YattaOkasan

Where do you see it not correlated with winning? A quick google search shows it is. Its less predictive than Turnovers so fair that turnovers are more important, but it definitely seems statistically significant. We could do some simple regressions against record but even the quick eye test from the OP shows the teams with a high winning percent are near the top of 3rd down %. Its def correlated with winning; probably less than turnovers but it is not insignificant like passing yards.

The concern, and its valid imo, is that we dont have a #1. Your list is correct on why to have hope but how likely are a lot of these things. Shakir, Samuel, MVS are the most established and Coleman's investment sorta demands he do a little. Do wanna check your MVS numbers. I dont see him having 500 yards 3 of 6 seasons (though they alternate and last year he did not get 500 so thats good). Then Hollins had to be force fed to get that 690 yards. I also don't count on Claypool for others. McD has shown he can be ahead of the curve (nickel usage, the way they used Josh as a runner was pretty unique, heavier personnel packages) so I hope hes getting ahead of a curve here related to having a defined WR1. I think theres a a good chance they pull it off, but it such a novel approach that I understand the concerns. Can appreciate that take. Im still focused on defense cause of how much we should be able to get out of it, but i understand the concerns about coaching cause the game plans have been pretty atrocious. Though not sure how much game planning could've saved AJ klein anyway and the previous years were potentially more Frazier. But the part that has a bit more excited is that we are starting to shift from a Back 7/coverage focus to a Front 7/pressure focus. That change in focus with a change to Babich gets me a bit excited. As mentioned appreciate you clarifying and hope you understand the hope for defense figures it out side more.

I generally agree with you that the offense has not been the problem in the playoffs, but doesnt that also sorta suggest there is less blood in that stone? This part of the thread started by talking about likelihood of success and dismissed the defense as a place for investment cause of playoff failures. I think its harder to get the offense to be better on average and more consistent than it is just to raise the average of the defense so thats its always acceptable. If we did that, then wont cost games anymore and the offense is already doing enough to win the games. That we havent raised the average play of the defense in the playoff is maddening but still seems like the answer.

Diggs was not about to need a new contract. He was on the team through 2027. But agree this is a different contract than that. I'm really happy with our RB, TE, and OL rooms so my concerns about WR are much less. You cant have everything with the cap. We chose not to invest in WR. Whether that works or not is the question.

There are 545 targets to go around from last year. Tell me your distribution then? I assume its by position X, Y, Z, TE, RB rather than players. Mine analysis was pretty simple but I think works. If you really want details on how it can work (again I really dont know if it will cause this is a pretty novel approach) then we would use condensed sets to that "boundary" WR are pretty close to the formation and can still get the free release. As for Dawson Knox he can easily have some of those 180 targets left over after the first 4 targets. Give Knox 60 targets (up 66% from last year, so a healthy increase), which would make him option 5 in the passing game and getting to 40-50 catches. That is the math working. Again after the first 4 targets in my example there are 160 targets. Doesnt matter who option 5 is. With 180 targets left over do you not think the next option will get enough opportunity to get to 40-50 catches. CBs and DTs have been rotated differently in the past (ones drive per drive the other is more snap to snap). Why did you combine them? Its just a framework to think from. There is some amount of snaps available for WR's. I think itll be more broadly shared (like DT) and theyll all get plenty of opportunity. You said the math doesnt work. I showed you two ways the math DOES work and you ignored. Do you think Kincaid gets more than 120, does shakir and samuel get more than 90? Does cook get more than 60? Does Josh pass less than 540 times (last years number)? Do all the other well say 6 options all get 30 targets? How do you not see the math working (and please use numbers cause its math).

It could totally not work. if we do the Beane question of "how does it fail?", I think we have identified the answer. Not enough talent. But I dont think you need to have a 1000 yard receiver to have a top 10 passing game. GB didnt have anyone above 800 yards and Love was still 7th in yards (some caveats with that analysis).

agree someone will come off the field. Disagree that the math doesnt work. You make it sound like theyll be on for a drive and then off a drive. I dont treat this like we did CBs a few years ago . I would expect a rotation more like DT (just realized how good of analogy this is). On for a few snaps then rest for a few. That way everyone will be fresh and running hard every route. Also not sure why youre talkin about WR4-6, when the discussion is target #5. Cook was a top 5 target in the passing game last year. Kincaid is obviously as well. If there are 2 WR on the field at all times then the top 3 WR can be on for 66% of the time. That should be enough snaps to get to 50 catches. More maths. Target #1 (Kincaid getting 120 targets) Target 2/3 (Samuel/Shakir getting 90 targets), Target 4 (Cook getting 60 which should be 40+) leaves 180 targets for the rest! Thats with Kincaid getting 30 more targets, Samuel/Cook staying the same, and Shakir doubling his targets. You dont think target 5 will get enough opportunity to reach 40-50 catches with that many targets left? How do you spread it around? Do you think WR4-6 are each getting 20 targets (there were only 5 WR last year and the last two shared 40 targets)? Does Ray davis steal a ton (he would have to take a lot more than murray's 20 to really impact the distribution. The Math absolutely works with out injury. It doesnt without injury if the top target gets 160 targets.

Not really how that works. We can't rework his deal until hes on the team. If youre not cap compliant they just stop processing things until you are (i.e. you cut players); I'm pretty sure its set up for this specific type of situation. So LV would have to rework his deal then trade. Reworking in LV is harder than it probably seems. Particularly cause his current contract pays him a base salary of 35 million the next two years. If you wanna rework his deal you probably have to extend him past age 35.

Why is this bold? Shakir was 5th in targets and receptions and last year and had 39 catches. Seems pretty intuitive that the 5th receiving option could have 40-50 if the top target isnt getting 160 targets.

It would be great but who you gonna cut to be cap compliant?

I think of like GB a lot. Noone over 800 yards but still 4200 passing yards. If you we could get that production combined with the rushing yards of Cook (1k), Davis (400), Josh (400); its a top 10 offense. But a lot of this is easier said than done so I dont necessarily count on it.

Agree on best overall roster, but Im not sure about Rodgers even if healthy. Its been two seasons since weve seen great play from him. And at his age return to form doesnt seem too likely.

I don’t expect anything of those three. I only mention hamler cause we keep forgetting he’s on the team. That’s not a ringing endorsement about what I expect of him (could he figure it out sure but I don’t think the bills have much stock in it). As we said earlier, it’s a bunch of unknowns. Feels as if they have to get 4+ players above 600 yards to make this thing work cause Im inclined to agree if your sentiment is that there’s not a 1k receiver on the team. So then the question is the likelihood of achieving that. And even though it’s rare to achieve, I feel pretty good that Kincaid, shakir and Samuel can get there. Question is does cook or Coleman get there. If both do then would you agree this offense would be seriously cooking? I’m not sure any offense has ever had 5+ players with >600 receiving yards. So yeah those other 3 players don’t matter to me. We’re missing top end talent but we have depth (again not those three players that I don’t expect anything from). Can we use that depth to do something rare? I think the talent is there to sling it for 600 yards to 4 players. Question is if we can do it.

Beasley entering year 8 diggs entering year 6 Brown entering year 6 these players had a LOT of history and they still proved they had more to show. what is your data to say playing with Allen doesn’t give a bump? correct they didn’t make big investments for the most part. However Samuel very much was an investment. None of those players were considered world beaters when we signed them and we got good production out of them.

I think its fair to be concerned that what we lost (5th year option) wasnt worth the gain (move up from 200 to 141). Since we got Van Pran at 141 and I dont think he wouldve been available at 200 Im ok with it. Though arguement could be that get Van Pran with 144 and then the cost of staying at 32 is a 2025 4th round pick (again im good trading out of 1st round).

Appreciate the thought about why you didnt add. For the glass half empty, we are doing something new (not just for us but the league in some ways). There have been a handful of times when 4 players got 600+ receiving yards on the same team. Yet there was some strong thought we would do that (sorta by necessity, which not a great place to be). But I allow myself to be hopeful cause in 2020 we tied (shouldve been sole owners if not for a Taiwan Jones drop) of the number of unique players with a receiving TD. Counter to that is what was a Daboll offense. Im sorta surprised were not having the same conversations about the defense too where we seem to be shifting towards leaning on our pass rush rather than our coverage in years past.

Agree it comes down to likelihoods, but I would say we dont have a ton of data on how likely many of these things are. There would be points and counter points that are both unknown (how much squatting in the middle vs allens arm scaring them is a good example). To your last point about getting more WR production than projected I think there is pretty significant data to say that will happen. Beasley, Brown, Diggs all had career years and outproduced expectations after their move. If I could guess your counter point (and its one of those unknowns), they are coming in with low expectations so beating those doesnt necessarily mean we have a good offense (even though we expect to out perform those expectations). God Hamler flying so far under the radar. Don't know what to make of him, but if hes over injuries he brings supreme speed and playmaking ability. Your line about options drafted in the first two rounds reminded me of him and he wasnt even on your list.

It’s all an interesting discussion. On the topic of defenders squatting in the middle. I think it should be a concern. But also think we do have enough juice on the outside particularly with Allen’s arm to counter that. Shakir isn’t great on the outside but with Allen’s arm they got Sneeds first (only?) TD allowed of the season. The fun of this season is we haven’t really seen them in the past do the things they must to be successful this year. Part of that is personnel and scheme but it should def still raise concern.

Yeah I def don’t rule it out. Was wondering who you would cut and the answer is solomon. It’s not unreasonable but I think unlikely at least for the initial 53. Beane has had all his 5th rounders make the roster their first year (even Joseph and Fromm I believe). I could see toohill also getting the Ferguson treatment. I think he’s acquired enough seasons to be a vet. So maybe solomon gets the IR (happened to 5th round shorter among others) then toohill gets a little paycheck to grill in the parking lot

Thats fair. Would mention that 5th round is bit of an investment for a player that wont make the team (I'm seeing 75% of 5th rounders make the roster link). I would also think Toohill is easier to stash on the PS. Agree Toohill is high effort/non stop motor, but I am much more interested in keeping the rights to solomon than keeping toohill.

They arent mentioning him cause of smoot I think. Do you think they keep 6 DE? If not who do you cut from Groot, AJ, Von, Smoot, Solomon. Most people have Smoot over Toohill. Toohill got a good number of sacks last year (5) but it was in a similar efficiency (5 sacks on ~450 snaps) as Smoot in 2022 (year he sustained ankle injury). Smoot had more pressures so was more disruptive. If smoot can return to that form after being another year removed from the achilles I think he is the better player. Would also note that Washington shipped off like all their DE and didnt retain Toohill (or play him the final game of the season, indicating they wanted to look at other players unless I missed an injury). That doesnt inspire a lot of confidence in him as a player either.

Bills DEs feel very strong side/weak side right now. Strong side is Rousseau with smoot as back up and weak side is AJ/Von split with Javon also getting in but even less early downs. strong/weak side may not be to the TE so much as passing strength because you want taron with Rousseau ahead of him on the passing strength. I ain’t got the time but I wonder how much taron lined up on groot or Shaqs side on early downs. Obvious passing and run downs wouldn’t need this approach as much imo.

Correct he did. I got the over. Rousseau had 8 in 2022 and was looking better last year before he fractured his foot so my floor is 8 for him. Epenesa has been consistent 6+ and looked great before injury. Combined with more snaps i have 8 as a floor for him. Then like most peeps the question is what does Von have left. I think he gets some form back to hit the first of his incentives (4 sacks) which will be a push. All this assumes health for 3 players that have missed games because of injuries the last 3 seasons. Everyone gets banged up a bit but DL health has been rough at the most critical times (maybe front 7 considering LB last year).

It costs 3 million just to try something else. If you’re upset about something focus on the contract. We sorta committed ourselves to him being the kicker when they offered the extension. I don’t remember a ton of people being super grumpy at it either. At this point I don’t know that there’s a lot to be done. Know who to replace him if he’s super terrible it otherwise gotta roll the dice with him.

We have so much good young OL depth. I could easily see a trade for Clapp or another vet if the youngins are ready to go