Execs Unfiltered On All 32 Draft Classes

[NoSaint]

20 hours ago, Areola Grande said:

I'm convinced the value Beane places on interior OL is somewhere between 🤮-->🗑️-->💩, despite the fact that it's been a consistent problem ever since he arrived [both with the play of the guys they've played musical chairs with, and the Teller/Spain crap we're sick of talking about by now]. He hasn't drafted a single iOL since coming here (not really counting 7th rounder Jack Anderson and Ford was taken as a highly-graded OT prospect). Hoping a new OL coach changes things because Bobby Johnson was awful, but seriously... it was like déjà vu from last year...

 

Creed Humphrey was in our laps, we turn down a favorable trade offer to take... Boogie Basham - with all those f***ing annoying characterizations ("raw, developmental "project" that will "compete" and "add depth".. ugh)?! Spent the first 3+ months of the season watching Cody Ford, Feliciano, Boettger, player X, Y, etc. play competing ole' turnstyle games while Humphrey looks like a lock 10-year pro bowler, barring health.

 

Rinse and repeat in the 3rd round. For the life of me I have tried really hard like the die-hard homer that I am to justify and rationalize that Terrel Bernard head-scratcher. Obviously I hope I'm dead wrong and he's a stud but he's just not going to play a significant role on the defense unless there are injuries.

 

It's particularly annoying because Creed was taken 63rd after Basham at 61 and Dylan Parham was taken minutes after Kyle Brandt put on that cringeworthy spectacle and kind of perplexed everyone.

 

Ok. Got that the negative Nancy b***hing out of the way. I realize this has been a franchise-changing front office and we've gone from decades in the tank to amongst the perennial contenders for the foreseeable future, I'm placing all my hopes on Elam becoming a top-25-40 NFL corner and Shakir being this year's late-round diamond in the rough.

 

Let's go Bills

see and I’d argue his investment in IDL indicates he sees value inside. 
 

unless I guess he chalks it up to josh being able to escape DT rushes 

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

On 5/6/2022 at 3:34 PM, Fan in Chicago said:

The other way to think about AJE is that in his second year, he could not beat out Addison. 

It is too early to pronounce judgment on Rousseau and Basham but Epenesa did not even trend in the right direction by the end of his second season. Let see if he turns out to be a late bloomer like Knox. But he is going to have only a few opportunities to show himself off in a rather crowded DE room. If he doesnt make the best if his chances, he wont dress on game days. 

 

I won't be shocked is Epenesa is a bust, certainly would not bet against it.

 

But don't see any shame in Epenesa not being able to beat out an 11 year pro who still had 7 sacks this past season.  Epenesa and others drafted in 2020 also suffered from no mini camp or pre-season games, believe training camp was also shortened, and other limitations that year around meetings, etc from what I recall.  You could argue at this point he has the equivalent of about 1.5 seasons under his belt.  Even 2021 rookies were behind the curve as don't think there was any spring football in 2020, plus other limitations and shortened season.  Recall Groot and Brown didn't even play college football in 2020.  (Hard to keep track of it as the years are kind of all blending together)

 

Also think Epenesa may be one of these guys they are still trying to figure out the balance between how heavy he needs to be not to be knocked around, but also how light to not lose his quickness.   While this is true of most players, think he may be more affected by it than some.

 

Didn't really ever think about this before, but for the Bills not having all their draft picks in 2020 due to Diggs trade probably wasn't the worst thing as rookies were put in a worse situation than other years.  Some did do well and didn't seem to matter, but I'm sure it put many behind the curve some.

[Augie]

On 5/6/2022 at 3:08 PM, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Both were selected far after, and neither were as heralded prospects, as... Chris Kelsay. So keep that perspective when judging how they are performing vs their draft position.

 

Maybe people would like our drafts better if we went back to sucking so we got to pick earlier?  🤷‍♂️

 

I’ll judge more on the overall team results than how this guy or that guy panned out. They’re doing something right! You can’t suck at drafting and be a Super Bowl favorite every year. I’d love more of a quick twitch/speed pass rusher, but so would every other team in the league. They are just not that easy to come by! I like our guys, let’s just keep winning! 

Edited May 7, 2022 by Augie

[JohnNord]

21 hours ago, FLFan said:

No, you really can’t.  It is much too early to evaluate these players and the implication that they  are busts this early in the process is misguided at best.  The fact is you would be hard pressed to find a DE drafted in a similar time frame in a similar position who has out performed them.  All three of these players by definition are projects at that position.  The points seemingly being made in that article are BS at best.  

I agree, it might be early and sometimes takes 2-3 seasons for a DE. 
 

But his point makes sense.  The Bills had to sign Miller to a big deal because the draft capital they invested at DE has not panned out.  

I also wouldn’t call Epinesa and Basham “projects” at DE.  Both were considered to be pro ready coming out of the draft, which is why it could be a call for concern that both struggled to get on the field early in their careers

 

[LABILLBACKER]

What excites me about Beane is he's beginning to understand the value of acquiring proven players thru draft picks or FA like Diggs & Von.  Beane's not going to hit on every pick but he'll find serviceable players the majority of the time. 

[Brand J]

7 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:

What excites me about Beane is he's beginning to understand the value of acquiring proven players thru draft picks or FA like Diggs & Von.  Beane's not going to hit on every pick but he'll find serviceable players the majority of the time. 

Beane has drafted one absolute star and a host of other very good players. As others on this board have said, picking at the end of each round will be much tougher in finding  true blue chip talents. Truth is, if Josh Allen hadn’t defied analytics to become the star he is today, we could very well be thinking about a new HC/GM going into the season. Hitting on the QB changes everything.

[billsfan1959]

1 hour ago, JayBaller10 said:

Beane has drafted one absolute star and a host of other very good players. As others on this board have said, picking at the end of each round will be much tougher in finding  true blue chip talents. Truth is, if Josh Allen hadn’t defied analytics to become the star he is today, we could very well be thinking about a new HC/GM going into the season. Hitting on the QB changes everything.

 

Allen didn't defy anything. There are no analytics or statistics that said anything at all about whether Allen would be successful or not. And Beane didn't give up all that draft capital to move to 7 to pick a QB he didn't believe was going to be a franchise QB.

 

So, in the end, the most important decision a GM in todays NFL can make is selecting a QB. And Beane absolutely hit it out of the f****ing park.

[Brand J]

27 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

Allen didn't defy anything. There are no analytics or statistics that said anything at all about whether Allen would be successful or not. And Beane didn't give up all that draft capital to move to 7 to pick a QB he didn't believe was going to be a franchise QB.

 

So, in the end, the most important decision a GM in todays NFL can make is selecting a QB. And Beane absolutely hit it out of the f****ing park.

Oh, there was a laundry list of statistics rolled out to prove he would suck, maybe you didn’t see them. One of the variances he had was so far into the negative, I questioned myself could he do something that had never been done before (all the other QBs on the list were washouts, no successes). And obviously Beane didn’t trade up for a player he didn’t believe in, that was never the question. I remember him saying at the time he would watch Darnold or Mayfield and think “what would Allen have done here?” I thought it was a dangerous approach to take, but yes, he hit a 500 foot home run.

[billsfan1959]

7 minutes ago, JayBaller10 said:

Oh, there was a laundry list of statistics rolled out to prove he would suck, maybe you didn’t see them. One of the variances he had was so far into the negative, I questioned myself could he do something that had never been done before (all the other QBs on the list were washouts, no successes). And obviously Beane didn’t trade up for a player he didn’t believe in, that was never the question. I remember him saying at the time he would watch Darnold or Mayfield and think “what would Allen have done here?” I thought it was a dangerous approach to take, but yes, he hit a 500 foot home run.

 

Name me one statistic that had any predictive ability whatsoever regarding whether or not Allen would be successful or not. I will save you the time. There aren't any. One of the biggest myths in modern football...

[Brand J]

30 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

Name me one statistic that had any predictive ability whatsoever regarding whether or not Allen would be successful or not. I will save you the time. There aren't any. One of the biggest myths in modern football...

Myth or not, they were out there. And if you’re interested enough to go digging you’ll find them. It’s also why many of the posters here believe large portions of the media were so reticent to give Allen his due; based on their stats and analytics he was sure to be a bust and their models were proven wrong. 
 

EDIT: the nature of their predictive ability was comparing his statistics to the history of QBs that came before him. There’s a thread now comparing arm lengths of CBs and why successful shorter armed CBs are fewer in number. The data for Allen was similar (not for physical measureables but for stats like accuracy) except there were no successes.

Edited May 7, 2022 by JayBaller10

[Brand J]

@billsfan1959Heres one such article that didn’t take me long to find. Josh Allen’s 60% Bust Rate There are others that go much more in depth as well if you want to do some digging.

[billsfan1959]

37 minutes ago, JayBaller10 said:

@billsfan1959Heres one such article that didn’t take me long to find. Josh Allen’s 60% Bust Rate There are others that go much more in depth as well if you want to do some digging.

 

I am actually aware of them. I argued this same thing quite extensively after Allen was drafted. Those statistics are meaningless in telling you whether any specific QB will be successful or not. The article you linked offers nothing. They have a "QBASE Rating" which means nothing in predictive ability - or much else for that matter. The fact they gave Baker Mayfield the fourth-highest QBASE projection (1480) of any prospect since 1997 and Josh Allen a -83 should tell you all you need to know about the validity of their QBASE rating.

 

They back up their analysis with statements like there have been only 5 QBs with less than a 58% completion rate drafted since 2005 and none of them were successsful; that Wyoming finished 119th in passingout of 130 teams in FBS - the lowest rank ever for a quarterback chosen in the top 100 picks of the NFL draft; and that since 1997, there have been 27 different quarterbacks chosen in the top 100 with QBASE ratings below zero - and none of them were very successful.

 

I won't bother to go through all of the reasons why these stats are absolutely meaningless when it comes to predicting whether or not Allen (or anyone else) would be successful - the list is way too long. The bottom line is they have no predictive ability at all.

 

At best, they are incomplete group statistics based on ridiculously small sample sizes and even more ridiculously superficial statistical variables and analyses. Even if they had some level of scientific validity to them, they would still be meaningless on an individual level. Think of them like the actuarial tables insurance companies use. They can give you all kinds of stats on life expectancy, but the one thing they can't tell you is how long you, as an individual, will live. The reason is that when you enter the realm of predicting outcomes for any given person, along with any other group data you have, you also have to factor in all of the relevant variables that are specific to that person - if you can even determine all of the variables that are relevant. And that is just a beginning point.

 

With Allen, this whole idea that he somehow defied the world of statistics just reached mythical proportions, summed up by the statement, "the Bills will have outsmarted basically all regular humans and the entirety of math itself." What a joke. There was no mathematical equation, formula, or framework within which anyone could show a math based reason why Allen wouldn't be successful. It just didn't exist.

 

 

 

[Brand J]

1 hour ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

I am actually aware of them. I argued this same thing quite extensively after Allen was drafted. Those statistics are meaningless in telling you whether any specific QB will be successful or not. The article you linked offers nothing. They have a "QBASE Rating" which means nothing in predictive ability - or much else for that matter. The fact they gave Baker Mayfield the fourth-highest QBASE projection (1480) of any prospect since 1997 and Josh Allen a -83 should tell you all you need to know about the validity of their QBASE rating.

 

They back up their analysis with statements like there have been only 5 QBs with less than a 58% completion rate drafted since 2005 and none of them were successsful; that Wyoming finished 119th in passingout of 130 teams in FBS - the lowest rank ever for a quarterback chosen in the top 100 picks of the NFL draft; and that since 1997, there have been 27 different quarterbacks chosen in the top 100 with QBASE ratings below zero - and none of them were very successful.

 

I won't bother to go through all of the reasons why these stats are absolutely meaningless when it comes to predicting whether or not Allen (or anyone else) would be successful - the list is way too long. The bottom line is they have no predictive ability at all.

 

At best, they are incomplete group statistics based on ridiculously small sample sizes and even more ridiculously superficial statistical variables and analyses. Even if they had some level of scientific validity to them, they would still be meaningless on an individual level. Think of them like the actuarial tables insurance companies use. They can give you all kinds of stats on life expectancy, but the one thing they can't tell you is how long you, as an individual, will live. The reason is that when you enter the realm of predicting outcomes for any given person, along with any other group data you have, you also have to factor in all of the relevant variables that are specific to that person - if you can even determine all of the variables that are relevant. And that is just a beginning point.

 

With Allen, this whole idea that he somehow defied the world of statistics just reached mythical proportions, summed up by the statement, "the Bills will have outsmarted basically all regular humans and the entirety of math itself." What a joke. There was no mathematical equation, formula, or framework within which anyone could show a math based reason why Allen wouldn't be successful. It just didn't exist.

 

 

 

In your original statement you said “Allen didn't defy anything. There are no analytics or statistics that said anything at all about whether Allen would be successful or not.” That was untrue. Even if you disagreed with such assessments and statistical analysis based on the body of his peers at the position, the analytics and statistics were out there. It’s predictive, not absolute. Just because all other QBs before Allen failed that came into the league with similar numbers, doesn’t necessarily mean Allen himself was guaranteed to fail, of course, but the data was gathered and used to predict an outcome. You can do this with any study, but there’s always an element of human error  when going off sheer numbers because they can’t measure such things as heart and will - two things Allen has an abundance of in addition to his freakish athletic abilities. 
 

That statement you quoted about outsmarting humans and mathematics is why so many were slow to come around on Allen - they wanted to be right. They wanted him to be a bust so his data wouldn’t defy their predictive analytics. More often than not I’d say their data points would be in the right, but there are always outliers and going off the tools they used to assess his potential success, Allen is the first outlier of the sort in NFL history. Meaningless? Not quite. 100% accurate? Of course not.

[billsfan1959]

1 minute ago, JayBaller10 said:

In your original statement you said “Allen didn't defy anything. There are no analytics or statistics that said anything at all about whether Allen would be successful or not.” That was untrue. Even if you disagreed with such assessments and statistical analysis based on the body of his peers at the position, the analytics and statistics were out there. It’s predictive, not absolute. Just because all other QBs before Allen failed that came into the league with similar numbers, doesn’t necessarily mean Allen himself was guaranteed to fail, of course, but the data was gathered and used to predict an outcome. You can do this with any study, but there’s always an element of human error  when going off sheer numbers because they can’t measure such things as heart and will - two things Allen has an abundance of in addition to his freakish athletic abilities. 
 

That statement you quoted about outsmarting humans and mathematics is why so many were slow to come around on Allen - they wanted to be right. They wanted him to be a bust so his data wouldn’t defy their predictive analytics. More often than not I’d say their data points would be in the right, but there are always outliers and going off the tools they used to assess his potential success, Allen is the first outlier of the sort in NFL history. Meaningless? Not quite. 100% accurate? Of course not.

I didn’t say the data was meaningless altogether - just as an measure of predicting outcome. People think they can use that kind of data to predict outcomes, but it doesn’t really have any predictive ability. It just doesn’t. 

 

I agree 100% that people wanted to be right on Allen. But I would also say that the analyses on which so many based their opinions was drastically flawed. 

[Brand J]

35 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

I didn’t say the data was meaningless altogether - just as an measure of predicting outcome. People think they can use that kind of data to predict outcomes, but it doesn’t really have any predictive ability. It just doesn’t. 

 

I agree 100% that people wanted to be right on Allen. But I would also say that the analyses on which so many based their opinions was drastically flawed. 

When it comes to the entertainment industry - acting, writing, music, sports, etc. -  it will always be easier to fail than succeed. Actually, that holds true in any industry. There will always be more sob stories than  successes, so if you’re thinking from that standpoint, then yes, the data is largely arbitrary, it doesn’t mean much. Most of these players are supposed to fail and it might not even be their fault, there’s just too many variables to success.
 

We can look at the numbers Allen posted in college and declare “he will be a bust, because ALL the others before him have busted,” but we know that’s not true. The data gives you a predictive outcome based on the history of that position, so if Allen proved to be an outlier - as he did in this case comparative to his peers - then I do think it’s fair to say he defied analytics and I can’t say their process is “drastically” flawed… because it wasn’t, until Allen came along. You’re more than welcome to disagree, of course.

[billsfan1959]

5 hours ago, JayBaller10 said:

When it comes to the entertainment industry - acting, writing, music, sports, etc. -  it will always be easier to fail than succeed. Actually, that holds true in any industry. There will always be more sob stories than  successes, so if you’re thinking from that standpoint, then yes, the data is largely arbitrary, it doesn’t mean much. Most of these players are supposed to fail and it might not even be their fault, there’s just too many variables to success.
 

We can look at the numbers Allen posted in college and declare “he will be a bust, because ALL the others before him have busted,” but we know that’s not true. The data gives you a predictive outcome based on the history of that position, so if Allen proved to be an outlier - as he did in this case comparative to his peers - then I do think it’s fair to say he defied analytics and I can’t say their process is “drastically” flawed… because it wasn’t, until Allen came along. You’re more than welcome to disagree, of course.

 

I agree that the data that you are looking at gives you a statistical breakdown of the history of that position. In that sense, it will tell you that the majority of QBs drafted, just in the first round, never achieve any real success - and the overwhelming majority never reach true franchise level success. So, any QB that becomes a franchise QB (or just becomes a multi year starter with some level of success) will do something that most QBs drafted in the 1st never do. So, in a broad sense, yes they achieve something that most 1st round QB picks never achieve. But, what that data doesn't tell you is which QBs will be the succesful ones, because, if you look at the data, you will also see most QBs drafted in the 1st round who meet the "statistical standards" of those that have been successful in the NFL - still end up not being very successful, if successful at all. That is my point, it is a group statistic that provides general information about the position and all QBs. From that perspective, any QB who becomes successful in the NFL is an outlier. You can say the same thing about anyone who ever achieves any position or goal that most fail at. It really provides no individual predictive ability.

 

Some might think there is no real distinction between the two. But there is. So,my opinion is that people looked at some broad statistics, with no real context or indepth analyses, and declared Allen would not be successful. It then became the national narrative about Allen. And when Allen became successful, they used the same flawed analyses to say to themselves that they weren't wrong about him, he just "beat the odds," that his success "came out of nowhere," and that "nobody saw it coming."

 

But, you are right, in the end we can agree to disagree.

 

Thanks for the good discussion

[machine gun kelly]

14 hours ago, JohnNord said:

I agree, it might be early and sometimes takes 2-3 seasons for a DE. 
 

But his point makes sense.  The Bills had to sign Miller to a big deal because the draft capital they invested at DE has not panned out.  

I also wouldn’t call Epinesa and Basham “projects” at DE.  Both were considered to be pro ready coming out of the draft, which is why it could be a call for concern that both struggled to get on the field early in their careers

 

Even though Basham started a lot of games in college, it doesn’t mean he was pro ready as these guy take development.  GROOT, is young flashed and growing.  My guess is Rousseau will steadily improve and has the raw skills to get better.  No one knows how Basham is practicing as he never plays so it’s an assumption mediocre if he can’t see the field with continuity.  Epenesa started out well finally last year against the Fins, but that’s it.  Probably a bust, or just a serial backup.  
 

It was a very fair comment from the executive regarding Beane’s choices, but also shrewd he found the $ and picked up Von.

[Zerovoltz]

On 5/6/2022 at 2:46 PM, FilthyBeast said:

As much as I hate to admit it, the Chiefs and Ravens organizations are still the class of the NFL with Veach and DeCosta respectively leading their front offices and killing it on the regular.

 

The Chiefs in particular probably had the best draft overall on paper and I think both McDuffie and Karlaftis are going to end up being perrenial probowl type of players. Karlaftis in particular could be a big time steal and projects similarly to Jared Allen who chiefs drafted way back when, but looks like an even better prospect since Allen was a mere 4th round pick.

 

Overall though, you still need to way a good 3 years down the road to know who truly nailed this draft and who didn't but the aforementioned teams are always going to get benefit of the doubt given their track records and SB trophies in the last decade.

 

As much as I enjoy postivie comments about my Chiefs....I wanted to chime in here and say that this is a bad comparison.  Jared Allen was a division II sack machine at Idaho State....and when he came out...and on into the NFL...he had a ton of "bend" to him.  Karlaftis simply isn't that type of player.  He doesn't offer much bend at all.  He's alot more like Ryan Kerrigan....a larger, power oriented guy who is expected to be a strenght VS the run and win in passing situatoins by power, or with strong hands and beating the O-linemans punch, and shedding blocks.  

 

I hope Karlaftis is a great player, but as mentioned in this thread...it's damn hard to find good DE (espeically pass rushers) beyond the top 15 or so in round 1.  The body and skill set is just hard to come by.  

 

Someone mentioned Creed Humphey was in the Bills laps and they took Basham instead.  .....that, in hindsight was a mistake, but the point that 2nd round project DE types, just don't offer a good ROI.  If you aren't taking one high, then there almost isn't any point.  IOL...WAY BETTER ROI in mid rounds on those guys.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 minute ago, Zerovoltz said:

I hope Karlaftis is a great player, but as mentioned in this thread...it's damn hard to find good DE (espeically pass rushers) beyond the top 15 or so in round 1.  The body and skill set is just hard to come by.  

 

Someone mentioned Creed Humphey was in the Bills laps and they took Basham instead.  .....that, in hindsight was a mistake, but the point that 2nd round project DE types, just don't offer a good ROI.  If you aren't taking one high, then there almost isn't any point.  IOL...WAY BETTER ROI in mid rounds on those guys.

Of course with Rousseau, the Bills were wagering maybe they got a guy who woulda gone top 15 if he played and just needed some seasoning.  
 

Basham I’m not sure of their logic, like Epenesa.  Just have to hope 1 of the 2 pans out.  I would have preferred Humphrey for sure esp if they thought he could play guard

[BarleyNY]

On 5/6/2022 at 4:18 PM, mjt328 said:

 

It's fair to question AJ Epenesa, since it's been two years.  But the rest of this post was ridiculous.

 

Everyone knew from the start that Greg Rousseau and Boogie Basham weren't going to play much last season.  We already had solid vets in front of them.  Jerry Hughes and Mario Addison may be past their prime, but I would hardly call them "talentless."   Rousseau did great in the run game, and hardly played on third downs last year.  Even though he technically started, the team is clearly bringing him along very slow as a pass rusher.

 

Ed Oliver took a huge step and played very good last year.  Don't be surprised if he's playing at a Pro-Bowl level in 2022.

 

The only other "top end pick" Beane has spent on defense was with Tremaine Edmunds, who has made two Pro-Bowls and continues to be a valuable piece of the #1 defense (scoring and yardage) in the NFL last year.  People expected him to be Ray Lewis or Luke Kuechly, which was unfair.  He's a solid starting middle LB, and if the Bills are forced to let him walk next year, he will be a very coveted free agent.

 

That’s not true wrt Rousseau.  He played the second most defensive snaps of all DEs and third most of all Bills DL.  Remember it’s a heavy rotation.  GR played about 50% of the snaps.  Hughes about 52%.  Oliver about 58%.  Full list:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/buf/2021-snap-counts.htm