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

[SCBills]

I'd actually be ok with Worthy at 28.

 

I still think we need another legit investment at WR on Day 2 (maybe early Day 3) or a FA addition when Tre's money clears, but Worthy's speed outside with Shakir/Samuel underneath and their YAC ability would be a very different look next year from the Diggs/Davis years of zero YAC.

[Roundybout]

1 minute ago, SCBills said:

I'd actually be ok with Worthy at 28.

 

I still think we need another legit investment at WR on Day 2 (maybe early Day 3) or a FA addition when Tre's money clears, but Worthy's speed outside with Shakir/Samuel underneath and their YAC ability would be a very different look next year from the Diggs/Davis years of zero YAC.

I would be ok with Worthy and someone like Polk later.

[stinky finger]

5 minutes ago, FireChans said:

I think the issue is if the fastest guy hits, you automatically have one of the best weapons in football.

 

it’s a ceiling v floor argument

Of all the potential WRs we could take, Worthy makes me most uneasy because of exactly this. 
 

He’s gonna boom or bust. 

[Shaw66]

10 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Now this is interesting.  We've been talking about #1 receivers.  

 

I just went back and looked at what you wrote in your post to which I replied.  You did not use the phrase "typical stud receiver" or "big tall fast guys".  This is what you said:

 

"I think, in fact, that receivers are becoming a dime a dozen, just like running backs.   Successful teams don't need a top-five running back, and I think the passing game already has evolved to the point that they don't need a top-five receiver.  I mean, they'll have a guy who is top-five in the stats, but he'll get there by being a scheme fit rather than being a great receiver.   I think that's exactly what we've seen in Kansas City.  And it's what we've seen in LA and Detroit and SF. "

 

I'm speaking to the point that guys like Kupp, Samuel, and St Brown are special players, and their teams regard them as special players.  They are getting paid like special players.   To use Emmanual Acho's term, they are "Freakazoids".

 

I searched your content for stuff about #1 receivers, stud receivers, and big tall fast guys.  Bearing in mind the search engine here has its flaws, I don't find a lot of stuff where you specify that to you, #1 receiver or stud receiver means "tall big fast" to you.  In fact, to the contrary.  So if that's now what #1 receiver or stud receiver means to you, I'll agree that teams have value for WR who don't fit that mold now a days.  But I don't think that's because receivers are a dime a dozen or because they are 'scheme fits', as you said in the post I responded to above.

 

From your post linked above, you said "A typical #2 is not good to great at getting separation and is not good to great at making contested catches.   A guy who is good to great at one or both of those skills is a #1 receiver.   People are naming players like Hill and Waddle and Cinci's wideouts.   Someone mentioned Gronk and Edelman.   They're all #1 receivers.  Why?  Because they're all good to great at getting open using their own skills, or in Gronk's case they're open when they're covered, so they don't need to separate."

 

I agree completely with your description of a #1 receiver quoted above, from August of 2023 to be fair.  There's nothing in there about "big tall fast guys", and I think that's appropriate.  I call to mind something Dawkins said about watching Diggs during an off season throwing session right after Diggs was traded to the Bills.  It was something to the effect of "until then, I didn't realize a human could be that good at football". 

 

That's a #1 WR to me: not a "big tall fast" guy, but a human who is "that good at football", who can separate, who can make contested catches, who - as you said in Aug 2023 - is "good to great at getting open using their own skills or is open when covered" or as Dawkins said, is "just that good at football"  Jefferson is a #1 WR even though he's not that tall and not that fast, because he has those traits.  Amon-Ra St Brown, same.

 

I believe teams still covet big tall fast guys and super-fast shifty guys who are "just that good at football".  The catch (see what I did there?) is that while in theory, these guys superior physical traits should help them get open or be "open when covered".  But a lot of times, other things aren't equal, which is why a 5th round receiver like Diggs or a 4th round receiver like Amon Ra St Brown who has enough height and speed but also the hard-to-define ability run deceptive routes, to fake DBs out of their cleats, who have passion and works at their craft, becomes better at football.  

 

I don't believe so many WR get drafted in the first round because they are "decent scheme fits", nor do they get highly paid because of this.  They get drafted in the first round because based upon college tape and measurables, GMs believe they will be "a human who could be just that good at football" in the NFL.  And that's why they get paid, too, once they prove that's who they are.
 

Elsewhere, I made the point as far as I can tell, "#1 receiver" is becoming like "franchise QB" used to be on this board BA (before Allen): a term that people define in different ways, without realizing it, resulting in a lot of talking past each other.  But in this exchange, it seems to me you are changing up what you're talking about, to insert a definition of #1 WR as a "big tall fast stud" that you weren't stating in your various posts on this topic, and that differs from a definition you have used in previous posts (like last August, quoted above).

 

 

I don't agree with you, but that's okay.  

 

I think receivers are becoming a dime a dozen and you just don't see it yet.  In fact, you go in the opposite direction - that receivers are becoming a need like a franchise QB, or at least people here seem to talk that way.   I agree, they do talk that way, and I think that perception is incorrect. 

 

One way I think you can see what I'm talking about is those three receivers you named who have gotten big contracts - St. Brown, Kupp, and Samuel.  They are exactly the right examples.   They got drafted in the fourth, third, and second rounds, respectively.   That means that these three NFL stars at the position, three guys who at least in terms of money are among the most valuable players at their position, all were viewed as ordinary prospects coming out of college, and that in each case, there were several other guys whom the NFL GMs thought were better prospects to build their teams around.  (Note that Shakir is another one - a guy who seems to be developing a more significant role in the offense than his draft status would suggest.)   Why has this happened?  Because what NFL teams need at receiver has changed from five years ago, just like the change that began at running back maybe 15 years ago.   

 

Those guys are getting money from their teams that KC didn't give to Tyreek Hill.  Why didn't the Chiefs pay Hill?  Well, I wasn't in the room, but I think it was because they could see that the colleges were turning out a lot of guys who didn't have Hill's speed but who were fast enough, guys who could be plugged into an effective offense at a fraction of the cost of Tyreek Hill.  In other words, they could see that, given what they wanted from receivers, receivers were a dime a dozen.  I think that is exactly why Beane seemed to be saying the other day that he wasn't concerned about the receiver position and that he would love to have a true #1 but it isn't necessary.  We can argue about what exactly he meant, but I think what he meant is that he doesn't need a Justin-Jefferson-type game changer.  

 

I've lived my whole life as a Bills fan thinking the Bills need a stud #1, and that was probably true for several decades.  It certainly was true when the Bills were going to the Super Bowl.   I'm pretty sure it's not so true any longer.   I think a stud QB, good starting role players, and good coaching is what's needed.  

[longtimebillsfan]

23 hours ago, mannc said:

Thank you.  No one in the top 10 is interested in moving to 28, and the Bills’ first next year is a devalued asset because the assumption is that it too will be a late pick.   A move up to the mid-teens is possible, but that’s about it.  Although I do think it’s possible that Odunze slides to that part of the draft…

I would be okay with Odunze st 28.

[london_bills]

1 minute ago, stinky finger said:

Of all the potential WRs we could take, Worthy makes me most uneasy because of exactly this. 
 

He’s gonna boom or bust. 

I always think of Marquise Goodwin when is see Worthy 

[Alphadawg7]

6 minutes ago, FireChans said:

I think the issue is if the fastest guy hits, you automatically have one of the best weapons in football.

 

it’s a ceiling v floor argument

 

Agree, but Worthy size limits his role at the next level IMHO.  Guys like Hill and Tank Dell play bigger than their size, Worthy doesn't and the lack of strength I think is going to limit his ability at the next level.  And guys like Tank are more the exception than the rule on top of that.  For a team like say Dallas, I can see him being a great addition potentially opposite Lamb, on turf, etc.  But for a team looking for a WR1...I don't think he is that dude.

[Roundybout]

Just now, london_bills said:

I always think of Marquise Goodwin when is see Worthy 

Goodwin split his training between football and the Olympics, though. I think Worthy is more of a complete receiver 

[BuffaloRebound]

Worthy probably doesn’t make it to pick 28.  I think Worthy or Thomas are the pick if we stay at 28.  If they’re both gone, it means Nix/Penix or one of the OT’s are still available at 28 and we trade back. 

Edited April 25 by BuffaloRebound

[nedboy7]

I have a new idea.  I want BT and XL both. 

[Alphadawg7]

6 minutes ago, Logic said:

Disagree. You talk about him like he wasn't actually a good college football player.

He was a freshman breakout and posted three years of good production at Texas.

But honestly...I don't want to spend the second best day of the football year arguing about any prospects. I've done enough of that the past few months. Today is a day for joy and pizza and booing Roger Goodell.

We'll stick with "agree to disagree" on Worthy, and we can check back in with each other as his NFL career goes along.

 

 

Yeah all good dude...but the college resume stuff isn't a great counter point as the first round draft history is littered with the corpses of stud college players at big schools who flamed out in the NFL.  

 

Hey, thats the beauty of the draft, lots of opinions and no facts (facts being NFL on field experience)...just hopes and dreams for all.  Gonna be a fun night, this is one of the more exciting and interesting overall drafts in a while.  Enjoy bud

[SectionC3]

9 minutes ago, SCBills said:

I'd actually be ok with Worthy at 28.

 

I still think we need another legit investment at WR on Day 2 (maybe early Day 3) or a FA addition when Tre's money clears, but Worthy's speed outside with Shakir/Samuel underneath and their YAC ability would be a very different look next year from the Diggs/Davis years of zero YAC.

I was against it initially because I think we need a larger human who can break a tackle or two and punish teams who want to lay back in cover 2 or cover 3 on us.  But I’ve come around on the idea in the last couple of weeks.  I’d still like to see us come out of this with a bigger body at the position, but if the FO decides it’s Worthy, I won’t get on the internet and complain anonymously because they’ve earned the benefit of the doubt. 

1 hour ago, SCBills said:

 

The thing that I can't wrap my head around is the development of Championship DNA.   

 

And maybe that just comes with winning, and we have to get over the hump to do so.

 

McDermott owns 13 seconds.  I don't who to blame for CIN.. that just seems like an absolute mess all around leading into that game.

 

Then this year.. injury luck.  EVERY. YEAR.  KC stays healthy at key positions and we either have big injuries or a depleted roster.   KC's WR room.. which couldn't catch a cold all year, played great against us.. and pretty much everyone in the postseason.  Conversely, we had to rely on Sherfield due to injury (Beane to blame for WR issues) and he clearly did not step up to the moment.  And Diggs.. supposed to be our guy to offset Kelce.  And he gets clamped, fumbles, drops passes.  Playoff non-factor in big games year in/year out.   

 

And alright, those two are gone.  Who's our Jones?  Maybe Oliver?... Oliver dominated the Steelers in the WC Game, but then got owned by KC.  

 

What's it going to take to get people to elevate with Josh Allen when it matters?

 

I blame a certain Instagam “influencer” for having an unannounced yard sale the evening before the game.  Nobody I’ve seen post here has the other piece of that episode, and it is bonkers.  

[BigDingus]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

My own rule is that major trade ups in the first round are prudent only for a QB - no other position is worth the draft capital it costs.   

 

I agree, unless we're talking a small trade up just a handful of places. 

 

But definitely not worth the cost to jump from the end of the Draft all the way up into the top 10.

 

The more I read about how the draft pick value chart came to be, the more broken it seems. It was meant as a snapshot reflecting trades up until that point. But despite how much has changed, teams strated treating it as gospel.

 

This makes things so much more lopsided in favor of teams that trade back than those trading up. If it's for a QB, it's at least understandable. 

[dave mcbride]

7 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Yeah all good dude...but the college resume stuff isn't a great counter point as the first round draft history is littered with the corpses of stud college players at big schools who flamed out in the NFL.  

 

Hey, thats the beauty of the draft, lots of opinions and no facts (facts being NFL on field experience)...just hopes and dreams for all.  Gonna be a fun night, this is one of the more exciting and interesting overall drafts in a while.  Enjoy bud

Yup, I agree that is one of the more interesting ones in a while. I think that's the because the Bills are at a true inflection point, moving from phase one of the Josh Allen Bills to phase two of the Josh Allen Bills (and I think there will be three phases in the end). All elite franchise QBs who stick around get basically an entirely new team every 6-7 years. Just look at Brady/Pats, Roethlisberger/Steelers, Rogers/Packers, etc. Mahomes still has Kelce but not for much longer, and even there it's basically an entirely new group outside of Kelce. Anyway, the Bills have to nail this draft AND the post-June 1 FA landscape. I have a sneaking suspicion based on no evidence that they have a deal in place with Justin Simmons, who bizarrely hasn't been signed yet. Something is up with that. He's a really good player - second team all pro four out of the past five years! Maybe the fact that he's 30 worries teams, but he's too good to be sitting there.

Edited April 25 by dave mcbride

[SCBills]

2 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

I was against it initially because I think we need a larger human who can break a tackle or two and punish teams who want to lay back in cover 2 or cover 3 on us.  But I’ve come around on the idea in the last couple of weeks.  I’d still like to see us come out of this with a bigger body at the position, but if the FO decides it’s Worthy, I won’t get on the internet and complain anonymously because they’ve earned the benefit of the doubt. 

 

Xavier Worthy at 28 and Javon Baker on Day 2 would completely revamp our WR room.  

 

Will we double dip?   Doubt it, but we'd have a YAC monster in the slot with Samuel, inside/outside flex with Shakir, speed outside in Worthy and a big body outside recevier in Baker.

 

Locked up for:

 

2 years Shakir

3 years Samuel

4 years Baker

5 years Worthy

[FireChans]

9 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Agree, but Worthy size limits his role at the next level IMHO.  Guys like Hill and Tank Dell play bigger than their size, Worthy doesn't and the lack of strength I think is going to limit his ability at the next level.  And guys like Tank are more the exception than the rule on top of that.  For a team like say Dallas, I can see him being a great addition potentially opposite Lamb, on turf, etc.  But for a team looking for a WR1...I don't think he is that dude.

Meh, if folks thought Hill and Dell were gonna play bigger than their size and be what they are today, they would’ve been picked much higher.

 

That’s the risk.

[longtimebillsfan]

10 minutes ago, london_bills said:

I always think of Marquise Goodwin when is see Worthy 

I had the exact same thought.

[wppete]

10 minutes ago, nedboy7 said:

I have a new idea.  I want BT and XL both. 

This would be a home run! Cmon Beane make it happen! 

[boyst]

16 minutes ago, Einstein said:

Chris Trappaso (CBS) made a good point on WGR last night.

 

When you're picking 28th and lower every year, a 1st round pick is really a 2nd round pick. In most draft years, there are only about 20-25 first round graded players. 

So if you're a team like the Bills, who is consistently picking late 20's in the first round, trading a 1st round pick and a 2nd round pick is similar to trading 2 second round picks.

polian has said similar. he is amazing to listen to basically saying that no one knows shiz.

 

but a good story he recently retold was drafting one year he wanted to move up with a 4th from next year to get into the 5th this year. the guy they identified was someone who has talent and was graded above the value that he was at on their draft board. he had to convince the orginzation that a 5th round pick this year is more important than a 4th round pick next year because you get that player now and don't wait a year. that when you have talent you think is worth the grade giving up potential next year is not as important to have a player on the team now.

 

that player was robert matthis.

 

he said it does not always work out but looking at next years draft is not the same as looking at this years draft. he doesn't like the jimmy johnson board. drafts are not equal. ever.

[jahnyc]

I think selecting Worthy at 28 would be reasonable value if he is available, but I am not seeing anything that suggests that he is or will become a true #1 WR, which, if true, means we would still need to fill that role.