Big Badazz Beane on Pat McAfee today

[PromoTheRobot]

55 minutes ago, TheWeatherMan said:

It seems like a good idea, until you realize it hasn’t worked for 7 straight years.  

 

95 wins? 5 AFC East titles? 6 straight playoff appearances? What a cluster****, am I right? 🙄 You can't win a Super Bowl unless you get this close. 

[Malazan]

3 hours ago, Luka said:

I keep hearing we needed to draft a wide receiver but I've yet to hear a single name that we missed out on or passed on that would even move the needle in this offense.

 

That's how you know it wasn't a deep class at wide receiver, no real big names. 

 

That's not how this works. We wait until we see some WR who was drafted in the 4th or 5th has a good season then we come back and say "We told you so!". You can't honestly expect us to tell who before because then we will be wrong and look like idiots.

Edited April 30 by Malazan

[Big Blitz]

I’d like to draft a “stud” WR to.  Not a mid one.  
 

The WGR guys are arguing about getting one in the 3rd or 4th round this year….maybe they’d have said round 2.  
 

From 2023 - a class that was ok - but better then 2025. 
 

Who on this list from round 3-7 (other then Nucua who everyone passed on bc he’s got injury history) would we want?  Who we losing sleep over missing out on??

 

 

Beane is right.  You want to NEAR guarantee yourself an ELITE WR you need to be picking early in the draft, sacrifice tons of capital to move up, or spend and take on salary - which still likely would require a trade.  
 

Seeing this list, and considering how weak the WR class is and the needs on D - pretty much every position - the approach for 2025 was acceptable.  
 

This 2023 draft is just a reference to give you an idea of the quality of WR typically available in rounds 3-7.  Go back and look at the recent drafts rounds 3-7 and you’ll see similar or worse.  
 

FYI in this draft the Packers also drafted Jayden Reed.  They took 3 WRs.  
 

This year they took another WR in round 1. 
 

Passing up on Starks or a CB which they definitely need.  
 

Just dumb.  

Edited April 30 by Big Blitz

[TheWeatherMan]

33 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

95 wins? 5 AFC East titles? 6 straight playoff appearances? What a cluster****, am I right? 🙄 You can't win a Super Bowl unless you get this close. 

All expected when you have the best QB in the NFL leading your team.  Regular season success has never been a gauge in determining greatness.  Being strategically dominated by the same team in the postseason for 4 of the past 5 seasons is not greatness. 

[Richard Noggin]

7 hours ago, JGMcD2 said:

 

Snap Counts for the Bills' 5th WR by Game:

• New York: Tyrell Shavers - 14%
  • 1 Target, 1 Catch, 69 Yards, 1 TD

 

 

Finally, someone with eyes that see. Shavers vs Virgil (vs Shenault vs Hamler) for WR5 in 2025 lol.

 

Draft WR and OL and RB in 2026 like an offensive mirror to 2025's defensive picks. 

[Ethan in Cleveland]

45 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

95 wins? 5 AFC East titles? 6 straight playoff appearances? What a cluster****, am I right? 🙄 You can't win a Super Bowl unless you get this close. 

Yah and if you change the name from McDermott to Schottenheimer or Reeves you would be saying a change needs to be made. The defense is why the Bills Gabe not been to a SuperBowl not the WR group. And that falls on McDermott.  Defend his success all you want, but at least Reeves and Levy made it to the big game. 

[ndirish1978]

4 hours ago, TheWeatherMan said:

We keep losing to the Chiefs because they have better coaches across the board.  It’s logical to say we score enough points to be able to beat the Chiefs, the offense isn’t the problem.  But when you have greatly prioritized defense the last 7 years with the same net result, maybe it’s time to try something different 

 

"Greatly prioritized" what a joke. Here's the prior 7 years in which we super duper prioritized our Defense and led to us losing in the playoffs. 

 

2024 - 5 of 10 picks went to the offense - Even

2023 - 4 of 6 picks went to offense - Offensive Draft

2022 - 3 of 7 picks to offense, 1 pick was a punter. 3 picks to defense = Even

2021 - 4 of 8 picks went to offense - Even

2020 - 4 of 7 picks went to offense, 1 pick was a kicker - Offensive draft

2019 - 4 of 8 picks went to offense - Even

2018 - 4 of 8 picks went to offense, we traded up 2x to get Allen - Even

 

So last 7 years we have had 5 even drafts and 2 offensive ones. Don't let the facts get in the way of a good irrational whining session though. Great example of the people voicing your argument, it's all off "vibes." You FEEL something is real, so you crack your knuckles and type your little heart out making ridiculous statements without taking 2 seconds to think "maybe I should check to see if I'm right."

 

Edited April 30 by ndirish1978

[TheWeatherMan]

35 minutes ago, ndirish1978 said:

 

"Greatly prioritized" what a joke. Here's the prior 7 years in which we super duper prioritized our Defense and led to us losing in the playoffs. 

 

2024 - 5 of 10 picks went to the offense - Even

2023 - 4 of 6 picks went to offense - Offensive Draft

2022 - 3 of 7 picks to offense, 1 pick was a punter. 3 picks to defense = Even

2021 - 4 of 8 picks went to offense - Even

2020 - 4 of 7 picks went to offense, 1 pick was a kicker - Offensive draft

2019 - 4 of 8 picks went to offense - Even

2018 - 4 of 8 picks went to offense, we traded up 2x to get Allen - Even

 

So last 7 years we have had 5 even drafts and 2 offensive ones. Don't let the facts get in the way of a good irrational whining session though. Great example of the people voicing your argument, it's all off "vibes." You FEEL something is real, so you crack your knuckles and type your little heart out making ridiculous statements without taking 2 seconds to think "maybe I should check to see if I'm right."

 

👏🏿 Bravo, that’s a nice and thorough review of FA cap space and draft capital spent on offense vs defense.  The focus on the # of picks spent overall as the delineating factor was well thought out.  
 

I’m wrong, we’ve obviously prioritized offense over defense the last 7 years because the # of picks spent on offense equal that of the defense…you win buddy. 😂 

[ndirish1978]

11 minutes ago, TheWeatherMan said:

👏🏿 Bravo, that’s a nice and thorough review of FA cap space and draft capital spent on offense vs defense.  The focus on the # of picks spent overall as the delineating factor was well thought out.  
 

I’m wrong, we’ve obviously prioritized offense over defense the last 7 years because the # of picks spent on offense equal that of the defense…you win buddy. 😂 

 

Glad to see you admit you're ridiculous. Thanks! I agree. 

[TheWeatherMan]

Just now, ndirish1978 said:

 

Glad to see you admit you're ridiculous. Thanks! I agree. 

Yes, I’m looking forward to more of your well thought out and thorough posts based on super in depth research 😂 

[BobbyC81]

9 hours ago, LEBills said:

Our 5th WR played about 34% of offensive snaps last year (MVS+Coop, Shakir, Mack, Keon and Samuel were all over 34%). Only 2 DTs, 2 DEs, and 3 CBs took more snaps. Though Smoot did take slightly more than that percentage in the games he was healthy.

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/buf/2024-snap-counts.htm

Well, maybe a higher drafted receiver would be better than the 5th WR.

 

Another point: many of us talk about needing a WR that can go deep.   In recent years, despite Josh’s strong arm, his deep passes are usually underthrown or overthrown.  So, is he not that good at it?  You’d think they’d practice it enough.  I recall a few each for J. Brown and Diggs over the years but not that many.

[QCity]

1 hour ago, ndirish1978 said:

 

"Greatly prioritized" what a joke. Here's the prior 7 years in which we super duper prioritized our Defense and led to us losing in the playoffs. 

 

2024 - 5 of 10 picks went to the offense - Even

2023 - 4 of 6 picks went to offense - Offensive Draft

2022 - 3 of 7 picks to offense, 1 pick was a punter. 3 picks to defense = Even

2021 - 4 of 8 picks went to offense - Even

2020 - 4 of 7 picks went to offense, 1 pick was a kicker - Offensive draft

2019 - 4 of 8 picks went to offense - Even

2018 - 4 of 8 picks went to offense, we traded up 2x to get Allen - Even

 

So last 7 years we have had 5 even drafts and 2 offensive ones. Don't let the facts get in the way of a good irrational whining session though. Great example of the people voicing your argument, it's all off "vibes." You FEEL something is real, so you crack your knuckles and type your little heart out making ridiculous statements without taking 2 seconds to think "maybe I should check to see if I'm right."

 

 

So if our first 4 picks are defensive players, then we take 4 offensive players in rounds 5-7 it's "even?" Maybe you should have taken 2 seconds here.

[ndirish1978]

1 hour ago, BobbyC81 said:

Well, maybe a higher drafted receiver would be better than the 5th WR.

 

Another point: many of us talk about needing a WR that can go deep.   In recent years, despite Josh’s strong arm, his deep passes are usually underthrown or overthrown.  So, is he not that good at it?  You’d think they’d practice it enough.  I recall a few each for J. Brown and Diggs over the years but not that many.

 

The bolded is true, we would do better at WR5 if we drafted a receiver higher in the draft. The issue for those of us who are ok with not drafting a receiver in the top 4 rounds this year is that you would be replacing DE3 or DT3 with that pick (yes, I don't count Daquan because I think he's out). Our D-line is bad. I believe the resources were better spent addressing DT in the 2nd and 4th and a DE in the 3rd. You have the right to disagree, it just gets tiresome when a portion of the board runs around arguing that we should have taken a WR early, which is an opinion, like it's a fact that everyone who disagrees with is wrong.  

[Joe Marino]

So basically, Shedeur is a half ass dummy. Got it!

[SoMAn]

13 hours ago, RobbRiddick said:

I like Beane a lot and see his point but when he says "people were saying this last offseason" he fails to remember he went out and panic traded for Cooper when he realised the WR room needed help

Coleman was still learning and was playing with an injured hand.   

The Bills were exceeding expectations in what many believed would be a ‘transition year’.  When the experienced pro bowl receiver became available at a reasonable price, Beane and Co. probably thought, ‘let’s go for it. We’re in the thick of it for a playoff spot, and maybe even the top seed.’ 
It was a gamble. The return investment was minimal, but it was a worthwhile risk. They don’t call Beane ‘big balls’ for nothing. 

[machine gun kelly]

This was a weak WR draft, but their mistake was not acquiring Metcalf.  Do you really think Metcalf wanted a No name QB, over the best QB in the NFL.  Do you think he wants a melodramatic over the hills QB like Rodgers if he even signs there.

[JGMcD2]

4 minutes ago, machine gun kelly said:

This was a weak WR draft, but their mistake was not acquiring Metcalf.  Do you really think Metcalf wanted a No name QB, over the best QB in the NFL.  Do you think he wants a melodramatic over the hills QB like Rodgers if he even signs there.

No, he wanted the most money. That was proven when he went to Pittsburgh after saying he only wanted warm weather cities. 

[yall]

13 hours ago, Einstein said:

You must be using a different metric for "top 50". 

For example, you might be using top-50 in receptions. Which is not a good idea, because, for example, an injured top 10 receiver would not be in this list.

My suggestion? Find a decent list of the top 50 WR's in the NFL. For example, if you want a large survey of the top 50 WR's, here is one. Over 250,000 NFL fans voted in this survey, so the results are likely relevant as it has a large sample set.

In this survey of a quarter million NFL fans, a little more than a handful of the top 50 WR's were taken round 4 or later.

Totally agree with that, I let chatGPT create the list so I'm unsure what metrics were used, but I also felt it passed the sniff test/reasonability check It was based upon who was included.

 

[JGMcD2]

10 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Move the needle immediately, for the Bills it was just Golden really and he went right at the point I'd have started to consider it value to go up for him.

 

I think that slightly misses the point though. Beane and some people siding with him want to make out that those talking about receiver were desperate for one early. That is by and large not true. It is certainly not true of me - in the Landon Jackson thread I was very clear and receiver at any of those spots days 1 and 2 over the guys we took was a reach. But by Beane's own admission when you get into day, and especially rounds 5 on you start attacking needs on the roster rather than simply saying BPA. He talked about that AT LENGTH in his pre draft presser. And when it came to those needs he valued a TE3, competition for Cam Lewis, another outside corner (although he did say Strong was BPA and that is believable he was 6th best on my board at that stage) and a developmental tackle over a developmental receiver. It's that bit that some of us are questioning and it is playing in a narrative that definitely exists over 8 years of drafts that relative to the league Brandon doesn't prioritise the position. 

Hancock has a legitimate shot to unseat Cam Lewis, who played over 50% of the Bills’ defensive snaps in 2024.

 

Hawes is viewed as a strong blocker - does that mean he takes over Alec Anderson’s role as the “6th offensive lineman”? If so, he’d be on the field for roughly 26% of offensive snaps, which is about 8% more than the average Bills 5th WR saw last season.

 

The Bills typically carry four outside corners out of camp. If Strong beats out Dane Jackson and Ja’Marcus Ingram, that alone might justify the pick.

 

Chase Lundt is probably a long shot to make the roster, likely competing with Ryan Van Demark for the final OL spot. That said, you’re high on him - did you prefer Horn, Mellott, Johnson, or White instead?

 

Here’s who we passed on to draft a TE3, a CB/S hybrid, another outside corner, and a developmental WR:

 

KeAndre Lambert-Smith (Trade-up required)

Tory Horton (Trade-up required)

LaJohntay Webster

Jimmy Horn

Tommy Mellott

Tez Johnson

Ricky White

 

The next WR drafted was Kaden Prather. To me, the gap between him and the group above feels negligible. 

 

Realistically, he has as good a chance as anyone to beat out Tyrell Shavers, Jalen Virgil, or KJ Hamler for the WR5 job - which translates to about 18% of offensive snaps per game. That role typically averages 1 target, 0.65 catches, and 7 yards per game. None of these names are pushing past Palmer, Shakir, Coleman, or Samuel.

[GunnerBill]

11 hours ago, JGMcD2 said:

 So why spend valuable draft capital on someone who might be your fifth receiver when they typically play 12 personnel or 6 OL? It’s a candid look at how they approached the board.

 

When instead it could go on your 3rd tight end, 10th OL or 7th DB...... That is the point here. Not that they should have forced a receiver pick early. But that when they get to the bit of the draft where they are attacking roster needs development receiver is always bottom of the list.