Cover 1 evaluation of Laviska Shenault and in-depth overview of injury history

[Thurman#1]

9 hours ago, OldTimer1960 said:

I agree that he looks fast in the tape that I’ve seen, but I am very concerned that many of his touches are on passes within 5 yards of LOS and on run plays.  Does he have the tools to become a good WR?  Yes, I think so, but I worry that his route running and experience are limited to the point that he won’t be much of an asset in year one and there is risk that he never develops as a WR.

 

 

Yeah, he has a lot of those touches that have not much to do with route-running.

 

But when he does run routes, he gets open consistently. He probably has a lot to learn but when you're getting open, you've got a head start on your learning.

[Thurman#1]

8 hours ago, Buffalo716 said:

He's great value in round 2 because he's a jack of all trades and can do alot 

 

He's not good value in the first because he isn't great at any WR skills and may never develop 

 

And 22 is not tail end of round 1.. you can get an absolute stud who is way more polished than Shenault there

 

31 would be the tail end

 

And I honestly don't want him at all. 22nd pick of round 2 sure

 

 

Well, that's a fair enough opinion, but it's certainly not the only one.

 

Polished isn't necessarily the most important thing. Eric Moulds wasn't polished. Great pick, though.

 

Drafttek has him at #27. If that's his actual value, #22 is a reasonable spot to take him. I like him, myself. Tough as nails.

 

And there's no especial reason to think he may never develop.

[BADOLBILZ]

13 hours ago, DCOrange said:

FWIW, DK was my #2 target behind Oliver at #9 last year and I don’t really want Shenault unless he slides to #54. I don’t think he’s anywhere near DK as a prospect personally. 

 

 

Yeah I was happy with Oliver because he checked as "elite pass rusher" so I was OK with passing on DK for that but I would have been pleased with Metcalf there too.   

 

I may be wrong about Shenault's ceiling but I know that he is nowhere near the freak talent that Metcalf was so people trying to draw a comparison are in the wrong area code.

[GunnerBill]

9 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Obviously you think so since you traded up for him in our mock-draft, and Buffalo716 has put in a word for him too.

 

Can you say a bit about why you feel that way, though?

 

 

 

You can add my name to the Ruggs > Shenault list too.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

You can add my name to the Ruggs > Shenault list too.

 

Fair, can you say more?

[thebandit27]

23 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

You can add my name to the Ruggs > Shenault list too.

And it ain’t close IMO.

 

Aside from the otherworldly top gear that Ruggs has, he runs tight routes and understands leverages. Basically, take all of the things that make Laviska dynamic with the ball in his hands, and Ruggs has them—save for the RB-like build and contact balance.

 

 

1:23 of this video says it all regarding Ruggs’ speed. He’s backpedaling and manages to sprint away from the defender. Unbelievable.

 

 

Edited February 6, 2020 by thebandit27

[Bray Wyatt]

I want speed on offense, someone that the defense has to account for on every play, making the defense a little more predictable. I think that person is Ruggs ideally, dont know if he will be there though. Shenault has the size everyone has been clamoring for and I think people are focused on that

[Reed83HOF]

13 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Yeah I agree with this... and I think it's largely the right call because DE/Edge Rusher is probably a more pressing need right now anyway.

Not at all, WR is the most pressing need we have, "we didn't score enough points" Brandon Beane. Look at the receiving stats for last year:

1.) We desperately need someone who is a threat to score every time they have the ball, we were 29th in YAC as a team

2.) Beasley had the most YAC on the team at 330, 44th best and grouped around players like Mixon, Goedert, Fant, Cobb & Edleman. McKenzie was 2nd and ranked #110 in YAC w/ 206 & Brown was ranked #112 w/205. This is John Ross and Amendola territory. Robert Woods was 6th in the NFL. 

3.) Yards/Catch we were 12th and Brown was 23rd in the league, Beasley was 2nd on the team and was 73rd in the league. We are terrible in these 2 categories 

11 hours ago, 947 said:

Shenault is a final piece to an already explosive offense, not a foundational building block to an offense, which is what we need. He'd make sense as a first rounder to a team like the Packers or Saints, but we need a WR who can run the whole route tree from day 1.

 

There just isn't 1st round value in the "McKenzie role", no matter how amazing a guy is. If we could pair Shenault with Van Jefferson in the 3rd, I'd feel a lot better about it.

How is this offense already explosive? Name me our playmakers and where they rank in the NFL = we are not a final piece away Entirely misread on my part

Edited February 6, 2020 by Reed83HOF

[Lurker]

10 hours ago, Buffalo Junction said:

I do. I watched Samuels whole gamecock career though. He showed the ability to set up DBs with route running, exceptional hands and body control. He’d have showed his talent on most teams.   

 

My point is that if he went to a non-playoff team with a meh QB, would we even be having this conversation.    I doubt it...

[DCOrange]

7 minutes ago, Bray Wyatt said:

I want speed on offense, someone that the defense has to account for on every play, making the defense a little more predictable. I think that person is Ruggs ideally, dont know if he will be there though. Shenault has the size everyone has been clamoring for and I think people are focused on that

 

The thing is, Shenault doesn't really use that size aside from his contact balance. He's not particularly good at getting off press coverage or making contested catches, which is really what people are looking for when they're thinking of the desire for a big WR.

 

A smaller player like Jalen Reagor is better in all those areas than Shenault is.

5 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

How is this offense already explosive? Name me our playmakers and where they rank in the NFL = we are not a final piece away

That's his point. He's saying Shenault is more of a finishing touch to an offense and we are not there yet.

 

Edit: Not saying I agree with that necessarily, but that's what he's saying.

Edited February 6, 2020 by DCOrange

[Reed83HOF]

10 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

And it ain’t close IMO.

 

Aside from the otherworldly top gear that Ruggs has, he runs tight routes and understands leverages. Basically, take all of the things that make Laviska dynamic with the ball in his hands, and Ruggs has them—save for the RB-like build and contact balance.

 

 

1:23 of this video says it all regarding Ruggs’ speed. He’s backpedaling and manages to sprint away from the defender. Unbelievable.

 

 

It is ridiculous when you watch him play, he does the back shoulder catches, makes contested catches, can track the ball in the air, he can stop on a dime, make the catch and accelerate to full speed in a second.He does the Mackenzie jet sweeps, he does the Beasley slot, he does the brown over the top, he run blocks amazingly well and not one other player in the draft comes close to this explosive skill set. Defense will have to game plan against him and will roll the safety coverage to him which will open up the rest of the field. There is nothing not to like. 

 

Also our trade up from #22 to #16 for Edmunds was our 1st & 3rd rounder and we got a 5th in return. Value won't be much different to go to 15 and, even if you have to go to 13 - you can't pass this up - the talent differential is too great

2 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

A smaller player like Jalen Reagor is better in all those areas than Shenault is.

That's his point. He's saying Shenault is more of a finishing touch to an offense and we are not there yet.

 

Edit: Not saying I agree with that necessarily, but that's what he's saying.

 First, I don't hate Shenault - I want to get that out there. He said, "Shenault is a final piece to an already explosive offense"; our offense is no nowhere near explosive and that is what I am calling out, because frankly I don't see it and no stats back up that claim.

[DCOrange]

9 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

 First, I don't hate Shenault - I want to get that out there. He said, "Shenault is a final piece to an already explosive offense"; our offense is no nowhere near explosive and that is what I am calling out, because frankly I don't see it and no stats back up that claim.

You're missing the context. 

 

Shenault is a final piece to an already explosive offense, not a foundational building block to an offense, which is what we need. He'd make sense as a first rounder to a team like the Packers or Saints, but we need a WR who can run the whole route tree from day 1.

 

He's saying Shenault would be the final piece to an already explosive offense and because we are not an explosive offense, he is not a good fit for us. He thinks he would be a good final piece for the Packers or Saints and says we need a building block, which Shenault is not.

[Lurker]

28 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

1:23 of this video says it all regarding Ruggs’ speed. He’s backpedaling and manages to sprint away from the defender. Unbelievable.

 

This isn't on you, but I always get a chuckle when I see highlight packages that feature opponents like New Mexico State, Southern Mississippi, Arkansas or Tennessee.   

 

Not really fair competition for the Alabama's of the world who can field 10-12 NFLers (many of them first rounders) year after year against future stock brokers and used car salesmen.    IMO, that's why its so hard to evaluate many of these draft prospects, where the hit rate on how they'll do against NFL competition is only about 60-40.   It takes multiple, multiple data points and evaluations--and then a whole lot of luck...

 

I like Ruggs and would be happy to have him, however!

 

 

Edited February 6, 2020 by Lurker

[Buffalo Junction]

12 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

My point is that if he went to a non-playoff team with a meh QB, would we even be having this conversation.    I doubt it...

I disagree. However, I will say that he was a lot more polished coming out than Shenault. Plus there’s the level of competition. Samuel put up a 10/210/3 game against Clemson his senior year and generally played well against SEC teams while drawing the top corner or double teams. His skills translated and it was easier to see than Shenault whom I cannot quite predict NFL performance. 

[Lurker]

15 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

Also our trade up from #22 to #16 for Edmunds was our 1st & 3rd rounder and we got a 5th in return. Value won't be much different to go to 15 and, even if you have to go to 13 - you can't pass this up - the talent differential is too great

 

I hope this is what they're thinking of again this year.   Be very aggressive at the top of the round for a guy they've specifically targeted.     If they have a conviction about a player, make it happen rather than wait and hope for the best...

[thebandit27]

6 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

This isn't on you, but I always get a chuckle when I see highlight packages that feature opponents like New Mexico State, Southern Mississippi, Arkansas or Tennessee.   

 

Not really fair competition for the Alabama's of the world who can field 10-12 NFLers (many of them first rounders) year after year against future stock brokers and used car salesmen.    IMO, that's why its so hard to evaluate many of these draft prospects, where the hit rate on how they'll do against NFL competition is only about 60-40.   It takes multiple, multiple data points and evaluations--and then a whole lot of luck...

 

I like Ruggs and would be happy to have him, however!

 

 

No doubt. I’d never post a simple highlight and say “see: this is our guy!!!” That one play, though, is perhaps the definitive example of how absurdly fast this dude is.

[Lurker]

1 minute ago, Buffalo Junction said:

I disagree. However, I will say that he was a lot more polished coming out than Shenault. Plus there’s the level of competition. Samuel put up a 10/210/3 game against Clemson his senior year and generally played well against SEC teams while drawing the top corner or double teams. His skills translated and it was easier to see than Shenault whom I cannot quite predict NFL performance. 

 

I agree with that.   I like Samuel and think he has a great future with a strong supporting cast on a playoff caliber team.    The same way Metcalf is set up in Seattle.

 

But IMO, Debo would just be "a promising rookie with untapped potential" in Jacksonville or Charlotte, meaning I doubt many posters would be taking about him as a type of player the Bills need.

[Buffalo Junction]

12 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

I agree with that.   I like Samuel and think he has a great future with a strong supporting cast on a playoff caliber team.    The same way Metcalf is set up in Seattle.

 

But IMO, Debo would just be "a promising rookie with untapped potential" in Jacksonville or Charlotte, meaning I doubt many posters would be taking about him as a type of player the Bills need.

In Jacksonville perhaps. I think he would have shown up big in Carolina. He would have found a way to show up as he tends to play up to competition. That said, on a bad team he wouldn’t have gotten any hype at all. 

[BADOLBILZ]

18 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

I agree with that.   I like Samuel and think he has a great future with a strong supporting cast on a playoff caliber team.    The same way Metcalf is set up in Seattle.

 

But IMO, Debo would just be "a promising rookie with untapped potential" in Jacksonville or Charlotte, meaning I doubt many posters would be taking about him as a type of player the Bills need.

 

 

I don't really understand where you are going with this take.

 

Maybe more posters got to see Metcalf and Samuel but it's not like 20 other teams got players like that in the draft last year.

 

It seems you are calling out posters lack of perspective on the league but I assure you that Carolina and Jacksonville had better passing games than Buffalo last year...........and young receivers DJ Moore(22) and DJ Chark(23) had 1,000 receiving yard seasons for those teams on what you seem to refer to as bad "set ups" or "supporting casts".

 

Players produce everywhere..........sometimes being on a good team helps and sometimes it limits production.     Who is to say that Samuel and Metcalf wouldn't have been better in places where they got more targets?

 

Here's the bottom line:

 

The Bills were 26th in the NFL in passing and have THE LEAST young receiving talent in the entire NFL.    

[Reed83HOF]

11 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

Here's the bottom line:

 

The Bills were 26th in the NFL in passing and have THE LEAST young receiving talent in the entire NFL.    

 We have 2 viable WRs imo, maybe Mckenzie, but he is like a 5th/6th WR to me

 

I'd argue we have some the worst WR talent in the league period, regardless of age