FireChans Posted May 16 Posted May 16 8 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: Hmm. If Green Bay's success is about a creative passing scheme why didn't it work with Alan Lazard and the corpse of Randall Cobb's career? Nah. It is about WR talent. The Packers have drafted some young guys outside of round 1 but have done so in bulk and had some hits. The Chiefs wide receiver room was the weakness of the team last year and while you can say they won a Superbowl so it justifies the decisions they took but Reid immediately went out and signed a former 1st round receiver in FA and then drafted a 1st round receiver. It is an interesting theory but I'm sorry I just don't buy it. The Bills receiver room doesn't look like this because the Bills have cottoned on to some league wide trend. It looks like this because they have criminally under prioritised the drafting of wide receivers. Since Beane has been GM only Tampa Bay (who have had Evans and Godwin the whole time) have prioritised the position less in the draft. 31st out of 32 teams. That is why our WR room now is a rookie, a decent slot guy who came on last year and other people's cast offs. What? You're telling me when Beane extended Diggs to make him the 6th highest paid WR in the NFL 25 months ago, it wasn't him trying to throw other teams off the scent that we would be going into the 2024 season with Coleman, Curtis Samuel, MVS, Shakir and Mack Hollins? 2 Quote
Shaw66 Posted May 16 Author Posted May 16 9 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said: If we get a Metcalf/Aiyuk/D Adams/Dhop the whole defensive strategy changes and Samuel/Shakir/Kincaid group will be free to eat underneath. What I believe is that yours is the old-fashioned approach. I thin k the new, team approach is that collectively they all create space for all of them to eat. Your approach means you're aleays dependent on having that stud #1. Its not a sustainable model. Giants invrsted heavy apital in bo a running back and OBJ - doubly unsustainable. 2 Quote
Mat68 Posted May 16 Posted May 16 1 hour ago, Einstein's Dog said: It's the MVS, Hollins part that I do not want to see. For all the talk about interchangeable WRs - it does not include those dregs. Don't need someone to take the volume of Diggs, but instead someone who is good, who helps split the overall target share and who would force the defenses to strategize against, which in turn makes the targets to the remaining players easier. If we get a Metcalf/Aiyuk/D Adams/Dhop the whole defensive strategy changes and Samuel/Shakir/Kincaid group will be free to eat underneath. MVS, Hollins and whoever else makes the roster are vying for the scraps. MVS and Hollins are better wrs than Harty and Sherfield. Hamler and Claypool offer more potential though neither have an expectation of playing or being on the roster. I dont expect them being able to afford the contract of Ayuik, Metcalf, or Adams. Eating the amount of salary to get under the 10 mil post June 1st would likely require a 1st. Thats a road I dont see Beane and Buffalo going. 24 Kincaid will be the primary target. Shakir, Samuel and Coleman will receive 90% of the wr targets. Quote
Beck Water Posted May 16 Posted May 16 20 hours ago, Shaw66 said: Bills fans have spent the first five months of 2024 talking about receivers: Whom the Bills have and whom they should get. The longer I’ve listened to that discussion, the more I’ve come to the conclusion that fans haven’t really internalized what’s happening in pro football. In short, I think that receivers are following in the footsteps of their cousins, the running backs. Fans, and the New York Giants, were late to realize that in terms of team performance, there isn’t much difference between having a great running back and having a really good one. And you almost always can find a really good one. There’s always a Singletary, a Cook, a Pacheco, or someone else. In earlier eras, if you had a Jim Brown or an Earl Campbell or a Barry Sanders, you were a contender. Not now. Now, you can have a Derrick Henry and, well, you have some great highlights, but highlights don’t get it done any more. Why did that happen to running backs? Two reasons: First, young players keep closing the gap between what the great players can do and what the next level of really good players can do. They learn the moves of the great players, and they condition themselves to be nearly as strong and as powerful. Second, the defenses have matured – the players are bigger, stronger, faster, so that a guy with Jim-Brown talent now finds a defense full of big, strong, fast defenders, and the coaches have schemed their defenses in ways that allow their big, strong, fast defenders to close gaps and gang tackle in ways that just weren’t done in earlier generations. Maybe some 250-pound guy who runs like LaDainian Tomlinson will come along, but that’s unlikely. (As an aside, the same thing is happening in the NBA. In less than ten years, the league has filled up with guys who shoot threes like Steph Curry, guys who are bigger, stronger, and quicker than Steph. And the defenses have gotten smarter. The Warriors of five years ago would be good today, but not dominant in the way they were. (And, by the way, there’s a whole generation of pro golfers who have caught up to the greatness of the early Tiger Woods. They don’t stand out like Tiger because, well, there are a lot of them.) And now we see it happening to receivers. Again, the difference between truly great and very good has gotten smaller, the number of very good receivers has increased. It’s happened for the same reasons that it happened to running backs. Receivers have gotten about as big and fast as they are going to get. The difference in speed between a 4.3 guy and a 4.4 or even 4.5 guy just isn’t very important – 4.5 is plenty fast enough. Kids in high school practice catching balls one-handed, practice tucking the ball away after the catch, etc. By the time receivers have gotten out of college, a lot of them have speed, route-running technique, and catching skills that rival what some of the best NFL players had ten years ago. In other words, it’s become almost impossible to get better physically in a way that makes any one receiver a dominant player. In addition to the younger receivers closing the talent gap, the defenders and the defenses they run have improved, too, for the express purpose of stopping the physically dominant receivers. If you want to win in the NFL, you simply cannot let one player get 150+ yards against you, rushing or receiving, so you create defenses to stop them. You shadow running backs, you double cover receivers, and then you develop nuanced variations off your defenses to slow down the opponent’s star player. Quickly, other teams adopt your ideas. The result is that even the very best running backs and receivers are not stringing 150-yard games, back to back to back, all season long. Yes, every once in a while a Tyreek Hill comes along, a physical freak, and he does string great games for a while, but it’s just a matter of time before teams adjust. What about all the great young receivers out there? Well, I think there’s an important distinction to be made between great receivers and great production. A guy like Julian Edelman was not a great receiver, in the classic Hall of Fame sense. He had great production because of the circumstances he was in, and because he was the right guy to take advantage of those circumstanes. Cooper Kupp is another. Amon-Ra St. Brown is another. These guys are all over the league, guys with excellent speed, very good ball skills, and brains. They have great production, but it isn’t so much that they create the production – they just fit the scheme and get production because they have the skill to take advantage of the opportunities that their offenses create. I’m not saying those guys aren’t good football players. What I’m saying is that they are the Pachecos and Cooks and Singletarys of the receiving world. What I’m saying is that teams are discovering that the physical difference between OBJ and St. Brown does not translate into an important difference in production on the field, just like the difference between Saquon Barkley and Pacheco. What about the true studs, the OBJs and the DHops of the world? The guys who actually create their production? Well, both of those guys came to greatness on their original teams, were true sensations and great weapons, and then were somewhat surprisingly dealt to other teams, where they never recovered their initial luster. Now they’ve been reduced to hired guns that teams hope can somehow reclaim their greatness or at least be reliable 4th receivers. The bottom line is, I think, that the game has moved on from the days when the ideal was to have a true stud skill player on offense (other than your QB). If you had a true stud, you gave him the ball every time you could. In fact, teams have discovered that having a guy who is so good that he demands the ball is a negative, not a positive. When you have a Derrick Henry or an OBJ, they’re only useful if you give them the ball a lot, and that limits your offense. Having a guy like Stefon Diggs, who is prone to sulking if he doesn’t get a catch in your first series, is a liability. The Bills certainly seem to have adopted this thinking. GO BILLS!!! The Rockpile Review is written to share the passion we have for the Buffalo Bills. That passion was born in the Rockpile; its parents were everyday people of western New York who translated their dedication to a full day’s hard work and simple pleasures into love for a pro football team. I love your writing, as always. This is a drum you've been banging a while now, though, and I think it ignores a bunch of contrary evidence. First of all, on the "WR are the new RBs" thing. You omit all the rule changes the NFL has made to protect the QB and favor the passing game, in search of a more exciting visual spectacle. Bluntly put, the number of fans excited by a grind-it-out battle between two strangling defenses is far lower than the number of fans excited by an "oohs and aaahs" laser light show between a top QB and his receivers pushing the ball downfield. The NFL has taken that into account with the rules. This means that the passing game, favored as it is, has become more efficient than the running game. In the battle for who ends the the game with the most points, that naturally means teams value what gets them those points. You have valid and good points about the physical skills and abilities of players coming out of college these days and the narrowing gap between "great" and "good" players. But I don't think that's the major driver of the lower value on RBs these days. I think rule changes favoring the passing game, and a lag in the "arms race" so to speak, between the type of defenses and defensive players necessary to shut down a high powered passing attack vs. a high powered running game, are more significant. Also, please keep in mind that the strong contributions of a receiver drafted in the 4th round like Amon Ra St Brown or the 5th round like Stefon Diggs, is not on the face of it evidence that "WR are a dime a dozen" and many are able to succeed in a good offensive system, but that draft evaluators are trying to predict NFL success for guys coming out of different levels of college competition, and the draft is far from an exact science. That seems to be conflated a bit, above. You also seem to disregard the effects of "father time" when considering the career trajectories of players like DHop and OBJ. They went from greatness, to hired guns, not because "WR are a dime a dozen now" or because they were system fits who lost their luster in a new system, but because of the unrelenting impact of hundreds of hits and in some cases, the need to rehab and recover from significant injuries, on their level of talent. DHop had a great season full of luster the year after he was traded to ARI - #3 in the league, just behind Adams and Diggs. The next two years, he struggled with hamstring injuries and torn MCLs. Likewise OBJ - he had a top-notch career derailed by a serious ankle facture in 2017, put up similar numbers in 2018 with the Giants and 2019 with Cleveland, then he tore his ACL which he's now done twice. Last, I'd like to look at the impact of a Tyreek Hill. Tyreek Hill is a physical freak, yes. But he's had league-leading numbers with two different teams and QBs, not just because he's a physical freak, but because he played next to a future HOF physical freak of a receiver in Kelce in KC and next to another top WR in Miami in Waddle. I would say this opposes your argument about "dime a dozen" WR - not only are top receivers significant, but top offenses usually pair two of them together. Kelce and Hill in KC; Hill and Waddle in Miami; Chase Higgins and Boyd in Cincy; AJ Brown added to Devonta Smith in Philly. Then there's a point that however large the impact of truly top WR may be, it's ultimately limited by the quality of the team around him. Let's look at a guy like Davante Adams, who had 5 successive probowl seasons capped by 2 successive all pro seasons in GB. He had arguably as good of a season with a lesser talent in Carr throwing to him in LV the year after he was traded - #3 in the league, probowl, All-Pro - yet it ultimately lacked impact on team wins because of the quality of the coaching and team around him. Do you really want to make the argument that the Bills passing offense was as strong in 2022 or 2023 with Diggs, Davis, and who? vs 2020 or 2021 with Diggs, Beasley, John Brown or Emmanuel Sanders, and Davis? If WR are "dime a dozen", shouldn't it have been? Ultimately, I think talent level does matter - and the Bills have been fighting since 2021 to get back to that level of talent in the WR room. OK, enough opining. Let's turn our attention to some hard evidence regarding this "WR are a dime a dozen" or "WR are the new RBs" though. First, Follow the Money Franchise Tags. Currently WR have the 4th highest franchise tag values, right after QB, DT, and LB. Franchise tags, of course, reflect what teams are actually paying players at different positions. So why is that, if WR are now regarded as "a dime a dozen"? Next, Follow the Draft. Can we agree that teams tend to consistently take shots in the first two rounds, particularly the first rounds, at player positions that are of high importance to their team's success? That's why we see so many QBs consistently drafted in the 1st, even though teams know very well that they won't all become Franchise Guys - teams know they need a QB, and other teams will be taking their shots. Well, WR are one of the most numerically common positions drafted in the top 2 rounds and especially, the first round, for the last 6 NFL drafts. 2019 1st: 2 2nd: 7 2020 1st: 6 2nd: 7 2021 1st: 5 2nd: 5 - 3 of those 1st round WR were drafted in the top 10 picks 2022 1st 6 2nd: 7 - 5 of those 1st round WR drafted in the top half 2023 1st 4 2nd: 4 2024 1st 7 2nd: 4 - 3 of those 1st round WR were drafted in the top 10 picks. Seems to me that if WR were truly a "dime a dozen" now a days, teams wouldn't be using up so much top draft capital in the 1st round, and the 1st 2 rounds. Cheers! Quote
HappyDays Posted May 16 Posted May 16 (edited) 2 hours ago, Shaw66 said: Kupp and St. Brown looked like Shakir until they more nicely into the system and started getting more targets. That's really not true at all... Kupp was drafted 69th overall and had 869 yards in his rookie season. ASB was drafted 112th overall and had 912 yards in his rookie season. Shakir was drafted 148th overall and had 161 yards in his rookie season... 611 yards last year... So Kupp and ASB each had more yards in their rookie season than Shakir had in his sophomore season. It's forgotten now but Shakir was on the roster bubble throughout much of training camp last year. He came on quite nicely in the 2nd half of the season but in no way has his career arc been close to the two elite players you named. It isn't nearly as simple as just giving a player more targets and expecting a bunch of more yards. Some players are naturally just better as low target players. Gabe Davis was like that. It remains to be seen how Shakir responds to an increased role. Edited May 16 by HappyDays 1 Quote
Utah John Posted May 16 Posted May 16 I've been thinking that Beane is ahead of the curve in this. His approach is to flood the field with 4-5 really big, reasonably fast receivers, and let Josh Allen find the open guy. A lot of offenses are being built with really fast receivers and so most defenses are being built to stop them. The Bills can field at least four receivers at 6'3" or more (some combination of Kincaid, Knox, Coleman, MVS and some of the others, with a smaller and quicker receiver in the slot) and one of them is going to be single covered by someone a lot smaller and lighter. I think size, strength, and agility will become the new speed in the NFL. Until defenses adjust again, hit em where they aint. 4 minutes ago, HappyDays said: That's really not true at all... Kupp was drafted 69th overall and had 869 yards in his rookie season. ASB was drafted 112th overall and had 912 yards in his rookie season. Shakir was drafted 148th overall and had 161 yards in his rookie season... 611 yards last year... So Kupp and ASB each had more yards in their rookie season than Shakir had in his sophomore season. It's forgotten now but Shakir was on the roster bubble throughout much of training camp last year. He came on quite nicely in the 2nd half of the season but in no way has his career arc been close to the two elite players you named. It isn't nearly as simple as just giving a player more targets and expecting a bunch of more yards. Some players are naturally just better as low target players. Gabe Davis was like that. It remains to be seen how Shakir responds. Shakir didn't get as many targets or catches largely because Diggs and Davis were on the field as the primary receivers on most plays. I am not saying Shakir is as physically gifted as ASB but he does seem to be getting better each year. Quote
HappyDays Posted May 16 Posted May 16 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Utah John said: Shakir didn't get as many targets or catches largely because Diggs and Davis were on the field as the primary receivers on most plays. I am not saying Shakir is as physically gifted as ASB but he does seem to be getting better each year. I like Shakir as a complementary piece. Expecting him to grow into the caliber of a Kupp or an ASB is if anything unfair to him IMO. That's how I would describe this WR room. It's top to bottom all complementary pieces. There is no go to guy unless Coleman defies expectations and immediately becomes a #1 caliber WR. My best hope isn't in the WR room. It's in Kincaid. He's the one player on the roster where I see a realistic path to being an elite receiver this year. After him my next best hope is Coleman hitting his stride by week 10 or so. So I'm not saying there is no path. But if that path doesn't develop we are not going to have an elite offense by "spreading the ball around." Every elite offense in recent memory has had a #1 target that everybody knew was the #1. In fact all elite offenses in recent memory also had a #2 target that was clearly the #2. There's no such thing as #1/#2 by committee. I thought that debate was closed last year... Edited May 16 by HappyDays 2 1 Quote
Beck Water Posted May 16 Posted May 16 10 minutes ago, HappyDays said: That's really not true at all... Kupp was drafted 69th overall and had 869 yards in his rookie season. ASB was drafted 112th overall and had 912 yards in his rookie season. Shakir was drafted 148th overall and had 161 yards in his rookie season... 611 yards last year... So Kupp and ASB each had more yards in their rookie season than Shakir had in his sophomore season. It's forgotten now but Shakir was on the roster bubble throughout much of training camp last year. He came on quite nicely in the 2nd half of the season but in no way has his career arc been close to the two elite players you named. It isn't nearly as simple as just giving a player more targets and expecting a bunch of more yards. Some players are naturally just better as low target players. Gabe Davis was like that. It remains to be seen how Shakir responds to an increased role. to amplify on this a bit: Kupp had close to 100 targets his rookie year and racked up 58 ypg. His second year, which was cut short by injury, was over 70 ypg which is pretty well the level he stayed at while getting more targets, until he did 'break out' during the Ram's SB season after they traded Stafford for Goff. But he was on the field 75% of the time starting his rookie year, and that only went up. The point is, he was on the field and contributing strongly from his first year, bar injury. Similar kind of thing with St Brown - he was contributing 54 ypg his rookie year and that went up to 73 then 95 ypg, but he was also on the field 75% of the snaps his rookie year and that only went up. With Shakir, I don't remember that "roster bubble" bit in pre-season. I think it was more we were looking harder at the guys who actually were, with the usual crop of "pre season heroes" from open practice. But while he had his "why don't we see more of him?" fans his rookie year, his catch % was 50% and he wasn't running sharp routes. He worked hard between his 1st and 2nd seasons, and it paid off big time in a huge jump in catch % from 50% to 86.7%, in playing time from 29% to 52% of the snaps, and a jump in YPG from 12 to 34. But no, Kupp and St-Brown were NOT on similar early year trajectories to Shakir. Nothing like. And of course, your point is valid that just because a guy looks good in limited snaps and when he's the #3 target in terms of how teams focus their attention, his production won't necessarily scale when he gets more snaps and a higher level of defensive attention (see Davis, Gabe) 1 Quote
Shaw66 Posted May 16 Author Posted May 16 14 minutes ago, HappyDays said: That's really not true at all... Kupp was drafted 69th overall and had 869 yards in his rookie season. ASB was drafted 112th overall and had 912 yards in his rookie season. Shakir was drafted 148th overall and had 161 yards in his rookie season... 611 yards last year... So Kupp and ASB each had more yards in their rookie season than Shakir had in his sophomore season. It's forgotten now but Shakir was on the roster bubble throughout much of training camp last year. He came on quite nicely in the 2nd half of the season but in no way has his career arc been close to the two elite players you named. It isn't nearly as simple as just giving a player more targets and expecting a bunch of more yards. Some players are naturally just better as low target players. Gabe Davis was like that. It remains to be seen how Shakir responds to an increased role. Thanks. Good stuff. Yes, I know it's not as simple as just giving them more targets. I think if you're trying to build a receiving as I've described, you don't put all your eggs in one basket. I think the Bills are taking a multiple approach. Do you think the Bills will have 4000 yards passing this season? Do you think they will have a 1000-yard receiver? I think the answer to both of those questions is yes. I don't know who the 1000-yard receiver will be, but I'm guessing that one of Kincaid, Shakir, Samuel, and Coleman will go over 1000. One of those guys is going to be productive in a way that resembles Kelce, St. Brown, Kupp and some others. They'll get more targets than they've gotten historically. Brady probably could tell us today which of those four is the one they think is most likely to be that guy, but I'd bet that even they would say they aren't sure. Yes, some guys are just low-target guys. I don't think it's been demonstrated yet that Shakir is one of those, nor has it been demonstrated with any of the others I named. They haven't historically had high targets, and that is in part because they aren't traditional-type stud #1s. They don't demand targets. My whole point is that there's nothing much about St. Brown or Kupp that allows them to demand targets, either. They just are good at taking advantage of opportunities. I think modern football is trending in the direction that will systematically afford targets to anyone who can take advantage. It's a more complicated way to run your offense, it stresses the defenses more, and it frees your offense from being dependent on one guy to create the opportunities for others. I know I'm not going to change you mind, and I also know that, at least as the league stands today, I'm overstating the case. However, I enjoy talking with you about it, because your opinions always are grounded in quality fact and analysis. Thanks. 2 Quote
stuvian Posted May 16 Posted May 16 (edited) 5 hours ago, chris heff said: Speaking of dime a dozen Quitez Cephus is gone already. so you're saying my Quintez Cephus Bills jersey investment was a little premature? Now you Cephus, Now you don't! The decision was made after he tried to attend a team meeting by Zoom from Seneca Falls Casino. Edited May 16 by stuvian 2 Quote
Buffalo Junction Posted May 16 Posted May 16 2 hours ago, FireChans said: I would have no problem with Beane living off the rotation of day 2/3 WR's every year. I think it's a GREAT strategy. The Steelers since 2009: 3rd Mike Wallace 3rd Sanders 6th AB 3rd Wheaton 4th Marty Bryant 3rd Sammie Coates 2nd JuJu 2nd James Washington 3rd Diontae Johnson 2nd Chase Claypool 2nd George Pickens With WR contracts exploding even more today compared to those days, it makes sense to live off rookie deals that are gonna outplay their talent with an elite QB and get overpaid (read: Gabe Davis). This is how the Steelers prolonged Big Ben's career. They kept surrounding him with a stable. Of course, they also got lucky and hit on a HoF talent. But you can't hit on a HoFer without drafting them. IMO, I don't think Beane plans to follow this strategy. If he was, the time to get a jump start was this draft. But if he does go for the revolving door of WR, I'm 100% on board over trading for an Aiyuk and paying him $30M. Of course, this flies in the face of the OP stating that WR's are the new RB's. It's actually completely the opposite, but there's a good strategy to help us in a zero sum league. Same strategy for the Steelers with Big Ben; defense or trenches in the first, pass catcher on day two. Protect the QB, affect the opposing QB, skill players. Unfortunately for this team it usually takes a 2-3 years for the strategy to really pay dividends as the day two guys generally have a flaw in their game or are less experienced. That said, I can view it as a possibility if you include Kincaid. Still not enough though. I agree that he probably should have double dipped this year or last year to expedite the process like the Packers did the last two years… because unless Shakir, Kincaid, and Coleman are back to back hits like Greg Jennings, James Jones, and Jordy Nelson this team might be behind on talent without a resurgence from Claypool or MVS. 1 Quote
Beck Water Posted May 16 Posted May 16 17 minutes ago, HappyDays said: I like Shakir as a complementary piece. Expecting him to grow into the caliber of a Kupp or an ASB is if anything unfair to him IMO. That's how I would describe this WR room. It's top to bottom all complementary pieces. There is no go to guy unless Coleman defies expectations and immediately becomes a #1 caliber WR. My best hope isn't in the WR room. It's in Kincaid. He's the one player on the roster where I see a realistic path to being an elite receiver this year. After him my next best hope is Coleman hitting his stride by week 10 or so. So I'm not saying there is no path. But if that path doesn't develop we are not going to have an elite offense by "spreading the ball around." Every elite offense in recent memory has had a #1 target that everybody knew was the #1. In fact all elite offenses in recent memory also had a #2 target that was clearly the #2. There's no such thing as #1/#2 by committee. I thought that debate was closed last year... So this is a series of interesting points. First off, I would say, if we thought Shakir ready and able to lock down a top WR role, we probably wouldn't have used our biggest FA signing on Samuel, who actually is a more Shakir-trajectory kind of a receiver who started out slow and earned his way from 30-ish to 50-ish to 86% of the snaps, with production rising from 13 y/g to 38 y/g to 57 y/g (under Brady as OC). I think of both as Swiss-army-knife type guys, who can play from the slot but also run routes outside. I think it's pretty clear that the Bills don't want a stable of "Swiss-army-knife" type guys. They want a big guy who can get off press and win contested catches with DBs draped all over him, and they don't feel 100% confident he joined the roster when they drafted Coleman hence the shot at Claypool. They also want a fast guy who can stretch the field, hence the MVS signing. MVS is a guy who is a legit field stretcher. His lowest Y/R is 15, his best season was 20. Claypool, in his first two (successful) seasons, was a 14 Y/R guy. I think it's been pointed out that while Diggs managed 17 Y/R the year before Buffalo traded for him, that really wasn't his bread-and-butter either before or afterwards. Now to the elite offense/spreading the ball around bit. That's essentially what KC tried last season, and it took them to the Superbowl - but their offense was NOT elite last season. They were what, #15 on points scored? They rode their #2 defense through games. They had a rusher close to 1000 yds and two receivers close to 1000 yds in Kelce and Rice. But even Kelce, who I would argue has been the Chief's #1 receiver since Mahomes was handed the keys (there were 2 years where Hill had more yards, but in one of them Kelce had more targets and receptions) - Kelce's targets and YPG declined to levels he hasn't seen since 2016. A bit of an aside, and not intended to argue against your overall point about #1 and #1/#2 WR, but last season, 2 of the 4 final teams (Ravens, #4 offense on points, and 49ers #3 offense on points) were run-first teams who rush more than they throw, but in very different styles. Baltimore's leading rusher for yards is their QB Lamar and they were 30th for passing attempts. Zay Flowers, their #1 receiver, had 77 receptions for 858 yds and after him, they spread the ball around pretty well - OBJ and Agholor, their two TE Andrews and Likely. The 49ers on the other hand, despite being #32 for passing attempts, had two 1000 yd receivers in Aiyuk and Kittle, and a 3rd 900 yd-ish receiver in Samuel. And, they were not very different in targets - 105, 90, and 89. I'm not sure who you'd say their undoubted #1 receiver was. On the other hand, you can by sure and by damn tell who their #1 RB is in Christian McCaffery. Their offense clearly runs through him, one of the few big trades where one can seemingly say the receiving team got their money's worth, as long as he's healthy. Anyway, a bit off your point, but I thought it was interesting to bring up in the context of #1 and #2 receivers - that essentially, 2 of the 4 final teams were run-centric teams and, I would argue, the two who played in the Superbowl, really didn't fit the pattern of having a clear #1 target at receiver and 3/4 arguably didn't have an elite passing game. Then of course, in terms of top offenses last year, the Cowboys and Dolphins very much fit the #1 or #1/#2 target pattern. I just thought it's worth pointing out that there are other ways to win (defense) and to run an elite offense, but unless Brady envisions James Cook transforming into Christian McCaffery, I really hope he's not planning to try to adopt the Ravens run-Lamar-run model. Quote
FireChans Posted May 16 Posted May 16 9 minutes ago, Buffalo Junction said: Same strategy for the Steelers with Big Ben; defense or trenches in the first, pass catcher on day two. Protect the QB, affect the opposing QB, skill players. Unfortunately for this team it usually takes a 2-3 years for the strategy to really pay dividends as the day two guys generally have a flaw in their game or are less experienced. That said, I can view it as a possibility if you include Kincaid. Still not enough though. I agree that he probably should have double dipped this year or last year to expedite the process like the Packers did the last two years… because unless Shakir, Kincaid, and Coleman are back to back hits like Greg Jennings, James Jones, and Jordy Nelson this team might be behind on talent without a resurgence from Claypool or MVS. And the beauty of having a stable, you aren’t relying on a rookie second round pick to be “the guy” right away because you already have your Mike Wallace starting. 2 Quote
Shaw66 Posted May 16 Author Posted May 16 1 hour ago, TBBills Fan said: You lost me at St Brown just being good. He is elite 6 feet, 195 pounds, 4.5 40. What physical talent does he have that makes him elite? He's elite because of his stats. How much of his stats is dependent on his physical abilities, and how much of it is dependent on the match of his particular athletic abilities with (1) a star offensive coordinator, (2) a solid, accurate veteran QB, (3) a high-performing tight end? No one projected St. Brown as a league-leading receiver. 1 Quote
Einstein's Dog Posted May 16 Posted May 16 1 hour ago, Mat68 said: MVS, Hollins and whoever else makes the roster are vying for the scraps. MVS and Hollins are better wrs than Harty and Sherfield. Hamler and Claypool offer more potential though neither have an expectation of playing or being on the roster. I dont expect them being able to afford the contract of Ayuik, Metcalf, or Adams. Eating the amount of salary to get under the 10 mil post June 1st would likely require a 1st. Thats a road I dont see Beane and Buffalo going. 24 Kincaid will be the primary target. Shakir, Samuel and Coleman will receive 90% of the wr targets. Managing the cap is part of Beane's job. If he chooses to not get another WR my evaluation of his performance decreases tremendously. He should of had (and I think he did) all of this planned or at least outlined in his head prior to unloading Diggs. The idea floated about now that Beane is ahead of the curve by assembling a room of no-name WRs doesn't come close to cutting it. No, my avenue to thinking Beane is smart is through his thinking ahead when he accumulated draft picks, put aside Tre money, and left some Josh money on the table, and only drafted one WR. That all makes sense when he trades for a good WR. A WR room featuring a rookie, $8M WR2/3, and Shakir is mind-blowingly poor. Getting into the weeds a little bit on the cap piece, the salary can be manipulated once they are brought on board. For instance last years salary of DHop is listed as $1.8M in spotrac. Games can be played with distributing the cost over multiple years. And if we got a WR for multiple years, the offensive playmakers are set. Josh- multiple, Cook 2 yrs more, Kincaid 4yrs, Shakir 2, K Coleman 4, Samuel 3, new WR multiple, backup RB 4. They don't need 2025 cap on offense playmakers. We'll see if Shaw changes his tune once Beane pulls the trigger and gets a real WR in here. Then you can say, even in this youth transition Beane improved the WR room. That's a good GM. Quote
oldmanfan Posted May 16 Posted May 16 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said: Managing the cap is part of Beane's job. If he chooses to not get another WR my evaluation of his performance decreases tremendously. He should of had (and I think he did) all of this planned or at least outlined in his head prior to unloading Diggs. The idea floated about now that Beane is ahead of the curve by assembling a room of no-name WRs doesn't come close to cutting it. No, my avenue to thinking Beane is smart is through his thinking ahead when he accumulated draft picks, put aside Tre money, and left some Josh money on the table, and only drafted one WR. That all makes sense when he trades for a good WR. A WR room featuring a rookie, $8M WR2/3, and Shakir is mind-blowingly poor. Getting into the weeds a little bit on the cap piece, the salary can be manipulated once they are brought on board. For instance last years salary of DHop is listed as $1.8M in spotrac. Games can be played with distributing the cost over multiple years. And if we got a WR for multiple years, the offensive playmakers are set. Josh- multiple, Cook 2 yrs more, Kincaid 4yrs, Shakir 2, K Coleman 4, Samuel 3, new WR multiple, backup RB 4. They don't need 2025 cap on offense playmakers. We'll see if Shaw changes his tune once Beane pulls the trigger and gets a real WR in here. Then you can say, even in this youth transition Beane improved the WR room. That's a good GM. Would you change your tune if he doesn’t make a trade and the Bills are once again a playoff team? Edited May 16 by oldmanfan 1 Quote
SoonerBillsFan Posted May 16 Posted May 16 7 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said: Managing the cap is part of Beane's job. If he chooses to not get another WR my evaluation of his performance decreases tremendously. He should of had (and I think he did) all of this planned or at least outlined in his head prior to unloading Diggs. The idea floated about now that Beane is ahead of the curve by assembling a room of no-name WRs doesn't come close to cutting it. No, my avenue to thinking Beane is smart is through his thinking ahead when he accumulated draft picks, put aside Tre money, and left some Josh money on the table, and only drafted one WR. That all makes sense when he trades for a good WR. A WR room featuring a rookie, $8M WR2/3, and Shakir is mind-blowingly poor. Getting into the weeds a little bit on the cap piece, the salary can be manipulated once they are brought on board. For instance last years salary of DHop is listed as $1.8M in spotrac. Games can be played with distributing the cost over multiple years. And if we got a WR for multiple years, the offensive playmakers are set. Josh- multiple, Cook 2 yrs more, Kincaid 4yrs, Shakir 2, K Coleman 4, Samuel 3, new WR multiple, backup RB 4. They don't need 2025 cap on offense playmakers. We'll see if Shaw changes his tune once Beane pulls the trigger and gets a real WR in here. Then you can say, even in this youth transition Beane improved the WR room. That's a good GM. Are you 100% Beane is going to trade for a WR vs going with Coleman developing into a #1 and spreading the ball around this year? 4 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: Would you change your tune if he doesn’t make a trade and the Bills are once again a playoff team? I just don't see a trade coming. Amd yes make the playoffs with Josh still putting up top QB numbers. Quote
Einstein's Dog Posted May 16 Posted May 16 8 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: Would you change your tune if he doesn’t make a trade and the Bills are once again a playoff team? No, that's not the barometer for Beane's performance. Beane supplies the talent to the coaches. The Bills almost didn't make the playoffs last year and I wasn't blaming Beane. Quote
oldmanfan Posted May 16 Posted May 16 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said: No, that's not the barometer for Beane's performance. Beane supplies the talent to the coaches. The Bills almost didn't make the playoffs last year and I wasn't blaming Beane. No. Of course you wouldn’t change your tune. What if Coleman goes for 1000 yards? If Shaw would have to change his tune, what would cause you to change your tune? Fair is fair after all. Edited May 16 by oldmanfan Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.