I'm really starting to love this WR room. We quietly got better

[FireChans]

5 minutes ago, Rampant Buffalo said:

 

Well . . . not necessarily. Maybe Beane's thought process was the following:

 

If I stay at 28, my guy is Coleman. If I trade down from 28 to 33, I'm pretty sure Coleman will still be there. But let's say I'm wrong about that, and Coleman is gone. I've got some other WRs graded almost as highly as Coleman. If I trade down, my upside is guaranteed: I know I'm getting the extra picks. There probably won't be a downside: Coleman will probably still be there. But if there is a downside it will be small, because I'll be able to take some other WR with almost as good a grade as Coleman.

 

If Beane wasn’t that worried about the grade difference of Coleman and say McConkey or Legette, that kinda works against “Coleman was their guy,” to me.

[Bill from NYC]

4 hours ago, eball said:

Get some rest, Bill. This crusade has to be exhausting for you. 
 

Take your own advice. At some point you might not be so boring and actually make sense from time to time.

[Alphadawg7]

58 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I supported both the trade back and drafting Coleman. Exactly what happened was literally my dream scenario. Still I do not think WR was sufficiently addressed this offseason. In fact that's two years in a row that the Bills took my draft crush with their first pick. Still I wish they had done more.

 

For me the individual moves are secondary to the larger philosophy. My personal player preferences are just opinions. The idea that the Bills need to overinvest in pass catchers is, to me, a cold hard fact. I would have rather taken Worthy followed by Franklin than just Coleman alone, even though I liked Coleman better than both of those players, because the first scenario would have represented what I KNOW to be a necessary change in the teambuilding philosophy. Instead I fear this regime has learned nothing and is stubbornly continuing to prioritize the wrong positions.

I mean in the last 3 drafts, they used 4 of their first 6 picks on offense so they have certainly made an effort to address offense these past 3 seasons at least.

And that first draft they had just extended Diggs and Davis was coming off of a 200 yard 4 TD playoff game and the offense had played better after Sanders injury made room for Davis to take a bigger role the back half the season.  So at that time, it looked like what we needed was a slot WR and depth.  They took Shakir in the 5th to be the future at slot while they signed Crowder to compete to start at slot until injury gave way to McKenzie.  They also took Cook in the 2nd when one of our biggest area of need was helping Josh with a run game.

 

Then the next year, they restructured Diggs thinking he would be here still this year and knowing that Davis didn’t step up with his expanded role while battling an ankle injury they went and got Kincaid after a run of receivers in the first.  They then further helped Josh taking O’Cyrus in the 2nd when we certainly needed OL help as well.  But at this time Diggs was still part of the future plans, hence the restructure to make moving on from him expensive and more difficult.  
 

And of course this year.  Now for me, I think of all the years that made more sense to take more than weapon/receiver for Josh it was this one given how many picks we had and the depth of the position.  But, we also had already signed Samuel too and the Bills have made it clear they are quite high on both Kincaid and Shakir after last seasons breakouts.
 

Personally, I think they wanted to balance all the youth on the team after trading Diggs with some vets as probably the main reason that they didn’t feel the need or want to take another WR this year.  I think it just came down to they cut ties with Diggs a season or two earlier than they had planned while they were still adding more weapons while planning to upgrade and move on from Davis and others.  

[FireChans]

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

 

I supported both the trade back and drafting Coleman. Exactly what happened was literally my dream scenario. Still I do not think WR was sufficiently addressed this offseason. In fact that's two years in a row that the Bills took my draft crush with their first pick. Still I wish they had done more.

 

For me the individual moves are secondary to the larger philosophy. My personal player preferences are just opinions. The idea that the Bills need to overinvest in pass catchers is, to me, a cold hard fact. I would have rather taken Worthy followed by Franklin than just Coleman alone, even though I liked Coleman better than both of those players, because the first scenario would have represented what I KNOW to be a necessary change in the teambuilding philosophy. Instead I fear this regime has learned nothing and is stubbornly continuing to prioritize the wrong positions.

Correct take.

 

I actually didn’t like Coleman predraft. But I’m no scout.
 

If they walked away with Coleman and Franklin or Corley or whatever, I would say hey, at least they recognize the problem. 

To come out of the deepest WR draft in years with WR as our biggest need is a failure. And them not recognizing that is an even bigger problem.

Edited July 16 by FireChans

[Billl]

1 hour ago, Rampant Buffalo said:

 

Well . . . not necessarily. Maybe Beane's thought process was the following:

 

If I stay at 28, my guy is Coleman. If I trade down from 28 to 33, I'm pretty sure Coleman will still be there. But let's say I'm wrong about that, and Coleman is gone. I've got some other WRs graded almost as highly as Coleman. If I trade down, my upside is guaranteed: I know I'm getting the extra picks. There probably won't be a downside: Coleman will probably still be there. But if there is a downside it will be small, because I'll be able to take some other WR with almost as good a grade as Coleman.

 

There’s no “maybe” about it.  It was 100% his thought process.  That isn’t the question.  The question is whether or not that’s a good strategy, so the debate starts there.  Is it smart to move up from the fourth round to the third round at the expense of letting Kansas City, Dallas, Baltimore, and San Francisco jump in front of you in the first round?

 

I don’t think I’m going too far out on a limb when I say that those are 4 of the absolute best front offices in terms of identifying talent in the draft.  That being the case, it seems foolish to settle for whomever was left after those teams picked especially given the fact that Kansas City clearly had a strong opinion, and you knew they were targeting a WR.  Personally, I don’t see the upside (moving from a 4th round pick to a third round pick) as being worth the potential downside of handing the team whose dynasty was built via swapping picks to move ahead of Buffalo in the draft.

 

Part of me wonders if this was a response to how the 2023 draft went down when Buffalo traded up from 27 to 25 and took Kincaid.  It almost feels like they looked back at that and came away thinking they’d have been better served standing pat or even trading back slightly and taking LaPorta if Kincaid didn’t make it to them.

Edited July 16 by Billl

[BADOLBILZ]

1 hour ago, YattaOkasan said:

Beasley entering year 8

diggs entering year 6

Brown entering year 6

these players had a LOT of history and they still proved they had more to show. 
 

what is your data to say playing with Allen doesn’t give a bump? 

 

correct they didn’t make big investments for the most part. However Samuel very much was an investment.  None of those players were considered world beaters when we signed them and we got good production out of them. 

 

Beasley, Brown and Diggs were all producing when they came to the Bills and were thus valued by the league and expensive to acquire.

 

MVS, Claypool and Hamler are all dumpster dives coming off bad or lost seasons.  

 

It wouldn't have been a surprise if none of them had found a team by training camp and ended up spending the season on some teams practice squad(as Hamler did last season).

 

The data about players who didn't get a bump are much more recent and relevant.........the likes of Emmanuel Sanders, Trent Sherfield and Deonte Harty...........all who saw significant declines from their previous "healthy" production after being paired with Allen.   Basically EVERY pro personnel WR acquisition following that 2019-2020 stretch.    I expect Curtis Samuel will at least break the trend of big drops in production but it wouldn't surprise me if the other 3 didn't do a damn thing for Buffalo this season.

 

 

[4merper4mer]

25 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Beasley, Brown and Diggs were all producing when they came to the Bills and were thus valued by the league and expensive to acquire.

 

MVS, Claypool and Hamler are all dumpster dives coming off bad or lost seasons.  

 

It wouldn't have been a surprise if none of them had found a team by training camp and ended up spending the season on some teams practice squad(as Hamler did last season).

 

The data about players who didn't get a bump are much more recent and relevant.........the likes of Emmanuel Sanders, Trent Sherfield and Deonte Harty...........all who saw significant declines from their previous "healthy" production after being paired with Allen.   Basically EVERY pro personnel WR acquisition following that 2019-2020 stretch.    I expect Curtis Samuel will at least break the trend of big drops in production but it wouldn't surprise me if the other 3 didn't do a damn thing for Buffalo this season.

 

 

Clearly Diggs was producing.  It would be interesting to look back and find your comments on the production of Brown and Beasley at the time they were acquired.  My guess is that perhaps you were not effusive with praise.  Personally I don’t remember you saying one positive thing ever about the Bills and your screen name is a criticism of a specific unit, but who knows maybe you were doing cartwheels for Beasley and Brown.

5 hours ago, eball said:

Get some rest, Bill. This crusade has to be exhausting for you. 
 

The only thing that will stop it is a time machine and McDermott avoiding the horrible Tre’ Davious White the evil cornerback.

[BADOLBILZ]

4 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I didn't misread that as that was not was I was referring to nor was it even something I read, it was an interview I watched like I watch almost every Beane interview and press conference.

 

But I can't help but notice you once again deflected away from the main part of the post where you were asked to commit to something.  You said Samuels is probably WR1 while also saying you believe Shakir is putting up 900 yards.

 

So are you going to commit to Samuels putting up more than 900 yards given that for him to be WR1 he would have to at least top Shakir?  You are always so keen on people committing to takes, so here is your shot to commit to yours.  

 

 

OK then it's settled........you were just lying.

 

Beane never said Coleman was their WR1.    

 

You can't prove it because it did not happen.

 

As for Samuel being "the Bills WR1" to begin the season........unless they trade for someone else he enters the season as clearly their most accomplished WR.    

 

There isn't a close second.  

 

Numbers assigned to a WR first represent their place in the pecking order within the team........and on a broader scale their place within the league.  Some teams ultimately turn out to not have had a WR1............others have multiple.

 

I do think Curtis Samuel starts the season in Diggs' "Z" position in 3 WR sets and that Samuel and Shakir will most likely be the only 2 WR on the field in 2 WR sets(unless Samuel is being used in the backfield instead of Cook/Davis OR Shakir gets supplanted in the slot by their desire to feed Coleman there).      

 

I also don't think that starting the season as the Bills WR1 will pay dividends for the Bills or Samuel.........if only because it doesn't promise to be a matchup advantage for Buffalo.   Samuel has never really been more than a WR3 facing lesser DB's prior to this.    It's going to be a big jump in competition and I think eventually Allen will have to turn elsewhere.    

 

But to start the season,  yep Samuel is likely the primary WR target.   I don't think that was the intention when they acquired him but they weren't aware that they would trade Diggs at that time.

 

I do think Shakir ultimately will end up leading the team in receiving yardage with a modest number around 900 but at the end of the season he is unlikely to be viewed as a WR1 on the broader scale around the league.

 

And Kincaid should end up being the most targeted player overall but if he keeps putting up a pathetic 9 yards per catch that would require a near 100 catch season just to even get to 900 yards.    I hope he is more productive at gaining yardage and scoring TD's this season but I also believe he might have less room to operate this season because of the lack of threats on the outside to open up the short/intermediate areas.

 

I think it was totally unnecessary to expand on how Samuel/Kincaid fit in relative to Coleman/Shakir but you asked for it,  there it is.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 16 by BADOLBILZ

[YattaOkasan]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Beasley, Brown and Diggs were all producing when they came to the Bills and were thus valued by the league and expensive to acquire.

 

MVS, Claypool and Hamler are all dumpster dives coming off bad or lost seasons.  

 

It wouldn't have been a surprise if none of them had found a team by training camp and ended up spending the season on some teams practice squad(as Hamler did last season).

 

The data about players who didn't get a bump are much more recent and relevant.........the likes of Emmanuel Sanders, Trent Sherfield and Deonte Harty...........all who saw significant declines from their previous "healthy" production after being paired with Allen.   Basically EVERY pro personnel WR acquisition following that 2019-2020 stretch.    I expect Curtis Samuel will at least break the trend of big drops in production but it wouldn't surprise me if the other 3 didn't do a damn thing for Buffalo this season.

 

 

I don’t expect anything of those three. I only mention hamler cause we keep forgetting he’s on the team. That’s not a ringing endorsement about what I expect of him (could he figure it out sure but I don’t think the bills have much stock in it). 
 

As we said earlier, it’s a bunch of unknowns. Feels as if they have to get 4+ players above 600 yards to make this thing work cause Im inclined to agree if your sentiment is that there’s not a 1k receiver on the team.

So then the question is the likelihood of achieving that. And even though it’s rare to achieve, I feel pretty good that Kincaid, shakir and Samuel can get there. Question is does cook or Coleman get there. If both do then would you agree this offense would be seriously cooking?  I’m not sure any offense has ever had 5+ players with >600 receiving yards.  
 

So yeah those other 3 players don’t matter to me. We’re missing top end talent but we have depth (again not those three players that I don’t expect anything from).  Can we use that depth to do something rare?  I think the talent is there to sling it for 600 yards to 4 players. Question is if we can do it. 

Edited July 16 by YattaOkasan

[Rampant Buffalo]

57 minutes ago, Billl said:

There’s no “maybe” about it.  It was 100% his thought process.  That isn’t the question.  The question is whether or not that’s a good strategy, so the debate starts there.  Is it smart to move up from the fourth round to the third round at the expense of letting Kansas City, Dallas, Baltimore, and San Francisco jump in front of you in the first round?

 

I don’t think I’m going too far out on a limb when I say that those are 4 of the absolute best front offices in terms of identifying talent in the draft.  That being the case, it seems foolish to settle for whomever was left after those teams picked especially given the fact that Kansas City clearly had a strong opinion, and you knew they were targeting a WR.  Personally, I don’t see the upside (moving from a 4th round pick to a third round pick) as being worth the potential downside of handing the team whose dynasty was built via swapping picks to move ahead of Buffalo in the draft.

 

Part of me wonders if this was a response to how the 2023 draft went down when Buffalo traded up from 27 to 25 and took Kincaid.  It almost feels like they looked back at that and came away thinking they’d have been better served standing pat or even trading back slightly and taking LaPorta if Kincaid didn’t make it to them.

 

 

You make good points.

 

That said . . . look at your own team, the Chiefs. After trading away Tyreek Hill, I think you guys used 3 first or second round picks on searching for his replacement. One of those picks turned into Rashee Rice. Not sure how the other two worked out. Now Rice is in a bit of trouble. Suppose Beane had said, "We need a WR also, and I trust KC's front office more than I trust my own scouting staff. Therefore, I'm going to draft each of the three prospects KC wants, before the Chiefs are able to take them." Had that been his strategy a few years ago, he'd have two disappointments and a guy in legal trouble.

 

At the end of the day, a guy like Beane needs to be true to his own board, rather than getting too caught up in someone else's. As a GM, there is literally no substitute for good talent evaluation.

 

If you have several WRs graded similarly, trading down is logical. If those were Beane's player grades, he has to act on that. Personally, I think that taking Coleman over McConkey was a very poor decision. But that's just one man's opinion, and we'll see how much or how little that opinion is worth in a couple years or so. I'd love to be wrong about Coleman. Josh Allen is the most valuable player in Bills franchise history, but his Super Bowl opportunities are being squandered by a bad supporting cast and sub-par defensive coaching in the playoffs. If Coleman proves me wrong, that's one less thing dragging down Allen's career.

[Rampant Buffalo]

7 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

I think it's more than possible, it's very likely

 

I'm not arguing that it wasn't the right move, just that it shouldn't be held up as proof of this serious investment in offensive weapons

 

What would make me happy: the Bills pass at least 60% of the time, if not more. Our WR corps is either good this year, or else Beane invests the necessary draft capital to make it good for next year.

 

What would make me sad: the Bills de-prioritize the passing offense. They run the ball at least 50% of the time, as part of, gag, "complimentary football." They draft WRs who are also good run blockers. More resources are devoted to the defense, while the offense is denied any premium players at the WR position.

 

The team's best asset is Josh Allen. Building around that asset would make me happy. Getting away from that asset, and doing other stuff instead, would make me sad.

 

Will I be happy or sad? I don't know yet. Ask me again next year, and I should have a more concrete answer.

[GoBills808]

13 minutes ago, Rampant Buffalo said:

 

What would make me happy: the Bills pass at least 60% of the time, if not more. Our WR corps is either good this year, or else Beane invests the necessary draft capital to make it good for next year.

 

What would make me sad: the Bills de-prioritize the passing offense. They run the ball at least 50% of the time, as part of, gag, "complimentary football." They draft WRs who are also good run blockers. More resources are devoted to the defense, while the offense is denied any premium players at the WR position.

 

The team's best asset is Josh Allen. Building around that asset would make me happy. Getting away from that asset, and doing other stuff instead, would make me sad.

 

Will I be happy or sad? I don't know yet. Ask me again next year, and I should have a more concrete answer.

i think its very reasonable to look into our recent moves and pull out a ball control offense

 

in fact i said as much as soon as they elected to trade down and like you i believe it's a mistake

[eball]

2 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

You see I would say that there is an abundance of data that tells us to expect these guys to underwhelm.

 

Samuel, entering year 8.   MVS year 7.   Claypool year 5.   KJ Hamler year 5.   Shakir year 3.   It's not like it's some young, unproven(one way or another) group that's 23 years of combined NFL experience.

 

They have A LOT of history that proves who they are.

 

As fo players getting a bump in production playing with Allen..........in reality that data isn't very encouraging either.    The lesser invested players have all failed to produce.    MVS,  Claypool and Hamler(who is kept together with popsicle sticks and gum at this point) are all dumpster dives.    It's not like they paid good money for productive players like Diggs, Brown and Beasley.    

 

 

Predicting success for these WRs would be overly optimistic, but it is reasonable to take a wait-and-see approach when the Bills will be operating an offense in which one diva WR won’t demand the lion’s share of targets.

 

I’m looking at Kincaid, Shakir, Cook, and Samuel to wind up with the most targets.  Coleman is likely to be next, in the 40-50 catch range.  With that production the Bills’ offense should be fine…do you not agree?

 

If the Bills get anything out of the MVS/Claypool/Hamler/Hollins mishmash it’s gravy.

 

[Don Otreply]

19 hours ago, DapperCam said:

Mistakes like that were Gabe Davis' specialty.

Ah yes, Gabe “ the ankle” Davis…  😁

 

 

[Don Otreply]

9 hours ago, FireChans said:

If Beane wasn’t that worried about the grade difference of Coleman and say McConkey or Legette, that kinda works against “Coleman was their guy,” to me.

Not really, Yes Coleman was likely the preferred choice, but very evidently the Bills were more than happy to get more picks and a different WR should that be the case,, the their guy thing is hyperbole, as every team has more than one player in the draft they will refer to as their guy when they draft him, it’s always been that way. 

[YattaOkasan]

2 hours ago, eball said:

 

Predicting success for these WRs would be overly optimistic, but it is reasonable to take a wait-and-see approach when the Bills will be operating an offense in which one diva WR won’t demand the lion’s share of targets.

 

I’m looking at Kincaid, Shakir, Cook, and Samuel to wind up with the most targets.  Coleman is likely to be next, in the 40-50 catch range.  With that production the Bills’ offense should be fine…do you not agree?

 

If the Bills get anything out of the MVS/Claypool/Hamler/Hollins mishmash it’s gravy.

 

I think of like GB a lot.  Noone over 800 yards but still 4200 passing yards.  If you we could get that production combined with the rushing yards of Cook (1k), Davis (400), Josh (400); its a top 10 offense.  But a lot of this is easier said than done so I dont necessarily count on it.  

[BillsVet]

2 hours ago, eball said:

 

Predicting success for these WRs would be overly optimistic, but it is reasonable to take a wait-and-see approach when the Bills will be operating an offense in which one diva WR won’t demand the lion’s share of targets.

 

I’m looking at Kincaid, Shakir, Cook, and Samuel to wind up with the most targets.  Coleman is likely to be next, in the 40-50 catch range.  With that production the Bills’ offense should be fine…do you not agree?

 

If the Bills get anything out of the MVS/Claypool/Hamler/Hollins mishmash it’s gravy.

 

 

This is funny.  You're essentially doing what a bunch of people did during the drought years of saying that, because they haven't played we can't do any sort of predictive analysis which might portend underwhelming results.   

 

And then you go and predict target numbers based on wishful thinking.  There's been enough analysis using past performance in this thread I won't repeat, but suffice it to say, this may be the least talented WR group since that 2018 season when Buffalo's offense was one of the worst since the 1978 rules changes through the first half of the season.  

 

Lot of people here, using the wishful thinking analysis "methodology" who assign trust to McBeane to build an offense.  Looks like to me, it's again just the idea that Josh will make everyone better.      

 

I bet Joe Brady didn't plan on coordinating this offense minus Diggs.  But, someone made the call to unload their best WR and go with a cast of lesser heralded types.  It's a bold strategy Cotton.  Let's see if it works out.   

[Avisan]

4 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

This is funny.  You're essentially doing what a bunch of people did during the drought years of saying that, because they haven't played we can't do any sort of predictive analysis which might portend underwhelming results.

There is a significant difference between the drought years and now in terms of who is throwing the ball and the quality of the defensive unit to fall back on if needed.

[BADOLBILZ]

3 hours ago, eball said:

 

Predicting success for these WRs would be overly optimistic, but it is reasonable to take a wait-and-see approach when the Bills will be operating an offense in which one diva WR won’t demand the lion’s share of targets.

 

I’m looking at Kincaid, Shakir, Cook, and Samuel to wind up with the most targets.  Coleman is likely to be next, in the 40-50 catch range.  With that production the Bills’ offense should be fine…do you not agree?

 

If the Bills get anything out of the MVS/Claypool/Hamler/Hollins mishmash it’s gravy.

 

 

 

1.  Wait-and-see is not an approach.   It's a lack of any opinion whatsoever.   Which is not REALLY the case with you in this post.   You have opinions you just don't want to show a logical basis for it.

 

2. Projecting your 5th target as "likely" to catch 40-50 passes is bold.   That probably suggests that one or more of the most targeted players was injured for a big chunk of the season.    

 

Also,  why would that production tell me that their offense would be fine?   There isn't any necessary correlation there.

Edited July 16 by BADOLBILZ

[Doc]

9 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

Beasley, Brown and Diggs were all producing when they came to the Bills and were thus valued by the league and expensive to acquire.

 

MVS, Claypool and Hamler are all dumpster dives coming off bad or lost seasons.  

 

It wouldn't have been a surprise if none of them had found a team by training camp and ended up spending the season on some teams practice squad(as Hamler did last season).

 

The data about players who didn't get a bump are much more recent and relevant.........the likes of Emmanuel Sanders, Trent Sherfield and Deonte Harty...........all who saw significant declines from their previous "healthy" production after being paired with Allen.   Basically EVERY pro personnel WR acquisition following that 2019-2020 stretch.    I expect Curtis Samuel will at least break the trend of big drops in production but it wouldn't surprise me if the other 3 didn't do a damn thing for Buffalo this season.

 

Harty and Sherfield are guys who never produced much before coming to the Bills.  I didn't understand the Harty signing given his production, injury history and salary.  Sherfield at least was a minimum deal.  But Sanders' last season was with the Bills.  Meaning he had one foot out the door when they signed him.

 

OTOH MVS produced almost 700 yards in 2022 with KC before having his targets halved last year and has been a consistent ~550 yard/season receiver.  They'll get something out of him.  Claypool was producing close to 900 yards with a declining Roethlisberger before (I suppose) bad attitude got him shipped out mid-season in Pgh in 2022 and then again from Chicago in 2023.  Joining a winning team and having a full off-season to digest the playbook should help him contribute.  Hamler is a complete unknown given his injuries and I'm not expecting much from him.  Whether they outproduce their career bests remains to be seen but I fully expect them to significantly outproduce what they did last year.