The overvaluation of Wide receivers

[ColoradoBills]

1 minute ago, Low Positive said:

Couple things.

1) These numbers are skewed by teams like the Ravens who ran a lot and the Bengals who almost never ran the ball.

 

2) What we can’t know is how many plays the Bills ran where the primary read was a WR but Josh had to check down to a TE or a RB due to a lack of separation. 

 

Exactly.  This is why stats are not cut and dry and never tell the whole story.

 

I see the real question in relation to the $.  Is a $30M+ WR worth it when you consider all the other options a team has.

[3rdand12]

1 hour ago, Don Otreply said:

Thanx Magox, 

 

that was good food for thought, it looks a little like our Bills are riding near the front of this trend…, 

This.

 And yea 

 Thanks Magox 🙂 good stuff to consider

[Low Positive]

1 minute ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

Exactly.  This is why stats are not cut and dry and never tell the whole story.

 

I see the real question in relation to the $.  Is a $30M+ WR worth it when you consider all the other options a team has.

The problem is that to run an offense like the Vikings or Bengals, you’ve got to have two top-level WRs. So, you’ve still gotta hit on a rookie, use void years like the Eagles, or just don’t pay your defense like Cincinnati. Paying one guy is not enough. 

[Beck Water]

So just for giggles I decided to look at the Iggles and the Chiffs.

 

Iggles 1069 run + pass plays.  621 rush plays or 58% rush plays.
Of their 42% or 448 pass plays, 261 targeted WR thus 58% of their pass plays targeted WR (so less overall plays targeting WR than the Bills 295, but a higher % since they had fewer pass plays)
Overall, 24% of their offensive plays targeted a WR

 

Chiffs 1050 run plus pass plays.  450 rush plays or 43% rush plays.

Of their 57% or 600 pass plays, 283 targeted WR thus 47% of their pass plays targeted WR.  

Overall, 27% of their offensive plays targeted a WR

 

 

12 minutes ago, Low Positive said:

Couple things.

1) These numbers are skewed by teams like the Ravens who ran a lot and the Bengals who almost never ran the ball.

 

2) What we can’t know is how many plays the Bills ran where the primary read was a WR but Josh had to check down to a TE or a RB due to a lack of separation. 

 

Yes.

[Beck Water]

12 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

I see the real question in relation to the $.  Is a $30M+ WR worth it when you consider all the other options a team has.

 

The quiet part of this is: WR in general is a position that tends to Diva a bit.  Not sure why, maybe the guys on here who have played at least in college at WR or CB can give some insight.  Maybe because the WR and CB are often alone 1 on 1 with all eyes on them, so they're positions where guys have to have a lot of self-confidence and a short memory for bad plays?  Maybe because they're getting punished hard on almost every play hitting or being hit?

 

So when you pay a WR top $$, his inner Diva seems to blossom, and he seems to feel he's "The Man", the Star, and he should get the ball whenever there's a possibility he's open.

I don't think the Bills should go out and pay a guy $30M.  But I do think the Bills need better WR than they had this year.

Edited Sunday at 07:52 PM by Beck Water

[ColoradoBills]

2 minutes ago, Low Positive said:

The problem is that to run an offense like the Vikings or Bengals, you’ve got to have two top-level WRs. So, you’ve still gotta hit on a rookie, use void years like the Eagles, or just don’t pay your defense like Cincinnati. Paying one guy is not enough. 

 

Right on.  Also, if a team has only 1 elite WR who gets the lion's share of targets it could be problematic if he's injured at any time.

[Buffalo716]

22 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

I'm late to the show here so need to catch up on what point is trying to be supported with the various stats?

Correct on the WR target pass plays.  Bills had 520 passing attempts, so that would be 295/520 or 57% of their pass plays targeting a WR
The Bills are listed in pro.football.reference as having 1025 plays: the sum of their pass attempts and rush attempts is 1011.

That makes them 49% rush, 51% pass.
 

Overall 29% of the Bills offensive plays targeted a WR.
 

 

Close - see above, 29%. 

 

I expect the Bills might have liked to have more pass plays targeting a WR, but their WR weren't up to the job, which is why we saw Ty Johnson getting critical targets in critical games.  

Somebody said around 40% of all targets go to a WR so I checked the bills percentage 

Edited Sunday at 07:56 PM by Buffalo716

[BearNorth]

2 hours ago, SoonerBillsFan said:

I'll just say, we need to add somone to break the cover 2 shell and get deep. I don't care if it's a 6th round pick if they can be dependable.  Re- sign Hollins and let's get to work.

Xavier Worthy was on the board, we traded the pick to our arch rival.  He is a get deep receiver.  Playoff stats this year 19 catches, 21 targets, 3 TD's 13 first downs in 3 games, 15.1 ypc.

[folz]

13 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

I mistyped.. it's 1011 plays not 1110

 

So 295 of 1011 is 29%

 

 

I wondered about TDs also. Now, the Bills are a bit unique because of Josh getting so many red  zone carries and the "Everybody Eats" philosophy this year. But, for the 2024 Buffalo Bills, 17 of their 65 total touchdowns went to WRs (or 26%). League wide though, wide receivers scored 562 of the total 1,387 touchdowns scored in the NFL in 2024 (or, WRs on average, scored 40.5% of all TDs in the NFL this season).

[Matt_In_NH]

1 hour ago, ProcessTruster said:

I wouldn't worry on it.   Beane will not be breaking the bank on a WR this season.   He'll prob take a solid run at Cooper but not more than $15 I am guessing; Coopers stock must have fallen based on last years production and his age.   We shall see.    The Bills are a "draft and develop" organization for the most part, so they will work to get Coleman to the next level, probably pay Shakir, get Kincaid and Samuel 100% healthy and prob draft a speed guy or two.   I don't see much more than that.  

 

Wild card is how high they go to keep Cook.  Not THAT will be interesting. 

Joe Marino did a good job breaking it down.....there might be a number you can agree to but it wont be 15M.  Cook is not an every down back.   Sometimes the smart move is letting someone else pay a guy like they did with Tremaine Edmunds.

[MikePJ76]

1 minute ago, Matt_In_NH said:

Joe Marino did a good job breaking it down.....there might be a number you can agree to but it wont be 15M.  Cook is not an every down back.   Sometimes the smart move is letting someone else pay a guy like they did with Tremaine Edmunds.

He is not an every down back but he has a quality that is hard to replicate.

 

He is a home run hitter and makes big plays.  He is very quick and explosive and this year his decision making and willingness to run inside put him over the top.  Without a back that can do the same to replace him the offense would be very different.  He turned a number of 8 to 10 yard runs into 20+ runs and at important times.

 

If they pay him and I hope they find a way it will be for that trait.  Comparing him to the traditional everydown back at 225+ who wears people down is the wrong way to view his value and worth to the team.  

 

I think his age and limited number of carries eases the concern about the fall off of old backs and his speed and explosiveness is a unique trait.  The Bills have very few players who can get to the edge anywhere on the field and go to the house.  

[Matt_In_NH]

3 minutes ago, MikePJ76 said:

He is not an every down back but he has a quality that is hard to replicate.

 

He is a home run hitter and makes big plays.  He is very quick and explosive and this year his decision making and willingness to run inside put him over the top.  Without a back that can do the same to replace him the offense would be very different.  He turned a number of 8 to 10 yard runs into 20+ runs and at important times.

 

If they pay him and I hope they find a way it will be for that trait.  Comparing him to the traditional everydown back at 225+ who wears people down is the wrong way to view his value and worth to the team.  

 

I think his age and limited number of carries eases the concern about the fall off of old backs and his speed and explosiveness is a unique trait.  The Bills have very few players who can get to the edge anywhere on the field and go to the house.  

He is a great player but you have to put a value on him just like any player.  RB's are all unique, they always bring different things to the table, with the line the Bills have they can get someone else for much less than 15M and not have a big drop off.

[3rdand12]

38 minutes ago, Low Positive said:

Couple things.

1) These numbers are skewed by teams like the Ravens who ran a lot and the Bengals who almost never ran the ball.

 

2) What we can’t know is how many plays the Bills ran where the primary read was a WR but Josh had to check down to a TE or a RB due to a lack of separation. 

recall when the major and repetitive issue was "protection" ?

Expect they will have this issue on their checklist !
 

[FireChans]

57 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

Wow, that's 27%.  Way lower than I thought.  It does justify the crux of this subject.

This is a symptom, not a cause. 

[3rdand12]

9 minutes ago, MikePJ76 said:

He is not an every down back but he has a quality that is hard to replicate.

 

He is a home run hitter and makes big plays.  He is very quick and explosive and this year his decision making and willingness to run inside put him over the top.  Without a back that can do the same to replace him the offense would be very different.  He turned a number of 8 to 10 yard runs into 20+ runs and at important times.

 

If they pay him and I hope they find a way it will be for that trait.  Comparing him to the traditional everydown back at 225+ who wears people down is the wrong way to view his value and worth to the team.  

 

I think his age and limited number of carries eases the concern about the fall off of old backs and his speed and explosiveness is a unique trait.  The Bills have very few players who can get to the edge anywhere on the field and go to the house.  

You want to keep him , absolutely. 

[MiracleAtRich1393]

3 hours ago, Matt_In_NH said:

People cannot stop talking about "weapons"  even after the Bills broke a lot of points records this year.  Meanwhile the DL is the actual problem.  The NFL GM's have gone too far too with paying way too much for WR's, they don't make the difference in the playoffs.   Bengals have Chase and Higgins, Dolphins have Hill and Waddle and they dont even make the playoffs...the Chiefs have been to three straight SB's, won two with very little at WR.   Yet the WGR crowd and many fans get on thier choo choo train about needs dozens of weapons....its so dumb.

A WR like Brian Thomas Jr would have added an element to the offense that's completely missing, which is an actual vertical threat. And as a 1st rounder with a 5th year option, would have been extremely cap friendly for 5 years (in keeping with the theme of the thread). The further you get in the playoffs, the more you need to be unsolvable. As bad as the defense was against KC, I think we put up 40+ and advance to the super bowl with a guy like that in the mix. Then with a far superior OLine to KC's and a diverse set of weapons, who knows how we would have fared against the Eagles. We missed on it last year though, no one like that really exists in this year's draft. A bungle no doubt.

 

I also want a killer DLine! The two are not mutually exclusive. Luckily this year's draft is loaded with them. Either make a big splash trade for Garrett or take a bunch of DLinemen high (or both) and punt on WR for another year.

Edited Sunday at 08:46 PM by MiracleAtRich1393

[Matt_In_NH]

20 minutes ago, MiracleAtRich1393 said:

A WR like Brian Thomas Jr would have added an element to the offense that's completely missing, which is an actual vertical threat. And as a 1st rounder with a 5th year option, would have been extremely cap friendly for 5 years (in keeping with the theme of the thread). The further you get in the playoffs, the more you need to be unsolvable. As bad as the defense was against KC, I think we put up 40+ and advance to the super bowl with a guy like that in the mix. Then with a far superior OLine to KC's and a diverse set of weapons, who knows how we would have fared against the Eagles. We missed on it last year though, no one like that really exists in this year's draft. A bungle no doubt.

 

I also want a killer DLine! The two are not mutually exclusive. Luckily this year's draft is loaded with them. Either make a big splash trade for Garrett or take a bunch of DLinemen high (or both) and punt on WR for another year.

My point is not that more talent is not better its just the obsession with only one position....and I believe some nasty DL would have a bigger impact in a playoff game vs the chiefs than a WR...the SB validated that.  You dont have to outscore the chiefs by scoring a million points....you can stop them.

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

No one wants to to give them their flowers, but the chiefs were the ones ahead of the curve on this, in trading Hill.

[MikePJ76]

57 minutes ago, Matt_In_NH said:

He is a great player but you have to put a value on him just like any player.  RB's are all unique, they always bring different things to the table, with the line the Bills have they can get someone else for much less than 15M and not have a big drop off.

see that is the thing though. 

 

Not many have the traits and explosiveness he does.

 

I am not sure where the bills would get a back that has them either considering where they pick and the fact that the roster probably will not allow a top 100 pick to be used for that position.  

 

Its a really tricky situation.  The Bills line and TE/WR blocking is very good in the running game but Cooks ability to score from anywhere is different than most backs.

 

 

[Jerome007]

In an ideal world, of course we'd keep Cook, he's been productive, fun to watch, and add a great WR1 while at it. But with the salary cap, sorry it's not the priority. OLinemen are paid better than backs for a reason. And at least the starting 6 are all back! Josh, TEs, Shakir.  Just one WR that has good production would be enough. Bills were the #2 Offense. It's the D that needs help, bad. DLine mainly. A good DLine can help LBs and DBs so much. 

 

And unless he pouts all year and thus makes zero dollars, Cook is signed for another season. The Bills do NOT have to accommodate him.

 

 

 

Edited Sunday at 09:23 PM by Jerome007