Where does Khalil Shakir rank in terms of NFL WRs?

[DrDawkinstein]

Without much analysis I'm going to wing an answer and say somewhere in the 40s. Assuming most #1s would be ahead of him, and a handful of #2s.

 

edit:

 

Ok did some light research, and yeah, he was 40th in receiving yards, high-20s in receptions, and didnt make the top 50 in TDs.

 

So yeah, low 40s if they were redrafting all the WRs.

Edited July 17 by DrDawkinstein

[JakeFrommStateFarm]

1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said:

I’ll make a list:

 

Chase

Jefferson

AJ Brown

BTJ

London

ARSB

Jeudy

Nabers

Lamb

Ladd

JSN

Wilson

McLaurin

Sutton

Davante

Flowers

Ridley

Nico

Evans

Jamo

DK

Mooney

Nacua

Moore

Hill

Tee

Pickens

Addison

Smith

Pittman

Waddle

Tank

Godwin

 

Shakir

 

He’s right around Jakobi Meyers, Deebo, Pierce, Downs, Jennings, Reed territory. 34 ish?

 

Honestly, WR talent in the NFL is supremely stacked.

 

Edit:

 

I realize I left out hurt dudes like Olave/Aiyuk/Rice.

 

That probably pushes Shakir to like 38ish? Top 40?

I think you have to compare him to other slots

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

This is a topic that has been kicked around in countless threads this summer. The opinions seem to vary greatly. Figured we should have one place to discuss. It might be some interesting debate over these last few days before camp really kicks in.

 

In terms of ranking, THIS IS NOT ABOUT FANTASY FOOTBALL. This is meant to be, “if the league drafted every WR tomorrow, at the same salary, what number would he be picked with?” I haven’t made my list yet but intuitively I feel like he’s probably somewhere between 25-30. Curious as to what others think…

 

I am pretty close to where you are if the draft was today.  I would say within a couple spots of 25 up or down personally.

 

I will say is the Shakir is HIGHLY respected around the league both amongst players and GM's.  He is going to go earlier in drafts than some other people think he would go because they focus on his totals and not the player or context of the totals.  He would be a 1,000-1,200 yard WR on a team that spread the ball around less and resulted in him getting more targets based on his career stats.  He might have hit 1,000 here last year here if he didn't miss a game and a half with an injury in an offense that ran a ton and spread the ball across the offense.  

 

But stats aside - What a lot of people are going to miss or not consider enough (not saying you, but others in general) is how much coaches and GM's covet WR's who fully buy into the team philosophy, willingly do all the dirty work (and do it well), etc and do their jobs and execute a high level.  He is smart, has great hands, fast, is great with the ball in his hands, unselfish, a good and willing blocker, and a highly reliable player.  

 

Coaches, GMs and QB's covet that kind of player, and make no mistake about it, there are not a lot of them with that kind of package.  Im not saying he is one of the first 15, but I think he would certainly be one of the first 30.  Someone made a list up thread, and there are several guys on that list he would get drafted ahead of.  

 

When talking about drafting - when you start getting past the top 15 guys, the other guys begin to blend together some and that increases as you move into the 20's where not a lot separates them anymore or age becomes a factor etc.  Not sure there is a lot of difference in value of some of the WR's going in the 20's as one going in the mid to late 30's.  And in that range GM's will be looking at one of best slot guys in the NFL right now and a guy who buys in, isn't selfish, does all the dirty work willingly, and executes consistently and is a player still on the rise.  He will have more appeal than a lot of the guys in those 20's and 30's who arent much different from each other or are older.  

 

So, I think he is almost certainly one of the first 30 WR's taken, possibly 20-25.  Top 20 not so sure because outside guys are kind of deep right now, and outside WR will have more demand by default, so not sure he would go that high, but I also wouldn't rule it out depending on what teams were picking in those high teen spots (like maybe Bills take him in those late teens for example). 

 

My guess is 22-28 feels the most probable.   

[RoscoeParrish]

30 minutes ago, JakeFrommStateFarm said:

I think you have to compare him to other slots

Why? 
 

He’s a WR. So is Jamar Chase. 
 

Part of the reason why Chase is more valuable is because he doesn’t have to play exclusively in the slot.

 

It’s like saying we can’t compare Rousseau to Myles Garrett because Rousseau is more of an edge setter than pass rusher.

Edited July 17 by RoscoeParrish

[Alphadawg7]

32 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

Without much analysis I'm going to wing an answer and say somewhere in the 40s. Assuming most #1s would be ahead of him, and a handful of #2s.

 

edit:

 

Ok did some light research, and yeah, he was 40th in receiving yards, high-20s in receptions, and didnt make the top 50 in TDs.

 

So yeah, low 40s if they were redrafting all the WRs.

 

My counter to this would be this: 

 

Stat totals don't reflect talent or ability.  His stat totals are highly impacted by the style of offense we run which limits his targets and every players targets as pass catchers here.  GM's are not going to hold that against him when analyzing what they think he can do in their offense where he probably gets more targets once out of Brady's "everybody eats" and lets run the ball a lot offense.  But they will see him as one of the best slots in the game, some of the best hands in the NFL, fast, dangerous after the catch, tough, hard to tackle, unselfish, and someone who does all the dirty work willingly and is good at it too.  

 

You can't look at totals without context in these situations and draw conclusive evaluations off them.  His stat totals definitely have context that will be considered when GM's would be making choices of the kind of player they want on their team, and what they can expect from them in the role they would have on that teams offense.  

 

I really doubt he would fall out of the top 30, GM's, coaches, players gush about him when they talk about him or Bills games.  There are not a lot WR's like him in the NFL who fully buy in to a role and the dirty work unselfishly like he does who also have his abilities.  Outside WR's will have a higher value positionally, but at a certain point they all start blending together and don't really stand out.  Shakir stands out at Slot and teams will covet what he brings to an offense and locker room.  

 

[GoBills808]

2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

My counter to this would be this: 

 

Stat totals don't reflect talent or ability.  His stat totals are highly impacted by the style of offense we run which limits his targets and every players targets as pass catchers here.  GM's are not going to hold that against him when analyzing what they think he can do in their offense where he probably gets more targets once out of Brady's "everybody eats" and lets run the ball a lot offense.  But they will see him as one of the best slots in the game, some of the best hands in the NFL, fast, dangerous after the catch, tough, hard to tackle, unselfish, and someone who does all the dirty work willingly and is good at it too.  

 

You can't look at totals without context in these situations and draw conclusive evaluations off them.  His stat totals definitely have context that will be considered when GM's would be making choices of the kind of player they want on their team, and what they can expect from them in the role they would have on that teams offense.  

 

I really doubt he would fall out of the top 30, GM's, coaches, players gush about him when they talk about him or Bills games.  There are not a lot WR's like him in the NFL who fully buy in to a role and the dirty work unselfishly like he does who also have his abilities.  Outside WR's will have a higher value positionally, but at a certain point they all start blending together and don't really stand out.  Shakir stands out at Slot and teams will covet what he brings to an offense and locker room.  

 

Intangibles are nice but talent wins in the NFL

 

doubt any GM is taking him anywhere near where you think, just too many better players available

[RoscoeParrish]

Just now, Alphadawg7 said:

 

My counter to this would be this: 

 

Stat totals don't reflect talent or ability.  His stat totals are highly impacted by the style of offense we run which limits his targets and every players targets as pass catchers here.  GM's are not going to hold that against him when analyzing what they think he can do in their offense where he probably gets more targets once out of Brady's "everybody eats" and lets run the ball a lot offense.  But they will see him as one of the best slots in the game, some of the best hands in the NFL, fast, dangerous after the catch, tough, hard to tackle, unselfish, and someone who does all the dirty work willingly and is good at it too.  

 

You can't look at totals without context in these situations and draw conclusive evaluations off them.  His stat totals definitely have context that will be considered when GM's would be making choices of the kind of player they want on their team, and what they can expect from them in the role they would have on that teams offense.  

 

I really doubt he would fall out of the top 30, GM's, coaches, players gush about him when they talk about him or Bills games.  There are not a lot WR's like him in the NFL who fully buy in to a role and the dirty work unselfishly like he does who also have his abilities.  Outside WR's will have a higher value positionally, but at a certain point they all start blending together and don't really stand out.  Shakir stands out at Slot and teams will covet what he brings to an offense and locker room.  

 

The counter to the “situation” argument is that Shakir was the #1 WR by a mile on an offense QBed by the MVP and future Hall of Famer.

 

He got 100 targets by a superstar elite QB. Thats probably a better situation than Darnell Mooney’s 100 targets by Kirk Cousins and Michael Penix, right?

[GoBills808]

4 minutes ago, RoscoeParrish said:

The counter to the “situation” argument is that Shakir was the #1 WR by a mile on an offense QBed by the MVP and future Hall of Famer.

 

He got 100 targets by a superstar elite QB. Thats probably a better situation than Darnell Mooney’s 100 targets by Kirk Cousins and Michael Penix, right?

Correct

This is likely near the statistical ceiling of Shakir much as it was for Diggs

[Alphadawg7]

10 minutes ago, RoscoeParrish said:

The counter to the “situation” argument is that Shakir was the #1 WR by a mile on an offense QBed by the MVP and future Hall of Famer.

 

He got 100 targets by a superstar elite QB. Thats probably a better situation than Darnell Mooney’s 100 targets by Kirk Cousins and Michael Penix, right?

 

Targets are targets - roles are roles.  He got 100 targets in 15.5 games last year.  He plays all 17 he flirts with or breaks 1000 yard mark here on a team that had many games with 9 or 10 different guys catching passes.  

 

IMHO there is no doubt what so ever his production is capped in Buffalo (as is anyone catching passes on this team) if we keep running the same offense as we did in 2024.  And teams and GM's know that and know there is more to evaluating a player than just "totals" without context.  

Edited July 17 by Alphadawg7

[DrDawkinstein]

3 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

My counter to this would be this: 

 

Stat totals don't reflect talent or ability.  His stat totals are highly impacted by the style of offense we run which limits his targets and every players targets as pass catchers here.  GM's are not going to hold that against him when analyzing what they think he can do in their offense where he probably gets more targets once out of Brady's "everybody eats" and lets run the ball a lot offense.  But they will see him as one of the best slots in the game, some of the best hands in the NFL, fast, dangerous after the catch, tough, hard to tackle, unselfish, and someone who does all the dirty work willingly and is good at it too.  

 

You can't look at totals without context in these situations and draw conclusive evaluations off them.  His stat totals definitely have context that will be considered when GM's would be making choices of the kind of player they want on their team, and what they can expect from them in the role they would have on that teams offense.  

 

I really doubt he would fall out of the top 30, GM's, coaches, players gush about him when they talk about him or Bills games.  There are not a lot WR's like him in the NFL who fully buy in to a role and the dirty work unselfishly like he does who also have his abilities.  Outside WR's will have a higher value positionally, but at a certain point they all start blending together and don't really stand out.  Shakir stands out at Slot and teams will covet what he brings to an offense and locker room.  

 

 

Yeah, nah. Top 30 is a bit of a stretch and bordering on homerism. Looking back at Roscoe's list, even if there are a couple I think Shakir is better than (McConkey, for example) there are others that would push him down. WR is a very stacked position across the NFL. He isnt going to be any GM's first choice, which is what would need to happen for him to crack the top 32 alone.

 

For my (non) analysis, I wasnt necessarily saying "he was 40th in yards therefore he's #40", but was getting an idea of just how many other WRs there are and how many that are producing.

 

I'm thinking that almost every #1 WR would go before him, and at least a handful of #2s, and maybe a couple of his fellow slots as well. So 35, 38, 40... seems to be a reasonable range.

[Mikie2times]

2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Targets are targets - roles are roles.  He got 100 targets in 15.5 games last year.  He plays all 17 he flirts with or breaks 1000 yard mark here on a team that had many games with 9 or 10 different guys catching passes.  

 

IMHO there is no doubt what so ever his production is capped in Buffalo (as is anyone catching passes on this team) if we keep running the same offense as we did in 2024.  And teams and GM's know that and know there is more to evaluating a player than just "totals" without context.  

I don’t know if he would somehow become this target monster elsewhere. He’s a pure slot who lives within 10 yards of the LOS. 100 targets is a lot for a guy like that. You could argue he’s getting more looks on average here. 

[GoBills808]

1 minute ago, Mikie2times said:

I don’t know if he would somehow become this target monster elsewhere. He’s a pure slot who lives within 10 yards of the LOS. 100 targets is a lot for a guy like that. You could argue he’s getting more looks on average here. 

the context missing is there is no place better for a wideout who would otherwise struggle to create for himself than an offense designed to manufacture you touches w a top QB who can extend plays downfield

[Alphadawg7]

1 minute ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Yeah, nah. Top 30 is a bit of a stretch and bordering on homerism. Looking back at Roscoe's list, even if there are a couple I think Shakir is better than (McConkey, for example) there are others that would push him down. WR is a very stacked position across the NFL. He isnt going to be any GM's first choice, which is what would need to happen for him to crack the top 32 alone.

 

For my (non) analysis, I wasnt necessarily saying "he was 40th in yards therefore he's #40", but was getting an idea of just how many other WRs there are and how many that are producing.

 

I'm thinking that almost every #1 WR would go before him, and at least a handful of #2s, and maybe a couple of his fellow slots as well. So 35, 38, 40... seems to be a reasonable range.

 

Well I can tell you first hand from contacts of mine he is more highly regarded and coveted in NFL circles than you probably think.  All good, its a made up premise here, anyway, no right or wrong answers just all discussion.

 

But to further the point - you just said WR is a stacked position, and you are right, its very deep with a bunch of guys who really don't separate from themselves in that 20-40 range where it gets highly subjective based on teams preferences, age, type of player, etc.  Shakir in that range sticks out as one of the best at his position, a slot WR who could put up 1000+ yards in their system with less target competition.  

 

So is a team going to take a WR inside the first 30 that isn't much different than the guys in the 30's or 40's or instead take one of the best slots who brings intangibles others dont then grab one of those other guys later?

 

Some of you are completely ignoring the strategy of drafting, weighing values now vs later, etc.  You are making it all based on fantasy stats essentially quoting his totals, and that isn't how its going to work in a draft.  There are several TE's that would go long before a lot of these WR's too on peoples lists for example.  

[Alphadawg7]

12 minutes ago, Mikie2times said:

I don’t know if he would somehow become this target monster elsewhere. He’s a pure slot who lives within 10 yards of the LOS. 100 targets is a lot for a guy like that. You could argue he’s getting more looks on average here. 

 

Not saying he would be a target monster, saying he would see an increase in targets on a team who spreads the ball less and runs less than we do.  He got 100 targets here because is a good player, and with the injury and his pace was 110 targets had he played all 17.  Even just 1 more target per game puts him at 127 targets eslewhere in an offense spreading the ball less between targets and running.  I think its more than reasonable he could and would see an increase of 1 more target per game in another offense.  

 

His pace was 110 targets here - with 1 more per game elsewhere that takes him to 127 targets, which based on his 8.21 yards per target last year, that puts him at 1050 yards on its own.  Now factor in how often we ran short routes/screens for hm just to use his RAC ability...if just a handful of those targets move to be 5-10 yards down field he could easily be looking at 1100 - 1200 range on those 127 targets.

 

So people are underestimating what he would be on another team with literally just 1 more target per game in a less spread the ball offense.  

Edited July 17 by Alphadawg7

[BullBuchanan]

1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said:

The problem with this line of thinking is cause and effect.

 

The Pats ran their slot offense when their best weapon was a slot. They also ran a bombs away offense when they had Randy Moss. 
 

I love Shakir, but if we had JJ or Chase instead, I don’t think we are using him the same way exclusively.

One could argue they learned their lesson from the Randy Moss experiment. Edelman has 3 rings, Moss has zero. The Pats were at their best when they ran boring efficient offenses with dependable player. The Chiefs philosophy has been the same after Mahomes first couple years.

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Help me understand this because this kind of thing confuses me. Are you saying that, “if they had a guy, that we all agree is better, he would be less impactful than Shakir?” If the Bills traded Shakir, straight up for Metcalf, they’d be worse off? Wouldn’t that mean that Shakir belongs ahead of him then? We aren’t factoring in “situation.” It is meant to be, “where would he be drafted if every WR in football were available to be picked?” 

Yes. Is it not obvious that they serve completely different roles? See my note above above Edelman vs Moss. As for how you're ranking it, you may not be factoring in situation, but I am. Situation is EVERYTHING in sports.

Edited July 17 by BullBuchanan

[RoscoeParrish]

17 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Targets are targets - roles are roles.  He got 100 targets in 15.5 games last year.  He plays all 17 he flirts with or breaks 1000 yard mark here on a team that had many games with 9 or 10 different guys catching passes.  

 

IMHO there is no doubt what so ever his production is capped in Buffalo (as is anyone catching passes on this team) if we keep running the same offense as we did in 2024.  And teams and GM's know that and know there is more to evaluating a player than just "totals" without context.  

 

5 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Not saying he would be a target monster, saying he would see an increase in targets on a team who spreads the ball less and runs less than we do.  He got 100 targets here because is a good player, and with the injury and his pace was 110 targets had he played all 17.  Even just 1 more target per game puts him at 127 targets eslewhere in an offense spreading the ball less between targets and running.  I think its more than reasonable he could and would see an increase of 1 more target per game in another offense.  

 

His pace was 110 targets here - with 1 more per game elsewhere that takes him to 127 targets, which based on his 8.21 yards per target last year, that puts him at 1050 yards on its own.  Now factor in how often we ran short routes/screens for hm just to use his RAC ability...if just a handful of those targets move to be 5-10 yards down field he could easily be looking at 1100 - 1200 range on those 127 targets.

 

So people are underestimating what he would be on another team with literally just 1 more target per game in a less spread the ball offense.  

I’m just not sure you are grasping what we are saying.

 

Yes, if you increase a players targets, that would increase their production. That reigns true for every single WR.

 

But the situation equation flips both ways. And I would argue the 2024 team may have been one of the best situations in the NFL for Khalil Shakir. So in a worse situation, of which there are MANY, for MANY reasons, he may be a 500-600 yard guy.

 

There’s a reason him and his agent took Darnell Mooney this offseason and it’s not because he’s in a different class of receiver.

6 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

One could argue they learned their lesson from the Randy Moss experiment. Edelman has 3 rings, Moss has zero. The Pats were at their best when they ran boring efficient offenses with dependable player. The Chiefs philosophy has been the same after Mahomes first couple years.

Do you think they lost the Super Bowl after going 18-0 because of Randy Moss?

[BullBuchanan]

1 minute ago, RoscoeParrish said:

Do you think they lost the Super Bowl after going 18-0 because of Randy Moss?

Of course not. What's your real question?

[JakeFrommStateFarm]

I don't think Shakir is as good as Josh Downs, another slot receiver 

[Lost]

number 42 on my board

[RoscoeParrish]

20 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

Of course not. What's your real question?

You said they learned their lesson because Randy doesn’t have a ring and Edelman has 3. 

 

As if the 2007 Patriots wasn’t an all time offense and an all-time team, and the 2018 Patriots wasn’t one of the worst Super Bowl winners ever.

 

So I asked the obvious question. Yes, situation matters. No, the Patriots didn’t lose the 2007 Super Bowl after going undefeated because their wide receivers were just too good. There was no lesson to learn.