If the Bills had had Diggs in 2019

[SCBills]

On 4/5/2020 at 10:12 PM, Ethan in Portland said:

Defense collapsed against the Texans. Another WR would not have made a difference last year in the playoffs. Diggs maybe gets them one more win but they still are in the WC spot.

Diggs will be huge in 2020 when the schedule is much harder.

Does Diggs catch the throw to Duke that should’ve been a TD?

 

Does Diggs make the sideline grab Brown didn’t keep in-bounds?

 

If either of those plays are made, we likely win.  Even with the defense falling apart in the second half. 
 

It’s amazing the revisionist history on that game..  Allen was pretty dang good up until he started forcing it late in game (when no one was stepping up for him).  I honestly have no clue how anyone could think a legit #1, who slides Brown into a high level #2, doesn’t make a massive difference....especially for a young QB in his second season/first playoff game.  
 

 

Edited April 9, 2020 by SCBills

[Shaw66]

13 hours ago, SCBills said:

Does Diggs catch the throw to Duke that should’ve been a TD?

 

Does Diggs make the sideline grab Brown didn’t keep in-bounds?

 

If either of those plays are made, we likely win.  Even with the defense falling apart in the second half. 
 

It’s amazing the revisionist history on that game..  Allen was pretty dang good up until he started forcing it late in game (when no one was stepping up for him).  I honestly have no clue how anyone could think a legit #1, who slides Brown into a high level #2, doesn’t make a massive difference....especially for a young QB in his second season/first playoff game.  
 

 

If you listen to the Beane interview with Florio, at the end of the interview he says almost exactly what you say here.   He says what the Bills needed in that game was what they needed all season long - to score more points.   And what they needed to do that was a wideout to combine with Brown and Beasley.  He tried to get one during the season but couldn't.  He says it was not Allen.  Yes, Allen tried to do too much, but he did it because he wants to win and nothing else was working.  

[Mr. WEO]

21 hours ago, Doc said:

 

Cousins only targeted him 3 times in that game.  Like I've been saying, you can't catch what's not thrown your way...

 

Don't get bogged-down in minutiae.  I said "yards/game" initially, and then used the extrapolated 1,205 yards to make the yards/game calculation quicker.  If a player had fewer than 1205 yards and played a full 16 games, Diggs moved up a notch.

 

And the discussion was wide receivers.  But if you want to include TEs and even Darren Waller's aberration/career year, he's still 9th.

 

Lots of things would have won that game.  Better WR play was definitely one of them.

 

 

11th.

 

And you're assuming he would have gotten at least 75 yards (his average) in that last game he didn't play---yet he only had that many or more in 7 of the 15 regular season games he played....and barely had that many, combined, in his 2 playoff games.  So his "yards per game" for the games he played is now 71.

[Mr. WEO]

On ‎4‎/‎5‎/‎2020 at 6:53 PM, GG said:

And a tying TD vs Baltimore and at least one more TD vs Texans.

 

On ‎4‎/‎6‎/‎2020 at 4:48 PM, LABILLBACKER said:

We would've beaten Houston. That much I can easily predict. 

 

On ‎4‎/‎6‎/‎2020 at 5:07 PM, Doc said:

 

 Bills-Texans game where just 1 more point would have won the game for the Bills in regulation.  Claiming Diggs wouldn't have even provided that is patently absurd and you know it.

 

18 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Oh, for Pete's sake.   Nobody's guaranteeing a win.   We're just having a conversation, and almost everyone can see what's plainly obvious - a receiver with excellent ability to get open on short routes, with excellent deep speed and with excellent ability to win 50-50 balls was probably the single biggest improvement the Bills could have used against Houston.   It's not that hard. 

 

You want me to imagine all the things that could still have gone wrong.  I could do that, but it would be a colossal waste of time.   You can spend time on it if you'd like.   So sure, maybe he'll get a bad case of BO and won't be permitted in the receiver room, or maybe he won't like beef on weck and the fans will boo him and he'll give everything the bird.   Maybe he will be unhappy because he isn't getting enough targets, maybe he can't play in the cold, maybe, maybe, maybe.  

 

All we're trying to do here is talk about what kind of impact Diggs is likely to have on the Bills offense.   And the answer, whatever you may think, is that there's a good chance he will have a significant positive impact, because he is a proven, quality NFL receiver in the prime of his career.   

 

 

 

Yes they were.

 

No one here that I see is arguing with the second bolded part.  Certainly not me as is documented.

23 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I think you're wrong about that.   Over his five seasons in the league, he's clearly one of the ten best.    365 catches for 4263 yards.    70+ catches, 800+ yards a season.  

 

Clearly better are Michael Thomas, Julio Jones, Hopkins.  Those three guys have consistently put up 1200-1400 yard seasons.

 

 More or less a statistical push are Keenan Allen, Amari Cooper, Mike Evans and OBJ.   Over five years they aren't much different.   

 

Definitely top 10.  

 

Diggs v.  OBJ or Evans would be "a statistical push"....only if you did not use statistics.

[Doc]

28 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

11th.

 

And you're assuming he would have gotten at least 75 yards (his average) in that last game he didn't play---yet he only had that many or more in 7 of the 15 regular season games he played....and barely had that many, combined, in his 2 playoff games.  So his "yards per game" for the games he played is now 71.

 

I'm not the one assuming anything: you are.  I have been saying "yards/game" which is the most important stat and better than opining "well he probably wouldn't have gotten 71 yards in that last game."  Hell I could do the same for players that had more yards and also played in just 15 games and say he ranks even higher, but I won't.  But since you seem to enjoy the abuse, he was rested for the season ender against Chicago.  Guess what he got in the earlier matchup against them in Chicago?  108 yards. 

 

No, he was 8th among WRs, which was the discussion.  Do the math yourself instead of relying on some faulty website that gives you wrong numbers, and doesn't tell you basic information like how well he performed in games without Thielen and how many yards he got against Chicago earlier in the season, although I suspect that latter 2 are errors on your part more than anything.

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 And the answer, whatever you may think, is that there's a good chance he will have a significant positive impact, because he is a proven, quality NFL receiver in the prime of his career. 

 

No one here that I see is arguing with the second bolded part.  Certainly not me as is documented.

 

Diggs v.  OBJ or Evans would be "a statistical push"....only if you did not use statistics.

  

 

Good.  It's good to know you agree about that. 

 

I don't know what you mean by the OBJ  Evans comment.   I, for one, do consider them a push.   I'd take Diggs over OBJ because of their relative attitudes, and I'd call Evans a push because Diggs is more gifted physically (he benefits from being smaller), but Evans makes up for it with sheer will, so far as I can tell.  

[Mr. WEO]

11 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

I'm not the one assuming anything: you are.  I have been saying "yards/game" which is the most important stat and better than opining "well he probably wouldn't have gotten 71 yards in that last game."  Hell I could do the same for players that had more yards and also played in just 15 games and say he ranks even higher, but I won't.  But since you seem to enjoy the abuse, he was rested for the season ender against Chicago.  Guess what he got in the earlier matchup against them in Chicago?  108 yards. 

 

No, he was 8th among WRs, which was the discussion.  Do the math yourself instead of relying on some faulty website that gives you wrong numbers, and doesn't tell you basic information like how well he performed in games without Thielen and how many yards he got against Chicago earlier in the season, although I suspect that latter 2 are errors on your part more than anything.

 

The "faulty website" is nfl.com.  Let's put aside the fact that, when anyone is discussing "top receivers" any year, they are talking about those with the most yards (excluding any "virtual" yards you conjure up) or receptions, not "YPG"----in 2019, "if you include TEs" (your words) he is at #11.  10 if you take out Kelce.

 

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?seasonType=REG&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=RECEIVING_YARDS_PER_GAME_AVG&tabSeq=0&season=2019&experience=&Submit=Go&archive=false&statisticCategory=RECEIVING&conference=null&qualified=false

 

I'm curious: do you really believe that, because he got 108 previously, he would get 108 again against Chicago?  After week 8, he had a single game over 100 (1 out of 9 games).  And last year, after going for 126 against Chicago in week 11, he only got 47 (on 8 catches, by the way) in week 17.

 

 

 

18 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

  

 

Good.  It's good to know you agree about that. 

 

I don't know what you mean by the OBJ  Evans comment.   I, for one, do consider them a push.   I'd take Diggs over OBJ because of their relative attitudes, and I'd call Evans a push because Diggs is more gifted physically (he benefits from being smaller), but Evans makes up for it with sheer will, so far as I can tell.  

 

 

Look at the numbers for OBJ and Evans.  Diggs doesn't compare, statistically, with either.

 

Attitude?  His history clearly states that if Diggs doesn't get the targets, he will act out. 

[Doc]

4 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

The "faulty website" is nfl.com.  Let's put aside the fact that, when anyone is discussing "top receivers" any year, they are talking about those with the most yards (excluding any "virtual" yards you conjure up) or receptions, not "YPG"----in 2019, "if you include TEs" (your words) he is at #11.  10 if you take out Kelce.

 

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?seasonType=REG&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=RECEIVING_YARDS_PER_GAME_AVG&tabSeq=0&season=2019&experience=&Submit=Go&archive=false&statisticCategory=RECEIVING&conference=null&qualified=false

 

I'm curious: do you really believe that, because he got 108 previously, he would get 108 again against Chicago?  After week 8, he had a single game over 100 (1 out of 9 games).  And last year, after going for 126 against Chicago in week 11, he only got 47 (on 8 catches, by the way) in week 17.

 

OK, I missed Gallup and Adams.  So he's 10th.  That's still top-10 in yards/game for WR's.  Which I've been saying all-along.

 

The last game is immaterial but I could easily see him getting 75 yards, which he topped in 3 of the last 7 games. 

[Mr. WEO]

15 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

OK, I missed Gallup and Adams.  So he's 10th.  That's still top-10 in yards/game for WR's.  Which I've been saying all-along.

 

The last game is immaterial but I could easily see him getting 75 yards, which he topped in 3 of the last 7 games. 

 

 

Of course you do.  lol.  So what if he couldn't do what you're claiming the year before against the same team.  THIS year it would happened....because you can SEE it happening!

 

In 2013, Julio Jones, Justin Blackmon and Gronkowski were all top 10 in YPG.  Each had fewer than 600 yards.  It's not a thing, doc.

 

 

Edited April 9, 2020 by Mr. WEO

[Doc]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

Of course you do.  lol.  So what if he couldn't do what you're claiming the year before against the same team.  THIS year it would happened....because you can SEE it happening!

 

In 2013, Julio Jones, Justin Blackmon and Gronkowski were all top 10 in YPG.  Each had fewer than 600 yards.  It's not a thing, doc.

 

Thanks for the opinion.  But you know what opinions are like.

 

I've destroyed every claim you made about Diggs WEO, from being a top-10 WR, to his stats without Thielen (86 yards/game, BTW) to being the Bills' top FA WR target, and all you're left with is "well, I don't think he'd have gained X amount of yards in the final game" or going back 6 years and using players who played less than half a season to try and disprove that he would have finished top-10 in yards/game.  LOL!  Good one.

 

The only question left is: "why are you doing this"?  The answer is clear.

[Mr. WEO]

9 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Thanks for the opinion.  But you know what opinions are like.

 

I've destroyed every claim you made about Diggs WEO, from being a top-10 WR, to his stats without Thielen (86 yards/game, BTW) to being the Bills' top FA WR target, and all you're left with is "well, I don't think he'd have gained X amount of yards in the final game" or going back 6 years and using players who played less than half a season to try and disprove that he would have finished top-10 in yards/game.  LOL!  Good one.

 

The only question left is: "why are you doing this"?  The answer is clear.

 

Look--we can all agree that he's a great pickup and easily the best guy on the squad, why create a fantasy storyline around it?  He has phenomenal games, the he disappears for stretches.

 

He was a dud in 3 of the games without Thielen (Thielen left the Chiefs game in the 1st and Diggs would go on to have 1 catch for 4 yards) when he should have been eating it up.  He was a dud in the playoffs....on his actual team (as opposed to his virtual/new team).  In the playoffs he's had 3 (of 5 career) games where he accumulated a total of 8 catches for 102 yards.

 

Anyway...

 

I was belittling your YPG life raft.  No one uses that when describing top WRs.  I showed you why.  You can see what those receivers total yardage "worked out to"...if they had played all the games, yet no one was saying they were "top 10".

 

And your claim that having him in the Texans game absolutely wins the game (despite the above).

 

And your "seeing things" in order for them to become true.  

 

And your "against the Bears" example that immediately was disproven with the previous season's result of same scenario.

 

And your goofy habit of creating data that didn't happen, but "would have".

 

 

  

 

 

[Doc]

17 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Look--we can all agree that he's a great pickup and easily the best guy on the squad, why create a fantasy storyline around it?  He has phenomenal games, the he disappears for stretches.

 

He was a dud in 3 of the games without Thielen (Thielen left the Chiefs game in the 1st and Diggs would go on to have 1 catch for 4 yards) when he should have been eating it up.  He was a dud in the playoffs....on his actual team (as opposed to his virtual/new team).  In the playoffs he's had 3 (of 5 career) games where he accumulated a total of 8 catches for 102 yards.

 

Anyway...

 

I was belittling your YPG life raft.  No one uses that when describing top WRs.  I showed you why.  You can see what those receivers total yardage "worked out to"...if they had played all the games, yet no one was saying they were "top 10".

 

And your claim that having him in the Texans game absolutely wins the game (despite the above).

 

And your "seeing things" in order for them to become true.  

 

And your "against the Bears" example that immediately was disproven with the previous season's result of same scenario.

 

And your goofy habit of creating data that didn't happen, but "would have".

 

LOL!  Yeah, I'm the goofy one with the "would haves" when you're claiming Diggs "wouldn't have" gotten X amount of yards in the season finale.  All because YOU provided the link that destroyed YOUR OWN argument that he wasn't a top-10 WR in yards/game.  This after losing the "well he didn't play well without Thielen, causing you to resort to using a singular game against the Chefs.  Then you go off on some fantasy storyline about what people talk about when talking about top-10 WRs.

 

But I'm used to it.  Seen it more times from you than I can remember.  If you want to continue being a pinata, be my guest.  I've made my point repeatedly.

[Mr. WEO]

2 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

LOL!  Yeah, I'm the goofy one with the "would haves" when you're claiming Diggs "wouldn't have" gotten X amount of yards in the season finale.  All because YOU provided the link that destroyed YOUR OWN argument that he wasn't a top-10 WR in yards/game.  This after losing the "well he didn't play well without Thielen, causing you to resort to using a singular game against the Chefs.  Then you go off on some fantasy storyline about what people talk about when talking about top-10 WRs.

 

But I'm used to it.  Seen it more times from you than I can remember.  If you want to continue being a pinata, be my guest.  I've made my point repeatedly.

 

Not one game but 3 games.  You know this.

 

And no, I don't get into making up numbers for players in games the didn't play--especially when there is evidence (previous season, same opponent, same final game) that it won't happen.   

 

MY OWN (emphasis yours) argument is that by standard measures, he wasn't a top 10 receiver.  You found another stat that he is top 10 in.  Nice!

 

I'm watching another guy in a press conference now who also favors claiming a win then awkwardly jogs  a victory lap after all the other winners and really all the other competitors are done and in the locker room.  Take your bow, Mr. President!

 

 

[Doc]

30 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Not one game but 3 games.  You know this.

 

And no, I don't get into making up numbers for players in games the didn't play--especially when there is evidence (previous season, same opponent, same final game) that it won't happen.   

 

MY OWN (emphasis yours) argument is that by standard measures, he wasn't a top 10 receiver.  You found another stat that he is top 10 in.  Nice!

 

I'm watching another guy in a press conference now who also favors claiming a win then awkwardly jogs  a victory lap after all the other winners and really all the other competitors are done and in the locker room.  Take your bow, Mr. President!

 

Top-10 yards/game WEO.  You proved it yourself.  And he didn't have to miss over half the season with injuries, just be rested for one game. 

 

But I'll apply WEO logic to other guys who didn't play all 16 games and say they they wouldn't have hit enough yards and therefore Diggs still finishes top-10. 

 

Isn't this fun?!

[T master]

If Diggs is who they say he is on the field i think there is more than a couple of games the Bills could have won ! For instance the Ravens game, they replayed it the other day on the NFL network & Knox had a drop in the end zone that would have tied the game if Diggs is that good at contested catches that would have ties the game & i think they could have went on to win it .

 

This year will tell if he can add a couple of big catches per game & at least 1 more TD per game that could be all they need to make a deep run in the play offs .

[JustWinPlease]

On 4/5/2020 at 12:46 PM, Putin said:

I think Singletary will be a BEAST this year , having Diggs on the outside will create so much more space for Singletary!!!

 

I have to disagree. I just don't see it with Singletary, he's small and slow. I don't see him as a bellcow capable of carrying the load.

He's a nice piece to have, a solid role player, but this team needs a legitimate RB1 that Singletary can be a complement to.

I'll gladly eat crow if I'm wrong.

(At the very least, they need competition for him...he shouldn't be the only player on the roster to be handed a starting job just because there's zero depth at RB.)

[Shaw66]

41 minutes ago, JustWinPlease said:

I have to disagree. I just don't see it with Singletary, he's small and slow. I don't see him as a bellcow capable of carrying the load.

He's a nice piece to have, a solid role player, but this team needs a legitimate RB1 that Singletary can be a complement to.

I'll gladly eat crow if I'm wrong.

(At the very least, they need competition for him...he shouldn't be the only player on the roster to be handed a starting job just because there's zero depth at RB.)

I agree with bellcow point.   He's not the guy who's just going to put burden of the team's rushing needs on his back and just carry that aspect of the team's performance.   I don't see him that dominant.    The style of his game is a Marshall Faulk, Thurman Thomas style - that is, the combination of running and receiving skills is what makes him valuable.   Before people go nuts, no, I'm not saying he's going to be Faulk or Thomas.   What I'm saying is that his style of play is the same as theirs, but I can't see him ever being productive like those guys.  

 

What I can envision is Singletary as the lead dog on a two-dog team.   That is, I think Singletary is too good to be just a complement to the starter.  I think it's the other way around.  

 

Singletary has already shown that he can be a factor in the lineup at pretty much any down and distance.   If you're third and eighteen, Singletary helps if he's on the field, because he's an open field pass catching threat.  If you're third and eight, he helps because he already understands blitz responsibilities and likely will get better.   If it's third and one, he's a threat passing or running.   

 

I think what the Bills need is another guy who can play that style, maybe a rookie who's learning and by mid-season could be expected to spell Singletary without forcing offensive play selection to be limited.     You want him to play the same style, instead a complementary style, because the Bills want to make being multi-faceted a problem for other teams, so the second running back has to be able to run the whole offense without hurting the team.   Think Kenneth Davis.   Now, his running style didn't look much like Thurman's, but that isn't the point.   Davis was valuable because when he came into the game, Kelly could still run the entire offense.   

 

If the Bills win Super Bowl in the coming years, the story about Singletary will be not that he's a star in the league, but it could be that he is a superb competitor with a broad skill set, an important contributor to a winning team.   I think that's his upper limit.

 

Bellcow?  No.  Lead dog on a two-dog team?  I think absolutely.   Needs to improve parts of his game a little bit, but absolutely he can be that guy.