Receivers the Bills could go after?

[Alphadawg7]

5 hours ago, Logic said:

According to Overthecap.com,  among all teams in the NFL, the Chiefs allocated the 3rd, 4th, and 3rd most cap dollars to their offense the past three years.

During the same time period, the Bills allocated the 24th, 12th, and 26th most cap dollars on offense. 

It's a big disparity. Quite simply, the Bills consistently spend a lot more on defense than they do on offense. 

 

The cap investment is a misleading stat.  When you have a lot of young players, your cap is down.  Our top 3 targets this year are a rookie, 2nd year player, and 3rd year player all on rookie deals.  And lets not pretend that large of a cap investment by KC was in the WR room because it was far less than what the Bills were spending on WR's the past 3 years.  
 

No disrespect (as I do respect you as a poster)...but this is cherry picking data and creating a picture that doesn't match the story.  You can't sit here and rant about WR investment then cite how much KC spends on their offense in general knowing full well that money isn't going to their crap room of WR's the past 2 seasons.  That money is going to Mahomes, Kelce and the OL.

 

5 hours ago, Logic said:

In terms of draft picks, they Bills have NEVER drafted a 1st round receiver. Yes, I realize they traded a 1st round pick for Stefon Diggs, but it doesn't change the fact that since 2017, not a single 1st round receiver has been selected by the Bills. That seems strange to me. They finally COULD have selected one this year, but even then, they traded down, watched three other teams take receivers, THEN picked one in the second round.

 

They used their first-round pick twice in 5 years on a WR and 3 if you count Kincaid.  I don't want to argue the ridiculous semantics with anyone that "Coleman was a 2nd rounder"...everyone knows it was their first-round pick and Beane confirmed he was taking Coleman before he got the Panthers to switch one spot.  So yeah, the history books will show he was a 2nd rounder, but lets not play games and pretend it wasn't really our first round pick we invested in Keon.  

 

And no offense, who cares about the other WR's taken?  Literally has no relevance whatsoever given the Bills elected to pass on them as they clearly were not their target.  Beane moved back and picked up extra capital and still got the guy they seemed to have wanted.  But because you don't like Keon you disapprove of it, which is fine, but for the Bills they were celebrating because they got their guy still and extra draft capital.  Time will tell if it was the right guy or not...but at least so far, Keon is having one of the best camps of any WR in the draft, which at this time of year is all you can really hope for until we get to see him in real games.

 

5 hours ago, Logic said:

Yes, they spent their top pick on an offensive skill player two years in a row, but only after a streak of using their top picks on a CB, DE, DE, and DT.

 

Sorry this is wrong.  You keep wanting to eliminate the history that doesn't support your opinion by omitting the first (and 4th) they invested to get Diggs.  So no, it wasn't a streak of those 4 defensive players.  That is a real transaction to get a top tier WR, it doesn't get to be omitted because it doesn't support your case.

 

As for the rest of the post...not gonna get into it, as you said, no need to relitigate differing established opinions on Coleman as its perfectly ok to have those differing opinions given he has never taken a real NFL snap.  So I respect your different opinion on him and lets just hope he proves your concerns wrong on the field, because if he does, then this team has an excellent young nucleolus to build on moving forward with him, Shakir, Kincaid, Cook, and Davis.  If he doesn't, then I expect you will be pleased next year as I would think Beane makes a big move at WR if this doesn't work this year.  Which, I am pretty sure everyone will be fine with and on board with as well.  

[GunnerBill]

6 hours ago, Logic said:

I also disagree with the notion that Coleman's 40 time is the only reason people didn't like the pick, but there's really no need to re-litigate that issue at this point in time. It's all been discussed ad nauseum.

 

Yea I hate this point. Not true of me AT ALL. My concerns about Coleman's tape were on this board before the Combine. I was surprised he ran that slowly at the Combine but it didn't change my opinion of him at all. 

[Kirby Jackson]

9 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Back to back seasons the Bills used their first pick in the draft on a pass catcher.  How has it not been a “top priority” when they have used literally their most valuable offseason asset for a weapon to catch passes for Allen the last 2 seasons?

 

No one would be saying this had Bills made a small move up for Brian Thomas Jr.  So, IMHO It’s not that they didn’t prioritize it, it’s because you and others don’t like the Keon pick and haven’t gotten over it yet.
 

Let’s be real, the vast majority of the panic and negativity is coming from people who didn’t like the Keon pick and don’t think he can be a WR1 …and it’s coming before he’s played an NFL snap…and 90% of that doubt is coming off a 40 time that really doesn’t matter and that he significantly improved when he ran it again.    

I don’t think anyone’s concerns with Coleman come from his slow 40. That was icing on the cake. The concern comes from this: 

 

Edited August 21 by Kirby Jackson

[GunnerBill]

8 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I don’t think anyone’s concerns with Coleman come from his slow 40. That was icing on the cake. The concern comes from this: 

 

 

The debate on Coleman was raging on this forum long before he ran the 40 in Indy. I remember distinctly being on a train platform on a cold, rainy, January morning typing a post on here on my phone saying my indicative receiver rankings after doing 3 games of all the perceived top guys had Coleman as WR9. That was looooong before the Combine. 

 

The only guy I really moved after Indy was Troy Franklin. I think I might have bumped Worthy a point or two as well but I dropped Franklin significantly and the reason was that the concern I had about his film was the exact issue that showed up in the gauntlet drill. You should never react just to the underwear olympics, but when you have a concern about a guy on film and you are going back and forth about how to weigh it up and then it shows itself so starkly in testing as well.... that is when you factor it in. 

[aristocrat]

Pray that Vegas goes winless for the first month and Adams wants out and we snag him. 

[BADOLBILZ]

7 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

Stretched parameters? That's nonsense.

 

Not every team does(have a Kelce). But we have Kincaid and he shows very likely to be that good.

 

Yeah, it's true that that year from MVS he was more productive than all three of Kincaid, Shakir or Samuel. That's true.

 

 

This is basically what all you said boils down to.

 

Kincaid is likely to be as good as Kelce..........but that everything else I said is true.

 

I am a big Kincaid fan but there have been TONS of TE's who have had better seasons than 673 and 2 and not gone to become Kelce.   Sorry.  Let's see him have anything resembling a pro bowl season before we jet past All Pro and first ballot HOF.   

 

As for your attempt at a cherry picked regression model.........yeah Kelce averaged 61 over his last 7 in 2022.   But he averaged 84 over his first 7 in 23'.   And he didn't average "60.8" or less in 23'.   Learn how to use data.   If you want to say a number proves decline then the SUCCEEDING numbers need to reflect that.

 

Travis Kelce had a different year in 2023.  He had a higher catch % than any of the previous 8 seasons which indicated the need to be more of a possession receiver due to the lack of productive depth at WR.   And nagging injuries resulted in playing almost 150 less snaps than he had in the prior 2 seasons.  That and resting the finale hurt his bulk numbers significantly.   Still a GREAT year with unreal performances that would be hard for any TE to top.  Like finishing his year catching an incredible 20 of 21 targets in the AFCCG and SB for over 200 yards.  

 

But Kincaid is "likely" to be as good you say.   No, he's not "likely" to be that good.  We can hope but his over/under for receiving yards is in the 700's because that is what the actuaries see as "likely".

 

 

Edited August 21 by BADOLBILZ

[BADOLBILZ]

4 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The debate on Coleman was raging on this forum long before he ran the 40 in Indy. I remember distinctly being on a train platform on a cold, rainy, January morning typing a post on here on my phone saying my indicative receiver rankings after doing 3 games of all the perceived top guys had Coleman as WR9. That was looooong before the Combine. 

 

The only guy I really moved after Indy was Troy Franklin. I think I might have bumped Worthy a point or two as well but I dropped Franklin significantly and the reason was that the concern I had about his film was the exact issue that showed up in the gauntlet drill. You should never react just to the underwear olympics, but when you have a concern about a guy on film and you are going back and forth about how to weigh it up and then it shows itself so starkly in testing as well.... that is when you factor it in. 

 

 

Yep.  I remember your thoughts.   Coleman was not a first round prospect by how the NFL grades them or even just being one of the top 32 players in the draft.  His upside could be special for a number of reasons, but he was raw.  

 

I've compared him to Davante Adams.   Adams was more polished than Coleman but still was rightfully ranked about the same (8th-10th) compared to his peers in the 2014 class.   He hit his ceiling.   But it took time.   It's not likely at all that Coleman will ever reach what I perceive as his "potential" but I don't think Bills fans could handle Coleman coming out of the box with 2 sub 500 yard seasons like Adams did.    

[GoBills808]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Yep.  I remember your thoughts.   Coleman was not a first round prospect by how the NFL grades them or even just being one of the top 32 players in the draft.  His upside could be special for a number of reasons, but he was raw.  

 

I've compared him to Davante Adams.   Adams was more polished than Coleman but still was rightfully ranked about the same (8th-10th) compared to his peers in the 2014 class.   He hit his ceiling.   But it took time.   It's not likely at all that Coleman will ever reach what I perceive as his "potential" but I don't think Bills fans could handle Coleman coming out of the box with 2 sub 500 yard seasons like Adams did.    

We could probably handle it better if we had Jordy Nelson on roster

 

 

[GunnerBill]

12 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

We could probably handle it better if we had Jordy Nelson on roster

 

 

 

And Randall Cobb. They still had both in their peak when they drafted Adams. 

[GoBills808]

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And Randall Cobb. They still had both in their peak when they drafted Adams. 

😂😂Right so we've done a significantly worse job at WR than the team that famously alienated their star QB over not doing a good job at WR

 

not great bob

[Cvanvol7]

18 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Lol no he wasn’t 

Ummmm yes he most definitely was. 

[teef]

2 minutes ago, Cvanvol7 said:

Ummmm yes he most definitely was. 

bro...

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, GoBills808 said:

😂😂Right so we've done a significantly worse job at WR than the team that famously alienated their star QB over not doing a good job at WR

 

not great bob

 

I think in fairness Rodgers complaints were really the period post 2016 when Nelson moved on etc and was replaced with nothing more than late round fliers on Geronimo Allison, MVS and Eq St Brown among others. But yes, nobody can argue we have done a good job giving weapons to our star QB. 

[Cvanvol7]

1 minute ago, teef said:

bro...

Im confused how there is any argument to be had here. The obvious plan based on money, the depth chart, and everything that has been said all off season was that Curtis Samuel was going to be the #1 WR. They have also said they wanna spread the ball around more and like what they have but Curtis Samuel is their WR1 and has been since the Digss trade. 

[Alphadawg7]

8 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea I hate this point. Not true of me AT ALL. My concerns about Coleman's tape were on this board before the Combine. I was surprised he ran that slowly at the Combine but it didn't change my opinion of him at all. 

 

7 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I don’t think anyone’s concerns with Coleman come from his slow 40. That was icing on the cake. The concern comes from this: 

 

 

6 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The debate on Coleman was raging on this forum long before he ran the 40 in Indy. I remember distinctly being on a train platform on a cold, rainy, January morning typing a post on here on my phone saying my indicative receiver rankings after doing 3 games of all the perceived top guys had Coleman as WR9. That was looooong before the Combine. 

 

The only guy I really moved after Indy was Troy Franklin. I think I might have bumped Worthy a point or two as well but I dropped Franklin significantly and the reason was that the concern I had about his film was the exact issue that showed up in the gauntlet drill. You should never react just to the underwear olympics, but when you have a concern about a guy on film and you are going back and forth about how to weigh it up and then it shows itself so starkly in testing as well.... that is when you factor it in. 

 

You guys do realize you are 2 people right and are not the majority?  To deny Keons 40 time was not the most talked about, the biggest complaint, etc is false history.  Just because you two had deeper and/or earlier thoughts does NOT translate to the mass response doing the same.  There is a thread dedicated to mocking his combine 40 time and that pops up in every thread about him.  In fact, the VAST majority didn't even mention anything other than 40 time until they heard other peoples additional concerns which they just repeated and echoed WITHOUT actually doing any of their own research because it supported their initial dislike based on his 40 time.

 

Sorry...but you are wrong on this.  I totally get, know, and accept you both had deeper thoughts, but you absolutely do not represent the majority on this in regard to this board, social media response, media, etc. where his 40 time is the unquestioned most debated and discussed concern about him. 

Edited August 21 by Alphadawg7

[teef]

4 minutes ago, Cvanvol7 said:

Im confused how there is any argument to be had here. The obvious plan based on money, the depth chart, and everything that has been said all off season was that Curtis Samuel was going to be the #1 WR. They have also said they wanna spread the ball around more and like what they have but Curtis Samuel is their WR1 and has been since the Digss trade. 

bro...

[Alphadawg7]

7 minutes ago, Cvanvol7 said:

Ummmm yes he most definitely was. 

 

Um...yeah no he still wasn't bro

[Cvanvol7]

2024 Depth Chart https://billswire.usatoday.com/2024/08/07/buffalo-bills-first-depth-chart-2024-preseason-nfl/

 

2023 Depth Chart https://billswire.usatoday.com/lists/buffalo-bills-depth-chart-2023-new-york-jets-nfl/

 

How come Curtis Samuel is the WR1? 

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

 

 

You guys do realize you are 2 people right and are not the majority?  To deny Keons 40 time was not the most talked, the biggest complaint, etc is false history.  Just because you two had deeper thoughts does NOT translate to the mass response doing the same.  There is a thread dedicated to mocking his combine 40 time and that pops up in every thread about him.  In fact, the VAST majority didn't even mention anything other than 40 time until they heard other peoples additional concerns which they just repeated and echoed WITHOUT actually doing any of their own research because it supported their initial dislike based on his 40 time.

 

Sorry...but you are wrong on this.  I totally get, know, and accept you both had deeper thoughts, but you absolutely do not represent the majority on this in regard to this board, social media response, media, etc. where his 40 time is the unquestioned most debated and discussed concern about him. 

 

The 40 time joke is just what it is - a joke. The same as we still call Isaiah McKenzie "McCittrick" and respond to every injury thread with "have they removed the spleen." 

 

I don't know or care about social media. That is an idiots charter. But there was lots of very considered, detailed, sensible, discussion of Coleman all spring. Pre-dating the combine. It was not just Kirby and I. 

[SoonerBillsFan]

I don't see us going after anyone at this late date.  We have who we have unless we suffer another injury.