Avisan
-
Posts
486 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Avisan
-
-
22 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:
There is something to this. They seem to draft “high floor, lower ceiling” players outside of Round 1 which could be seen as insecurity about their own ability to coach players up.Alternatively-- the Bills have an EXTREMELY high hit rate for draft picks, which plays into why they were still able to win the division last season despite having so many injuries to key starters
-
4 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:
So every receiver who isn't drawing double teams is playing badly? Man, this "in aggregate" formula to success is complicated. I think @JerseyBills might be running a ponzi scheme here.
5.43 yards per target on 58 targets in the last 7 games of the season. He was bad, fam.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, Motorin' said:
To his point though, that was with Diggs commanding double attention and having the luxury of being over looked by the defense.
Diggs was at 5.43 yards per target on the Brady stretch of the season and was frequently single covered. We still targeted him more than 8 times per game, he just didn't produce.
People (like myself) that are not concerned saw a productive offense under Brady and view Diggs' and Davis' (poor) production as readily replaceable. Davis had a couple of big games in that stretch but was only targeted 26 times total.
3 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:He typically drew the amount of attention commensurate w other wr1s, yes
Did he produce commensurate with other WR1s?
-
2
-
-
9 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:
If you stretch the truth in both directions it makes the story seem bigger than it is.
????
Diggs averaged 5.43 yards per target under Brady, it was bad, dude. He was targeted on average over 8 times per game and simply didn't do much with those targets.
-
12 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:
Diggs underperformed in the second half but wasn't "objectively bad". Was Kincaid "objectively bad" under Brady because he produced less than Diggs? Because that's the case. And you are predicting Kelce results for Kincaid........which are the greatest ever for a split TE. Just getting a little hyperbolic, I'd say.
Diggs' per-target numbers were brutal on the back stretch. The argument isn't based on volume stats.
-
31 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:
Hollins is one of the least-efficient WRs I have ever watched. He's Robert Royal but as an outside WR. If he plays significant snaps, he'll go from preseason fan favorite to mid-season fan whipping boy, is my prediction.
What? His production numbers don't remotely bear that out. He has roughly average efficiency. If you threw a 550 attempt season to Mack Hollins' career per-target averages, you get a ~60% completion percentage for ~4,200 yards and 25 touchdowns. He's fine. Not good, but fine.
-
2
-
-
10 minutes ago, Chaos said:
Did not playing solidify his roster spot?
He was already a lock.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, balln said:
What was strength of schedule / opponent in those games
Our opponent W-L under Dorsey was .441 (avg 7.5 wins on the season). Under Brady it was .513 (avg 8.7 wins on the season).
-
2
-
-
55 minutes ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:
Complete regular season stats:
26.2 average PPG with Dorsey. 23.0 median
27.0 average PPG with Brady. 21.0 median
Also, median points under Brady was 27 FYI. Your numbers are off.
-
42 minutes ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:
Why would we only look at the 6 week slide period and ignore the 3 best offensive performances under Dorsey? Do weeks 2-4 not count? If you're arbitrarily excluding data from your stats to make an argument, its not much of an argument
Complete regular season stats:
26.2 average PPG with Dorsey. 23.0 median
27.0 average PPG with Brady. 21.0 median
Because the poster referenced it directly?
The Bills offensive executed about 9 more plays per game under Brady than under Dorsey with no drop in passing YPA. They were much more consistent.
-
20 minutes ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:
I'm interested to see what type of career Dorsey has. I don't think he was a very good OC for the Bills, but I think he is over-hated by most fans here.
He was handcuffed in 2 different ways by McBeane
1) The mandate for Josh Allen to not run as much
2) Complementary football (IE the #1 priority was clock control instead of scoring)
I don't think the offense looked very different under Brady (and the stats bear that out). The Brady offense against Chiefs, Chargers, Patriots, and Dolphins were every bit as inconsistent as the Dorsey offense looked during our 6 game mid-season swoon.
The 5 game win streak to end the regular season had more to do with the DEF, and some luck, then it did the offense.
Thankfully the DEF forced 15 turnovers in Brady's 7 games (compared to 4 turnovers in Dorsey's final 6 games). That gave our OFF so many more possessions and took some pressure off as well.
Luckily we eeked out some wins due to Toney lining up offside, playing the Chargers with a backup QB and interim coach, Patriots with 4 turnovers in 10 plays, and we had a punt return for TD against the Dolphins. The offense was fairly bad in all 4 of those games.
The stats do NOT bear that out. The Bills scored far more points and ran nearly 10 additional plays per game as an offense versus the slide period. They were a much more consistent team, offensively, under Brady.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:
Breaking news- teams tend to score fewer points in losses!
Sure, but it's scoring fewer points that creating losses, not losses creating fewer points. Very different from the teams-running-more-when-ahead thing.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:
Nor will I if it proves sustainable against the better teams in the NFL. That is where my concern is.
The Bills under Brady scored 27 per game against pretty good competition last season, despite Diggs falling off a cliff. Genuine question, what is the sustainability concern and where does it stem from? What do we think will be worse as compared to the back seven games of the season?
-
17 hours ago, GunnerBill said:
Brady went ball control when he took over
How are we defining "ball control"?
The Bills passed about the same amount, they just happened to be running ~9 more plays per game than they did under Dorsey because their drives weren't constantly sputtering. YPA was unchanged, too. Turns out running the ball a little more when it's beneficial to do so can improve your offensive consistency.
If the Bills continue to win games at a 6:1 ratio in the 2024 season I can promise I will not be complaining about how they do it.
-
So... when our offense is excellent, per usual, this year, are y'all still dooming going to acknowledge you were wrong? Asking for a friend.
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:
In addition to the many on this board, I will supply this from Fantasy Football Index's Offseason Transaction Report 2024. You would agree that Beane is in charge of the Bills Offseason transactions, right?
BUFFALO BILLS
Key gains: WR Keon Coleman (2nd), WR Curtis Samuel (Was.), S Mike Edwards (K.C.), RB Ray Davis (4th), WR Mack Hollins (Atl.), WR Marquez Valdes-Scantling (K.C.), LB Nicholas Morrow (Phi.).
Key losses: WR Stefon Diggs (trade), C Mitch Morse (cut), DE Leonard Floyd (S.F.), CB Dane Jackson (Car.), CB TreDavious White (LAR), WR Gabe Davis (Jac.), S Jordan Poyer (Mia.), RB Latavius Murray.
F
The most dramatic changes are at wide receiver. Diggs wasn’t much of a factor the second half of last season and Gabe Davis was annually inconsistent, but there likely will be growing pains with all the new faces. Josh Allen lobbied for the team to select Coleman, while Samuel has worked with this offensive coordinator in the past. … Buffalo also shed several starting defenders. Injuries limited some of them, but the pass rush and secondary won’t be as good. … Ray Davis lasted until the fourth round but put up 21 touchdowns last year at Kentucky, looking like he’ll be better than anybody who backed up James Cook last year.
You are citing some random fantasy football website's opinion as the basis of your claim?
-
1 hour ago, Einstein's Dog said:
Beane has had a rough year
(Citation needed)
-
5 minutes ago, Logic said:
YESSSSS!! HALLELUJAH!One thing I really like about Coleman so far as that he comes across as being pretty cerebral about what moves will get him open and why. Seems to have a really good understanding of how defensive backs will typically move in a given coverage/leverage. Hoping he can translate that into continuing success against increased level of defensive competence in the modern NFL.
-
7
-
2
-
-
8 minutes ago, Rock-A-Bye Beasley said:
yay! Our WR1 is 34th best. Do you hear what you’re stretching to say?the truth is we needed to add to last years group. There was talk of adding a true #2 or 1B to compliment Diggs and push Davis to #3
instead both are gone and we have a second round rookie and some bottom of the roster players for depth.
?
I was addressing a specific argument because it was quantifiable and therefore easy to address. It ends the ambiguity and allows the conversation to progress based on that shared reality.
-
49 minutes ago, NoSaint said:
Honestly, pen to paper are either confidently top 40? It’s hard to get them there.
Shakir's production under Brady extrapolates out to 906 yards over 17 games, which would have been 34th highest among all pass catchers last season. That wasn't particularly difficult, unless you think we'll be unable or unwilling to use Shakir in the same way we did under Brady last season.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, FireChans said:
That’s just your opinion of opinions.
See how silly this rabbit hole gets?
I am very aware that arguments made in bad faith typically fail to lead to productive discussions, yes.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, FireChans said:
Are there facts about Nate or just opinions?
I mean, CLAYPOOL has been shown the door by 3 franchises in 2 seasons. He’s a league minimum guy who by physical talent alone should be worth more in the league.
But there can’t be facts that he’s probably gonna suck, just opinions, which are subjective. Right?
Opinions unbacked by any facts are of comparably lower value than opinions backed by a non-zero quantity of facts.
Is anybody here making an argument that the Bills' WR room is going to be good because they expect Claypool to be our starting lineup?
-
Just now, FireChans said:
It’s the same logic, yeah?
We don’t know anything about Nate in 2024. Who knows if he could be great? There are no facts about him sucking, just opinions, which are subjective.
Surely you can do better than this, right?
...Right?
-
2 minutes ago, FireChans said:
It’s about as close to a fact as you can get.
otherwise, why can’t we believe that maybe Nate Peterman can still be a franchise guy?
Oof, this is a rough take, and a rough comparison.
Five out of our expected top 6 have had seasons as productive NFL players with significant roles. One of those five is a reclamation project, unrelated to his physical talent. The remaining player is a rookie that has NFL size and talent.
Nathan Peterman has exactly zero games against NFL starters that show he can even be a stopgap.
Not all hypotheticals are equally likely.
Bills @ Steelers - Preseason Game 2 - Sat 8/17 7PM
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Genuinely no, he was pretty okay for the first stint. No clue what happened to him.