NFL.com ranking teams WR situations before free agency/draft

[first_and_ten]

4 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said:

Michael Thomas did quote something on Twitter about how the Bills Medical Staff did tons of research on Allen's injury.  Thomas replied with something like "that's how it's done!"

Adding OBJ and Michael Thomas to favorable $ deals and both with a lot to prove could really be interesting.

Would allow us to draft OL each of the first 3 rounds
 

 

I like how you think

[Success]

4 minutes ago, Victory Formation said:

Bills need an above average WR in FA and they need an A+ WR in the draft.

 

A+ would probably have to be round 1, maybe round 2.  

 

Could be asking a lot there. We can't be big players in FA as it is, and we'll have needs at O-line, safety, possibly LB & punter, etc.

 

I really don't think they should invest much more in skill positions.  I wouldn't mind a high-round WR pick, but I'd probably stop there.  Allen can be like Brady was - he can make receivers better, IF he has more time in the pocket.  The line is so important.

 

[Warriorspikes51]

Just now, Success said:

 

A+ would probably have to be round 1, maybe round 2.  

 

Could be asking a lot there. We can't be big players in FA as it is, and we'll have needs at O-line, safety, possibly LB & punter, etc.

 

I really don't think they should invest much more in skill positions.  I wouldn't mind a high-round WR pick, but I'd probably stop there.  Allen can be like Brady was - he can make receivers better, IF he has more time in the pocket.  The line is so important.

 

 

The Salary Cap is monopoly $ that can be moved around. If the Bills want to acquire multiple good players, they can make it work.   

[dollars 2 donuts]

13 hours ago, MJS said:

I'm done with the McKenzie experiment, personally. I do not want to see him back.

 

 

I like him a lot...but I 100% agree with you.  

 

More was needed.

 

It wasn't there...it just honestly wasn't there and not even close.

 

 

[newcam2012]

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Nobody "needs" a 1b.

 

There are like five at most teams that have one.

 

It'd be lovely to have one, it really would. But if you needed two #1s, only like three or four teams would have a passing offense. KC doesn't even have one #1 WR, much less two, and they did pretty well this season.

 

And Davis is a legitimate #2. Not a great one, but he's a #2.

 

I do expect them to try to upgrade at receiver, though.

You are correct because the Bills are playing and using Davis as the #2WR. 

 

However, he should not be the #2 WR. He's skill set is very limited. He's ability to create space takes too much time and he's too stiff in the hips. Additionally, he's terrible at catching contested balls. 

 

The fact that the Bills play him as a #2WR speaks volumes about the inept coaching staff decisions. As the season progresses it became apparent Davis is no #2. He's a #3 or 4 WR at best. 

 

I'm curious to see if the Bills coaching staff still goes back to the well. Will they use Davis as a #2 WR. Imho, that would be a colossal mistake. Why do I think they will line him up as a #2 again? 

 

You know the team is in trouble when they have to go back to the streets and pick up Brown and Beasley. Yet, they let Hodges walk and other better receivers were available like TY Hilton. 

 

 

[Simon Says]

17 hours ago, Success said:

Pretty fair assessment.

 

We didn't get to see too much of Crowder - but honestly, I thought he made a big difference when he was in.  He seemed like he was turning into a very good 3rd down guy.

 

The homer in me also holds out hope for Davis, and thinks Shakir could take a big next step.  Don't ask the non-homer.

 

Crowder had 6 catches in 4 games,so, he was practically invisible. If he is healthy,I wouldn't be opposed to Bills bringing back....on a team-friendly deal.

[RG Murdock]

I agree with this assessment. You know your WR room is garbage, when your listed with the Panthers, Falcons, and Browns. When you look at it, Beane has royally messed this team up! The Bills D-Line and O-Lines are in shambles, The WR room is pathetic (Even with the magnificent Diggs). Were about to lose Poyer and Edwards with ZERO replacements (The Bernard pick was disgraceful). The Miller acquisition is setting the team back. Bills have little cap room, and 6 draft picks. And were counting on this man to bail the Bills out?? Good luck with that. I smell 3rd place. Without the Allen Pick, Beane is Doug Whaley or Buddy Nix.... Or worse....  The bloom is off the Rose.              

[Success]

38 minutes ago, Herb Nightly said:

Crowder had 6 catches in 4 games,so, he was practically invisible. If he is healthy,I wouldn't be opposed to Bills bringing back....on a team-friendly deal.

 

Yeah - I've had a few replies to that effect on my Crowder comment. 

 

It has kind of made me question my observational skills. I just have a memory of him making a difference when he was out there - I felt like he had Beasley, '21 kind of potential.

 

But the stats kind of counter that.  It's really minimal production.

 

[Cheektowaga Chad]

3 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

I agree.........the Chiefs highly value talent at the WR position and yes it shows when they take swings at the Josh Gordon's and John Ross's.   

 

But they sorta' set the tone for teams investing massively in receiving targets when they shocked many by paying Sammy Watkins $16M aav to presumably be WR1 all the way back in 2018 when they already had two 1,000+ yard receivers in Hill/Kelce in their primes in their WR corps.

 

I wouldn't be surprised in the least to see the Chiefs go WR in round 1.    They probably learned a lesson passing on Tee Higgins in favor of a perceived "needier" position at RB.    If teams can't stop you from passing the ball........they can't stop you at all.    So it's easy to justify keeping the cupboard full at WR, IMO.  

 

 

If somehow healthy "Slant Mike" would give them a potentially elite slot WR option.

 

I've mentioned it before but I seem to remember him having a Bills connection somehow.........like he grew up a Bills fan or something.

 

 

I thought there was a connection as well but all I could find was that he tweeted complementary things about how the bills handled josh Allens injury this season (granted I didn't look to in-depth)

[BADOLBILZ]

3 minutes ago, Cheektowaga Chad said:

I thought there was a connection as well but all I could find was that he tweeted complementary things about how the bills handled josh Allens injury this season (granted I didn't look to in-depth)

 

 

I think Yolo had said something about it in a prior season.   

[JaCrispy]

18 hours ago, Success said:

Pretty fair assessment.

 

We didn't get to see too much of Crowder - but honestly, I thought he made a big difference when he was in.  He seemed like he was turning into a very good 3rd down guy.

 

The homer in me also holds out hope for Davis, and thinks Shakir could take a big next step.  Don't ask the non-homer.

 

Davis’ skill set limits the offense, as a #2…

[Thurman#1]

7 hours ago, newcam2012 said:

You are correct because the Bills are playing and using Davis as the #2WR. 

 

However, he should not be the #2 WR. He's skill set is very limited. He's ability to create space takes too much time and he's too stiff in the hips. Additionally, he's terrible at catching contested balls. 

 

The fact that the Bills play him as a #2WR speaks volumes about the inept coaching staff decisions. As the season progresses it became apparent Davis is no #2. He's a #3 or 4 WR at best. 

 

I'm curious to see if the Bills coaching staff still goes back to the well. Will they use Davis as a #2 WR. Imho, that would be a colossal mistake. Why do I think they will line him up as a #2 again? 

 

You know the team is in trouble when they have to go back to the streets and pick up Brown and Beasley. Yet, they let Hodges walk and other better receivers were available like TY Hilton. 

 

 

 

 

You don't "use somebody as your #2." That's just nonsense. You don't play a #3 as a #2. That doesn't even make sense as a concept. Those numbers refer to how good the guy is. Play a #4 as a #2? What does that even mean? Nothing. Being on the other side from your #1 doesn't make a guy a #2 and it doesn't mean you're treating him as one. You've got to have someone over there. But that guy might be a #2, a #3 or even a #4 depending how good he is. What he is is an x, a z, a slot, a flanker, a split end; there's a lot of verbiage for where they play and what they do. But anyone who uses #2 as a position is just being lazy.

 

The reason Davis is a #2 is that he's a #2. 

 

Everything about how he plays and produces says this. 

 

He's 30th in yards among WRs. I mean, theoretically, that's a #1. In reality of course, there aren't really 32 true #1s, but it is without the slightest question production at the level of a #2. So is his TDs (T-12th). So is his yards per catch. He's 27th at catches of 20+ yards

 

He simply produces at the level of a #2. The reason for that is real real simple ... it's because he's a #2. One of the better #2s in the league? No, probably not, I'd say. But he's a #2, whether you like it or not.

 

Does that mean he doesn't need to get better, working on eliminating drops for one thing? Hell, no. He's got to fight to keep improving And he knows that. Every player does, really. But looking at him specifically, sure, he's got some things to work on.

 

Does it mean that since we've got him we're OK at WR? Well, we could get by, but no, they should try to bring in more and better.

 

 

 

 

[Thurman#1]

6 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

Davis’ skill set limits the offense, as a #2…

 

 

Everyone's skill set limits the offense. Everyone could be better.

[newcam2012]

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

You don't "use somebody as your #2." That's just nonsense. You don't play a #3 as a #2. That doesn't even make sense as a concept. Those numbers refer to how good the guy is. Play a #4 as a #2? What does that even mean? Nothing. Being on the other side from your #1 doesn't make a guy a #2 and it doesn't mean you're treating him as one. You've got to have someone over there. But that guy might be a #2, a #3 or even a #4 depending how good he is. What he is is an x, a z, a slot, a flanker, a split end; there's a lot of verbiage for where they play and what they do. But anyone who uses #2 as a position is just being lazy.

 

The reason Davis is a #2 is that he's a #2. 

 

Everything about how he plays and produces says this. 

 

He's 30th in yards among WRs. I mean, theoretically, that's a #1. In reality of course, there aren't really 32 true #1s, but it is without the slightest question production at the level of a #2. So is his TDs (T-12th). So is his yards per catch. He's 27th at catches of 20+ yards

 

He simply produces at the level of a #2. The reason for that is real real simple ... it's because he's a #2. One of the better #2s in the league? No, probably not, I'd say. But he's a #2, whether you like it or not.

 

Does that mean he doesn't need to get better, working on eliminating drops for one thing? Hell, no. He's got to fight to keep improving And he knows that. Every player does, really. But looking at him specifically, sure, he's got some things to work on.

 

Does it mean that since we've got him we're OK at WR? Well, we could get by, but no, they should try to bring in more and better.

 

 

 

 

I wouldn't be upset if they let Gabe walk. He's replaceable and nothing special. 

[Thurman#1]

1 hour ago, newcam2012 said:

I wouldn't be upset if they let Gabe walk. He's replaceable and nothing special. 

 

 

#2s are indeed replaceable. But will probably cost on the order of $10M a year or more. And then you have to worry about how they fit on each team and in each offense. Not all of them do.

 

But you're kidding yourself if you think they'll let Gabe walk. You're stuck with him for another year at the very least. Cutting him now would save us $2.9M cap hit minus $174K dead money, or around $2.7M, and $2.7M for (assuming zero improvement) 836 yards and 7 TDs is a value that few if any GMs would give up, particularly in a year when the cap is tight.

 

IMO they'll be bringing in another FA, though probably not a $10M a year guy. And hopefully drafting one somewhat early. Hopefully that will make you happier.

Edited February 24, 2023 by Thurman#1

[newcam2012]

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

#2s are indeed replaceable. But will probably cost on the order of $10M a year or more. And then you have to worry about how they fit on each team and in each offense. Not all of them do.

 

But you're kidding yourself if you think they'll let Gabe walk. You're stuck with him for another year at the very least. Cutting him now would save us $2.9M cap hit minus $174K dead money, or around $2.7M, and $2.7M for (assuming zero improvement) 836 yards and 7 TDs is a value that few if any GMs would give up, particularly in a year when the cap is tight.

 

IMO they'll be bringing in another FA, though probably not a $10M a year guy. And hopefully drafting one somewhat early. Hopefully that will make you happier.

I don't dispute any of that. 

 

I didn't mean let him walk literally. I just was saying that because I don't think he would be missed. He has a very limited skill set. His hips are not fluid or shifty. As a result, he can get quick separation and his routes are limited. He blows at contested catches. 

 

Gabe will likely never be a dependable and reliable receiver without a true elite number 1 and 2 on the team. As a 3 or a 4 he can do well and we've seen that. 

 

Next year, no way should Davis get anything close to #2 WR money. I believe that would be in the neighborhood of 15 mil.  

11 hours ago, dollars 2 donuts said:

 

 

I like him a lot...but I 100% agree with you.  

 

More was needed.

 

It wasn't there...it just honestly wasn't there and not even close.

 

 

McKenzie is likely not on the team next year. An upgrade is badly needed. Although, I think the Dorsey scheme hurt McKenzie. 

Edited February 24, 2023 by newcam2012

[Thurman#1]

1 hour ago, newcam2012 said:

I don't dispute any of that. 

 

I didn't mean let him walk literally. I just was saying that because I don't think he would be missed. He has a very limited skill set. His hips are not fluid or shifty. As a result, he can get quick separation and his routes are limited. He blows at contested catches. 

 

Gabe will likely never be a dependable and reliable receiver without a true elite number 1 and 2 on the team. As a 3 or a 4 he can do well and we've seen that. 

 

Next year, no way should Davis get anything close to #2 WR money. I believe that would be in the neighborhood of 15 mil.  

McKenzie is likely not on the team next year. An upgrade is badly needed. Although, I think the Dorsey scheme hurt McKenzie. 

 

 

 

You're very clearly wrong that Gabriel Davis wouldn't be missed. His skillset has allowed him to be a consistent threat, a guy who gets open with great consistency. It always cracks me up how people who don't like him say that he only makes catches when he's really open, not getting that getting really open is a skill, one that he's really good at.

 

He's a guy who makes contested catches often when called on to do so (I listed 8 or 9 yesterday, if you missed those catches it's simply because your confirmation bias isn't letting you see them).

 

Won't be elite? Well, yeah, but the idea that a team only needs or wants elite receivers is deficient thinking. There's always room for guys who can 

 

And Davis will absolutely get #2 money next year. That's what happens to #2 recievers. And Gabriel Davis is a #2 receiver. But no, the thought that #2 money is $15M a year is just clueless. High-level #2s, maybe, but #2s can be had significantly cheaper than that. $15M a year is basically 26th in the league. That's very low #1 or more likely very high #2 level. The #32 highest WR AAV salary is $10M per year, two guys, Russell Gage and Valdes-Scantling (Spotrac).

 

We don't need an upgrade for Gabriel Davis. Should we bring in some new guys, hopefully a high draft pick included? Sure. And Davis is pretty likely to be there with that guy. Very possibly for years.

 

They are almost certainly at least discussing giving Gabriel an extension this offseason. That doesn't mean it will happen, but he could very easily be here for years. Simply, he's a productive guy, a #2 who probably has more upside.

 

 

Agreed about McKenzie.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 24, 2023 by Thurman#1

[Pete]

Draft/sign/trade for WR 1B 

Shakir in slot

sign/draft fast WR who can catch and an upgrade on WR 5

Edited February 24, 2023 by Pete

[dollars 2 donuts]

5 hours ago, newcam2012 said:

I don't dispute any of that. 

 

I didn't mean let him walk literally. I just was saying that because I don't think he would be missed. He has a very limited skill set. His hips are not fluid or shifty. As a result, he can get quick separation and his routes are limited. He blows at contested catches. 

 

Gabe will likely never be a dependable and reliable receiver without a true elite number 1 and 2 on the team. As a 3 or a 4 he can do well and we've seen that. 

 

Next year, no way should Davis get anything close to #2 WR money. I believe that would be in the neighborhood of 15 mil.  

McKenzie is likely not on the team next year. An upgrade is badly needed. Although, I think the Dorsey scheme hurt McKenzie. 

 

newcam, blunt and good responses above.

 

I concur completely.

 

 

[newcam2012]

6 hours ago, dollars 2 donuts said:

 

newcam, blunt and good responses above.

 

I concur completely.

 

 

Thanks. I get a lot of negative feedback for my critical posts which I admit are usually ultra negative. 

 

Nice to get some positive feedback.