Shaw66

Bumbles! Bumbles told me once he had a draft of a book, but if I recall correctly, he had stopped working on it. I'm so glad he finished it, or wrote another, or whatever. I have plenty of Bumbles stories, but I'll keep them to myself. I'll just say he's a great guy and leave it at that. Congratulations, pal! I'm happy for you.

On brand is right. One minor point on the Edmunds history: Beane said that in preparing for that draft, he considered all kinds of trade up scenarios, both for the QB and for other positions, but he had not considered a scenario where he traded up to get Allen and still had a shot at Edmunds. That is, he assumed Edmunds would not be available to him with the resources he had left after trading up for Allen. He did exactly what you said, except that he was surprised to find he had enough resources to get Edmunds. I think we have to remember that the Bills put a lot of stock, more than most teams, in what they learn about these guys in interviews. They certainly will have the mlb prospects ranked by their strict physical abilities, but Sanders and Campbell (and probably Simpson) likely meet all the minimum physical requirements they're looking for. If Beane moves on one of these guys, it will be because they are convinced his head is on straight in the ways that McDermott wants - team player, growth mindset, intense competitive desire, etc. For better or worse, it's the bias they've built into their evaluation of players.

Well, I understand the worry, but I don't worry. I mean, I worry that Beane may be making bad judgments, but I don't have any way know, except three years down the road. I agree, it seems like last year. Beane said something like "Elam was the last guy we had a first-round grade on, so we moved up to get him." I have no idea how they conclude a guy has a first round grade, but I suspect it may be colored by need. So, I will not be surprised, at all, if the Bills move up a few spots from 27 to get a linebacker. Beane will say the same thing - we had a first-round grade on him, and we didn't want to lose him. I actually like Beane's philosophy - he has the courage to go get the guys he wants. My problem with Beane is that his history in the draft hasn't shown me that he's really good at figuring out which guys he should want.

I've never gotten into the RAS world and don't know exactly what to think about it. But I found Sanders' RAS, and it's not materially different. His is 9.28, but when I look at the relevant individual data, I don't see a lot of difference. I mean, Sanders broad jump is less, but do I care? Sanders sprint splits are marginally better, which is more important than broad jump. Sanders agility score is lower, which I care about, but not as much as the foot speed, where Sanders has a real edge. I think what people are saying is true: Campbell has the higher floor, Sanders the higher ceiling. High ceiling is what Beane went after with Allen and with Edmunds. Beane is fearless, so on these numbers I'd guess he'll go after the ceiling again.

Well, I don't know if he merits a first-round grade, but I see in him what you see. Well, I don't see Lawrence Taylor. If he had much of Lawrence Taylor in him everyone would have seen it by now. But "dynamic and can not only play off the ball and he can rush the passer and not just a blitzer but actually has pass rush moves.... And he's got that NASTY, which this team needs more of" is exactly right. He's all of that. Especially the NASTY part - he's hungry to hit people, and that's the thing that no one ever said about Edmunds. Technique isn't always the best, but he hits people.

Yeah. I like this. A year ago at this time, Beane and McD were talking about the things that Edmunds had shown so far and what they hoped he would do in 2022. I'm reminded that in Allen's second year, Beane said he hoped Allen would make him write a big check when the time came; Allen did and Beane did. Beane said the same thing to McD about Edmunds, and Edmunds didn't do what he needed to do to force Beane to write the big check. A year ago, too, Beane and McDermott were thinking about what they'd do if they weren't going to write the check. They began thinking critically about the guys who might become free agents, and they were looking with great care at the guys in the draft. I don't know anything at all about Campbell or Simpson, except that like you, many people seem to think that those are guys who could play the position at least satisfactorily. The fact that Beane didn't seem to chase any free agent linebackers with enthusiasm tells me (1) that McDermott has said he can live with the guys he already has and/or, more importantly, (2) that one or more of those three guys can do it as a rookie. If two or three of these draftees look good to Beane, then maybe he waits to round two, and maybe he trades out of round one into early round two. But that hasn't generally been Beane's style. He will like one of those guys better than the others, and he likely will move UP to get the guy he wants. He might move up a few positions in round one, or he might move up in round two. If Beane moves UP in round one, say from 27 to 20, to take a middle linebacker, then you're looking at the 2023 starter.

That is far from completely true. Most of the players are improving from year to year, not degrading. They are getting the best diets and training in the world. They are working at improving pretty much all year long, practicing new skills and improving old ones. They don't reach their physical prime until 27 or 28. If you're running your team in an intelligent manner, you're expecting most of the players you have to improve. The Bills have reasonable expectations, for example, that Brown, Bates, Dawkins, Davis, Shakir, Cook, Allen, and Hines will improve. They have reasonable expectations that Oliver, Epenesa, Rousseau, Basham, Bernard, Elam, Benford will improve. They expect all of those guys to play better in 2023 than in 22. In addition, you have other guys who are true vets, and although they might continue to improve, they might begin to decline physically. Still, you're happy to have them. Hyde and Poyer and White and Morse are in that category. You don't ignore the fact that you're going to have replace them, and you make plans, but their positions are not positions of need until they show that's true. I'll repeat something I heard J.J. Redick say. When he was a junior in college, he didn't expect to be drafted into the NBA. Then he got drafted and he made the NBA. As a rookie, he asked a vet what he needed to do in the off-season, and the guy said "learn how to do something you can't do now." Redick said that every year for the ten or so years he was in the NBA, every off-season he developed a new part of his game. Shooting, with the off-hand, changes of direction, dribbling skills, whatever. He said that if you don't keep improving your game, you're on your way out of the league. It's true in the NFL. A couple of years ago, Diggs was working on developing his stopping muscles. He said everyone works on speed out of the cut, but his trainers had explained that being able to stop in advance of the cut was equally important, so his off-season training regimen was working on those muscles. I have no doubt that guys like Gabriel Davis and Spencer Brown had very clear off-season programs that were designed to improve particular skills. Neither one of those guys is yet facing is physical decline; on the contrary, both should be physically a little stronger, and also mentally stronger, in 2023.

I don't know why people don't get this. Beane has a very clean line that divides what he will say and what he won't say, and Beane is about as frank and clear about how he sees players as any GM or coach I've heard.

I think a lot of fans tend to panic about this stuff. First, as I've said a thousand times, this league is less about talent and more about coaching than people understand. When you get to the right tackle, you're talking about guys who are not among the 20 best tackles in the league, because they're all left tackles. When you get down below the top 20, you're talking about guys whose talent looks pretty much like the talent of the guys around him. It's an ordinary bell curve distribution, and the difference between the 30th and the 40th best tackle in the league is not very great. Same as the difference between the 30th and 40th best receiver. Davis caught a lot of passes for a lot of yards last season, and many fans fail to recognize that his production puts him solidly in that 30th-40th best receiver category. That's a good #2 to have. Second, fans rarely really understand how good or bad a player is. We simply don't have the information or experience to evaluate guys the way the coaches do. When I hear Beane on Brown, what I hear him saying is that they know his development, they've watched his development, and they think he's going to be better. I have to trust that judgment, because I really don't know the first thing about what the Bills expect of their right tackle and how close he is. Third, fans in these conversations fail to recognize that players really do improve. A guy like Brown, especially, with no quality high school experience and third-tier college experience and coaching, coming into a position where even the best college players are unprepared for what the NFL expects, simply is not going to be the player you want when he first steps on the field. If he's a McDermott type, he's working and studying daily, and we haven't seen his full development yet. Fourth, when Beane says our starting middle linebacker is on the roster, he's saying something that's literally true today. He's not saying that guy WILL be the starter; he's saying that if they had to name the roster today, the only guys they have to choose from are the guys who are on the roster. Beane ALWAYS says he's looking to improve the roster at every position, and every player (except Allen) knows that he's always at risk of being replaced. Dion Dawkins knows the Bills could go OT in the first round, and the guy they draft could challenge not only Brown but Dawkins, as well. Davis, too, knows that the Bills could take a receiver in the first, and that receiver could be the eventual replacement for Diggs. If that's who he is, he also could be the immediate replacement at #2. The real point of what Beane says is that although he might take a linebacker or a receiver at #1, they've determined that they don't have a true need at those positions. That's what allows the Bills to go BPA. I don't think what Beane has said to date should be understood that any position on the roster is safe. That said, we've seen and heard him enough not to expect that he won't go pure BPA in the first round. I think they have to be looking for a tackle or a linebacker, and they will move to get one. Possibly a receiver. And, given their history, I won't be surprised to see them take a defensive lineman.

I'm with you on this. Pretty clear that the position was important to the Bills when they moved up to take Edmunds. I believe McDermott sees it this way, too. I don't see how you can have a top-10 defense without the right guy in the middle, in the same way you can't have a top-10 offense without a QB. The only question is whether McDermott and Beane see that guy in this draft. If they do, I expect Beane will go get him. That's always been his style - he isn't afraid to make the bold move to get his guy. Sanders in round one wouldn't surprise me.

One thing that makes the draft so inscrutable to me is balancing value with getting the guy you want. Sanders is projecting at a high- to mid-second round pick. Bills draft at the end of the second round. If Sanders is the 40th best guy in the draft, it just seems like a waste to spend the 27th pick on him. What about the "value" you lose by doing that? There is some guy who is the 27th best guy in the draft, and the difference in that value is significant. Now, maybe the Bills have Sanders at 30, not 40, and if they do, taking him at 27 isn't a problem. But if the Bills have him at 40, do they try to trade down a bit, say to the fifth or seventh pick in the second round, and pick up an extra pick, which they could use? But that's a risk, because someone else might grab Sanders. Last year, I think Beane said they went into the draft with only 25 guys with a first-round grade. Maybe they'll be there again this season. If they have a first-round grade on Sanders, then maybe he's their guy and they'll do whatever, maybe even trade up, to get him. But if they have only 25 first-round grades again this year, and Sanders isn't one of them, what do they do? I posted somewhere else about Sanders. I don't know anything about him except having watched his highlights. I really like his size and hitting. He isn't a classic tackler by any means, but he attacks ball carriers in a way that Edmunds never has. He has the same 40 time as Keuchly. I didn't like his first-step quickness. He's also, I think, relatively new to the linebacker game, having been an edge at Alabama and only having a year at Arkansas. I don't know that he has the talent to play as a rookie, but he looks to me like a guy the Bills would like to have on the field in the middle of the defense. I wouldn't mind just taking him at 27 and not worrying about the value proposition.

Here's my honest take. I've always seen Beane's reasoning on draft night, and I've always gotten excited about the guys he takes. I expect I'll be the same this year. I'll stay excited through September or October. However, I've got to say that my feelings looking back at his drafts are verging toward the angry side, and I could be down right angry if he hasn't landed some real help for the Bills. I want to see some serious contribution from Beane draftees. Rousseau, Epenesa, Elam, Cook, Oliver, Brown, plus the unnamed rookies, some of these guys need to start making plays instead of just taking up space .

Sorry. I can't even spell draft without looking it up. I can name more UConn Husky basketball (men or women) players than I can name players in the draft. On draft nights, I'm counting on you guys to tell me whether to be excited or angry.

Thanks for your comments in this thread. I've jumped around a bit here and learned. I happened to watch a Youtube highlights video of Sanders, and I can see why people think he has promise. I like his size and his mobility, although it's clear from the video that he doesn't play at the speed Edmunds does. As you say, none are the prospect Edmunds was. What I really liked about Sanders is that he attacks ball carriers. He gets downhill and hits people with the intention of taking them off their feet. I don't mean he's a run stopper. I mean when he arrives at the ball carrier in the flat or over the middle, he hits the guy like I always hoped Edmunds would hit the guy. I think he has the size and mobility to play the position the way the Bills played Edmunds. Probably a little better player downhill and a little less range in coverage.

Something like "beauty is in the eye of the beholder"?

Can someone tell me how to make a Dorsey emoji? My response to every six out of ten posts would be my Dorsey emoji. Then all I'd need is McDermott emoji for the other four.

Thanks. I learn a lot in these discussions. I am, by the way, getting optimistic about the coming season. I have a lot of confidence in McDermott. I'm counting on Beane bringing home a decent crop. Won't really know about that until November.

Thanks, Gunner. You did the homework and took the time to explain the point clearly, with an example. The fundamental point is that consistency is not a statistic that correlates well with talent, at least in pro football. I think it's particularly true with the number guy at multiple positions - #2 corner, #2 tackle - but especially with skill position players, because the #2 receiver or the #2 running back simply is not the focus of the offense week after week, because the #1 guy is focus. That's why he's #1. I understand your earlier point about doing what the Steelers did/do, which is to keep drafting receivers in rounds 3-5, and it makes sense for two reasons. One is that every once in a while a real stud shows up there, so if you're drafting regularly there, once in a while you find a real keeper. The other reason is that you rarely keep your #2 guy for more than a few years. They get too expensive, or you need someone better. In fact, that's exactly how the Bills got Davis. Your point, and I agree, is that you have to keep doing it. Of course, that's the point for every position. You have to keep drafting corners, because your number 2 corner never stays for more than a few years. You have to keep drafting tackles, because either your right tackle isn't good enough or if he is, he becomes too expensive. The Bills actually have been better on the receiver end than the offensive line end. The Bills at least invested draft capital in Diggs, Knox, Davis, and Hodgins over the past few years. They should be drafting twice as many offensive linemen as receivers, and that hasn't happened.

Someone said when Harris signed that they hope he will be what Moss didn't measure up to - the power back with enough mobility to handle the running game in general. I think that's right. McDermott wants to platoon his backs, and as I said, he loves being versatile. I think he wants to platoon Harris and Cook, sort of Motor-heavy and Motor-light. The Bills like to pull their linemen and overload the point of attack, and that's the kind of style that Harris can do damage in. He can move the pile. So I'm expecting to see Cook probably start, but be spelled on every third series or so by Harris. Harris will get goal line duty, and Hines will sub in at various times, maybe particularly as the third down back when Harris is on for his shift. And I agree about Davis having a down year. It was his first season as a full-time starter, and I suspect he learned some lessons. I expect him to have more impact in 23.

I love how you have a little explanation for why your arguments aren't wrong. Like somehow Davis's horrible catch percentage means he's a problem. The catch percentage alone. But Deebo's catch percentage isn't a problem, for some reason. I just proved to you that catch percentage is not a good measure of how good a receiver is, but you reject the proof. You also dismiss that he was 34th in the league in yards receiving, because somehow that stat isn't meaningful for him but it's meaningful for everyone else because Davis isn't "consistent." Sorry, you've failed and you don't even know it.

This new take on the problem is interesting. Thanks to Colorado for coming up with the data. I like your take, that he's on the field a lot because he blocks. And that may help explain why he got so many targets. And, I'll admit, that's where Davis's failings catching the ball become a bit of a problem. I had the same thought about Knox. But if the reason Davis is on the field is to block, then Hopkins and Beckham (1) are not going to like being in that role, and (2) may not be good at it. So, I still come back to Dorsey. What is the running game going to look like? Is a quality blocker necessary (that's why Kumerow brought some value)? If the running game is going to be the feature, then the Bills need Davis on the field, and if that's why he's playing, then his reception totals actually are great. Or, would the Bills be willing to tank the running game, get a stud receiver for a year or two to pair with Diggs? Whatever they do, whichever way they go, it will be up to Dorsey to make it work. Frankly, I think McDermott is all about being balanced, being multiple, That's why they got Harris - McDermott wants to be a better power running team. And that's why they got Harty - he wants to attack deep. He wants to be able to do everything. And that's why they like Davis, because he's a better blocker than most receivers, and he's a better receiver than most blockers (like Kumerow). All of which says to me that the Bills think Davis is just what they want in the position, and they'll work on his receiving skills.

Yeah, I don't have any major quarrel with this. I'm not going to be surprised to see the Bills get what they can from Davis and then move on. Oh, and by the way, I know you weren't saying Davis should go, but others are. Reading what you said made me think one other thing. There are very few teams that actually keep their #2s around very long. Colts did it for a long time, but it's much of a revolving door for teams. That's because there's a limit to how many players teams can lock up for the long term, and #2 receiver is virtually never a priority, because of needs at more important positions. So, who the next #2 is going to be is a continuing question for GMs. What Beane meant when he said he's fine with Davis (whatever his exact words were) was that #2 receiver is not a problem now.

You know, Beck, there are millions of fans hooked on pro football. Some of them are geeks like the guys at Pro Football Reference, who make all this data available. Some of them are geeks like Football Outsiders, whose work I like, and some of them are geeks like PFF, whose work I don't like. But I will tell you, quickly, that I can't really tell you whose data is useful and whose isn't. What i do know is that data can be used for two different purposes. One is to evaluate players for the purpose of figuring out how to work with them to improve. That's an internal, coaching purpose. The other purpose is to help fans try to figure out what teams are good and what players are good, to fuel discussions and to recognize greatness. The first kind of data, the internal data, isn't particularly useful for the second purpose. Why? Because there is a low correlation of that data to greatness. Catch percentage is one of those internal-use numbers, and it's a number that doesn't correlate with greatness. How do I know that? Because I know that Gabriel Davis and Deebo Samuel and Davante Adams are NOT worse receivers than 150 other guys currently in the league. That's ridiculous. Receptions, yards, and touchdowns correlate with effectiveness, and those are the data that reasonable fans look to to determine the relative value of players. That triangular thing is cool, created by some geek to come up with some way compare receivers. Looks cool, but I'm sure I don't a picture like that to know that Diggs is a better receiver than Knox and Davis.

These are two different things. Some people here are saying Davis is inadequate and the Bills should move on. Beane was responding to thoughts like that. What he was saying was, effectively, that #2 receiver is not a hole in the lineup that he needs to fill. Talking about OBJ and Hopkins is something different. Beane has said often that he always will consider opportunities to make the team better, so of course he actively considers stars like that who might be available. Personally, I don't think either makes sense, because my first impression is that I wouldn't want to add another difficult personality to the receiver room. That concern notwithstanding, I'd certainly be talking to them. Talking about moving on from Davis now just doesn't make sense. This team wants to contend for a Lombardi, and they need a linebacker, a D tackle, an O tackle much more than they need a 200- or 300-yard upgrade at the #2 receiver. And that's the other reason why, although Beane will look at Hopkins and OBJ, he's not likely to pull the trigger. He has more important positions to spend his money on.

So, I had to look at the catch percentage data. I mean, who ever looks at that? But I was curious. Davis is 186th, at 51%. See any other names under 60%? I did. Names like Deebo Samuel, Courtland Sutton, Elijah Moore, Julio Jones, Davante Adams. Maybe it's time for the 49ers to move on from Samuel.