Jump to content

Marquez Valdes-Scantling meeting with the Bills (UPDATE: Signed)


Recommended Posts

Just now, Billl said:

shut up and take my money GIF by Product Hunt

 

Do it, Beane.


MVS outplayed Diggs in our Divisional Game, so that’s how I’m going to choose to think of him if we sign him. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brand J said:

That guy was dropping passes all year, even had a reporter asking him “whats wrong?” In the playoffs he made some tough catches. The WR needy Chiefs moved on, I don’t think we should pursue him.

Yeah, haven't we had enough dropped passes from wide receivers last season?

  • Disagree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Brand J said:

That guy was dropping passes all year, even had a reporter asking him “whats wrong?” In the playoffs he made some tough catches. The WR needy Chiefs moved on, I don’t think we should pursue him.

He was the Chiefs starter outside for most of his time there. They replaced him with Hollywood Brown. That’s a significant upgrade.

 

He’d be coming here as a depth player and insurance for our young WRs. There’s a big difference.

 

And he made plays for the Chiefs to win in the playoffs. Let’s say he replaces Trent Sherfield. Is that not an upgrade?

Edited by Buffalo_Stampede
  • Like (+1) 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SCBills said:


MVS outplayed Diggs in our Divisional Game, so that’s how I’m going to choose to think of him if we sign him. 

He does have a knack for making incredibly awkward looking but effective plays in the clutch.  I’ll give him that much.  He’s a very poor man’s Gabe Davis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FireChans said:

The Chiefs acquired two speedy WR’s to replace him. We acquired Keon Coleman.


He was too expensive for what he brought to their offense consistently. I think he’d be a good addition here if the price is right. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brand J said:

That guy was dropping passes all year, even had a reporter asking him “whats wrong?” In the playoffs he made some tough catches. The WR needy Chiefs moved on, I don’t think we should pursue him.

 

50.3% career catch%.  LOL  50.0% this past season.  

 

Funny, we boot Davis and some want an even worse WR re: drops and catch% and with no particularly consistent skillset.  

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PBF81 said:

 

50.3% career catch%.  LOL  50.0% this past season.  

 

Funny, we boot Davis and some want an even worse WR re: drops and catch% and with no particularly consistent skillset.  

 

 

And he leads the league in depth of target. Davis was also near the top. More difficult targets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PBF81 said:

 

50.3% career catch%.  LOL  50.0% this past season.  

 

Funny, we boot Davis and some want an even worse WR re: drops and catch% and with no particularly consistent skillset.  

 

 

Compare the contracts.  

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SydneyBillsFan said:

I realise that we don't have much salary cap space but a Chiefs hand-me-down? No thanks.


Well we already got a hand me down from them in Edwards so what’s another. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LABILLBACKER said:

Catching the damn ball is all that matters. Who cares how far downfield he gets if he's only going to drop it.    

 

Hard pass

He doesn’t drop all of them.  He came up big for them en route to the Sb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Billl said:

He does have a knack for making incredibly awkward looking but effective plays in the clutch.  I’ll give him that much.  He’s a very poor man’s Gabe Davis.


I have noticed that about him. Hardly any clean catches even with well thrown balls. Like he has a hard time tracking it down. Can’t argue about his playoffs production though. Without him you guys wouldn’t have beaten Cincy in 2022. 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, NeverOutNick said:

I wouldn’t say he’s “better” than Cephus or Hamler. Cephus has more dependable hands but is not a vertical threat. Hamler is a big time vertical threat but is never healthy. At least MVS has had moments as a proven vertical threat. I’d be fine with him for a 1 year cheap prove it deal to compete with all the other never fighting for spots 4-6 on the WR depth chart 


Cephus's career best single season yardage is 349.

KJ Hamler's is 381.

MVS's is 687.

MVS has posted 3,155 yards and 16 TDs in his career.

Cephus and Hamler COMBINED have posted 1,188 yards and 7 TDs in their careers.

So if we're talking production over potential, then yes, I'd say MVS is better than Cephus and Hamler. If you want to argue that those two guys have untapped potential, I won't argue with you, but based on their careers to date, MVS has absolutely been the superior player.

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BarleyNY said:

Jeebus. You’re right. And that’s a rough realization to come to terms with. Shakir, Samuel, Coleman and the likes of MVS, Hollins, etc. Ouch. MVS could legit be WR3 if Coleman isn’t ready.


or I keep saying - heaven forbid Samuel rolls an ankle in a preseason game and misses September? Week 1 could get real thin real fast if Coleman is even slightly a project and either Shakir or Samuel miss any early reps 

23 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

50.3% career catch%.  LOL  50.0% this past season.  

 

Funny, we boot Davis and some want an even worse WR re: drops and catch% and with no particularly consistent skillset.  

 

 


for 10% of the cost and as wr4 instead of wr2

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...