Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
GreggTX

Predict Diggs' 2020 stats

Recommended Posts

122 catches 1848 yards, 15 tds

 

Since we traded for him he became Jerry Rice, so anything less than that is a disappointment. 

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

85 catches, 1310 yards, & 8 TD's -->  16 games (If we play 16)

Edited by snamsnoops

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

He wasn't the Vikings #1 receiver....


So your point is that he simultaneously was not in fact the #1 receiver, but also got more than enough targets. What a stretch. Dude, you’re so contrarian. Do you even know why you do it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

He wasn't the Vikings #1 receiver....


Wrong as usual. 

Share this post


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


So your point is that he simultaneously was not in fact the #1 receiver, but also got more than enough targets. What a stretch. Dude, you’re so contrarian. Do you even know why you do it? 

 

I was correcting the errors in your posts:

 

It is false that he got "hardly any" targets from Cousins (others have corrected you on that as well--yet you keep digging deeper and deeper...).

 

It is false that he was the #1 WR (unless you mean after their #1WR was injured).

 

See?  It's hardly "contrarian" to point out obvious BS.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

So now 243 targets in 2 years defines "didn't get any targets"?

 

10 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea that was a bizarre take. 

From the list I’m looking at on ESPN he’s the only wr in the top 20 for yds that saw less than 100 targets. He had 94. The next closest is 113. 
 

Last year he wasn’t targeted nearly as much as other high profile wr’s. That’s a fact. It’s not a bizarre take IMO. 

Edited by Stank_Nasty

Share this post


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

 

From the list I’m looking at on ESPN he’s the only wr in the top 20 for yds that saw less than 100 targets. He had 94. The next closest is 113. 
 

He’s not been targeted nearly as much as other high profile wr’s. It’s not a bizarre take IMO. 

 

 

He's been in the league for more than a season...scroll up to your post above to see the 2 year total.  For the past 3 seasons, he has had 338 targets. In '17 and '18 he was not the primary target (Theilen was by numbers). So that's 244 targets for a #2 WR those 2 seasons.  "Didn't get any"---is ridiculous, and bizarre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well since 2015 his low end was in 2018 at 10 yds./r, and high end was 17.9 yds/r in 2019. Basically the middle ground was around 13 and change.  I am forecasting like I used to do with my sales reps as I was always pushed by my AVP for monthly forecasts and was educated I needed to be within 2%.  The best way for me to do that was looking at run rates, not listening as much to the pie in the sky individual forecasts as some are constantly pessimistic or the opposite are hopelessly optimistic.

 

With that said, I’m guessing 81 receptions for 13.5 yds./r, and 1100 yards.  I know being a true #1 a number of people are guessing a lot more, but I’m considering Brown and Beasley will also have good seasons, and we’ll run the ball even more between Singletary, Moss and Allen.  They won’t walk away from Allen in some impromptu and designed runs as it makes our offense scary.  I do think we will have a very balanced attack which will make us dangerous.

 

The problem already discussed is facing the Chiefs, Broncos, Titans, 49ers, Hawks, and even the probably improved Cardinals.  If we were playing last year’s schedule, I’d say the stats would be even higher.  As long as we have a full season and hopeful of that point, we will have a battle hardened team, and will go into the playoffs with a home game, and ready to play the toughest teams in the AFC.

 

Go Bills!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

I was correcting the errors in your posts:

 

It is false that he got "hardly any" targets from Cousins (others have corrected you on that as well--yet you keep digging deeper and deeper...).

 

It is false that he was the #1 WR (unless you mean after their #1WR was injured).

 

See?  It's hardly "contrarian" to point out obvious BS.  

 

 

 

Its an inherent contradiction. It you agree that he is here to be a #1, but that before he was a #2, then by definition he was not getting a sufficient number of targets. Easy and obvious. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


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

Its an inherent contradiction. It you agree that he is here to be a #1, but that before he was a #2, then by definition he was not getting a sufficient number of targets. Easy and obvious. 

 

 

He is in Buffalo to be #1.  He will get a lot of targets. 

 

He got a lot of targets as a #2 in Minnesota from Cousins.  Not "hardly any", as you bizarrely claimed.

 

There is no contradiction.  Your claim was flatly wrong--by a mile. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

He is in Buffalo to be #1.  He will get a lot of targets. 

 

He got a lot of targets as a #2 in Minnesota from Cousins.  Not "hardly any", as you bizarrely claimed.

 

There is no contradiction.  Your claim was flatly wrong--by a mile. 

Sure, man. Im glad you are happy with the idea of giving Diggs 100 targets. I, and I would wager most, think that is obviously ridiculous. But you stay edgy, man. 

Share this post


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


So your point is that he simultaneously was not in fact the #1 receiver, but also got more than enough targets. What a stretch. Dude, you’re so contrarian. Do you even know why you do it? 

Actually Diggs was their #1 receiver. You would know that if you watch the games 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

Sure, man. Im glad you are happy with the idea of giving Diggs 100 targets. I, and I would wager most, think that is obviously ridiculous. But you stay edgy, man. 

 

Oh I think he'll get more than 100 easily.

 

"Happy" with 100 targets?  Of all the responders to the OP in this thread ONLY ONE (before me of course) has predicted more than 100.  NOBODY else thinks it will be more.  Even that poster estimated 122---which would slightly above what he averaged over 3 years with Cousins giving him "hardly any" targets.

 

Why would you die on this molehill?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Mr. WEO

Share this post


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

Mr WEO is the one you want to be disagreeing with

I see. For the record I do believe Diggs will get over a 100 targets so you are not alone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thielen's going to struggle without Diggs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, TBBills said:

If he doesn't have over 1k yards it means something bad happened to either think or Allen.

I doubt he ever even thought of that.

Or it means the NFL doesn’t play a full season. I would bet that, even if a season is completed, c. 4 weeks won’t be played. 

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...