Jump to content

Edit! McKenzie is back on a 2 year deal worth 4.4 million


BillsMafi$
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Malazan said:

 

given the draft failure rate of WRs, I think you're still off base. Using the '100 career' reception marker (a low bar), only ~25% of WRs in the 1st round are successful. So if there's 5-10 guys who *could* be developed to reach that mark (as you yourself say).. and those 5-10 guys are all drafted in the 1st round.. You're going to 1.25 to 2.5 guys reaching that level of success.

 

Braxton Berrios reportedly returned down 5 million a year and believes he'll get much more. 

 

Many of you need to reset your minds on NFL player compensation.

 

Of course, I'm being unfair here as McKenzie still needs 1 more reception to get to 100 for his career. 

You are going based purely off of how we know NFL players turn out... We know there's a pretty good rate of non success

 

It doesn't stop you from drafting said players 

 

And I never said in the first round... Overall there's about 40 to 45 draft eligible wide receivers per year now... Now a good amount of them will not have NFL success based on a lot of factors 

 

But out of those 45 prospects there are 5-10 yearly who have the speed , acceleration, agility, and catching ability to be a gadget type player... Whether they become successful or not isn't the question... But the talent to develop is there 

 

Also because of how many wide receivers have draft eligible grades now ... A few every year with draftable grades go undrafted because how deep the league is 

 

Around 30% of the league is UDFA ... It's shows the depth of talent

 

 

 

 

  • Eyeroll 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, purple haze said:

This doesn’t take that off the table at all.   Unless Beane focused on this signing to allow pick 25 to be used in a trade.

I agree but yet it lets him fill a potential opening in the passing game w a known product and takes away a hole in the lineup, and let’s them select a BPA, but yes I am hopeful of a WR in round one!

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Warcodered said:

Honestly it might make it more likely, we didn't go out and sign an expensive guy and WR room still has space for a rookie.

 

I'd suspect they sign a mid-tier veteran (Fuller) or young, promising guy (Braxton Berrios) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd imagine there's a good chance that Dorsey had a hand in this. Pretty much everyone thought he was good as gone, and wasn't utilized that often with Daboll. Dorsey must want to recreate the patriots game with him. Hopefully dorsey has a plan on how to use him and make him worth the contract 

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

You are going based purely off of how we know NFL players turn out... We know there's a pretty good rate of non success

 

It doesn't stop you from drafting said players 

 

And I never said in the first round... Overall there's about 40 to 45 draft eligible wide receivers per year now... Now a good amount of them will not have NFL success based on a lot of factors 

 

But out of those 45 prospects there are 5-10 yearly who have the speed , acceleration, agility, and catching ability to be a gadget type player... Whether they become successful or not isn't the question... But the talent to develop is there 

 

Also because of how many wide receivers have draft eligible grades now ... A few every year with draftable grades go undrafted because how deep the league is 

 

Around 30% of the league is UDFA ... It's shows the depth of talent

 

You think the success rate for 100 receptions on a career gets better the lower the round? That's a bold take. 

 

You are saying this rookie would replace McKenzie. That means they need to perform right away. 

 

I think you should take a minute and collect your thoughts and what you're trying to say. 

Edited by Malazan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Malazan said:

 

You think the success rate for 100 receptions on a career gets better the lower the round? That's a bold take. 

 

You are saying this rookie would replace McKenzie. That means they need to perform right away. 

 

I think you should take a minute and collect your thoughts and what you're trying to say. 

I think you're taking what I'm saying out of context

 

I never said we should draft a rookie to replace Mckenzie or that a rookie could come in and duplicate it 

 

I said his worth on the open market is overestimated because the talent in that gadget player pool is pretty deep actually 

 

Everybody else seems to understand what I was trying to say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Malazan said:

 

I'd suspect they sign a mid-tier veteran (Fuller) or young, promising guy (Braxton Berrios) 

I don’t think we see another free agent WR.  McKenzie was that.  Too many excellent WRs in the draft to sign another mid-tier vet at the WR position.  Need a young, cheap option and draft is deep with them.  Also Stevenson is still there to be developed.   

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Rebel101 said:

McKenzie is about to replace Beasley and is a much better option 

Well, if you say so.   

 

Beasley's best skill--which seems to be really under-appreciated around here--was finding the holes in zone coverage and keeping the sticks moving.  McKensie's a more dynamic player, but not as accomplished at that kind of outlet / hot-read / drive-extender play, IMO.   

 

It will be up to Dorsey to tweak the playbook a bit to accentuate 'Lil Dirty's strengths and not try to make him Beasley 2.0.

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

This signing makes me think we’re out of the FA market for WR, but will likely take a WR early in the draft.  
 

Diggs-McKenzie-Davis is solid, but ideally McKenzie is WR4/gadget in a pass heavy offense.   
 

If he starts showing out against zone coverage, then we can re-evaluate him as primary slot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Steptide said:

Maybe, maybe not. If they can use him how they did in the 2nd Patriots game, he'll absolutely be worth it 

I hear ya. But its a projection, and you can get a guy in the draft for a lot cheaper if you are willing to project. He doesn’t move the needle for me. I am excited to see what else they do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, purple haze said:

I don’t think we see another free agent WR.  McKenzie was that.  Too many excellent WRs in the draft to sign another mid-tier vet at the WR position.  Need a young, cheap option and draft is deep with them.  Also Stevenson is still there to be developed.   

 

I'm assuming they sign somebody in addition to Hodgins/Stevenson and they draft someone. I will say, if they obtain a solid 2nd TE, maybe they forego the mid-tier vet. I'd expect them to have another WR3 type of guy besides Mckenzie regardless of what they do in the draft. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, whorlnut said:

He’s had the opportunity for a while now. And oh by the way, he’s been inactive and has had ball security issues. I’m not sure why everyone is so excited about this. It’s pretty meh to me…

because near the end of the season and playoffs he played very well. He's a good player and meh is not a word

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, YoloinOhio said:

I’m not kidding - I had a dream last night that he signed. 

 

What was McKenzie wearing?

 

48 minutes ago, atlbillsfan1975 said:

 This is an overpay IF McKenzie doesn’t improve on his numbers from last year. I am guessing the front office and coaches met to discuss what his role will be. McKenzie will get his shot since Beasley won’t be on the roster most likely. My concern with McKenzie has always been durability due to extra touches. 

 

As for cost, the devil is in the details. As for durability he is tiny but I don't recall McKenzie ever taking a big hit. He seems to protect himself really well.

 

45 minutes ago, Putin said:

So what else does MaCKenzie brings to the table besides the crossing routs against man coverage ?? 

 

This falls under the "If someone has to explain it to you, you'll never understand anyways."

 

33 minutes ago, Magox said:

With Emmanuel and Beasley most likely gone that still means the Bills have to find another two WR’s.   The draft is deep with receivers, I think they pick up both there.

 

Or as others have suggested, another tight end to employ in 2 TE sets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, nucci said:

because near the end of the season and playoffs he played very well. He's a good player and meh is not a word

At the end of the year, Singletary played well and so did Bates. Are yoy willing to bet that is sustainable? I’m not. Not even close. I’m more inclined to think their true selves are somewhere between “meh” and average. 

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

  • BillsMafi$ changed the title to Edit! McKenzie is back on a 2 year deal worth 4.4 million
This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

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.   Restore formatting

  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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...