Mikey152
-
Posts
511 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Mikey152
-
-
25 minutes ago, FireChans said:
It's also factual that despite Amari's lower snap count, he has been the 2nd most targeted WR on the team over the last two weeks. He has 1 target less than the #1.
The next closest WR to him in targets is Mack Hollins who has 5 less.
He's doing that with an injured wrist on a reduced snap count.
How's this for a stat...
The Bills have won every game where Khalil Shakir led the team in targets, and they have scored 30 in every game where he was first or second in targets (whole team, not just WR).
The Bills have lost every game where Amari Cooper led the team in targets. They scored 30 nine times when he wasn't first or second in targets.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
I’m not a coach. I assume that they want Hollins and Coleman out there to block. The one thing that can’t be argued are the passing numbers in games with Cooper vs. without. They are posted throughout the last couple of pages. There is no opinion there. Those are facts. The passing game, scoring, and record, despite playing much better teams, have all been superior in the games where Cooper has played. I don’t disagree with facts.
The Houston game the passing attack was atrocious. The Ravens just jammed the middle of the field and dared the Bills to win on the boundary. They said as much. The Bills adjusted and got Cooper. He’s won outside for years. Since that point, it has unlocked a different level on the offense (again check the numbers on the last few pages). People looking at his stats without looking at the offensive stats in those games are choosing to do so to make them more right about the WR group. They are still just average and they were well below average prior to Amari.
Samuel hasn’t played well but he’s the guy that they thought he was. He has always been a gadget guy. As an Ohio State fan, I tried to tell that to everyone. Some tried to say, “no he is a wide receiver.” He still has a role here but his skill set was redundant with Shakir.
Cooper has played in 6 games...They have scored 30 in 11.
Amari Cooper has outsnapped Mack Hollins in one game since he became a Bill...Week 8. That also happens to be the week Curtis Samuel missed. He was supposed to be their man beater, but for whatever reason it has failed, so they brought in a replacement.
Is it good that with Cooper, the Bills have a guy that can win 1 on 1? Sure. That is a valuable skill and makes their offense harder to play against. But it isn't THE REASON it is hard to play against...if it was, Cooper would get way more snaps and targets. Cooper keeps teams honest, he doesn't make it go.
Clearly I was wrong when I thought the Bills had a guy like that on the roster in MVS/Claypool/Samuel. They all failed to be that guy and I am glad Amari is on the team. But lets not get it twisted...he is an important piece, but not as important as the other pieces.
-
26 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
I guess that the question to that is were they as bad as some of us thought? The backs and TEs were always okay. The WRs were not good though. The passing game was shut down and they traded for a number 1. The numbers in the games that he’s played have been substantially better. Now the WRs are an average unit and the backs & tes are above average as receivers. The OL is top 5. The QB is otherworldly. The OC has been sensational. The offense has been excellent. That doesn’t mean that the wide receivers are/or have been good. They’ve been fine.
Serious question...
Lets say you're right, and despite his limited snaps and targets, Cooper is having an impact on the passing game indirectly. Why was he 4th in snaps at WR the last two weeks, if he is truly a #1 WR and that impactful? What other #1 is 4th in snaps on their team?
And what about the reverse? Do you not think that Hollins and Coleman are having similar impacts on the running game and Josh's efficiency? There is a reason they get more snaps than Cooper, and it isn't because they are better at getting open. If the only thing that mattered was the ability to get open, teams would play 5 WR most of the time. Of course that is ludicris, but so is the idea that WR only help the offense when they draw coverage or catch passes.
I watched the Ravens game and the Houston game. The main reason the offense looked bad wasn't WR, it was offensive line. There were free rushers on A LOT of plays. Josh was sacked 3 times and pressured on almost half his drop backs against the Ravens, and it wasn't because he was holding on to the ball because nobody was open. There was clear miscommunication up front. Houston game was similar, and Josh forced things and played his worst game this season.
The Bills did make a good move grabbing Cooper. It is clear that Samuel wasn't who they or I thought he would be this season against man.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
37 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:
Typical...
Changing the argument to suit your needs is par for the course. Let me state this plainly for you before I move on from this thread for good.
The point of this thread was that the WR room, despite the drop in name recognition, would be better than last year. That the offense would play better.
The people who agreed believed that the more diverse skill set and selfless, team oriented mentality would outweigh the production gap. The non-believers were worried that without a true #1 (or two), the offense would struggle to move the football and be worse than last year.
The graphs above compare the Bills with and without Amari Cooper...like it is some shock that adding a pro bowl WR made the offense better. But where is the comparison of the pre-Cooper Bills to last year? That first graph wasn't best in the league, but it sure wasn't the worst, either...I bet it was better than last season.
Curtis Samuel was a flop for whatever reason. Coleman had growing pains then an injury. Amari Cooper fixes that. But it doesn't change the fact that I wouldn't trade Hollins and Coleman for a healthy Diggs and Davis right now. That was the point of this thread...The WR group got better, even if it isn't "better". And that is true. It has been true all season. They are a better team with this roster.
15 minutes ago, FireChans said:You, a post ago, "correlation doesn't equal causation."
You, now, "a lack of correlation equals a lack of causation."
Back to stats 101, my friend.
Saying nobody got it right when the GM made a desperate trade for a WR in October is very funny to me.
That trade was about Samuel falling off a cliff. Even the haters have been surprised by that.
So you're claiming non-linear correlation? I find this funny, because this runs counter to the whole #1 WR theory, but whatever.
-
1 minute ago, FireChans said:
Marlon Humphrey correlated with a primetime 21 point loss when he got to shadow Shakir instead of a boundary WR.
Who would he shadow on the 50%+ snaps where Cooper wasn't on the field last week?
Against Detroit Cooper had the 4th most snaps AT RECEIVER and zero targets, but he is the reason we put up 48? Really?
Amari Cooper is clearly a better WR than the guy he replaced (MVS), but to act like he was the key to unlocking this offense is just silly. Honestly, this offense looked fantastic when Kincaid and Coleman were out and Knox/Anderson were getting more snaps...perhaps we should cut them.
Amari Cooper on last years team instead of Diggs, and this offense isn't this good. It's the line, it's the RBs, its the new WR all coming together. Amari isn't the only reason they have gotten better as the season has gone on, and its completely disingenuous to suggest as much
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:
I don't know why or how this is even debatable
Getting Cooper was massive
this was us pre Cooper
and this is us post Cooper lol
Correlation does not equal causation....
-
21 hours ago, warrior9 said:
I don't believe this is debatable.
Fantasy football has ruined peoples outlooks on real football. They literally left cooper by himself, ran 4x1's and countered to his side on Cooks TD run. It left Dawson knox wide open several times. People who don't see his addition as value are just smooth brain, stat couch QBsAgain, nobody is saying Amari Cooper isn't valuable...
I just find it ironic that for a hundred pages people argued that the WR position is about more than just stats, and all we saw was "Top 25" this and "100 Targets" that. We "NEED" a number 1 WR for this offense to function and were told a #1 was somebody with big numbers and a bigger contract.
So We start off like a house on fire, and haters are quiet...then we suck for a few weeks (which also happen to be the worst the Oline has played all season) and haters are saying "see, told ya" Beene gets Cooper, and the offense gets better...but Cooper isn't getting #1 snaps, gets hurt, and isn't even putting up close to #1 production in any stat. Haters say "WR is about more than just stats"
WTF
Side Note: The Bills have scored 30+ points 11 times this season. Amari Cooper has played in 6 games for the Bills and started 4. He was 4th on the team in snap percentage this week against the Lions behind Coleman, Shakir and Hollins. He was also 4th last week behind Hollins, Shakir and Samuel.
-
2
-
-
21 hours ago, NewEra said:
I’m moving the goalposts? Idk, maybe my grammar error caused you to misunderstand my post.
Some people were saying that this was the worst Bills WR unit in the last 40 years. I disagreed.
I do think cooper has made an impact, even in games last Sunday. I just think the WR unit we had before cooper was a lot better than many suggested.
And those saying that the WR unit has performed as they were expected aren’t telling the whole truth imo. Hollins is much better than most of ya’ll said he’d be. Coleman has been good and was hitting his groove before the injury. Shakir has been as advertised but his rac ability has hit a new level imo. He’s even better than last season. Samuel has been an injured bust that seems to be the most expensive gadget guy in the league. But he’s shown up in a few big moments.
No, I meant the negative folks are...
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, NewEra said:
Some people much more than just that.
Moving the goal posts...
Every post about a #1 WR used stats and contracts as confirmation. Of course, now that we traded for Cooper none of that matters. We have a #1 that was on the bench in the red zone in our last game, has been hurt, and has poor numbers...but clearly he is the reason our offense is going off now because he sucks away all the coverage.
I'm not saying Cooper wasn't a good get for this team, but to act like HE is the reason the offense is good now (or even one of the top 5 reasons) is just silly.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, HappyDays said:
He's been an active factor in every game he played in. Including yesterday despite the zero targets.
A lot of fans misunderstood the conversation in the offseason. Nobody was saying the Bills needed a Justin Jefferson caliber WR to have a good passing offense. What we were saying was that the Bills needed a WR that could match up with outside CBs. Before trading for Cooper we didn't have that. So we got into that stretch of games against Baltimore/Houston/NYJ and defenses figured out it was pretty easy to shut us down - just clog the middle and dare us to win outside. It was a HUGE problem. Claiming otherwise is the definition of revisionism to use your term. It became a problem again when Cooper missed the Indy game.
With him on the field defenses can't cheat to the middle. They have to respect his ability to win outside. That opens up everything else. Eventually teams might start cheating back to the middle again and then Cooper's opportunities will open up. Adding him took us from easy to defend to one of the most versatile offenses in the league. Even he has zero targets he is having an impact just by being on the field. Now we can attack every single blade of grass on the field. If you can't see the difference you're not paying attention.
And the game Cooper missed?
the real reason they struggled in those Ravens and Houston games were two fold: they were the worst games the line played by far, and Shakir was banged up or out.
claiming that Cooper is the reason they have gone on this run, and thus “victory” is pretty ridiculous
-
10 minutes ago, Logic said:
Indeed.
The Bills' historic offensive production this season makes me think of Beane's offseason quote: "let's not forget we can throw to tight ends and running backs, too. Last I checked, it's not just receivers that can catch passes".
I laughed at the quote as being silly at the time, but now the joke's on me. All three running backs and both tight ends contribute to the passing game in a big way.
But as far as pure wide receiver production and viability, Kirby is right: just average.
Shakir is a great security blanket for Josh. Cooper is more or less a low end WR1 at this point in his career. Coleman has shown promise and may eventually turn into a viable WR1.
All in all, the pass catching corps as a whole (taking into account all positions) has been good, but the wide receivers are essentially who we thought they were.If we're still using stats to describe the WR group, we still haven't learned anything.
-
Assuming the injury happened on the hit and not the subsequent fall, why are we worried it is a ligament? Did the hit bend his wrist in an awkward way?
Unless I am missing something, this is a blunt force injury and the joint was never forced into an awkward position, so it is more likely a break or bruise...not seeing how a ligament injury is even possible.
-
1
-
-
47 minutes ago, FireChans said:
Amari Cooper saw more snaps than Hollins this week. So did Shakir.
Prior to the Cooper addition, Hollins got the second most snaps at WR on the team.
This is not all a coincidence. Less Mack Hollins = good. More Shakir/Coleman/Cooper = good.
Every team has a limited time to gameplan. Every second spent on film or gameplanning on Amari is less time spent on Shakir or Coleman. It is truly zero sum. Teams can no longer say, "lets not bother worrying about Mack" and spend their energies elsewhere.
FWIW, with a healthy Shakir, the team eclipsed 190 passing yards twice in the first 4 weeks of season. We didn't have to pass for much of those games but it wasn't like we were throwing it all over the yard either.
Anyways, don't want to belabor the point. I was curious if your take changed since you made the thread. I suppose it has not.
...I didn't make the thread
-
2 hours ago, FireChans said:
Josh Allen has >600 passing yards and 4 passing TD's in his last two games.
Prior to trading for Amari, he had 526 passing yards and 3 passing TD's in the last 3 games.
Despite the Amari addition and the best QB in the NFL right now, we have the 15th best passing offense by yards.
Where is the OP
I am sure having Cooper has been a great addition, but to act like he is the key that unlocked it all is kind of silly. He really isn't getting a lot of snaps or targets and certainly not enough to explain the sudden increase in production.
The real difference the last two weeks has been A) Healthy Shakir B) Emergence of Coleman (taking snaps from Hollins and MVS) C) Worse teams and a home game.
I will say, Samuel was a big miss on my part. He just has not been a factor, at all. That clearly hurt their ability to beat man against good defenses, and it also pushed some guys up the roster that maybe shouldn't be getting so many snaps.
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, ticketssince61 said:
I never new that it was spotted 25 yards from spot of kickoff. I just assumed that it was the 40 yard line
Heads up by the Texans to do that. Rule will probably be changed
sounds silly, but it almost makes sense to get a personal foul intentionally.
-
1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:
So Tucker isn’t credible enough? Harmon has an agenda? Orlovsky taking about the inability to win vs. man good enough?
There’s plenty more where that came from. Instead of discrediting the data and experts, can you provide the data and experts refuting the separation concerns (prior to Cooper of course)?
The Bills receivers were awful prior to this move. They are now average and that may be enough because the league is pretty open. Credit to the Bills for realizing their massive mistake and giving Josh a real weapon. Progress
Maybe I can ask this way...
What is more likely, last season...that Stephon Diggs lost a step and could no longer "separate" or that changes to the scheme limited his ability to do so in favor of a more team-based offensive system?
In other words, certain routes and/or route combinations make it easier for receivers to win against man. So do certain alignments and personnel groupings. This idea that a good receiver just constantly separates from coverage regardless of who is covering them, where they line up, or what route they run is ridiculous and not at all realistic.
I would bet money that teams that more frequently use 6 OL, 12 personnel, and condensed sets tend to have a lower average WR separation regardless of their perceived talent. They also probably have a better epa and running game, so it's a trade off.
-
4 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
Matt Harmon’s expertise on the subject good enough?
I don't know, does it? Matt Harmon also loves Curtis Samuel because he separates...
Matt Harmon has an agenda. The idea that on a given play all the receivers will be open/separating is just silly.
-
16 minutes ago, DCofNC said:
While I’m not 100% with you, I think your points have a lot of merit. To that end, why can other teams scheme to player strengths and we continue to try to force a scheme to work regardless of the pieces? It’s beyond infuriating to know what JA CAN DO, then watch this JV scheme struggle to move the ball.
Dorsey had a JA friendly system...
-
1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:
Ah yes, the old, “I don’t like what the data says so discredit the source.” That’s a popular way to go about things in 2024.
That “confirmation bias” continues to be backed up by data. They aren’t getting open. You can watch the all 22, listen to experts like Ross Tucker (talked about it yesterday on WGR), read data supporting it or choose to deny it. At this point it isn’t a “feeling” that they aren’t good. The Bills made a move yesterday because they see it too.
I’m not blaming the receivers 100% (I had it at a very conservative 70%). The teams with bad receivers throw to their first read less often. That’s not surprising. Cooper gets separation and is a great route runner. The Bills are missing that. He takes away that cover 0 that teams have decided to play because of the lack of receivers.
Ah yes, I am sure Ross Tucker poured over hours of tape before making that claim...
And I have watched the games and some all-22, including some posted on here. In fact, there were just two clips the other day "proving" that our WR don't get separation...Only, the first they showed had 7 DBs in cover 2 and Kincaid could have been wide open but he ran right at the safety, not to mention the back was available and Josh didn't even look at him. But please, tell me all about how that was on the WR.
FWIW, Diggs wasn't really getting separation when they made the switch to Brady, either...everyone assumed he just lost a step or was disinterested. But maybe it has more to do with the scheme, and more specifically with the type of adjustments they are allowed to run. It's pretty clear (to me) that, unlike under Dorsey, the WR are being coached to run the routes as assigned. That pretty much means the route combinations become the coverage beater, not the player. In theory, that works...but it forces your QB to process a lot more information pre and post snap and generally only one or two guys will be open on a given play.
Oh and as for teams with bad receivers throwing less to first read...maybe you should take off the blinders and look at the other teams below average in that stat...Bears, Packers, Lions, Niners, Vikings...those are all good receiver teams.
-
1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:
My goodness were the Bills in bad shape here prior to this:
A few things:
There is no way someone can, with 100% accuracy, determine the first read in a play simply by watching all-22. Beyond that, who is compiling/vetting these charts? Credentials? Bottom line, this is not an objective stat and should t be treated as one.
Second, even if this stat is 100% true, I think you are committing a logical fallacy due to confirmation bias. Your premise is the WR suck, and this “stat” which doesn’t say if the first read was open or not, if the first read was even a WR, or the type of defense being played against the call confirms it because the first read isn’t good enough to get open.
there are a lot of reasons this is happening, and I don’t even know wr is at the top of the list. First, Josh has always had a tendency to hold the ball…he’s not really an anticipatory thrower AND he has a ton of confidence in his ability to extend plays. Second, this offense has changed to more of a “run your route” style offense, which means the post snap defense has a lot of influence on where the ball is going. His first read is going to be based on his presnap read. It’s not like he picks a receiver and says “get open” and the receiver can’t, so he moves on.
Honestly, I don’t think the problem is the receivers, per se. I think trying to read the whole field under pressure while trying to not make a mistake is causing Josh to be indecisive. It doesn’t help that none of the receivers can just destroy man coverage and make it easy for him, I guess…but he shouldn’t need that if he is who we think he is.
pretty much, I think Josh is the best thrower of the football in the NFL and I don’t think it is close…that covers up the fact that he is middle of the pack when it comes to decision making, and this offense and receiver core is exposing that to a certain extent. Hopefully some more “easy” reads with Cooper gets the job done.
-
19 hours ago, HappyDays said:
Sorry that you haven't seen that stat before. The reason it's measured is that (and this goes without saying) QBs are less efficient when throwing the ball beyond their first read. Some are affected more than others of course. For example it's been a known weakness in Tua's game that his efficiency drops off a cliff when forced past his first read. For that reason it's notable that the Bills are the NFL's most efficient offense while being dead last in first read percentage.
https://www.fantasypoints.com/nfl/articles/2023/first-read-targets-and-fantasy-football#/
As a point of reference, the difference between 7.9 YPA and 6.9 YPA was the difference between the 5th best QB and the 20th best QB last year.
This is what the article concludes after some statistical analysis:
I don't mean to use this stat to criticize. I commend Josh, Brady, and the OL for making this sort of inherently less efficient style the most efficient offense in the NFL. I credit the pass catchers for executing on the plays that go to them. But there is an implication here that we are not throwing to the first read a lot because of skill position talent deficiency.
Do you not see what is happening here?
Your original premise was the Bills offense will struggle because they have bad WR. That we are wasting Josh Allen.Clearly through three games, this has not been the case. So now you have moved on to the premise that Josh and Brady are doing this IN SPITE of the Wr.
I can show you your bias pretty easily…
Our Qb is low in attempts (don’t trust him), most of his passes are around the LOS (probably because he throws so many picks otherwise), He barely completes passes to his WR despite the fact they are one of the most efficient groups in the nfl (game manager), and he never throws to his first read (indecisive and timid).
You give Josh the benefit of the doubt because you think he is great…but he’s middle of the pack in yards this year too, yall. He’s also on track for not even cracking 4K, and yet this is his best season ever.
i won’t go as far as to say it is hypocrisy, but it is 100% rooted in bias heading into the season. With Josh, you think he is great so you focus on the good. With the WR, you think they suck so you focus on the bad.
Maybe, just maybe…football is a team sport, and the Bills have built a good team. WR included.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, NewEra said:
Because you’re using stats from 1 game and 2 half games. I don’t expect 2/3rds of our games to be won by halftime…. Do you? If you don’t, then it’s useless fluff.
and if by chance that were to be the case….there would be nothing negative about it. Our WR numbers (180 catches and less than 2,000) would be just fine, because we’d be steam rolling every one.
if you’re going to project those to be the WR numbers, why wouldn’t you also project our scoring numbers, wins, scoring differential along with them?
I’m not projecting anything. I’m just stating that any statistical projection after the 3 games we just had are useless fluff. If we were to project our scoring number, winds and scoring differential based on these 3 games, the results would ensure that our WRs would be just fine. We’d be undefeated and crushing everyone weekly
Ironically, this same crowd told me all offseason that I wasn’t allowed to project rate stats. (Even though that’s literally the point)…but apparently highly variable volume stats are fine to project.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Royale with Cheese said:
If the production continues, how can it still be considered a weakness?
Do any of those questions really matter if we have seeing this type of production? It's not like Allen is always throwing to tight windows because the WR's are blanketed.That last sentence to me is saying that you're never going to give the WR's credit even if this production continues. Brady isn't going to call a certain play if he feels he doesn't have the WR's to execute it and that includes getting open. We are spreading the ball out because both Allen and Brady trust the WR's on the field.
Collectively they are good, or at least what they're showing now. Raw stats aren't the only thing that prove a player is good or not.
But overall the league is down in passing. Mel Kiper makes a crazy comment to eliminate the Cover 2 because it's hurting the deep passing attack. Well we are adjusting to it and it seems like the FO is getting criticized for it.
That's why this thread is pointless...
They are starting with a premise (the WR are bad) and using confirmation bias to support their theory. Josh could have the best season of his life and win the MVP, and sentiments in here will be that he did it IN SPITE of his WR. How silly is that?
Here is my question to all the haters: Joe Brady isn't new. Josh Allen isn't new. The Oline isn't new. The RB aren't new. The TE isn't new. Even the scheme isn't really new. The only thing that is new this season is the WR room. Why are you SO sure that some of this success isn't because they are good in this scheme? And if they are good in this scheme and the offense and team succeeds, doesn't that make them good for the Bills? And doesn't that equally make guys like Diggs and Davis worse IN THIS SCHEME?
Flat out, this scheme requires the receivers to catch, RAC, and block. Same as the rest of the skill guys. The guys this year are CLEARLY a better fit than the guys last year, regardless of your arbitrary metrics about who is better. All it takes is two eyes to see it. Everyone talks about how much better Josh looks, like he took some magic potion this offseason...maybe he just has a better team???
Analogy: A Ferrari is better than a RAM 1500...unless you need to tow something.
-
1
-
2
-
-
12 minutes ago, eball said:
If there's one thing I know, it's that whatever happens this season you'll skew the conversation to make it seem as though you predicted it all along...it's like the sun rising and setting.
Tell us again how the Bills aren't a young team "in any regard?" You conveniently dropped out of that conversation after being "corrected."
I also noticed in the Shakir thread that you couldn't help yourself from demeaning him at your first opportunity (the "short-armed Shakir").
You keep being you, dude...the rest of us are enjoying our team without having to prove ourselves right all the time.
(waiting for the incoming personal insult/attack in 3...2...1...)
So true...
But just for fun, lets just try and pin him down...
Badol -
Ignoring the small sample size for the moment, the fact that the Bills are the top scoring team in the NFL, 3-0, and have very low yardage output from their receivers compared to both the league and their own team last season are all true.
So, that leads us two one of only two possible conclusions, as far as I can tell. Either:
A) Yardage is an important indicator of WR quality/performance, and the Bills are succeeding IN SPITE of their WR...which also suggests that maybe top-flight WR isn't critical for a good offense?
or
B) Top flight WR are important to a good offense, and the bills have a good offense...which logically means their WR are good (or at least a good fit) and yardage totals maybe aren't the best barometer of success because they are at least partially dependent on targets.
-
1
-
I'm really starting to love this WR room. We quietly got better
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
I think we are arguing different things.
they can be deeper than last year without Cooper and better this year with him...those two things aren't mutually exclusive. I have definitely never said Amari Cooper makes us worse. Clearly he helps. But he isn't the #1 receiver on this team. He plays a role, and one that they clearly had a gap at thanks to the epic fail that was Curtis Samuel so far this season. I really hope it is his injuries.