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

[Mat68]

54 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said:

$4.5 million for a Chiefs cast off? Beane is not nearly as good of a GM as many give him credit for.

Buffalo paying 1/3 the price for the role he played in KC? Bad how?  Kc paid him to be there wr 1 or 2.  Buffalo is paying him to be wr 4 or 5

[SoCal Deek]

1 minute ago, Warriorspikes51 said:

 

Knox is a proven reliable target in the red-zone and shows up in the post season 

He is? He does? If you say so. 

[Process]

58 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said:

$4.5 million for a Chiefs cast off? Beane is not nearly as good of a GM as many give him credit for.

So you're predicting that MVS will have at least 55 catches 750 yards and 7 TDs? Love the optimism.

[TheyCallMeAndy]

I’d guess the groupings are

 

Samuel

Shakir

Coleman 

Hollis

 

Quez

MVS

Hamler 

Isabella

Claypool

 

Shorter

Last years UDFAs

This years UDFAs

[Buffalo_Stampede]

I’m going to sympathize with the WR train people for a moment. It was a horrible offseason for these guys. We should all pour one for them tonight.
 

[transient]

2 hours ago, muppy said:

well I was stating my intention and the thought is now out there.  We all would love to have that production  🙂

 

[SWATeam]

8 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

He is? He does? If you say so. 

Not too hard to check the stats.  Last year was a down year playing through the wrist injury, but the prior two seasons Dawson had 15 regular season TDs.  And he has 6 postseason TD's in 10 games.

[GoBills808]

3 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

I’m going to sympathize with the WR train people for a moment. It was a horrible offseason for these guys. We should all pour one for them tonight.
 

As opposed to the guys who...don't want good wideouts I guess? So congrats?

[Logic]

47 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Well there in lies the disconnect or disagreement per se.  You are "sold" that Coleman isn't capable of being a WR1.  And while there is nothing wrong with you having that opinion of an unproven player, I think you are not leaving yourself room to be proven wrong either.  As much sold you are that he is nothing more than a WR2, there are others sold he can be an elite WR1.  

 

I get it though, everyone has takes or opinions this time of year, and nothing wrong with that.  But, I would recommend at least leaving room for the concept that Coleman may just be the Alpha you say you would be excited about this group if we had.  He was definitely drafted by guys who scouted him beyond just a highlight tape at FSU to be the Alpha.  But hey, I am not saying you are wrong for your opinion or concerns either, I just think its always, 100% of the time, a mistake to conclusively decide on a rookies future before they have ever stepped on the field.  How many people had St. Brown pegged to be who he is on draft night?  Nobody was talking about Davante Adams, Cooper Kupp, etc etc on the nights they were drafted to be elite top 5 players at points in their careers.  Mr. Irrelevant just started in the Super Bowl and was an MVP candidate in his first full year starting, also only his 2nd year in the league.  

 

The best talent doesn't normally have all the best measurables, that has been proven time in and time again over and over throughout NFL history.  People (saying in general, not sure what your main beef specifically is with him) wanting to write off or significantly cap Coleman's potential because they don't love really one main measurable (his 40 time being the most talked about negative and then translating that to he won't get open) is incredibly premature.  I am all for doubt, concerns, questions, etc...its the conclusive mindset that he "can't" be something before he has stepped on the field that I will never understand...same goes for anyone who conclusively decided he will be a stud as that is just as premature too.  

 

Lastly...this whole statement I bolded above is wild to me, and honestly, its a "fools gold" type answer, meaning it leads to a false positive answer.  First off, ranking the WR group is an absolutely meaningless exercise and really has no realistic way to predictive of on field results.  No disrespect, but this notion that the only way to rank or build a WR group is on sheer talent is not at all accurate.  I get the mindset, but it leads to a false predictive conclusion of expected results.  A bottom tier WR group is currently the back to back SB champions.  In all 7 of Brady's SB wins he had a mediocre or bottom tier group of WR's and the ones he lost he had his best set of WR's in his career.  All kinds of teams besides Chiefs and Patriots had mediocre to bad WR groups who won the SB even in the passing era of the NFL like Philly, Seattle, Ravens, Giants, etc.  

 

What makes a group good or not is not the individual accolades, its the fit within the team, the offense, as a core, etc.  Not many teams who won the SB in the past 20 years had a truly dominant Alpha WR.  Its not about having a WR that puts up over 1500 yards...in fact, go check the NFL SB winners and count how many teams had that kind of WR on their roster when they won the SB.  

 

You want to win in the postseason then you better win in the trenches and you better move the chains.  Its not rocket science, and there are many ways to move the chains.  Some do it with a dominant run game...some do it with spreading the ball around with a balanced attack...some do it with an all out air attack to an Alpha WR.  You know which of those happens more?  The teams who SPREAD the ball around with a balanced offense.  Go count how many SB winners won in an all out air attack to a Alpha WR.  Go count how many SB winners won in an all out ground attack.  And then go and look at the box score of the teams who had a balanced offense where they spread the ball around, were able to run the ball, and kept the chains moving controlling the clock and scoring points.  Its overwhelmingly that category.  

 

So while I get until we see the product on the field there is warranted doubt, concerns, questions, etc...this whole we are "doomed" mentailty doesn't actually add up to SB championship results.  We have literally have the #1 WR in efficiency and catch rate from 2023 just now coming into his own, we have the 2nd leading TE in efficiency and catch rate as a rookie in Kincaid, we just added a 4.3 guy in Samuel who has never had a real QB and had his best seasons under Brady, and we have a promising rookie how at the very least is a MUCH NEEDED redzone TD machine.  And thats with arguably the 2nd best QB in the league, and some other quality depth behind them and a run game that was quite good last year and might be even better this year.  

 

Meanwhile, the best WR's of the last 20 years mostly are without a SB ring.  None for Adams, Hopkins, Megatron, Julio, Jefferson, Chase, Diggs, etc, etc.  Would it be great to also have a WR like one of those guys...sure...but history has shown its not even remotely close to "necessary", especially to the degree some of you have bene making it out to be.

 

I don't say all this to smite you, I say all this to maybe help talk you off your ledge abit because you have been abnormally angry and over the top about this subject for awhile.  And I think its fair to be concerned until we see what happens, but there is also more possibility and more hope here than you realize.  

 

Personally...I think Josh Allen is about to have his best career season yet.  And there is no one who will be running out there on that field the DC can ignore, including Cook and Davis out of the back field.   

Thanks for the post. I truly appreciate your perspective and your taking the time to try to instill some optimism in me.

As to the things I bolded:

1.) I don't think ranking WR corps (on paper, which is all anyone can really do at this time of year) is a meaningless exercise. I think there is value in sizing up different areas of a team's roster and weighing them against other team's personnel, to see how your team may stack up against others or what kind of attention your GM is or isn't paying to certain areas of a roster at a given moment. I wonder if your hesitance to participate in this exercise is indicative of the fact that you, like me, would fail to be able to honestly rate them much higher than "bottom third".

2.) As HappyDays pointed out above, pretty much every Super Bowl participant going back multiple years has had a dominant #1 pass catcher. Sure, in the Chiefs' case, it's been the tight end. And yes, the Bills have a young one who looks like he COULD become elite. But he's not there yet, and building the roster around him as if he already is doesn't seem like the soundest strategy to me. Hope is not a plan.

3.) I will admit to adamantly voicing my displeasure with the way Beane has gone about building the WR corps this year. But if my disapproval has been "over the top", then I would argue that those defending the team have at times been just as over the top in their delivery. I think the offense's success this season will depend on a lot of "hoped for" things coming to fruition. We HOPE Shakir breaks out. We HOPE Samuel has a career best season. We HOPE Coleman hits the ground running. We HOPE Kincaid proves to be a Kelce level player. We HOPE Claypool or MVS or Hamler step up. We HOPE Brady proves to be a good OC now that he has the gig full time. IF all of those things come true, then we'll have a good offense. But hoping/expecting that many things to happen seems just as over the top as me fearing that they won't. If I have any anger at all, it's because I have the gnawing feeling that my favorite team is failing to optimally set its franchise QB up for success offensively, and that that failure is starting to become an ongoing pattern. 

4.) While no DC "ignores" anyone in the NFL, I only see one guy on the Bills' roster who might command some special attention, and that's Kincaid. None of the Bills' WRs are guys that opposing DCs are circling in red pen or having extra meetings about.

Again, I appreciate your response. I respect your position. I understand and accept that others are more optimistic about this plan working out than I am, and I understand and accept that my pessimism on the matter is a departure from my usual rosy outlook on things. I'm sticking to what my eyes and my gut tell me. I hope -- I really, truly, sincerely hope -- that I'm wrong and you're right. I will happily come back here at the end of the 2024 season if the Bills are a fantastic passing offense and my fears prove unfounded, and tell everyone how wrong wrong wrong I was. You can hold me to that. And I hope that I can hold you to the same if the inverse happens, and the Bills are toothless in the passing game. 

[SoCal Deek]

8 minutes ago, SWATeam said:

Not too hard to check the stats.  Last year was a down year playing through the wrist injury, but the prior two seasons Dawson had 15 regular season TDs.  And he has 6 postseason TD's in 10 games.

And his Team management thought so highly of him that they drafted his replacement with a First Round pick and just asked him to take a pay cut. 

[NeverOutNick]

31 minutes ago, Dillenger4 said:

MVS will light it up with Josh.

Coleman - we are ALL gonna love him.

Samuel - underrated bigtime.

RayRay - pounder baby!

Cook - nuff said.

Shakir - excellent depth.

Kincaid - Nuff said.

Hamler - now this is the x spot. If he or Claypool rise - look out.

Knox - blocker!

 

Starters: MVS! Coleman, Shakir, Samuel, Kincaid, Knox, Cook, RayRay, Ty J, x spot. Pretty sweet.

Now if the D stays healthy look the F out!!! This team will win the SB.

 

Depth. Pounders. Tough. Win. Go BILLS!

I think you are underselling Shakir. I have a feeling he’ll be our best actual WR this year. He’s the closest thing to Nakua we’ve got and gets better every year 

[SWATeam]

2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

And his Team management thought so highly of him that they drafted his replacement with a First Round pick and just asked him to take a pay cut. 

Knox is still the highest paid skill position player on the team.

 

Kincaid is not his replacement, they want to play two TE's

[nedboy7]

Shakir is depth now? 
And we are gonna miss Gabe and Digg’s production?  
this place is bat ***** crazy. 
go back to last season and read some threads. 

[somnus00]

This is the new reality for teams paying their QB franchise money. You have a couple of young talented guys playing on a rookie deal (Shakir, Coleman). Some mid-tier free agents you hope will outplay their contract (Samuel, Hollins, MVS), and you take a few shots on guys with elite measurables and hope your coaches strike gold (Claypool, Hamler, Isabella).

 

How many teams, paying franchise QB  money, have elite WR rooms?

Edited May 14 by somnus00

[SoCal Deek]

4 minutes ago, SWATeam said:

Knox is still the highest paid skill position player on the team.

 

Kincaid is not his replacement, they want to play two TE's

But you have to agree it’s pretty unusual for your ‘highest paid skill position player’ to be a blocking TE…..no? 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

13 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

As opposed to the guys who...don't want good wideouts I guess? So congrats?

We all want good wideouts. I just find it fascinating that the Bills added so many WR’s Bills fans disliked, and while doing so they traded away Diggs.

 

 

[2003Contenders]

Ironic that we have a GM named B. Beane, because it looks like our GM, Brandon, appears to be taking a page out of the GM of the Oakland A's Billy "Moneyball" Beane from years past. Given the cap constraints that we find ourselves in this year, that makes sense.

 

Rather than looking at a conventional WR1, WR2, etc., Beane is looking at the totality of the receiving corps which coupled with an elite QB, he believes can maintain the overall production from the team last year that did ostensibly have a "WR1" in Diggs.

 

It is true that we are losing our top 2 receivers from last season in Diggs and Davis who accounted for 152 catches, 1929 yards and 15 TDs. But if we take a step back and look at the final 7 games of the season, when Brady was calling the offense (and the team went 6-1 with just the one heartbreaking loss to Philly), Diggs/Davis combined for just 46 catches, 571 yards and 3 TDs. Worse, Diggs was disparagingly unproductive with the receptions he did have, averaging less than 10 yards per catch, 315 yards on 34 receptions and just 1 TD. Shakir was more productive than either of them over that span, accounting for 363 yards (Davis had 256). 

 

Meanwhile, after our top 3 in Diggs/Davis/Shakir, there was very little production from any other WR. Sherfield and Harty COMBINED for 26 receptions, 236 yards and 2 TDs. Getting more production from our new WR4 and WR5 could help to cushion the blow of losing Diggs and Davis. So would hopefully seeing an uptick in Shakir's production.

 

I am not suggesting that Shakir is capable of fully replacing Diggs just because he was more productive later in the season (and especially in the playoffs) than Diggs. But assuming Shakir is a more primary target in the 2024 offense, it stands to reason that he can increase his total 2024 output of 39 receptions for 611 yards and 2 TDs substantially. He wasn't far behind Davis last year in terms of catches (45-to-39) and yards (746-to-611), so I do not think it is unreasonable to project, say, 52 receptions for 800 yards for Shakir. Replacing Davis's TD output may not be as easy -- but I think 4-5 TDs for Shakir is a reasonable, conservative expectation.  I can also see similar numbers for Samuels (he had 62 receptions and 4 TDs last season with garbage at QB) and the rookie Coleman, who I can see being a TD-machine in this offense and matching (or even exceeding) Davis' TD output. 

 

Getting back to the Bills' dismal WR4 and WR5 production in 2023, coming off an admittedly underwhelming season, MVS still out-produced Sherfield/Harty COMBINED with  315 yards. He's just a year removed from posting 687 yards and posted 690 back in 2020. That's to say that he alone could make up for some of the lost WR production -- and help to provide some added insurance in the event that Coleman has a rookie learning curve to overcome. Whomever from Hollins/Cephus/Claypool/Hamler/Shorter makes the team should also pick up some of that production as well.

 

Of course, none of this even accounts for the expected involvement (and improvement) from the TEs and RBs in the passing game. Or that Brady's offense may be less WR-centric and more run-oriented and make more use of 12-personnel and TE involvement.

 

Long story short, if we replace from 2023:

 

Diggs     107 rec 1183 yards 8 TD

Davis       45 rec  746 yards 7 TD

Shakir      39 rec  611 yards 2 TD

Harty        15 rec  150 yards 1 TD

Sherfield  11 rec    86 yards 1 TD

------------------------------------
Total      217 rec  2776 yards 19 TD

 

With something like for 2024:

 

Shakir     52 rec  800 yards  5 TD

Samuel   65 rec  770 yards   4 TD

Coleman 51 rec  750 yards   8  TD

MVS       31 rec  480 yards    2 TD

Hollins*  16 rec  200 yards   1 TD

------------------------------------

Total      215 rec  3000 yards  20 TD

 

In this scenario (which I don't think is unreasonable), we still get better production from the top 5 WRs even if we don't have a single WR with 100+ receptions and 1000+ yards.

Edited May 14 by 2003Contenders

[SWATeam]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

But you have to agree it’s pretty unusual for your ‘highest paid skill position player’ to be a blocking TE…..no? 

Lee Smith is a blocking TE.

 

While Knox hasn't really broke out like I thought he would, he offers a lot more than that.  He is very athletic.  I think he and Kincaid will be a very nice tandem.   

[Chaos]

1 minute ago, 2003Contenders said:

Ironic that we have a GM named B. Beane, because it looks like our GM, Brandon, appears to be taking a page out of the GM of the Oakland A's Billy "Moneyball" Beane from years past. Given the cap constraints that we find ourselves in this year, that makes sense.

 

Rather than looking at a conventional WR1, WR2, etc., Beane is looking at the totality of the receiving corps which coupled with an elite QB, he believes can maintain the overall production from the team last year that did ostensibly have a "WR1" in Diggs.

 

It is true that we are losing our top 2 receivers from last season in Diggs and Davis who accounted for 152 catches, 1929 yards and 15 TDs. But if we take a step back and look at the final 7 games of the season, when Brady was calling the offense (and the team went 6-1 with just the one heartbreaking loss to Philly), Diggs/Davis combined for just 46 catches, 571 yards and 3 TDs. Worse, Diggs was disparagingly unproductive with the receptions he did have, averaging less than 10 yards per catch, 315 yards on 34 receptions and just 1 TD. Shakir was more productive than either of them over that span, accounting for 363 yards (Davis had 256). 

 

Meanwhile, after our top 3 in Diggs/Davis/Shakir, there was very little production from any other WR. Sherfield and Harty COMBINED for 26 receptions, 236 yards and 2 TDs. Getting more production from our new WR4 and WR5 could help to cushion the blow of losing Diggs and Davis. So would hopefully seeing an uptick in Shakir's production.

 

I am not suggesting that Shakir is capable of fully replacing Diggs just because he was more productive later in the season (and especially in the playoffs) than Diggs. But assuming Shakir is a more primary target in the 2024 offense, it stands to reason that he can increase his total 2024 output of 39 receptions for 611 yards and 2 TDs substantially. He wasn't far behind Davis last year in terms of catches (45-to-39) and yards (746-to-611), so I do not think it is unreasonable to project, say, 52 receptions for 800 yards for Shakir. Replacing Davis's TD output may not be as easy -- but I think 4-5 TDs for Shakir is a reasonable, conservative expectation.  I can also see similar numbers for Samuels (he had 62 receptions and 4 TDs last season with garbage at QB) and the rookie Coleman, who I can see being a TD-machine in this offense and matching (or even exceeding) Davis' TD output. 

 

Getting back to the Bills' dismal WR4 and WR5 production in 2023, coming off an admittedly underwhelming season, MVS still out-produced Sherfield/Harty COMBINED with  315 yards. He's just a year removed from posting 687 yards and posted 690 back in 2020. That's to say that he alone could make up for some of the lost WR production -- and help to provide some added insurance in the event that Coleman has a rookie learning curve to overcome. Whomever from Hollins/Cephus/Claypool/Hamler/Shorter makes the team should also pick up some of that production as well.

 

Of course, none of this even accounts for the expected involvement (and improvement) from the TEs and RBs in the passing game.

 

Long story short, if we replace from 2023:

 

Diggs     107 rec 1183 yards 8 TD

Davis       45 rec  746 yards 7 TD

Shakir      39 rec  611 yards 2 TD

Harty        15 rec  150 yards 1 TD

Sherfield  11 rec    86 yards 1 TD

------------------------------------
Total      217 rec  2776 yards 19 TD

 

With something like for 2024:

 

Shakir     52 rec  800 yards  5 TD

Samuel   65 rec  770 yards   4 TD

Coleman 51 rec  750 yards   8  TD

MVS       31 rec  480 yards    2 TD

Hollins*  16 rec  200 yards   1 TD

------------------------------------

Total      215 rec  3000 yards  20 TD

 

In this scenario (which I don't think is unreasonable), we still get better production from the top 5 WRs even if we don't have a single WR with 100+ receptions and 1000+ yards.

Its plausible for Kincaid to have 100 catches and 1000 yards. 

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, SWATeam said:

Lee Smith is a blocking TE.

 

While Knox hasn't really broke out like I thought he would, he offers a lot more than that.  He is very athletic.  I think he and Kincaid will be a very nice tandem.   

I hope you’re right. I’m really not anti-Knox. But in a salary cap driven league I find it hard to believe he’s not seen as a luxury the Bills can’t afford. And for Knox himself, I can’t imagine he’s not thinking he’d get more opportunities befitting his skillset elsewhere.