THE ROCKPILE REVIEW - Receivers are a Dime a Dozen

[Einstein's Dog]

8 minutes ago, SoonerBillsFan said:

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?

I just don't see a trade coming. Amd yes make the playoffs with Josh still putting up top QB numbers.

Actually I see trading for a WR as a way to develop Coleman.  Without a trade we're throwing him in there.

 

I do want to spread the ball around.  Having another good WR will help to do that.  Having Aiyuk or Metcalf along with Coleman on the field will open things up for Shakir/Kincaid/Samuel underneath.

[oldmanfan]

4 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

Actually I see trading for a WR as a way to develop Coleman.  Without a trade we're throwing him in there.

 

I do want to spread the ball around.  Having another good WR will help to do that.  Having Aiyuk or Metcalf along with Coleman on the field will open things up for Shakir/Kincaid/Samuel underneath.

My fear is you get a guy that is like Diggs and demands X number of touches and complains if he doesn’t get them.  A guy like that can diminish development of the rest of the WR group.

 

Brady’s offense will ask Josh to go to the open guy.

Edited May 16 by oldmanfan

[Einstein's Dog]

5 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

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.

Well, I expect and want Coleman to be good.  Coleman is slated to be an important piece even in my world where we trade for a WR.

 

So, I guess if we don't trade for another WR and Hollins gets a 1,000  I'll change my tune and think Beane did a good job and Shaw was right any JAG will do.

[SoonerBillsFan]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

My fear is you get a guy that is like Diggs and demands X number of touches and complains if he doesn’t get them.  A guy like that can diminish development of the rest of the WR group.

 

Brady’s offense will ask Josh to go to the open guy.

100%

5 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

Actually I see trading for a WR as a way to develop Coleman.  Without a trade we're throwing him in there.

 

I do want to spread the ball around.  Having another good WR will help to do that.  Having Aiyuk or Metcalf along with Coleman on the field will open things up for Shakir/Kincaid/Samuel underneath.

Sending you a pm

 

[BillsVet]

It's pretty simple.  Bills have dramatically under-allocated draft picks and UFA dollars to the position the past 7-8 offseasons.  This, ergo, somehow becomes how the position isn't really that valuable to align with what the "team" has done.  Not surprised people arrive at that take to deflect from what the team decided.    

 

This issue at WR will become even more noticeable in September and continue the whole season, whereupon people will forget theoretical discussions about the value of WR's in the 2024 NFL and wonder why the heck McBeane don't invest there.  

 

 

 

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

 

This issue at WR will become even more noticeable in September and continue the whole season, whereupon people will forget theoretical discussions about the value of WR's in the 2024 NFL and wonder why the heck McBeane don't invest there.  

 

 

That is my worry. That we get through 2024 and still think "our biggest need in round of the draft is a wide receiver." And 2025 looks at this stage like a really good pass rushing group and should be the ideal time for the Bills to finally find a stud edge rusher. But if the hole is still there on offense.....

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

It's pretty simple.  Bills have dramatically under-allocated draft picks and UFA dollars to the position the past 7-8 offseasons.  This, ergo, somehow becomes how the position isn't really that valuable to align with what the "team" has done.  Not surprised people arrive at that take to deflect from what the team decided.    

 

This issue at WR will become even more noticeable in September and continue the whole season, whereupon people will forget theoretical discussions about the value of WR's in the 2024 NFL and wonder why the heck McBeane don't invest there.  

 

 

 

They traded for Diggs.  Drafted guys like Zay Jones and Gabe and now Coleman.  Brought in FAs like Beasley and Brown and Sanders and a number of others.  Drafted backs that could pass catch like Moss and Cook and now Davis.  Spent a first round on a pass catching TE on Kincaid and a lower pick on Knox.  During this time they’ve also been working on upgrading the O line for Josh.
 

 

[Beck Water]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

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.  

 

Yes, as the league stands today, you're overstating the case.

 

I don't understand the quality fact and analysis basis of saying that there is "nothing much about St. Brown or Kupp that allows them to demand targets, either". 

 

I would agree that neither St Brown nor Kupp appear to be diva-type WR, but typically when a guy gets that many targets, there's indeed something about him that's demanding them - he's getting open and/or he's demonstrated his ability to make contested catches or catches in traffic.  They're getting the targets, not just because they're somehow in the "right place at the right time", but because they've demonstrated they have the physical and mental abilities to deserve those targets.  They aren't just "dime a dozen" guys who showed up in the right place at the right time and could be replaced by any of 11 other receivers.

 

I'm not arguing that Coleman (dark horse), Kincaid, Samuel, or Shakir could not become 1000 yd receivers - in fact, I devoutly hope that you're right, and one or more of them do.  But the fact of the matter is, when it comes to Samuel and Shakir, they have had opportunity in the league and have not demonstrated the ability to do so.  Samuel in his 8 year career has shown himself to be a dependable slot and gadget guy who can line up outside at times, and claim close to 100 targets a season in 60-ish % of the snaps, on the regular.  Shakir has advanced to claim 50% of the snaps, and I thought he took a big jump last season in his route-running and his ability to release, but he just hasn't he hasn't shown signs of what Kupp or St Brown did their initial years in the league.  Could he be a slow developer, sure.  He did come from a lower level of competition at Boise State, with a lot to learn.

 

Kincaid showed flashes.  He is so smooth, he has great hands, he runs nice routes.  Of anyone on the team, I have the highest hopes for him.  The question is: how will the Bills use him?  He had 91 targets and 9 Y/R last year.  It's hard to break 1000 yds with that.  He'd need like 140-ish targets.  I was told that Utah used him differently, on deeper routes, and he did well.

 

Time will tell I guess.

As far as whether the Bills will have >4000 yds passing this season, well, the Chiefs did last year - 4,183 to be exact.  And, they did it without a 1000 yd receiver, though Kelce and Rice came close.   But again, the fact is, they weren't an elite passing offense last season until near the end and the playoffs.  Their defense and run game carried them.

 

[GoBills808]

4 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Yes, as the league stands today, you're overstating the case.

 

I don't understand the quality fact and analysis basis of saying that there is "nothing much about St. Brown or Kupp that allows them to demand targets, either". 

 

I would agree that neither St Brown nor Kupp appear to be diva-type WR, but typically when a guy gets that many targets, there's indeed something about him that's demanding them - he's getting open and/or he's demonstrated his ability to make contested catches or catches in traffic.  They're getting the targets, not just because they're somehow in the "right place at the right time", but because they've demonstrated they have the physical and mental abilities to deserve those targets.  They aren't just "dime a dozen" guys who showed up in the right place at the right time and could be replaced by any of 11 other receivers.

 

I'm not arguing that Coleman (dark horse), Kincaid, Samuel, or Shakir could not become 1000 yd receivers - in fact, I devoutly hope that you're right, and one or more of them do.  But the fact of the matter is, when it comes to Samuel and Shakir, they have had opportunity in the league and have not demonstrated the ability to do so.  Samuel in his 8 year career has shown himself to be a dependable slot and gadget guy who can line up outside at times, and claim close to 100 targets a season in 60-ish % of the snaps, on the regular.  Shakir has advanced to claim 50% of the snaps, and I thought he took a big jump last season in his route-running and his ability to release, but he just hasn't he hasn't shown signs of what Kupp or St Brown did their initial years in the league.  Could he be a slow developer, sure.  He did come from a lower level of competition at Boise State, with a lot to learn.

 

Kincaid showed flashes.  He is so smooth, he has great hands, he runs nice routes.  Of anyone on the team, I have the highest hopes for him.  The question is: how will the Bills use him?  He had 91 targets and 9 Y/R last year.  It's hard to break 1000 yds with that.  He'd need like 140-ish targets.  I was told that Utah used him differently, on deeper routes, and he did well.

 

Time will tell I guess.

As far as whether the Bills will have >4000 yds passing this season, well, the Chiefs did last year - 4,183 to be exact.  And, they did it without a 1000 yd receiver, though Kelce and Rice came close.   But again, the fact is, they weren't an elite passing offense last season until near the end and the playoffs.  Their defense and run game carried them.

 

saying there's nothing about Kupp that demands targets is just proof you don't watch football outside bills games

[Beck Water]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

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. 

 

Obviously, if St Brown were projected as a league leading receiver, he wouldn't have been drafted in the 4th round.  But as has been pointed out, the draft is no sure thing.  Players who teams grade lower, outperform players projected to be better every year.  That doesn't mean they're a "dime a dozen", it means something about them was over- or under-weighted.

 

When you put up height, weight and 40 time and ask "what physical talent does he have that makes him elite?", it appears as though you believe height, weight, and speed are Where It's At for talent.

 

When the Bills WR got together in Florida in the 2020 off season after the Diggs trade, Dion Dawkins said some thing to the effect of "until I watched Stefon Diggs that day, I had no idea a human being could be that good at football".   Diggs (6 feet, 195 lbs, 4.5s 40) had at the time, elite physical abilities to deceive a DB with his hips and feet, to knock off DB hands with physicality, to run crisp and deceptive breaks, and to change speed during his routes so that good angles become bad.

 

It's not his size weight and speed, it's how he is able to use them.  And that's true of most of the elite WR in the league.

 

Yes, the quality of the OC, the QB, and the other receivers also matter, but it's like cooking - the chef still needs quality foods.

 

13 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

saying there's nothing about Kupp that demands targets is just proof you don't watch football outside bills games

 

Just to be clear, by "you" here, you're not referring to myself, yes?  Because I'm certainly not saying that.

 

(I would say the same goes for St Brown)

Edited May 16 by Beck Water

[Rampant Buffalo]

5 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

My point was not that every guy can be a star receiver.  My point is that the kind of guys who increasingly are putting up big numbers are yardage collection guys, not overwhelming physical talents.   Kupp and St. Brown looked like Shakir until they more nicely into the system and started getting more targets.  The Bills now have three guys - Shakir, Samuel, and Coleman - who could be yardage collectors.   They all feature good route running, good hands, and good run after catch talent.   

 

These guys are all over the league, and they keep coming out of college.  

 

And they're better than Beasley.  Beas, like Edelman, was exceptionally valuable less than ten yards off the line of scrimmage.   They made plays downfield occasionally, but where they sparkled was with their ability to separate off the line.  The yardage collectors are different in that they're more adept at running the entire route tree.  Yardage collectors may not separate as well as Beas and Edelman, but they get open by being intelligent route runners.  They're more valuable than Beas and Edelman.  

 

And the most important point about the yardage collectors is that the they don't have to be freak athletes, like a Justin Jefferson.  They're freak athletes, to be sure, in terms of quickness, brains, etc., but they aren't physically dominant.   That's important, because that makes them more easily replaceable.  When the Patriots lost Welker, Edelman stepped right in.  Now, it's not always the case that you'll have an equally good talent waiting in the wings, but you can always have a guy who fits the profile who can move into the role and you can see how he does.  No team has a potential Justin Jefferson on the practice squad waiting to take the place of the real Justin Jefferson. 

 

It seems to be working in the same way for the Bills at running back.  Draft a Singletary, then draft a Moss, then draft a Cook, then draft a Davis.   If one works out, play him.  If he doesn't, move on and get another one.   Chiefs' running backs room looks the same.  And their receiver room does, too. 

 

And, by the way, several people have said the Chiefs aren't using the dime-a-dozen approach because they have a Hall of Fame TE.   That's true, but Kelce also is a yardage collector.   Gronk overpowered defenses at tight end.   Kelce doesn't.   He's big and breaks some tackles occasionally, but he's not unguardable like Gronk was.   Kelce is a smart route runner with good hands and some after the catch ability.   He happened to come in a different body type than Kupp and St. Brown and Samuel (Curtis) and Samuel (Deebo), but he plays the same game.  And that's what the Bills hope to have in Kincaid, too.  

 

I think you and I are seeing this differently. Here's how I see it.

 

Suppose a GM says the following: "You know something? The guys we have at RB are okay. Not great. Just okay. You know something else? If we had a top 5 RB, I'd bet he'd get a full yard per carry more than the guys we've got now." So that GM goes out and drafts a top 5 RB. They give him 20 - 25 carries per game; causing that team to generate an additional 20 - 25 yards of offense per game.

 

Now look at the Bills' recent playoff loss to the Chiefs. Bills receivers had 160 yards of drops. If the Bills had had the exact same WRs they'd had, except with better hands, that's an additional 160 yards of offense. Moreover, Bills' receivers had great difficulty gaining separation. If they could have done a better job there, that's additional offensive yardage you're adding, over and above the 160. At least in that game, improving the WR position would have generated an order of magnitude greater yardage than you'd typically expect from improving the RB position.

 

I realize that most games aren't like this. But if reasonably good receivers are a dime a dozen, I'll gladly donate one of my own dimes to avoid a nightmarish collapse at the WR position, such as the one we just endured. I have a dime right here, and I'm looking at it right now. 

 

[Shaw66]

29 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Yes, as the league stands today, you're overstating the case.

 

I don't understand the quality fact and analysis basis of saying that there is "nothing much about St. Brown or Kupp that allows them to demand targets, either". 

 

I would agree that neither St Brown nor Kupp appear to be diva-type WR, but typically when a guy gets that many targets, there's indeed something about him that's demanding them - he's getting open and/or he's demonstrated his ability to make contested catches or catches in traffic.  They're getting the targets, not just because they're somehow in the "right place at the right time", but because they've demonstrated they have the physical and mental abilities to deserve those targets.  They aren't just "dime a dozen" guys who showed up in the right place at the right time and could be replaced by any of 11 other receivers.

 

I'm not arguing that Coleman (dark horse), Kincaid, Samuel, or Shakir could not become 1000 yd receivers - in fact, I devoutly hope that you're right, and one or more of them do.  But the fact of the matter is, when it comes to Samuel and Shakir, they have had opportunity in the league and have not demonstrated the ability to do so.  Samuel in his 8 year career has shown himself to be a dependable slot and gadget guy who can line up outside at times, and claim close to 100 targets a season in 60-ish % of the snaps, on the regular.  Shakir has advanced to claim 50% of the snaps, and I thought he took a big jump last season in his route-running and his ability to release, but he just hasn't he hasn't shown signs of what Kupp or St Brown did their initial years in the league.  Could he be a slow developer, sure.  He did come from a lower level of competition at Boise State, with a lot to learn.

 

Kincaid showed flashes.  He is so smooth, he has great hands, he runs nice routes.  Of anyone on the team, I have the highest hopes for him.  The question is: how will the Bills use him?  He had 91 targets and 9 Y/R last year.  It's hard to break 1000 yds with that.  He'd need like 140-ish targets.  I was told that Utah used him differently, on deeper routes, and he did well.

 

Time will tell I guess.

As far as whether the Bills will have >4000 yds passing this season, well, the Chiefs did last year - 4,183 to be exact.  And, they did it without a 1000 yd receiver, though Kelce and Rice came close.   But again, the fact is, they weren't an elite passing offense last season until near the end and the playoffs.  Their defense and run game carried them.

 

This is really good.  It's a good discussion of lots of technically relevant stuff.  Thanks. 

 

Yes, as an example, Kupp has some special skill.   And Kelce.   Their special skill is that they play the game with supreme intelligence.   They don't seem to have any physical skill that stands out; what makes them stand out is that running almost any route tree, they can perceive the correct options, thinking along with the QB, and they have good physical skills to move where they have to move and to catch the ball.  And those guys are very valuable in a disciplined offensive environment, where smart coaches are actually creating circumstances for those guys to read and react.   

 

I am not saying Shakir or Samuel is about to become Kupp or St. Brown.  I'm saying they all establish their value to the team by being committed to playing a team game - everyone blocks, everyone runs his routes professionally, everyone catches the ball as they should.  That's the difference.   Our view of Diggs was that he was and had to play like the lead dog.  My view of the Bills' receiver room now is that it's full of team players, and a leader will emerge. 

 

And my view generally is that more teams play football with that style, the value of receivers in free agency will fall.   Not their importance; receivers are always going to be important.  But their value.   

 

I fully get that I could be partially or even completely wrong about this.  It's just the way it looks to me.   

[FireChans]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

That is my worry. That we get through 2024 and still think "our biggest need in round of the draft is a wide receiver." And 2025 looks at this stage like a really good pass rushing group and should be the ideal time for the Bills to finally find a stud edge rusher. But if the hole is still there on offense.....

I think that's a guarantee.

 

I mean, we've been discussing about doing more at the boundary for how many seasons now?

[DrMaxPower]

I think there may be something to the overall theory but I think you're getting ahead of yourself a bit.

 

Paying $25-60 million for WR 1/2 severely handicaps your ability to build the rest of your team. Doubly so if you're already paying a QB.

 

It seems like almost every draft the last few years has been a 'strong' class. What, 4 of the last 5 years at this point? People are already talking about next year's WRs. The college game has changed and they are churning out WR talent like crazy. Eventually it becomes the new norm that you can re-fill your WR room through the draft and spend elsewhere.

 

It isn't there yet, but I would not be surprised if in 5 years this is what the 'smart' teams are doing. Everybody is looking for the next advantage to exploit, the next opportunity to be the forward thinker on the cutting edge. I could see it happening at WR with the explosion of both salaries and new talent.

[Shaw66]

41 minutes ago, Rampant Buffalo said:

 

I think you and I are seeing this differently. Here's how I see it.

 

Suppose a GM says the following: "You know something? The guys we have at RB are okay. Not great. Just okay. You know something else? If we had a top 5 RB, I'd bet he'd get a full yard per carry more than the guys we've got now." So that GM goes out and drafts a top 5 RB. They give him 20 - 25 carries per game; causing that team to generate an additional 20 - 25 yards of offense per game.

 

Now look at the Bills' recent playoff loss to the Chiefs. Bills receivers had 160 yards of drops. If the Bills had had the exact same WRs they'd had, except with better hands, that's an additional 160 yards of offense. Moreover, Bills' receivers had great difficulty gaining separation. If they could have done a better job there, that's additional offensive yardage you're adding, over and above the 160. At least in that game, improving the WR position would have generated an order of magnitude greater yardage than you'd typically expect from improving the RB position.

 

I realize that most games aren't like this. But if reasonably good receivers are a dime a dozen, I'll gladly donate one of my own dimes to avoid a nightmarish collapse at the WR position, such as the one we just endured. I have a dime right here, and I'm looking at it right now. 

 

That just isn't the point.  The point is that the philosophy that I think is taking over is a philosophy that says, "a well functioning passing team will outproduce a group of receivers who have a perceived #1."   That philosophy says that every receiver on a well functioning passing team will do multiple things well, and the offense will not depend on him to produce all that he is capable of producing individually.  That is, the system may need him do more in the offense than go deep or whatever it is that makes him so special, and as he does those other things, his value based on his special skills drops.  But from the team point of view, the production is better with the team approach.   (And, by the way, this teamwork-is-better-than-individual-stars philosophy is very much, maybe completely in-tune with McDermott's approach.   So, it seems quite plausible that McDermott's view of the receiver room is what I'm describing.   He may be really excited about Kincaid, Samuel, Shakir, Coleman, Cook, Knox and whoever else steps up with contributions.)

 

Again, what do I know?  It just seems that way to me.    

 

 

[Beck Water]

50 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

That just isn't the point.  The point is that the philosophy that I think is taking over is a philosophy that says, "a well functioning passing team will outproduce a group of receivers who have a perceived #1."   That philosophy says that every receiver on a well functioning passing team will do multiple things well, and the offense will not depend on him to produce all that he is capable of producing individually.  That is, the system may need him do more in the offense than go deep or whatever it is that makes him so special, and as he does those other things, his value based on his special skills drops.  But from the team point of view, the production is better with the team approach.   (And, by the way, this teamwork-is-better-than-individual-stars philosophy is very much, maybe completely in-tune with McDermott's approach.   So, it seems quite plausible that McDermott's view of the receiver room is what I'm describing.   He may be really excited about Kincaid, Samuel, Shakir, Coleman, Cook, Knox and whoever else steps up with contributions.)

 

Again, what do I know?  It just seems that way to me.    

 

OK, so I think there are a couple of things here.

 

The first is, I think that your idea of McDermott's view is absolutely correct.  I think he 100% has the philosophy "teamwork is better than individual stars" and values generalists - a Taron Johnson who can cover the slot receivers like a DB, but who can also play the run like an undersized LB; a Poyer who can play interchangeably between free and slot safety, but also come up into the box and both cover like a slot corner/light linebacker or play the run (the way they substituted for Milano, right?  play Dodson against the run but then bring Poyer up to cover and backfill safety with Rapp).

 

So I want to introduce two contrary notions for you to chew over:

1) a guy like Milano or Taron Johnson, generalists who can play sideline to sideline and cover but is also a thumper against the run and can penetrate into the backfield, are far from "dime a dozen" - it may be actually harder to find and develop a guy like that, than it is to find a guy who has one great skill.  That may mean the team winds up paying these guys, not like a top dollar star because the market doesn't value their position at top dollar - but significantly more than 'replacement cost' for longer, just because of that challenge in finding and developing them

2) when it's crunch time, in the playoffs, these generalists may fall off at specific skills leaving holes the opponent can exploit. So then you need some guys who are elite at what they do, period.   I think McDermott reluctantly came around to that idea on defense, and that's why we saw the team taking some rifle shots such as paying Von Miller the Big Bucks in free agency and re-upping Tre White at a good price.  Of course, we all know how that came out, with injuries.

 

So now let's apply that to your idea that "every receiver on a well functioning passing team will do multiple things well".   In principle, it's fantastic.  But in practice, receivers do tend to have specialized sets of skills where they're elite, and other skills where they're good, or maybe OK.  Justin Jefferson, for example, started his career with the Vikings as a downfield threat averaging 16 yds per reception.  Then he supercharged himself into a league leader in 2022 by developing into a complete receiver who could play any position including from the slot.  Is he a great slot receiver, no, but he can play from the slot well enough that the defense has to worry about it, and that's how he went from 88 receptions/1400 yds to 128 receptions/1800 yds at a cost of 2 yds/reception (from 16 down to 14).  So he would be an example, perhaps, of exactly what you're talking about here: a guy where the system needed him to do more than go deep and who wound up with better production from that 'generalist' approach.

 

Back to the Bills: we have two receivers in Samuel and Shakir who can technically line up anywhere and run any route, and a very promising TE who was used short last season but may be able to do more than that.  But that doesn't mean they have elite or even very good skills everywhere.  Shakir may be able to stretch the field vertically if the refs are throwing DH and DPI laundry and he's not facing the opponent's #1 corner, but when it comes to crunch time, in the playoffs, it may become a hole the opponent can exploit.   We don't have that guy who can face the other team's #1 corner and double coverage and still get open.  The thing is, with Diggs on the team last season, it appeared we still didn't - that's what Greg Cosell described as "the reality on film".

 

That's the Achilles Heel of the "every receiver on a well functioning passing team will do multiple things well":

1) it's actually harder to find and develop guys of whom that's truth.  There are plenty of guys who think they can, and long for a broader role, but can't (Beasley thought he could play downfield and talked about that when he came to Buffalo.  Spoiler: against a top defense, no, he really couldn't).

2) At crunch time,  you may wind up with several guys who do things well, but no one who is elite.  No freakazoids.  And that may be enough to win, but not enough for a Championship.

Edited May 16 by Beck Water

[Beck Water]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

This is really good.  It's a good discussion of lots of technically relevant stuff.  Thanks. 

 

Yes, as an example, Kupp has some special skill.   And Kelce.   Their special skill is that they play the game with supreme intelligence.   They don't seem to have any physical skill that stands out; what makes them stand out is that running almost any route tree, they can perceive the correct options, thinking along with the QB, and they have good physical skills to move where they have to move and to catch the ball.  And those guys are very valuable in a disciplined offensive environment, where smart coaches are actually creating circumstances for those guys to read and react.   

 

I am not saying Shakir or Samuel is about to become Kupp or St. Brown.  I'm saying they all establish their value to the team by being committed to playing a team game - everyone blocks, everyone runs his routes professionally, everyone catches the ball as they should.  That's the difference.   Our view of Diggs was that he was and had to play like the lead dog.  My view of the Bills' receiver room now is that it's full of team players, and a leader will emerge. 

 

And my view generally is that more teams play football with that style, the value of receivers in free agency will fall.   Not their importance; receivers are always going to be important.  But their value.   

 

I fully get that I could be partially or even completely wrong about this.  It's just the way it looks to me.   

 

I'd just like to point out an apparent contradiction.  You say that Kupp and Kelce don't have any physical skill that stands out.  Then you point out that they have "good physical skills to move where they have to move and to catch the ball".

 

It seems from some of what you've written that you equate elite physical skills with measurables like size and speed.  My point is that elite physical skills come in other forms.  Kelce has (or had) elite physical skills - he has the fluidity and ability to cut on his routes of a receiver, and elite hands/ ball tracking perception, at the size of a TE.  That means among other things, he can push off subtly and get away with it, and then of course that he's almost always open a foot over the DB's best vertical.  Diggs in 2020/2021 had elite physical skills - not speed, but burst; ability to cut sharply and juke the defensive back; ball tracking skill and hands.

 

Those are the elite physical skills I see that stand out in Kupp and in Amon-Ra St Brown and several other top receivers.

 

 

[Shaw66]

10 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

OK, so I think there are a couple of things here.

 

The first is, I think that your idea of McDermott's view is absolutely correct.  I think he 100% has the philosophy "teamwork is better than individual stars" and values generalists - a Taron Johnson who can cover the slot receivers like a DB, but who can also play the run like an undersized LB; a Poyer who can play interchangeably between free and slot safety, but also come up into the box and both cover like a slot corner/light linebacker or play the run (the way they substituted for Milano, right?  play Dodson against the run but then bring Poyer up to cover and backfill safety with Rapp).

 

So I want to introduce two contrary notions for you to chew over:

1) a guy like Milano or Taron Johnson, generalists who can play sideline to sideline and cover but is also a thumper against the run and can penetrate into the backfield, are far from "dime a dozen" - it may be actually harder to find and develop a guy like that, than it is to find a guy who has one great skill.  That may mean the team winds up paying these guys, not like a top dollar star because the market doesn't value their position at top dollar - but significantly more than 'replacement cost' for longer, just because of that challenge in finding and developing them

2) when it's crunch time, in the playoffs, these generalists may fall off at specific skills leaving holes the opponent can exploit. So then you need some guys who are elite at what they do, period.   I think McDermott reluctantly came around to that idea on defense, and that's why we saw the team taking some rifle shots such as paying Von Miller the Big Bucks in free agency and re-upping Tre White at a good price.  Of course, we all know how that came out, with injuries.

 

So now let's apply that to your idea that "every receiver on a well functioning passing team will do multiple things well".   In principle, it's fantastic.  But in practice, receivers do tend to have specialized sets of skills where they're elite, and other skills where they're good, or maybe OK.  Justin Jefferson, for example, started his career with the Vikings as a downfield threat averaging 16 yds per reception.  Then he supercharged himself into a league leader in 2022 by developing into a complete receiver who could play any position including from the slot.  Is he a great slot receiver, no, but he can play from the slot well enough that the defense has to worry about it, and that's how he went from 88 receptions/1400 yds to 128 receptions/1800 yds at a cost of 2 yds/reception (from 16 down to 14).  So he would be an example, perhaps, of exactly what you're talking about here: a guy where the system needed him to do more than go deep and who wound up with better production from that 'generalist' approach.

 

Back to the Bills: we have two receivers in Samuel and Shakir who can technically line up anywhere and run any route, and a very promising TE who was used short last season but may be able to do more than that.  But that doesn't mean they have elite or even very good skills everywhere.  Shakir may be able to stretch the field vertically if the refs are throwing DH and DPI laundry and he's not facing the opponent's #1 corner, but when it comes to crunch time, in the playoffs, it may become a hole the opponent can exploit.   We don't have that guy who can face the other team's #1 corner and double coverage and still get open.  The thing is, with Diggs on the team last season, it appeared we still didn't - that's what Greg Cosell described as "the reality on film".

 

That's the Achilles Heel of the "every receiver on a well functioning passing team will do multiple things well":

1) it's actually harder to find and develop guys of whom that's truth.  There are plenty of guys who think they can, and long for a broader role, but can't (Beasley thought he could play downfield and talked about that when he came to Buffalo.  Spoiler: against a top defense, no, he really couldn't).

2) At crunch time,  you may wind up with several guys who do things well, but no one who is elite.  No freakazoids.  And that may be enough to win, but not enough for a Championship.

This all makes sense.  It's the argument on the other side.  I don't think that's where things are going, but it makes sense.   I will point out, however, that you stud receiver also might not show up in the playoffs, so the fact that team system may fail cuts both ways. 

 

And I think the Milano argument is incorrect.  Milano, or Von Miller, play positions where although some teamwork is necessary, the positions are primarily about individual skills.  They play off the players around them to some extent, but mostly it's about their individual makeup.  The receivers are in part about choreography - the routes they run, the options they need to make, releases off the line out of bunch formations.   

[Rampant Buffalo]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

That just isn't the point.  The point is that the philosophy that I think is taki

ng over is a philosophy that says, "a well functioning passing team will outproduce a group of receivers who have a perceived #1."   That philosophy says that every receiver on a well functioning passing team will do multiple things well, and the offense will not depend on him to produce all that he is capable of producing individually.  That is, the system may need him do more in the offense than go deep or whatever it is that makes him so special, and as he does those other things, his value based on his special skills drops.  But from the team point of view, the production is better with the team approach.   (And, by the way, this teamwork-is-better-than-individual-stars philosophy is very much, maybe completely in-tune with McDermott's approach.   So, it seems quite plausible that McDermott's view of the receiver room is what I'm describing.   He may be really excited about Kincaid, Samuel, Shakir, Coleman, Cook, Knox and whoever else steps up with contributions.)

 

Again, what do I know?  It just seems that way to me.    

 

 

 

Back in the '90s, there were several elite WRs. Jerry Rice. Michael Irvin. Andre Reed. Herman Moore. Also Sterling Sharpe, of the Green Bay Packers. When Sharpe went down with a career-ending injury, it was felt that it would hurt Brett Favre considerably. It didn't. If anything Favre improved, by spreading the ball out more, instead of forcing it to a triple-covered Sharpe. That could be seen as an example of the point you're making, albeit an example from several decades ago.

 

Hypothetically, let's say there's truth to what you wrote in the quoted post, and that teams are or soon will be seeking to have several good receivers, instead of a perceived #1. A situation like that wouldn't make WRs into the next RBs, at least not for me. Instead, they'd be like offensive linemen. Imagine two OLs: one with 5 good players who work together, the other with a star LT and then a bunch of scrubs. Which OL do you think will be more effective? To me it's obvious that the OL with five good players will be more effective, even though none of its players are elite.

 

To continue the metaphor: if you have an OL of good players, adding an elite LT to that mix can definitely help. That's why the best LTs get drafted high, and why the best LTs get paid. If you have a group of good WRs, adding an elite WR can make a significant improvement. There are more WRs who are merely good, than there are WRs who are elite. But merely good WRs are not the norm, as demonstrated with the Bills' experience with the WR position. If you have 3 - 4 guys at WR who are good but not great, you're doing better than most teams.

 

[folz]

Good topic/discussion...

 

I agree with a lot of what Shaw posted (especially about the gap closing between the elite WRs and the very good WRs), but I wonder if the one caveat to the overall theory is having an elite QB. Most of the examples that I think of when I think of teams with non-elite WR corps still getting it done, I think of Brady and the Patriots; Rodgers and the Packers, Mahomes and KC.

 

All three (and Josh) are elite QBs. Plus Brady had Gronk, Mahomes had Kelce, and Rodgers...well he didn't really have a stud after Adams left (but then he didn't win a Super Bowl either, they were good but not great). 

 

So, if you have an elite QB (who can raise the play of your WR corps) and one elite playmaker (could be a TE or maybe even a RB rather than a WR), then you can still have a top offense. Since the QB is elite, he can make any throw, spread the ball around, hit tighter windows, ball placement, etc. So, your receivers maybe don't need to be elite, as long as they fit a role and have good hands (which we have been lacking of late---Shakir, Kincaid, Coleman, and Samuel all have good hands---Davis, Mckenzie, Knox, and even Diggs of late had much lower catch percentages, etc.). Can Dalton be our elite playmaker?

 

 

Conversely though, if your QB isn't elite (more middle of the pack), the top-end WR may become much more important. They are needed to help create more opportunities for the QB, because he can't create as many on his own...due to whatever he is lacking (arm strength, processing speed, elusiveness in the pocket, whatever). Or maybe if you have a rookie/young QB, you still want that top-end WR as a security blanket and to help teach the young guy, etc.

 

So, it may just be a team-by-team basis based on the level of confidence in your QB. Teams with top-5 to top-10 QBs may feel they can plug and play WRs, while teams with middle- to low-end QBs want that elite, playmaking WR(s) to help get open quickly, have the size or speed advantage, etc. to help their QB.

 

So, I'm thinking that yes, there is a trend of some sort, but also, maybe it's only at the top of the league? Just a thought.