Jump to content
YoloinOhio

Cover 1 evaluation of Laviska Shenault and in-depth overview of injury history

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Virgil said:

So don't trade the farm for someone else.........

 

@Reed83HOF😘

Ruggs is better

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Buffalo716 said:

He's great value in round 2 because he's a jack of all trades and can do alot 

 

He's not good value in the first because he isn't great at any WR skills and may never develop 

 

And 22 is not tail end of round 1.. you can get an absolute stud who is way more polished than Shenault there

 

31 would be the tail end

 

And I honestly don't want him at all. 22nd pick of round 2 sure

Man.... if somebody is GREAT value in the 2nd, it inherently means they would still be solid value in the bottom 3rd of the 1st round. 
 

if the guy was of normal value in the 2nd, THEN you could say he was a bad value in the first. 
 

if somebody is a GREAT value in the 2nd it means he slipped passed where he should be picked at normal value. In which case.... you grab him if you are confident he’s gonna make an impact. You don’t just pass on him because he wasn’t a bargain bin “great value” pick. 
 

I would be really worried about our FO if they were just saying “we should only go after great value bargains”. They would end up missing on a lot of guys they wanted that way. If you want a guy and he isn’t gonna be around the next time up... please pull the trigger. 
 

that said. They may not even want him. I just cringe at the philosophy you’re rolling with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Buffalo716 said:

Not my top 3 choice's but he's the guy pundits and everyone mocks to us

 

He was used as a jack of all trades, he ran reverses, wildcat, play in the slot and outwide

 

So he's versatile but he isn't amazing at any position right now. I don't think he is a top end X in the league and his best attribute is running with the ball in his hands

 

I don't expect him to run a super fast time... 4.49 the fastest I expect and he just isn't a clean route runner yet

 

In such a deep class I'd rather take a WR who is polished and runs crisp routes

 

Who's the guy you prefer at 22 then?

 

I don't watch any college ball, but Shenault is the most appealing guy to me right now... and I think Daboll would salivate over a swiss army knife like Viska, don't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Stank_Nasty said:

Man.... if somebody is GREAT value in the 2nd, it inherently means they would still be solid value in the bottom 3rd of the 1st round. 
 

if the guy was of normal value in the 2nd, THEN you could say he was a bad value in the first. 
 

if somebody is a GREAT value in the 2nd it means he slipped passed where he should be picked at normal value. In which case.... you grab him if you are confident he’s gonna make an impact. You don’t just pass on him because he wasn’t a bargain bin “great value” pick. 
 

I would be really worried about our FO if they were just saying “we should only go after great value bargains”. They would end up missing on a lot of guys they wanted that way. If you want a guy and he isn’t gonna be around the next time up... please pull the trigger. 
 

that said. They may not even want him. I just cringe at the philosophy you’re rolling with. 

You are twisting my words. He would be great value at our 2nd round pick which is closer to third . That doesn't mean he has good value in round 1 either. Players get over drafted as well as under drafted

 

He is not a good a value anywhere in round 1 because he isn't polished imo and I wouldn't take him in the first at all. I don't have a first round grade on him

 

I have a second round grade on him and your nitpicking me because I said it be great value in the second where we pick but not at 22

 

I don't have a top 22 grade on him so it's not good value at all to me. But I do have a top 50 grade on him so at 54 I said its great value, change it to good value if you don't like my word choice

 

I don't have a first round grade on him so I don't think it's good value anywhere in the first

4 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Who's the guy you prefer at 22 then?

 

I don't watch any college ball, but Shenault is the most appealing guy to me right now... and I think Daboll would salivate over a swiss army knife like Viska, don't you?

At 22 I would Rather see if a D End or Lineman falls

 

If not Henry Ruggs or Ceedee Lamb if available

 

And yes he is a Swiss army knife. Listen if we draft him he's a bill and I will support him

 

He has a unique skill set and I think Daboll could create ideas to get him the ball .. with the ball he is electric

Edited by Buffalo716
  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

At 22 I would Rather see if a D End or Lineman falls

 

My "speed reading" of the Beane-meister's tea-leaves is that he feels the "deep WR draft" means we can get a WR who will help us in the 2nd, but if there's an Edge they really like who falls in the 1st to where he thinks he can get him, we'll take him because "those guys go fast"

 

 

  • Like (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

My "speed reading" of the Beane-meister's tea-leaves is that he feels the "deep WR draft" means we can get a WR who will help us in the 2nd, but if there's an Edge they really like who falls in the 1st to where he thinks he can get him, we'll take him because "those guys go fast"

 

 

 

Yeah I agree with this... and I think it's largely the right call because DE/Edge Rusher is probably a more pressing need right now anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Buffalo716 said:

Not my top 3 choice's but he's the guy pundits and everyone mocks to us

 

He was used as a jack of all trades, he ran reverses, wildcat, play in the slot and outwide

 

So he's versatile but he isn't amazing at any position right now. I don't think he is a top end X in the league and his best attribute is running with the ball in his hands

 

I don't expect him to run a super fast time... 4.49 the fastest I expect and he just isn't a clean route runner yet

 

In such a deep class I'd rather take a WR who is polished and runs crisp routes

It would not be out of the question for at least 3 receivers to be gone already by the time the Bills pick (Jeudy, Lamb, and Ruggs).  Unfortunately, the top three edge rushers could also be gone (Young, Epenesa, and Gross-Mattos).  I didn't even mention the top three offensive tackles, who will also be gone.  The point is, the fourth best WR might be a very reasonable value at that point in the draft.  I think Shenault's versatility may have held back his development as a route runner.  The question Buffalo's talent evaluators will need to try and answer is whether or not Shenault has the capacity to develop into a polished route runner with a full route tree.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shenault is a final piece to an already explosive offense, not a foundational building block to an offense, which is what we need. He'd make sense as a first rounder to a team like the Packers or Saints, but we need a WR who can run the whole route tree from day 1.

 

There just isn't 1st round value in the "McKenzie role", no matter how amazing a guy is. If we could pair Shenault with Van Jefferson in the 3rd, I'd feel a lot better about it.

Share this post


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

 

And the Bills should have one or more Super Bowls.

 

Playing that game doesn't change anything.   If Samuel would have been picked at 35 (Jags) or 37 (Panthers), do you think he would have been as effective as he was at 36?

I do. I watched Samuels whole gamecock career though. He showed the ability to set up DBs with route running, exceptional hands and body control. He’d have showed his talent on most teams.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Reed83HOF said:

Ruggs is better

 

Obviously you think so since you traded up for him in our mock-draft, and Buffalo716 has put in a word for him too.

 

Can you say a bit about why you feel that way, though?

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, OldTimer1960 said:

I agree that he looks fast in the tape that I’ve seen, but I am very concerned that many of his touches are on passes within 5 yards of LOS and on run plays.  Does he have the tools to become a good WR?  Yes, I think so, but I worry that his route running and experience are limited to the point that he won’t be much of an asset in year one and there is risk that he never develops as a WR.

 

 

Yeah, he has a lot of those touches that have not much to do with route-running.

 

But when he does run routes, he gets open consistently. He probably has a lot to learn but when you're getting open, you've got a head start on your learning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Buffalo716 said:

He's great value in round 2 because he's a jack of all trades and can do alot 

 

He's not good value in the first because he isn't great at any WR skills and may never develop 

 

And 22 is not tail end of round 1.. you can get an absolute stud who is way more polished than Shenault there

 

31 would be the tail end

 

And I honestly don't want him at all. 22nd pick of round 2 sure

 

 

Well, that's a fair enough opinion, but it's certainly not the only one.

 

Polished isn't necessarily the most important thing. Eric Moulds wasn't polished. Great pick, though.

 

Drafttek has him at #27. If that's his actual value, #22 is a reasonable spot to take him. I like him, myself. Tough as nails.

 

And there's no especial reason to think he may never develop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DCOrange said:


FWIW, DK was my #2 target behind Oliver at #9 last year and I don’t really want Shenault unless he slides to #54. I don’t think he’s anywhere near DK as a prospect personally. 

 

 

Yeah I was happy with Oliver because he checked as "elite pass rusher" so I was OK with passing on DK for that but I would have been pleased with Metcalf there too.   

 

I may be wrong about Shenault's ceiling but I know that he is nowhere near the freak talent that Metcalf was so people trying to draw a comparison are in the wrong area code.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Obviously you think so since you traded up for him in our mock-draft, and Buffalo716 has put in a word for him too.

 

Can you say a bit about why you feel that way, though?

 

 

 

You can add my name to the Ruggs > Shenault list too.

  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

You can add my name to the Ruggs > Shenault list too.

 

Fair, can you say more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

You can add my name to the Ruggs > Shenault list too.


And it ain’t close IMO.

 

Aside from the otherworldly top gear that Ruggs has, he runs tight routes and understands leverages. Basically, take all of the things that make Laviska dynamic with the ball in his hands, and Ruggs has them—save for the RB-like build and contact balance.

 

 

1:23 of this video says it all regarding Ruggs’ speed. He’s backpedaling and manages to sprint away from the defender. Unbelievable.

 

 

Edited by thebandit27
  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want speed on offense, someone that the defense has to account for on every play, making the defense a little more predictable. I think that person is Ruggs ideally, dont know if he will be there though. Shenault has the size everyone has been clamoring for and I think people are focused on that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Yeah I agree with this... and I think it's largely the right call because DE/Edge Rusher is probably a more pressing need right now anyway.

Not at all, WR is the most pressing need we have, "we didn't score enough points" Brandon Beane. Look at the receiving stats for last year:

1.) We desperately need someone who is a threat to score every time they have the ball, we were 29th in YAC as a team

2.) Beasley had the most YAC on the team at 330, 44th best and grouped around players like Mixon, Goedert, Fant, Cobb & Edleman. McKenzie was 2nd and ranked #110 in YAC w/ 206 & Brown was ranked #112 w/205. This is John Ross and Amendola territory. Robert Woods was 6th in the NFL. 

3.) Yards/Catch we were 12th and Brown was 23rd in the league, Beasley was 2nd on the team and was 73rd in the league. We are terrible in these 2 categories 

11 hours ago, 947 said:

Shenault is a final piece to an already explosive offense, not a foundational building block to an offense, which is what we need. He'd make sense as a first rounder to a team like the Packers or Saints, but we need a WR who can run the whole route tree from day 1.

 

There just isn't 1st round value in the "McKenzie role", no matter how amazing a guy is. If we could pair Shenault with Van Jefferson in the 3rd, I'd feel a lot better about it.

How is this offense already explosive? Name me our playmakers and where they rank in the NFL = we are not a final piece away Entirely misread on my part

Edited by Reed83HOF
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Buffalo Junction said:

I do. I watched Samuels whole gamecock career though. He showed the ability to set up DBs with route running, exceptional hands and body control. He’d have showed his talent on most teams.   

 

My point is that if he went to a non-playoff team with a meh QB, would we even be having this conversation.    I doubt it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bray Wyatt said:

I want speed on offense, someone that the defense has to account for on every play, making the defense a little more predictable. I think that person is Ruggs ideally, dont know if he will be there though. Shenault has the size everyone has been clamoring for and I think people are focused on that

 

The thing is, Shenault doesn't really use that size aside from his contact balance. He's not particularly good at getting off press coverage or making contested catches, which is really what people are looking for when they're thinking of the desire for a big WR.

 

A smaller player like Jalen Reagor is better in all those areas than Shenault is.

5 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

How is this offense already explosive? Name me our playmakers and where they rank in the NFL = we are not a final piece away

That's his point. He's saying Shenault is more of a finishing touch to an offense and we are not there yet.

 

Edit: Not saying I agree with that necessarily, but that's what he's saying.

Edited by DCOrange
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:


And it ain’t close IMO.

 

Aside from the otherworldly top gear that Ruggs has, he runs tight routes and understands leverages. Basically, take all of the things that make Laviska dynamic with the ball in his hands, and Ruggs has them—save for the RB-like build and contact balance.

 

 

1:23 of this video says it all regarding Ruggs’ speed. He’s backpedaling and manages to sprint away from the defender. Unbelievable.

 

 

It is ridiculous when you watch him play, he does the back shoulder catches, makes contested catches, can track the ball in the air, he can stop on a dime, make the catch and accelerate to full speed in a second.He does the Mackenzie jet sweeps, he does the Beasley slot, he does the brown over the top, he run blocks amazingly well and not one other player in the draft comes close to this explosive skill set. Defense will have to game plan against him and will roll the safety coverage to him which will open up the rest of the field. There is nothing not to like. 

 

Also our trade up from #22 to #16 for Edmunds was our 1st & 3rd rounder and we got a 5th in return. Value won't be much different to go to 15 and, even if you have to go to 13 - you can't pass this up - the talent differential is too great

2 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

A smaller player like Jalen Reagor is better in all those areas than Shenault is.

That's his point. He's saying Shenault is more of a finishing touch to an offense and we are not there yet.

 

Edit: Not saying I agree with that necessarily, but that's what he's saying.

 First, I don't hate Shenault - I want to get that out there. He said, "Shenault is a final piece to an already explosive offense"; our offense is no nowhere near explosive and that is what I am calling out, because frankly I don't see it and no stats back up that claim.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

 First, I don't hate Shenault - I want to get that out there. He said, "Shenault is a final piece to an already explosive offense"; our offense is no nowhere near explosive and that is what I am calling out, because frankly I don't see it and no stats back up that claim.

You're missing the context. 

 

Shenault is a final piece to an already explosive offense, not a foundational building block to an offense, which is what we need. He'd make sense as a first rounder to a team like the Packers or Saints, but we need a WR who can run the whole route tree from day 1.

 

He's saying Shenault would be the final piece to an already explosive offense and because we are not an explosive offense, he is not a good fit for us. He thinks he would be a good final piece for the Packers or Saints and says we need a building block, which Shenault is not.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

1:23 of this video says it all regarding Ruggs’ speed. He’s backpedaling and manages to sprint away from the defender. Unbelievable.

 

This isn't on you, but I always get a chuckle when I see highlight packages that feature opponents like New Mexico State, Southern Mississippi, Arkansas or Tennessee.   

 

Not really fair competition for the Alabama's of the world who can field 10-12 NFLers (many of them first rounders) year after year against future stock brokers and used car salesmen.    IMO, that's why its so hard to evaluate many of these draft prospects, where the hit rate on how they'll do against NFL competition is only about 60-40.   It takes multiple, multiple data points and evaluations--and then a whole lot of luck...

 

I like Ruggs and would be happy to have him, however!

 

 

Edited by Lurker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

My point is that if he went to a non-playoff team with a meh QB, would we even be having this conversation.    I doubt it...

I disagree. However, I will say that he was a lot more polished coming out than Shenault. Plus there’s the level of competition. Samuel put up a 10/210/3 game against Clemson his senior year and generally played well against SEC teams while drawing the top corner or double teams. His skills translated and it was easier to see than Shenault whom I cannot quite predict NFL performance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

Also our trade up from #22 to #16 for Edmunds was our 1st & 3rd rounder and we got a 5th in return. Value won't be much different to go to 15 and, even if you have to go to 13 - you can't pass this up - the talent differential is too great

 

I hope this is what they're thinking of again this year.   Be very aggressive at the top of the round for a guy they've specifically targeted.     If they have a conviction about a player, make it happen rather than wait and hope for the best...

  • Like (+1) 1

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...

×
×
  • Create New...