bills 16 65 982 15.1 61.4 84 6 14 4 47 1 Actually, he missed only 3 of 32 games coming into this year--that's fewer games missed than Beckham, Julio, and Dez in their first 2 seasons IIRC. And as is typical of those that try to marginalize his on-field performance, you have completely disregarded context. He plays in an offense that ranked 32nd in the NFL in pass attempts--that's dead last. Yet, somehow, he ranked 22nd in receiving yards, 14th in TDs, and 1st in yards/target. This is called context--it is meant to give a frame of reference so that you can consider what the raw numbers actually mean. The easiest way to state it is as follows: you would never, ever try to tell me that Blake Bortles is a better QB than Ben Roethlisberger...at least I hope not. Yet Bortles had more passing yards and more TDs than Ben last year, despite geting sacked 2.5 times more. See? The raw numbers are meaningless without context. Sure, catches, targets, YAC etc. He sure can draw a double team....but so do the other 20 guys above him and they seem to produce as well. Look, I like the kid but there is too many excuses being made. For those who say he's not injury prone than how would you define this? Here's the point: you can argue that he's injury prone, and that holds water. What you can't do it claim that he's not productive when he's on the field, which is what you said originally. Clearly that's not true. I see a guy who is 12th in yards per game, first in yards per target, fourteenth in TDs, 22nd in yards, and 47th in targets. The numbers speak for themselves. Indeed they do...on a per-opportunity basis, he's as good as anyone.
Recommended Posts