Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Limeaid

Is having a #1 WR that important or just good to have?

Recommended Posts

If it means you are simply adding a better WR to your roster, then yes. You're adding talent. Use it wisely. Call it what you will.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2019 at 5:45 PM, Limeaid said:

There is an article in Foebes on WRs. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/curtisrush/2019/07/08/the-buffalo-bills-dont-have-a-true-no-1-receiver-so-whats-the-big-deal/#4e432bb56727

Some of it is economic:

He put Sammy in same sentence as word elite without mentioning availability or rehab and that is tough! Of course  6' 2" Robert Foster and Zay Jones will not get mentioned based on rookie contracts.

 

Some of which is percentage caught which I think is most important.

 

I think availability is also very important, when you spend most of your time being rehabbed you cannot be catching the ball  - Beasley was available 93 of 96 games.

 

If you depend on a #1 WR I think you are more vulnerable.  Andre was #1 WR for Bills but it teams slanted coverage to him too much Bills could beat teams with other players.  Unlike Cole he played a lot over the middle but he was a big WR like Foster and Jones (he was at our tailgate but he did not seem much bigger than me, maybe his body is compressing as he gets older).  He always was available playing in 234 games and missed most games year he was injured before contract year.  He also played in 21 playoff games.  If a team has a dominant #1 WR it can lose its identity without the player.

 

You need a deep bench at WR, especially without an established QB. You are better if one of those is an elite impact player.

 

Comparing injuries and catch percentage between a guy that’s often getting more targets than the other gets catches and those targets being twice as far down field in heavier coverage is a fools errand though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2019 at 6:26 PM, Jauronimo said:

Its asinine to make diminish the impact of OBJ, AB, Julio, AJ Green based on playoff appearances.  

 

 

 

Dunno,  I would definitely add playoffs and championships won as part of any pro-athletes resume and impact analysis. I mean that is why they are paid millions of dollars, to help their teams win games not to pad stats.

 

As great as our SB Bills teams were, those players will always be rated lower than players with similar stats on teams that won the big game - it is just the way winning and losing either adds to or diminishes the perception of a player's impact on the game.

 

In today's spread offenses I think the concept of a number 1 receiver is giving way to role players ala NE and New Orleans. Just scheming guys open, whether they are slot, perimeter, seam, or RBs releasing. I wonder how much it would change their offense for a team like New Orleans, that likes to dink and dunk down the field, to have a stud player like Julio Jones? Would he be featured less and have less yards than he has had with Atlanta?

 

I think good teams with solid QBs make good receivers look great without tying up significant cap signing so-called "elite" receivers. On poor teams elite receivers often disappear and the prima donnas tend to implode. It will be interesting to see how AB fares this year and how the Steelers perform without him.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, GreggTX said:

If it means you are simply adding a better WR to your roster, then yes. You're adding talent. Use it wisely. Call it what you will.

It depends on what else you can do with they money.  It is a zero sum game and previous GM tried to spend future money to get results and it did not work.

 

If you sign Lammy for $16 million a year to play WR and he gets hurt you are in a world of hurt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, WideNine said:

 

Dunno,  I would definitely add playoffs and championships won as part of any pro-athletes resume and impact analysis. I mean that is why they are paid millions of dollars, to help their teams win games not to pad stats.

 

As great as our SB Bills teams were, those players will always be rated lower than players with similar stats on teams that won the big game - it is just the way winning and losing either adds to or diminishes the perception of a player's impact on the game.

 

In today's spread offenses I think the concept of a number 1 receiver is giving way to role players ala NE and New Orleans. Just scheming guys open, whether they are slot, perimeter, seam, or RBs releasing. I wonder how much it would change their offense for a team like New Orleans, that likes to dink and dunk down the field, to have a stud player like Julio Jones? Would he be featured less and have less yards than he has had with Atlanta?

 

I think good teams with solid QBs make good receivers look great without tying up significant cap signing so-called "elite" receivers. On poor teams elite receivers often disappear and the prima donnas tend to implode. It will be interesting to see how AB fares this year and how the Steelers perform without him.

 

 

The saints Michael Thomas has absolutely been elite the last 2 seasons. And it’s no coincidence they’ll also had absurdly good teams. He and kamara gave that offense another gear. It’s taken freak occurrences to keep them from the title game. 

 

Also Julio Jones was absolutely one of the main reasons the falcons marched to the Super Bowl in 16. He had a phenomenal playoff run and A phenomenal catch in the Super Bowl that all gets overshadowed due to AWFUL field position awareness and clock management by the coaching staff. 

 

Teams can win without and elite #1 but there are plenty of examples of teams with top tier wr’s helping them to a title or right to the cusp. 

  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, WideNine said:

 

Dunno,  I would definitely add playoffs and championships won as part of any pro-athletes resume and impact analysis. I mean that is why they are paid millions of dollars, to help their teams win games not to pad stats.

 

As great as our SB Bills teams were, those players will always be rated lower than players with similar stats on teams that won the big game - it is just the way winning and losing either adds to or diminishes the perception of a player's impact on the game.

 

In today's spread offenses I think the concept of a number 1 receiver is giving way to role players ala NE and New Orleans. Just scheming guys open, whether they are slot, perimeter, seam, or RBs releasing. I wonder how much it would change their offense for a team like New Orleans, that likes to dink and dunk down the field, to have a stud player like Julio Jones? Would he be featured less and have less yards than he has had with Atlanta?

 

I think good teams with solid QBs make good receivers look great without tying up significant cap signing so-called "elite" receivers. On poor teams elite receivers often disappear and the prima donnas tend to implode. It will be interesting to see how AB fares this year and how the Steelers perform without him.

 

 

Thats fair and makes sense. What doesn't make sense is arguing that "having an Andre, Bruce, Thurman, and Talley isn't even important cause they didn't win the super bowl and some years didn't make the playoffs".

  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try and put this in material terms so that everyone can understand a top-dog receiver's importance: Plaxico Burress. Burress, drafted 8th overall, was an absolute stud -- just incredibly physically talented --  and once he became a full-time starter in 2001, the Pittsburgh offense took off, going from 18th to 3rd in yardage in one season. They got to the championship game that season and lost to the Pats. They lost in a shootout in the second round of the playoffs the next season (34-31 in OT; Pittsburgh never saw the ball in OT because they lost the toss), but Burress was a great performer in the postseason in both of those seasons. He missed some time the next season (2004), but still had a solid postseason. The Pats lost to the Steelers in the championship game, but that was a game in which spygate was in full force. He then went to the Giants in 2005, and the Giants went to the playoffs (11-5) and finished 4th in yardage (Burress put up big numbers that season). They had finished 23rd the year before and went 6-10.  Clearly, he had an impact. In 2007, you know the story. He had another excellent season (over 1000 yards), performed well in the playoffs, and made the game-winning TD catch vs the 16-0 Pats. After that, he shot himself on the dance floor, but that doesn't detract from his impact. 

Edited by dave mcbride
  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, WideNine said:

 

Dunno,  I would definitely add playoffs and championships won as part of any pro-athletes resume and impact analysis. I mean that is why they are paid millions of dollars, to help their teams win games not to pad stats.

 

As great as our SB Bills teams were, those players will always be rated lower than players with similar stats on teams that won the big game - it is just the way winning and losing either adds to or diminishes the perception of a player's impact on the game.

 

In today's spread offenses I think the concept of a number 1 receiver is giving way to role players ala NE and New Orleans. Just scheming guys open, whether they are slot, perimeter, seam, or RBs releasing. I wonder how much it would change their offense for a team like New Orleans, that likes to dink and dunk down the field, to have a stud player like Julio Jones? Would he be featured less and have less yards than he has had with Atlanta?

 

I think good teams with solid QBs make good receivers look great without tying up significant cap signing so-called "elite" receivers. On poor teams elite receivers often disappear and the prima donnas tend to implode. It will be interesting to see how AB fares this year and how the Steelers perform without him.

 

 

 

New Orleans and New England have all time great qbs. It goes a long way to “just scheming” guys open.

 

Michael Thomas would also be our best WR, Kamara our best back, or cook probably our best tight end. It helps when those role players are very very good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NoSaint said:

 

New Orleans and New England have all time great qbs. It goes a long way to “just scheming” guys open.

 

Michael Thomas would also be our best WR, Kamara our best back, or cook probably our best tight end. It helps when those role players are very very good.

 

True.

 

I think most of us hope that Allen becomes that QB who can elevate the play of guys around him.

 

Takes time, but I think today's game plays into Brees' strengths.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Jauronimo said:

Thats fair and makes sense. What doesn't make sense is arguing that "having an Andre, Bruce, Thurman, and Talley isn't even important cause they didn't win the super bowl and some years didn't make the playoffs".

 

I get where you are going, and for me as a fan of those Bills' teams I feel they were elite players that had the misfortune of hitting a perfect storm of NFC Superbowl teams.

 

I often wonder how many good players become great players because they land with the right team with the right coaching around them, vs players that make average or poor teams better because they bring elite skills...

 

The truth, like most things in life, is probably somewhere in the middle and some positions carry more impact than others.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, WideNine said:

 

True.

 

I think most of us hope that Allen becomes that QB who can elevate the play of guys around him.

 

Takes time, but I think today's game plays into Brees' strengths.

 

 

 

 

 

But I can’t underscore enough that it’s not just drew. 

 

They are better at RB, WR1, TE, both tackles and a guard before you start getting into tougher calls. In addition to the all time great qb, their other 10 guys tend to be better. It’s a talent league and while we improved greatly there’s still work to be done 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

But I can’t underscore enough that it’s not just drew. 

 

They are better at RB, WR1, TE, both tackles and a guard before you start getting into tougher calls. In addition to the all time great qb, their other 10 guys tend to be better. It’s a talent league and while we improved greatly there’s still work to be done 

 

On paper😈 we are better, but I agree OBD took steps to infuse talent and Allen needed a better supporting cast.

 

Really hoping it all comes together this year. Been a while since we had an offense we could get excited about.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

I'll try and put this in material terms so that everyone can understand a top-dog receiver's importance: Plaxico Burress. Burress, drafted 8th overall, was an absolute stud -- just incredibly physically talented --  and once he became a full-time starter in 2001, the Pittsburgh offense took off, going from 18th to 3rd in yardage in one season. They got to the championship game that season and lost to the Pats. They lost in a shootout in the second round of the playoffs the next season (34-31 in OT; Pittsburgh never saw the ball in OT because they lost the toss), but Burress was a great performer in the postseason in both of those seasons. He missed some time the next season (2004), but still had a solid postseason. The Pats lost to the Steelers in the championship game, but that was a game in which spygate was in full force. He then went to the Giants in 2005, and the Giants went to the playoffs (11-5) and finished 4th in yardage (Burress put up big numbers that season). They had finished 23rd the year before and went 6-10.  Clearly, he had an impact. In 2007, you know the story. He had another excellent season (over 1000 yards), performed well in the playoffs, and made the game-winning TD catch vs the 16-0 Pats. After that, he shot himself on the dance floor, but that doesn't detract from his impact. 

Perfect. I know you glossed over the Giants SB win intentionally but I have to point out that he single handedly won the Giants Packers NFC Championship game routinely beating Al Harris. I mean he just waxed him. Eli threw bubble routes to Plaxico with no particular need to place the ball and the Packers defense, having had this happen several plays over already, knew the Giants were running the exact same play at least once every set of downs. And Al Harris is just jamming Plaxico.. he's not even worried about a fake for a deep route. Neither is Plaxico nor the viewers or the coaches. Everybody watching that day just saw Plaxico shove Al Harris around like a rag doll as he catches a short bubble screen for at least 5 yards.

 

I mean I don't think I've seen a WR embarrass a CB more than Plaxico did to Al Harris that day. He finished with 11 catches on 13 targets and 151 yards. The 8-8 Giants don't make that miraculous run without Plaxico Burress. 

 

Sure teams have won without a WR really factoring in. But you can't say a WR hasn't been a difference maker giving stellar performances in a SB winning team playoff run.

 

While I have everybody's attention and seeing how this thread was locked before I could view it. I'd like to say that this man is my hero.. and no this is not my burner account cause I don't have this unmitigated confidence in me: you guys are some cellar swelling sweaty nerds. All of you lot. @Mooshocker

 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Limeaid said:

It depends on what else you can do with they money.  It is a zero sum game and previous GM tried to spend future money to get results and it did not work.

 

If you sign Lammy for $16 million a year to play WR and he gets hurt you are in a world of hurt.

 

To be fair, our cap situation wasn’t that bad, if we didn’t decide to slash and burn without care about the short term. 

 

Also, 16m isn’t some crazy cost in relation to the cap and you need a few superstar talents on a team. Does it hurt less when your 16m LT, DT, or CB get hurt? You need stars and depth. In the window of a rookie qb contract it’s a heckuva lot easier to support that. Especially if drafting decent alongside that.

  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Patriots dominance has skewed the perception of the importance of a number 1 receiver. If not for the Patriots and their completely anomalous run, there would be a few teams with legit number 1's with rings. I also believe it's slightly less important than in the past with more complex formations/patters, but it's still valuable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P said:

Perfect. I know you glossed over the Giants SB win intentionally but I have to point out that he single handedly won the Giants Packers NFC Championship game routinely beating Al Harris. I mean he just waxed him. Eli threw bubble routes to Plaxico with no particular need to place the ball and the Packers defense, having had this happen several plays over already, knew the Giants were running the exact same play at least once every set of downs. And Al Harris is just jamming Plaxico.. he's not even worried about a fake for a deep route. Neither is Plaxico nor the viewers or the coaches. Everybody watching that day just saw Plaxico shove Al Harris around like a rag doll as he catches a short bubble screen for at least 5 yards.

 

I mean I don't think I've seen a WR embarrass a CB more than Plaxico did to Al Harris that day. He finished with 11 catches on 13 targets and 151 yards. The 8-8 Giants don't make that miraculous run without Plaxico Burress. 

 

Sure teams have won without a WR really factoring in. But you can't say a WR hasn't been a difference maker giving stellar performances in a SB winning team playoff run.

 

While I have everybody's attention and seeing how this thread was locked before I could view it. I'd like to say that this man is my hero.. and no this is not my burner account cause I don't have this unmitigated confidence in me: you guys are some cellar swelling sweaty nerds. All of you lot. @Mooshocker

 

Yup, I thuought about mentioning that performance and should have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

Yup, I thuought about mentioning that performance and should have.

Yeah I remember it specifically since I watched I with my brother: Packers fan. In between his whining over nothing to do and the commentators joking "well we know the Giants don't have to worry about pulling out any tricks to get important yards on a play. They have the most automatic play to go to given the mismatch they've exploited today."

 

I wanted to mention it because it's not only Plaxico's best impact in winning a close game.. but I've cited this specific performance as one of the best examples of any WR heavily accounting for a playoff win. I know there are more gaudy playoff numbers but Giants limited offense against such a good Packers team makes Plaxico's game one of the best playoff performances by a WR i know. Giants simply wouldn't have been able to move the chains.

 

Point is folks a great WR can bail you out on a playoff run just as much as Von Miller did having a career game in the SB. Every game is tough in a 3-4 game playoff run and someone needs to step up and have a career game in order to play above the team's ability. Because the opponent is likely playing above theirs if they're any threat to win the whole thing. And WRs have shown time and time again that they can pull out the win. As is any case with a team another unit can use that extra game the WR allowed them to have their own transcendent performance. 

 

If any Rams player between OL, Cooks, Goff, or Gurley steps up and makes several impactful plays they win. And Cooks was certainly given the opportunity to be in SB lore if he makes any of the tough grabs he got his hands on. CJ Anderson got them there the game before and WR1 Cooks could have finished it with his absolute best. Gilmore simply got the better of him. CB1s are ultra talented themselves and I think you at minimum need a WR1 that can beat at least half the top CBs on every team

Edited by BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or go deep with several WR2's that can consistently win their matchup against opposing secondary's corner with the upside to have outstanding performances. Which I think Robert Foster fits into well right now. Goal for me just is to have the same amount of dominant impact games collectively from the group of less consistent but capable WRs as a WR1 may have. Altogether they can still have the probability of impacting a win as a traditional WR1-3 depth chart dominated by the top guy would.

 

I think that's more difficult to achieve but less expensive. We don't have 3 Robert Fosters so the WR Corp isn't where I want it to be yet but it's finally getting paid attention to and is passable in this league and for young Josh Allen right now IMO... where in past years it most definitely was not. It won't hold the offense back as much but I still want so see the unit be a strength in 2 years or less and be the clear difference maker for a couple of wins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Big plays at crucial times along with steady production is critical for an offense. Look no further than the Bills last year- of course there was other problems but we had the worst receivers in the league and no one close to a number 1 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, billsfan_34 said:

Big plays at crucial times along with steady production is critical for an offense. Look no further than the Bills last year- of course there was other problems but we had the worst receivers in the league and no one close to a number 1 

It got bad. Basically 3 years straight of completely ignoring the position. After Watkins, Woods, and Goodwin were long gone we were depleted and stuck with lazy plugins like Jordan Mathews and Kelvin Benjamin.

 

It's been a while since we've witnessed a group that was good let alone at least not such a detriment. So hopefully we have something that's not completely taking away from what everyone else is doing on offense this year.

Edited by BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I look.at it this way.  When the Bills were on the 4 year SB run, HOF QB Jim Kelly had 2 HOF WR s to throw to.  James Lofton and Andre Reed.  And then of course throw in HOF Thurman.

 

Scheme and coaching is cool, but you win with studs in the NFL.  So yeah, it's important.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P said:

It got bad. Basically 3 years straight of completely ignoring the position. After Watkins, Woods, and Goodwin were long gone we were depleted and stuck with lazy plugins like Jordan Mathews and Kelvin Benjamin.

 

It's been a while since we've witnessed a group that was good let alone at least not such a detriment. So hopefully we have something that's not completely taking away from what everyone else is doing on offense this year.

Couldn’t have said it better!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real question is what is the overall talent level?

 

Would you rather have 5 very good receivers or 1 great/4 average receivers?

 

Would you rather have good RBs and TEs with good receivers or 2 great receivers with no supporting cast.

 

IMO it is about balance.  Any one person can be schemed away (yes some tougher than others) so have many good/above average is better than 1 great player trying to carry the load.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was the point of having a great WR when we had a quarterback who never threw the ball? I’d say the same was true last year when Peterman threw it to the guys in the other helmets. Let’s see how Josh does then we can go shopping for a WR next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...