YoloinOhio Posted June 1, 2017 Author Posted June 1, 2017 At this point, might as well just throw some gasoline on this thread and burn it down..... How about they trade Sammy straight up for Hogan and then see what Da'Rick is up to these days? Bringing Hogan the Great into this pretty much = throwing the gasoline on it
NewEra Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 And yet him and TT were one of the best duos the second half of 2015. Oh yeah, I forgot. TT is awesome. My bad
26CornerBlitz Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 Look at the story. These injuries aren't just in one season. He's been injured consistently. It's a move that could be good or bad depending on what they got for him and what they turned it into. IMHO, anyway. I agree there's a lot of good arguments against trading him. I just think that if it became the difference between getting and not getting a QB who is a consistent top ten guy, I'd support it in a second. Though I absolutely agree that a healthy Sammy stands a chance of being a very good player. He's already a very good player even with his injury history, the QBs he's played with, and the offensive schemes that have been oriented toward the run game. His numbers tell that story.
GG Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 Oh ok so this is what you really meant. The Bills could still get a Franchise QB while keeping Watkins on the roster you know this right? You don't have to trade away every player on your roster to get a franchise QB. Other teams have accomplished getting good QBs by not trading away their best assets. Imagine that. Yea. I think his point is trading Sammy to help us move up to get that franchise QB. But that would be stupid, IMO. Why trade away an already establish great player when you could trade unstablished ones?(draft picks) That's why I said final piece. If Bills enter next draft with 3 first round draft picks, they have greater ammunition to strike a deal, especially if they need to move up to the top. Would that be a better bargaining chip than offering 2 '18 firsts & '19 first? I don't know, but it must be part of their thinking. And that would be the only justification to trade Sammy. You don't trade him unless you pick a QB high up. My guess is that if the rumors are coming out, the Bills are far more concerned about Sammy's injury and may be trying to get some value
26CornerBlitz Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 That's why I said final piece. If Bills enter next draft with 3 first round draft picks, they have greater ammunition to strike a deal, especially if they need to move up to the top. Would that be a better bargaining chip than offering 2 '18 firsts & '19 first? I don't know, but it must be part of their thinking. And that would be the only justification to trade Sammy. You don't trade him unless you pick a QB high up. My guess is that if the rumors are coming out, the Bills are far more concerned about Sammy's injury and may be trying to get some value There have been zero legitimate sources that have supported the Bills entertaining offers for Watkins. None. Notta. Zilch.
Gugny Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 There have been zero legitimate sources that have supported the Bills entertaining offers for Watkins. None. Notta. Zilch. Well, that settles it then. If no one wants him. He's a bust.
26CornerBlitz Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 Well, that settles it then. If no one wants him. He's a bust. The kind they have in Canton?
Thurman#1 Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 (edited) t That's just it Thurman: he's already a very good player. Actually, his per-target production is downright elite. As I've said over and over, the numbers every year clearly indicate that quantity of targets is the #1 predictor in accumulation of statistics, and is so by a significant margin. The main contributor to Sammy not producing like the Beckham's and Joneses of the league has been a relative lack of usage when he's on the field. The second-greatest contributor has been lack of availability. We need only look at the difference in the QB's performance when he's on the field versus when he's not to see his impact on the game: http://www.buffaloru...ying-his-impact "Last season, Tyrod Taylor and EJ Manuel averaged 6.65 yards per attempt when Watkins was not on the field. When Watkins was on the field, Taylor and Manuel combined for a 7.38 yards-per-attempt average." "The disparity is even more staggering when solely focusing on Taylor. Taylor with Watkins: 8.23 YPA Taylor without Watkins: 7.13 YPA" His per-target production is elite, you say? Beckham: 63% catch rate (higher than his teammates), 9.01 yards per target. 7.66 TDs per target. That's elite. Antonio Brown: 67% catch rate. 8.87 yards per target. 5.30 TDs per target. Julio Jones: 64% catch rate. 9.79 yards per target. 5.15 TDs per target. Sammy: 55% catch rate. 8.91 yards per target. Very fine yards and TDs per target. Ungreat catch rate. The only difference between the times he's looked utterly unstoppable and the times he hasn't has been a focus (or lack thereof) on making him the primary weapon in the passing game. The target numbers bear it out. They do not. Injuries have looked like a much larger factor. The target numbers are likely effect rather than cause. He might, for example, not have been getting open as much when injured, causing his target numbers to go down. Edited June 1, 2017 by Thurman#1
26CornerBlitz Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 His per-target production is elite, you say? Beckham: 63% catch rate (higher than his teammates), 9.01 yards per target. 7.66 TDs per target. That's elite. Antonio Brown: 67% catch rate. 8.87 yards per target. 5.30 TDs per target. Julio Jones: 64% catch rate. 9.79 yards per target. 5.15 TDs per target. Sammy: 55% catch rate. 8.91 yards per target. They do not. Injuries have looked like a much larger factor. The target numbers are likely effect rather than cause. He might, for example, not have been getting open as much when injured, causing his target numbers to go down. I have to wonder if having Eli, Big Ben, and Matt Ryan vs. EJ/Orton/Taylor has anything to do with their higher catch rates? Naaah probably not.
Thurman#1 Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 (edited) He's already a very good player even with his injury history, the QBs he's played with, and the offensive schemes that have been oriented toward the run game. His numbers tell that story. I'd argue they tell a story of inconsistency and being pretty good. 800 yards a year and 6 plus TDs don't say "very good." Nor does the catch percentage, which was less than Woods', for instance. With yeah, that one terrific streak, but also a lot of not so terrific production. In any case, let's say I agree he's already very good even with his injury history. I don't, but let's say I did. If trading a very good player was the difference between getting and not getting a top ten QB ... I make the trade in an instant. I trade McCoy, Glenn, Sammy, Incognito ... there's not a player on the team I wouldn't trade to make that difference. I have to wonder if having Eli, Big Ben, and Matt Ryan vs. EJ/Orton/Taylor has anything to do with their higher catch rates? Naaah probably not. That argument doesn't entirely hold up. Beckham, for instance, has a much higher catch rate than the other Giants recievers do over the period. It's more him than Eli. And yet Woods has a higher catch rate than Sammy. Defenses plan to attack the pass games of those teams. In Buffalo, it's been "Make him be a quarterback." They plan to stop the run first. Having Tyrod as his QB has likely had some very positive effects as well what you're looking at. Edited June 1, 2017 by Thurman#1
Dopey Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 I'm sure he Watkins would prefer not to be traded. He would prefer to let the Bills not pick up the option and become a free agent. At this point he and his agent can go to a team that: A) has a real QB B) has the passing game as a legitimate part of their game plan C) is 1 or 2 players away from serious SB aspirations, with him being 1 of the 2 players. Maybe a WR and CB away from being "complete", or as "complete" as a team can be in this day and age of mediocrity Unless, of course we find a trade partner that has 2 of the 3 situations happening. Hopefully he is healthy and given every opportunity to excel. If so, I see a big year for him.
thebandit27 Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 t His per-target production is elite, you say? Beckham: 63% catch rate (higher than his teammates), 9.01 yards per target. 7.66 TDs per target. That's elite. Antonio Brown: 67% catch rate. 8.87 yards per target. 5.30 TDs per target. Julio Jones: 64% catch rate. 9.79 yards per target. 5.15 TDs per target. Sammy: 55% catch rate. 8.91 yards per target. Very fine yards and TDs per target. Ungreat catch rate. Some of your numbers are incorrect. Sammy's YPT is 8.94 (Julio's is 9.73, OBJ's is 8.96, Brown's is 8.74--these are all per each player's career stats at ESPN.com) http://www.espn.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/16725/sammy-watkins http://www.espn.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/13982/julio-jones http://www.espn.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/16733/odell-beckham-jr http://www.espn.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/13934/antonio-brown Also, I'm not sure catch rate is a relevant statistic given that it's highly dependent upon the QB's accuracy. A better metric would be drop percentage IMO. For this, I used Sporting Charts, and went back to 2014 (the first year that Sammy and OBJ were in the NFL): https://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/drops/2014/ Year Watkins Julio OBJ Brown 2016 3.9 2.3 3.6 1.3 2015 3.1 3.0 3.2 1.0 2014 3.1 3.1 1.5 2.8 So in actuality, we have a YPT that ranks right among the elite, and a drop percentage that is quite similar as well. They do not. Injuries have looked like a much larger factor. The target numbers are likely effect rather than cause. He might, for example, not have been getting open as much when injured, causing his target numbers to go down. You're using opinion to try to buttress this argument. If we're to look only at data and not make suppositions, then we would very clearly see that Sammy's target share increased dramatically once he became outspoken about his lack of use (i.e. he was the 4th-most targeted WR in the NFL over the final 9 games of 2015). If we're using your argument, would the claim be that he suddenly learned how to get open during that time frame, but was unable to do so otherwise? You're smart enough to know that that argument doesn't hold water.
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 If Watkins wants a pay day he has to perform at his peak all season long and not miss any games with a foot injury. If Watkins has fair #'s and gets injured again, he won't be sees as a #1 WR for many teams. A bit harsh, but it bears the truth.
thebandit27 Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 Here's a bit more context to warp your head around: http://www.footballperspective.com/guest-post-adam-harstad-on-sammy-watkins/
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 Here's a bit more context to warp your head around: http://www.footballperspective.com/guest-post-adam-harstad-on-sammy-watkins/ warp or wrap?
26CornerBlitz Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 I'd argue they tell a story of inconsistency and being pretty good. 800 yards a year and 6 plus TDs don't say "very good." Nor does the catch percentage, which was less than Woods', for instance. With yeah, that one terrific streak, but also a lot of not so terrific production. In any case, let's say I agree he's already very good even with his injury history. I don't, but let's say I did. If trading a very good player was the difference between getting and not getting a top ten QB ... I make the trade in an instant. I trade McCoy, Glenn, Sammy, Incognito ... there's not a player on the team I wouldn't trade to make that difference. That argument doesn't entirely hold up. Beckham, for instance, has a much higher catch rate than the other Giants recievers do over the period. It's more him than Eli. And yet Woods has a higher catch rate than Sammy. Defenses plan to attack the pass games of those teams. In Buffalo, it's been "Make him be a quarterback." They plan to stop the run first. Having Tyrod as his QB has likely had some very positive effects as well what you're looking at. Those are not accurate projections at all.
oldmanfan Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 warp or wrap? At this point in this thread they're equivalent
Kirby Jackson Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 (edited) Those are not accurate projections at all. If we use Watkins career to date he averages 7.46 targets per game. That amounts to 119.36 targets per 16 games. He also average .554 catches per target, .062 TD per target and 8.91 yards per target. If we extrapolate that over the 16 game schedule it is 66 receptions, 1,063 yards and 7.4 TDs. Those numbers are solid. If you raise his targets to 9.06 per game (about 10-12th in the league) you are looking at 145 targets for the season (or 30 less than Mike Evans had last year). 145 would put Sammy in line with Crabtree and Demaryius Thomas. That feels reasonable. If you use his same career numbers with 145 targets looks like this: 80 catches 1,292 yards 9TDs That would have him top 5 in yards, top 20 in receptions and top 6 in TDs. For those that only care about the gross stats they would be pretty happy. If they throw him the ball good things happen. Edited June 1, 2017 by Kirby Jackson
26CornerBlitz Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 If we use Watkins career to date he averages 7.46 targets per game. That amounts to 119.36 targets per 16 games. He also average .554 catches per target, .062 TD per target and 8.91 yards per target. If we extrapolate that over the 16 game schedule it is 66 receptions, 1,063 yards and 7.4 TDs. Those numbers are solid. If you raise his targets to 9.06 per game (about 10-12th in the league) you are looking at 145 targets for the season (or 30 less than Mike Evans had last year). 145 would put Sammy in line with Crabtree and Demaryius Thomas. That feels reasonable. If you use his same career numbers with 145 targets looks like this: 80 catches 1,292 yards 9TDs That would have him top 5 in yards, top 20 in receptions and top 6 in TDs. For those that only care about the gross stats they would be pretty happy. If they throw him the ball good things happen. Those projections also include his 2016 that I consider to be a throwaway year with him clearly hampered by the foot injury.
Kirby Jackson Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 Those projections also include his 2016 that I consider to be a throwaway year with him clearly hampered by the foot injury. Yep, I don't want to be accused of an agenda so I just took everything good and bad.
Recommended Posts