Brandon
-
Posts
3,545 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Brandon
-
-
8 minutes ago, dollars 2 donuts said:
Didn't Lad say he's met with the Bills?
Am I missing something on the list?
Yes, he has stated that he has met with the Bills multiple times. These lists can be useful for gauging positional interest, but don't assume they're complete.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, noacls said:
You think they don't need LBs? Did you watch KC playoff game?
Injuries were an overwhelming factor at LB by that point in the season. Maybe they add one late in the draft to compete for the last spot on the roster, but no, they don't have a significant need for a LB unless they have concerns about Milano's return this year.
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, Dillenger4 said:
I actually love it and think it is bang on what Beane will do. Defense is the goal boys.. like it or not. We need to stop the other teams for once.
we had the 6th highest scoring offense last year. Not an issue.
If the Bills want defense from this draft, they can do a hell of a lot better than this.
-
7 hours ago, njbuff said:
I don’t pay any attention to mocks by having harsh opinions, but if this Chad guy was looking for clicks and/or make Bills fans angry with this mock……
he has certainly accomplished that.
I’ve been on this planet for a thousand years and this might be the WORST mock I’ve ever seen.
We are talking about the Bills 2000 ACTUAL draft here for heaven’s sake. That is how bad this is.
Even Erik Flowers had good sack totals in his final year in college. Kneeland...best season was 4.5 sacks twice...and one of the worst 10 yard split times (to clarify, of the DE group) at the combine. He's getting some late 2nd projections, but seems like an early day 3 guy to me.
If that's the pick, I think I'm just going to give up.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:
I stopped reading when saw he had us taking a LB in Round 3.
I should have stopped reading at Kneeland in R1.
-
1
-
-
Projectile vomit alert.
-
I'm not a huge fan of trading up for Thomas, but I get it.
Although I think Polk will go a round later, I'm not going to argue considering that I think Pearsall could go late R1.
-
I certainly wouldn't argue against it. They looked like a team that needed a 1st or 2nd round investment at WR even before the season ended. Now, they've lost both Davis and Diggs. Curtis Samuel gives them a few more options, but I'd still fully support WR picks at 28 and 60. Aside from safety, I think the defensive needs align more with depth, anyway, at least for 2024, and they have plenty of 4th and 5th round picks to address those.
-
52 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:
Beane's thoughts about WR and the offense kind of reflect my own. The E-P offense they run is about route running, understanding spacing and concepts, reliability, and versatility.
To me, the most important thing Beane said was:
Essentially they would love to have a #1 but it is not something they need. "In this offense, you need guys who are smart, versatile, selfless, and can make the plays that their skillset allows them to make. If it's a tall guy that Josh is going to throw a 50/50 ball, he has to come down with it. If it's a guy who want to get the ball in his hands and get some RAC, he has to do that."
That is the most telling to me. If the guy is big he has to play big. If a guy is supposed to be fast he needs to play fast. Also they aren't going to ask a slow guy to get RAC or little guys to play big.
Gabe Davis, big, didn't play big, did not run good routes, not really versatile. Did not make plays when counted on. Gone.
Deonte Harty, was supposed to be fast and get RAC and be a downfield threat...did none of that and he is gone.
Diggs smart, versatile, not selfless...dogged it at times. Did not make the plays he was supposed to make as a #1. Gone.
Smart, versatile, selfless players...guys who don't care who is getting the ball, are going to run their routes hard and be where they are supposed to be.
Everything Beane says narrows it down in my mind. The guys who meet those criteria who will go early outside the top three are Worthy, Franklin, McConkey, and to a lesser extent Leggette.
Thomas does play big and I can see him as a guy they like. I really like him, but I am not sure he offers what Beane is talking about. Same with Coleman and AD Mitchell, who I like.
I am not a betting man, but I would bet on Worthy, McConkey or Franklin being their guy.
I completely agree with that and I would also add that, just looking at the types of early round prospects they've brought in over the last two or three years, most fit that same basic profile. Jordan Addison, Tank Dell, JSN, Zay Flowers, Jalin Hyatt, John Metchie...Less emphasis on size, more on route running potential and separation. You could even throw in their higher profile veteran acquisitions...John Brown, Cole Beasley, Stefon Diggs, Emmanuel Sanders, Deonte Harty, and Curtis Samuel. I'm not saying they're all the same guy, but there's a basic pattern there.
-
1
-
-
I think I'll pass on that one.
-
Just now, Nephilim17 said:
Interesting that when he discussed WR traits he mentioned YAC. It wasn't in reference to any specific guy but I sense that's important, especially given how little YAC Bills WRs have had the past few years.
This comment/concept combined with more I read about Mitchell the less I think he's in play. Legette over Mitchell if we pick at 28 or in the 2nd. Not where I was a few weeks ago, but that's my uneducated guess.
Ladd McConkey. Aside from the speed, quickness, and route running, he's also very good after the catch.
-
1
-
1
-
5
-
-
4 minutes ago, Mikie2times said:
If Marshawn Kneeland is available round 1 I think that is who we will pick and it's going to piss a lot of people off. Beane just doesn't seem to value WR's at a high rate.
That would definitely piss a lot of people off, for sure.
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:
If he is speaking the truth… I find it interesting that he hasn’t spoken to the Top 10 teams yet …. Nothing wrong with at least asking the price …
If true, it might suggest that they really like one or more WRs outside of those top 3 and don't need to trade up that far to accomplish their goals.
-
5
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, buffalostu2 said:
Maybe I am scorned from the back to back DE picks resulting in Boogie Bashom, but I just don't like back to back positional picks.
There are only so many footballs to go around. Burton in the second round would become, best case and most likely scenario, the sixth best option to the get the ball to in our offense. I can't help but think we could find someone later in the draft for that spot.
They've lost 241 targets to the two starters and about 285 targets total at the WR spot. Curtis Samuel will take up some of the slack, and they probably won't do it, but there's plenty of passes to go around for two more at 28 and 60.
-
3 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:
I just don't see other teams having a big appetite for a costly trade up to 28 for the same reasons we'd want to make a move back. Outside chance of a team doing it for a QB, but that's it. Your example is weighted heavily in favor of the Bills.
There's likely to be a run on WRs starting around the last few picks of R1 and down to about 40-45. Five or six will probably go in that range. I think there will be teams willing to move up to get the one they like the most.
Of course, that's also an incentive for the Bills to stay right where they are. They're in a good spot and will likely have their choice of the group that goes in that range, if they want one.
-
19 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:
You're definitely trading up from #60 if you want Legette. It will cost you a 2025 2nd, probably. Maybe Polk is there if you wait. #60 is not a great spot in the draft.
That's my expectation as well. I think Legette probably goes in the top 40.
And I also agree about pick 60. It seems like it'll be kind of a dead spot in this draft for matching the Bills needs with value.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:
Here’s a question. Let’s say we draft a WR at 28 and another in the 2nd. They both have average rookie seasons. Let’s say around 40-50 catches and 3-4 tds.
Are we set at WR in 2025?
It depends. If it seems like the overall offense is performing well and those guys are increasing their production throughout the season, cutting down on mistakes and generally building momentum in the right direction, yeah, I think the Bills probably would be set at WR for 2025.
-
1 minute ago, DJB said:
I just don’t see how you can look past his 0% separation rate against college DB’s and think he will be fine against NFL corners.
Massive red flag to draft this guy in the first two rounds
Yeah, I think you have to consider what he did on the field first...in this case, significant issues with separation. If the combine testing confirms that, which it did, then you have a problem. The gauntlet drill is interesting, but in light of his play against live competition, it seems like an anomaly. And further, he didn't do the agility drills, which makes me wonder why.
I say that, but I actually liked him more than I thought I would when I went back and watched him play a bit. There's something there. I just don't think I'd want the Bills to be the team to risk it in a deep WR draft.
4 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:I oddly think he could be used as a "big slot" type (spare me the "your mom" jokes here please). When you watch him run drills he's surprisingly fluid and agile. Maybe he'd be better off on the move than as a boundary receiver.
Many are saying that's his best usage in the NFL, but that's too much crossover into Dalton Kincaid's role, IMO.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Just now, Coach Tuesday said:
Just fyi, that same piece by McGinn notes concerns about Legette's intelligence. He's not only a one-year wonder but he's also a late bloomer and the whispers are that it's because he's just not very bright (or perhaps, to be fair, learning disabled). In any event I would think that's just as much if not more of a red flag for this regime than Mitchell's Type 1 diabetes. This regime likes students of the game.
I have no idea if that's true, but I would agree that it would be a major concern, if it is.
-
8 minutes ago, nosejob said:
I'd rather they went Dline in the 2nd especially if they can get Sweat., Fiske or whatever. Somehow, some way BB has to create a 3rd without trading back from 60.
I'd also prefer that if they're available. I'm not sure they will be, and the rest of the DE/DL prospects that seem likely to be there at 60 seem pretty ordinary to me. Maybe a little better at DT than DE, but it's still not much more than a 50-50 preference compared to a safety. And I think they have a more immediate need at the latter.
-
1 minute ago, gonzo1105 said:
The way the tea leaves are trending imo are Troy Franklin or Keon Coleman. I know that’s not popular around here nor am I saying they’ll be the pick at 28 but that’s the way it looking to me.
There has been no indication of a private workout or top 30 visit with Legette to this point which doesn’t disqualify but I have to think they would bring in every WR they were severely interested in. Maybe it leaks out that they did bring him in
I agree completely on Troy Franklin. If they go WR with their first pick, I think it likely comes from the group of Franklin, McConkey, Worthy, and Legette (possibly also Wilson if they trade down).
I'm not as convinced on Coleman. Due diligence, sure, but I think there's too much role overlap with Dalton Kincaid.
-
46 minutes ago, SoonerBillsFan said:
A safety in the 2nd is too high.
I'd rather not, but late 2nd round looks like kind of a dead spot in this draft to me for some of the other Bills' needs. If they can get a starting caliber safety at 60, that may be tough to pass up, depending on what's available.
-
1 hour ago, Dr. Who said:
I think if they stick at #28, Beane ought to take McConkey. Then trade up in the second to secure Legette, presuming he doesn't sneak into the first round. McConkey is a top 5 or 6 WR, imo, and I think he can be a volume WR his first year.
I'm leaning more and more to the idea that, if the Bills keep pick 28, it will be McConkey. Just in terms of pre-draft visits the last few years, they seem to have a significant preference for these types of speed/quickness/route-running types early and less apparent concern for height/weight. Ignoring the top 3 that they have no shot at, McConkey seems like the best overall of that sub-group, IMO, and I think I've about settled on him as WR 5 in this draft.
If they can add both him and Legette, I'd definitely be happy. I'm just not sure how. I think we're more likely looking at McConkey OR Legette at 28 and maybe whatever is left at 60 or one of the better mid-round prospects in a trade into R3.
-
4
-
-
Absolutely not.
Chad Reuter 7 round mock
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Apples to oranges. He's a DE. Those guys are DTs.