Bills 2nd Rnd pick in 2025 Draft : TJ Sanders - DT South Carolina

[BillsPride12]

1 hour ago, Draconator said:

Commercial that's been playing during the draft on NFL Network

Oh ok gothca.  I'm out of the loop on commercials these days too

[FireChans]

36 minutes ago, Mikie2times said:

Yup. People are right, largely last season the run wasn’t an issue. Until we faced Baltimore AGAIN. Then it was like how can we possibly stop the run? Everybody on this board was freaked out (rightfully so, they dropped 200+ on us the last time). They did it again after, we did literally the best possible job we could in the first half. We forced multiple fumbles. Got a key drop at the end. Won the game we would have lost if they put 5 more minutes on the clock.  
 

Now the Beane fan club is like, meh. Don’t need run defense. Doesn’t matter. We are good there. 😂 it’s just classic fan boy crap you see on here. Not even worth arguing with them.

If the biggest example to worry about the run defense is a game we “almost lost” (read: won), in the playoffs, I’m just not that worried.

 

I’m not the biggest fan of the Sanders pick but he doesn’t need to get us to top 5 against the run to be a success imo

Edited 16 hours ago by FireChans

[Ralonzo]

14 hours ago, LEBills said:

 

 

14 hours ago, Rock-A-Bye Beasley said:

Shemar Turner taken by the Bears. Could be better than Sanders. 

 

Don't look at that chart whatever you do

[Thrivefourfive]

21 minutes ago, Magox said:

 

He's not a 1 technique, and it's not about the size.  It all boils down to whether or not he will be a good player or not.

Agree. I think everyone here wanted a nose tackle though. Sanders is a QB pressure guy. The Bills need to pressure the QB. time’s gonna tell. 

[JohnNord]

2 minutes ago, Simon said:

 

I didn't love his game, but a DT coming off a wrist injury is sort of helpless out there.

I get that - but he was still cleared.  You’d expect him to be a little less effective coming off the injury but not to the point that he was the worst player on defense as Carter had been by many accounts.  
 

Any time your 3rd round pick is a healthy scratch late in the season, behind street free agents signed mid year, it usually doesn’t bode well.

[Maine-iac]

We've spent how many picks on DE's and DT's?  I can think of one time a player drafted by Beane led the team in sacks.  They draft DE's for their run stopping ability and DT's for their pass rushing ability.  We end up with DE's who get 7 or 8 sacks and DT's who get 5 sacks and we hold our breath against teams that run the ball well.  It's the system we run.  Oliver is a great 3 tech.  Sanders looks like he'll be a good 3 tech.  Same with the other DT's.  Problem is habitually our "plan" for stopping the run is perfect execution on every play and keeping Zion Logue on the practice squad and calling him up a few times a year.  If Sanders turns out to be a great pass rusher it will be a win over Carter and if he can sure up the run that will be a bonus.

[Mikie2times]

11 minutes ago, FireChans said:

If the biggest example to worry about the run defense is a game we “almost lost” (read: won), in the playoffs, I’m just not that worried.

 

I’m not the biggest fan of the Sanders pick but he doesn’t need to get us to top 5 against the run to be a success imo

Last three years stack ranked by rushing yards allowed. Includes playoffs.  

 

[FireChans]

4 minutes ago, Mikie2times said:

Last three years stack ranked by rushing yards allowed. Includes playoffs.  

 

Confused by what you are trying to show me here

[Maine-iac]

7 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Confused by what you are trying to show me here

The correlation between rushing yards given up and losses would be my guess.  Higher the rushing yards given up the more frequent the losses.  Look at the January games on that list.  I count 4 January games we've given up over 120 yards rushing and have 1 win in those games.

[Prospector]

2 hours ago, Maine-iac said:

Deone Walker is a 1tech like Jordan Phillips (who played for us) is a 1tech.

Called it

Just now, Prospector said:

Called it

Thank you, thank you very much… doesn’t mean he’ll turn out great, but I called it

[Maine-iac]

3 minutes ago, Prospector said:

Called it

Thank you, thank you very much… doesn’t mean he’ll turn out great, but I called it

I don't hate the pick.  Especially at this stage of the draft.  I hope he's not supposed to be our run stopper though.  He's big I'll give them that.

Edited 15 hours ago by Maine-iac

[FireChans]

4 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:

The correlation between rushing yards given up and losses would be my guess.  Higher the rushing yards given up the more frequent the losses.  Look at the January games on that list.  I count 4 January games we've given up over 120 yards rushing and have 1 win in those games.

Well yeah. Rushing yards are correlated with winning. There’s lots of reasons for that. Like teams with big leads run the football a lot.

 

Correlation doesn’t equal causation.

 

Every team is going to have a similar chart. Because a lot of teams losses will also be games they get run on a lot. 

[3rdand12]

5 hours ago, Shortchaz said:

This guy has a chance to be a chris jones type. He’s tall and fast. As a professional, he will have the training staff and opportunity to become a game wrecker. hopefully he wants that and works hard towards it. 

 

I wouldn’t be shocked if he has a better career than Oliver, low bar to be more valuable when factoring pay. I believe his larger frame/speed combo gives him a higher ceiling. 

 

 

 

 

 

Some of Us wanted the defense tweaked a bit so Oliver would be able to get those one on ones he excels at as penetrating DT.

 Hoping they take a real 1tech later on at least. and I will stop being a bit disappointed in this pick.

Shame they traded away for him . But we will see.

[Maine-iac]

Just now, FireChans said:

Well yeah. Rushing yards are correlated with winning. There’s lots of reasons for that. Like teams with big leads run the football a lot.

 

Correlation doesn’t equal causation.

 

Every team is going to have a similar chart. Because a lot of teams losses will also be games they get run on a lot. 

I think in this case correlation dose equal causation.  You give up a bunch of rushing yards you lose more.  There is a statistical association between the variables and a change in one variable (rushing yards given up) makes a change in the other (losses).

[FireChans]

Just now, Maine-iac said:

I think in this case correlation dose equal causation.  You give up a bunch of rushing yards you lose more.  There is a statistical association between the variables and a change in one variable (rushing yards given up) makes a change in the other (losses).

You are just defining correlation lol

[Maine-iac]

Copied and pasted 

Correlation means there is a statistical association between variables. Causation means that a change in one variable causes a change in another variable.

[3rdand12]

4 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I think those names are a reminder that to this point, Beane/McDermott have done one thing, and one thing only, that previous regimes didn't. That's to find a franchise QB. A league MVP player.

 

But we're already 1/2 way through his career with no championships to show for it yet. 8 years later with the same issues and problems since day one. Can't stop the run against physical offenses and can't hold a lead in criticsl spots.

 

Let's hope this season is different with the group of free agent signings and draft picks. 

well they did seem to improve the offense overall , with getting Josh a highly functioning if not dominant O line with depth.

That was a huge need.

 But yes , needs to win Championship games by improving that defense all around still

 Go Bills

 

 

[Coach Tuesday]

Please don’t nerd-derail this thread.

[Mikie2times]

7 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Well yeah. Rushing yards are correlated with winning. There’s lots of reasons for that. Like teams with big leads run the football a lot.

 

Correlation doesn’t equal causation.

 

Every team is going to have a similar chart. Because a lot of teams losses will also be games they get run on a lot. 

Except we have only lost one game by 7 or more points in that entire sample. It’s not like teams are just running to run out the clock. They’re running to keep the ball away from our offense and to control the game. This isn’t a result of correlation at all. It’s how teams attack us and have been doing so for years. It just doesn’t matter that much when we have a 20 point lead.

[FireChans]

3 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:

Correlation means there is a statistical association between variables

Correct

 

5 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:

You give up a bunch of rushing yards you lose more.  There is a statistical association between the variables

This is also correct and also the definition of correlation. Not causation.

 

Giving up a lot of rushing yards is associated with losing more. This is an example of correlation.

 

where is @GoBills808, he’s better at this than me at explaining.