Dr. Who
-
Posts
6,660 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Dr. Who
-
-
Traded our 2nd next year to move up in the second. Yes, there is an UGA bias. I've seen these players enough to feel comfortable with my evaluation on them. Guess a lot of folks don't like or are blase about Mitchell. I like this draft, all the same.
28.
Adonai MitchellWR Texas
40.
Ladd McConkeyWR Georgia
128.
Tykee SmithS Georgia
133.
Mason McCormickOG South Dakota State
144.
Jordan JeffersonDT LSU
160.
Tyler DavisDT Clemson
163.
Isaac GuerendoRB Louisville
200.
Xavier ThomasEDGE Clemson
204.
Zion Tupuola-FetuiEDGE Washington
248.
Carter BradleyQB South Alabama
-
2
-
1
-
-
-
8
-
2
-
4
-
2
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, billsfan89 said:
I am just now getting familiar with McConkey’s game but is he more of a slot or a boundary WR? The Bills need a boundary WR as Shakir and Samuel are more hybrid slot boundary WR’s and at best even if the Bills view Shakir as a true boundary WR they won’t likely view Samuel as that so I he issue is the Bills can’t likely draft a slot high up.
He played 70% of his snaps on the outside at UGA. He's not primarily a slot receiver. I think he can fill the Diggs' role. You still need an X -- Thomas, Legette, Mitchell, etc. I think we need two WR early, and I'd be thrilled if McConkey were one of them.
-
2 hours ago, Beck Water said:
I can not reasonably pretend to know enough about college football and the WR prospects to tell where the balance of risk and prudence lies. I'm just concerned, given the Rousseau/Basham debacle.
Well, given the state of our WR room today, Beane has rather backed himself into, or allowed himself, to be placed in a momentarily dangerous position. Minus WR1 and WR2, bracketing out whether Diggs was still a WR1 or Davis an adequate WR2, the overall talent is very poor relative to the rest of the NFL. Beane simply has to make a best effort play, and endure the risk of inherent uncertainty that is crystallized in the drama of sport, but part of the existential nature of choice. It's either push all your chips in on a top 3, should that option present itself, split the difference on a fella like Thomas, or double dip at #28 and a trade up from #60.
The folks who think there is another plan, like waiting till #60, or God forbid, even later to address the WR deficit are deceiving themselves about what we currently have, even if Kincaid becomes the fella we all hope he can be, and Samuel and Shakir are at least capable pros.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:
So, if I were king, I'd make Terry Pegula wear a big cowboy hat with that number emblazoned on it for a month.
For sure, I'd make him wear it to Las Vegas for the 2024 Draft. Maybe Jack Eichel would come up to him and say "hi."
I bet he'd fire Don Granato then, and maybe hire a real GM and coach. Or sell to someone who gave a damn, but
most likely that would be someone who'd want to move the team to Atlanta or Portland or somewhere else more
deserving of a dozen years plus of missing the playoffs.
-
1 hour ago, Beck Water said:
So I think there are a couple of layers to this.
The first is the layer I already covered elsewhere - drafting a player high in the 1st, or even in the 1st at all, does not guarantee an elite talent. It gives teams the highest probability, but it's far from a certainty. Nor does drafting later exclude an elite talent. So to a certain extent, those who feel we can "let the draft come to us", point to the intrinsic uncertainty of player evaluations, and the fact that draft picks are an alignment between the team's internal talent evaluation and their sense of "how the frog will jump" for the other 31 teams.
The second layer is that there's a difference between what's needed to win in the regular season, vs what's needed to win in the playoffs. The Bills managed 10 wins and a trip to the playoffs with no #1 WR, sort of "#1 by committee" between John Brown, Cole Beasley, creative play design, and a handful of "guys". But they couldn't close the deal.
Next year we went to the AFCCG with the addition of Diggs as a true #1 (by the way, I hate that term "alpha". It gets used all the time by a bunch of chest-thumpers who feel the need to tell the world they're the top wolf in a theory of pack hierarchy that's been debunked for several decades - in fact, the same scientist who developed it, later debunked it. But I digress). It wasn't quite good enough to get us into the Superbowl, but arguably we were close on offense.
But then we saw Brown decline, and obviously not quite enough done to replace them with Davis 2nd year, and 34 year old Sanders/32 year old Beasley. We were still good to stack W in the regular season, but just having a #1 in Diggs wasn't enough in the playoffs.
So the third layer is, if asked whether it's more important to have a #1 WR or to have a number of capable receivers to spread the ball around, my vote is "Both are needed". In the playoffs, with the best defenses, if you don't have a #1, they'll stifle all your receivers. If you do have a #1 but not enough depth, they'll stifle your #1 and the rest of the guys won't be able to do enough.
Anyway TL;DR I'm not sure the mindset you think you're seeing, is exactly the mindset people have. But maybe I'm wrong.
Yes, you are certainly wrong. Or perhaps not, but I like to start with a strong statement that affirms all my prejudices.
It seems to me your argument, if I follow you well, is rather reminiscent of a similar argument with regard to the defense. It performs admirably in the regular season, then fades into disappointment once the zebras tend to allow more holding, and one is confronted with the better qbs, etc. Folks say we lack playmakers, and that hits both sides of the ball. We have depth, and we have good players, but few elite talents that can rise to the challenge of the moment once the post-season comes.
I do think we currently lack the minimum threshold for that quality of playmaker, though we have some young guys who might ascend to that level. Josh is the only one I comfortably count as one. This doesn't mean he has not had failures, but our franchise qb is certainly someone who can be that player. (I am not using alpha as a technical scientific term, debunked or otherwise. I just grabbed it as part of a conversation, but if it offends you or bothers you because it is populist nonsense, I have no attachment to it whatsoever.) However we get them, first round, fifth round, free agent, trade, I think we need to elevate the talent level of the WR room beyond capable players.
I'm not sure we can pay the price for a top 3 WR, and of course, even the so-called safest pick has some element of risk. So many factors play into life, and it is true in sports as elsewhere. It's not a science, but an art, and the best scientists also have an aesthetic sense. Mathematicians and physicists often intuit the answer before they find the "proof" for it. I'm pretty sure you know all this. So, I would be excited to get one of those top 3 WRs, but probably be rather appalled at the price tag. My own sense of balancing prudence and risk is to opt for a double dip early at the position. I still think the odds of finding a playmaker talent at WR favor getting them early, so I'd prefer two lottery tickets. And I think you could get geometric payoffs, where the combination exceeds the value of each alone.
Personally, I love McConkey, and as a few others have surmised, I think he could fill the Diggs' role. He's not just a slot, and he's simply a smooth, beautiful route runner with more speed than some credit. Then I'd like to add a big-bodied X: Thomas, Mitchell, Legette are my preferences. This is not selling off next year's first, but it would cost something to come away with two of those.
-
25 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
He's so smooth, the fella is WR Fred Astaire. One of my favorites in this draft.
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
I guess that we just have a different idea of how often they will throw. I have them at 36 pass attempts a game. Without big play availability that feels about right. They averaged 33 pass attempts a game with Brady. That’s a little bit misleading though because they only threw the ball 15 times vs. Dallas. We disagree at how often the Bills will throw.
We also disagree that the rest of those guys are capable of taking that kind of target share. Some of these guys were productive with low target share and low attention from the defense. The Bills don’t have anyone that scares teams in the passing game with the exception of maybe Kincaid (if he keeps developing). The rest of those guys are role players and without an alpha in the room they are going to be defended like top players. That’s not ideal. The Bills NEED an alpha. All of those guys need that guy to take attention.
If the Bills top receivers are on the roster now, they won’t go to the playoffs. they have to get 1 of the top 3 or 2 of the top 12. They can’t bank on “hoping” to be right in the 4th or 5th. That’s not an option any longer. It was a bad idea when Diggs was here. Now, it isn’t a thought.
I don't think a lot folks are buying the need for an alpha. Many seem to think the idea of WR1 is obsolete. They believe all you have to do is spread the ball around to capable receivers. There's no sense that the stress imposed by a dominant WR opens up space for the role players, and that without that fella, the space goes away and with it, much of the productivity of the role players.
Indeed, there are those who argue that we found Davis and Shakir in the mid-rounds, and presuming they were/are "good enough," there's no urgency, or they point to a deep draft at the position and think one can safely let the draft come to you. This relative complacency perpetuates the same m.o. of asking Josh Allen to elevate mid-level talent, rather than providing him with some elite talent to work with. It's disheartening to me to see that mindset, and I don't understand how it is compelling to many, but apparently it is.
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, Allen2D̶i̶g̶g̶s̶TBD said:
Someone from the top group has to fall because I don't think we'll have 7 receivers go in the 1st round like a lot of mocks are showing. Teams also have access to prospects' medical information that isn't publicly known, which can cause a prospect to fall.
I just hope Beane doesn't get antsy and trade up for a wide receiver in a draft with this much depth.
Well, I guess it depends what you mean by fall, and who you think are WR 4 - 6. Regardless, all the tier 2 and probably tier 3 will be gone by the mid-forties. Maybe Polk makes it to #60, and I would take him if that were the case.
-
29 minutes ago, Solomon Grundy said:
“It’s not about timed speed, it’s about game speed.” Student of the game. Perfect fit for Bills, talent and culture wise
I don't like him, especially if he has to play big slot to be effective in the NFL. That's the argument I have seen made. If he could be an effective boundary receiver, that is a different story, but I'm not convinced that is the case. I sure as hell wouldn't take him at #28.
-
1
-
4
-
-
5 minutes ago, Allen2D̶i̶g̶g̶s̶TBD said:
I would rather take a wr in both the 1st and 2nd round than trade up to the top 15 for a receiver.
Adonai Mitchell or Brian Thomas may be there at #28 and then take McConkey, Franklin, or Wilson at #60.
Unlikely Thomas is there, and only possible Mitchell will be. McConkey and Franklin for sure are gone well before #60.
If you want two early, you have to trade up from #60, imo. I would add Legette to the list, personally.
-
1
-
2
-
-
10 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:
Suddenly wondering if Brown is a possibility in a package to Chicago for the 9th pick.
Would absolutely not surprise me.
If it means able to keep the two seconds next year I’d be ok with it.
Odds this is possible?
To Bills
Pick 9
To Bears
28
60
2025 first
Spencer Brown
So you get pick 9, you give up #28, next year's first, your starting RT, and #60, and then you are waiting till day 3 for your next pick? And you are counting on Collins to be your new starting RT? I hate it, in CAPS.
-
3
-
3
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, LeGOATski said:
No, it was either keep Diggs and add a guy like Samuel, or upgrade from Diggs and add a guy like Samuel.
I don't see Samuel as a Davis replacement, so I don't see that move as addressing the loss of the boundary receiver, or now Diggs.
Unless you think Shakir can take over for Davis, I think you still need two.
-
1 hour ago, LeGOATski said:
Don't think they need two in this draft. They need to land one "alpha," as you put it. They already have 4 other starters catching the other passes (Kincaid, Jimbo, Samuel, Shakir....and also Knox...). If they draft another receiver late and he turns out good, that would be icing on the cake, but not a need.
Did you think they needed one before Diggs was traded, or were you content to take a late round receiver? Because otherwise, I think trading Diggs implies two is better than one.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Zerovoltz said:
Now that Diggs has been traded and it's come to light there has been ongoing problems in the Diggs/Allen relationship.....I STAND BY THIS. Allen is going to have a great year, and the Bills are going to be FINE. Allen is now free to run the offense without having in the back of his mind that he has to get one of the guys a number of targets. The ball can and will go to the optimal reciever on a given play.
P.S. It wasn't a fake slide.
-
3
-
1
-
1
-
-
I think he'll rebound and have a decent year, but he is declining. Solid WR2 is probably his ceiling, but who knows? He no longer plays for my team, so thankfully, I no longer have to give a damn about his antics.
-
1
-
-
I do think the top 3 represent a genuine tier that has very good odds to yield WR1 with high ceilings and relatively safe floors. So, I would understand paying the price to get one, and be excited by the player. OTOH, it will cost a lot and pretty much make impossible addressing reasonable needs. I think, given where the quality is in the draft, you'd want to add OL depth, CB depth, S, DL, RB2, and ideally two WRs.
You might create a scenario where you could trade up for Thomas and still make that happen, but it would be difficult. Thomas is not a finished product; you're betting on traits. Right now, he's a one-trick pony, albeit it's quite a pony. I'd certainly be happy to get him, and I don't have the skepticism some bright folks on this board appear to have towards him.
After trading DIggs, my preference is to double dip early at receiver. I'm in the group who think that is the best way to maximize the value of Josh Allen, and the best approach to that elusive post-season success. I would not neglect D in the draft, but I still say you prioritize WR. The plan should be to get 2 in the first 45 picks, and the closer to the first 40 the better.
The easiest route is to stay at #28, and trade up from #60. Or trade back from #28 and also move up from #60. I personally don't want Coleman. I could be talked into Franklin, but he's not one of my favorites. I like Mitchell more than most. The tandem I like best is Legette and McConkey.
-
1
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Chicken Boo said:
Franklin is an X.
I don't see him as a "big-bodied" X, so the qualifier matters from my perspective.
-
3 hours ago, GunnerBill said:
It's never about just a testing time. The problem for Keon is long before he ran the 40 at the Combine the thing that everyone agreed was a potential red flag for NFL purposes on his tape was his separation ability. Then he went to the Combine at ran a 4.6 and confirms what the tape shows. This is a guy who is going to struggle to separate at the NFL level.
It doesn't mean he can't play, or is bound to bust, but it means that it would not be a wise use of a 1st round pick. Personally, as I've said before, I look at Cooper Kupp as the comp. Bigger guy (okay Coleman is 6'4, Kupp is 6'2) who struggles to separate outside but is good with the ball in his hands. The Rams just plugged him in as a big slot and said "we'll scheme you open" and that is easier to do inside where you are going to get more free releases and see more zone coverage. Kupp went early round 3, Coleman still has a 2nd round grade on my board and most others that I speak to seem to agree. I know you might say "but in hindsight now you'd take Kupp in the first round!" And my answer would be - no I wouldn't. Because in the case of Kupp the results would justify that as a good tactical move, strategically it is still not a value way to spend a first round pick.
Further, the problem with Coleman as a big slot is that is where Kincaid lines up most of the time. I don't want to draft a WR high with the expectation that he needs to take snaps from Kincaid to see the field a lot.
-
1
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Ralonzo said:
Second post-draft mock, and this time while I was sitting back with my trade-back philosophy a funny thing happened. A guy fell. And fell and fell. And finally it was all I could stands and I couldn't stands no more.
*** TRADE ***
From BUF: #28, 2025 R2
From JAX: #17
PICK: 17 RND: 1 (BUF from JAX) Rome ODUNZE WR Washington
I would have thrown in a 4th too, but this bluff got through. You know who the guy is.
*** TRADE ***
From BUF: #60
From ARI: #66, #104
PICK: 66 RND: 3 (BUF) Kingsley SUAMATAIA OT BYU
Getting an early 4th is key here and we get the guy we'd have taken at 60 anyway.
PICK: 104 RND: 4 (BUF) Cole BISHOP S Utah
Rangy and smart safety fits the next biggest need for the team.
PICK: 128 RND: 4 (BUF) Beaux LIMMER C Arkansas
I'm fine with McGovern and Anderson at C but the value here is excellent. Kromer will get the best 5 out there.
PICK: 134 RND: 4 (BUF) Jarrian JONES CB Florida State
Our zone corner, previously discussed.
PICK: 144 RND: 5 (BUF) Johnny WILSON WR Florida State
This is Tariq Woolen stuff where an off-the-range athlete drops for reasons unknown.
PICK: 160 RND: 5 (BUF) Nehemiah PRITCHETT CB Auburn
At this point I'm looking for Beane's "explosive" traits, his 10 and 40 splits speaks to elite recovery speed.
PICK: 163 RND: 5 (BUF) Myles COLE DE-EDGE Texas Tech
Our sleeper Groot, previously discussed.
PICK: 200 RND: 6 (BUF) Jordan JEFFERSON DT LSU
Again, explosiveness (4.70 at 313lb) and the value here is nuts.
PICK: 204 RND: 6 (BUF) Ryan FLOURNOY WR Southeast Missouri State
Later rinse repeat. High level suddenness and high end traits needing coaching. 3 X WRs? Sure why not.
PICK: 248 RND: 7 (BUF) Trevin WALLACE LB Kentucky
Prospect for ST can really move, profiles a bit like Dorian Williams in being short, yet long.
You moved up eleven spots for a 2025 2nd? What's the point of the mock if they are so outrageously out-of-touch with reality? I understand that one must accept a certain amount of credulous math, but that's too much. And then Odunze falling to #17 in the first place is highly unlikely. I think Johnny Wilson is a fifth-round pick. That's about where I think you can take a chance on him. I prefer Cornelius Johnson as a late rounder WR if he's there, but Flournoy is intriguing as well. I'd be surprised if Bishop is around past pick 100, but great if it happens. Tykee Smith is someone I like a bit later in round 4. Did you have a choice between Limmer and Bortolini? I think I prefer the latter, but that's a solid choice. Jordan Jefferson at 200 is another impossible happening. As you say, the value is nuts.
Below was my attempt to see what would happen if you made a realistic trade up for a top 3 WR. It was expensive -- #28, 128, 2025 1st, 2nd, and 4th. I tried less and the model rejected it. So, I dunno, but just as ballpark, maybe it's indicative. The main point, I think, is if you go that way, you're not getting everything you'd like, and the second WR has to come late. It would have helped if the Machine was generous enough to offer Jordan Jefferson at 200.
9.
Malik NabersWR LSU
60.
Chris BraswellEDGE Alabama
133.
Audric EstimeRB Notre Dame
144.
Tykee SmithS Georgia
163.
Gabe HallDT Baylor
200.
Cornelius JohnsonWR Michigan
204.
Khristian BoydDT Nothern Iowa
248.
Frank CrumOT Wyoming
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
42 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said:
Yea ok. Or…let’s think here. Oh, right…The Bills showed high interest and said things to Thomas who has in turn told his friends what team seems to like him the most
I see some folks saying the Bills would be wise to let the draft come to them. I very much doubt Beane lets Davis walk and trades Diggs without a much more proactive plan to address the WR room. Thomas probably makes the most sense as a target you can get at a price point that may be high, but not as exorbitant as what would be entailed to get a top 3 WR.
1 hour ago, Chicken Boo said:Just as I thought. Troy Franklin killing it.
I prefer McConkey, but I'd be fine with Franklin as part of a tandem. The other fella better be a big bodied X, imo. Thomas, Mitchell, Legette, or even Coleman; maybe Walker a bit later.
-
1
-
-
Assuming they would still take Sweat if he fell, here's a scenario. I used a 2025 3rd to move up for Legette.
37.
Ladd McConkeyWR Georgia
51.
Xavier LegetteWR South Carolina
69.
T'Vondre SweatDT Texas
98.
Kiran AmegadjieOT Yale
133.
Audric EstimeRB Notre Dame
144.
Tykee SmithS Georgia
163.
Jonah EllissEDGE Utah
168.
Justin EboigbeDT Alabama
199.
Joe Milton IIIQB Tennessee
200.
Nehemiah PritchettCB Auburn
-
1
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, ScorpionZero said:
I see why now, but I can't judge. I made that mistake when I was young and dumb. Never made it again.
Oh, I don't wish to be unnecessarily severe. Folks make mistakes, but you'd think this close to the day that could set you up for life, there would be more self-awareness and minimum prudence. Then again, youth is not really cautious that way. (And naturally, it could have grave repercussions for others.) Some here seem to believe Beane and McD won't even consider him now. I really don't know. I read somewhere that he has a reputation for partying. If there's a spark of common sense in him, this could be a wake up call.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, ScorpionZero said:
MDD the easiest place to make trades.
I like this a lot, but Sweat might be off our board now, and probably should be.
Maybe plug Fiske or Jenkins in that slot.
-
1
-
How should we address WR?
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
I have no idea what they are going to do, or what Beane is thinking, obviously, but I don't think Samuel was signed as a replacement for Davis, as some appear to speculate. They will line him up all over the place, including the backfield. I don't see him as a boundary receiver primarily. Samuel is a versatile weapon that fits Brady's vision for the offense, but if anything, I'd rather picture him as an upgrade to the role Harty was supposed to fulfill. In addition, I am not convinced a significant leap in targets for Shakir is the best option. As others have pointed out, he would be an outlier as a success on the outside given his short arms. I like him as a weapon, but I don't see him as expanding his targets so much that the WR room can't tolerably add two WRs that command significant targets.
You can get by with 1 WR early. You could just adjust the targets and give more to Samuel and Shakir, Kincaid and Knox, etc. I personally still do not see a big-bodied X to replace Davis. If you think that is all you need, then someone like Thomas, Mitchell, or Legette should be the main interest in the draft. I am not convinced Coleman can be a boundary receiver like that because of limited speed, but some like him. Maybe Burton, Walker, or Polk could be considered on day 2.
My argument for McConkey is that I think he's a special talent who can play the role that Diggs has been playing. Franklin could, too, but I like McConkey better. Lots of folks probably have it the other way around. I think his ceiling is well above Shakir's. I would rather keep Shakir's targets on the lower end, where I think you can maximize his talent, than expand them significantly. I like the idea of two rookie contracts for a potential WR1 and WR2 that can grow together with Josh, and I'd rather have some redundancy in the WR room in the sense that you have more latitude where the targets can be spread around, and backup options if someone gets injured.
That may not be efficient, but that's the way I prefer to go with it, and some of this is to take advantage of the extraordinary depth at the position early in the draft (the tiers of WR that will go in the first 40 to 45 picks.) Some will counter that we have too many other needs and this is a luxury set of choices. I don't see it precisely that way, but I am not strictly motivated by filling out the roster as completely as possible.