Receivers the Bills could go after?

[Kirby Jackson]

9 hours ago, RunTheBall said:

I think it’s hilarious that people put so much stock in a depth chart.

 

The only thing the depth chart is is a tool for McD to send a message or make rookies think they are earning their spot. He’s been doing this from day 1. Coleman will get more targets than Mack, and very quickly Davis and Bishop will be moved up. 

I’m sorry, if you think that anyone believes Mack will get more targets than Coleman. No one believes that. What some of us are bothered by, is that there was a scenario, that the Bills could go into this year with Mack Hollins and their top pick, neck and neck. FWIW, on the “rookies earn it part” the Bills had 2 rookies last year that were on top of their positions on the depth chart. That’s just BS. This isn’t high school. You don’t make “rookies earn it.” You play the best players on the team.
 

You let your top 2 WRs go. You entered a historically great WR draft and left with one guy battling for the 3rd spot on one of the worst WR depth charts in the NFL. That’s almost not possible. Whoever the WR that they picked should have walked across the stage, shook Goodell’s hand, and been the best outside receiver on the team. They should have taken at least one more guy as well. That guy (Javon Baker for example) should also be playing ahead of guys like Hollins/Claypool/MVS/Isabella/Hamler/Shavers. The fact that the Bills let it get to a point where, 3 days before the start of the season, Mack Hollins is a viable option, is the failure. 

No one believes that Hamlin will play ahead of Bishop all year either. That is just this way for now because Bishop missed a lot of camp.

[dave mcbride]

4 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

They should have drafted a receiver last year knowing it was a strong possibility that both of their guys might walk after the 2023 season. 

Um … they basically did. Barring injury, Kincaid is going to show the league how damn good he is. He is the first genuinely good TE the Bills have had since maybe Ernie Warlick in the 1960s. It’s staggering to think that Pete Metzelaars, who I would I guess ran a 5.3 40 in his “prime,” was arguably the best TE the Bills have had in the post-AFL era.

 

Kelce and Gronk demonstrate how a great TE allows you to succeed in a passing game with so-so WRs. Just look at the 2014 Pats: good slot guys (which the Bills have) in Edelman and (to a much lesser extent) in Amendola and then … the immortal Brandon Lafell. Same with that 2010 Pats team, the year after Moss left. The TEs were great, however.

Edited September 5 by dave mcbride

[Captain Hindsight]

11 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But to say "well we have given him a few dollars it will all be fine" when they knew their other outside receiver was likely walking as a FA after the season... it is a failure to prepare. Beane gambled. And he lost.

He did. I would also argue he got maximum value out of a bad situation. It would have been smart to pick one more WR in the draft tho

[oldmanfan]

8 hours ago, BillsVet said:

 

If you believe WR's are interchangeable...well there's a bridge in Brooklyn for for sale that you might be interested in.  

 

In terms of raw talent no.  In terms of how they fit into Brady's offense yes.  We'll see how it works, but apparently you just want to live in denial of what Brady has said.

8 minutes ago, Captain Hindsight said:

He did. I would also argue he got maximum value out of a bad situation. It would have been smart to pick one more WR in the draft tho

People keep saying this, but would picking up another WR is, say, round 3 or 4 really be much different than picking up some of the FAs we brought in this year?

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Um … they basically did. Barring injury, Kincaid is going to show the league how damn good he is. He is the first genuinely good TE the Bills have had since maybe Ernie Warlick in the 1960s. It’s staggering to think that Pete Metzelaars, who I would I guess ran a 5.3 40 in his “prime,” was arguably the best TE the Bills have had in the post-AFL era.

 

I like the Kincaid pick. I think he is potentially a top 3 tight end in football. But guys who win outside are harder to find and more valuable. If they knew their two outside receivers were going I'd have liked to see them come out of that draft with an outside receiver. Could they have got up another 2 or 3 picks to get Jordan Addison (who they loved)? Maybe. They chose not to. And they did have a serviceable tight end, although I don't deny Kincaid is a clear upgrade as a receiving threat. 

 

I just think that winning outside matters to playing good offense in the NFL and to spend two years punting on the receiver position in the draft and then find both of your outside guys leaving at the same time to the extent you are now considering whether you might have to start Mack Hollins or a guy who has been 70% a slot receiver for the past two seasons as one of their primary outside guys for 2024. Basically Kincaid could be great this year, be the #1 tight end in football and I still think if our outside receivers can't win their assignments with some consistency it will limit the ceiling of the offense.

[Kirby Jackson]

5 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

In terms of raw talent no.  In terms of how they fit into Brady's offense yes.  We'll see how it works, but apparently you just want to live in denial of what Brady has said.

People keep saying this, but would picking up another WR is, say, round 3 or 4 really be much different than picking up some of the FAs we brought in this year?

Unequivocally, yes. Signing washed up, scrub vets, is a WAY worse idea than drafting guys that were available a round or 2 after where they should have been picked because of the depth of the position in the draft. McMillan/Baker/Walker/Cowing/Thrash >>>>>>> scrub vets

[GunnerBill]

16 minutes ago, Captain Hindsight said:

He did. I would also argue he got maximum value out of a bad situation. It would have been smart to pick one more WR in the draft tho

 

Or to have not ignored the position beyond two 5th round lottery tickets (one looks like it's worked, one is cut by year 2) in the two prior drafts. My knock on them is less about what they have done at receiver in 2024 given where they found themselves. It is more that they could have been better prepared had they taken different decisions in 2022 and 2023. 

[oldmanfan]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Unequivocally, yes. Signing washed up, scrub vets, is a WAY worse idea than drafting guys that were available a round or 2 after where they should have been picked because of the depth of the position in the draft. McMillan/Baker/Walker/Cowing/Thrash >>>>>>> scrub vets

And if I wanted to take the time I could find way more examples of guys that were taken and never did anything in the league.  Look at the guys we drafted.  We just got rid of two older guys at safety so we drafted one of the best prospects at the position in round 2.  Maybe we take a WR over Carter round 3.  Davis in round 4 gives you another solid RB that can also catch.  And once you get to round 5 it’s a crap shoot - you pick the best guy on your board.

 

The success of this offense will not result upon some theoretical guy you want to dream up that they could have taken at WR on day 3.  At best that guy would be fourth on the depth chart.  This offense succeeds of fails based on Brady and how well he uses and schemes for the talent he has.  Talent that includes now a pretty solid run game, one TE in Kincaid that looks really good and one in Knox that has shown he gets open in the red zone.  Talent that includes a Swiss Army knife guy in Samuel that finally gets a QB, an emerging talent in Shakir, a rookie with size and good hands in Coleman, and three RBs that all have shown they can come out of the backfield and catch passes.  Oh, and a pretty fair QB.

 

So we’ll see what Brady does.  He did pretty well last half of last year even with a declining Diggs and a hurt guy in Davis.  I suspect we’ll see a lot of interesting things out of the offense this year.

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I like the Kincaid pick. I think he is potentially a top 3 tight end in football. But guys who win outside are harder to find and more valuable. If they knew their two outside receivers were going I'd have liked to see them come out of that draft with an outside receiver. Could they have got up another 2 or 3 picks to get Jordan Addison (who they loved)? Maybe. They chose not to. And they did have a serviceable tight end, although I don't deny Kincaid is a clear upgrade as a receiving threat. 

 

I just think that winning outside matters to playing good offense in the NFL and to spend two years punting on the receiver position in the draft and then find both of your outside guys leaving at the same time to the extent you are now considering whether you might have to start Mack Hollins or a guy who has been 70% a slot receiver for the past two seasons as one of their primary outside guys for 2024. Basically Kincaid could be great this year, be the #1 tight end in football and I still think if our outside receivers can't win their assignments with some consistency it will limit the ceiling of the offense.

How many times over the years have we seen a guy like Know get open downfield?  Or when Davis (no speed merchant) got free on the outside?  It is about scheme more that just raw speed or whatever.

[GunnerBill]

26 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

 

How many times over the years have we seen a guy like Know get open downfield?  Or when Davis (no speed merchant) got free on the outside?  It is about scheme more that just raw speed or whatever.

 

Where did I say anything about it being just about "raw speed"?

Edited September 5 by GunnerBill

[Kirby Jackson]

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

And if I wanted to take the time I could find way more examples of guys that were taken and never did anything in the league.  Look at the guys we drafted.  We just got rid of two older guys at safety so we drafted one of the best prospects at the position in round 2.  Maybe we take a WR over Carter round 3.  Davis in round 4 gives you another solid RB that can also catch.  And once you get to round 5 it’s a crap shoot - you pick the best guy on your board.

 

The success of this offense will not result upon some theoretical guy you want to dream up that they could have taken at WR on day 3.  At best that guy would be fourth on the depth chart.  This offense succeeds of fails based on Brady and how well he uses and schemes for the talent he has.  Talent that includes now a pretty solid run game, one TE in Kincaid that looks really good and one in Knox that has shown he gets open in the red zone.  Talent that includes a Swiss Army knife guy in Samuel that finally gets a QB, an emerging talent in Shakir, a rookie with size and good hands in Coleman, and three RBs that all have shown they can come out of the backfield and catch passes.  Oh, and a pretty fair QB.

 

So we’ll see what Brady does.  He did pretty well last half of last year even with a declining Diggs and a hurt guy in Davis.  I suspect we’ll see a lot of interesting things out of the offense this year.

How many times over the years have we seen a guy like Know get open downfield?  Or when Davis (no speed merchant) got free on the outside?  It is about scheme more that just raw speed or whatever.

You’re missing the point. The Bills didn’t need to find guys to be 5th on their depth chart. They needed to find a guy at the top. Let me say it differently, “they would have been better of drafting Justin Shorter in the 5th than signing MVS.” While Shorter was a long shot to be a number 1, he has better odds of it than MVS who has proven that he can’t play.
 

If Shorter turns out to be Shorter, you sign MVS, Claypool, Hollins or whatever scrub you want that’s left over to be your 5th. You hope that you draft Puka Nacua and not Justin Shorter. When you are missing a number 1 WR, one of the 3 most important positions in football, you need to make way more of an effort to find one (even if that results in drafting a guy like Shorter and cutting him). You are no worse off because there are scrub vets all over the street and practice squads that you can add if that guy fails. Hope that clears it up. 

 

Edited September 5 by Kirby Jackson

[oldmanfan]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Where did I say anything about it being just about "raw speed"?

when did you overlook "or whatever"?

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

when did you overlook "or whatever"?

 

So what's the "whatever?" The whole point about playing "outside" in the NFL is it is where it comes down to player vs player. And sure, scheme can help, but the reason wide receivers, corners, edge rushers and offensive tackles are the four best paid positions after Quarterback is that in anything other than the smallest of sample sizes any weaknesses that exist are hard to hide with scheme. Your guys have to win their assignments more often than not. I worry about what the Bills have out there. To me leaving yourself in a position where your top two guys leave in a single offseason and you have no realistic in house options to play outside is just poor planning. And despite the fact I think Kincaid can be great and Shakir can be really good, I suspect their lack of true boundary guys who can win outside caps the potential of the offense. 

[oldmanfan]

40 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

You’re missing the point. The Bills didn’t need to find guys to be 5th on their depth chart. They needed to find a guy at the top. Let me say it differently, “they would have been better of drafting Justin Shorter in the 5th than signing MVS.” While Shorter was a long shot to be a number 1, he has better odds of it than MVS who has proven that he can’t play. If Shorter turns out to be Shorter, you sign MVS, Claypool, Hollins or whatever scrub you want that’s left over to be your 5th. You hope that you draft Puka Nacua and not Justin Shorter. When you are missing a number 1 WR, one of the 3 most important positions in football, you need to make way more of an effort to find one (even if that results in drafting a guy like Shorter and cutting him). You are no worse off because there are scrub vets all over the street and practice squads that you can add if that guy fails. Hope that clears it up. 

 

The Bills had what you would consider a true #1 in Diggs, and I would note that even with him they did not reach the promised land.  And they don't have him now because, if you are to believe his words, he decided he needed to shake things up for himself (not that I think he was a true #1 -whatever that may be - the last part of last season).  

 

To me the only surefire way to get the kind of WR you want is to do so in free agency or trade.  Only through those routes would you know whether a guy has it to be a force in the league.  And because of Diggs and other contracts (like Miller's), they simply were not in the position to take a swing at a guy this offseason.  They did get Coleman and we'll see what impact he makes.  Could they have traded a bunch of picks and such to move way up in the draft?  Sure.  But then you are ignoring other positions such as safety that required upgrades this year.  And again with no guarantees of a real hit.

 

I am intrigued to see what Brady does with this group.  I do think there will be a lot of WRs available in FA next year (I see Higgins in our future), and Beane will have funds to make a move.

16 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

So what's the "whatever?" The whole point about playing "outside" in the NFL is it is where it comes down to player vs player. And sure, scheme can help, but the reason wide receivers, corners, edge rushers and offensive tackles are the four best paid positions after Quarterback is that in anything other than the smallest of sample sizes any weaknesses that exist are hard to hide with scheme. Your guys have to win their assignments more often than not. I worry about what the Bills have out there. To me leaving yourself in a position where your top two guys leave in a single offseason and you have no realistic in house options to play outside is just poor planning. And despite the fact I think Kincaid can be great and Shakir can be really good, I suspect their lack of true boundary guys who can win outside caps the potential of the offense. 

I disagree with your boundary guy concept but agree about matchups.  And that is what Brady has to do, create favorable matchups that allow for guys to get open downfield.  Previous coordinators, as well as Brady, did so by getting a guy like Cook or Davis matched against a LB, or Kincaid matched against a slower LB, and so on.  So when you keep talking about boundary guys you lose me.  Split Cook out and get him isolated against a LB, is he a boundary guy?

Edited September 5 by oldmanfan

[Kirby Jackson]

3 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

The Bills had what you would consider a true #1 in Diggs, and I would note that even with him they did not reach the promised land.  And they don't have him now because, if you are to believe his words, he decided he needed to shake things up for himself (not that I think he was a true #1 -whatever that may be - the last part of last season).  

 

To me the only surefire way to get the kind of WR you want is to do so in free agency or trade.  Only through those routes would you know whether a guy has it to be a force in the league.  And because of Diggs and other contracts (like Miller's), they simply were not in the position to take a swing at a guy this offseason.  They did get Coleman and we'll see what impact he makes.  Could they have traded a bunch of picks and such to move way up in the draft?  Sure.  But then you are ignoring other positions such as safety that required upgrades this year.  And again with no guarantees of a real hit.

 

I am intrigues to see what Brady does with this group.  I do think there will be a lot of WRs available in FA next year (I see Higgins in our future), and Beane will have funds to make a move.

I agree that it wouldn’t have been easy. It was the lack of prioritizing it that rubs me the wrong way. You could have drafted a different safety, DT, etc.. Those positions aren’t as important. The Nukua and Shorter examples makes sense here. It didn’t matter if the Bills got a number 1 as a rookie or a bust that never played a snap. They had to take a swing.

 

I agree that they will get a number 1 in the offseason. Higgins makes a lot of sense. That extra 2nd gives them some firepower should McMillan or Burden fall a little. They could also use that extra 2nd to trade for a guy that’s ready to get paid (Olave, Wilson, Pickens). There are some avenues to get a 1. I just can’t fathom how they let this offseason go by without more of an effort. They have Josh Allen in his prime. 

[JP51]

3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I agree that it wouldn’t have been easy. It was the lack of prioritizing it that rubs me the wrong way. You could have drafted a different safety, DT, etc.. Those positions aren’t as important. The Nukua and Shorter examples makes sense here. It didn’t matter if the Bills got a number 1 as a rookie or a bust that never played a snap. They had to take a swing.

 

I agree that they will get a number 1 in the offseason. Higgins makes a lot of sense. That extra 2nd gives them some firepower should McMillan or Burden fall a little. They could also use that extra 2nd to trade for a guy that’s ready to get paid (Olave, Wilson, Pickens). There are some avenues to get a 1. I just can’t fathom how they let this offseason go by without more of an effort. They have Josh Allen in his prime. 

They absolutely must prioritize getting Josh weapons much more so than they have. I think they have tried in the past 2 years but I think they must continue to do that. Just looking at what the WR position is getting paid, having a stable of young WR is critical to me. 

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I agree that it wouldn’t have been easy. It was the lack of prioritizing it that rubs me the wrong way. You could have drafted a different safety, DT, etc.. Those positions aren’t as important. The Nukua and Shorter examples makes sense here. It didn’t matter if the Bills got a number 1 as a rookie or a bust that never played a snap. They had to take a swing.

 

I agree that they will get a number 1 in the offseason. Higgins makes a lot of sense. That extra 2nd gives them some firepower should McMillan or Burden fall a little. They could also use that extra 2nd to trade for a guy that’s ready to get paid (Olave, Wilson, Pickens). There are some avenues to get a 1. I just can’t fathom how they let this offseason go by without more of an effort. They have Josh Allen in his prime. 

I think we have to see, and I think we have more weapons than you might imagine.  Samuel for example has been restricted by lack of good QB play, and Brady can use him all over the field.  Shakir is certainly intriguing given his finish last year.  And I think everyone agrees about Kincaid.  We’ll see a lot of motion, more play action, screens etc. based on the latter part of last year.
 

One last point about Josh.  People are worried about his prime but he’s got a lot of years ahead.  If we run the ball effectively and if Josh learns to slide quicker he’s got plenty of time to win a few.

[Low Positive]

I think we're all extra salty about this because it was a repeat of the 2018 draft. We spent three months obsessing about college players at the position we knew the Bills would be taking. A consensus was formed around those players in this community. Then Brandon Beane goes and takes the guy that we all had ranked as damn near undraftable. It makes us angry, because we want something so badly that we have no control over. 

[GunnerBill]

36 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I disagree with your boundary guy concept but agree about matchups.  And that is what Brady has to do, create favorable matchups that allow for guys to get open downfield.  Previous coordinators, as well as Brady, did so by getting a guy like Cook or Davis matched against a LB, or Kincaid matched against a slower LB, and so on.  So when you keep talking about boundary guys you lose me.  Split Cook out and get him isolated against a LB, is he a boundary guy?

 

Sure, you can split Cook out on the outside and a linebacker will go with him and you have a mismatch. If you do it 10 plays in a row the linebacker will not follow him they will treat him like a wide receiver and then the cornerback opposite him has the advantage in his favour. 

 

Eventually you have to have guys who can win outside against corners. No amount of scheme can hide that deficit, if it exists, over a prolonged period.  

[oldmanfan]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Sure, you can split Cook out on the outside and a linebacker will go with him and you have a mismatch. If you do it 10 plays in a row the linebacker will not follow him they will treat him like a wide receiver and then the cornerback opposite him has the advantage in his favour. 

 

Eventually you have to have guys who can win outside against corners. No amount of scheme can hide that deficit, if it exists, over a prolonged period.  

We disagree.  And I suspect we will see victories outside for the Bills all year.

[BillsVet]

26 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I agree that they will get a number 1 in the offseason. Higgins makes a lot of sense. That extra 2nd gives them some firepower should McMillan or Burden fall a little. They could also use that extra 2nd to trade for a guy that’s ready to get paid (Olave, Wilson, Pickens). There are some avenues to get a 1. I just can’t fathom how they let this offseason go by without more of an effort. They have Josh Allen in his prime. 

 

I am concerned with their ability to identify and draft offensive skilled talent, particularly as compared to defensive.  They've found some good starters in the latter, but the former has not been good save for Josh.  They haven't developed a top end WR or TE from 2017-2022.  Maybe Kincaid is that guy, but the WR group doesn't reflect anyone unless Keon earns the comparisons to perhaps Davante Adams.    

 

They really gotta up that part of the game because shelling out big bucks on UFA WR's isn't a long term solution.  Might produce immediate results but means taking on a big cap hit and/or a contract extension as with Diggs.