BillsVet
-
Posts
10,082 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by BillsVet
-
-
11 hours ago, SoonerBillsFan said:
If Beane feels a guy is worth moving up for, AND the cost isn't too much then you can bet he will do it.
That's not the point really, nor anything I'm doubting. McBeane have proven time and again they'll use draft picks to move up, as they did with Kincaid and Elam in RD1 these last 2 years.
The issue is, people like to claim the draft is a total crap-shoot and that's surface-level analysis. You can be a decent drafting team without prioritizing the riskier positions to draft and look OK or better. You can get burned drafting the higher positions and be viewed not so good.
Drafting well is finding talent primarily at the harder to find positions because it more than likely shows up in W-L column. I don't think the question to ask is whether the draft is a crap-shoot, which in this discussion is mostly RD1-2 picks. It's more about are teams bold enough there to go after the premium positions to find elite talent. When they do, they're more likely to win if they have decent personnel people.
-
1
-
-
Drafting is more questionable when it involves players who are isolated on the field. That is, the QBs, WR's, LT's, DE's, and perhaps in man CB's. They are always in demand, frequently drafted high, and their translation from college to the pros is often more in doubt.
The IOL, DT, LB, S, RB's, and perhaps TE's are a different matter, primarily because they typically aren't drafted high. When they are, something is special about them to necessitate a RD1 pick which, I believe, makes them less of a risk. The premium positions listed above get drafted high sometimes without that characteristic...but because they play a high-value position.
Nothing is absolute and no team is head and shoulders above the others though. I recall @BADOLBILZ noting how the Bills during the drought weren't terrible drafting, but they used high picks on lesser positional value, had hits and few busts, but the end result was still those 4-7 win teams. And during those years, their success at QB, WR, LT, DE was minimal. And when they took a CB high who excelled, typically those guys lasted one contract and left in UFA like Clements and Gilmore.
Still have to take shots, as McBeane proved with Josh, at QB.
-
1
-
4
-
-
40 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:
It depends. If McDermott is serious about the WR position, there would seem to be enough quality receivers in this draft to make a difference. If he decides to focus more on defense (a distinct possibility imo) then yes; we will almost certainly be lacking yet again at WR. Logic tells me that he HAS to address WR often and early. History tells me that he is mostly about defernse.
We will find out soon enough.
I've always liked the draft for how it shows what a team is really thinking long-term. In UFA, they're filling more immediate needs, but the draft is a more long-term personnel decision process. And we spend most of the lead up projecting what will happen. Draft weekend confirms or denies those thoughts.
At the end of last season, I think McD finally got what we wanted on offense: a more run-heavy team that threw more short to intermediate. Josh's yards per attempt went down, even though he was throwing it as frequently under Dorsey compared to Brady (35 to 33 attempts per game). Upside is Josh reduced his INT's, but I'm still not a fan of taking the ball out of Josh's hands or running him like Brady did.
Wouldn't be surprised to see them go in another direction and justify it by noting the depth of this WR class. And then point to what's in-house already, but we will find out soon enough.
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, corta765 said:
I am hoping that the WR corp can be like 2019 where Beasley and Brown came in and gave established solid production. Thing with that is Smoke still went for 1000 yds 6 TDs which for a rookie would be pretty impressive. But if between two rookies shakir samuel kincaid the end of year stat line is this I am happy with it (no order of who):
75 rec 925 yds 6 TDs
69 rec 855 yds 5 TDs
50 rec 625 yds 7 TD
47 rec 565 yds 3 TD
43 rec 510 yds 4 TDs
3480 yds 25 TDs
That isn't including Knox or RB etc.. but something like that would be solid even without a 1000 yd guy or anyone over 80 rec
Josh 2019 wasn't Josh 2020-present, but the game that stands out which goes against this idea was against Baltimore late in 2019. Buffalo's WR depth was Brown, miscast as a WR1 and Beasley as their slot guy. Late in the 4th quarter on a 4th and 8, Brown was matched up 1:1 versus Marcus Peters and couldn't make the catch. Bills lost 24-17. Similar issues surfaced against Houston in the WC game a few weeks later. Bills' offense lacked the receivers to score when they needed. This prompted the trade for Diggs, but since then they've expended little in UFA or higher draft picks.
In fact, Buffalo hasn't drafted a receiver worth re-signing among all the home-grown guys they've retained. That this could happen in the passing era is an indication something's amiss with how they value the position.
The more if's and hopefully's you've got heading into the season, the less likely things will work out.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, sunshynman said:
He doesn't want to limit Josh, he will be hands off the O, he wants smarter decisions and longer drives. Josh will always take his shots. McD is fine with that. The problem is we didnt have the talent at WR to get sepration. Shakir is a very good (soon to be great) WR. He and Kincaid were are only real targets in the 2nd Half. With younger more talent at WR this year; the O will be more explosive. Diggs stopped being effective because Davis couldn't draw away coverage.
The run-pass ratio from Dorsey to Brady was much different because Buffalo just started running the ball more under Brady. This worked in the regular season, but only to a point. Didn't stop Brady from relying too much on Josh gaining yards on the ground like his predecessors resorted to by the end of the season and into the playoffs.
If the idea is to take the ball out of Josh's hands more running it with the backs and/or have him run, this offense is limited. It's limited when you run out receivers who are short to intermediate types, can't track it downfield, and historically 10-12 ypc options. Defenses cheat. And in the current NFL, expecting to maintain 10+ play drives consistently is not a recipe for success.
The difference in WR talent shows up more in the playoffs when scoring gets harder because you can't be that personnel-limited even with Josh.
-
Buffalo hasn't traded a primary starter this near the draft since Jason Peters went to Philadelphia in 2009. It wasn't surprising they didn't subsequently adjust their board given the crew in charge back then.
This time, Beane alluded to shopping Diggs for a while, which at the least was a decision to come out of their post-season review in late January/early February. And if that's the case, not a stretch to believe their draft board was built knowing that Diggs was going to be moved. Especially since they saw a draft class with strong WR talent.
It would say a lot about this regime if they decided that their primary receiving options for Josh next season were Samuels, Shakir, Kincaid, Knox and a RD2-3 rookie. Because as much as Diggs was declining, it wouldn't be that many degrees of separation from what Buffalo did at OT after trading Peters: relying on rookies/2nd year players and lesser talented options to make up for that deal.
Their vision for this team has crystalized in the last couple seasons. And now, most people are seeing that what McD wants to do on offense is to limit Josh and focus on a by-committee offensive approach with decent skilled talent, but not elite. That's not going to work in the AFC.
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, 518Buffalo said:
I'm firmly in the Packers model camp of adding WR talent through the draft. I would love to draft the best WR at 28 or even trade back into the 2nd, and then pick up another in the 4th to compete with Shorter for the last active roster spot. I wouldn't be opposed to Beane getting aggressive if there's a guy he really likes and he's only giving up one of our first or MIN 2nd next year, but with the roster retool we just went through the focus should be on maximizing Josh's 2nd window which to me means putting rookie-scale WRs around him. I think even without a true #1 next year, between Kincaid/Shakir/Samuel/Cook/rookie WR there is solid enough depth for Josh to work with if he can perform at the level we expect him to. I mean hell Mahomes just won 2 SBs without a top WR.
Shakir
Samuel
1st or 2nd round WR
Hollins
4th round WR
Shorter/Isabella
Don't really care what the Packers did with their WR group...they've accomplished little in the playoffs even with Rodgers going back years. They are in no way a blueprint for how to build an offense and even after investing more at WR, it was too little too late. If there's a similarity to Buffalo, it's that they didn't support their franchise QB with what it takes to build a SB caliber offense.
This sort of evaluation above values their quantity too highly as opposed to quality. This is only realized when the season starts and guys like Shakir and Samuel are elevated to more prominent roles they cannot equal previous production. It's like Davis a few years ago going from being the WR3 and people just assuming he'd produce as a WR2. He never did.
And then there's the assumption that younger players will improve. Davis never really did nor has Knox. I like Kincaid, but it's no guarantee that a 2nd year player breaks out. You don't pin your hopes on young players who are unproven, while increasing their role. It's why one of the issues moving Diggs is that they didn't have a plan aside from drafting someone.
Let's assume they get into position to take one of the top WR's. Josh's top targets next year will include that rookie, Samuel (who is a career 10.7 ypc guy), 2nd year man Kincaid, Shakir who is a tweener type WR, and PS caliber types. To me, even with the trade, their planning to support Josh is highly questionable.
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Bill from NYC said:
I am thinking that perhaps I'm going against the grain with my opinion. I have been very tough on McDermott but my initial reaction to this trade is positive but with a caveat.
If he dedicates the early picks to WRs and OTs, I think it was a good move. I don't think that Diggs is getting better, and a #2 is frankly a bit more than I expected. This draft appears to be loaded with receivers and OL, and now is the time to focus more on the offense and these positions specifically.
The caveat? If McDermott drafts safeties, corners and other defenders with the early picks we will be heading right back to the Levy/Jauron days and lose football games. I truly hope this doesn't happen but again, at this point I support the trade.
Jmo.
Only difference is McD has a QB where those Levy/Jauron teams never figured that part out. Of course, it was a different era and this team is better resourced financially, but the HC who runs the show is as much defensive focused as Jauron ever was.
Some are definitively concluding that with this trade Buffalo just has to go WR in RD1. I'm not in that boat because they used their top pick last year on a flex TE, and 5 of 7 RD1 picks on defense before that. I very much could see McD getting his way again and grabbing another DB. And like his predecessor DJ, it's what he knows and feels comfortable with. What he doesn't understand nor wants to is how to build a competent NFL offense around a franchise QB, who others have noted, has his flaws.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:
Yup. The extension was a reaction to pressure from Diggs and now the trade is a reaction to pressure from Diggs (Houston was his preferred destination) and so Beane has just put a “kick me” sign on his own nuts. All of the agents know now that Beane is easy to manipulate.
Doesn't help Beane that his HC is wound tighter than a 1920s baseball and never wrong.
-
4
-
1
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, BruceVilanch said:
Hopefully there's a plan
It's more of a process.
13 minutes ago, May Day 10 said:This blows a huge hole in the hull of the ship here.
Still a little soon after the Baltimore tragedy.
8 minutes ago, GerstAusGosheim said:This is Sean buying another year. He blew the Josh/Diggs window and he's looking start over.
Diggs is a twit for sure, but it's clear McD can't handle personalities that aren't in lock-step with him. Most NFL coaches realize they have to and do grudgingly.
8 minutes ago, May Day 10 said:Run, Run, Pass, Punt
I would not be surprised to see them be more ball control, defensive-oriented. I have a hard time seeing McClappy, even if he does get a young receiver or 2, playing them. And less so featuring them.
-
1
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, ndirish1978 said:
I love Beane. That said, I don't hace confidence that there will be difference making WRs near pick 28 and I don't see us hitting on an early rd DE because frankly I don't have confidence in this FO's ability to identify and draft DLmen. A rotational DT plays 40-50% of the snaps and is involved in every single play they are on the field for. A backup WR, which is what I believe will be left around 28, can run dozens of routes and will realistically affect 4-6 plays with catches and maybe a couple more if they can block well. Unless we get a gift dropped in our lap I don't really see how a top 5-10 WR is better for our team than a rotational piece with upside. We are going to put Shakir, Samuel and Diggs out there half the plays and drop Shakir to put in another TE in 12 personnel. There are realistically 4 WRs that could come in and convince this staff to sit Shakir or Samuel and we're not sniffing them barring a miracle.
This is a defeatist mentality based on their late position in RD1 and something I've seen over the years. It's like Whaley moaning about being in QB purgatory, yet some years later a new regime at OBD emphasized going to get their guy...and did it. I get that it's a cultural thing though...most people are scared to death of any risk now. Why not apply that outlook to the football team?
Your assertion that a rotational DT who "is involved in every single play" is surface-level analysis. He's on the field perhaps 30-40 snaps and comes into contact with the opponent OL. Great. But reducing a WR to only impact 4-6 plays because they were targeted or made a catch is delusional. A guy who has speed affects the game by creating opportunities for other receivers. The work an opposing DC has to do accounting for that guy behind the scenes is something you completely miss.
And lost in all this debate is that people continue viewing the draft as more for need than it really is. If you're a good team and using the draft that way, you won't be a good team for long. Another DT for a safe McDefense isn't going to do much long-term, even if he's a good starter.
-
1
-
-
I don't think Beane is as concerned about the draft pick short from the league.
It's the classic, "look over there" move. And I get it because re-framing the narrative that the NFL is a problem takes focus from him at a media event. One he likely anticipated receiving questions about how they'll get beyond the divisional round game for the first time since 2020.
-
1 minute ago, DJB said:
See this is how we will beat Mahomes
We talkin' bout safeties.
-
2
-
8
-
2
-
-
17 hours ago, TheWeatherMan said:
To be fair, I’d be excited about a new kicker.
Setting the bar high I see.
-
1
-
-
People in here getting excited about safeties.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, GASabresIUFan said:
Samuel stats have been similar to last year regardless if it was Cam Newton or Teddy Bridgewater or whomever played in Wash.
Late-career Cam, the now-retired Bridgewater, and Sam Howell versus Josh Allen.
Think Shakir's QB is the same as the aforementioned 3 QB's Samuel's played with. As in, their production being similar is the comparison?
If you do, then it's time to head back to the Sabres Board.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, GASabresIUFan said:
Shakir vs Samuel in 2023
Shakir 39/45, 611 yds, 2 TDs, 15.7 yds/r, Catch % 86.7, 17 catches of 20+, 282 yds YAC, 7.2 yds yac/r, 0 drops (The 7.2 tds yac/r was 3rd in the NFL for receivers with 20 or more receptions.)
Samuel 62/91, 613 yds, 4 TDs, 9.9 yds/r, Catch % 68.1, 11 catches of 20+, 260 yds YAC, 4.2 yds yac/r, 2 drops
Maybe the guy throwing them the ball helped one guy's production versus having inhibited the other.
-
4
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Warriorspikes51 said:
IMOI want Beanemay look to do Armstead & SamuelFIFY
They got Mitchell Trubisky, Mack Hollins and Nick Morrow...what more do people want?
-
2
-
-
Talking about the center position. Next week it'll be back to another top safety or DT. Maybe even a RB.
These off-seasons get longer every year and I didn't think that was possible about 10 years ago.
-
What if we had thread titles which briefly identified the point of the thread AND did not ask a question?
It would be amazing.
-
1
-
-
Maybe the old-timers were right back in the 30s, 40s, and 50s. Lifting lots of weights may not be conducive to staying healthy and flexible enough to play baseball.
The wear and tear of a 162 game schedule, compared to the 17 game NFL season, IMO is more about flexibility and endurance and less about raw power.
Then again, I still love my 1920s/30s/40s/50s era Yankees when Pete Sheehy was the equipment manager and poor athletic training was the norm.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, KDIGGZ said:
Yes because the Giants offense is as good as the 49ers. Let's talk after this season that Barkley is about to have
There are many contenders for TBD's quibbling champion. You're making your case right now...best of luck!
-
1 hour ago, KDIGGZ said:
The knock on CMC was that he wasn't worth the money and was always hurt. He's now the best non QB offensive player in the NFL. Clearly they are paying for a healthy Saquon who is every bit as good.
288 touches for 1242 yards and 10 TDs is now every bit as good as 339 touches for 2023 yards and 21 TDs. I understand now.
-
1
-
-
53 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:
Good for Devin, seems a bit high but when you lose Barkley best to over pay for his replacement to look like you're trying.
And when your job is on the line as Daboll's is this season, you're pushing to use all that cap space available.
Because there might not be a next season.
Bill Belichick rumored to be interested in Cowboys & Bills...
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
It would be the biggest gut punch for Bills fans to have the franchise QB demand a trade after the 2025 season because the QB didn't perceive the HC/GM provided the resources to win in 2024 and 2025. Because by early 2026 the PSL's are sold, ticket prices raised, and the new stadium set to opening for the 2026 season. I can't see, if Terry was faced with a Josh or McD decision, the HC not being sent packing.
There's too much financially riding on Josh and McD ain't that great a coach. You hope it never comes to that, particularly because McBeane know who is carrying them today and into the future.