Buffalo_Stampede Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 10 minutes ago, Dr. Who said: Strange, but QB often ends up throwing to WR. So much goes into it but the QB makes it all work. I’m not sure what you’re arguing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 1 minute ago, Buffalo_Stampede said: I think a rookie WR on the Bills tops out around 50-60 targets next year. I don’t see a path to more unless they really hit on the player. It’s a pretty crowded target share with another receiver added. The Bills need an X on paper, but I’m not sure if that X role will continue to be the same since we have a new OC. Our 1st, 2nd, and likely 3rd in targets are already on the roster in Diggs, Kincaid, and Samuel. You’d likely see the rookie slot in close to Samuel but possibly sharing targets with Shakir. But WR is more about the future than what? The targets and path talk is the same at any position. What late first round DL from the draft figures to garner the same or more snap share as the Bills returning 5 of Rousseau/Jones/Oliver/Epenesa/Miller? A first round guard or a safety would have an obvious path to a starting job right away if that's the criteria but otherwise any rookie figures to have to share snaps/targets for this team "unless they really hit on the players". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonzo1105 Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 1 minute ago, BADOLBILZ said: But WR is more about the future than what? The targets and path talk is the same at any position. What late first round DL from the draft figures to garner the same or more snap share as the Bills returning 5 of Rousseau/Jones/Oliver/Epenesa/Miller? A first round guard or a safety would have an obvious path to a starting job right away if that's the criteria but otherwise any rookie figures to have to share snaps/targets for this team "unless they really hit on the players". Sounds to me there should be more of a Cooper DeJean crowd around here with this line of thinking. What percentage of this board do you think would be okay with DeJean even though he’d be a 100% starter at Safety day 1? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Who Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 2 minutes ago, gonzo1105 said: There is nothing more straw man than I like 3 players. It’s not about WR it’s about if they go WR and it’s not a specific player they will still be upset. I posed this question weeks ago and said if they take McConkey and while you said you’d be okay there were many others who said they wouldn’t be accepting of that. If the Bills take WR I get it, if they take Chop Robinson I get it, if they take Jerzahn Newton or Cooper DeJean I get it. Even if they took Jackson Powers Johnson it makes sense. If they take Brock Bowers or a Tackle or a Nickle Corner I might be more upset. Okay, you might be arguing with human nature, but I understand your view. There are holes on the team, so there are multiple positions that make sense from that perspective. The argument for WR is not just about a hole at WR2, but a desire to see a shift in team-building strategy towards prioritizing offense with Josh Allen, a generational QB who too often is asked to elevate mediocre talent. It's also considers that hitting on a potential WR1 going forward gets a premium position on a rookie contract, allowing one to use that "savings" elsewhere in constructing a roster. Cooper Dejean is an exciting player, but he's a S in the NFL, and you ought to have noticed it is a position that is not as expensive to fill as WR. Center in the first is not the smartest play for similar reasons, and also because you can find good Centers later in the draft. In this draft alone, Van Pran and Frazier on day 2, and probably Bortolini and Limmer on day 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beck Water Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 20 minutes ago, Dr. Who said: Strange, but QB often ends up throwing to WR. It has happened that a QB caught his own pass, but it's very very rare - and usually doesn't go for much gain. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Who Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 6 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said: So much goes into it but the QB makes it all work. I’m not sure what you’re arguing. If you get Josh Allen better WR talent, he'll win more games. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsGospel2014 Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 If we select a DT in the 1st round we get what we have coming to us. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbo44 Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 I’d be okay with a DeJean or DL in rd 1 if we get a Legette type in rd 2. After the top 4 wr’s , all likely gone before we pick (barring a high cost to move in the teens) the 10th wr is probably just as likely to success as the 5th. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Stampede Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 9 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said: But WR is more about the future than what? The targets and path talk is the same at any position. What late first round DL from the draft figures to garner the same or more snap share as the Bills returning 5 of Rousseau/Jones/Oliver/Epenesa/Miller? A first round guard or a safety would have an obvious path to a starting job right away if that's the criteria but otherwise any rookie figures to have to share snaps/targets for this team "unless they really hit on the players". I thought the person I replied to was implying that we need a WR next year to get the offense back to where it was a few years ago. I don’t think a WR at 28 will impact the season next year as much as some think. It might be year 2 when we see the biggest impact. Now if we trade up it’s a different story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billl Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 I’d run to the podium if he’s still on the board when Kansas City picks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Stampede Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 6 minutes ago, Dr. Who said: If you get Josh Allen better WR talent, he'll win more games. Thats a big myth simply because the offense isn’t why we lose games when it matters. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan2313 Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 8 minutes ago, Dr. Who said: If you get Josh Allen better WR talent, he'll win more games. Dude forgot all the drops in the KC game and remembers how many sacks our heavily invested DL had in that game..... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 (edited) 27 minutes ago, gonzo1105 said: There is nothing more straw man than I like 3 players. It’s not about WR it’s about if they go WR and it’s not a specific player they will still be upset. I posed this question weeks ago and said if they take McConkey and while you said you’d be okay there were many others who said they wouldn’t be accepting of that. If the Bills take WR I get it, if they take Chop Robinson I get it, if they take Jerzahn Newton or Cooper DeJean I get it. Even if they took Jackson Powers Johnson it makes sense. If they take Brock Bowers or a Tackle or a Nickle Corner I might be more upset. You don't appear to have any real philosophy or game plan wrt to drafting on day 1. Is it just immediate need-based and no regard for the value of the position or, say, how it impacts by far the most important player on the team? For instance, why would you be upset with a tackle? Spencer Brown is a free agent next winter. Suppose he plays well........do you really want to pay him $20M aav? If there is a future star LT that you could put at RT for a couple seasons and then switch him to left if and when Dawkins flames out or needs to kick inside then why would you be upset? I'm not saying that would be ideal because I think the WR position is both a need and a place that is likely to provide BPA and also best player as a rookie at #28. But the draft is a process, not just an annual event to patch perceived immediate needs in the lineup. Edited March 19 by BADOLBILZ 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Stampede Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 (edited) 5 minutes ago, BillsFan2313 said: Dude forgot all the drops in the KC game and remembers how many sacks our heavily invested DL had in that game..... We’re talking about the draft. Value matters. After the top 4 WRs for me I see a lot of equally graded WRs. Edited March 19 by Buffalo_Stampede Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeFrommStateFarm Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 If we take a DT at 28 that is the direct result of McD pulling his weight. So you McD lovers who are petrified of going back to the drought in case McD is fired, you reap what you sow !!! Hopefully Josh gets sick of the Sh*t at some point ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said: I thought the person I replied to was implying that we need a WR next year to get the offense back to where it was a few years ago. I don’t think a WR at 28 will impact the season next year as much as some think. It might be year 2 when we see the biggest impact. Now if we trade up it’s a different story. Again...........what position do you think promises more immediate help that also promises *comparable* long term value than WR? It's easy to come up with a reason to not draft any position. What's difficult is to compare and separate the options. I understand that we have people who are borderline frantic about patching every hole on paper...........not saying that's you but anyone who thinks that drafting a center or safety in round 1, for instance, is a good use of such a limited resource(1st round pick) is obviously coming from an immediately needy perspective. Edited March 19 by BADOLBILZ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonzo1105 Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 1 minute ago, BADOLBILZ said: You don't appear to have any real philosophy or game plan wrt to drafting on day 1. Is it just immediate need-based and no regard for the value of the position or, say, how it impacts by far the most important player on the team? For instance, why would you be upset with a tackle? Spencer Brown is a free agent next winter. Suppose he plays well........do you really want to pay him $20M aav? If there is a future star LT that you could put at RT for a couple seasons and then switch him to left if and when Dawkins flames out or needs to kick inside then why would you be upset? I'm not saying that would be ideal because I think the WR position is both a need and a place that is likely to provide BPA and also best player as a rookie at #28. But the draft is a process, not just an annual event to patch perceived immediate needs in the lineup. How is drafting a big X not a full an immediate need position. Again, I asked why McConkey would be a bad pick and the vast majority called him a slot when he’s an ideal replacement for Diggs in the future. Taking a DT isn’t just filling ms immediate need. We have 2 guys in the roster one of which tore his pec and is 33 years old and is likely here for 1 year before he’s cut. Take Chop Robinson is not an immediate need as we now have 5 DEs with game experience. Yea DeJean is one of those guys and he’s maybe by a round better than any other Safety on the board. You’re right there sounds like nothing more gameplan than I like 3 players and if I don’t get them then idk what to do. Do you think Brandon Beane is sitting there with his big board and telling everyone yup we’re only looking at WR here at 28. I don’t want a tackle because I think we have an in-house option in RVD who played really well last year when called upon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 26 minutes ago, gonzo1105 said: Sounds to me there should be more of a Cooper DeJean crowd around here with this line of thinking. What percentage of this board do you think would be okay with DeJean even though he’d be a 100% starter at Safety day 1? There are always people who want to throw a first round pick at any perceived position of need. Even if it's devalued. There is a very vocal minority that often suggests RB in round 1 every year so any position outside of ST only will please some people if it's a perceived immediate need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkirk Donski Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 2 hours ago, Malazan said: I like how people in here act like the Bills already did this.. Also, Daniel Jeremiah definitely 'has the pulse' of the Bills.. 2023: Quentin Johnston (WR) 2022: Breece Hall (RB) 2021: Asante Samuel Jr. (CB) 2020: -- 2019: T.J. Hockensen (TE) 2018: Josh Rosen (QB) So based on his results.. the Bills are absolutely taking a WR then.. Mock drafts are not meant to be 'accurate' or based on 'inside information'. They're meant to generate traffic by getting people to run to reddit, facebook, message boards, etc screaming about this stuff. He picked the same josh I did. Definitely a dumbass 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 21 minutes ago, Turbo44 said: I’d be okay with a DeJean or DL in rd 1 if we get a Legette type in rd 2. After the top 4 wr’s , all likely gone before we pick (barring a high cost to move in the teens) the 10th wr is probably just as likely to success as the 5th. Dejean if he’s great - half the paycheck of a wr still. you have to hit on DE or WR in the draft to reset the window to being akin to having a rookie contract qb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.