MMQB: Bills spent considerable time with top WRs including Jeudy and Lamb

[Don Otreply]

16 minutes ago, BillsFan17 said:

There is no point in going back and forth. There were a handful if not more plays that were/weren't made that cost the Bills that game. You believe it was solely not having a WR, again that's a fine opinion to have. The fact that Allen fell apart in the fourth, the fact they took points off the board for no reason, the fact they had a phantom call on Cody Ford, the fact that Beasley was drastically underutilized, the fact Daboll sputtered in the second half...

 

But yes, the only factor that matters is WR. I'm done debating the Bills losing to the Texans solely because a WR or lack there of.

Now you’re being hyperbolic, this silly statement is not what anyone is arguing, those thing contributed, and everyone realizes that, but the game would have been won on two or three passing plays that the receivers botched, even with all the other contributing factors, you’re just arguing for the sake of your ego now, talk about clutching pearls, sheesh...

 

Go Bills!!!

Edited March 3, 2020 by Don Otreply

[BillsFan17]

16 minutes ago, Don Otreply said:

Now you’re being hyperbolic, this silly statement is not what anyone is arguing, those thing contributed, and everyone realizes that, but the game would have been won on two or three passing plays that the receivers botched, even with all the other contributing factors, you’re just arguing for the sake of your ego now, talk about clutching pearls, sheesh...

 

Go Bills!!!

"You're being hyperbolic..." as I point out a variety of plays that helped result in a lose...

 

Then you follow it up with two or three plays by a WR win us that game..

 

 

You are 100% right, a WR absolutely wins us that game. Nailed it. Nothing else about that game mattered, two or three plays by a WR win us the game. You are undoubtedly, unabashedly, without question right.

[stinky finger]

19 hours ago, T master said:

 

Pull a Ditka & go get one ! Were moving on up - to the top - to get a deluxe player in the draft !! 

 

Your theme screams - draft Jefferson.

[NewEra]

2 hours ago, DFT said:

JJ in my opinion is definitely the more technically sound.  But that’s what has me thinking it’s NOT him, honestly.  I think that getting a guy that has the better ability to “catch anything with ease”, suits JA the most.  I don’t think he’s where he needs to be to reap the benefits of JJ’s precision.  Both are incredible though, no question.  I just have a sneaky suspicion that it would be the more sure-handed Lamb.  And it would have to be a leapfrog over AZ scenario because I just can’t see them passing on him.   But again, I’m probably overthinking things.

Agreed. If the discussion is, who is a better fit for JA, I think it’s lamb.  I really hope it’s lamb, if this is real talk.  I really hope we don’t trade up, but if we do....it better be for lamb or chase young.  

[Alphadawg7]

9 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yep. There was not a Jeudy, Ruggs or Lamb in last year's class. I never said there were not guys who could come in and make an impact. In fact I was the guy who called Deebo Samuel one of the safest picks in the draft and I was the only person around here I can recall, except the departed Turbs, who had AJ Brown graded out as my #1 guy. 

 

This class is loaded. There is even more depth than last year. But what it has that last year lacked is those top end elite prospects. 

 

On chances of busting top 10 vs 22.... the numbers are that top 10 picks bust about 36% of the time. 1st rounders outside of the top 20 bust about 53% of the time. That was a study done a few years back. It does not mean Jeudy or Lamb or Ruggs can't bust. But you are giving up capital to reduce the chances. 

 

And for the 100th time I am not even advocating a trade up. I am just rejecting the idea that it is just a lottery and you have as much chance with the 22nd ticket picking the 2nd tier receiver prospects as you do with the say 10th ticket picking a top tier receiver prospect. You can still hit. But your odds are reduced. 

 

Draft grading before the draft is not an exact science, but to say there wasn't a "Juedy, Ruggs, Lamb" in last years draft proved to not be an accurate evaluation of the draft given the success the WR class had.  

 

But your stats on the bust rate you just said are not accurate.  The success rate of a top 5 pick is 71%.  But picks 6-10 is at 51%. 11-15 is at 57.1% 16-20 is at 51.4% and 21-32 is at 47%.

 

Lamb, Ruggs, and Juedy are almost certainly not going to be top 5 picks.  None of them are even lock for top 10.  So that is my point.  The success rate of a guy we take at our pick is not SIGNIFICANTLY different like you keep suggesting.  The top 10 success rate is skewed by the top 5 heavily, and none of these guys are going top 5.  

 

And I would argue heavily that Justin Jefferson for instance is pretty close to the top 3 after showing his speed at the combine which was his only big concern.  He is an excellent route runner, big, fast, and has great hands with a great ability to go get contested balls.  

 

There is no way that Juedy, Ruggs, or Lamb is so much better than Jefferson and so much less risk than Jefferson that its worth giving up multiple high value draft picks to take them over him.  The "risks" as you like to say are not reduced much going from one of those 3 to Jefferson.  And there are other WR's who are near these guys too.  

 

Thats the point.  I am all for a small trade up to get the guy Beane and McD grade out as the one they covet, but to say the risk is SIGNIFICANTLY lower in them over say Jefferson is a gross exaggeration.  I get you are not advocating for a trade up, and I am only addressing your comments of how its SIGNIFICANTLY lower risk.  

 

(To be clear, ALL CAPS were used to emphasize a key word, not yell bud).

Edited March 3, 2020 by Alphadawg7

[Lurker]

4 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 The success rate of a top 5 pick is 71%.  But picks 6-10 is at 51%. 11-15 is at 57.1% 16-20 is at 51.4% and 21-32 is at 47%.

 

How are you defining "success?"

[Alphadawg7]

16 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

How are you defining "success?"

 

There are a lot of metrics out there, but many of the ones out there defines success min level to be a solid, but yet unspectacular season on up.  A quality starter and above essentially. 

Edited March 3, 2020 by Alphadawg7

[Alphadawg7]

Here is an interesting read that was posted on TSW last draft cycle.  It shows the bust rats, pro bowl rates, all pro rates, etc by position in first round and also specifically the top 10 selections.

 

Interesting that the bust rate for the first round last 25 years for a WR is 30% yet the bust rate for WR's taken in the top 10 is higher at 35%.  

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2441018-which-positions-are-the-safest-riskiest-at-the-top-of-the-nfl-draft

[SoTier]

17 hours ago, BillsFan17 said:

Again, we hear this all the time. And yet, we still see guys going later that pan out better. I love the top three, and if one of them slide, awesome. If not, by all means wait and you can absolutely expect guys later in the class to have an impact.

 

Just because those guy are that good, doesn't take away from the immense talent this class has to offer. Moreover, to just blindly assume it's not at all possible for any of those guys to flop/bust is also extremely irrational. The most high profile of specs have flopped in the past.

 

Again, I would love to get my hands on one of them, but not at the cost of giving up assets to go get one. Not a chance with the depth of the class.

 

I think that's a false perception that results from the fact that we often focus on the first round guys who bust but ignore the second rounders who do the same.  The further back in the draft a player is taken, the more likely he is to fail to become even a solid NFL player much less a star playmaker.  A lot of it is perception, too.  People remember the highly touted first rounders who crash and burn and the handful of Day 2 or Day 3 guys who become Pro Bowlers but the players outside the first round who don't pan out don't even make a blip on people's radar except for maybe personal reasons.   Case in point is Zay Jones; the only reason we even recognize his name is because he was a 2nd round pick for the Bills who busted.

 

On the matter of trading up in the draft, IMO, I'm okay with trading up to get into the top third/top half of the first round but I think trading up in later rounds is a waste of resources because of the increased chances of faiure.   

[SoTier]

15 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I didn't say that.  You said they bust SIGNIFICANTLY less.  I said the stats dont suggest its SIGNIFICANT.  I can list a ton of WR's who busted to match your list that didn't.  

 

Statistically, the bust rate of someone taken in the top 10 isn't SIGNIFICANTLY better than someone taken at 22.  My point was simply that its not a significant as you made it out to be, and its also not an exact science year to year either.  

 

You dont mortgage the future to move up for a WR this year in this draft class.  You can move up still, but its totally unnecessary to make a huge move.  Last year you and lots of others kept saying there were no #1 WR's in the draft or special guys, yet many came in and made huge impacts right away and proved just how good that draft class was like many of us kept saying.  

 

Again this year, its loaded and even more so than last year.  You do not need to give up the farm to get any one player at WR this year is all I am saying.

 

Are you talking any position or specifically WRs?   Some positions are not considered valuable enough to warrant spending a top five or top ten pick on.  Teams frequently don't start using their first round picks on interior OL positions until later, so the bottom half or third of the first round frequently produces Pro Bowl guards and centers.   OTOH, it's pretty clear that QBs taken in the bottom half of the first round aren't likely to find much success.  Right off, I can think of only 4 QBs taken at #16 or lower since 2000 who have had real success in the NFL: 2000 - Chad Pennington; 2005 - Aaron Rodgers; 2008 - Joe Flacco; 2018 - Lamar Jackson.  

 

I think if you look at success and draft position without regard to position, you are probably right that there's not a big difference in the number of busts from positions 1-10 and positions 22-32.   However, that's a very simplistic and unrealistic view because some positions are considered more valuable, and the best prospects at that position get snapped up early even if they aren't as good prospects as other players at positions that aren't valued as much and are, therefore, much more likely to bust.

[Teddy KGB]

4 hours ago, BillsFan17 said:

So many people want their narrative to be right, they will blindly ignore absolutely every other factor to further push their agenda.

 

Its okay, if you firmly believe a WR makes or breaks that game, that's fine. Clearly you have to clutch those pearls and ignore everything else.

that’s because “they”  are right, Bills lost to Houston by how much again ? 

Edited March 3, 2020 by Teddy KGB

[Don Otreply]

2 hours ago, BillsFan17 said:

"You're being hyperbolic..." as I point out a variety of plays that helped result in a lose...

 

Then you follow it up with two or three plays by a WR win us that game..

 

 

You are 100% right, a WR absolutely wins us that game. Nailed it. Nothing else about that game mattered, two or three plays by a WR win us the game. You are undoubtedly, unabashedly, without question right.

Why do you purposefully play the blow hard? Your points were noted, and they were contributing factors as you said, but one can as well see the obvious plays that decided the game in our opponents favor. But you are so stubborn that you refuse to even entertain anything but your own view. Do have a nice day, and enjoy the upcoming FA period and the draft, I know I will, later 17, 

 

Go Bills!!!

[Dkollidas]

With what it cost Pittsburgh to move from 20 to 10 last season, I wouldn’t be against a move up if we didn’t trade away a future 1st round pick. 
 

I’d be willing to move up for any of Jeudy, Lamb or Ruggs. I just think they all have an elite trait that will make each guy special in his own way. 

[Reed83HOF]

19 minutes ago, Teddy KGB said:

that’s because “they”  are right, Bills lost to Houston by how much again ? 

 

 

[formerlyofCtown]

On 3/2/2020 at 12:10 PM, White Linen said:

It's amazing how similar their measurables are.  I'm normally against a trade up in the first round.  It just costs too much, IMO.  However I'd consider it for Jeudy - I think he's going to be special.  Even though they have similar playing styles - the way Jeudy runs routes and has a lot of nasty in his game, I'd only consider it for him. 

As long as he don't break his foot.

[quincy]

I agree with DFT - Lamb to Arizona at pick 8 makes too much sense.

 

If Buffalo really wants Lamb, imo they'd have to get to 7 (Carolina) and Carolina will be receiving a lot of calls from all the teams interested in Lamb. Would Rhule really entertain a trade back with, for example Simmons being there? They may be in a full rebuild but in our case a drop from 7 to 22 would be too steep I think.

 

I think a trade up to 12/13/14 is much more feasible for a similar deal to what Pittsburgh gave up for Devin Bush.

 

I think Lamb is a top 10 pick, the Jets would be tempted by Jeudy at 11 and we'd need to make a trade to land Ruggs within the next 3 picks (before Denver).

 

Is Kmet a luxury pick at 22? Or slightly later with a small trade down? Is he the number 1 TE this year?

 

I think he'd work well with Knox and we can run 2TE sets frequently. Just my attempt to think a bit outside the box.

 

 

 

 

[Putin]

20 hours ago, Sherlock Holmes said:

That's the scenario I think plays out... that's why you go after a proven commodity.

 

Is Jeudy the best because a few months ago eveybody acted like it...  or is he not even the best receiver on his team (Ruggs III)?

Is it Lamb? 

Is it Shinault?

Is it somebody else?

 

That is exactly my point . 

When we traded up for Sammy he was considered by most the BEST WR in that draft  unfortunately we all know how that worked out , 

[Putin]

27 minutes ago, quincy said:

I agree with DFT - Lamb to Arizona at pick 8 makes too much sense.

 

If Buffalo really wants Lamb, imo they'd have to get to 7 (Carolina) and Carolina will be receiving a lot of calls from all the teams interested in Lamb. Would Rhule really entertain a trade back with, for example Simmons being there? They may be in a full rebuild but in our case a drop from 7 to 22 would be too steep I think.

 

I think a trade up to 12/13/14 is much more feasible for a similar deal to what Pittsburgh gave up for Devin Bush.

 

I think Lamb is a top 10 pick, the Jets would be tempted by Jeudy at 11 and we'd need to make a trade to land Ruggs within the next 3 picks (before Denver).

 

Is Kmet a luxury pick at 22? Or slightly later with a small trade down? Is he the number 1 TE this year?

 

I think he'd work well with Knox and we can run 2TE sets frequently. Just my attempt to think a bit outside the box.

 

 

 

 

I don’t believe McBean will give up so much ammunition to move anywhere near the top 10 , ( for a WR ) 

maybe if one of them drops to let’s say 15 then I ca see a similar move like he did with Edmunds , I just can’t see McBean trading the farm for a rookie WR ( just my opinion)

Edited March 3, 2020 by Putin

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

There is no way that Juedy, Ruggs, or Lamb is so much better than Jefferson and so much less risk than Jefferson that its worth giving up multiple high value draft picks to take them over him.  The "risks" as you like to say are not reduced much going from one of those 3 to Jefferson.  And there are other WR's who are near these guys too. 

 

So I think they are that much better. They are not massively less risky than Jefferson I agree with that because I see him as this year's Deebo. He is a safe pick. He will be a productive NFL receiver. But if you wanna take a big slot at #22 my answer would be - be my guest. I'll pass. I have him as WR9. I don't think he has true #1 potential. 

 

Edited March 3, 2020 by GunnerBill

[DFT]

11 minutes ago, Putin said:

That is exactly my point . 

When we traded up for Sammy he was considered by most the BEST WR in that draft  unfortunately we all know how that worked out , 

That’s because Sammy relied on his pure talent up to that point.   His own admission was he barely had to try until the pros.  What players find out when they transition from college, to the pros is that your talent alone is not enough.  It is a constant work to improve every aspect.  Sammy was too lost in his own brand, something that never reared its ugly head when he was scouted.  Talent-wise and production, no question Sammy was as good of a prospect as could be as a top 5.  I don’t see this in any of the top 3 prospects this year.  These guys are the total package in my opinion.  But we just don’t know until the proverbial rubber meets the road.