Simms: Gabe Davis is a good player, but he's not a number two

[PBF81]

8 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

For teams with later draft picks I'd argue it's less feasible than theoretically possible. You generally have to get very lucky with a draft pick that far overperforms his draft spot. 

 

And even then the teams with two #1s don't see a ton of high level success. Some. But it's not that common and the list of SB champs, as you know, tells a story about how well getting two #1s generally turns out.

 

No disagreement here.  But the focus should be on that second part.  

 

Also, I just posted, in response to the "best teams ..." about how Davis has outperformed Deebo Samuel in terms of TDs & 1st-Downs, on a per-start basis.  

 

Samuel is SF's #2 WR.  They are the current favorites to win the Super Bowl.  

 

So logically, if a team needs a great #2 WR to win a Super Bowl, why is that the case.  (rhetorical)  

 

What a team needs is a solid offensive philosophy and a coach that's capable of carrying it out in optimizing/maximizing the talent that's on that unit.  

 

Pretty simple really.  

 

 

[Mango]

1 minute ago, Scott7975 said:

 

It doesn't matter.  They invested in those players and they became superbowl contenders. It doesn't matter if they can keep those players down the road.  It got them to the show.  We don't invest.  Gabe Davis is not getting us to the show running sprints.  

 

Roster construction and costs 100% matter. You can't just scream "I LIKE THOSE PLAYERS MY TEAM SHOULD HAVE PLAYERS I LIKE". Acquisition cost via the draft and the salary cap are an integral part of piecing together a championship roster together. You can't ignore the information and path you don't like in order to get a result you find preferable. 

So fine, it doesn't matter. Just go to settings and turn the cap off for this simulation. Go sign whoever you want. In fact, lets change Allen's position to punter, then sign him to a 10 year extension and then set it back to QB. 

You are just yelling at clouds. We aren't even conversing at good faith anymore if you are just going to throw out information and say "It doesn't matter". 

 

 

[Thurman#1]

2 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

 

This year is not great for them receiver wise.  Thats why they are looking to improve it. They still have guys that can run routes and move chains though.  Are you saying they didn't have weapons in the past?  Their guys are running the tree.  Davis is running sprints.  I'd rather have a guy that can run the routes in the offensive system and can move chains and keep us short of the sticks on third down consistently than a guy that is going to catch 2-3 balls for a chunk of yards per game.

 

 

That's nonsense that Davis is only going long, just nonsense. Fair enough that there are some routes he doesn't have much success at, particularly the short routes requiring quickness. But he does have a lot of success at various intermediate and deep routes.

 

And Davis very much does keep the chains moving. More than 70% of his catches are firsts. The fact that many of them are not just first downs but firsts with some added yardage beyond the sticks isn't a bad thing by any standard.

 

As for the continuity receiver, how much clearer could it be that that's what they drafted Kincaid for? He might not turn out to be that guy, but it's way way way too early to say that and there's no question that they Bills brought him in to fill that role.

 

If the Chiefs had wanted a true #1, they had a way to do that. Could've kept Tyreek, but ... they didn't. For obvious reasons.

 

Yeah, the Chiefs are looking to improve, given the right fit and the right contract, but the guys they are bringing in are not contenders for #1 status.

 

2 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

No disagreement here.  But the focus should be on that second part.  

 

Also, I just posted, in response to the "best teams ..." about how Davis has outperformed Deebo Samuel in terms of TDs & 1st-Downs, on a per-start basis.  

 

Samuel is SF's #2 WR.  They are the current favorites to win the Super Bowl.  

 

So logically, if a team needs a great #2 WR to win a Super Bowl, why is that the case.  (rhetorical)  

 

What a team needs is a solid offensive philosophy and a coach that's capable of carrying it out in optimizing/maximizing the talent that's on that unit.  

 

Pretty simple really.  

 

 

 

 

Yeah, sorry, I was still editing. I hadn't meant to imply disagreement. You can see I changed things.

 

Couldn't agree much more.

[GoBills808]

5 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

No disagreement here.  But the focus should be on that second part.  

 

Also, I just posted, in response to the "best teams ..." about how Davis has outperformed Deebo Samuel in terms of TDs & 1st-Downs, on a per-start basis.  

 

Samuel is SF's #2 WR.  They are the current favorites to win the Super Bowl.  

 

So logically, if a team needs a great #2 WR to win a Super Bowl, why is that the case.  (rhetorical)  

 

What a team needs is a solid offensive philosophy and a coach that's capable of carrying it out in optimizing/maximizing the talent that's on that unit.  

 

Pretty simple really.  

 

 

Are you saying Gabe Davis is as good as Deebo Samuel?

[Wayne Arnold]

Gabe Davis is a number four. Dude can't catch, does nothing special from a route-running standpoint and it's embarrassing that he was voted captain of this team. Pathetic, actually.

[Wayne Arnold]

 

That being said, the offense will be fine. Players go through slumps, that includes units. I'd rather the slump happen now than in January. Funny how overreactionary people are but that's just how it goes.

 

Hopefully the players and coaches are ignoring all the negativity.

[dollars 2 donuts]

 

 

BTW, Robert Woods is a really good example of a good to actually great #2.  Almost never the #1, but just extremely dependable and trustworthy.

 

I loved him here as the 2 even when our offense was sputtering.  

 

 

 

 

[Paup 1995MVP]

14 hours ago, Maine-iac said:

The problem isn't that Gabe isn't a #2 WR.  The problem is that there is no one catching passes outside of him and Diggs.  If we had a slot WR or TE who caught lots of underneath stuff and ran the seam once in a while (like Beasley used to) then we wouldn't be so focused on Davis catching 90 passes being more like Diggs.  We need a chain mover and Davis isn't a chain mover therefore it must be Davis's fault, except it isn't.

Shakir and Kincaid could move the chains if we played them in the slot and had them run routes in the middle of the field like Beasley used to.  

 

Get Knox on the bench.  He has bad hands and doesn't run well.  Go with Kincaid Shakir Davis and Diggs with Cook or Murray in the backfield as our regular offense and the offense would be much more fluid.  Knox slows the entire offense down.  Teams that run a lot of 12 personnel usually have 2 TE's that can get down the field.  I think back to the old Patriots of Gronk and Hernandez.  I think that Morris has more upside then Knox at this point.

[Big Turk]

1 hour ago, Scott7975 said:

 

This year is not great for them receiver wise.  But who cares?  How many SB's and AFCCG have they been to now because they keep investing? Thats why they are looking to improve it. They still have guys that can run routes and move chains though.  Are you saying they didn't have weapons in the past?  Their guys are running the tree.  Davis is running sprints.  I'd rather have a guy that can run the routes in the offensive system and can move chains and keep us short of the sticks on third down consistently than a guy that is going to catch 2-3 balls for a chunk of yards per game.

 

How are you so sure that Davis isn't running routes that any receiver that plays his position in this offense would be running due to the concepts they favor versus Davis cannot run those routes?  

 

The short answer is you don't, so all of this is speculation on your part.  Unless you have some inside knowledge or are a fly on the wall of the Dorsey/Daboll meeting rooms.  Are you suggesting he should just go out and run whatever to "prove" he can run other routes that aren't what he is being asked to do?

Edited October 19, 2023 by Big Turk

[Scott7975]

1 hour ago, PBF81 said:

 

San Francisco's the leading Super Bowl contender right now.  Deebo Samuel is their #2 WR.  He's had one notable season, otherwise borderline #2/#3 seasons. 

 

He's currently on pace for 800 yards, 3 TDs, and 30 1st-Downs.  

 

Davis is on pace for almost 1,000 yards, 11 TDs, and more than 30 1st-Downs.  

 

Samuel has averaged about 1 TD for every 4 starts and 3 1st-Downs per start. 

 

Davis has averaged about 1 TD for every 1.5 starts (nearly three times the rate) and 3 1st-Downs per start.  

 

Would we rather have Samuel, ... for example?  Would he perform better here than he has in San Fran?  If so, why?  

 

He's currently on a 3-year $72M contact as a former high 2nd-round draft pick.  

 

Thoughts?  

 

 

 

My thoughts are I would take Samuel over Davis in a heartbeat. His per game stats are roughly similar to Davis. Samuel missed more than 3/4 of the last game as he left with a shoulder injury in the first quarter.  So your overall stats you are showing are skewed. As good as Purdy has been, he isn't Allen. 49ers also have more weapons, spread the ball around more, and have a good running game to boot.  So its not an apples to apples comparison you are making here. Furthermore, Samuel runs a full route tree and not just sprints, he has way more YAC, and he is better at contested catches. You can't show everything with stats. 

[GoBills808]

Just now, Scott7975 said:

 

My thoughts are I would take Samuel over Davis in a heartbeat. His per game stats are roughly similar to Davis. Samuel missed more than 3/4 of the last game as he left with a shoulder injury in the first quarter.  So your overall stats you are showing are skewed. As good as Purdy has been, he isn't Allen. 49ers also have more weapons, spread the ball around more, and have a good running game to boot.  So its not an apples to apples comparison you are making here. Furthermore, Samuel runs a full route tree and not just sprints, he has way more YAC, and he is better at contested catches. You can't show everything with stats. 

No kidding lol

 

The guy is a first team AllPro

[Scott7975]

1 hour ago, Mango said:

 

Roster construction and costs 100% matter. You can't just scream "I LIKE THOSE PLAYERS MY TEAM SHOULD HAVE PLAYERS I LIKE". Acquisition cost via the draft and the salary cap are an integral part of piecing together a championship roster together. You can't ignore the information and path you don't like in order to get a result you find preferable. 

So fine, it doesn't matter. Just go to settings and turn the cap off for this simulation. Go sign whoever you want. In fact, lets change Allen's position to punter, then sign him to a 10 year extension and then set it back to QB. 

You are just yelling at clouds. We aren't even conversing at good faith anymore if you are just going to throw out information and say "It doesn't matter". 

 

 

 

You don't understand.  Those teams invested in the position.  They are superbowl contenders.  We have not invested in the position and havent contended for a superbowl since we had prime Diggs, prime Beasley, and Brown.  Which were a much better combo than a bunch of whoevers off the street, Diggs, and Davis.

 

You can't argue cap space when all those teams made it work.  They all have the same cap space.

[Beck Water]

1 hour ago, Wayne Arnold said:

Gabe Davis is a number four. Dude can't catch, does nothing special from a route-running standpoint and it's embarrassing that he was voted captain of this team. Pathetic, actually.

 

This is the sort of idiotic take that makes me question why I hang here.

[Scott7975]

14 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

 

How are you so sure that Davis isn't running routes that any receiver that plays his position in this offense would be running due to the concepts they favor versus Davis cannot run those routes?  

 

The short answer is you don't, so all of this is speculation on your part.  Unless you have some inside knowledge or are a fly on the wall of the Dorsey/Daboll meeting rooms.  Are you suggesting he should just go out and run whatever to "prove" he can run other routes that aren't what he is being asked to do?

 

Yeah, I am so sure that the Dorsey developed an offense that one WR has two routes that he runs almost all the time.  Come on man.

[Beck Water]

15 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

How are you so sure that Davis isn't running routes that any receiver that plays his position in this offense would be running due to the concepts they favor versus Davis cannot run those routes? 

 

I'm having trouble parsing this sentence.  Could you try to break it up into smaller pieces and say it differently?

[GoBills808]

4 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

This is the sort of idiotic take that makes me question why I hang here.

I mean is it really that much more idiotic than suggesting Davis is a comparable player to Samuel?

[BuffaloRebound]

39 minutes ago, Paup 1995MVP said:

Shakir and Kincaid could move the chains if we played them in the slot and had them run routes in the middle of the field like Beasley used to.  

 

Get Knox on the bench.  He has bad hands and doesn't run well.  Go with Kincaid Shakir Davis and Diggs with Cook or Murray in the backfield as our regular offense and the offense would be much more fluid.  Knox slows the entire offense down.  Teams that run a lot of 12 personnel usually have 2 TE's that can get down the field.  I think back to the old Patriots of Gronk and Hernandez.  I think that Morris has more upside then Knox at this point.

I’d actually like to see Knox as an H-back more. He’s good at blitz pickup and his strength is more run after catch.  Kind of how Jusczyk is used by 49ers.  They need to give up on him being a traditional tight end.  

[FireChans]

2 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

A slot guy doesn't have to be just a slot only guy like Beasley or Renfrow though.

 

Cooper Kupp can play anywhere but in his 1900+ yard season he was mostly in the slot.

 

What you want as a SB contender are 2 WR's who can play anywhere.......inside or out..........then you don't have to take those guys off the field if you are playing 12 or 21 etc..   Needing to have a slot only on the field funnels you into 11 personnel.

 

I agree that the ideal is 2 WR’s that can do it all. 
 

But the Pats won multiple rings with slot only guys and a great TE, and inconsistent at best outside WR’s.

 

I personally think the Bills should have sought out upgrades at #2 WR last offseason. They did not. I think if they they were not going to upgrade outside WR, this offense at least needed a player to fill the slot role. They did not do that either. 

[Scott7975]

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

That's nonsense that Davis is only going long, just nonsense. Fair enough that there are some routes he doesn't have much success at, particularly the short routes requiring quickness. But he does have a lot of success at various intermediate and deep routes.

 

And Davis very much does keep the chains moving. More than 70% of his catches are firsts. The fact that many of them are not just first downs but firsts with some added yardage beyond the sticks isn't a bad thing by any standard.

 

As for the continuity receiver, how much clearer could it be that that's what they drafted Kincaid for? He might not turn out to be that guy, but it's way way way too early to say that and there's no question that they Bills brought him in to fill that role.

 

If the Chiefs had wanted a true #1, they had a way to do that. Could've kept Tyreek, but ... they didn't. For obvious reasons.

 

Yeah, the Chiefs are looking to improve, given the right fit and the right contract, but the guys they are bringing in are not contenders for #1 status.

 

He runs sprints with the two routes that he runs.  Thats what he does.  Occasionally has a 10 yard curl.

 

Yeah but he only catches like 3 balls a game.  Thats not a consistent chain mover.  Its 3 chunk plays a game. Thats what that is.  The rest of the game he is a decoy running sprints and invisible.  For a team that wants to methodically move the ball down the field, you need more than just Diggs to do that.  Davis is not good at much of anything besides running down the sideline.  He aint a route tree guy. He aint a separation guy.  He aint a contested catch guy. He aint a speed guy. He's a guy that runs down the sideline. The Bills need better than that.  That should be clear from the fact they signed back a washed up Brown and Beasley off their couch last season.  If Diggs went down this offense would be toast because Davis isn't good enough to hold down the fort.

 

I'm happy they drafted Kincaid but they don't use the TEs much. Why? I don't know.  The draft choice made sense given where we were at and what was available. Knox was just given a high contract to be that guy though.  Kincaid doesn't change what Davis is.

 

The Chiefs continually look to address the WR every season and every in season.  Thats why they just traded with the Jets to get their receiver back from them, because they know they need to improve in that area. Thats why they keep spending high draft picks on them.

[Big Turk]

16 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

I'm having trouble parsing this sentence.  Could you try to break it up into smaller pieces and say it differently?

 

Basically I am asking how he knows that Davis cannot run other routes versus Davis is running the routes that anyone who plays his position in the offense(X, Y, Z or whatever they call it in this offense) is running because those are the route concepts for a player at that position to run.

 

He can only run the routes that he is supposed to run. OP is making a giant jump to conclusion that Davis cannot run other routes so they only ask him to run a few routes.  I am asking how he knows that another receiver that replaced him wouldn't be asked to run those same routes because that is his role in the route concepts of the offense at that position and not be given all the other routes he isn't running.