Elite Slot WR Kincaid.

[FireChans]

8 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Kinda sad that you don't even understand how pathetic this thread is.

 

The questions was dumb, as are all questions whose answer is, "Um, obviously not. Duh." And that is indeed the answer to this stupid question.

 

That question was about as thoughtful and on point as a parent looking at his 18 month old spitting out his first word and asking, "Any reason to think this kid isn't headed for a future as a ditch digger so far?" 

 

Pure dumbage. Too early to have any idea, and it's sad that you don't get that.

 

Again, he's out-produced Tony Gonzalez's first five games.

 

And I didn't come up with "Maybe he'll be better in the future." What I came up with was closer to "Asking this early shows far more in a sad way about the guy who asked the question than it does about Kincaid."

 

Oh, and your title was even more pathetic than your post.

 

 

 

 

You were a big Edmunds guy, weren’t you lmao

[newcam2012]

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

 

Dawson Knox in 2021 - 39.1 YPG, 9 TDs

This year - 14.5 YPG 🤮 on pace for maybe 3 TDs

 

Nyheim Hines in 2021 - 16.2 rushing YPG, 18.2 receiving YPG

Hines with us last year - -.3 rushing YPG (yes that is a negative sign 🤮), 5.9 receiving YPG

 

Trent Sherfield in 2022 - 24.5 YPG

Sherfield this year - 9.0 YPG 🤮

 

Zack Moss in 2022 with us - 18.2 rushing YPG 🤮

Moss with Colts in 2022 - 45.6 YPG

Moss with Colts this year - 93.3 YPG❗️

 

What evidence is there that Dorsey is maximizing ANY of our players' skill sets? Allen and Diggs would be superstars with any OC. What is he doing to raise the level of the players around them?

 

Great post. 

41 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:

Lucky Knox is there then 

Don't you love the explosive 12  personnel of the Bills? Almost as good as Gronk and Hernandez. 

[Aussie Joe]

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

 

Dawson Knox in 2021 - 39.1 YPG, 9 TDs

This year - 14.5 YPG 🤮 on pace for maybe 3 TDs

 

Nyheim Hines in 2021 - 16.2 rushing YPG, 18.2 receiving YPG

Hines with us last year - -.3 rushing YPG (yes that is a negative sign 🤮), 5.9 receiving YPG

 

Trent Sherfield in 2022 - 24.5 YPG

Sherfield this year - 9.0 YPG 🤮

 

Zack Moss in 2022 with us - 18.2 rushing YPG 🤮

Moss with Colts in 2022 - 45.6 YPG

Moss with Colts this year - 93.3 YPG❗️

 

What evidence is there that Dorsey is maximizing ANY of our players' skill sets? Allen and Diggs would be superstars with any OC. What is he doing to raise the level of the players around them?

 

Wasnt Dorsey Josh’s pick right as OC?

 

 

[Big Blitz]

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

 

I can't imagine that when Beane used a 1st + a 4th on a player, he envisioned him as nothing more than a 3 yard outlet. It just doesn't feel like Dorsey ever does anything creative to take advantage of his players' skill sets. It's very much a "line up and beat your man" offense, and NFL defenses have gotten way too advanced for that to be the only club in your bag.

 

And I’m back in the wth exactly does James Cook do here camp.  
 

Meanwhile, Zach Moss looks like Thurman Thomas.  

[newcam2012]

37 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Yes, there absolutely is.

 

We're five games in. We still don't have any idea what he is. 

 

This is a dumb thread. If it had been a couple of years it would have made some sense.

 

Frickin' Tony Gonzalez put up fewer yards in his first five games than Kincaid has, and equalled Kincaid's zero TDs. Am I saying Kincaid is Gonzalez? No, though some feeb would probably accuse me of doing so if I hadn't put this sentence in. I'm saying the first five weeks mean squat.

 

 

It does mean something. You can dismiss it. Kincaid has underwhelmed and he's under utilized by Dorsey. Five games in and Dorsey has no clue how to incorporate Kincaid into this offense. He did the same thing with Cook and Hines last year. 

 

Kincaid can be good really good. We likely won't know with Dorsey pulling the strings. That was many people's concerns when he was drafted. 

 

Zac Moss looks pretty good right now. 

[Thurman#1]

1 minute ago, FireChans said:

You were a big Edmunds guy, weren’t you lmao

 

 

Yup. typical strategy for a sad guy with a pathetic losing argument. Change the subject without admitting what happened. 

 

As for Edmunds, I was. Everyone bright should have been. He was a very good player who priced himself out of this team.

 

But I didn't declare this year a disaster now that he was gone, either. I said it should be interesting to see how they replace him. I sure did NOT think they'd replace him so beautifully so very quickly. If he stays healthy Bernard looks like he will be a really good one.

[newcam2012]

1 minute ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Yup. typical strategy for a sad guy with a pathetic losing argument. Change the subject without admitting what happened. 

 

As for Edmunds, I was. Everyone bright should have been. He was a very good player who priced himself out of this team.

 

But I didn't declare this year a disaster now that he was gone, either. I said it should be interesting to see how they replace him. I sure did NOT think they'd replace him so beautifully so very quickly. If he stays healthy Bernard looks like he will be a really good one.

I mean talk about inconsistency. Bernard looks to be a good one after a 5 game sample but to criticize Kincaid after a five game sample is a no no. 

[Thurman#1]

2 minutes ago, newcam2012 said:

It does mean something. You can dismiss it. Kincaid has underwhelmed and he's under utilized by Dorsey. Five games in and Dorsey has no clue how to incorporate Kincaid into this offense. He did the same thing with Cook and Hines last year. 

 

Kincaid can be good really good. We likely won't know with Dorsey pulling the strings. That was many people's concerns when he was drafted. 

 

Zac Moss looks pretty good right now. 

 

 

It does not mean anything. You're right, I can dismiss it. Anyone with triple digit functioning brain cells should.

 

He has been here five games. That's all that needs to be said. The fact that you don't understand this is really sad. 

 

Again, he has out-produced Tony Gonzalez in Tony's first five games. That's because the first five games, if not very good, mean absolutely nothing. With this record of production, he could have a terrible career, a Hall of Fame career, or absolutely anything in between.

 

And yeah, Moss does look good. He was never going to be used as a bell cow, the way that he apparently needs to be used. Remind me, did Moss look great when Daboll was here? Blaming Dorsey for something that as yet means absolutely nothing is just dumb.

[FireChans]

4 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Yup. typical strategy for a sad guy with a pathetic losing argument. Change the subject without admitting what happened. 

 

As for Edmunds, I was. Everyone bright should have been. He was a very good player who priced himself out of this team.

 

But I didn't declare this year a disaster now that he was gone, either. I said it should be interesting to see how they replace him. I sure did NOT think they'd replace him so beautifully so very quickly. If he stays healthy Bernard looks like he will be a really good one.

I just didn’t feel the need to respond to whatever point you thought you nailed with that last one. Wishful thinking doesn’t make an argument. 

 

was fun to remember how incessantly you beat the Edmunds drum. Lol

[Thurman#1]

2 minutes ago, newcam2012 said:

I mean talk about inconsistency. Bernard looks to be a good one after a 5 game sample but to criticize Kincaid after a five game sample is a no no. 

 

 

Again, dumb.

 

Saying someone "looks like" he will be a good one after a small sample is reasonable. I didn't say he is going to be great or even good. I waffled, very deliberately, because we can't be sure yet. And yes, really good production for a short time does say more than really bad production for the same short time. Good production at least shows you have the capability of performing really well. It doesn't mean you will continue to do so, but since you've already shown you can do it, your chances of continuing to do so are better.

 

Short-term bad production might mean you're just not good enough. Or that they don't trust you enough yet. Or that you're not quite ready yet, and might take another week or two or another year or two. Or that you need another off season in a real strength program. Or that they don't want to put some of his abilities on film yet because they want to use him as a surprise in crucial games later in the season. There's a million possibilities. We don't yet know which one is correct. With Bernard we at least know he's capable of being really good for a short period of time.

 

"If he stays healthy Bernard looks like he will be a really good one." Two conditionals in a short sentence. And for a reason. 

[Thurman#1]

16 minutes ago, FireChans said:

I just didn’t feel the need to respond to whatever point you thought you nailed with that last one. Wishful thinking doesn’t make an argument. 

 

was fun to remember how incessantly you beat the Edmunds drum. Lol

 

 

Yup. You just didn't feel the need to respond with anything responsive or relevant.

 

Yeah, we get it. It's a loser's argument. We see it here all the time.

 

Sad you have to keep going back to Edmunds in a Kincaid thread as if you're making a point. It's what people without a decent argument do, distract as much as you can and hope people won't notice.

[FireChans]

18 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Again, dumb.

 

Saying someone "looks like" he will be a good one after a small sample is reasonable. I didn't say he is going to be great or even good. I waffled, very deliberately, because we can't be sure yet. And yes, really good production for a short time does say more than really bad production for the same short time. Good production at least shows you have the capability of performing really well. It doesn't mean you will continue to do so, but since you've already shown you can do it, your chances of continuing to do so are better.

 

Short-term bad production might mean you're just not good enough. Or that they don't trust you enough yet. Or that you're not quite ready yet, and might take another week or two or another year or two. Or that you need another off season in a real strength program. Or that they don't want to put some of his abilities on film yet because they want to use him as a surprise in crucial games later in the season. There's a million possibilities. We don't yet know which one is correct. With Bernard we at least know he's capable of being really good for a short period of time.

 

"If he stays healthy Bernard looks like he will be a really good one." Two conditionals in a short sentence. And for a reason. 

 

12 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Yup. You just didn't feel the need to respond with anything responsive or relevant.

 

Yeah, we get it. It's a loser's argument. We see it here all the time.

 

Sad you have to keep going back to Edmunds in a Kincaid thread as if you're making a point. It's what people without a decent argument do, distract as much as you can and hope people won't notice.

Waffled deliberately, like saying “so far?”

 

lmao you rule

[Thurman#1]

29 minutes ago, FireChans said:

 

Waffled deliberately, like saying “so far?”

 

lmao you rule

 

 

I rule? I mean, thanks, but not really.

 

Compared to you, of course, yeah, I make a ton more sense, but so do most on here. Overall, I'm just a person who uses common sense as most on here do. Shouldn't be anything special about that.

 

And if you want to prove that wrong, go back and find all the threads where I started threads asking dumb questions like yours about guys who have been in the league for five weeks.

 

I don't do that. Because it's dumb.

 

I also made my argument about a second-year guy who has proved something by playing very well for a short period of time. He hasn't proven enough, but something. Not you, though. You popped off about a rookie, a five-game rookie. Dumb.

 

Bernard is a second-year man who looked like a failure as a rookie, by the way. Can you think of anyone else who might be like that?

 

I do sometimes enter dumb threads and point out how stupid it is to be even thinking this so early. That's what you see. And if you can find threads I started asking dumb questions like this so early - conditionals or not - you will indeed have won an argument. Should I wait?

 

 

Edited October 9, 2023 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

Stats for TEs in their First Five Games

 

Pat Friermuth  100 yards, 1 TD

Kelce   missed his entire first year

Dallas Goddert 106 yards, 1 TD

Hockenson 187 yards, 2 TDs, significantly better, and an 8th overall pick. 

Kyle Pitts 308 yards, 1 TD, significantly better, and a 4th overall pick

Dalton Schultz  zip

Darren Waller 18 yards, 0 TDs

Mark Andrews  135 yards, 1 TD

George Kittle 166 yards, 1 TD

 

 

 

Two guys have signficantly more than Kincaid in their first five games. And they were a 4th overall pick and an 8th overall pick. Kittle is on the edge of significance, so let's give him credit also. The rest are in Kincaid's range or below.

 

You can argue that Kincaid doesn't have a TD and several of these guys do. Fair enough. And yet, Diggs admitted he stole that in week 4 from Kincaid. Kincaid was wide open in the end zone two steps to the right. He would likely have had that TD if Diggs hadn't changed his route and run to the daylight Kincaid was in.

 

Point - AGAIN - being that it's too early to understand anything, regardless of the fact that he hasn't stood out.

[Straight Hucklebuck]

5 games in and we’ve yet to anything out of Kincaid.

 

He catches the ball, so the hands part is correct.

 

But does he have any speed, or ability to truck people or agility to shake people or snap of his routes?

 

Dorsey has no imagination so this is what you’ll get. 

 

And Sal C telling everyone that it takes 3-4 years for a Tight End to get comfortable in the league. 

 

[billybob71]

Bills will prob get on a roll again because we have a great QB, but all its gonna take is one bad head scratching game plan against a good team in the playoffs and thats gonna be it... I don't think Dorsey is  good enough at this time to out scheme top DCs and Defenses when it counts. McD is doing a nice job with the D!! but he may regret his OC hire

[FireChans]

6 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

I rule? I mean, thanks, but not really.

 

Compared to you, of course, yeah, I make a ton more sense, but so do most on here. Overall, I'm just a person who uses common sense as most on here do. Shouldn't be anything special about that.

 

And if you want to prove that wrong, go back and find all the threads where I started threads asking dumb questions like yours about guys who have been in the league for five weeks.

 

I don't do that. Because it's dumb.

 

I also made my argument about a second-year guy who has proved something by playing very well for a short period of time. He hasn't proven enough, but something. Not you, though. You popped off about a rookie, a five-game rookie. Dumb.

 

Bernard is a second-year man who looked like a failure as a rookie, by the way. Can you think of anyone else who might be like that?

 

I do sometimes enter dumb threads and point out how stupid it is to be even thinking this so early. That's what you see. And if you can find threads I started asking dumb questions like this so early - conditionals or not - you will indeed have won an argument. Should I wait?

 

 

You think Kincaid looks like a failure as a rookie?

 

Man, I was just saying his usage has been disappointing so far. That’s a little bold, even for me.

[newcam2012]

8 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Again, dumb.

 

Saying someone "looks like" he will be a good one after a small sample is reasonable. I didn't say he is going to be great or even good. I waffled, very deliberately, because we can't be sure yet. And yes, really good production for a short time does say more than really bad production for the same short time. Good production at least shows you have the capability of performing really well. It doesn't mean you will continue to do so, but since you've already shown you can do it, your chances of continuing to do so are better.

 

Short-term bad production might mean you're just not good enough. Or that they don't trust you enough yet. Or that you're not quite ready yet, and might take another week or two or another year or two. Or that you need another off season in a real strength program. Or that they don't want to put some of his abilities on film yet because they want to use him as a surprise in crucial games later in the season. There's a million possibilities. We don't yet know which one is correct. With Bernard we at least know he's capable of being really good for a short period of time.

 

"If he stays healthy Bernard looks like he will be a really good one." Two conditionals in a short sentence. And for a reason. 

If he stays healthy Kincaid looks like he will be a really good one. 

[T master]

20 hours ago, Roundybout said:

Dorsey won’t use him outside of dippy flat routes and blocking. He’s one of the worst OCs in the league 

 

Yep if they got rid of him and that POS HC this team would be Super Bowl bound just in those 2 moves alone ...

[NewEra]

8 hours ago, newcam2012 said:

It does mean something. You can dismiss it. Kincaid has underwhelmed BECAUSE he's under utilized by Dorsey. Five games in and Dorsey has no clue how to incorporate Kincaid into this offense. He did the same thing with Cook and Hines last year. 

 

Kincaid can be good really good. We likely won't know with Dorsey pulling the strings. That was many people's concerns when he was drafted. 

 

Zac Moss looks pretty good right now. 

Fixed 

8 hours ago, newcam2012 said:

I mean talk about inconsistency. Bernard looks to be a good one after a 5 game sample but to criticize Kincaid after a five game sample is a no no. 

TEs need targets to produce.  LBs don’t.  

1 hour ago, FireChans said:

You think Kincaid looks like a failure as a rookie?

 

Man, I was just saying his usage has been disappointing so far. That’s a little bold, even for me.

Stop embarrassing yourself with this childish behavior.