Final WRs on Roster

[BillsFanForever19]

13 hours ago, BullBuchanan said:

I have Hamler as a stronger consideration than Hollins as we don't have a kick returner on the roster right now. They have Shakir penciled in on the official depth chart right now, but I'd be floored if that's the plan as I expect him to be a massive part of the offense. Hamler has experience doing it in college and a handful of tries in the pros. If he makes the roster, i expect it to be for that reason. If he's not the KR, Then I think they keep shorter instead.

I understand Hollins plays a different role than MVS, but signing MVS will likely reduce the opportunities that Hollins would get on the roster. in 6 professional seasons, Hollins has 1 year exceeding 251 yards receiving. I just think even a reserve should have a higher floor than that. I understand that the front office thinks that Trent Sherfield role is important, but there has to be a limit. It would be great is a guy could block, play special teams and actually contribute on offense if needed. I'm hoping Shorter (or even one of the UDFAs) is that guy

 

Daequan Hardy was almost exclusively Drafted as a Kick Returner. And if you're arguing lack of production as a reason to not keep Hollins, I haven't the foggiest how you can say Hamler should be a bigger consideration.

 

Hollins had 690 yards two seasons ago. Yes, last season, it was 251. But he was also playing on a PUTRID Falcons passing offense with a terrible QB and was hurt 4 games.

 

You point to Hollins only going over 251 once. But Hamler? He hasn't had 251 yards total *combined* in the last 3 seasons. He didn't play a single snap last season, put up 165 yards in 2022, 74 yards in 2021, and 381 yards in 2020. Hell, if you combine ALL of Hamler's yardage since entering the league in 2020 - it's less than what Hollins did in 2022 alone.

 

Mack Hollins was signed within the first couple days of Free Agency with a specific role in mind. He's often one of the first names Beane brings up when talking about the WR core. I think if you're hoping for Mack Hollins to be cut (for whatever reason), you're setting yourself up for disappointment.

Edited June 9 by BillsFanForever19

[Doc Brown]

On 6/5/2024 at 4:15 PM, Logic said:

Looking at the contract/guarantees given to the free agent WRs tells us that the first five you listed are roster locks. They're not cutting Hollins or MVS.

That leaves:

Claypool, Hamler, Shavers, Shorter, and Isabella

...fighting for the final one or two spots, depending on whether they keep six or seven WRs on the 53. As others have mentioned, health and special teams contributions will likely wind up being the deciding factors.

 

When they cut OJ Howard and ate $2.6m in dead camp my thinking about the importance of contract/guarantees when it came to roster spots.  I agree with your list but am not ruling out a surprise cut of Hollins or MVS.  

[Kirby Jackson]

16 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

I’m not sure if it’s bad or good. I’m just a bit shocked at how few Bills draft picks are in that list. If you remove Coleman, who again has yet to play a snap all of you have left is Shakir. Maybe that’s true of most position groups in the modern NFL 

They haven’t prioritized the position in the draft so it is a little unique to them. How many total receivers have been drafted since Beane got here? Coleman, Shakir, Davis, Shorter, Hodgins, McCloud and Proehl is the answer (I think). Prior to Coleman it was a 5th, 4th, 5th, 6th, 6th & 7th (if that list is right). They haven’t invested prime assets in the position. That’s why you get this group, which on paper is bottom 3 in the NFL. 

[eme123]

There is no sense ranking these guys in the traditional sense because the Bills plan appears to use WR by commitee (i.e Chiefs). None of these guys are going to command double teams or extra attention. I love Shakir but he is super clunky. Hes a guy that Josh is going to look for when the play breaks down. Coleman has some developing to do before he becomes a true #1. In fact i wouldnt be shocked if his playing time to start the year is really limited. So the FA’s we signed are going to be important. 

Edited June 9 by eme123
Miss type

[BillsFanForever19]

10 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

When they cut OJ Howard and ate $2.6m in dead camp my thinking about the importance of contract/guarantees when it came to roster spots.  I agree with your list but am not ruling out a surprise cut of Hollins or MVS.  

 

OJ Howard is the exception that everyone likes to try and make the rule.

 

If you can only point to one guaranteed money vet FA signing that was released by Beane in the same year - out of all of his guaranteed money signings, that data doesn't make for a very good argument. Possible? Yes. Likely? No, extremely unlikely.

Edited June 9 by BillsFanForever19

[Doc Brown]

44 minutes ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

OJ Howard is the exception that everyone likes to try and make the rule.

 

If you can only point to one guaranteed money vet FA signing that was released by Beane in the same year - out of all of his guaranteed money signings, that data doesn't make for a very good argument.

True but it just shows me they're willing to eat a little bit of dead cap if a player is as bad as Howard was in training camp/preseason.  If Hollins is horrible in preseason then they'd pry swallow his $1.1m in dead cap.  What's interesting about MVS's contract is if they were to cut him they added some void years so they wouldn't eat all that dead cap right away.

[dgrochester55]

Locks

 

1) Shakir

2) Samuel

3) Coleman

 

Likely

 

4) MVS

5) Hollins

 

Battling for last spot

 

6) Claypool/Hamler

 

Outside looking in

 

Shorter, Shavers, Isabella, UFDA WR's

 

MVS and Hollins aren't flashy but they are reliable veterans.  For them to be cut, you would need a combination of them performing poorly and one or two unproven receivers having a breakthrough

 

The last spot IMO is Claypool's to lose.  Hamler could surprise if he stays healthy. Isabella would likely be practice squad again.

 

While it is possible that Shorter, Shavers or the UDFA WR's might break through, they are unproven and would most likely end up on the practice squad unless they play well above the expected level and become the next Shakir.  They only way that I see them making the team otherwise are injuries or Claypool and Hamler both flopping.

 

 

Edited June 9 by dgrochester55

[BillsFanForever19]

2 hours ago, dgrochester55 said:

Locks

 

1) Shakir

2) Samuel

3) Coleman

 

Likely

 

4) MVS

5) Hollins

 

Battling for last spot

 

6) Claypool/Hamler

 

Outside looking in

 

Shorter, Shavers, Isabella, UFDA WR's

 

MVS and Hollins aren't flashy but they are reliable veterans.  For them to be cut, you would need a combination of them performing poorly and one or two unproven receivers having a breakthrough

 

The last spot IMO is Claypool's to lose.  Hamler could surprise if he stays healthy. Isabella would likely be practice squad again.

 

While it is possible that Shorter, Shavers or the UDFA WR's might break through, they are unproven and would most likely end up on the practice squad unless they play well above the expected level and become the next Shakir.  They only way that I see them making the team otherwise are injuries or Claypool and Hamler both flopping.

 

So many of you are so DRASTICALLY overrating Hamler's chances of making this roster.

 

He's a "Futures" guy now. Futures are lucky to even make the Practice Squad. He's a 5'9" 178 lb. abandoned 2nd Round Pick with under 650 yards total since entering the league in 2020, who when given his change of scenery second chance, was never even activated and discarded at the end of the year, will be almost two years removed from his last game at the start of the season, has had 2 torn ACL's, and hamstring issues.

 

He's on his 3rd team in under a year, brought in with other Practice Squad and UDFA level players. Shorter, being an undeveloped 5th Round investment, will have way more of a chance than Hamler.

 

Hamler is *clearly* on the outside looking in. He's this year's Andy Isabella. Someone who you all fall in love with because he has some speed and was once Drafted in Round 2, but ultimately has a ceiling of the Practice Squad - regardless of what he does with the 3rd team during the Pre-Season. And Andy Isabella didn't have as many issues as Hamler when he came here.

 

If he were looked at as any sort of commodity, we wouldn't have brought in 5 more WR's after acquiring him with only 4 spots vacated - who all have, at least, a much better shot at making the roster, if not guaranteed to.

 

I see almost no way he goes from cut on the Broncos after a 2nd Round investment, Practice Squad on the Colts without a single elevation, to on the 53 for us. It's either he shows something and comes back on the Practice Squad, or he's outright cut.

 

Of the 5 guys you list as not locks, he'll be the easiest to get back and by a wide margin. Being cut from 3 teams in a year doesn't lend itself to being signed to a 53 by another team, cold when it comes to their system.

 

Hell, I'd say it's more likely Andy Isabella or Tyrell Shavers makes the squad - entering year 2 in the system and not being injury prone.

Edited June 10 by BillsFanForever19

[BillsFanForever19]

3 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

True but it just shows me they're willing to eat a little bit of dead cap if a player is as bad as Howard was in training camp/preseason.  If Hollins is horrible in preseason then they'd pry swallow his $1.1m in dead cap.  What's interesting about MVS's contract is if they were to cut him they added some void years so they wouldn't eat all that dead cap right away.

 

MVS' contract was structured not to spread out the hit to make a cut easier, but out of necessity.

 

I think the plan was to sign one of the top remaining Outside WR's when Tre's money came in. But after Michael Gallup, Odell Beckham Jr., DJ Chark, and Zay Jones got scooped up before the money came and other teams started bringing MVS in for visits - we had to somehow make his contract work with the little money we had on hand.

 

Which meant we were forced to add void years to his deal to give him a higher guarantee, while still fitting it into our cap figure this year. Whether it's a hit that's spread out over years or all at once, it's over 2.5m in guarantees we're paying him either way.

[djp14150]

52 minutes ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

So many of you are so DRASTICALLY overrating Hamler's chances of making this roster.

 

He's a "Futures" guy now. Futures are lucky to even make the Practice Squad. He's a 5'9" 178 lb. abandoned 2nd Round Pick with under 650 yards total since entering the league in 2020, who when given his change of scenery second chance, was never even activated and discarded at the end of the year, will be almost two years removed from his last game at the start of the season, has had 2 torn ACL's, and hamstring issues.

 

He's on his 3rd team in under a year, brought in with other Practice Squad and UDFA level players. Shorter, being an undeveloped 5th Round investment, will have way more of a chance than Hamler.

 

Hamler is *clearly* on the outside looking in. He's this year's Andy Isabella. Someone who you all fall in love with because he has some speed and was once Drafted in Round 2, but ultimately has a ceiling of the Practice Squad - regardless of what he does with the 3rd team during the Pre-Season. And Andy Isabella didn't have as many issues as Hamler when he came here.

 

If he were looked at as any sort of commodity, we wouldn't have brought in 5 more WR's after acquiring him with only 4 spots vacated - who all have, at least, a much better shot at making the roster, if not guaranteed to.

 

I see almost no way he goes from cut on the Broncos after a 2nd Round investment, Practice Squad on the Colts without a single elevation, to on the 53 for us. It's either he shows something and comes back on the Practice Squad, or he's outright cut.

 

Of the 5 guys you list as not locks, he'll be the easiest to get back and by a wide margin. Being cut from 3 teams in a year doesn't lend itself to being signed to a 53 by another team, cold when it comes to their system.

 

Hell, I'd say it's more likely Andy Isabella or Tyrell Shavers makes the squad - entering year 2 in the system and not being injury prone.

 

if Hamler is  100% and has his speed he shouldn’t be taken lightly.  He also is still young, I think 24.

people forgot he was even signed

 

He may be a PS guy

 

Claypool has been on what 3 different teams yet folks have him on the roster.

 

I’ve been saying this is very wide open roster being

 

Coleman, Shakir, and Samuel are the only locks right now

 

2QB+3RB+FB/TE+9OL+3 TE+5WR=23 players 

9 DL+5LB+9DB=23 players

LS+P+K+Returner=4 players

50 players

3 wild cards based on injuries for in season IR, rookies/ young players who could get claimed , and extra depth

one of these spots could go to an additional WR. 
 

 

 

[BillsFanForever19]

4 hours ago, djp14150 said:

 

if Hamler is  100% and has his speed he shouldn’t be taken lightly.  He also is still young, I think 24.

people forgot he was even signed

 

He may be a PS guy

 

Claypool has been on what 3 different teams yet folks have him on the roster.

 

I’ve been saying this is very wide open roster being

 

Coleman, Shakir, and Samuel are the only locks right now

 

2QB+3RB+FB/TE+9OL+3 TE+5WR=23 players 

9 DL+5LB+9DB=23 players

LS+P+K+Returner=4 players

50 players

3 wild cards based on injuries for in season IR, rookies/ young players who could get claimed , and extra depth

one of these spots could go to an additional WR. 

 

 

The difference between Hamler and Claypool (beyond the size) is that he had multiple seasons over 860 yards each and was a talent that teams were not only acquiring - but trading assets for, even last year. He's never not been 53 man rostered and doesn't have an injury history, as opposed to Hamler who has a really dodgy one.

 

Hamler's a guy that hasn't had a total of even 650 yards in his entire career, entering Year 5. He's never had so much as a 400 yard season. He had 381 in 2020 and has amassed a total of 234 yards in the 3 years since combined. He was cut twice in under a year, without anyone interested in trading for him. The entire league could have taken him off the Practice Squad at any time last season for nothing and no one did.

 

To say that Claypool = Hamler as far as a prospect goes is simply inaccurate. Claypool has had multiple years of 850+ yards. He's proven he is capable of it. Hamler never has. Claypool is a bit of a reclamation project. Hamler has shown nothing to even reclaim.

 

And MVS and Hollins will be here. If you want to say they aren't a stone cold lock, that's not an insane thing to say. But MVS was signed to 2.55m guaranteed. Josh personally brought him to his home, told him he wants to play with him, and recruited him.

 

Hollins was signed within the first couple days of FA for his versatility and leadership, with a specific role in mind. He's a known commodity as a very good Special Teamer (at a time when we let a lot of our core go) and a very good down field blocker. He's one of the first guys Beane talks about when asked about the WR Room.

 

Again, you can say they aren't "stone cold locks". But they're very close and WAYYY more likely to be here than not. The idea that Hamler is going to play one of them off is an extremely unrealistic idea. 

Edited June 10 by BillsFanForever19

[Doc Brown]

3 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

MVS' contract was structured not to spread out the hit to make a cut easier, but out of necessity.

That's pry the reason but the only reason I bring it up is Beane did the same thing with Howard's contract with an added void year.  I just caution people not to read too much into the guarantees in Hollins's and MVS's contracts although like I said it's pry at least above 90% they both make the team.

[Doc]

Last year the Bills started off the season with 5 WRs so I'll say Coleman, Samuel, Shakir, MVS and Claypool. 

Edited June 10 by Doc

[BADOLBILZ]

 

I wouldn't press the pencil too hard writing Coleman down as WR1.

 

His range of potential outcomes also includes "inactive on game days"  or moved to the slot at the expense of Shakir and/or Samuel snaps.

 

 

[Doc Brown]

5 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

I wouldn't press the pencil too hard writing Coleman down as WR1.

 

His range of potential outcomes also includes "inactive on game days"  or moved to the slot at the expense of Shakir and/or Samuel snaps.

 

 

Could the range of potential outcomes be part of a trade package for Aiyuk or Metcalf?  I kid.  Kind of.

[GunnerBill]

5 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

That's pry the reason but the only reason I bring it up is Beane did the same thing with Howard's contract with an added void year.  I just caution people not to read too much into the guarantees in Hollins's and MVS's contracts although like I said it's pry at least above 90% they both make the team.

 

And people were indignant that offseason when some of us started to say Howard was not a lock. People including Sal C on WGR who only softened his stance in the final 48 hours before cutdowns when someone had clearly given him the wink he switched to "And I gotta tell you guys, I think OJ Howard could be in trouble here." Less than a week after basically ridiculing a fan who called in for saying the same thing. 

[BillsFanForever19]

36 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And people were indignant that offseason when some of us started to say Howard was not a lock. People including Sal C on WGR who only softened his stance in the final 48 hours before cutdowns when someone had clearly given him the wink he switched to "And I gotta tell you guys, I think OJ Howard could be in trouble here." Less than a week after basically ridiculing a fan who called in for saying the same thing. 

 

Again, though, you're making the one exception the rule. One time in all of the guaranteed signings doesn't make it likely. It just means it isn't a total impossibility.

Edited June 10 by BillsFanForever19

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

Again, though, you're making the one exception the rule. One time in all of the guaranteed signings doesn't make it likely. It just means it isn't a total impossibility.

 

I'm not. I am not saying because it happened to OJ Howard it is likely to happen again. What I am saying is it proves that if a FA signing stinks in camp a relatively small amount of guaranteed money won't stop the Bills making a decision.

[Doc]

12 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

That's pry the reason but the only reason I bring it up is Beane did the same thing with Howard's contract with an added void year.  I just caution people not to read too much into the guarantees in Hollins's and MVS's contracts although like I said it's pry at least above 90% they both make the team.

 

I'm not sure I'd say Hollins is 90% to make the roster, or even anything close to it, unless he looks like a stud.  His production over his career has been scant and mostly what you hear about him is his great attitude.  But he can do that on the PS and the $1.1M guaranteed he's getting will somewhat off-set the salary drop from being on the PS.

[YattaOkasan]

28 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

I'm not sure I'd say Hollins is 90% to make the roster, or even anything close to it, unless he looks like a stud.  His production over his career has been scant and mostly what you hear about him is his great attitude.  But he can do that on the PS and the $1.1M guaranteed he's getting will somewhat off-set the salary drop from being on the PS.

You think Hollins will come back to the PS?  I think the dude will get paid to play somewhere else.  Hes worthy of a roster spot in the NFL for ST alone.  Don't think he makes his way back to PS if he is cut.  3.6k snaps over 6 years is nothing to thumb your nose at.