Rumor: Bills trying aggressively to move up for a WR in round one

[Logic]

1 minute ago, warrior9 said:

You can love a 6'1 170 pound WR. BUT the bolded is ABSOLUTELY and UTTERLY false. That is A HORRIFIC take. 

 

Zay Flowers ran a 4.42 and is 4 inches shorter than Worthy and weighs 10 pounds more. HOLLY WOOD BROWN?!?!?!?!?!?! REALLY?

 

Sure Tyreek has been great but so has: Mike Evans, Davante Adams, JJ, CeeDee Lamb, AJ Brown, Aiyuk, Chris Godwin, Amon-Ra St. Brown, Kupp, Keenan Allen, Puka, Deebo, Cooper, and the list goes on.

only ONE has ran under a 4.4.... 

 

Your little fast guys are FAR out numbered.  Be honest, what did you think of Quentin Johnstone coming out of TCU last year? Assume you loved him? 

I'm not doing this with you today.

It is my opinion that you're fixating on and exaggerating Worthy's negative qualities and completely ignoring his positive qualities.

The fastest 40 time in combine history, to go along with a freshman breakout season, three straight years of quality production at Texas, and a likely 1st or 2nd round draft position, all indicate that Worthy is a legitimate weapon, and that NFL teams view him as such.

It's fine that you don't like the prospect. I do. Like I said, we can agree to disagree. We'll see in a day or two where he winds up, and we can check back in with each other as his career in the NFL goes along.
 

People get far too certain about draft prospects and far too emotionally invested in their success or failure. I like him. You (very clearly and evidently) do not. C'est la vie.

[warrior9]

1 minute ago, Logic said:

I'm not doing this with you today.

It is my opinion that you're fixating on and exaggerating Worthy's negative qualities and completely ignoring his positive qualities.

The fastest 40 time in combine history, to go along with a freshman breakout season, three straight years of quality production at Texas, and a likely 1st or 2nd round draft position, all indicate that Worthy is a legitimate weapon, and that NFL teams view him as such.

It's fine that you don't like the prospect. I do. Like I said, we can agree to disagree. We'll see in a day or two where he winds up, and we can check back in with each other as his career in the NFL goes along.
 

People get far too certain about draft prospects and far too emotionally invested in their success or failure. I like him. You (very clearly and evidently) do not. C'est la vie.

You're not doing it because you said speed speed speed and it's UTTERLY false. The best WR's in this league other than ONE don't run below a 4.4

 

Your speed claim is inaccurate. I didn't even talk about Worthy at all in my previous post. Again, what did you think of Quentin Johnstone coming out of TCU? 

[Bill51390]

I think Worthy would be a great pick if we still had Diggs. I’m not sold on drafting him to come in and be our #1 right away. 

[warrior9]

8 minutes ago, Logic said:

I'm not doing this with you today.

It is my opinion that you're fixating on and exaggerating Worthy's negative qualities and completely ignoring his positive qualities.

The fastest 40 time in combine history, to go along with a freshman breakout season, three straight years of quality production at Texas, and a likely 1st or 2nd round draft position, all indicate that Worthy is a legitimate weapon, and that NFL teams view him as such.

It's fine that you don't like the prospect. I do. Like I said, we can agree to disagree. We'll see in a day or two where he winds up, and we can check back in with each other as his career in the NFL goes along.
 

People get far too certain about draft prospects and far too emotionally invested in their success or failure. I like him. You (very clearly and evidently) do not. C'est la vie.

How fast was the Chiefs team last year? (We were faster at every single offensive position) 

Im so concerned that people believe a 6’1 170lb WR can come in here and be a true #1. 

Edited April 24 by warrior9

[julian]

2 minutes ago, warrior9 said:

You're not doing it because you said speed speed speed and it's UTTERLY false. The best WR's in this league other than ONE don't run below a 4.4

 

Your speed claim is inaccurate. I didn't even talk about Worthy at all in my previous post. Again, what did you think of Quentin Johnstone coming out of TCU? 

Did Worthy steal your parking spot lol, you don’t think it’s odd that the player is universally considered a highly valued prospect by pretty much every scouting department in the NFL as you yell and stomp your feet telling everyone he’s gonna fail.

[Steptide]

13 hours ago, CaptnCoke11 said:

so this means they aren’t 

My thoughts exactly. Beane is sneaky. Member when it came out that the bills were all in on Darnold? Or was it Rosen? Whatever, u get it 

[Royale with Cheese]

4 minutes ago, warrior9 said:

You're not doing it because you said speed speed speed and it's UTTERLY false. The best WR's in this league other than ONE don't run below a 4.4

 

Your speed claim is inaccurate. I didn't even talk about Worthy at all in my previous post. Again, what did you think of Quentin Johnstone coming out of TCU? 

 

Jamar Chase ran a 4.38

Tyreek Hill best was 4.29

DK Metcalf ran a 4.33

Jaylen Waddle 4.37

[TOboy]

1 minute ago, warrior9 said:

How fast was the Chiefs team last year?

Im so concerned that people believe a 6’1 170lb WR can come in here and be a true #1. 

Why are you so concerned what other people believe?

 

Personally I agree with you on Worthy. I wouldn’t love him and would far prefer BTJ or Mitchell as I think they can be true #1’s. 
 

That said, why worry about what others think? The only opinion that matters is Beane (and arguably others in the organization). If they go with Worthy we’ll just have to hope they knew better than us and root him on. At least it is tantalizing to imagine him catching 70 yard bombs from Josh. 

[warrior9]

Just now, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Jamar Chase ran a 4.38

Tyreek Hill best was 4.29

DK Metcalf ran a 4.33

Jaylen Waddle 4.37

How many of those guys are 170 pounds? 

1 minute ago, TOboy said:

Why are you so concerned what other people believe?

 

Personally I agree with you on Worthy. I wouldn’t love him and would far prefer BTJ or Mitchell as I think they can be true #1’s. 
 

That said, why worry about what others think? The only opinion that matters is Beane (and arguably others in the organization). If they go with Worthy we’ll just have to hope they knew better than us and root him on. At least it is tantalizing to imagine him catching 70 yard bombs from Josh. 

It’s a forum that we talk about the Bills and our feelings about the team. The draft is tomorrow. 

[HOUSE]

You guys do this to me every year 

Thanks....

[Royale with Cheese]

Just now, warrior9 said:

How many of those guys are 170 pounds? 

 

DeVonta Smith is and he ran a 4.3

 

Worthy is 21, he can add muscle.

[warrior9]

Just now, Royale with Cheese said:

 

DeVonta Smith is and he ran a 4.3

 

Worthy is 21, he can add muscle.

Is he a number 1?! 

[Low Positive]

5 minutes ago, julian said:

Did Worthy steal your parking spot lol, you don’t think it’s odd that the player is universally considered a highly valued prospect by pretty much every scouting department in the NFL as you yell and stomp your feet telling everyone he’s gonna fail.

This is what obsessed fans do at draft time; they "scout" and "grade" college prospects, form strong and unmovable opinions and then throw temper tantrums that would put a 3-year-old to shame when the team has a different draft board than they do. 

[warrior9]

2 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

DeVonta Smith is and he ran a 4.3

 

Worthy is 21, he can add muscle.

If we had a bonafide #1. A big bodied guy, Worthy would be PERFECT. But we already have small guys. We do not need Worthy. We need a #1

[Royale with Cheese]

1 minute ago, warrior9 said:

Is he a number 1?! 

 

Do you need a true #1 WR to win a Super Bowl?

[warrior9]

Just now, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Do you need a true #1 WR to win a Super Bowl?

I would consider Kelce the Chiefs #1. Yes, you do. We don’t have Kelsey at TE, yet. Again if we had a dominate #1 or a Kelce… I’d be all for the worthy pick. We don’t have that. 

3 minutes ago, Low Positive said:

This is what obsessed fans do at draft time; they "scout" and "grade" college prospects, form strong and unmovable opinions and then throw temper tantrums that would put a 3-year-old to shame when the team has a different draft board than they do. 

No ones doing that bud. But go ahead. 

[Paup 1995MVP]

12 hours ago, jahnyc said:

With all of the negative stuff that has been leaking out as we get closer to the draft, I would be surprised if the Bills were trying to move up for Thomas or Mitchell.  Granted, this seems to happen before every draft, some of the information being true and some not so much, but given our needs, I can't see Beane using resources to trade up for a pick that does not have high character.  If this is the case, and the target is a WR, it suggests that he wants Odunze.  Not sure that an "aggressive" trade up would be necessary for Worthy, but if Mitchell and Thomas are falling on draft boards, I guess it is possible that Worthy would be considered by some teams to be the 4th best WR option n the draft.

What have Mitchell and Thomas done since the last college season ended that they are falling on draft boards?   I have read a bunch that the Bills are interested in trading up for Thomas.  

 

No way do I mortgage the farm for any of the top 3 WR's.  There are a lot of great WR's that are drafted after the first round.  Personally I would rather trade back into the 2nd round and pick up another 2nd or 3rd and draft two good WR's on day 2.  We have a great QB.  He can make most WR's look pretty dam good.  We have a lot of needs, and don't need to be the desperate team overpaying to move up for anyone who is not a QB.  Beane does a good job.  But he doesn't always have to be the outlier trading up for someone he loves like a Cody Ford, Devin Singletary or Kair Elam.  

[Beck Water]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Does someone really believe that the WR that the Bills draft will not be their number 1 immediately?? 😂😂 Is that for real? The Bills have a solid slot WR with good production on low volume. They have a gadget guy that is good with the ball in his hands. If we do not understand that the draft pick walks off the bus as the alpha in the WR room we do not understand the current WR room.

 

I don't know what is meant by "alpha" - that's usually a term used to reflect dominance, and a rookie really better have a more modest approach and, no matter how good he is, recognize the NFL equivalent of "that's nice sonny, but this here's the fleet"

 

I personally hope the Bills draft someone who will be ready to step in play a majority of the snaps as the X receiver, if that's what you mean, because that's clearly where the gap in the Bills WR game is right now.

 

I think I've queried you before regarding whether you're referring to Curtis Samuel as "a gadget guy that is good with the ball in his hands".  If so, I continue to think you're seriously mispresenting a receiver who, except for the season he was on IR, has been playing >60% of the snaps and contributing >60 receptions and >600 yds 4 of his last 5 seasons (the 5th season being, IR).  I agree he's not a boundary receiver, but he's way more than "a gadget guy", gadget guys don't take that many snaps or produce that much.

6 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Do you need a true #1 WR to win a Super Bowl?

 

WR, no.  Receiver, yes.

 

I don't know if you've noticed, but "#1 receiver" seems to be a bit like the term "franchise QB" we used to bruit around all the time when we didn't have one.  It means different things to different people and folks argue about it without clarifying what it means to them or the chap they're talking with.

[Brandon]

11 minutes ago, warrior9 said:

Is he a number 1?! 

 

I don't care whether he is or not.  He's averaging 80 catches for over 1,000 yards in his first three seasons in the league.  If that's a #2,  I can still live with that. 

Edited April 24 by Brandon

[Thurman#1]

37 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

That paper is from 2005 and based on data mostly from the  1980s/1990s, when some GMs were still consulting Street and Smith's to figure out who to take in the third round and/or spending top five picks on running backs. Teams have a LOT more resources now and are generally better evaluators than they were then. No one is trading an entire draft for Ricky Williams. And as for the model recently, just look at the Pats - they followed the Massey/Thaler advice yet from 2014-2023, yet their hordes of draft picks mostly resulted in a vast wasteland. Has anyone tried to replicate their analysis for this analytics-dominant era? I honestly suspect that the results will not be replicated.

 

 

 

 

Have more modern papers looking at more modern data found anything different? The answer of course is that they have not. They've universally found the same thing.

 

Massey and Thaler themselves updated that paper in 2013 and found that the same biases towards overconfidence continue. FiveThirtyEight did a study in 2016. Again, much the same thing. The Harvard Sports Analysis Collective. It goes on and on. This has been a busy area for analysis and there just hasn't been much disagreement in modern studies. Teams have adjusted their behavior a bit due to analytics, but they're still making the same mistakes.

 

The Pats aren't relevant here. Massey-Thaler (and all the rest) don't say that if you don't make massive trade-ups you will have excellent drafts. Since teams follow this strategy in overwhelming numbers, the idea is ridiculous. What they say is that if you don't follow their advice you are very likely to do worse than you would have. Not that if you do follow their advice you're guaranteed to draft very well.

 

Teams are better evaluators now? Based on what? That's is at best very questionable. The draft isn't a crapshoot. But it really is still very difficult to predict who'll do well in pro football. 

 

Where's all the data that these great evaluators of today have raised the levels of success in first-rounders over the years since Massey-Thaler?

[Royale with Cheese]

2 minutes ago, warrior9 said:

I would consider Kelce the Chiefs #1. Yes, you do. We don’t have Kelsey at TE, yet. Again if we had a dominate #1 or a Kelce… I’d be all for the worthy pick. We don’t have that. 

 

Travis Kelce at age 34 is not an elite or dominant playmaking TE anymore.  The Chiefs scored 23 ppg last year as an offense last year and in the playoffs.

 

We also have Kincaid entering his prime years while Kelce is starting to decline.

 

 

[Roundybout]

 

I need him so bad you guys 

[warrior9]

3 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Travis Kelce at age 34 is not an elite or dominant playmaking TE anymore.  The Chiefs scored 23 ppg last year as an offense last year and in the playoffs.

 

We also have Kincaid entering his prime years while Kelce is starting to decline.

 

 

He isn’t Kelce yet. He can be. He isn’t yet. I agree on kelce but to look at his numbers in the play offs. 

[section122]

30 minutes ago, warrior9 said:

You're not doing it because you said speed speed speed and it's UTTERLY false. The best WR's in this league other than ONE don't run below a 4.4

 

Your speed claim is inaccurate. I didn't even talk about Worthy at all in my previous post. Again, what did you think of Quentin Johnstone coming out of TCU? 

Why do you keep bringing up johnston? Hes 6'4 and ran in the 4.5s.  He and worthy are completely opposite style receivers.

[Brandon]

1 minute ago, Roundybout said:

 

I need him so bad you guys 

 

I just don't see why any of those top 10 or so would trade out of the pick if he's that good.  Chicago,  in particular,  with that 9th pick looks like a prime landing spot to go along with a rookie QB.  

 

It's going to cost a fortune. 

[warrior9]

6 minutes ago, Brandon said:

 

I don't care whether he is or not.  He's averaging 80 catches for over 1,000 yards in his first three seasons in the league.  If that's a #2,  I can still live with that. 

He won’t because he can’t get off the line. He is not Davanta off the line. Davanta is special off the line which is why he’s having a good few years.
 

1 minute ago, section122 said:

Why do you keep bringing up johnston? Hes 6'4 and ran in the 4.5s.  He and worthy are completely opposite style receivers.

Evaluation of talent bubba. 

[Royale with Cheese]

3 minutes ago, warrior9 said:

He isn’t Kelce yet. He can be. He isn’t yet. I agree on kelce but to look at his numbers in the play offs. 

 

If Kelce was so dominant in the playoffs, how did KC only score 23 ppg?  Why was the offense not just humming?  

[section122]

1 minute ago, warrior9 said:

 

Evaluation of talent bubba. 

I dont understand is it some sort of gotcha?

 

Johnston had a lot of detractors last year.

 

Also every single talent evaluator misses on people. 

[warrior9]

1 minute ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

If Kelce was so dominant in the playoffs, how did KC only score 23 ppg?  Why was the offense not just humming?  

That’s what their O did all year… think you’re proving my point? It’s not about speed speed speed. 

[26TrapDraw]

7 minutes ago, Roundybout said:

 

I need him so bad you guys 

That’s fine and that’s your prerogative but I need him to play for Buffalo.

[Dillenger4]

This thread is drivel. Beane moving into the top 10 is likely not happening. I can see a move up to 20, maybe, but even that is questionable.

Unless it's for a stud DE, CB.

Go get Ayouk. 

[BillsVet]

11 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

Travis Kelce at age 34 is not an elite or dominant playmaking TE anymore.  The Chiefs scored 23 ppg last year as an offense last year and in the playoffs.

 

We also have Kincaid entering his prime years while Kelce is starting to decline.

 

Taylor, are you down on Travis already?  I guess that wouldn't be unexpected.   

 

Maybe Kincaid is your man now...that would definitely make the season interesting!

[Dillenger4]

3 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

If Kelce was so dominant in the playoffs, how did KC only score 23 ppg?  Why was the offense not just humming?  

Are you for real? Are you "Real with Cheese"?

They won the SB for christ sake.

[Thurman#1]

4 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

 

WR, no.  Receiver, yes.

 

I don't know if you've noticed, but "#1 receiver" seems to be a bit like the term "franchise QB" we used to bruit around all the time when we didn't have one.  It means different things to different people and folks argue about it without clarifying what it means to them or the chap they're talking with.

 

 

Even changing it from receiver to wide receiver it's still a bit questionable. Was Kelce still a #1 last year? With 984 yards and 5 TDs? He sure was for a long time, but the Chiefs won last year and I myself don't see a #1 on that 2023 Chiefs roster anywhere.

 

Having a terrific TE really does help your odds. They're really productive, but much cheaper. That's probably why we grabbed Kincaid last year, to attempt following KC (and the Pats dynasty) in not needing a #1 WR if you have a terrific TE and a great QB who can spread things around.

 

Was Edelman a true #1? I mean, he had three years over a thousand yards. An excellent receiver? Yeah. But a true #1? I say no. One of the best slots of all time? Yup, but again ....

 

In 2018, New England's last title year, Edelman had 850 yards, Josh Gordon was second on the team with 720 and Gronk third with 682. The three combined for 12 TDs. Where was their #1?

 

You don't need one, you just don't. Having one can really help, particularly if you're not overpaying. But you don't need one.

 

Fair enough, though, that the term #1 is unclear. You're dead right about that.

 

 

[Royale with Cheese]

3 minutes ago, warrior9 said:

That’s what their O did all year… think you’re proving my point? It’s not about speed speed speed. 

 

The point was actually having a real #1.

 

Also, KC also won the Super Bowl with speed speed speed as well when they had Hill and Hardman.  So they proved you can with both ways.

 

  

2 minutes ago, Dillenger4 said:

Are you for real? Are you "Real with Cheese"?

They won the SB for christ sake.

 

You missed the point.  The point was you can win a SB without having an elite #1 WR.  It was just proven.

[BarleyNY]

10 minutes ago, Brandon said:

 

I just don't see why any of those top 10 or so would trade out of the pick if he's that good.  Chicago,  in particular,  with that 9th pick looks like a prime landing spot to go along with a rookie QB.  

 

It's going to cost a fortune. 

That’s exactly the issue. It’s gonna hurt, but I am still expecting it to happen. 

[Dillenger4]

2 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

The point was actually having a real #1.

 

Also, KC also won the Super Bowl with speed speed speed as well when they had Hill and Hardman.  So they proved you can with both ways.

 

  

 

You missed the point.  The point was you can win a SB without having an elite #1 WR.  It was just proven.

Ok, sorry - didn't read the whole thing. I agree 100%. I like the new rumour of Bills moving up for Jared Verse. Now that makes sense!

[dave mcbride]

18 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

 

Have more modern papers looking at more modern data found anything different? The answer of course is that they have not. They've universally found the same thing.

 

Massey and Thaler themselves updated that paper in 2013 and found that the same biases towards overconfidence continue. FiveThirtyEight did a study in 2016. Again, much the same thing. The Harvard Sports Analysis Collective. It goes on and on. This has been a busy area for analysis and there just hasn't been much disagreement in modern studies. Teams have adjusted their behavior a bit due to analytics, but they're still making the same mistakes.

 

The Pats aren't relevant here. Massey-Thaler (and all the rest) don't say that if you don't make massive trade-ups you will have excellent drafts. Since teams follow this strategy in overwhelming numbers, the idea is ridiculous. What they say is that if you don't follow their advice you are very likely to do worse than you would have. Not that if you do follow their advice you're guaranteed to draft very well.

 

Teams are better evaluators now? Based on what? That's is at best very questionable. The draft isn't a crapshoot. But it really is still very difficult to predict who'll do well in pro football. 

 

Where's all the data that these great evaluators of today have raised the levels of success in first-rounders over the years since Massey-Thaler?

The 538 analysis covers players drafted in 1990 or later and who retired before 2013, so that doesn't really refute my point. And it says this: "No surprises here: The higher the draft pick, the longer a player will stick around in the NFL. First-rounders last a year longer than second-rounders, and the same goes for second-rounders compared with third-rounders. The gaps between rounds narrow slightly in the latter half of the draft, but a seventh-round pick like Mr. Irrelevant, the last pick of the NFL draft, can expect a career just under half as long as the average first-rounder. This is evidence that teams are getting better talent in earlier rounds."

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-hard-to-tell-how-good-nfl-teams-are-at-the-draft/

Edited April 24 by dave mcbride

[nedboy7]

2 hours ago, CaptnCoke11 said:

Did you consult your crystal ball?

 

Joe Marino's take on XW has convinced me his is not our guy. 

[FireChans]

12 minutes ago, Brandon said:

 

I just don't see why any of those top 10 or so would trade out of the pick if he's that good.  Chicago,  in particular,  with that 9th pick looks like a prime landing spot to go along with a rookie QB.  

 

It's going to cost a fortune. 

We would hate for the Cody Ford’s and Boogie Basham’s to go swindle some other teams out of their money.