Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
YoloinOhio

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

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

but he SHOULD have been.

 

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

Be honest.  You just don't like the guy, for whatever reason.  You're on every post bashing him for various reasons, even though highlight reels, draft projections and scouting reports disagree with you.

 

I've got an inkling that you had strong criticisms of DK last season too.  I can tell.

Scouting reports disagree? All of them say he has good but not great speed and needs work on route running

 

Anthony Johnson from UB was touted as a top 3-4 round pick and he had amazing tape and better production than Shenault and then went undrafted

 

Do I think Shenault goes undrafted? Not at all

 

But I'm not here to make friends. I call it like I see it and he's just not my favorite WR In the class

 

He has great skills with the ball in his hands and is a good playmaker but in this class I don't see him as a top 5 guy when all is said and done

 

I have nothing against the guy , I think there are better WRs

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

Be honest.  You just don't like the guy, for whatever reason.  You're on every post bashing him for various reasons, even though highlight reels, draft projections and scouting reports disagree with you.

 

Watch entire games, not the cut and paste marketing stuff.    And draft projections before the combine and pro days are so much toilet paper.

 

From the games I watched, Shenault is very raw as a WR.   His route running is inconsistent, his blocking nonexistent.    He's a dynamo with the ball in his hands.   He's the textbook definition of a RB playing WR.     

 

Maybe Daboll can get creative and design an offense around that.    And I wouldn't be opposed--if Shenault was a slot guy or WR4, not WR1...

Share this post


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

 

Watch entire games, not the cut and paste marketing stuff. 

 

I was told the exact same thing last year about Metcalf.  

 

Sometimes talent jumps off the screen.  It's not hard to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

Laviska can do it all, but he may not be there at #22.  Especially after he rips the combine.

 

Since when are YAC and good hands NOT WR skills?  And Shenault doesn't need a ton of development.

 

I'm very curious as to what you thought about D.K. Metcalf around this time last year?  Were you one of those worried about his 3-cone?  Be honest.


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. 

Share this post


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

No but I played D1 football and still scout and coach

 

I know what a 4.4 looks like and that's not it. It's solidly a 4.5 ish in my estimation

 

When your around the game everyday for 30+ years you can pick things up 

So if he runs a 4.4 at the combine you are going to change your mind?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 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


This is more or less where I’m at with him as well. I think he’ll end up a quality NFL contributor, but not in the next 2 years, and not a superstar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

I was told the exact same thing last year about Metcalf.  

 

Sometimes talent jumps off the screen.  It's not hard to see.

 

Metcalf had a big, big 'unknown' quality about his production, his body builder physique, his ability to step in and contribute right away.   He wasn't a sure thing by any means and most scouting reports were all over the place on him.

 

With the 'Hawks, he was inconsistent early in the year and to his credit, stepped it up in December.    Going to a playoff calibre team with a future gold jacket QB sure helped him, no doubt.   

 

 

Share this post


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

I have felt for some time that Daboll would fall in love with him and make him a top priority. 

Me too. Hes so tempting. Imagine the playbook....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

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...