How should we address WR?

[billsfan89]

1 hour ago, nosejob said:

The first thing that popped in my head when I read the bolded was...Ladd McConkey.

 

 

I am just now getting familiar with McConkey’s game but is he more of a slot or a boundary WR? The Bills need a boundary WR as Shakir and Samuel are more hybrid slot boundary WR’s and at best even if the Bills view Shakir as a true boundary WR they won’t likely view Samuel as that so I he issue is the Bills can’t likely draft a slot high up. 

[Nephilim17]

Marino's latest podcast offers compelling reasons to not freak out if the Bills take a higher-graded D prospect in the first and then take a WR in the 2nd.

He points to Green Bay and other examples of good WR rooms and players that didn't involve a first rounder.

Sorry, if already posted in this thread but here it is (again) and it's a good listen:
 

 

[Kirby Jackson]

37 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

 

I am just now getting familiar with McConkey’s game but is he more of a slot or a boundary WR? The Bills need a boundary WR as Shakir and Samuel are more hybrid slot boundary WR’s and at best even if the Bills view Shakir as a true boundary WR they won’t likely view Samuel as that so I he issue is the Bills can’t likely draft a slot high up. 

He’s a little bit of both. Size and athletically he’s basically identical to Garrett Wilson. There are stereotypes with guys that look like him 😂😂. He can play either place. He reminds me of Diggs honestly. The Antonio Brown comparisons are reasonable as well.

[billsfan89]

22 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

He’s a little bit of both. Size and athletically he’s basically identical to Garrett Wilson. There are stereotypes with guys that look like him 😂😂. He can play either place. He reminds me of Diggs honestly. The Antonio Brown comparisons are reasonable as well.

 

My concern with the Bills is that whomever they draft can't be a pure slot guy (which McC doesn't seem to be) and ideally the player would be more of a pure boundary player. I think of Shakir and Samuel as hybrid slot boundary players (although of the two I think Shakir is more capable of consistently playing on the boundary but he should flex into the slot now and again). Seems like from the description of what you are telling me about McC if asked to play the boundary consistently it wouldn't be a bad fit? If so I like what I see from him, I think he would be a good fit on this offense, they can then take a mid-round WR whose more of a pure boundary player to round out the depth.  

[billsfan89]

3 hours ago, Jimmy Harris 69 said:

Moving up always gives one the chance to “win the draft” in the eyes of some expert. History has shown the cost is too high, and it fails to be the difference maker (see the falcons with no trophy and see the chiefs hoisting the trophy using a bunch of what-sis). I’d be satisfied with a staying at 28 or even moving down a tad. Moving down and dealing Minnesota’s 2025 number 2 could potentially get us a starting receiver, DT and safety in rounds 2 and 3. We could then grab another receiver in round 4 or 5, in addition to staying open to veterans on the market this summer. We need edge, cb and rb help as well. McConkey, Worthy should still be in play in late round 1, the others in later rounds. This list is from cbs sports. 
 

Ladd McConkey, UGA, 6-0 / 185

 Worthy, TEXAS, 6-1 / 172

Coleman, FSU, 6-4 / 215

Baker, UCF, 6-1 / 208

Franklin, OREG, 6-3 / 187

McMillan, WASH, 6-1 / 192

Corley, WKY, 5-11 / 210

Polk WASH, 6-2 / 204

 Legette, SC, 6-3 / 227

Smith, TXAM, 5-10 / 200

Wilson, MICH, 6-0 / 192

 Cowing, ARIZ, 5-11 / 175

 

 

I actually think moving up massively/significantly for a non-QB or a lackluster QB prospect actually leads to pundits saying that the team that traded back more often than not won the trade. I think many feel that trade ups of more than a few spots high up tend not to be worth it most of the time. NFL roster building is almost more about not having weaknesses and good depth than it is about what your top elite talent looks like (outside of the QB position). Getting more picks or swapping out lower end picks for higher ones and get more or better "bites at the apple" to bring in talent all over the roster is better than going up higher on the board. 

 

You do need at least 2-3 elite non-QB players but the issue is that even trading up well into the top 10 does not guarantee that at that much higher a degree and as we have seen throughout NFL history elite top 5 at their position players are found all places in the draft and even some like Jason Peters un-drafted (although UDFA's being elite players is rare). 

 

I think given how deep this draft class is staying at 28 unless Brian Thomas maybe falls to around 24/25 (which would be a smaller more manageable trade up) the Bills best bet is to "let the draft come to them" and draft a WR at pick 28 like Legette or McConkey or trade down 5-10 spots and pick up a 3rd round pick and still take a WR like Franklin or Wilson and use that 3rd round pick to fill a need elsewhere on the roster and then take another WR at pick 128 for added depth while using pick 60 and whatever you got from the trade down to build the defensive line or if at pick 60 a top guard or center is there add a piece to the offensive line. 

[Kirby Jackson]

8 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

My concern with the Bills is that whomever they draft can't be a pure slot guy (which McC doesn't seem to be) and ideally the player would be more of a pure boundary player. I think of Shakir and Samuel as hybrid slot boundary players (although of the two I think Shakir is more capable of consistently playing on the boundary but he should flex into the slot now and again). Seems like from the description of what you are telling me about McC if asked to play the boundary consistently it wouldn't be a bad fit? If so I like what I see from him, I think he would be a good fit on this offense, they can then take a mid-round WR whose more of a pure boundary player to round out the depth.  

I agree 100% with this. McConkey can play the boundary and is polished. He can take targets early. Honestly of all of the guys that we talk about, with the exception of the top 3, he’s most capable of volume. 

[Mat68]

I think all options are on the table at this point.  I went with wr at 28 and different position at 60.  I think the Bills are digging deep into Alabama and Jermaine Burton.  Went to Alabama pro day instead of Texas both were on the same day.  Maybe taking attention off Texas wideouts. 

 

Trading all the way up for one of the top 3 seems a bit rich.  If they do it I would be excited but pretty much rolling with the dline as it is.  I think they need to do something at 60 to add depth to Edge or draft Jones successor at DT.  
 

I could see a trade up to the 20s late teens including a 25 2nd.  Beane really likes a guy he will go get them.  

6 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

I actually think moving up massively/significantly for a non-QB or a lackluster QB prospect actually leads to pundits saying that the team that traded back more often than not won the trade. I think many feel that trade ups of more than a few spots high up tend not to be worth it most of the time. NFL roster building is almost more about not having weaknesses and good depth than it is about what your top elite talent looks like (outside of the QB position). Getting more picks or swapping out lower end picks for higher ones and get more or better "bites at the apple" to bring in talent all over the roster is better than going up higher on the board. 

 

You do need at least 2-3 elite non-QB players but the issue is that even trading up well into the top 10 does not guarantee that at that much higher a degree and as we have seen throughout NFL history elite top 5 at their position players are found all places in the draft and even some like Jason Peters un-drafted (although UDFA's being elite players is rare). 

 

I think given how deep this draft class is staying at 28 unless Brian Thomas maybe falls to around 24/25 (which would be a smaller more manageable trade up) the Bills best bet is to "let the draft come to them" and draft a WR at pick 28 like Legette or McConkey or trade down 5-10 spots and pick up a 3rd round pick and still take a WR like Franklin or Wilson and use that 3rd round pick to fill a need elsewhere on the roster and then take another WR at pick 128 for added depth while using pick 60 and whatever you got from the trade down to build the defensive line or if at pick 60 a top guard or center is there add a piece to the offensive line. 

Only 1 I could fully get behind is Marvin Harrison Jr.  I would say the Andrew Luck prospect of WR.  Was a future 1st round pick since highschool

[billsfan89]

9 minutes ago, Mat68 said:

I think all options are on the table at this point.  I went with wr at 28 and different position at 60.  I think the Bills are digging deep into Alabama and Jermaine Burton.  Went to Alabama pro day instead of Texas both were on the same day.  Maybe taking attention off Texas wideouts. 

 

Trading all the way up for one of the top 3 seems a bit rich.  If they do it I would be excited but pretty much rolling with the dline as it is.  I think they need to do something at 60 to add depth to Edge or draft Jones successor at DT.  
 

I could see a trade up to the 20s late teens including a 25 2nd.  Beane really likes a guy he will go get them.  

Only 1 I could fully get behind is Marvin Harrison Jr.  I would say the Andrew Luck prospect of WR.  Was a future 1st round pick since highschool

 

I would think a trade up to 3 would be at such a steep cost that I would pass. And Marvin Harrison JR as good of a WR prospect as he is (and I think he's probably the best prospect at WR since Calvin Johnson or Julio Jones in my opinion certainly as blue chip a WR prospect can get) is simply not worth the huge trade up that would likely be required. 

 

I think if the package was picks 28, 60, 128 and 144 this year plus a 1st and 2nd next year I wouldn't hate it, its a steep price but you are getting Josh as good of a cost controlled WR1 as possible and you still have a 2nd next year even if you give up one in a trade up. BUT I think the price AZ will want to go all the way down from 3 to 28 is likely to be picks 28, 60, 128 and 144 plus 1st round picks in 2025 and 2026 along with a 2nd rounder in 2025 and a 3rd in 2026. 

 

AZ is going to want to set up their drafts in 2025 and 2026 with multiple firsts and two additional premium picks. I just don't think any non-QB prospect is truly worth giving up a future first let alone two. 

[njbuff]

Would you double dip and how would you do it?

 

A. Major trade up for Harrison, Nabers or Odunze, then sign Boyd post draft.

 

or

 

B. Take WR’s in the first two rounds?

 

That’s assuming that you wanna double dip.

[Dr. Who]

3 hours ago, billsfan89 said:

 

 

I am just now getting familiar with McConkey’s game but is he more of a slot or a boundary WR? The Bills need a boundary WR as Shakir and Samuel are more hybrid slot boundary WR’s and at best even if the Bills view Shakir as a true boundary WR they won’t likely view Samuel as that so I he issue is the Bills can’t likely draft a slot high up. 

He played 70% of his snaps on the outside at UGA. He's not primarily a slot receiver. I think he can fill the Diggs' role. You still need an X -- Thomas, Legette, Mitchell, etc. I think we need two WR early, and I'd be thrilled if McConkey were one of them.

[billsfan89]

5 hours ago, Dr. Who said:

He played 70% of his snaps on the outside at UGA. He's not primarily a slot receiver. I think he can fill the Diggs' role. You still need an X -- Thomas, Legette, Mitchell, etc. I think we need two WR early, and I'd be thrilled if McConkey were one of them.

I know we have gone back and forth on this but I do want to ask why you think the Bills need two boundary WR’s to come in as rookies? Are Shakir and Samuel splitting snaps at the slot in your mind? 

 

Genuinely asking because it just doesn’t seem likely that any offense is going to give more snaps to a second round rookie over Shakir a player who is a third year player coming off a very strong end to his second season and Samuel a proven 28 year old vet they just signed to a fairly big contract. The offense is also likely to employ Knox as a second TE at least for a good chunk of formations which leads to the Bills employing on two WR’s and I think Shakir or Samuel will be one of them in those situations.

 

I definitely think this team needs a boundary WR who can soak in 70-80 targets effectively. But I don’t think this team needs a second boundary WR that is going to play heavy snaps over Shakir/Samuel/Knox and even Hollins may get situational snaps.

 

I just don’t think the Bills would have signed Samuel and only think he can play slot unless they thought Shakir could play outside. Or if they thought Shakir was playing only in the slot then they probably feel comfortable with Samuel on the boundary at least a good chunk of the time.

 

If you view Shakir as a slot and you need to replace Gabe and you are knowing Diggs is not certain why sign a player whose a slot exclusively to your largest free agency deal?

Edited April 11 by billsfan89

[Dr. Who]

1 hour ago, billsfan89 said:

I know we have gone back and forth on this but I do want to ask why you think the Bills need two boundary WR’s to come in as rookies? Are Shakir and Samuel splitting snaps at the slot in your mind? 

 

Genuinely asking because it just doesn’t seem likely that any offense is going to give more snaps to a second round rookie over Shakir a player who is a third year player coming off a very strong end to his second season and Samuel a proven 28 year old vet they just signed to a fairly big contract. The offense is also likely to employ Knox as a second TE at least for a good chunk of formations which leads to the Bills employing on two WR’s and I think Shakir or Samuel will be one of them in those situations.

 

I definitely think this team needs a boundary WR who can soak in 70-80 targets effectively. But I don’t think this team needs a second boundary WR that is going to play heavy snaps over Shakir/Samuel/Knox and even Hollins may get situational snaps.

 

I just don’t think the Bills would have signed Samuel and only think he can play slot unless they thought Shakir could play outside. Or if they thought Shakir was playing only in the slot then they probably feel comfortable with Samuel on the boundary at least a good chunk of the time.

 

If you view Shakir as a slot and you need to replace Gabe and you are knowing Diggs is not certain why sign a player whose a slot exclusively to your largest free agency deal?

I have no idea what they are going to do, or what Beane is thinking, obviously, but I don't think Samuel was signed as a replacement for Davis, as some appear to speculate. They will line him up all over the place, including the backfield. I don't see him as a boundary receiver primarily. Samuel is a versatile weapon that fits Brady's vision for the offense, but if anything, I'd rather picture him as an upgrade to the role Harty was supposed to fulfill. In addition, I am not convinced a significant leap in targets for Shakir is the best option. As others have pointed out, he would be an outlier as a success on the outside given his short arms. I like him as a weapon, but I don't see him as expanding his targets so much that the WR room can't tolerably add two WRs that command significant targets.

 

You can get by with 1 WR early. You could just adjust the targets and give more to Samuel and Shakir, Kincaid and Knox, etc. I personally still do not see a big-bodied X to replace Davis. If you think that is all you need, then someone like Thomas, Mitchell, or Legette should be the main interest in the draft. I am not convinced Coleman can be a boundary receiver like that because of limited speed, but some like him. Maybe Burton, Walker, or Polk could be considered on day 2.

 

My argument for McConkey is that I think he's a special talent who can play the role that Diggs has been playing. Franklin could, too, but I like McConkey better. Lots of folks probably have it the other way around. I think his ceiling is well above Shakir's. I would rather keep Shakir's targets on the lower end, where I think you can maximize his talent, than expand them significantly. I like the idea of two rookie contracts for a potential WR1 and WR2 that can grow together with Josh, and I'd rather have some redundancy in the WR room in the sense that you have more latitude where the targets can be spread around, and backup options if someone gets injured.

 

That may not be efficient, but that's the way I prefer to go with it, and some of this is to take advantage of the extraordinary depth at the position early in the draft (the tiers of WR that will go in the first 40 to 45 picks.) Some will counter that we have too many other needs and this is a luxury set of choices. I don't see it precisely that way, but I am not strictly motivated by filling out the roster as completely as possible. 

[steven50]

I dont normally post on the off season because:

 

1. Mock drafts are stupid. Unless there is an obvious 1 or 2 at QB none of them are ever right.

 

2. The Bills rarely (never?) pick the fan consensus in the draft. Seriously, the most often heard sound at the NFL draft is groans and boos.

 

I dont think this one will be really different. From what little I have seen of our new offensive coordinators old body of work He is more of a "spread the ball around", , kind of guy then a, "Number 1 receiver force them the ball!" kind of guy.

 

Quote

 

LSU

Brady, who had a key role in that offense with the title "pass game coordinator/wide receivers coach," wanted to spread defenses out with three-plus receivers, use motion every third drop back on average and take to the air early and often.

 

With Burrow, Chase and Co. at LSU, the Tigers utilized motion on 34.2% of their dropbacks, the 29th-highest rate in college football (out of around 130 teams).

 

Carolina Panthers

He sent out "11" or "10" personnel on 69.6% of the team's dropbacks that season, which ranked 19th in football.

 

Brady deployed motion more frequently in Carolina in 2020 than at LSU the year before -- a sizable 46.5% of the club's drop backs

 

In 2020, the Panthers ranked 5th in the NFL in pass success rate to RBs

 

Buffalo before Brady

2023: Buffalo was in the bottom third of motion rate and has been one of the heaviest "12" personnel -- one back, two tight ends -- clubs in football.

 

 

 

The offense Brady was play calling for last year was not his offense. I think the Bills will look entirely different this year and the running backs will be a much bigger part of that as well as the spread.

 

I could be wrong because the draft is nothing but speculation but it wouldn't shock me if we dont pick a Wide receiver with our first pick if the guy(s) they want are gone.

 

If the guy they want is gone I think they go BPA.

 

 

 

Edited April 11 by steven50
same sentence twice

[billsfan89]

12 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

I have no idea what they are going to do, or what Beane is thinking, obviously, but I don't think Samuel was signed as a replacement for Davis, as some appear to speculate. They will line him up all over the place, including the backfield. I don't see him as a boundary receiver primarily. Samuel is a versatile weapon that fits Brady's vision for the offense, but if anything, I'd rather picture him as an upgrade to the role Harty was supposed to fulfill. In addition, I am not convinced a significant leap in targets for Shakir is the best option. As others have pointed out, he would be an outlier as a success on the outside given his short arms. I like him as a weapon, but I don't see him as expanding his targets so much that the WR room can't tolerably add two WRs that command significant targets.

 

You can get by with 1 WR early. You could just adjust the targets and give more to Samuel and Shakir, Kincaid and Knox, etc. I personally still do not see a big-bodied X to replace Davis. If you think that is all you need, then someone like Thomas, Mitchell, or Legette should be the main interest in the draft. I am not convinced Coleman can be a boundary receiver like that because of limited speed, but some like him. Maybe Burton, Walker, or Polk could be considered on day 2.

 

My argument for McConkey is that I think he's a special talent who can play the role that Diggs has been playing. Franklin could, too, but I like McConkey better. Lots of folks probably have it the other way around. I think his ceiling is well above Shakir's. I would rather keep Shakir's targets on the lower end, where I think you can maximize his talent, than expand them significantly. I like the idea of two rookie contracts for a potential WR1 and WR2 that can grow together with Josh, and I'd rather have some redundancy in the WR room in the sense that you have more latitude where the targets can be spread around, and backup options if someone gets injured.

 

That may not be efficient, but that's the way I prefer to go with it, and some of this is to take advantage of the extraordinary depth at the position early in the draft (the tiers of WR that will go in the first 40 to 45 picks.) Some will counter that we have too many other needs and this is a luxury set of choices. I don't see it precisely that way, but I am not strictly motivated by filling out the roster as completely as possible. 

We are in full agreement on the need to draft a WR early but I just don’t think McBeane who generally speaking is very prudent when building a roster is spending 8-10 million a year on a replacement for your WR4. 
 

It would be a foolish waste of resources to spend your largest free agent contract  on upgrading a role player slot. Which leads me to believe they feel that Samuel is a slot or slot boundary hybrid and that Shakir is likely a slot boundary hybrid player at a minimum.

[Kirby Jackson]

4 hours ago, billsfan89 said:

We are in full agreement on the need to draft a WR early but I just don’t think McBeane who generally speaking is very prudent when building a roster is spending 8-10 million a year on a replacement for your WR4. 
 

It would be a foolish waste of resources to spend your largest free agent contract  on upgrading a role player slot. Which leads me to believe they feel that Samuel is a slot or slot boundary hybrid and that Shakir is likely a slot boundary hybrid player at a minimum.

The only thing that I’ll say in contrast (and we generally agree on it) is that the Bills wanted that player. It wasn’t like they thought, “we need WR and will decide between Samuel and OBJ.” The Bills wanted Samuel because of his skillset. The Bills were less looking at it as Samuel plays “___” snaps on the boundary and “___” snaps in the slot. The Bills looked at him as a guy that they said, “we want him to get 8 touches a game.” That’s a little more aggressive than what Deebo gets but in line.
 

I think Deebo is a better pure receiver but Samuel a better runner. It may be something like 3 catches and 5 carries or some variation there. The Bills were pretty clear that they needed more explosion. Samuel provides that. I think that they paid for that. They paid for the 8 touches more than paying for the routes run. It’s just a small area where we disagree a little. To me Samuel is a rich man’s Harty/McKenzie or a poor man’s Deebo. He is more chess piece than WR. 

[GunnerBill]

17 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I agree 100% with this. McConkey can play the boundary and is polished. He can take targets early. Honestly of all of the guys that we talk about, with the exception of the top 3, he’s most capable of volume. 

 

I think he can play as a move receiver. He can play on the boundary 75% of his time but you are not running a ton of down the field stuff with him. I see him as more Deebo Samuel in usage than Stefon Diggs. He lines up wide about 3/4s of the time but then runs mainly in cutting or horizontal stuff. I don't think he can play as a vertical receiver to anywhere near the extent Diggs did or has in his NFL career. Stef was kind of a move/vertical hybrid. CeeDee Lamb is that too. Antonio Brown at his peak was as well. But those guys are rare. 

Edited April 11 by GunnerBill

[nosejob]

17 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I agree 100% with this. McConkey can play the boundary and is polished. He can take targets early. Honestly of all of the guys that we talk about, with the exception of the top 3, he’s most capable of volume. 

Yeah I think he's the one guy who can come in and take 70 targets like he's been here for a year already. However, I would love Ladd and Legette, which leads to question..Do you secure that monster 1st, then settle for a Pearsall?.....or take Ladd and hope to get a Coleman?

 

I'm all for trading next year's 26-32 pick to a team like GB for 41 and 88.(they are just one of the teams with 2  2s and 2  3s).

My hope would to be Ladd at 28 then maybe move 41 to 37 for Legette.  Then I'm looking to lock down Sweat and willing to move to the mid 50s to get him.

 

Btw Maason Smith at 88

[Kirby Jackson]

3 minutes ago, nosejob said:

Yeah I think he's the one guy who can come in and take 70 targets like he's been here for a year already. However, I would love Ladd and Legette, which leads to question..Do you secure that monster 1st, then settle for a Pearsall?.....or take Ladd and hope to get a Coleman?

 

I'm all for trading next year's 26-32 pick to a team like GB for 41 and 88.(they are just one of the teams with 2  2s and 2  3s).

My hope would to be Ladd at 28 then maybe move 41 to 37 for Legette.  Then I'm looking to lock down Sweat and willing to move to the mid 50s to get him.

 

Btw Maason Smith at 88

That’s a tough one. I love the idea of Ladd and Legette. I also love the idea of the top 3. Pearsall is a guy that I’m higher on than most. I like him more than Coleman (even at the same spot). Baker is another guy in that mold that you might be able to get.
 

I think that you need 2 for sure. The quality of the 2nd is dependent on who is the 1st. If your first pick is McConkey you can shoot for upside with your next pick because he has a high floor (if healthy). If your first pick is Coleman, you need a higher floor guy with your 2nd WR pick. You can’t draft 2 boom or bust guys. 

[nosejob]

4 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

That’s a tough one. I love the idea of Ladd and Legette. I also love the idea of the top 3. Pearsall is a guy that I’m higher on than most. I like him more than Coleman (even at the same spot). Baker is another guy in that mold that you might be able to get.
 

I think that you need 2 for sure. The quality of the 2nd is dependent on who is the 1st. If your first pick is McConkey you can shoot for upside with your next pick because he has a high floor (if healthy). If your first pick is Coleman, you need a higher floor guy with your 2nd WR pick. You can’t draft 2 boom or bust guys. 

Well one thing's for sure, and I'm betting it will happen is that...Beane has to at the very least, create a 3rd rd. pick. Late picks won't get us there and moving down into the 30s could kill the plan.

 

He's gonna have to use a pick from next year.

[Victory Formation]

@billsfan89

@Dr. Who

@nosejob

 

As far as targets go, Cover 1 has a video on this very topic tonight at 7PM on YouTube, make sure you guys check them out, they do a great job over there!