Kincaid Comparisons

[Alphadawg7]

31 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

Should we revisit the TE stats thread where a good number of you said he was going to have 1,000 yards receiving and 10 TD's? Nobody drafts a TE high in the first round because they don't provide bang for your buck. It's not a position of value. A good rookie TE season was always going to be roughly what Kincaid has given us which is nothing to write home about compared to a great #2 receiver (Flowers, Nacua).

 

Have you ever had any take in any thread on this board that wasn't coming from a negative view point?  The moment I see a thread that doesn't directly have a negative tone, I know with 100% certainty 2 people are gonna use the roll eyes or laugh emoticon to it...you and @Airseven.  Its as sure as the rising and setting of the sun.  

 

First...You don't draft anyone over what their ROOKIE year might yield.  You know Kincaid is here at least for 4-5 years right?  What he does or doesn't do as a rookie does NOT indicate whether he was a worthy first round pick as his career spans more than his rookie year.  

 

Second, why are you even attempting to mention Flowers or Nacua when neither were options when the Bills were on the clock and took Kincaid.  Flowers was drafted BEFORE our pick, so couldn't have taken him.  Nacua?  I guarantee you had never heard of him until his week 1 game with the Rams and you put in your free agent bid in fantasy to get him.  So lets not pretend Nacua had any shot for any team to take him in the first round, he was a 5th round pick.  You know like Shakir...a guy I am pretty sure I have seen you dump on and be negative about because he was a "5th round pick".  

 

Bottom line is simple...Kincaid has the talent, but opportunities here are limited by his role and usage.  Plug Kincaid into the Lions offense and he has the same kind of season, maybe better, than LaPorta.  He will be a legit weapon for years to come and has the potential to be special or elite.

 

For the record, I don't disagree that we need a better WR2 as Davis isn't it.  But that doesn't make the Kincaid pick a bad pick either.  

 

[KDIGGZ]

1 minute ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Have you ever had any take in any thread on this board that wasn't coming from a negative view point?  The moment I see a thread that doesn't directly have a negative tone, I know with 100% certainty 2 people are gonna use the roll eyes or laugh emoticon to it...you and @Airseven.  Its as sure as the rising and setting of the sun.  

 

First...You don't draft anyone over what their ROOKIE year might yield.  You know Kincaid is here at least for 4-5 years right?  What he does or doesn't do as a rookie does NOT indicate whether he was a worthy first round pick as his career spans more than his rookie year.  

 

Second, why are you even attempting to mention Flowers or Nacua when neither were options when the Bills were on the clock and took Kincaid.  Flowers was drafted BEFORE our pick, so couldn't have taken him.  Nacua?  I guarantee you had never heard of him until his week 1 game with the Rams and you put in your free agent bid in fantasy to get him.  So lets not pretend Nacua had any shot for any team to take him in the first round, he was a 5th round pick.  You know like Shakir...a guy I am pretty sure I have seen you dump on and be negative about because he was a "5th round pick".  

 

Bottom line is simple...Kincaid has the talent, but opportunities here are limited by his role and usage.  Plug Kincaid into the Lions offense and he has the same kind of season, maybe better, than LaPorta.  He will be a legit weapon for years to come and has the potential to be special or elite.

 

For the record, I don't disagree that we need a better WR2 as Davis isn't it.  But that doesn't make the Kincaid pick a bad pick either.  

If you read what I said I stated we needed a #2 WR. You can get one easily end of 1st or even later on. The #2 receiver on your team is almost always going to have better production than your TE (especially when you already have one). It's just common sense, which is why most teams don't draft one in the 1st. Nobody was sitting here last April saying "you know what we really need is another TE." Everyone and their mother knew we needed a #2 WR though

[Alphadawg7]

1 minute ago, KDIGGZ said:

If you read what I said I stated we needed a #2 WR. You can get one easily end of 1st or even later on. The #2 receiver on your team is almost always going to have better production than your TE (especially when you already have one). It's just common sense, which is why most teams don't draft one in the 1st. Nobody was sitting here last April saying "you know what we really need is another TE." Everyone and their mother knew we needed a #2 WR though

 

Sorry, you can't "easily" get a top end WR2 at the end of the first or later on.  Most WR's don't bust out as rookies at a level that would be greater than the expectations Davis had as our WR2 coming into the season.  And further more, far more WR's bust or flame out early in the NFL than go on to be 1000 yard WR's.  So where you are coming up with the notion it can "easily" happen is a bit puzzling.  

 

And we already had a WR2 in Davis when we drafted Kincaid.  It is not like Davis left in FA, the Bills had a hole at WR2 and then took a TE over a quality WR prospect in the first.  And I want to upgrade from Davis too...but its a BIG difference looking to upgrade versus having to replace because someone is already gone.  

 

Bills took the best recieving option on the board in Kincaid who was widely seen as the BPA.  The other worth WR's had already been drafted and the Bills didn't lose a WR2 and have a "hole" at WR2.

 

So I really don't get the issue you have with Kincaid...there was NOT a better option when we took him, and he has already shown the kind of talent he brings to the table and is already one of our most reliable pass catchers.  He was drafted to be a long term weapon here, not just what he might do as a rookie.

[billsfan89]

He’s a rookie who took some time to catch on but he’s been very good late in the season. Also an underrated part of his game is his blocking. He is a very strong blocker which should not go over looked.

[HOUSE]

Another wasted draft pick just like Ed Oliver who is to small and James Cook that can't break a tackle...

.

Edited January 3 by Bogie_Klinkhammer

[Taro Nimbus]

So......................hes not as good as other TE's??

[KDIGGZ]

7 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Sorry, you can't "easily" get a top end WR2 at the end of the first or later on.  Most WR's don't bust out as rookies at a level that would be greater than the expectations Davis had as our WR2 coming into the season.  And further more, far more WR's bust or flame out early in the NFL than go on to be 1000 yard WR's.  So where you are coming up with the notion it can "easily" happen is a bit puzzling.  

 

And we already had a WR2 in Davis when we drafted Kincaid.  It is not like Davis left in FA, the Bills had a hole at WR2 and then took a TE over a quality WR prospect in the first.  And I want to upgrade from Davis too...but its a BIG difference looking to upgrade versus having to replace because someone is already gone.  

 

Bills took the best recieving option on the board in Kincaid who was widely seen as the BPA.  The other worth WR's had already been drafted and the Bills didn't lose a WR2 and have a "hole" at WR2.

 

So I really don't get the issue you have with Kincaid...there was NOT a better option when we took him, and he has already shown the kind of talent he brings to the table and is already one of our most reliable pass catchers.  He was drafted to be a long term weapon here, not just what he might do as a rookie.

He's a good TE. I'm not a fan of TE's high in your draft. Value positions are QB, WR, T, DE, CB (less so on this team/zone).

 

Also as for being negative, if everyone was negative I would likely be the most positive. I often take the opposing point of few in my responses. I'm not going to post in a thread and say "I agree." What's the point?

[MikePJ76]

I said this other day I think Kincaid is more like Jason Witten although smaller.  He looks like a really tough guy to cover within a 25 yard window.  Witten is going to the hall of fame by making a a million catches in that window.

 

He does not look like the tony gonzalez antonio gates type.  The guy who just gets a step down the seam and is gone.  

 

this is not a bad thing.  Kincaid can become the chain mover here for the next 10 years and score a bunch of TDs in the redzone when Allen is no longer able to run all the time down there.

[Mr. WEO]

25 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Have you ever had any take in any thread on this board that wasn't coming from a negative view point?  The moment I see a thread that doesn't directly have a negative tone, I know with 100% certainty 2 people are gonna use the roll eyes or laugh emoticon to it...you and @Airseven.  Its as sure as the rising and setting of the sun.  

 

First...You don't draft anyone over what their ROOKIE year might yield.  You know Kincaid is here at least for 4-5 years right?  What he does or doesn't do as a rookie does NOT indicate whether he was a worthy first round pick as his career spans more than his rookie year.  

 

Second, why are you even attempting to mention Flowers or Nacua when neither were options when the Bills were on the clock and took Kincaid.  Flowers was drafted BEFORE our pick, so couldn't have taken him.  Nacua?  I guarantee you had never heard of him until his week 1 game with the Rams and you put in your free agent bid in fantasy to get him.  So lets not pretend Nacua had any shot for any team to take him in the first round, he was a 5th round pick.  You know like Shakir...a guy I am pretty sure I have seen you dump on and be negative about because he was a "5th round pick".  

 

Bottom line is simple...Kincaid has the talent, but opportunities here are limited by his role and usage.  Plug Kincaid into the Lions offense and he has the same kind of season, maybe better, than LaPorta.  He will be a legit weapon for years to come and has the potential to be special or elite.

 

For the record, I don't disagree that we need a better WR2 as Davis isn't it.  But that doesn't make the Kincaid pick a bad pick either.  

 

 

where di he say that Nacua had a shot to be drafted in the 1st round?

 

also, I'm pretty sure Nacua was available in the 5th.  Bills went with a guy projected to go in 5th/6th/7th round.

[Straight Hucklebuck]

1 hour ago, ngbills said:

This is likely going to ruffle some feathers around here. Every year there are guys stats that overstate their performance. I think that is year it is Kincaid. This is less about his ability and more how he was used most of the season. This past game we finally saw him going downfield where he should be. He is not Cole Beasley who will catch and pass and quickly turn up field for the extra yards squeezing through guys, he is not a monster TE that will catch a pass and run guys over for 5 yards. Yet he was primarily used in that capacity racking up easy catches but limited yards or impact. Below are some comps from the other starting TE's around the league.

 

Yards per rec

Kincaid 8.9

Kittle 15.7 tops amongst TE's

Most starters are in the 10-11 range

 

TD

Kincaid 2

LaPorta is top at 9

Many others have 5-6. Kincaid at the low end with 2

 

1st Downs

Kincaid 26

Kelce 51 tops amongst TE's

Most with similar rec numbers are in the 30's and 40's. Kincaid is low end. 

 

Average Depth of Target

Kincaid 5.8 yards

Pitts is tops at 11.4 yards; Kittle is at 9.4 yards

Most are in the 6-7 range, though some in the 5's with Kincaid at the low end. 

 

Yards after Catch

Kincaid 4.3 yards

Kittle and Njoku at 7.4 yards are tops

Many are in the 4-6 range with Kincaid at the low end. 

 

Broken Tackles

Kincaid 3

McBride is at 10 and Njoku and LaPorta are at 9

Many other from 2-7 range. Kincaid at low end. 

 

This is not a Kincaid sucks post. This is a they are confused in how to use him post and lets not celebrate his # of rec's stats. He is not a throw it to and watch him run over or around guys like he is being used. He is a tall lanky TE that should be going down the same and catching contested passes. Most NFL caliber players could replicate Kincaid catches or they would be out the league. He can and should do more and I want to see that from him...like we saw some of last week. I am happy he broke some reception records blah blah, but lest see them cut him loose. 

Yeah, the Bills let Kincaid get too far into the season using him solely as a dump off outlet to get any real numbers.

 

Also, Knox and Kincaid have not co-existed without eating into each others numbers, Kincaid’s snap count was 55% on Sunday.

 

All you can hope is that the Bills saw some things Sunday that they can utilize going forward, to where the season won’t be a predictor for his post season impact.

 

It starts by getting his snap count up. He’s not on the field enough. 

[JoshAllin]

He's being saved for Miami and the playoffs

[nedboy7]

He is second in receptions and third in yards.  So I think while he should be used more, it is more or a reflection of the weird place our passing game has been for several weeks.  Btw this goes against the McB dont draft for offense in the 1st round.  Kincaid is a great pick with a huge future along JA. 

[brianthomas]

up until a couple months ago, Kincaid's average air yards per target were 3.3 yards, amongst the lowest in the league. I got downvoted the most of any post ive ever written for stating that fact. Maybe people thought i was speaking down on him. But its all about how we're using him thats the issue.

Throws 3 yards down the field should be high percentage completions. The reasons why should be obvious.

Having these plays in our offense are good to have, it gets Josh in a rhythm, 3 yards becomes 5 & 6 etc. But the numbers show Kincaid needs to get the ball more & deeper down the field.

As an aside: to me this issue is similar imho to how we were using Cook. The numbers showed he needed more touches & when he did he proved why with good results. Kincaid did the same thing when he broke out with production we havent seen here maybe ever. Perhaps the injury had the greatest affect on him, but now that he's healthy the air yards need to be more around 10 yards than 3. If even only just to open up more of the underneath stuff.

 

[Straight Hucklebuck]

There were (5) big Tight End options in the Draft:

 

Kincaid: 66-589-2 (1st)

 

LaPorta: 81-860-9 (2nd)

 

Mayer: 27-304-2 (2nd)

 

Musgrave: 33-341-1 (2nd)

 

Washington 7-67-0 (3rd)

 

 

 

Kraft 28-324-2 (3rd)

 

Mallory 18-207-0 (5th)

 

 

I think Mayer could still be one of the better Tight Ends from this draft despite the lower numbers, but with Kincaid we're not dealing with a bust of a player - he's passed that bar. Kincaid is reliable, and has carved out the #1 receiving Tight End role by year end. I think maybe we see he's not a physical mismatch that will barrel over people, or Moss-people in the end zone. The Bills don't seem to scout that criteria high up their list when they select WRs and Tight Ends. 

 

Edited January 3 by Straight Hucklebuck

[Alphadawg7]

16 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

He's a good TE. I'm not a fan of TE's high in your draft. Value positions are QB, WR, T, DE, CB (less so on this team/zone).

 

Also as for being negative, if everyone was negative I would likely be the most positive. I often take the opposing point of few in my responses. I'm not going to post in a thread and say "I agree." What's the point?

 

Im not a fan of a TE high in the draft either, but high in the draft for me is top 20.  I don't see where we picked as "high" in the draft.  And more importantly, there is nothing that is 100% accurate all the time.  For example, while I am not a fan of taking a TE high in the draft, that doesn't make taking one high "always" wrong.  

 

You said QB, WR, T, DE, CB - Well we didn't need a QB, so that takes that off your list.  We already discussed all WR's worthy of the pick were off the board, so that takes that off the list.  We didn't really need a T either, and there wasn't one graded higher than Kincaid there either, so you can take that off the list.  We didn't need a DE, so you can take that off the list nor was there one there that should have been taken over Kincaid.  And we did not need a CB either, nor was there one graded higher than Kincaid there anyway.

 

So, again...while I don't disagree about your priority list, the reality is that we either did not need a player at those positions like QB or there were not players graded higher than Kincaid that should have been chosen over Kincaid at that slot.  So I fail to see where the negativity on the Kincaid pick can come from, we took the BPA and added a weapon for Allen, something the offense also did need.

 

And no disrespect...but the real "whats the point" question you should be asking is to yourself...whats the point of just focusing on taking the opposing view of the popular opinions for the sake of doing so?  All you are saying is that your responses are not written to be accurate or correct, they are simply written to be the opposite of popular opinion...which by default means you care less about accuracy in your opinions and comments, and more about disagreement and opposition.  

 

But, if I am being honest...what you said isn't really true anyway because I don't see you take the "opposite" view points in threads where everyone is negative.    

 

You asked me what is the point of agreeing on a message board...well what do you think a board like this is for?  Just arguing?  Its a discussion board to discuss things with other people who share the same interest in the subject matter.  Sometimes you agree, sometimes you disagree...that is the point to conversation.  

[bouds]

1 hour ago, KDIGGZ said:

Should we revisit the TE stats thread where a good number of you said he was going to have 1,000 yards receiving and 10 TD's? Nobody drafts a TE high in the first round because they don't provide bang for your buck. It's not a position of value. A good rookie TE season was always going to be roughly what Kincaid has given us which is nothing to write home about compared to a great #2 receiver (Flowers, Nacua).

Not like Flowers numbers are really anything to write home about either, although that's going to change in the long term for sure.  

[KDIGGZ]

6 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Im not a fan of a TE high in the draft either, but high in the draft for me is top 20.  I don't see where we picked as "high" in the draft.  And more importantly, there is nothing that is 100% accurate all the time.  For example, while I am not a fan of taking a TE high in the draft, that doesn't make taking one high "always" wrong.  

 

You said QB, WR, T, DE, CB - Well we didn't need a QB, so that takes that off your list.  We already discussed all WR's worthy of the pick were off the board, so that takes that off the list.  We didn't really need a T either, and there wasn't one graded higher than Kincaid there either, so you can take that off the list.  We didn't need a DE, so you can take that off the list nor was there one there that should have been taken over Kincaid.  And we did not need a CB either, nor was there one graded higher than Kincaid there anyway.

 

So, again...while I don't disagree about your priority list, the reality is that we either did not need a player at those positions like QB or there were not players graded higher than Kincaid that should have been chosen over Kincaid at that slot.  So I fail to see where the negativity on the Kincaid pick can come from, we took the BPA and added a weapon for Allen, something the offense also did need.

 

And no disrespect...but the real "whats the point" question you should be asking is to yourself...whats the point of just focusing on taking the opposing view of the popular opinions for the sake of doing so?  All you are saying is that your responses are not written to be accurate or correct, they are simply written to be the opposite of popular opinion...which by default means you care less about accuracy in your opinions and comments, and more about disagreement and opposition.  

 

But, if I am being honest...what you said isn't really true anyway because I don't see you take the "opposite" view points in threads where everyone is negative.    

 

You asked me what is the point of agreeing on a message board...well what do you think a board like this is for?  Just arguing?  Its a discussion board to discuss things with other people who share the same interest in the subject matter.  Sometimes you agree, sometimes you disagree...that is the point to conversation.  

I didn't say I'm arguing for the sake of arguing. I skip over the topics I agree with and I respond to those I disagree with. If that upsets you then you can mute me. I personally want to see other points of view. If everyone said "I love the Bills" and there was no discussion I would probably go to another team's board, which I've done in the past 

[Bferra13]

No one is discussing the elephant in the room... Knox. When Knox was out Kincaid was thriving, and so in part was the passing offense. Since he's come back... yuck. 

[SoonerBillsFan]

2 hours ago, ngbills said:

This is likely going to ruffle some feathers around here. Every year there are guys stats that overstate their performance. I think that is year it is Kincaid. This is less about his ability and more how he was used most of the season. This past game we finally saw him going downfield where he should be. He is not Cole Beasley who will catch and pass and quickly turn up field for the extra yards squeezing through guys, he is not a monster TE that will catch a pass and run guys over for 5 yards. Yet he was primarily used in that capacity racking up easy catches but limited yards or impact. Below are some comps from the other starting TE's around the league.

 

Yards per rec

Kincaid 8.9

Kittle 15.7 tops amongst TE's

Most starters are in the 10-11 range

 

TD

Kincaid 2

LaPorta is top at 9

Many others have 5-6. Kincaid at the low end with 2

 

1st Downs

Kincaid 26

Kelce 51 tops amongst TE's

Most with similar rec numbers are in the 30's and 40's. Kincaid is low end. 

 

Average Depth of Target

Kincaid 5.8 yards

Pitts is tops at 11.4 yards; Kittle is at 9.4 yards

Most are in the 6-7 range, though some in the 5's with Kincaid at the low end. 

 

Yards after Catch

Kincaid 4.3 yards

Kittle and Njoku at 7.4 yards are tops

Many are in the 4-6 range with Kincaid at the low end. 

 

Broken Tackles

Kincaid 3

McBride is at 10 and Njoku and LaPorta are at 9

Many other from 2-7 range. Kincaid at low end. 

 

This is not a Kincaid sucks post. This is a they are confused in how to use him post and lets not celebrate his # of rec's stats. He is not a throw it to and watch him run over or around guys like he is being used. He is a tall lanky TE that should be going down the same and catching contested passes. Most NFL caliber players could replicate Kincaid catches or they would be out the league. He can and should do more and I want to see that from him...like we saw some of last week. I am happy he broke some reception records blah blah, but lest see them cut him loose. 

He needs to be the clear #1, not knox.

[BlazinBill]

2 hours ago, ngbills said:

This is likely going to ruffle some feathers around here. Every year there are guys stats that overstate their performance. I think that is year it is Kincaid. This is less about his ability and more how he was used most of the season. This past game we finally saw him going downfield where he should be. He is not Cole Beasley who will catch and pass and quickly turn up field for the extra yards squeezing through guys, he is not a monster TE that will catch a pass and run guys over for 5 yards. Yet he was primarily used in that capacity racking up easy catches but limited yards or impact. Below are some comps from the other starting TE's around the league.

 

Yards per rec

Kincaid 8.9

Kittle 15.7 tops amongst TE's

Most starters are in the 10-11 range

 

TD

Kincaid 2

LaPorta is top at 9

Many others have 5-6. Kincaid at the low end with 2

 

1st Downs

Kincaid 26

Kelce 51 tops amongst TE's

Most with similar rec numbers are in the 30's and 40's. Kincaid is low end. 

 

Average Depth of Target

Kincaid 5.8 yards

Pitts is tops at 11.4 yards; Kittle is at 9.4 yards

Most are in the 6-7 range, though some in the 5's with Kincaid at the low end. 

 

Yards after Catch

Kincaid 4.3 yards

Kittle and Njoku at 7.4 yards are tops

Many are in the 4-6 range with Kincaid at the low end. 

 

Broken Tackles

Kincaid 3

McBride is at 10 and Njoku and LaPorta are at 9

Many other from 2-7 range. Kincaid at low end. 

 

This is not a Kincaid sucks post. This is a they are confused in how to use him post and lets not celebrate his # of rec's stats. He is not a throw it to and watch him run over or around guys like he is being used. He is a tall lanky TE that should be going down the same and catching contested passes. Most NFL caliber players could replicate Kincaid catches or they would be out the league. He can and should do more and I want to see that from him...like we saw some of last week. I am happy he broke some reception records blah blah, but lest see them cut him loose. 

I haven't even gotten completely through this paragraph and i have to comment on your Cole Beasley fighting for yards comment - legit question - do you really see Cole in that way- I loved Cole but dude pretty much caught the ball and fell down- at least that's what I remember anyway.

 

Thanks for taking the time and breaking productivity values out- I love the kid and think he will be great in time- I just think some expected him to ball out like Kelce in his rookie year - not a fair ask or sell IMHO