Big Badazz Beane on Pat McAfee today

[GunnerBill]

13 minutes ago, gonzo1105 said:

 

I think with the last 5 guys on that list you could argue there isn’t a difference at all. I think there is a gap between the top 2 and Prather but not as big as people perceived before the process 

 

Yea basically this. I don't have a view on Prather actually I haven't watched any of him. I will at some point over the summer try and find some tape but as of now, no view. But I do think there is a gap between the top 2 who we would have had to trade up slightly for cost us one of the 5ths and Lundt and the guys on @JGMcD2's list below them.

 

I think @BillsVet actually summed up my frustration with receiver quite well when he said it just feels like there are some positions where Beane is always worrying about the pipeline - DL, DB, LB, OL, even running back. But it just feels like he is content to go year to year at receiver making tactical adds like Samuel and Palmer in FA rather than being a bit more strategic. The frustration isn't just that he didn't take one this draft. It has been building for four years when he has always seemed to find a reason to prioritise something else over keeping that pipeline of weapons for Josh well stocked (do you stock a pipeline? mixed metaphor maybe.... but you get the point )

[Chandler#81]

35 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

All of this kind of proves my point though, it comes down to what you prioritise. Would a developmental receiver, likely our WR5 in 2025, play fewer snaps as a rookie than Hancock if he wins that job off Cam Lewis and a TE3 who is a blocker? Yep. But is that what we are prioritising? Which guy has the easiest path to snaps in 2025? Why are we not looking at these rookies as potential four year investments? I'm really only talking about the trade up guys - Horton and Lambert - developmental speed receiver who can play outside and the Bills had for a 30 visit. To get either of them the trade up would have meant giving up one of the 5ths (either Hancock or Hawes) and Lundt to trade up. One way of looking at it is your way and saying who plays most snaps in 2025? My approach might be more if all six guys we are talking about here: Hancock, Hawes, Lundt, Strong, Horton and Lambert are starting level players by the end of their rookie contracts which ones cost the money to pay? It's the receivers, then Strong and Lundt (if he stays at tackle). So if I have a chance to take a shot on getting one of those at a discount rate who makes the most sense to get - it's the receivers. 

 

Add to that - how much better are the Bills if Hancock is 25% better as a DIME and DB utility piece than Cam? How much better are they if Hawes is on the field instead of Anderson? Whereas how much better are they if a Horton or Lambert does outplay expectations and by their second year are a legit piece of the offense? I think unquestionably the last of those makes the biggest % difference in the Bills as a team. 

 

I like Lundt and Strong and while I watched less of Hancock and very little of Hawes I understand the fit for them. In isolation they all make sense. It is the opportunity cost that makes less sense to me when you pass on a developmental guy who could potentially in future years be a receiver that makes plays for you. 

 

I think Beane takes the wrong message from Khalil Shakir. It shouldn't be "great he hit I don't need to worry about shooting for developmental receivers much for the next few years." It should, in my opinion, be "great, day 3 is a place where you find less well rounded receivers but guys with specific skillsets that you can then fuse together and make work with Josh Allen." 

We added 2 developmental WRs from the UDFA group and Drafted one AND  a TE while stocking up on D players in a D rich draft. WTH more does it take to convince some people?

[gonzo1105]

5 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

I really appreciate your input here - especially with @GunnerBill involved, I think this could lead to some really interesting discussion, given that you both build out draft boards each year.

 

Who else did you have available at TE, NB, CB, and OT that fits the Bills’ needs and could have been taken instead of Hawes, Hancock, Strong, and Lundt?

 

That should help illustrate the decision-making at each spot, particularly when compared to the idea of trading up for someone like Lambert-Smith or Horton.

Im not at my computer but for the Bills specifically I would have had Hawes, Fidone, and Bartholemew at TE, Hancock and Longerbeam were there at NB, CB I would have to look , and I didn’t expect them to take a tackle so I was surprised when they went there.
 

I will say though by the time Lundt went I was vouching for Tommy Mellott at WR so most of the play now WRs were already gone. To me they would have had to of taken one with the Hancock/Hawes pick and it wouldn’t have happened with Hancock because the Bills scouts , according to Beane, were pretty unanimous when it came to the Hancock selection. 
 

Really you have look at which WRs were left at the Hawes pick to determine was he more valuable than taking a developmental #5 WR who may play or be inactive 

[WideNine]

21 hours ago, TBBills Fan said:

Bingo

 

Also, I am pretty sure that it may not be particularly easy to find a field stretcher, with good hands and catch radius, who is unselfish - what I mean is that he can play in an offense that distributes the ball and balances pass with the run without throwing a sideline or social media tantrum, that will be a good locker room presence, that also has early round grades.

 

There is likely more to it than some seem to be suggesting than just take a WR with talent early.

 

 

Edited April 30 by WideNine

[Mat68]

21 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

So he has demonstrated he will make a move to fix the position if it needs it? He did it in October.  They did not like the wr class.  Many did not.  The big needs at dline and db were filled.  Why is this still be discussed.  If the team has a need Beane has shown he will go to great lengths to fix them.  

[HomeskillitMoorman]

1 minute ago, Mat68 said:

So he has demonstrated he will make a move to fix the position if it needs it? He did it in October.  They did not like the wr class.  Many did not.  The big needs at dline and db were filled.  Why is this still be discussed.  If the team has a need Beane has shown he will go to great lengths to fix them.  

 

He didn't fix it though. Cooper sucked. And if you don't think he sucked, obviously he and Josh weren't able to create a chemistry on the field for him to be more impactful during the season...which would illustrate that it's a tough fix mid-season. I don't see how he fixed it in October. 

[Mat68]

5 minutes ago, WideNine said:

 

Also, I am pretty sure that it may not be particularly easy to find a field stretcher, with good hands and catch radius, who is unselfish - what I mean is that he can play in an offense that distributes the ball and balances pass with the run without throwing a sideline or social media tantrum, that will be a good locker room presence, that also has early round grades.

 

There is likely more to it than some seem to be suggesting than just take a WR with talent early.

 

 

Said player doesnt block or play teams.  The 5th wr will have a roster spot and jersey for the 3 deep shots a game?  When in reality the explosive play comes when its a simple sail concept and Allen rolls out and finds someone for down the field outside of structure.  

[HappyDays]

5 hours ago, JGMcD2 said:

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.

 

Even in the context of immediate needs taking Tory Horton over Jordan Hancock makes sense. Cam Lewis is a better player than Tyrell Shavers or Laviska Shenault. We just gave him a 2 year contract last offseason, and now we're looking to replace him? But we're letting Shavers or Shenault end up on the roster? I don't understand that at all.

 

Deone Walker over Jalen Royals is still the move that I think has the most potential to haunt us, especially with KC taking Royals. You're lying to yourself if you're not at least a bit anxious about that outcome. All the arguments you're making about the Bills could have applied to the Chiefs too. Their WR room was Rice, Worthy, Brown, JuJu, plus their TEs Kelce and Gray. They could have left the room as is and let Justyn Ross compete with Tyquan Thornton for the #5 spot. Instead they gave Mahomes yet another young weapon to develop in the pipeline. They've added a WR with a 1st-4th round pick in each of the last four drafts. Personally I'd be looking to copy their formula, it seems to be working.

[Doc Brown]

42 minutes ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

I know what you're saying but I don't think it's as simple as that. 

I completely agree with you.  It's kind of like the MVP conversation in that Allen did more with less than Lamar but Lamar was phenomenal also with slightly better stats. When two QB's are that close the only thing you can really go by is head to head matchups when the pressure is the highest in the playoffs.  I think if we beat the Chiefs in the playoffs next year and win the Super Bowl I'd give the nod to Allen as the best QB in the league.  Also, with the 13 second game.  I don't care how soft are coverage was.  Mahomes had to execute two perfect plays to get them into field goal range and he did.

[HomeskillitMoorman]

8 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

I completely agree with you.  It's kind of like the MVP conversation in that Allen did more with less than Lamar but Lamar was phenomenal also with slightly better stats. When two QB's are that close the only thing you can really go by is head to head matchups when the pressure is the highest in the playoffs.  I think if we beat the Chiefs in the playoffs next year and win the Super Bowl I'd give the nod to Allen as the best QB in the league.  Also, with the 13 second game.  I don't care how soft are coverage was.  Mahomes had to execute two perfect plays to get them into field goal range and he did.

 

I agree overall. 

 

On the last part though...yes Mahomes had to execute those plays but I would still say it's highly unlikely that if Josh was put in that situation that the coverage would have been that soft and vanilla in that same scenario with 13 seconds. I'm not taking away from Mahomes when I say that because you don't control who you're going up against, and as I still think he should carry the mantle of best QB in the league right now...but rather that Josh doesn't get to go up against that...he actually most of the time in those big games has to go up against formidable defenses, coaching and scheme. 

Edited April 30 by HomeskillitMoorman

[Mat68]

1 minute ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

 

He didn't fix it though. Cooper sucked. And if you don't think he sucked, obviously he and Josh weren't able to create a chemistry on the field for him to be more impactful during the season...which would illustrate that it's a tough fix mid-season. I don't see how he fixed it in October. 

He was not good.  After the trade the offense was.  Palmer is an upgrade over Cooper and Hollins.  My point Beane has no problem being aggressive.  He didnt trade up for Thomas.  Philly, Miami, LAR and Pittsburgh all got value at positions of need.  You cant just trade up because you want to. Need someone who wants to move back.  Pretty obvious they missed on their top players and why they moved backed.  This year everyone expected DE, DT,CB in some order.  Complaining about a 4th rd wr not drafted is asinine.  Royals or Horton would have a tough time cracking the top 4 barring injury.  Moore or another similar wr offers the 25 Bills the same value maybe more.  Whats the issue?  Poor wr draft.  Deep dline draft.  Turns out Buffalo best value picks were db on day 3.  Day 3 get your highest rated guys and guys who could make the team.  I see no problem with what happened. 

[HappyDays]

11 minutes ago, Mat68 said:

They did not like the wr class.  Many did not.

 

The WR class was seen as weak with top end talent, but it was known to be strong in terms of day two and three WRs with vertical traits. That's where it feels like we missed the boat. Kyle Williams, Felton, Royals, Horton, D*ke, Thornton... and that's just off the top of my head. I had my own preferences among that group but to me the most critical thing was adding some kind of field stretcher in a draft rich with that skill set.

 

We should have double dipped last year too when the WR class was especially strong. I actually liked the Coleman pick which was an unpopular opinion, but we needed to add a true field stretcher too to complement his skill set. Because we didn't, we added MVS and Claypool which didn't work out at all, we lost games early in the season because we didn't have anybody to threaten defenses downfield, and then we had to trade a 3rd rounder for a half season rental to give us that skill set so our season wouldn't go completely off the rails. So the mistake compounded and cost us a top 100 draft pick this year. And now Cooper is gone and we have added nobody to replace his skill set. I just don't get it. They're making the same roster decisions that have proven to be mistakes in the past.

[HomeskillitMoorman]

19 minutes ago, Mat68 said:

He was not good.  After the trade the offense was.  Palmer is an upgrade over Cooper and Hollins.  My point Beane has no problem being aggressive.  He didnt trade up for Thomas.  Philly, Miami, LAR and Pittsburgh all got value at positions of need.  You cant just trade up because you want to. Need someone who wants to move back.  Pretty obvious they missed on their top players and why they moved backed.  This year everyone expected DE, DT,CB in some order.  Complaining about a 4th rd wr not drafted is asinine.  Royals or Horton would have a tough time cracking the top 4 barring injury.  Moore or another similar wr offers the 25 Bills the same value maybe more.  Whats the issue?  Poor wr draft.  Deep dline draft.  Turns out Buffalo best value picks were db on day 3.  Day 3 get your highest rated guys and guys who could make the team.  I see no problem with what happened. 

 

I don't actually have a problem with him not drafting a WR if the right guy wasn't on the board. I was disagreeing more with the idea that he fixed the situation last year with the Cooper trade or that they've earned some kind of trust with putting the right support around the QB or their defensive drafting when the incompetence around all of those things is why we've underperformed so much in the playoffs. 

Edited April 30 by HomeskillitMoorman

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

 

That also doesn't mean a better GM and coach couldn't win an actual championship with the best player we've ever had though. We have heavily underachieved in the playoffs, we really haven't even been close to winning a Super Bowl. They've created a situation where the ask of our franchise player is much higher than what other teams are asking of franchise players are on other teams. 

 

Josh has something like 33 TD's and 4 INT's in the playoffs...and is barely over .500! This is unprecedented, it's never happened in the history of the NFL. They have overall let him down with the defenses, coaching and support they've put around him. I'd be curious to see how that could be debated. 

 

Players play the games. We never blame theme, though.

[Mat68]

27 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Even in the context of immediate needs taking Tory Horton over Jordan Hancock makes sense. Cam Lewis is a better player than Tyrell Shavers or Laviska Shenault. We just gave him a 2 year contract last offseason, and now we're looking to replace him? But we're letting Shavers or Shenault end up on the roster? I don't understand that at all.

 

Deone Walker over Jalen Royals is still the move that I think has the most potential to haunt us, especially with KC taking Royals. You're lying to yourself if you're not at least a bit anxious about that outcome. All the arguments you're making about the Bills could have applied to the Chiefs too. Their WR room was Rice, Worthy, Brown, JuJu, plus their TEs Kelce and Gray. They could have left the room as is and let Justyn Ross compete with Tyquan Thornton for the #5 spot. Instead they gave Mahomes yet another young weapon to develop in the pipeline. They've added a WR with a 1st-4th round pick in each of the last four drafts. Personally I'd be looking to copy their formula, it seems to be working.

Still need guys to cover em.  I think Wr can and should be looked at to improve at all times.  Hard to find a flaw in judgement for the picks made.  Besides any wr is better.  Arguing over day 3 picks is wild.  Each guy has a path to make the team.  

[JGMcD2]

39 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Even in the context of immediate needs taking Tory Horton over Jordan Hancock makes sense. Cam Lewis is a better player than Tyrell Shavers or Laviska Shenault. We just gave him a 2 year contract last offseason, and now we're looking to replace him? But we're letting Shavers or Shenault end up on the roster? I don't understand that at all.

 

Deone Walker over Jalen Royals is still the move that I think has the most potential to haunt us, especially with KC taking Royals. You're lying to yourself if you're not at least a bit anxious about that outcome. All the arguments you're making about the Bills could have applied to the Chiefs too. Their WR room was Rice, Worthy, Brown, JuJu, plus their TEs Kelce and Gray. They could have left the room as is and let Justyn Ross compete with Tyquan Thornton for the #5 spot. Instead they gave Mahomes yet another young weapon to develop in the pipeline. They've added a WR with a 1st-4th round pick in each of the last four drafts. Personally I'd be looking to copy their formula, it seems to be working.

I’m genuinely not that anxious about the Deone Walker vs. Jalen Royals outcome. I understand the concern, especially with Royals landing in Kansas City, but I think it’s a bit of a leap to assume he’s going to hit just because of where he was drafted. The Chiefs track record at wide receiver is more mixed than it might seem.

 

Since Mahomes became the starter, they’ve drafted six WRs in seven drafts. Rashee Rice is the clear success, and Xavier Worthy looks promising. But they’ve also invested in Skyy Moore (2nd round) and Mecole Hardman (2nd round), who haven’t quite lived up to expectations. Then there’s Cornell Powell and Tremon Smith - both 6th-round picks - where the returns were minimal. We’ll see how Royals pans out, but it’s far from a guarantee.

 

The Bills have taken a similar number of swings - seven WRs in seven drafts since Allen became the starter. Gabriel Davis and Khalil Shakir were solid hits, and we saw some encouraging things from Keon Coleman pre-injury. We’ll see about Kaden Prather, but like Kansas City, we’ve had some late-round misses too - Justin Shorter, Marquez Stevenson, and Isaiah Hodgins among them.

 

The Chiefs’ approach reflects a volume strategy with premium picks, while the Bills have made the most of late selections. Neither team has a perfect record, but the production per draft value arguably favors the Bills so far.

Edited April 30 by JGMcD2

[Mat68]

16 minutes ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

 

I don't actually have a problem with him not drafting a WR if the right guy wasn't on the board. I was disagreeing more with the idea that the fixed the situation last year with the Cooper trade or that they've earned some kind of trust with putting the right support around the QB or their defensive drafting when the incompetence around all of those things is why we've underperformed so much in the playoffs. 

The trade is relevant to me because some think they dont do anything to improve wr.  Imo since Brady took over Buffalo hasnt been able to play the same style of defense Mcdermott wants to.  Back 7 has been slow.  Playoffs they have been exposed.  I want Allen to have as many weapons as possible.  Has to make sense though.  Draft was very meh at wr.  College in general was besides 2 freshman.  

[hondo in seattle]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea basically this. I don't have a view on Prather actually I haven't watched any of him. I will at some point over the summer try and find some tape but as of now, no view. But I do think there is a gap between the top 2 who we would have had to trade up slightly for cost us one of the 5ths and Lundt and the guys on @JGMcD2's list below them.

 

I think @BillsVet actually summed up my frustration with receiver quite well when he said it just feels like there are some positions where Beane is always worrying about the pipeline - DL, DB, LB, OL, even running back. But it just feels like he is content to go year to year at receiver making tactical adds like Samuel and Palmer in FA rather than being a bit more strategic. The frustration isn't just that he didn't take one this draft. It has been building for four years when he has always seemed to find a reason to prioritise something else over keeping that pipeline of weapons for Josh well stocked (do you stock a pipeline? mixed metaphor maybe.... but you get the point )

 

I share this long-term frustration, even acknowledging that Diggs as a counterargument.  It seems to me that when a team lands a QB with generational talent, two things ought to become priorities: (A) You get him a bunch of big uglies on the OL as a capable bodyguard.  (B) You get him someone to throw to.  

 

I don't feel like Beane's ignored A or B entirely.  But it feels like when Josh has had pass catchers to throw the ball to, he didn't have bodyguards providing him the time to throw.  And when he finally got a line that gave him time to throw, he had no one to throw to.   It just doesn't seem the best way to make use of Josh's talent.  

[Doc Brown]

31 minutes ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

I agree overall. 

 

On the last part though...yes Mahomes had to execute those plays but I would still say it's highly unlikely that if Josh was put in that situation that the coverage would have been that soft and vanilla in that same scenario with 13 seconds. I'm not taking away from Mahomes when I say that because you don't control who you're going up against, and as I still think he should carry the mantle of best QB in the league right now...but rather that Josh doesn't get to go up against that...he actually most of the time in those big games has to go up against formidable defenses, coaching and scheme. 

When two players are that elite I like to go with a hypothetical scenario.  You're down four points and need a TD to win the game with 2:00 left with two timeouts and you're going to be executed if they don't score a TD.  Do I trust Mahomes or Allen more?  Until proven wrong, I would choose Mahomes.  I feel like we're arguing about whether Pepsi or Coke is the better pop though.  Both are elite.

[HappyDays]

16 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

Since Mahomes became the starter, they’ve drafted six WRs in seven drafts. Rashee Rice is the clear success, and Xavier Worthy looks promising. But they’ve also invested in Skyy Moore (2nd round) and Mecole Hardman (2nd round), who haven’t quite lived up to expectations. Then there’s Cornell Powell and Tremon Smith - both 6th-round picks - where the returns were minimal. We’ll see how Royals pans out, but it’s far from a guarantee.

 

The Bills have taken a similar number of swings - seven WRs in seven drafts since Allen became the starter. Gabriel Davis and Khalil Shakir were solid hits, and we saw some encouraging things from Keon Coleman pre-injury. We’ll see about Kaden Prather, but like Kansas City, we’ve had some late-round misses too - Justin Shorter, Marquez Stevenson, and Isaiah Hodgins among them.

 

Going back to 2022, by the trade value chart the Chiefs have spent 432 points on WRs. The Bills by comparison have spent 206. So KC is literally investing more than double what we are. It isn't comparable prioritization at all. Adding UDFA graded prospects like Shorter and Prather doesn't balance the scales. And this shouldn't come as a surprise - it's established that the Bills invest less into the position than any other team.

 

Of their past 3 WRs drafted high, KC has one bust in Skyy Moore. That's a great hit rate, 2 out of 3. I agree with you that what we've gotten out of our WRs relative to the value we've spent on them has been strong. Davis was a very good 4th round pick and Shakir was an excellent 5th round pick. Diggs was a home run as a 1st round trade despite how it all ended. Coleman is TBD. I don't have an issue with how Beane scouts the position. I have an issue with how little he invests in young talent.