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

[Alphadawg7]

3 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

 

I knew the 2018 "they was outta money" argument would surface.  Didn't prevent them from giving 5 and 50 to Star or 3 and 27 to Trent Murphy.  And then, thru first half of 2018 they had one of the worst offenses since the '78 rules changes.

 

None of this book you've written removes the fact that in 2018 they drafted their franchise QB and then proceeded to put bargain bin types around him while improving the defense each year.  Even if you include the 3rd rounders from 2018-20, after Josh they went MLB, DT, DT, bust OL, RB, TE, Diggs trade, Epenesa, RB.  Didn't draft a WR until Davis in RD4 of 2020 after taking Josh.        

 

Actually, everything I wrote removes that fact, not sure you read the whole thing.  You can't seem to understand that the years you are hung up on Beane was rebuilding an entire roster and can't seem to accept that includes having to address the defense as well.  And now you want to project that as if it means he cares more about the defense than offense, when actually he had invested more in the offense than defense, especially as Allen entered his prime.  

 

All good, everyone entitled to their opinion, but there is context you are overlooking IMHO that is affecting your opinion.

[BillsVet]

2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Actually, everything I wrote removes that fact, not sure you read the whole thing.  You can't seem to understand that the years you are hung up on Beane was rebuilding an entire roster and can't seem to accept that includes having to address the defense as well.  And now you want to project that as if it means he cares more about the defense than offense, when actually he had invested more in the offense than defense, especially as Allen entered his prime.  

 

All good, everyone entitled to their opinion, but there is context you are overlooking IMHO that is affecting your opinion.

 

McBeane decided to remake the roster and prolong the rebuild in 2017-18 while they burned cap space.  But the issue we're talking about here is WR's and their lack of draft investment there.  

 

They used far too many UFA dollars trying to buy/trade for an offense in 2019-20 and that's why we're having this conversation here today.  Because they didn't find the players to develop behind those guys like Brown, Beasley, and Diggs.  

 

I even refrained from, during the first 6 years (2017-2022) of McBeane how they used 5 of their 7 RD1 picks on defense.

[FireChans]

19 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I totally agree drafting for "need" and taking players out of need over better graded players is a bad strategy.  But you can't argue that about any of those draft picks outside of Basham.  Nor were many of Beanes picks bad either.   

 

BUT...EVERY pick is a "need" pick.  Bills are not taking a QB first round for example.  This idea that BPA does not involve some sort of need for the team is just not a real thing.  

Ford was a first round graded player, and I mocked Ford to us in the 2nd ahead of the draft and this board mocked me up and down about he would never reach us.  And I was someone who wanted DK badly that draft...but even I was fine with the Ford pick given he was right there as BPA and our trenches were embarrassingly bad the year before.  

 

AJE again, was BPA and someone projected to go in the first round.  It was not a need stretch it was a good pick and we followed it up going all offense until the final pick of Dane Jackson.  

I don’t know how you can be very confident that these players were all BPA on the Bills board?

 

There are obvious examples where you have to rule out silly needs like kicker or QB as the Bills.

 

I just don’t know that I buy the Bills have gotten lucky that their BPA and their biggest off-season need have coincided with their high picks almost every draft. 
 

The corollary of BPA is the big A, which stands for available. I don’t think that a pick like Elam really counts. We made a targeted trade up, imo, because of need. And unfortunately, that proved to be a mistake. 

[GoBills808]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Daboll was a better OC than Dorsey. I actually said when he was in the running for jobs I never loved him as a HC hire. Again - didn't think he had the temperament for it. 

Dorsey's offenses were consistently better against better competition

 

he also never got the benefit of playing a terrible Jets defense 2x year, the year after Daboll left they went to the top of the league

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, BillsVet said:

 

McBeane decided to remake the roster and prolong the rebuild in 2017-18 while they burned cap space.  But the issue we're talking about here is WR's and their lack of draft investment there.  

 

They used far too many UFA dollars trying to buy/trade for an offense in 2019-20 and that's why we're having this conversation here today.  Because they didn't find the players to develop behind those guys like Brown, Beasley, and Diggs.  

 

I even refrained from, during the first 6 years (2017-2022) of McBeane how they used 5 of their 7 RD1 picks on defense.

 

You are back tracking here to keep cherry picking small parts of data to paint a picture that the full data does not conflicts with.  First you talked about the the first 2 picks, now you are including a year where Beane was not the GM so you can include Tre and then also now only discuss the first pick and also go back to leaving 2023 and 2024 off again where it was again offense.  

 

I get it, you have your mind made up.  And hey, that is fine, nothing wrong with that as everyone is entitled to their own opinion, everyone does it.  But my philosophy is when one has to cherry pick tiny parts of data in order to paint a narrative that complies with their opinion that the full data maybe doesn't support or contradicts, then maybe those are the times to be open to reevaluating, adjusting, or expanding that initial opinion through evaluating the full context, data, and/or history of said discussion.  In this particular case, it doesn't mean you would suddenly have to agree or like every move Beane made, just means that maybe its not as skewed as you initially thought when factoring the full context and history.

 

 

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, FireChans said:

I don’t know how you can be very confident that these players were all BPA on the Bills board?

 

There are obvious examples where you have to rule out silly needs like kicker or QB as the Bills.

 

I just don’t know that I buy the Bills have gotten lucky that their BPA and their biggest off-season need have coincided with their high picks almost every draft. 
 

The corollary of BPA is the big A, which stands for available. I don’t think that a pick like Elam really counts. We made a targeted trade up, imo, because of need. And unfortunately, that proved to be a mistake. 

 

Again, almost 100% of all draft picks have "need" built into them for every team.  No team is drafting a guy they 100% do not need in any capacity, especially in the first half of the draft unless they are SB champs with a stacked roster and have the luxury of taking an abundance at one position which is rare, but even then usually an anticipated need maybe in the next season or two based on people they expect to lose to FA, retirement, cap reasons, etc.  

 

AJE was a first round projected DE and top 30 graded player by almost all accounts heading into the draft.  He was great value where we got him...to dispute he wasn't either the BPA or amongst one of the BPA at our pick is silly.  And getting pressure on the QB was our biggest weakness.  So it definitely aligned.

 

Now with Elam, without a doubt CB was our biggest need and you can make a case we made a move to fill that "need".  However, one thing that has been consistent with Beane is that he is a straight shooter and he specifically stated that Elam was the last first round graded player left on his board (remember we are picking late and there are not normally 32 first round graded players in drafts).  So on Beanes board he was the literal BPA, its been stated by Beane and confirmed with draft footage as well.

 

Now, I bolded that part above because as you stated that was your opinion based on your own thoughts on who was BPA, which is totally fine and fair.  But on Beane's board, Elam was the literal BPA and that is who he made the move to get, especially since he was the last player with a first round ground on his board as well.  So he still went BPA even if you had someone else as your personal BPA.  And Beane also said he didn't enter the first round set on taking a corner, but that is how the board fell.  

 

Totally up to you on how you want to take Beane's word on that, but its not like he said that later to cover himself for Elam starting slow, this was all stated during and after we took him.  

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, GoBills808 said:

Dorsey's offenses were consistently better against better competition

 

he also never got the benefit of playing a terrible Jets defense 2x year, the year after Daboll left they went to the top of the league

 

Dorsey faced that vaunted Jets defense 3 times...we lost 2 of those games to Zack Wilson.  In those 3 games Dorsey led offense averaged 17.6 ppg.  

 

Joe Brady faced the same Jets defense once and put up 32 points...almost DOUBLE Dorseys average over 3 games where his offense never scored more than 20 in any of the 3 games.

 

And no Dorseys offenses were not better against better competition.  And further more, Dorseys offense last year averaged 19.8 ppg going 2-5 (should have been 0-7) against teams with a combined win % of .436 leaving us well out of the playoff race.  Brady took over and went 6-1 against teams whose combined win % was over .500 and included wins over 3 playoff teams, the Super Bowl champs, and against 2 teams Dorsey lost to.  

[FireChans]

4 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Again, almost 100% of all draft picks have "need" built into them for every team.  No team is drafting a guy they 100% do not need in any capacity, especially in the first half of the draft unless they are SB champs with a stacked roster and have the luxury of taking an abundance at one position which is rare, but even then usually an anticipated need maybe in the next season or two based on people they expect to lose to FA, retirement, cap reasons, etc

Obviously. The connotation of drafting for need is drafting for IMMEDIATE need. Like drafting a CB in the first round because you need a starting CB RIGHT NOW. Drafting for 2-3 years down the road is generally considered not drafting for “need.” I know you know this. There’s no reason to try to muddy the waters semantically.

 

6 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

AJE was a first round projected DE and top 30 graded player by almost all accounts heading into the draft.  He was great value where we got him...to dispute he wasn't either the BPA or amongst one of the BPA at our pick is silly.  And getting pressure on the QB was our biggest weakness.  So it definitely aligned

Like I said, we don’t know what the Bills board was. What we do know is that we needed a DE going into the draft and we drafted a DE with our first pick of said draft, and he was a disappointment. It is certainly possible he was the best player left on their board when they picked. It’s also possible he wasn’t. Without intimate knowledge of the Bills board, we will never know for sure.

 

7 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Now with Elam, without a doubt CB was our biggest need and you can make a case we made a move to fill that "need".  However, one thing that has been consistent with Beane is that he is a straight shooter and he specifically stated that Elam was the last first round graded player left on his board (remember we are picking late and there are not normally 32 first round graded players in drafts).  So on Beanes board he was the literal BPA, its been stated by Beane and confirmed with draft footage as well

Again, the connotation of BPA is taking the best player available when you pick. I believe Beane when he says he was their last first round grade (but I do acknowledge he could be lying), but I think it’s a safe assumption they traded up for him out of need. I have never seen a BPA-type strategy described as “trade up for the best player you have left on your board.” That’s just not how the strategy is described in these conversations. This is a strategy that I believe most teams follow for QB’s and for good reason, you can’t wait to get a guy when you don’t have a QB. 
 

Ultimately, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that a lot of Beane’s early rounds picks have strongly correlated with needs and a lot of his best picks have been in the later rounds and those rounds haven’t really correlated with needs at all. We have had so many 3rd round and later picks pan out at the NFL level. Part of that is obviously luck so it’s hard to make any definitive opinion, but I’m kinda leaning to a “Beane favors needs much more in rounds 1-2 than he does in later rounds,” take.

[Alphadawg7]

18 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Obviously. The connotation of drafting for need is drafting for IMMEDIATE need. Like drafting a CB in the first round because you need a starting CB RIGHT NOW. Drafting for 2-3 years down the road is generally considered not drafting for “need.” I know you know this. There’s no reason to try to muddy the waters semantically.

 

Again, almost all draft picks, at least in the first half, address teams immediate needs.  Drafting for a need down the road is what is defined as a "luxury pick"...like you don't need him now, but might later.  And I know you know that.  

NFL stands for Not For Long with GM's and Coaches...none of them are going into drafts about how about I pass up these holes on my team and take a luxury pick I don't need that probably doesn't help us get better now and then just hope I don't get fired when we don't improve this year.

 

No disrespect, but you are blurring the lines of a teams draft pick addressing a need and a team passing up much better prospects to reach for a need.  Like what Gruden and the Raiders did with Clelin Ferrel for example.

 

18 minutes ago, FireChans said:

 

Like I said, we don’t know what the Bills board was. What we do know is that we needed a DE going into the draft and we drafted a DE with our first pick of said draft, and he was a disappointment. It is certainly possible he was the best player left on their board when they picked. It’s also possible he wasn’t. Without intimate knowledge of the Bills board, we will never know for sure.

 

What we do know is that AJE was a consensus top 30 player in the whole draft consistently around the early 20's.  His average mock draft projection was also in the first round.  Bills got him with the 54th pick in the draft.  It is silly to even consider that he was not either the BPA or amongst the BPA.  Bottom line, it 100% was not an over draft, reach, or desperate move out of need.  He was without question one of the best players still available at that stage of the draft by all accounts.  

 

18 minutes ago, FireChans said:

 

Again, the connotation of BPA is taking the best player available when you pick. I believe Beane when he says he was their last first round grade (but I do acknowledge he could be lying), but I think it’s a safe assumption they traded up for him out of need. I have never seen a BPA-type strategy described as “trade up for the best player you have left on your board.” That’s just not how the strategy is described in these conversations. This is a strategy that I believe most teams follow for QB’s and for good reason, you can’t wait to get a guy when you don’t have a QB. 
 

 

I disagree with the bolded, I have absolutely love football, not just the Bills.  And I love the draft, so I read and watch a lot of stuff on other GM's too before and after the draft.  And I have seen lots of GM's talk about why they traded up being that said player was their highest graded guy, the last first round grade on a player, etc.  I have also seen tons say the reason they traded down or out of the first was because they did not have any first grounded left on their board or the drop off was big after that player, etc.  And Beane has talked like this now in several drafts himself including Elam and Kincaid as why he traded up in both cases.

 

18 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Ultimately, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that a lot of Beane’s early rounds picks have strongly correlated with needs and a lot of his best picks have been in the later rounds and those rounds haven’t really correlated with needs at all. We have had so many 3rd round and later picks pan out at the NFL level. Part of that is obviously luck so it’s hard to make any definitive opinion, but I’m kinda leaning to a “Beane favors needs much more in rounds 1-2 than he does in later rounds,” take.

 

Every teams early round picks correlate with their needs, not sure why you think that is an outlier with Beane or some sort of flawed draft.  And more importantly, Beane has one of the best draft records in the NFL over his tenure as GM.  

 

Either way, been a good convo

Edited August 7 by Alphadawg7

[LABILLBACKER]

When is Claypool's toe going to heal. This kids NFL clock is about to expire.

[Alphadawg7]

I think people are so focused on not having a proven elite WR that they are sleeping on just how good Kincaid and Shakir have been thus far and what their real potential is this year.  Add in that Coleman by all accounts has had one of the best camps of the entire rookie class so far with Samuel also having a strong camp, and this offenses potential is really trending up right now.  

 

Of course...its just camp...this all needs to be seen when the games get real.  But never a bad thing to see our two young ascending players having things written about them like they are "always open" and both having an excellent camp as two guys expected to take big steps forward this year.

[oldmanfan]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

I think people are so focused on not having a proven elite WR that they are sleeping on just how good Kincaid and Shakir have been thus far and what their real potential is this year.  Add in that Coleman by all accounts has had one of the best camps of the entire rookie class so far with Samuel also having a strong camp, and this offenses potential is really trending up right now.  

 

Of course...its just camp...this all needs to be seen when the games get real.  But never a bad thing to see our two young ascending players having things written about them like they are "always open" and both having an excellent camp as two guys expected to take big steps forward this year.

 

[Back2Buff]

2 hours ago, LABILLBACKER said:

When is Claypool's toe going to heal. This kids NFL clock is about to expire.

 

Easy to get him onto PS.  I dont mind this.  I think he still has the ability to be something in this league, but it would need to be as a top 4 WR since he doesnt really play ST.  He will be a nice add if someone in top 4 goes down.

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, Back2Buff said:

 

Easy to get him onto PS.  I dont mind this.  I think he still has the ability to be something in this league, but it would need to be as a top 4 WR since he doesnt really play ST.  He will be a nice add if someone in top 4 goes down.

 

One positive is that hes been willing to play ST and reportedly working hard at that prior to the injury.  My biggest concern is can he maintain the same positive mentality, work ethic, and mindset if he isn't getting the opportunities he maybe feels he should get.  That has been his issue in the past, maturity and not handling himself well.  Talent is there though, so hopefully he gets back in time to make a legit run for the 53 or takes a PS spot if not.  

 

I will say this, I think he would likely be poached from the PS if we put him there.  Much lesser players get poached all the time, and as injuries happen, some team is gonna bring him in as he is talented enough to make just about any team in the NFL.  

[BADOLBILZ]

7 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Daboll was a better OC than Dorsey. I actually said when he was in the running for jobs I never loved him as a HC hire. Again - didn't think he had the temperament for it. 

 

 

They just have totally different styles.  

 

Daboll tried to run a "gotcha' play" on every play in Buffalo.   It's that Mike Mularkey/Sam Wyche style.   When it works it creates the false sense that they are geniuses.   When it doesn't.......it's a disaster like Mularkey's entire second season in Buffalo(or Daboll last year in NY).  And that's just who Daboll is as a coach.......whether it's as an OC or a HC.  More style than substance.  Not enough attention to detail.  His 2023 Giants team was one of the most unprepared teams you will ever see start a season.  Trying to parse the HC part off implies that he's totally different as an OC.  He's not.  He'd already been fired 3 times as an OC for chrissakes.  

 

Dorsey is a more traditional play caller who is going to run plays that he thinks his team can execute and not be fixated on tricking the opposing DC every play.   That's why his offense was more consistent with less.   And also why he got almost no credit when it produced.

 

[Simon]

6 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

Daboll tried to run a "gotcha' play" on every play in Buffalo.

 

Hell, at some point during his second season one of our genius' coined the adverb Dabollish because of it. 

[BADOLBILZ]

8 hours ago, FireChans said:

I'm not calling Daboll great. I'm saying that if Brady is great with Josh and gets hired away, I wouldn't punish McD by firing him. I don't think McD gets ANOTHER OC to throw under the bus. That was the point.

 

Anyway, you're hilariously wrong about Daboll. He won a playoff game for the Giants for the first time since 2011. It was also their first playoff appearance since 2016. He also won coach of the year by having DJ look competent for 17 games. He's a shitshow, huh? lmao. 

 

Pay attention to the GMen since Eli won a Superbowl. Talk about shitshows.

 

 

Mike Mularkey actually beat Andy Reid in KC in the playoffs in January 2018.  He was a coach of the year candidate in Buffalo in his first year.  Is he good?   Being a good coach is about consistency.   Sloppy, inconsistent coaches like Daboll ride that roller coaster for a reason.    

[BADOLBILZ]

21 minutes ago, Simon said:

 

Hell, at some point during his second season one of our genius' coined the adverb Dabollish because of it. 

 

Hey, fans LOVE a nifty reverse to Lil' Dummy for 5 yards.  That would always elicit a compliment from the booth or a camera close up of Daboll marinating in his genius.   Nicely executed gap run play for the same 5 yards that could have just as easily been run?  Establish an identity when you have a super human QB?   Boring.   

Edited August 7 by BADOLBILZ

[GoBills808]

4 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Hey, fans LOVE a nifty reverse to Lil' Dummy for 5 yards.  That would always elicit a compliment from the booth or a camera close up of Daboll marinating in his genius.   Nicely executed gap run play for the same 5 yards that could have just as easily been run?  Establish an identity when you have a super human QB?   Boring.   

dont forget exposing Allen to a completely unnecessary 1v1 w the Texans safety in the wildcard on the John Brown lateral pass...you know just because

 

daboll was auditioning for HC as much as he was crafting an offense

[GoBills808]

Also before @FireChansask- I don't blame daboll in the slightest for parlaying his role in developing Allen into a HC spot. It's the smart play when you find yourself in that position. All I ask is we remember his offenses accurately when we try to compare the list of mediocre OCs we've been subjected to the last 7yrs