BarleyNY
-
Posts
11,593 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by BarleyNY
-
-
i'm prepared for anything but insist that tangible improvement is on display week by week
Hoping for a competitive team that is well coached, fundamentally sound and aggressive. I know we don't have all of the talent necessary from a championship, but I'll be happy if I see that everything else is in place and that some of the talent is in place. Then I'll know we have a chance in the not too distant future.
-
So first of all, I'd recommend forking out the less than $20 to get this PDF QB catalogue emailed to you. It's obvious he put tons of work and time into this. Last year when someone first mentioned him to me on reference to this catalogue, my reaction was: "who the hell is Cian Fahey?!"
Well, in short, he's good at what he does... having worked at Footballoutsiders for a while before going out on his own. But no matter what you think of his knowledge, what the catalogue primarily accomplishes (at least for me) is a good deal of comparative data that goes beyond the typical charted data the league tracks.
The focus is on the actual level of play of a QB on the field by attributing credit and/or blame for individual things the QB almost always gets credit (i.e.:completion %) or blame (i.e.:interceptions, sacks) for.
Fahey acknowledges the inevitable subjectivity involved, but uses the same subjective criteria to chart 33 NFL QBs and every single one of their snaps. So it's pretty evenly subjective, at least.
There are chapters that discuss in detail all 33 QBs more anecdotally, but I don't want to post too much simply because of the amount of work he put into it. If you're a football fan and specifically a fan of QBs, it's easily worth $20.
But here are a few pieces of comparative data some that seem to counter some preconceived notions.
I think people can figure out what these terms mean themselves, but again, Fahey explains in detail what each category means and what he includes.
All I'm doing is including the rankings among his 32 peers for each category:
INTERCEPTABLE PASS % - 3rd
CAUGHT (by the defense) INTERCEPTABLE PASS % - Tied for 6th highest
ACCURACY % - 9th
ACCURACY % behind LOS - 19th
ACCURACY % passes 11-15 yards - 8th
ACCURACY % passes 11-20 yards - 10th
ACCURACY % passes 5 or more yards - 7th
% of total attempts up to 10 yards beyond LOS - 24th
% of total attempts beyond 10 yards beyond LOS - 10th
FAILED RECEPTION (by the WR) %.- 4th highest
CREATED RECEPTION (by the WR) % - 20th highest
CREATED YARDS (by the WR) % - 26th
ADJUSTED COMPLETION % - 5th
ADJUSTED YPA - 3rd
SCREENS, SCREEN TDs, & SCREEN % - 33rd
AVOIDABLE SACK % - 18th
Anyway... there's a LOT more in the catalogue but I don't know if everyone remembers McDermott's PC about why the Bills decided to keep Taylor and one of the things he mentioned was that in watching Taylor on film last year he was really good (the actual word might have been fantastic, but now I'm too lazy to look it up) and all everyone could call it was "coachspeak?" Maybe that's true, to some degree... but maybe he was also being truthful...
This makes a lot of sense. Tyrod has been prone to pulling the ball down and getting out of the pocket and/or running when he doesn't see an open WR. Where he's needed to improve is doing less of that by improving his anticipation and throwing receivers open. He has made strides avoiding big hits though. That's been welcome.
-
I like most of what I've seen so far so I'm optimistic. This group still has much to prove so I'll make that cautiously optimistic. I definitely like the more measured, analytics driven approach.
-
I'm not saying that Watkins wasn't held back by the QB situation and the offense we ran. He was. You're right about that. A lot of Bills were held back by Rex and Co. I just don't know if he holds up to the extra physical demands of more targets. That's a concern to me. Julio Jones proved himself before his big payday. Watkins hasn't. It sucks, but I think that's why the team didn't pick up his option. They're moving on from him barring something unprecedented*. I wish they'd have given him the extra year with the option to prove himself, but they didn't.Agree with some of your points regarding Gilmore and the defenses failures. But I think with regards to Watkins you are greatly under estimating how important the offensive philosophy and QB are for a WR. Is there a greater example in NFL history than Randy Moss in Oakland?
And I think we have seen a bit more than just flashes from Watkins. His final six games of the 2015 season he played at a top 10 level if not top 5 for his position. No coincidence, he saw double digit targets in four out of those final six games. Zero double digit targets in the previous games he played in that season. (He was at 5 targets when he left at the half of the Bengals game and only two targets in the Miami game).
Yes health is a big concern but I'm actually more worried about his supporting cast.
*Almost unprecedented. I couldn't find any players that had their 5th year options declined and were on the same team in season 5. There is one. Mark Ingram. So I'll go with rare, not unprecedented.
-
Smart and aggressive.
-
Watkins wins the properly utilized argument every time. Is there any player over the last three years that even comes close to not being utilized properly as much as Watkins?
1. Run oriented team
2. Flawed QBs throwing him the ball (EJ, Orton and Taylor).
Except that we actually saw proof with Gilmore. We saw him perform at a top 10 CB level for two seasons. With Watkins it's purely based on flashes. The qualifier with Gilmore is simply putting him in the proper defense. There are multiple qualifiers with Sammy:
- needs to be in the right offense
- needs to have a quality QB
- needs to stay healthy
The first two I won't argue as they're very reasonable. But the last one is a big problem. Watkins hasn't stayed healthy even with a lesser workload so I'm not banking on him staying healthy with more targets every game. I'm not saying that it's not possible - especially if his foot is finally fixed (I don't have that info) - and I'm not saying I wouldn't have picked up his option (I would have unless his foot is still in bad shape), but I am saying that his health in your scenario is a huge "if" and that any predictions about how good he can be are dependent on that.
There have been some horrible misuses of players over the years. Mostly overpaying guys who don't fit an offense or defense or are underutilized. Mike Wallace in Miami. Great one trick pony - going deep - got paid large to be put in a timing offense with a short to intermediate range QB. Fail. Albert Haynesworth proves his worth as a penetrating 1-gap DL and gets paid a ton by Washington to eat up space as a 2-gap NT. WTF? Rex Ryan gets hired to improve an attacking top 5 defense that plays press zone and proceeds to make them a passive read and react squad with CBs on islands. The list goes on and on. Many situations have been worse than Sammy's, including Gilmore's. Heck, almost everyone on the defense the last two seasons had it worse than Sammy.
-
Jordan Johnson would certainly be a great story.
-
I agree that they have made up their mnd in a spiteful way although I definitely see it as extremely odd.
Picking up the option increases his trade value. It was moronic not to do so or to not trade him in time for the acquiring team to exercise their option.
I like almost everything the new guys have done but this one is completely befuddling.
I don't think it is spiteful. It's a new regime making a hard decision about a player who is very talented, but has not had the production his talent and draft position implies he should. Think about this: What if Sammy got a second contract from the Bills in line with what you'd expect for the 4th overall pick of the draft and someone of his talent level? Do you think we'd get good value from him for that? Honestly, I doubt we would. Would he take less than that contract for the Bills? No, that's not how it happens in the NFL. Players who don't get their second contract at that level get that lesser deal with another team.
-
For a second rounder next year? Pull that trigger til the gun goes *click*.
Bold move AND clearing out remnants of the past regime? Love it.
Ha ha, you aren't serious right?
The reality of the situation is that Sammy's class is the 4th to have 5th year options for 1st rounders. Exactly zero players whose options weren't picked up (or weren't extended prior to needing to use the option) were with their team in their 5th season. Like it or not, agree with the team declining the option or not, this is Sammy's last season as a Bill. The new regime has made their decision. It doesn't matter if we're serious or not, the team is. It is what it is. Maximize his value to the team.
-
Gilmore was not even close to Sammy in terms of talent. Not only that, he came up short in the clutch and gave up key first downs and other big plays. Tell me, in all the time he was here, how many games did he win for us?
NE could sign him because they have about 100 billion dollars in cap space. If he busts out in Foxboro the Pats will be fine as long as they have Brady in top form.
He DOES have some talent but his effort was lackluster and I am being kind. I know it really is hard for people to accept but Stephon Gilmore was just another name on the list of wasted draft picks for the Bills. And yes, I know he was "good" so I won't call him a "bust." But, he was a dumb selection and I said this the day he was drafted.
When Gilmore was being properly utilized he produced at a top 10 CB level - and he did so consistently. That's pretty damn good. Watson has shown flashes of being a dominant WR, but he has not done so consistently and he sure hasn't PRODUCED at the level of a top WR. Injuries have obviously been a factor. But that's the rub with Watson. His production has not matched his talent. Gilmore's did before Rex put him on an island.
-
And yet I made no such argument and you jumped on my back. Nice play.
I said that your net vs. gross cost post was awful because you are validating a dishonest argument. Sorry if that hurt your feelings, but it's true.
-
Its actually the perfect way to explain the different perceptions and why people argue about it. Yes, it is simply 2 firsts and a fourth = Sammy Watkins. Plain as day.
However phrase it a certain way and "the bills traded away 2 1st round picks to get a 1st round pick to use for Sammy Watkins" Sounds like a lot of picks specifically 3 1st rounders.
Or phrase it another way and "the bills swapped 1st round picks, and traded 1 1st round pick to draft Sammy Watkins" Sounds like a lot less, and maybe 1 1st rounder and then 1 to draft him.
Different people will apply their mindset of the trade to make it look good or bad and that doesn't sit right with the people looking at it from the other way.
Exactly!
Except nothing else is pertinent to any discussion about Watkins (unless you want to get into specific pick values). The "other" ways of describing the transaction are just people trying to mislead. Either downplaying his cost (just traded away one first and one fourth to get him) or overblowing his cost (we used 3 firsts and a fourth). Both are intentionally deceptive and I discount the opinion of anyone employing such dishonesty.
-
Yes. It comes down to gross cost versus net cost. People who don't want to take into account net cost ignore the fact that the Bills still had a first rounder in 2014 (so 3 picks - 1 spent on Watkins in first round = 2 picks). People who don't take into account gross cost ignore the fact that Sammy cost (his original pick in 2014 + 2 picks in 2015 = 3 picks) but ignore the existence of an asset in and of itself.
3+ years later I am incredulous that we have never gotten beyond this.
Horrific argument. Two firsts and a fourth = Sammy Watkins. Is anything else material to the discussion?
-
Yes, we gave up two firsts and a fourth but that's not the same as saying we traded away two firsts. We used one. It may sound like semantics, but it isn't. We traded a first for a higher value first but people with agendas never seem to mention that.
It makes sense to use what was given up for a player. People often omit some part of the total which makes is seem like less was spent on acquiring a player than what really was. That's misleading, usually intentionally.
-
Wrong. 15 first round picks from the 2013 draft didn't have their 5th year options picked up or their contract extended prior to needing to pick it up. Zero are with the team that drafted them. Ditto 10 in 2012 and none were still with their team in year 5. Ditto 2011 draft with 0 for 10. That was the first season for fifth year options. So no team has ever declined a 5th year option and retained the player.Like it or not, your statement that they are moving on from him is unfounded. They want to make sure he plays well post injury and if so they offer him a new deal. Just as rational if not more so than assuming they're moving on.
(I included players that were cut or out of the league with those that had their options declined.)
-
It would be a terrible idea, and pretty strong evidence that our new administration is clueless. If they were going to trade Watkins, they should have done it before the draft and before they declined the year five option. Now he has less value to a potential trading partner.
That's a good point about the option. Cooks had his picked up whiched helped his value. A team would want to negotiate a long term deal as part of any trade for Watson now that it's declined. I don't see a trade happening, but I'd jump at the chance to get a late 1st or early 2nd for Watkins. That'll be way more than we'll get as a comp pick when he walks next offseason. We can get our 6-8 wins this season with or without him on the field for 6-12 games.
I thought his option should've been picked up, but it wasn't. Like it or not, this regime is moving on from him. If they can get something significant for him while doing so, then great. Again, I don't see it happening, but I'd jump at the chance to get real value for him.
-
Dez Bryant had these same injuries and Cowboys signed him to huge long term deal.
That's what good teams do. Skill needs to be recognized and eventually injuries will go away.
That's completely wrong. The only significant injury that Dez Bryant had prior to signing his big deal was a broken ankle his rookie season (2010). He signed his deal before the 2015 season and promptly started piling up the foot and leg issues that have plagued him the last two seasons. There's no chance that he'd have gotten a contract even remotely close to his current deal if those injuries had happened before his deal was negotiated.
-
it is but a rumor, and we have no idea what kind of factors are involved here...injuries, attitude, family, finances? i am kinda thinking of it like hockey, don't want to lose him for nothing.
Injury. I said it when they didn't pick up his option. That was the first step in the Bills moving in from Watkins.
Gilmore is a good player........but he's a flawed, one-trick pony, who has had consistent injury issues over a longer period than Sammy. SG might make a few pro bowls but he will never be great.
Watkins is a potential HOF talent........he's more in that elite Jason Peters category in terms of potential.......in that he could become the league's very best WR for a period of his career. Only 23 years old.
This and the Marshawn Lynch and Dareus and Kouandjio situations should be red-flags for future picks though.........think long and hard about drafting 20 year old kids from the south and CA and plopping them in white suburban Buffalo.......lotta' culture shock and they aren't mature enough to handle it......expecially because they've been getting fast tracked.............those extra couple years make a big difference when contract time comes up.
You're high. Gilmore has been a more producer player than Watkins. Gilmore was a high quality corner that played at a Pro Bowl level the entire time he was playing press zone. Watkins has flashed at a top 5 talent level - which is what enamours so many - but he hasn't produced. His best seasons have been at a good level.
That's ridiculous. We gave up two firsts and a fourth to draft him. Everyone understands that. Well, almost everyone.We didn't trade away two first round picks and a fourth for Sammy. We traded away one first round pick in the deal. We used one to draft him.
-
Still some big holes in the snow removal department.
-
Ask, and he shall receive.
Thanks!
-
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DAc7uCKXgAExV-x?format=png&name=large
Here's a comparison graphic for Hodges vs. Brown. Can someone post the actual pic? It's from PFF. Looks like quite the upgrade.
-
-
I broke down the cap consequences of cutting versus trading Dareus earlier in the thread. He still has $20.6M of unamortized bonus money on the books now. It would be very, very difficult to even trade him due to that. He sure can't be cut due to the guaranteed salaries on top of that and he's not eligible to be waived since he has more than 4 accrued years in the league. The Bills are stuck with him for this season for sure. Trading him before 2018 would still hurt, but be manageable. If he screws up again this season I can't see anyone wanting him even at his base salaries though. In that scenario he just wouldn't be tradeable unless we pulled a Houston-Cleveland style trade. We're stuck with him for awhile regardless of what the FO or HC is saying.Most of that dead money is dead because it's guaranteed, not because it's the unamortized remains of his signing bonus.
If they traded him or waived him and someone picked up the contract, it wouldn't cost us nearly that much in dead money. But whether we would be able to do that is questionable. Maybe, maybe not.
And yeah, he has established a pattern and patterns are hard to break. Hope he manages it.
-
His background was all college scouting as I recall when he came from the Eagles. Irsay hired him because he played at Purdue and he wanted someone to go out and schmooze the masses with his Indy roots. He had no knowledge of the cap and no pro scouting. In the structure he walked into in Indy, they had parted ways with Polian who was Team President when they fired Chris... and the buffer was gone between he and Irsay who is a train wreck. Grigson was ok the first year because they retained Telesco as AGM and he knew how to run everything in that FO ... Telesco "bolted" to SD the following season and Grigson was left on his own. Not pretty. And he's too arrogant to admit he didn't have it all down. That said he's a good scout. And Cleveland needs more football guys.
Thanks for the breakdown.
Bills get more cap space today - 6-2-17
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Where'd you get your numbers? Spotrac has the Bills at $12.3M in space for the top 51 as of now.
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/cap/
True until cut down day. Then all 53 and practice squad players also count.