Rookie Playing Time in McDermott Era

[mrags]

29 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I'd still say that.

Kk

[PBF81]

43 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

Because I thought throughout the draft process that Williams was a WILL not a MIKE. 

 

Well, that is what every single draft profile on Williams says, I haven't found one, and I've looked at a good dozen that says he's even capable of playing MLB at all.   I have no idea why so many here were saying that he'd end up playing MLB.  

 

 

43 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

But Beane immediately dismissed it as an idea. It wouldn't be my ideal look but I do think it might be the best way of maximising the talent they have at some stage.  

 

We were just talking about how coaches say anything.  LOL  

 

At the end of the day, if we have a MLB that's perpetually getting run through, over, and around, it would make sense to make some kind of adjustment.  

 

 

43 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

Dodson is a backup level talent and I am not sure Bernard belongs in the league. 

 

That's a bit harsh for Bernard, although I've already seen enough that he's not going to start at MLB with anything that below-average performance at the position.  

 

As ot Dodson, I don't disagree in the least.  Hence the issues at MLB.  But all along they've said that those two are 1/2 on the depth chart.  After that are Klein and Spector.  I know you're bigger on Klein than I am, but do you see either of them starting there with any particular success?   I don't.  

 

You know my take on the matter otherwise.  I'm told that this was all planned out.  

 

 

Edited August 7, 2023 by PBF81

[Kwai San]

20 hours ago, jwhit34 said:

 

Wyatt Teller (5th) played 45% of snaps and had 3rd highest # for guards

 

 My gawd just seeing Tellers name raises my blood pressure by about 50 points........WHAT was Beane thinking????  WHAT????????

[Kwai San]

11 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

So there's no mysterious "somehow" about it.  Allen was far from ready. 

 

Peterman had a great preseason - we all saw it.  At the slower pace and lower defensive quality of preseason games, he was making all the reads and enough of the throws.  And don't overlook that Daboll likely had a learning curve as our OC. 

 

I suspect that at the whiteboard and in the film room, Peterman is unmatched.  He's still in the league, you know. 2 seasons with the Raiders, now in his 2nd season with the Bears.  I call what Peterman must have, "Catnip for Coaches".  Other than naughty pics of 3 different coaching staffs, there's no other explanation.  He can probably learn a playbook and understand what the correct read is given the defense superfast and superwell - he just can't apparently do that in real time at regular season game speed, and his brain writes checks his noodle arm can't cash (as Fitzpatrick did at times).

 

Then, people act like Allen came in all ready to be coachable and succeed.  If one pays attention to various things that were said about him by Bohl (his coach at Wyoming) and even stories Allen himself tells - that isn't the case.  Allen was hard-headed and would sometimes ignore coaching to do what he thought best, with disasterous results at times.  Allen told a story about Daboll in one of his rookie training camp practices.  The play call was he was supposed to throw to the running back in the flat.  Instead he threw to the back corner of the endzone and "it didn't go too well" (it was picked).  Daboll was furious and started yelling in Allen's headset.  Allen came to the sideline and took his helmet off and Daboll came over and was still yelling.  Went away, calmed down, thought it over some more and came back and yelled.  And there was still yelling from Daboll going on the sidelines into 2019.  This is Allen's story!  He has also said he is embarrassed now to realize how little he knew about the Bills protections at that time.  Eric Wood on one show intimated that between the Vikes game and the Green Bay game, Allen wasn't focused on a proper week of preparation. 

One of the reasons McDermott will absolutely bench rookies, or not start rookies, is if they aren't "being coachable" - listening to the coaches, following their assignment as laid out in the play call, taking direction about needed changes in technique.  These are young, high-testosterone males who have suddenly become wealthy beyond most people's dreams, including most of the coaches and coaching assistants.  And like Allen, some of them have succeeded against all odds, and sometimes they did so by "tuning out the noise" (including coaching) and following their own path.  It's no surprise that sometimes it's tough for the coaches to get their attention. 

One of the only tools the coaches have to get their attention, is to say "you're gonna sit and watch until you're ready to listen and learn".   These guys love ball, and it hurts them to sit and watch, especially if they think they could do it better (and as Talley said, if you don't have an ego you don't belong on the field). And yeah, Allen tore his UCL his rookie season, but I think he was kept on the bench a bit longer than he could have been, because they wanted him to watch and learn how to prepare properly and get into a proper routine as demonstrated by Anderson and Barkley.  Did the FO totally mishandle the QB room in 2018, and did the coaches tremendously mis-evaluate whether Peterman could start?  Yeah, they did.  There should have been an experienced vet in there from the start.

 

With Elam, it was pretty much spelled out that the reason he was benched during his rookie year was freelancing and seeking picks at the expense of his assignment.  One of the Athletic guys did a feature.

 

With Cook, it wasn't just the fumble.  McDermott said about him in a presser, something to the effect of "he's starting to learn that what you practice, carries over into the game.  Very seldom does it happen that you play well after practicing differently".  If that wasn't pointed I don't know what is.

 

 

Excellent post - thanks!!!!!

[Kwai San]

9 hours ago, Buftex said:

I do believe that all the pre-season games are broadcast live on NFL+.  Not the case for the regular season, but in the preseason only.

 

If you don't have NFL+, NFL Network will show the game at 7am eastern Sunday Morning (Aug.13), and again Wednesday (Aug. 16th) at 4pm eastern.

 

Personally, Saturday games suck for me, so though I will watch, it won't be live. 

 

Many thanks for this info.......now I know!!!  Kudos....

[Kwai San]

7 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

Assuming your data is correct, this also shows that there is little correlation between the round we draft a player and their rookie play time.

Plugging your data into a regression analysis:

 

We receive a summary output of:

 

The coeffecient obviously has no practical meaning in this context, however the F-stat of 1.8 with a p-value of 0.2 shows that the regression model is not statistically significant at a 0.05 significance level. The r square backs this up with only 9.09% of the variation in the playing time explained by the round drafted. In other words the draft round does not account for a significant portion of the variation observed in the percentage of snaps played by rookies.

This coaching staff is just as likely to start a 5th rounder as a 2nd rounder.
 

 

3 draft classes is 50% of Beane's draft classes. That is a significant number. 

 

This could be re-hypothesized as "Opinion seems to be influenced by the last 3 draft classes. The reality is that our draft choices have not been as strong in recent years."

 

Jesus.....my head hurts.........

[Kwai San]

6 hours ago, bigK14094 said:

I think that Jackson, Elam and Benford are all in play to be starters.  I also think the brain trust saw how bad Tre White was last year and it has crossed their mind that Tre might not ever get back to the all Pro form he got paid for.

 

I hope not......I fear you might be right but I hope not.   Bear in mind that White was VERY slowly brought back which leads me to believe that his injury was significant enough that he wasn't anywhere near 100% when he was brough back.  Lets see what this season tells us before we make our minds up.

[Beck Water]

Just now, Kwai San said:

 

I hope not......I fear you might be right but I hope not.   Bear in mind that White was VERY slowly brought back which leads me to believe that his injury was significant enough that he wasn't anywhere near 100% when he was brough back.  Lets see what this season tells us before we make our minds up.

 

There seem to be multiple reports that White seems to be looking much closer to his old form in training camp than he did in practices and games last year.

But time will tell.

[Kwai San]

4 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

There seem to be multiple reports that White seems to be looking much closer to his old form in training camp than he did in practices and games last year.

But time will tell.

 Yup.....father time will reach out and either swipe him from the field or gift him a few more years......an SOB that Father Time guy is!!!

[GunnerBill]

7 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

Well, that is what every single draft profile on Williams says, I haven't found one, and I've looked at a good dozen that says he's even capable of playing MLB at all.   I have no idea why so many here were saying that he'd end up playing MLB.  

 

 

 

We were just talking about how coaches say anything.  LOL  

 

At the end of the day, if we have a MLB that's perpetually getting run through, over, and around, it would make sense to make some kind of adjustment.  

 

 

 

That's a bit harsh for Bernard, although I've already seen enough that he's not going to start at MLB with anything that below-average performance at the position.  

 

As ot Dodson, I don't disagree in the least.  Hence the issues at MLB.  But all along they've said that those two are 1/2 on the depth chart.  After that are Klein and Spector.  I know you're bigger on Klein than I am, but do you see either of them starting there with any particular success?   I don't.  

 

You know my take on the matter otherwise.  I'm told that this was all planned out.  

 

 

On Williams I think it was just some fans who don't really pay attention to the draft putting 2 and 2 together. Beane said right after they drafted him "he is mainly an outside guy." Those of us who watched his college film already knew that.  It is similar to last year when we had a need for depth at outside receiver and drafted Shakir and Beane said "we think he can do both but he is primarily an inside guy" and we had people on here swearing blind he would be the next guy up outside. Then he played zero outside snaps in pre-season and still people were fixed on it. We had to wait exactly 2 weeks for those of us who said "the next guy up outside is Kumerow" to be proven correct. 

 

I think on what Beane says about players I put much more stock in that than coachspeak. Partly because GMs generally are talking in a different context and because Beane is honest to a fault (and I do mean to a fault). He struggles to play things close to his chest even when he should. So for now I believe them that Milano playing a quasi-MIKE is off the table. But I don't completely rule out the prospect that they re-consider it at some point in the season if nothing else works. 

 

I wasn't one of the ones strongly disagreeing with you on Klein. I think it is possible they can fashion a type of MLB role that Klein could play and give you a kinda tick below average semi-decent floor in terms of production. If you do that he isn't a liability by any means. But it isn't the role Edmunds played. He definitely can't do that and would be a major problem if you asked him to. 

 

Personally I think the most likely outcome is Dodson gets first crack at the job in the regular season. I think he is the one who best allows them to run their defense. But he is a major downgrade from Tremaine Edmunds and you'd need him to play at a significantly higher level than he has demonstrated to this point of his career to feel like you are "good" at that position. 

 

[JGMcD2]

20 hours ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

I think if you go back it stems from Gore getting reps over Singletary and effectively benching Cook for his first carry fumble - which was pop-warner level coaching.

That Belichick guy is pop-warner caliber for sure. 

[PBF81]

12 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

On Williams I think it was just some fans who don't really pay attention to the draft putting 2 and 2 together. Beane said right after they drafted him "he is mainly an outside guy." Those of us who watched his college film already knew that.  It is similar to last year when we had a need for depth at outside receiver and drafted Shakir and Beane said "we think he can do both but he is primarily an inside guy" and we had people on here swearing blind he would be the next guy up outside. Then he played zero outside snaps in pre-season and still people were fixed on it. We had to wait exactly 2 weeks for those of us who said "the next guy up outside is Kumerow" to be proven correct.  

 

We agree that many don't bother to read the reality on some prospects.  This stuff is freely available on multiple draft sites.  Most of it stems from the same handful of sources, most sources don't go out and do their own research on 300 and some draft prospects.  It takes a while to do a thorough analysis on a player including view key game films, review the statistical data, etc.  Most simply defer to the Mel Kiper's and other draft "gurus" online which .  I estimate that it takes about 6-8 hours to conduct a fairly thorough analysis on a player, and that's a full-time job for someone intent on doing a hundred or more players.  Most schools will provide the video of a particular player and only every play he was involved in on O or D if you ask them, but that's still a couple of hours, particularly with replaying, slow-mo, etc.  Some stuff is online, but I've not seen it en masse to that extent.  I always find it amusing the people that claim that they watched every team's draftees play in college.  Point being, that the info is already out there and it all essentially aligns, at least insofar as positional possibilities, etc.  

 

 

12 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

I think on what Beane says about players I put much more stock in that than coachspeak. Partly because GMs generally are talking in a different context and because Beane is honest to a fault (and I do mean to a fault). He struggles to play things close to his chest even when he should. So for now I believe them that Milano playing a quasi-MIKE is off the table. But I don't completely rule out the prospect that they re-consider it at some point in the season if nothing else works.  

 

I'm not sure how "quasi-MLB" would work though.  I suppose Lloyd could "fill-in," but if it's only a "quasi" role, ... It definitely raises questions.  

 

My issue with the current situation, and now that we've agreed on Williams and Bernard, is that Beane has made no plans for the post-Edmunds Bills.  I know that you disagree, no need to give me a red-X, but it's readily apparent to me that never having drafted an ILB/MLB with any significant chance of developing into a starter, nor having picked one up in free-agency at any point, is an issue.  How big of one we shall soon see.  

 

 

12 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

I wasn't one of the ones strongly disagreeing with you on Klein. I think it is possible they can fashion a type of MLB role that Klein could play and give you a kinda tick below average semi-decent floor in terms of production. If you do that he isn't a liability by any means. But it isn't the role Edmunds played. He definitely can't do that and would be a major problem if you asked him to.  

 

We agree entirely on the bolded part above.  Where we differ is in that from what I've seen, he'd be a liability, a weakness in the D, perhaps not a huge one, but one nonetheless if he ended up starting at MLB.  I don't think that opposing OCs and the QBs that we face would have a lot of difficulties exploiting him.  He's not improving nor getting any faster at his age either.  There too we'll have to wait and see.  

 

On the official website however he's the starting SAM, so that doesn't say much for Bernard or Dodson either.  I don't know how current that is, but it was empty about a week ago.  

 

Also, consider, if Klein were that good, why has he bounced around on practice squads several times over the past couple of seasons.  He's technically been on Chicago, Baltimore, and the Giants.  Starting caliber LBs simply don't get bounced around like that.  

 

 

12 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

Personally I think the most likely outcome is Dodson gets first crack at the job in the regular season. I think he is the one who best allows them to run their defense. But he is a major downgrade from Tremaine Edmunds and you'd need him to play at a significantly higher level than he has demonstrated to this point of his career to feel like you are "good" at that position. 

 

We are in alignment there, but I don't see that situation lasting very long, although as discussed, not sure what the solution will be.  Perhaps simply a weakness in the middle.  

 

Thanks for the exchange!!  

 

 

20 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

There seem to be multiple reports that White seems to be looking much closer to his old form in training camp than he did in practices and games last year.

But time will tell.

 

Stands to reason though as well.  I mean he's only 28 and this will be his second season back.  I'd expect him to be at least 80% which for him would still be above-average.  Hopefully "his old form" and 100%.  Agree though, it's encouraging based upon reports.  

 

 

[GunnerBill]

21 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

We agree that many don't bother to read the reality on some prospects.  This stuff is freely available on multiple draft sites.  Most of it stems from the same handful of sources, most sources don't go out and do their own research on 300 and some draft prospects.  It takes a while to do a thorough analysis on a player including view key game films, review the statistical data, etc.  Most simply defer to the Mel Kiper's and other draft "gurus" online which .  I estimate that it takes about 6-8 hours to conduct a fairly thorough analysis on a player, and that's a full-time job for someone intent on doing a hundred or more players.  Most schools will provide the video of a particular player and only every play he was involved in on O or D if you ask them, but that's still a couple of hours, particularly with replaying, slow-mo, etc.  Some stuff is online, but I've not seen it en masse to that extent.  I always find it amusing the people that claim that they watched every team's draftees play in college.  Point being, that the info is already out there and it all essentially aligns, at least insofar as positional possibilities, etc.  

 

 

 

I'm not sure how "quasi-MLB" would work though.  I suppose Lloyd could "fill-in," but if it's only a "quasi" role, ... It definitely raises questions.  

 

My issue with the current situation, and now that we've agreed on Williams and Bernard, is that Beane has made no plans for the post-Edmunds Bills.  I know that you disagree, no need to give me a red-X, but it's readily apparent to me that never having drafted an ILB/MLB with any significant chance of developing into a starter, nor having picked one up in free-agency at any point, is an issue.  How big of one we shall soon see.  

 

 

So I watch at least 3 full games of over 100 players each year in the run up to the draft. The last four years it hovers somewhere between 135 and 150 guys. I reckon somewhere between an hour and a half an 2 hours per player.... somewhere around 300 hours. 

 

When I say "quasi-MLB" I mean essentially you play Milano as the MIKE, you let him call the defensive signals and you give him the respective gap responsibilities in the run game but you don't use him in the way the Bills have traditionally used their mike in pass coverage and that is where you get creative and mix up personnel groupings in pass coverage and don't have two linebackers that pretty much play 100% of the snaps. Maybe you use Neal or Rapp in some dime packages. 

 

Why do you presume I disagree? I don't think the Bills have an obvious answer on the roster at MIKE. I think their choices are a career backup type in Dodson, a past his best player in Klein who you'd have to compensate for in other ways or doing something much more radical and situationally driven (see above) with their scheme. I don't disagree every time you say something critical of the Bills. I disagree when you say stuff that is demonstrably untrue or clearly a reach. I don't think your take on the MIKE position is either of those.

[PBF81]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

So I watch at least 3 full games of over 100 players each year in the run up to the draft. The last four years it hovers somewhere between 135 and 150 guys. I reckon somewhere between an hour and a half an 2 hours per player.... somewhere around 300 hours. 

 

You must be retired, LOL, that's 2 months of full-time work.

 

I typically spend time only on the picks we make.  At least the day 1 & 2 guys.  I didn't this year, just read the profiles.  

 

 

[GunnerBill]

Just now, PBF81 said:

 

You must be retired, LOL, that's 2 months of full-time work.

 

I typically spend time only on the picks we make.  At least the day 1 & 2 guys.  I didn't this year, just read the profiles.  

 

Nope it is just a hobby. I enjoy it. Start around Xmas. Watch a lot on my commute and while running on the treadmill. Soon clock up the hours.

[PBF81]

18 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Nope it is just a hobby. I enjoy it. Start around Xmas. Watch a lot on my commute and while running on the treadmill. Soon clock up the hours.

 

Train commute?

 

 

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

Train commute?

 

Yes.

[PBF81]

3 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

So I watch at least 3 full games of over 100 players each year in the run up to the draft. The last four years it hovers somewhere between 135 and 150 guys. I reckon somewhere between an hour and a half an 2 hours per player.... somewhere around 300 hours. 

 

Regarding the Day 1 prospects, how often do you come up with an analysis that differs from the typical media take?  

 

 

[FireChans]

20 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

On Williams I think it was just some fans who don't really pay attention to the draft putting 2 and 2 together. Beane said right after they drafted him "he is mainly an outside guy." Those of us who watched his college film already knew that.  It is similar to last year when we had a need for depth at outside receiver and drafted Shakir and Beane said "we think he can do both but he is primarily an inside guy" and we had people on here swearing blind he would be the next guy up outside. Then he played zero outside snaps in pre-season and still people were fixed on it. We had to wait exactly 2 weeks for those of us who said "the next guy up outside is Kumerow" to be proven correct. 

 

I think on what Beane says about players I put much more stock in that than coachspeak. Partly because GMs generally are talking in a different context and because Beane is honest to a fault (and I do mean to a fault). He struggles to play things close to his chest even when he should. So for now I believe them that Milano playing a quasi-MIKE is off the table. But I don't completely rule out the prospect that they re-consider it at some point in the season if nothing else works. 

 

I wasn't one of the ones strongly disagreeing with you on Klein. I think it is possible they can fashion a type of MLB role that Klein could play and give you a kinda tick below average semi-decent floor in terms of production. If you do that he isn't a liability by any means. But it isn't the role Edmunds played. He definitely can't do that and would be a major problem if you asked him to. 

 

Personally I think the most likely outcome is Dodson gets first crack at the job in the regular season. I think he is the one who best allows them to run their defense. But he is a major downgrade from Tremaine Edmunds and you'd need him to play at a significantly higher level than he has demonstrated to this point of his career to feel like you are "good" at that position. 

 

To the Klein point, this coaching staff has already lived and learned with what he can offer as an MLB. I recall when Edmunds or Milano was missing time, they started switching responsibilities around, they had some growing pains using Klein. They did figure out the best way to use him eventually, and he actually started making some pretty big plays, even as an old, slow vet.

1 minute ago, PBF81 said:

 

Regarding the Day 1 prospects, how often do you come up with an analysis that differs from the typical media take?  

 

 

@GunnerBill’s yearly draft analysis jamboree is legitimately the best content ever produced on TBD. He is must read every offseason, particularly his QB grades, his first round grades and his mocks. Even his sleepers. He does not get enough props for putting it out every year. You should go back and read some. 

[GunnerBill]

25 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

Regarding the Day 1 prospects, how often do you come up with an analysis that differs from the typical media take?  

 

 

 

I mean in 2022 I didn't have a 1st round grade on the guy who went 1st overall.... so there is that. Depends year to year. Some years I am close to the "consensus" some years I am further from the pack. But there are equally guys like Emmanuel Forbes in this last draft who I was talking about as a top 20 pick before he started getting buzz off the media.