Jump to content

The Great Tremaine Edmunds Debate


JohnNord

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

If Edmunds is a pro bowl caliber MLB their have to be a dozen other AFC fan bases who are REALLY frustrated at the lack of performance on their roster. Is that really true? I doubt it.

 

At MLB? Well who are the AFC guys you'd take ahead of him? Darius Leonard? Sure, he is a lock. Devin Bush? Missed half the season injured. Maybe at a stretch Hightower? I personally think he slightly past his best but he opted out anyway. There are numerous teams in the conference in a really bad way at the spot - the Bengals, the Browns, the Raiders, the Jets, the Titans and the Chargers just right off the top of my head are deficient at the spot.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

 

1.  Get an actual 1 technique DT in front of him again

 

Now THIS is a big part of the solution! Go back and watch the Chiefs game. Time and time again Edmunds was literally swallowed up by a Chiefs Offensive Lineman. So much so that you couldn’t even see Tremaine’s number to know it was him! The only way Edmunds will ever be successful is keep the OL from getting to his level.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Fan in Chicago said:

I wouldn't be surprised if Beane tries to trade him.  In the draft,  you look for the NFL equivalent of a college graduate degree.  Bills shoukd not be in the business of putting players through college and hoping they graduate to be job- worthy in time for a second contract. Especially first rounders

Marv Levy always wanted smart players....it was one of his criteria for selecting in the draft.  A really low Wonderlich score is a warming.....ala CJ Spiller and W. McGahee.....who needed their signals in from the sideline separately, as they couldn't catch the play call by the QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've written about Edmunds a lot.  I may decide to get into the detailed discussion in this thread, but that largely will be repeating things I've said elsewhere.  

 

I think the Bills should keep Edmunds, and he should continue to be the Bills middle linebacker.  When you get past all of the analysis and the details and the stats, the basic question is whether the Bills will have a better middle linebacker if they get rid of Edmunds.   I think the answer to that question clearly is no.  Edmunds is at a minimum a better than average NFL middle linebacker.  He still is young for the league and growing into the role.  An All-Pro middle linebacker is not an essential piece of a championship team.  

 

The Bills should keep Edmunds because he isn't a liability, his replacement almost certainly will be worse, and he has potential. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

He definitely took a step back in 2020 from where he was in 2019. In 2019 there were still occasional run fit issues but he really was a difference maker in the passing game and the success of the Bills' zone scheme was dependant on Edmunds ability to take away pass lanes and the rally and tackle in underneath coverage. 

 

He did not play as well in coverage - especially early in the year. I know he was hurt and I am not sure how much that affected him. The issues were biting on misdirection and play action, as well as seeming slowed running sideline to sideline more than struggling to disengage from blocks. That wouldn't immediately scream "bad shoulder" to me but it is possible that the injury just got in his head and affected his confidence. 

 

What is true is once he got healthy he did play better and the 2nd half of his season was more akin to his 2019 season. Over his first 10 games of 2020 opposition QB passer ratings when targeting Edmunds were over 100 6 times and he gave up 4 touchdowns in coverage. Over his final 8 including playoffs he did not give up a touchdown and gave up passer ratings over 100 just twice - one of those obviously being Kansas City where I would agree with the defenders that he was not assisted by the scheme. 

 

But basically all his numbers were worse in 2020 than 2019 when you really dig into the advanced stats. 

 

- Worst QB rating vs him in coverage of his career 

- worst yards per completion give up of his career

- worse QB completion % against him than 2019 (though better than his rookie year)

- fewer QB pressures (he had 16 over his first two years and only 3 in 2020 despite being sent on the blitz more times than either other year)

- fewest passes defensed of his career (3 in 2020, down from 9 in 2019 and 12 in 2018)

- fewest tackles for loss (4 in 2020, down from a career high 10 in 2019)

 

I remain an Edmunds fan. I do think the first 10 weeks of his 2020 season were hampered by his injury but 2020 was a regression. That is true of a lot of the defense, for sure, but it is also the case that they need their big ticket items on that defense to step up and Edmunds is one of those. The Bills will take up Tremaine's 5th year option. They are not, despite what some fans think, going to move him outside. But make no mistake 2021 is a pivotal year in this kid's career. If he wants a long term extension from Buffalo he needs to return to 2019 form. 

 

 

The bolded is really not true. What he had was a massive improvement in 2019 over 2018 and then a regression in 2020. He was trending towards elite for me at the end of last year. That trend took a knock this year and he needs to rebound in 2021. 


This seems like a pretty honest evaluation from someone who admittedly was a Tremaine supporter.  I agree that they’ll pick up the option for year 5 but he REALLY needs to show something in 2021.  All excuses go out the window 

7 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I've written about Edmunds a lot.  I may decide to get into the detailed discussion in this thread, but that largely will be repeating things I've said elsewhere.  

 

I think the Bills should keep Edmunds, and he should continue to be the Bills middle linebacker.  When you get past all of the analysis and the details and the stats, the basic question is whether the Bills will have a better middle linebacker if they get rid of Edmunds.   I think the answer to that question clearly is no.  Edmunds is at a minimum a better than average NFL middle linebacker.  He still is young for the league and growing into the role.  An All-Pro middle linebacker is not an essential piece of a championship team.  

 

The Bills should keep Edmunds because he isn't a liability, his replacement almost certainly will be worse, and he has potential. 


By keep, do you mean sign him to a second contract that puts him among the top 5-10 highest paid at his position?  Or just keep him for years 4 and maybe 5 of his rookie contract and then decide?

10 hours ago, Boxcar said:

Erik and Nate? Not sure if it was Nate that time, but Erik did at least one video breakdown of Tremaine Edmunds. I left coming away with the impression that his issues are 99% he doesn't know where he has to be and makes bad decisions. I also don't agree that he's a bad tackler. When he is able to read the play correctly and has to fill a gap, nothing is coming out the other side.

 

I agree he needs to be better at shedding blocks, too. I don't think the excuse of him being 22 is a bad one. It's very valid. Reading offenses in the NFL is hard. Some players take longer to get it than others. Edmunds' physical package is well worth the risk that he never really gets it.

At what point does age NOT become an excuse?  23? 24?  34?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I've written about Edmunds a lot.  I may decide to get into the detailed discussion in this thread, but that largely will be repeating things I've said elsewhere.  

 

I think the Bills should keep Edmunds, and he should continue to be the Bills middle linebacker.  When you get past all of the analysis and the details and the stats, the basic question is whether the Bills will have a better middle linebacker if they get rid of Edmunds.   I think the answer to that question clearly is no.  Edmunds is at a minimum a better than average NFL middle linebacker.  He still is young for the league and growing into the role.  An All-Pro middle linebacker is not an essential piece of a championship team.  

 

The Bills should keep Edmunds because he isn't a liability, his replacement almost certainly will be worse, and he has potential. 

Can’t all of these arguments be made for Milano?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

You'd think Star Lotulelei was an all pro or something reading this board...

Devin White is the same age as Edmunds and that guy is what a stud MLB looks like. 

He's a decent player. Nothing spectacular.... the Bills went 13-3 because Josh Allen played at an MVP level all year.

 

If Allen played like he did last season the Bills wouldn't have sniffed .500 this season. 

Oh, I know what you think. You're the Mikey of this board, to use a reference that ages me. Let's see Bills fan who hates everything vs. experts who have analyzed his tape + my own eyes from repeated watches. 

 

You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm gonna go with the latter. Seriously though, do you ever enjoy anything with the Bills. I'm sorry to personally attack, but it's just so bloody predictable with you.

 

Also, as I have said before with Star. He was brought here after a disastrous 2017 defense of tight ends mostly to help with that. In 2018 and 2019, this defense gave up the fewest yards to tight end. He does not play... the MOST yards to tight ends. 

 

Honestly, it's kind of laughable that you would say that this board worships Star when all you would see was people bemoaning his play and contract until strangely the defense suffered when he was not there.

57 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I've written about Edmunds a lot.  I may decide to get into the detailed discussion in this thread, but that largely will be repeating things I've said elsewhere.  

 

I think the Bills should keep Edmunds, and he should continue to be the Bills middle linebacker.  When you get past all of the analysis and the details and the stats, the basic question is whether the Bills will have a better middle linebacker if they get rid of Edmunds.   I think the answer to that question clearly is no.  Edmunds is at a minimum a better than average NFL middle linebacker.  He still is young for the league and growing into the role.  An All-Pro middle linebacker is not an essential piece of a championship team.  

 

The Bills should keep Edmunds because he isn't a liability, his replacement almost certainly will be worse, and he has potential. 

This sums up my feelings much more clearly and succinctly than what I wrote. Kudos, Shaw66!

Edited by thurst44
Addressing a part of his comment I missed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FireChans said:

Tyrod is about to be enshrined 

You must know that is a ridiculous parallel. Tyrod was a 4th or 5th alternate. Tremaine was a 1st alternate last year and made the team straight up this year.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bad vs the run, bad vs the pass... doesn't make impact plays.  The MLB experiment failed... he doesn't have the instincts for the position and maybe doesn't have them for any position.  Made the Pro-Bowl by default due to injuries this year.

 

We are the worst in the league vs TE due to a huge issue at MLB and Edmunds takes a lot of the blame. 

 

He is what he is at this point, he isn't going to suddenly turn it on and get better at play recognition and instinctual play.  Like what was mentioned earlier in this thread, he's just an athlete...  Not a horrible pick by Beane but he just hasn't developed.  I don't see how you sign him to big money after his rookie deal..  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Boxcar said:

Erik and Nate? Not sure if it was Nate that time, but Erik did at least one video breakdown of Tremaine Edmunds. I left coming away with the impression that his issues are 99% he doesn't know where he has to be and makes bad decisions. I also don't agree that he's a bad tackler. When he is able to read the play correctly and has to fill a gap, nothing is coming out the other side.

 

I agree he needs to be better at shedding blocks, too. I don't think the excuse of him being 22 is a bad one. It's very valid. Reading offenses in the NFL is hard. Some players take longer to get it than others. Edmunds' physical package is well worth the risk that he never really gets it.

I don't entirely agree, but a very fair assessment. (and I'll admit to putting a bit of a sunshine spin on players sometime, but i truly don't get the pitchforks that are out for this guy... or really anyone on the roster right now).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

At MLB? Well who are the AFC guys you'd take ahead of him? Darius Leonard? Sure, he is a lock. Devin Bush? Missed half the season injured. Maybe at a stretch Hightower? I personally think he slightly past his best but he opted out anyway. There are numerous teams in the conference in a really bad way at the spot - the Bengals, the Browns, the Raiders, the Jets, the Titans and the Chargers just right off the top of my head are deficient at the spot.

 

 

 

 

And the Browns let playmaking Joe Schobert walk to the Jags.

 

The reality is that the position is de-valued for a reason.

 

Everyone thinks "teams are passing more we need great coverage LB's".............well KC basically played the AFCCG without LB's and won with ease.

 

The Ravens could easily have been in the AFCCG with maybe the worst MLB in the NFL last year in Patrick Queen.

 

MLB is nice to be strong at.........but it's not steering teams to success............the NFC is the weaker conference for a reason.........they've got all the best MLB's and few of the best QB's.

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, JGMcD2 said:

I vote we get rid of Edmunds and replace him with a linebacker from the 1980s. We will then be able to stop all the elite running offenses in the league like the Ravens, Colts, Patriots and Rams. 
 

Our 1980s LB won’t be able to defend against the pass, but that’s ok. 

Well, truthfully, neither can Edmunds so  . . . 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, JohnNord said:

Not sure I few that strongly.  The potential is there but I didn’t see it this season

The fact that there is such debate surrounding his game is all anyone needs to know about how good he is.

 

Don't recall any debate at all about how good or bad Biscuit or Talley were, for example.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Eyeroll 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JohnNord said:

 


By keep, do you mean sign him to a second contract that puts him among the top 5-10 highest paid at his position?  Or just keep him for years 4 and maybe 5 of his rookie contract and then decide?

At what point does age NOT become an excuse?  23? 24?  34?

What to do at contract time is exactly the right question.   I'll talk about that in a minute.  

 

Age isn't an excuse.  But age is relevant in Edmunds' case, because players develop with experience, and his age made him and continues to make him relatively inexperienced.   He should continue to develop.  The fact that he should continue to develop is relevant to your more important question.  

 

I think there are very, very few players who are so important that you pay them whatever they want.  Allen is one of those.  I don't think Edmunds is.  The Bills have to evaluate Edmunds, decide how important he is to the defense, decide how much better they think he is going to get, and then put a dollar value on that.   If Edmunds puts a higher value on himself than the Bills do, the Bills have to have the discipline to let him walk.  I would definitely exercise the fifth-year option on him, because it gives the Bills another year to see how he develops and because it gives the Bills another year to see whether his successor might be in the pipeline.  

 

If you ask me, I certainly would pay him at the top-10 level.   Not the top-5 level.   He's not producing at the top-5 level.  But top-10?  Sure, I'd pay at that level.   Looking at annual salaries, the 8th highest inside linebacker is at $12 million, the 16th is at $8 million.  The difference is just not that great.   Paying Edmunds $12 million a year, which is a little better than top-10, would be worth it.  You're not going to get a better guy for substantially less. 

 

I also think that the people who are down on him have unreasonable expectations.   Players should not be evaluated based on where they were drafted.   GMs are evaluated on where they drafted players, but players are evaluated by how they play.   I think fans who think Edmunds is regularly out of position or plugging the wrong gaps are remembering the guy from two years ago.  I think people who think he hurts the Bills in pass defense completely miss the point that he covers larger zones more effectively than almost any MLB I've watched, because he has the speed and body size to do that.  

 

He isn't and probably never will be a top-5 hitter.  He tackles more like a safety than a classic middle-linebacker.  But even there he's been improving regularly.   

 

If Edmunds leaves, fans will almost certainly be disappointed with his replacement.  

2 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

The fact that there is such debate surrounding his game is all anyone needs to know about how good he is.

 

Don't recall any debate at all about how good or bad Biscuit or Talley were, for example.

 

 

There's debate about Edmunds because he isn't playing to expectations.   Compared to players in the league, he isn't so disappointing. 

 

I regularly thought Biscuit was over-rated.   He NEVER played to his draft-hype.  

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Disagree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, thurst44 said:

You must know that is a ridiculous parallel. Tyrod was a 4th or 5th alternate. Tremaine was a 1st alternate last year and made the team straight up this year.

Yeah and his competition was garbage.

 

The Pro Bowl as a benchmark is stupid.

7 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

The fact that there is such debate surrounding his game is all anyone needs to know about how good he is.

 

Don't recall any debate at all about how good or bad Biscuit or Talley were, for example.

 

 

The Great Luke Kuechly Debate was never raging on the Panthers forums

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

 

There's debate about Edmunds because he isn't playing to expectations.   Compared to players in the league, he isn't so disappointing. 

 

I think there is debate because he was less productive in 2020 than in 2019. There is a question how much of that was injury, how much of it was scheme, how much of it was other pieces around him but that is where I think some fans will say, and there is some legitimacy to it "you were drafted in the first half of the first round, you gotta step up!"

 

My view is that Edmunds has shown us already that when he is on he is a really good football player who impacts the way offenses can attack us. What he has to do is be more consistent. I think the second half of his year was better than the first, but even within that there were mistakes and plays that really frustrate you with him. I still think the kid can be special, but as everyone acknowledges if he wants that new contract he has to show that special on a more consistent basis next year. 

4 minutes ago, FireChans said:

The Pro Bowl as a benchmark is stupid.

 

I would certainly say it is limited in its usefulness, put it that way. Here is what is more telling for me:

 

2019: Tremaine Edmunds two votes (out of the 50 available) for all pro consideration

2020: 0 votes

 

His 2019 season he really was trending towards breaking out as one of the top young linebackers in the league. This past season? Not so much. There might be legit reasons for the regression but there was a regression in his play. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, JGMcD2 said:

They have the same amount of repetitions. It’s just that White’s age 20 season was at LSU while Tremaine’s was in the NFL. 
 

I’m not really privy to the things that White went back to school to work on and what Tremaine has worked on, but I would venture to guess that White was able to focus on his deficiencies in a comfortable environment as a returning player at LSU while Edmunds was adjusting to being a professional player and working on his deficiencies. One guy had a little more on their plate. 
 

Edmunds was considered to have elite traits, but was still seen a development prospect with the ability to develop into an elite player. He fell to 16 for a reason, if he was closer to a finished product with his skill set he’s likely going higher, maybe Top 5 like White? I said pretty elite AND close to finished product for a reason. Both were important to the overall statement. 
 

It’s no longer worth discussing because you will absolutely never move off any of your points as you’ve made very clear before. It’s a waste of my time. 

 

 

They both played 3 years in college and left after Junior years.  Edmunds played 32 games and White played 34 games, so I don't know what you are referring to when you say "returning player at LSU".  Pointing out where each was when they turned 20 make no more sense than your original statement.

 

Edmunds was an elite prospect--considered the top 2 LB....and he was the 2nd LB taken in the draft.  You're argument gets weaker with each post, so...it was wise to bail out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...