Poeticlaw Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 To me a #1 receiver is the receiver you count on to make the catches and plays especially in the clutch and move the chains. # 1 receiver doesnt neccessarily have to be the leader in Yards but should be a leader in receptions and moving the chains. A # 1 receiver should be ranked in the # 32 in receptions (becuase there is 32 Teams) Lee Evans is not a # 1 receiver hes a deep threat reciver but he cannot be counted on in a possesion game and is not worth 9 Mil a year Josh Reed who is really nothing more than a slot reciever and a very good one at that he proved that from year one on this team. He has been more of a #1 receiever than our official #1. Josh reed is ranked 46 in receptions with 54 Catches Lee Evans is ranked 36 in receptions with 58 Catches Since Josh averages 6 catches per game and and Lee averages 3 there is a good chance that Josh will have more receptions than lee evans and these are important catches first down catches moving the chain catches while 90% of Lees catches comes from a deep ball which is why he has more yards I dont think thats worth 9 Mil a year. I don want to hear about double teams I have seen plenty of recievers catch balls in double temas it seems that Lee cannot even catch the ball when hes in single coverage its only when he has no one areound him to interfere with his catching. Dont mean to bust up on our so called star player but hes not a fit for this offensive system and since he is not a fit for this offensive sytem he should not have been paid 9 mil a year we paid that to Eric moulds and he average more than 80 catches a year and was good for moving the chains no just the deep ball. I apologize if I offend anyone but this is the reality I see this team overpaying for talent that doesnt fit our system.
bbills17 Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 To me a #1 receiver is the receiver you count on to make the catches and plays especially in the clutch and move the chains. # 1 receiver doesnt neccessarily have to be the leader in Yards but should be a leader in receptions and moving the chains. A # 1 receiver should be ranked in the # 32 in receptions (becuase there is 32 Teams) Lee Evans is not a # 1 receiver hes a deep threat reciver but he cannot be counted on in a possesion game and is not worth 9 Mil a year Josh Reed who is really nothing more than a slot reciever and a very good one at that he proved that from year one on this team. He has been more of a #1 receiever than our official #1. Josh reed is ranked 46 in receptions with 54 Catches Lee Evans is ranked 36 in receptions with 58 Catches Since Josh averages 6 catches per game and and Lee averages 3 there is a good chance that Josh will have more receptions than lee evans and these are important catches first down catches moving the chain catches while 90% of Lees catches comes from a deep ball which is why he has more yards I dont think thats worth 9 Mil a year. I don want to hear about double teams I have seen plenty of recievers catch balls in double temas it seems that Lee cannot even catch the ball when hes in single coverage its only when he has no one areound him to interfere with his catching. Dont mean to bust up on our so called star player but hes not a fit for this offensive system and since he is not a fit for this offensive sytem he should not have been paid 9 mil a year we paid that to Eric moulds and he average more than 80 catches a year and was good for moving the chains no just the deep ball. I apologize if I offend anyone but this is the reality I see this team overpaying for talent that doesnt fit our system. I agree with you. I like Lee Evans but I think the money we spent on him could be spent better elsewhere (or on someone else). Lee's good, but he's not a game changer and I'm not convinced he can perform like the elite WR's do when they're double covered all game
marauderswr80 Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 Lee is a game changer! However, you have to have an OC willing to get him the football. Plus it helps to have help on the other side of him..... Every game changer at WR or teams #1 guys ALL have another SOLID WR on the other side. Name one team who dont? I can....Buffalo Bills..... I think we call can blame the OC on this one not Lee Evans.
bizell Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 you need an OC that has plays designed for a player's strengths, and a quarterback willing to try to get the ball to said receiver.
Billsjunkie Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 You put Lee Evans on most other teams and he is a #1 receiver. Not his fault that Trent won't throw into double coverage or the OC not using him to his strengths. I think Lee would be killer on slants and screens aka Wes Welker. Lee Evans is most certainly a #1 WR.
dave mcbride Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 A true #1 is a guy teams gameplan against yet who still makes a number of plays almost every game. Steve Smith is one; TO is another. So is Brandon Marshall. At this point, I'd call Reggie Wayne one (his attributes most resemble Evans's at this point, incidentally). Evans isn't, but I think that if the Bills tight end game improves, you'll see him put up the stats of one. There's a pretty strong correlation between a WR with big numbers and capable TE play. Apparently, the Bills are big fans of Derek Fine. If he pans out, that'd be huge. He's looked pretty smooth so far. Both he and Schouman are far better receivers than Royal.
Buffalo Mike1 Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 Lee is a game changer! However, you have to have an OC willing to get him the football. Plus it helps to have help on the other side of him..... Every game changer at WR or teams #1 guys ALL have another SOLID WR on the other side. Name one team who dont? I can....Buffalo Bills..... I think we call can blame the OC on this one not Lee Evans. Somebody needs to step up to the plate and provide inforfation on WHY Lee Evans has become a 40 million dollar decoy.
TheLynchTrain Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 Its been repeated on here before: Lee Evans contract will pale in comparison to the top guys at the end of the year. After he signed his contract, Roy Williams got a 5 year 45 mil contract. More top guys (and guys that don't deserve it) will receive rediculous contracts this year and next. Remember Berrians 7 year 49 mil? Remember nate Burleson's 7 year 49 mil the year before that? 9 mil a year will be the standard for guys of that caliber in the future. I guarantee that by March of 2010 Lee Evans won't even be in the top 10 receiver money category. If he is, he'll be 9 or 10. Its the way of the NFL, and the bills had to keep their top guy, even if it looks like they're overpaying him now.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 you need an OC that has plays designed for a player's strengths, and a quarterback willing to try to get the ball to said receiver. This, to me, has been the biggest let-down of Turk's first season. He came in promising to move Evans around, get him the ball as much as possible, etc. But it hasn't happened. I think sometimes you need to call plays for guys like Evans--not necessarily game-breaking plays--but just plays so they can touch the ball. The Broncos run this sweet play-action play where the WR (usually Marshall) goes in motion one way, then they boot the other and Marshall comes back across the formation for the catch. It might only be a 6-yard gain, but sometimes guys like Marshall (or Evans) can make a guy miss on plays like this and you have a 30-yard gain. And it helps the receivers get into a rythym when they touch the ball a lot.
Buffalo Mike1 Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 Its been repeated on here before: Lee Evans contract will pale in comparison to the top guys at the end of the year. After he signed his contract, Roy Williams got a 5 year 45 mil contract. More top guys (and guys that don't deserve it) will receive rediculous contracts this year and next. Remember Berrians 7 year 49 mil? Remember nate Burleson's 7 year 49 mil the year before that? 9 mil a year will be the standard for guys of that caliber in the future. I guarantee that by March of 2010 Lee Evans won't even be in the top 10 receiver money category. If he is, he'll be 9 or 10. Its the way of the NFL, and the bills had to keep their top guy, even if it looks like they're overpaying him now. Exactly- I do not have a problem with his contract, just throw him the damn ball.
YOOOOOO Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 The problem is our OC's have trouble doing one basic thing..... Designing play that get the ball into your playmakers hands.... Were are the WR screens, hitch/dig routes, quick slants... Even reverses to him.... Get the ball in his hands
QB Bills Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 To me a #1 receiver is the receiver you count on to make the catches and plays especially in the clutch and move the chains. # 1 receiver doesnt neccessarily have to be the leader in Yards but should be a leader in receptions and moving the chains. A # 1 receiver should be ranked in the # 32 in receptions (becuase there is 32 Teams) Lee Evans is not a # 1 receiver hes a deep threat reciver but he cannot be counted on in a possesion game and is not worth 9 Mil a year Josh Reed who is really nothing more than a slot reciever and a very good one at that he proved that from year one on this team. He has been more of a #1 receiever than our official #1. Josh reed is ranked 46 in receptions with 54 Catches Lee Evans is ranked 36 in receptions with 58 Catches Since Josh averages 6 catches per game and and Lee averages 3 there is a good chance that Josh will have more receptions than lee evans and these are important catches first down catches moving the chain catches while 90% of Lees catches comes from a deep ball which is why he has more yards I dont think thats worth 9 Mil a year. I don want to hear about double teams I have seen plenty of recievers catch balls in double temas it seems that Lee cannot even catch the ball when hes in single coverage its only when he has no one areound him to interfere with his catching. Dont mean to bust up on our so called star player but hes not a fit for this offensive system and since he is not a fit for this offensive sytem he should not have been paid 9 mil a year we paid that to Eric moulds and he average more than 80 catches a year and was good for moving the chains no just the deep ball. I apologize if I offend anyone but this is the reality I see this team overpaying for talent that doesnt fit our system. are you joking? josh reed has been more of a #1??? teams don't gameplan around josh reed....if you read any of the pregame or postgame comments from other teams, they always talk about how they try to plan around smothering lee evans....never heard of anyone worrying about josh reed (not to take anything away from his improved game) as people have stated already, lee just doesn't get the ball...don't know whether that's because of the qb or schonert/jauron sadly, even when he is covered, he makes the catches...can you name of many instances this year where he was thrown the ball and didn't catch it? double-teamed or not? the guy is immensely talented and that talent is just wasting away year after year here it sucks, because i really feel this offense has the skill but it's just not being used...jauron or whoever needs to identify if it's the qb, or schonert's scheme and do something about it...probably wishful thinking because it's jauron, but i really feel this season was lost because of the offense's inability to challenge deep does anyone know of a website that will tell you how many times a team has attempted throws of at least 30 yards?
Peter Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 Lee Evans is a very good receiver and I am glad that he is on our team. Yet, when the other team wants to take him away, they can. That is one of the reasons why Josh Reed is so important to this team.
Sisyphean Bills Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 He's not an elite receiver. He's the best receiver on a team with a dysfunctional passing game.
StupidNation Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 Evans is not a #1. He's Peerless Price in his prime, or Avery of N.O with better hands. Both need a Colston or Moulds to bring out their best. He's not worth the $9 mil, no matter what someone makes in 2 years from now. The original poster is correct and sadly Evans is not a #1. On the other hand, did you watch that screen to Evans last week? He stiff armed the guy and got 10 yards. He needs to be able and willing to run over the middle. He clings to the sidelines and I don't think it's just the OC, he just might short-arm everything in the middle because of fear. I've seen him on some slants and he doesn't run them with conviction. I honestly believe he hates contact and he's not physical enough. If it were up to me I would run him in some reverses once every other game, 1-2 screens a game, 1-2 slants a game, 2 20-50 yard deeper routes, and a few curls. Make him earn the paycheck. Right now he's covered like glue. If anyone says Lee would get the ball and "just throw it to him" watch the first Dolphins game in the 3rd and 4th quarters where he's blanketed and 2 balls are swatted away when he got no separation.
marauderswr80 Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 Somebody needs to step up to the plate and provide inforfation on WHY Lee Evans has become a 40 million dollar decoy. bang your head all you want......... ALL big time WR's have someone on the other side of them. As for Lee being a decoy, go ask Schonert....... But like I said, all the big time WR's have better then average WR's on the other side. We dont!
bizell Posted December 25, 2008 Posted December 25, 2008 bang your head all you want......... ALL big time WR's have someone on the other side of them. As for Lee being a decoy, go ask Schonert....... But like I said, all the big time WR's have better then average WR's on the other side. We dont! Steve Smith hasn't, and he's still been wildly successful.
My Friends Call Me Tebucky Posted December 25, 2008 Posted December 25, 2008 Evans is not a #1. He's Peerless Price in his prime, or Avery of N.O with better hands. Both need a Colston or Moulds to bring out their best. He's not worth the $9 mil, no matter what someone makes in 2 years from now. The original poster is correct and sadly Evans is not a #1. On the other hand, did you watch that screen to Evans last week? He stiff armed the guy and got 10 yards. He needs to be able and willing to run over the middle. He clings to the sidelines and I don't think it's just the OC, he just might short-arm everything in the middle because of fear. I've seen him on some slants and he doesn't run them with conviction. I honestly believe he hates contact and he's not physical enough. If it were up to me I would run him in some reverses once every other game, 1-2 screens a game, 1-2 slants a game, 2 20-50 yard deeper routes, and a few curls. Make him earn the paycheck. Right now he's covered like glue. If anyone says Lee would get the ball and "just throw it to him" watch the first Dolphins game in the 3rd and 4th quarters where he's blanketed and 2 balls are swatted away when he got no separation. That's a great post...great receivers use the middle of the field too. They'll run an occasional slant or drag to Evans, but it's very rare, disturbingly rare. And it's not the coaching...he's had 3 OC's in his time in Buffalo, and he's never been a presence over the middle. That's him, not coaching.
stuckincincy Posted December 25, 2008 Posted December 25, 2008 Evans is not a #1. He's Peerless Price in his prime, or Avery of N.O with better hands. Both need a Colston or Moulds to bring out their best. He's not worth the $9 mil, no matter what someone makes in 2 years from now. The original poster is correct and sadly Evans is not a #1. On the other hand, did you watch that screen to Evans last week? He stiff armed the guy and got 10 yards. He needs to be able and willing to run over the middle. He clings to the sidelines and I don't think it's just the OC, he just might short-arm everything in the middle because of fear. I've seen him on some slants and he doesn't run them with conviction. I honestly believe he hates contact and he's not physical enough. If it were up to me I would run him in some reverses once every other game, 1-2 screens a game, 1-2 slants a game, 2 20-50 yard deeper routes, and a few curls. Make him earn the paycheck. Right now he's covered like glue. If anyone says Lee would get the ball and "just throw it to him" watch the first Dolphins game in the 3rd and 4th quarters where he's blanketed and 2 balls are swatted away when he got no separation. Nice post. I don't see many Bills' games - zero to 1 or 2 max per year on tv here in the Cincinnati market. So I refrain on making layer comments. When they are shown, I record and study them. Evans strikes me as an "every team needs a deep threat" type, if that makes any sense. I don't fault them for re-signing him...what else do they have? I wonder if BUF will compete for Houshmandzadeh. His attitude is terrific, and I completely reject the notion that he wouldn't want to play for BUF. It's a fair argument as to how many miles he has left, but he is one of the best at taking the whacks in traffic, as well as getting back into play to help a harried QB.
Big Turk Posted December 25, 2008 Posted December 25, 2008 I think defenses are literally scared to death of Evans and they play so far back it is very hard for him to get deep. That being said, he should be able to use this to his advantage and run hooks, outs, crossing patterns, etc and get open... From what I am hearing, Evans is open quite a bit, and Edwards chooses to throw it short or dump it off, which is a topic of conversation for another day... I think Edwards needs to start at least throwing a couple of deep shots to Evans every game, regardless of whether its complete or not...just to kind of show them they are gonna try...right now, it seems teams are taking away Evans deep, then blanketing the underneath routes because they know Edwards isn't looking to throw long. Once we throw a couple of long passes, the teams will need to back off a little, which would theoretically open up more underneath stuff...its kinda like a chess match, but if you already know your opponent is gonna try the same move every time, it becomes much easier to defend, which is what the Bills are doing...
Recommended Posts