NoSaint Posted July 18 Posted July 18 19 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: How so? He’s certainly behind St. Brown, Ladd, Godwin, JSN, probably Jayden Reed. That’s just guys off the top of my head. If you count guys that split time like Ceedee Lamb, Zay Flowers, Chase, Garrett Wilson, he falls more. I think sometimes folks forget some WR1 get a lot of slot volume, like ceedee, etc… 1 Quote
RoscoeParrish Posted July 18 Posted July 18 3 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: But there is no reason to assume the additional targets would all be more bubble screens. He has 100 targets, that is a large baseline, that includes a balance of types of passes and routes he runs. You can't now say to get more targets it only has to be more bubble screens. Not all of them would be, but some of them would have to be to get him to 150. He got some last year and it cut his ADOT in half. In half! Do you think that an extra one or two a game would not decrease his ADOT even further? I think it would. That’s purely my opinion, but imo, I think there’s no way that Shakir gets to 150 targets without a lower ADOT than 2024. 4 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: And again, that is exclusively tied to our offense as well and the type of plays we run for him. But a lot of you talk about him like he is ONLY capable of one type of play yet he has 2 years of showing he can make plays, and hes made a lot of them, all over the field, not just bubble screens. He has elite YAC ability, so Brady designed some quick strike plays to use that, but you and others now hold that against him as if that is his only primary use, which it wasnt. I’m trying to talk about the type of player Shakir has shown to be, especially as a focal point. There are certain realities I think we have to accept. Shakir has great wiggle and great RAC ability, and very good hands. He is a slot guy that cannot play on the boundary. There is a harder ceiling on those guys. His own offensive coaches thought the best use of his talents was to get the ball in his hands in a myriad of different ways and it worked. He had a career year in everything, despite taking a dip in efficiency. I don’t think that’s disrespectful to Shakir. 9 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: And keep in mind, that he was also the best WR on the team last year, so he was doing this without some bigger threats around him, especially with Keon getting hurt, Kincaid being hurt, and Cooper doing almost nothing. Playing along side another WR and more opens up for him - and in 2023, with Diggs, Davis, and our first round pick Kincaid it was Shakir who led the team in yards receiving after Brady took over showing how much more effective he can be with some other attention around him and not having to rely on just bubble screens. I kinda think you are taking both angles on this. You are saying that it would be helpful if he had another WR to take some of the load off. That’s true. the corollary to that is that he had basically no competition for target share last year either. 11 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: Now keeping up the 2023 efficiency was not realistic, thanks to how elite it was combined with sample size. BUT - It is MORE than fair to assume his true efficiency most likely lies somewhere between 2023 and 2024 where a lot more short throws were brought in as a weapon and helped bring some of the YPC down but still had strong YAC numbers showing his abilities. What do you mean by “true” efficiency? Do I think if we had another awesome WR option, and Shakir got 80 targets instead of 100, his efficiency would be in between 2023 and 2024, maybe even pretty close to 2023? I do. But I think that kinda proves that he isn’t really a focal point guy. 15 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: So again, this notion his efficiency would keep tanking further with each additional target after a large sample size is just not realistic and is a slap in his face to his talents and abilities Wes Welker was one of the greatest slots of all time, agreed? He had a career yards per target of 7.8. I don’t think it’s a slap in the face to suggest Shakir’s true efficiency floor is in that ballpark. We are talking about a guy who on decent volume had an 800 yard season. Just to put that in perspective for you. He’s very fun to watch and I’m glad he’s a Bill. 1 1 Quote
GunnerBill Posted July 18 Posted July 18 23 hours ago, LEBills said: Yea he was 39th in the NFL of WRs for yards per game last year and 58th for touchdowns. A good player and is valuable to us, but in a vacuum he would be ranked in the 30s around those players you mentioned. Agree. 35th to 45th. 3 Quote
dave mcbride Posted July 18 Posted July 18 18 hours ago, BullBuchanan said: Why do you keep trying to make this whole boundary vs slot receiver argument? What are you even talking about? It has absolutely nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I give up dude. You're right about whatever point it is you're trying to make. That was the story all game. They were off by a foot here or there over and over again all game. He didn't even hit the timing routes because that wasn't their bread and butter in that scheme. Fast forward to 2014 and everything was timing. The ball was out of Brady's hands before the D line even made it to the LoS. That's not really the story of the game. A lot of it came down to coaching decisions. For instance, BB decided to forego kicking a FG midway through in the third quarter on 4th and 13 from the 31 yard line. I thought that was insane at the time, and I was right. Brady threw a low-percentage heave to Jabar Gaffney that really had no chance. It would have been a 49 yard FG attempt in a dome for Gostkowski, who in all likelihood would have made the kick. Bear in mind that they lost by 3 points. After the Giants went up 10-7, the Pats threw it every single play on a stalled drive early in the fourth rather than mix it up. And then they blitzed on the game winning TD to Plaxico, shortly after Asante Samuel dropped what absolutely should have been the game-ending interception. At any rate, the 2006 Pats were probably the most dominant team in NFL history, and just had a bad day. Their not winning the SB had nothing to do with the fact that Randy Moss was the top receiver on the team. Quote
Alphadawg7 Posted July 18 Posted July 18 (edited) 1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said: Not all of them would be, but some of them would have to be to get him to 150. He got some last year and it cut his ADOT in half. In half! Do you think that an extra one or two a game would not decrease his ADOT even further? I think it would. That’s purely my opinion, but imo, I think there’s no way that Shakir gets to 150 targets without a lower ADOT than 2024. I’m trying to talk about the type of player Shakir has shown to be, especially as a focal point. You see - right here you just kind of again said all of the extra targets would be those bubble screens. We are only talking about 1 more target per game, and you just said 1 or 2 more bubble screens. His ratio to bubble screens to other passes is already factored into his 100 targets and efficiency. Therefore, if you assume the same target distribution, which you should, then the per target efficiency scales with the extra target, not decreases. But the way you just phrased again is increasing the targets by increasing just bubble screens essentially and I don't think that is reasonable way to estimate his target increase. 1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said: There are certain realities I think we have to accept. Shakir has great wiggle and great RAC ability,o and very good hands. He is a slot guy that cannot play on the boundary. There is a harder ceiling on those guys. His own offensive coaches thought the best use of his talents was to get the ball in his hands in a myriad of different ways and it worked. He had a career year in everything, despite taking a dip in efficiency. I don’t think that’s disrespectful to Shakir. I kinda think you are taking both angles on this. You are saying that it would be helpful if he had another WR to take some of the load off. That’s true. the corollary to that is that he had basically no competition for target share last year either. I said that 2024 is probably his floor on things like YPC because of the increased short yardage throws (by strategic design) vs his elite efficiency in 2023 being helped by lower volume and many big plays. You and others keep wanting to further lower his floor as if he has no ability or talent above doing more bubble screens. This is really the spot where we disagree, the assumed type of targets on any above his pace last year. 1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said: What do you mean by “true” efficiency? Do I think if we had another awesome WR option, and Shakir got 80 targets instead of 100, his efficiency would be in between 2023 and 2024, maybe even pretty close to 2023? I do. But I think that kinda proves that he isn’t really a focal point guy. To be clear, I didn't say he was a focal point guy, but that doesn't mean he cant be a significant player in an offense still. And what I meant by true efficiency is that no one season ever determines a players efficiency, and that his 2024 was likely more indicative of his floor, and 2023 was more indicative of an outlier with the combo of lower volume and several big plays within that volume. When I said that was more about what his efficiency looks like over a period of seasons, not just picking any one season. 1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said: Wes Welker was one of the greatest slots of all time, agreed? He had a career yards per target of 7.8. I don’t think it’s a slap in the face to suggest Shakir’s true efficiency floor is in that ballpark. We are talking about a guy who on decent volume had an 800 yard season. Just to put that in perspective for you. He’s very fun to watch and I’m glad he’s a Bill. Its all good, all discussion, and all subjective. I just think people are short changing just how good he is at what he does and that he is being pigeon hold a bit too much into this bubble screen stuff. He was on pace for 110 targets here last year but he missed a little time with the injury. I think his sweet spot for say max targets is probaby 110-130 in an offense, and in our offense that puts him just at or over 1000 yards, and in an offense where the rest of the field is opened up a bit more with help elsewhere, I think his efficiency goes up and totals as well. That being said - My hope is that we see guys like Keon, Palmer, Kincaid, and maybe even Moore prove they need targets this year, and that results in fewer targets for Shakir. But let me be clear, not because Shakir isn't good enough for these targets, I say that because I want to see these other guys also be good which would make our offense even better if so. I still think he would be one of the first 30 with all the intangibles he brings along with ability and talent compared to a lot of the other guys in that range who are either older or blend too much with the next 20 or so guys still available. Edited July 18 by Alphadawg7 Quote
GunnerBill Posted July 18 Posted July 18 1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said: Not all of them would be, but some of them would have to be to get him to 150. He got some last year and it cut his ADOT in half. In half! Do you think that an extra one or two a game would not decrease his ADOT even further? I think it would. That’s purely my opinion, but imo, I think there’s no way that Shakir gets to 150 targets without a lower ADOT than 2024. I’m trying to talk about the type of player Shakir has shown to be, especially as a focal point. There are certain realities I think we have to accept. Shakir has great wiggle and great RAC ability, and very good hands. He is a slot guy that cannot play on the boundary. There is a harder ceiling on those guys. His own offensive coaches thought the best use of his talents was to get the ball in his hands in a myriad of different ways and it worked. He had a career year in everything, despite taking a dip in efficiency. I don’t think that’s disrespectful to Shakir. I kinda think you are taking both angles on this. You are saying that it would be helpful if he had another WR to take some of the load off. That’s true. the corollary to that is that he had basically no competition for target share last year either. What do you mean by “true” efficiency? Do I think if we had another awesome WR option, and Shakir got 80 targets instead of 100, his efficiency would be in between 2023 and 2024, maybe even pretty close to 2023? I do. But I think that kinda proves that he isn’t really a focal point guy. Wes Welker was one of the greatest slots of all time, agreed? He had a career yards per target of 7.8. I don’t think it’s a slap in the face to suggest Shakir’s true efficiency floor is in that ballpark. We are talking about a guy who on decent volume had an 800 yard season. Just to put that in perspective for you. He’s very fun to watch and I’m glad he’s a Bill. Awesome post. Agree 100%. Quote
RoscoeParrish Posted July 18 Posted July 18 24 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: You see - right here you just kind of again said all of the extra targets would be those bubble screens. We are only talking about 1 more target per game, and you just said 1 or 2 more bubble screens. His ratio to bubble screens to other passes is already factored into his 100 targets and efficiency. Therefore, if you assume the same target distribution, which you should, then the per target efficiency scales with the extra target, not decreases. But the way you just phrased again is increasing the targets by increasing just bubble screens essentially and I don't think that is reasonable way to estimate his target increase. To go from 100 targets (roughly 6.6 per game based on his 2024 pace) to 150 targets (8.8 per game) you are talking a little over 2 extra targets per game. In order to manufacture those targets, imo, some of them would NEED to be more around the line of scrimmage. You aren’t dialing up 2 intermediate targets a game extra. Efficiency and ADOT would continue to drop. We just saw how much his efficiency dropped going from 45 to 100. Another 50 would continue to drop it imo. You say it’s factored in but I don’t think so. To get Shakir that level of volume, you are going dial up more manufactured stuff by definition. Did anyone predict his ADOT was gonna get cut in half after 2023? I doubt it. But it’s very telling to me that his OC did that in order to get him 100 targets. You are basically arguing that his 2024 usage is his baseline usage because it was. It’s circular logic. You could’ve said something similar after 2023. Assuming a little statistical drop off because his efficiency stats were bonkers, his target distribution should’ve remained relatively similar going from 2023 to 2024 and his ADOT should have never been cut in half. Unfortunately, we now have another year of evidence that that’s not how it works. In order to get his targets up, we DID have to use him more around the LoS, we DID have to manufacture a lot of touches, and it DID harm his efficiency. 30 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: I said that 2024 is probably his floor on things like YPC because of the increased short yardage throws (by strategic design) vs his elite efficiency in 2023 being helped by lower volume and many big plays. You and others keep wanting to further lower his floor as if he has no ability or talent above doing more bubble screens. This is really the spot where we disagree, the assumed type of targets on any above his pace last year See above. 35 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: It’s all good, all discussion, and all subjective. I just think people are short changing just how good he is at what he does and that he is being pigeon hold a bit too much into this bubble screen stuff. He was on pace for 110 targets here last year but he missed a little time with the injury. I think his sweet spot for say max targets is probaby 110-130 in an offense, and in our offense that puts him just at or over 1000 yards, and in an offense where the rest of the field is opened up a bit more with help elsewhere, I think his efficiency goes up and totals as well. 38 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: That being said - My hope is that we see guys like Keon, Palmer, Kincaid, and maybe even Moore prove they need targets this year, and that results in fewer targets for Shakir. But let me be clear, not because Shakir isn't good enough for these targets, I say that because I want to see these other guys also be good which would make our offense even better if so. I still think he would be one of the first 30 with all the intangibles he brings along with ability and talent compared to a lot of the other guys in that range who are either older or blend too much with the next 20 or so guys still available I don’t want to do a lot of heavy back on forth on this any further because it’s too much math. But I do want to address the bolded because I think it’s the crux of the matter. I think you see Shakir a lot differently than me. But I also think you see the top 30 WRs in the NFL a lot differently too. Almost all of those guys, DON’T max out. The 30th WR in the NFL in receiving yards last year was Tyreek Hill. His offense wants to give him MORE targets, not less. The Bears want to get the ball to DJ Moore who was 29th in yards MORE, not less. I see Shakir as exactly who he is has been. His value add is at its best when he is maxing it probably between 60-80 targets and is very efficient on those targets. There are not a lot of top 30 WRs that you want hitting that target load. Most of them, you want them getting anywhere from 120-140 targets. And that’s the difference between being a #1 and a #2 to me. I want the #1 to get the ball all the time. I want a Diggs to get 150 targets. And if Shakir gets 60 or 80 along the way, that’s great and valuable too. So to me, there’s no chance that Shakir is top 30. His intangibles are great, but I think he’s at his best with only a moderate load of targets. And that puts him in a different class than the top 30. Ultimately, I see Shakir as maxing out as a 600-800 yard per year guy for his career. I don’t think 2024 was his efficiency floor, but I think there’s a very good chance that his career total averages never eclipses what he did in 2024. And I think finding the sweet spot of getting enough targets to be both MORE productive than 2024 and MORE efficient than 2024 is next to impossible. If Shakir retires from the NFL in 10 years, his career averages will likely be like 50 catches, 710 yards, and a handful of TDs. Thats not nothing and that’s still quite valuable mixed with some good traits but that’s not more valuable than the top 30 or so WRs. 1 1 1 1 Quote
Alphadawg7 Posted July 18 Posted July 18 1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said: To go from 100 targets (roughly 6.6 per game based on his 2024 pace) to 150 targets (8.8 per game) you are talking a little over 2 extra targets per game. In order to manufacture those targets, imo, some of them would NEED to be more around the line of scrimmage. You aren’t dialing up 2 intermediate targets a game extra. Efficiency and ADOT would continue to drop. We just saw how much his efficiency dropped going from 45 to 100. Another 50 would continue to drop it imo. You say it’s factored in but I don’t think so. To get Shakir that level of volume, you are going dial up more manufactured stuff by definition. To be clear, I said several posts back 1 more target per game. Not sure who is talking 50 more targets, that is WR1 territory and I have not seen anyone suggest that and certainly not me. And again, at 100 targets there is already a mix of route types, to assume to add 17 more targets over a season means it has to predominantly come from one route type is not a logical way to estimate or predict outcomes. There is no way around that no matter how much you want to insist it seems to only be possible via bubble screens. 1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said: Did anyone predict his ADOT was gonna get cut in half after 2023? I doubt it. But it’s very telling to me that his OC did that in order to get him 100 targets. Literally everyone expected a drop across the board in efficiency on double the volume, including me. 1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said: You are basically arguing that his 2024 usage is his baseline usage because it was. It’s circular logic. You could’ve said something similar after 2023. Assuming a little statistical drop off because his efficiency stats were bonkers, his target distribution should’ve remained relatively similar going from 2023 to 2024 and his ADOT should have never been cut in half. Unfortunately, we now have another year of evidence that that’s not how it works. In order to get his targets up, we DID have to use him more around the LoS, we DID have to manufacture a lot of touches, and it DID harm his efficiency. See above. I am not even factoring in his 2023, like 0 factor even though those are real stats he did achieve, I have given him 0 value for them despite him achieving them when in reality some sort of blended between the two is more than warranted. I am still removing them entirely. 1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said: I don’t want to do a lot of heavy back on forth on this any further because it’s too much math. But I do want to address the bolded because I think it’s the crux of the matter. I think you see Shakir a lot differently than me. But I also think you see the top 30 WRs in the NFL a lot differently too. Almost all of those guys, DON’T max out. The 30th WR in the NFL in receiving yards last year was Tyreek Hill. His offense wants to give him MORE targets, not less. The Bears want to get the ball to DJ Moore who was 29th in yards MORE, not less. I think you have lost a bit of what this Topic started as - The OP poised this a DRAFT (in caps to emphasize, not yell as all is good) - and not a 1 year FFL draft, but an NFL draft to build a roster. In a draft, age, fit, style, tangibles, etc all get weighed. Tyreek Hill is on the final year or two of his career...Shakir is in his prime. A team drafting to build a roster isn't going to draft $30M WR at age 31 (who is also a bad teammate and overall POS - yes things that will be considered in a draft) over a young Shakir still ascending in his prime making $15M per and with his long list of intangibles (dirty work, great hands, clutch, playmaker with ball in his hands, good and willing blocker, etc). Its just not gonna happen, at least it shouldn't. This is NOT a rankings list (again highlighting not yelling), this is where do they go in an NFL draft if the league redrafted today. The reality is there are a lot of TE's that would go ahead of a lot of the WR's in the 20's and 30's too, but this was only about Shakir and how many WR's go before him in a draft. And that is a large disconnect I think in our views of both Shakir and the other WR's. I am staying true to the task of the OP and treating this as a GM would who is going to factor all the intangibles, roster makeup, draft strategy, costs, age etc. Otherwise we can kill this thread and everyone can move back to the rankings thread. 1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said: I see Shakir as exactly who he is has been. His value add is at its best when he is maxing it probably between 60-80 targets and is very efficient on those targets. There are not a lot of top 30 WRs that you want hitting that target load. Most of them, you want them getting anywhere from 120-140 targets. And that’s the difference between being a #1 and a #2 to me. I want the #1 to get the ball all the time. I want a Diggs to get 150 targets. And if Shakir gets 60 or 80 along the way, that’s great and valuable too. So to me, there’s no chance that Shakir is top 30. His intangibles are great, but I think he’s at his best with only a moderate load of targets. And that puts him in a different class than the top 30. Again, you are ranking not drafting see above. 1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said: Ultimately, I see Shakir as maxing out as a 600-800 yard per year guy for his career. I don’t think 2024 was his efficiency floor, but I think there’s a very good chance that his career total averages never eclipses what he did in 2024. And I think finding the sweet spot of getting enough targets to be both MORE productive than 2024 and MORE efficient than 2024 is next to impossible. If Shakir retires from the NFL in 10 years, his career averages will likely be like 50 catches, 710 yards, and a handful of TDs. Thats not nothing and that’s still quite valuable mixed with some good traits but that’s not more valuable than the top 30 or so WRs. Not only are you trying to rank instead of the draft task of this thread, but I also don't agree with your limited view on him. People said this to me when he was a 5th round pick - they said this to me before he broke out - they keep trying to say this to me after he broke out. Shakir keeps proving to be more than that, and I don't personally think he has fully peaked yet either. But its all good, all individual perspective and all just a make believe draft anyway. Cheers 1 Quote
RoscoeParrish Posted July 18 Posted July 18 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: To be clear, I said several posts back 1 more target per game. Not sure who is talking 50 more targets, that is WR1 territory and I have not seen anyone suggest that and certainly not me. And again, at 100 targets there is already a mix of route types, to assume to add 17 more targets over a season means it has to predominantly come from one route type is not a logical way to estimate or predict outcomes. There is no way around that no matter how much you want to insist it seems to only be possible via bubble screens. Literally everyone expected a drop across the board in efficiency on double the volume, including me. I am not even factoring in his 2023, like 0 factor even though those are real stats he did achieve, I have given him 0 value for them despite him achieving them when in reality some sort of blended between the two is more than warranted. I am still removing them entirely. I think you have lost a bit of what this Topic started as - The OP poised this a DRAFT (in caps to emphasize, not yell as all is good) - and not a 1 year FFL draft, but an NFL draft to build a roster. In a draft, age, fit, style, tangibles, etc all get weighed. Tyreek Hill is on the final year or two of his career...Shakir is in his prime. A team drafting to build a roster isn't going to draft $30M WR at age 31 (who is also a bad teammate and overall POS - yes things that will be considered in a draft) over a young Shakir still ascending in his prime making $15M per and with his long list of intangibles (dirty work, great hands, clutch, playmaker with ball in his hands, good and willing blocker, etc). Its just not gonna happen, at least it shouldn't. This is NOT a rankings list (again highlighting not yelling), this is where do they go in an NFL draft if the league redrafted today. The reality is there are a lot of TE's that would go ahead of a lot of the WR's in the 20's and 30's too, but this was only about Shakir and how many WR's go before him in a draft. And that is a large disconnect I think in our views of both Shakir and the other WR's. I am staying true to the task of the OP and treating this as a GM would who is going to factor all the intangibles, roster makeup, draft strategy, costs, age etc. Otherwise we can kill this thread and everyone can move back to the rankings thread. Again, you are ranking not drafting see above. Not only are you trying to rank instead of the draft task of this thread, but I also don't agree with your limited view on him. People said this to me when he was a 5th round pick - they said this to me before he broke out - they keep trying to say this to me after he broke out. Shakir keeps proving to be more than that, and I don't personally think he has fully peaked yet either. But its all good, all individual perspective and all just a make believe draft anyway. Cheers FWIW, Kirby did specifically say “same salary.” I took the “WR draft” angle as 32 teams with zero WRs and not factoring in dynasty/age. Which basically to me is “who are the most valuable WRs to GMs in 2025, ignoring age/price point.” If you are taking age and price point into account, I think I agree lol. Edited July 18 by RoscoeParrish Quote
Don Otreply Posted July 18 Posted July 18 Depends how you measure, skill set; higher than his statistics show statistics; we all know the answers 1 Quote
Alphadawg7 Posted July 18 Posted July 18 4 minutes ago, RoscoeParrish said: FWIW, Kirby did specifically say “same salary.” I took the “WR draft” angle as 32 teams with zero WRs and not factoring in dynasty/age. Which basically to me is “who are the most valuable WRs to GMs in 2025, ignoring age/price point.” Well for it not to be a rankings list, everything matters and I did mention that in all my previous posts about that stuff. To be fair, didn't see the "same salary" caveat in the OP, but that kind of makes this exercise a waste of time. He didn't say ignore age or other things though, just salary. But you can't discuss where someone will go in a draft as a "different" topic than just another rankings list if you remove all the things that would make it different than a rankings list. So, still sticking to it being a draft, I still stand by he would be one of the first 30 taken even if you remove the one caveat of salary because age, personality, chemistry, intangibles, etc were not removed and would still all be in play on discussing where they would get drafted. And that still has him going in the first 30 WR's in my book as well. Again all good 1 Quote
BullBuchanan Posted July 18 Posted July 18 4 hours ago, dave mcbride said: That's not really the story of the game. A lot of it came down to coaching decisions. For instance, BB decided to forego kicking a FG midway through in the third quarter on 4th and 13 from the 31 yard line. I thought that was insane at the time, and I was right. Brady threw a low-percentage heave to Jabar Gaffney that really had no chance. It would have been a 49 yard FG attempt in a dome for Gostkowski, who in all likelihood would have made the kick. Bear in mind that they lost by 3 points. After the Giants went up 10-7, the Pats threw it every single play on a stalled drive early in the fourth rather than mix it up. And then they blitzed on the game winning TD to Plaxico, shortly after Asante Samuel dropped what absolutely should have been the game-ending interception. At any rate, the 2006 Pats were probably the most dominant team in NFL history, and just had a bad day. Their not winning the SB had nothing to do with the fact that Randy Moss was the top receiver on the team. Watch the games. I just rewatched them at 1.5x speed and the difference between offensive philosophy was night and day. You're right, Brady had a terrible day in SB XLII. He was really the reason they lost. Multiple errant throws in critical positions that would have seen them score several more times. However, it was the scheme that allowed a bad day from Brady to lose them the SB. In XLIX and every SB Brady played with NE after that, his default look wasn't waiting 3/4/5 seconds to push the ball 7/15/25 yards down the field. It was bubble screens and drags to Edelman and Vereen that came out of his hands before the defensive line even made is back to the LoS. They kept the offense moving in every direction and neutralized one the the greatest defenses int he history of football. Witht hat scheme, Brady didn't have to be anywhere near as perfect and he was able to get into a rhythm. It was an evolution of what they ran when he first came into the league when he still had a noodle arm. Quote
Doc Brown Posted July 18 Posted July 18 He'd pry go in the 40 to 50 range if the NFL had a five round WR draft for one season. I'd be thrilled if he gave us the same production as last year. 1 Quote
NewEra Posted July 18 Posted July 18 4 hours ago, dave mcbride said: That's not really the story of the game. A lot of it came down to coaching decisions. For instance, BB decided to forego kicking a FG midway through in the third quarter on 4th and 13 from the 31 yard line. I thought that was insane at the time, and I was right. Brady threw a low-percentage heave to Jabar Gaffney that really had no chance. It would have been a 49 yard FG attempt in a dome for Gostkowski, who in all likelihood would have made the kick. Bear in mind that they lost by 3 points. After the Giants went up 10-7, the Pats threw it every single play on a stalled drive early in the fourth rather than mix it up. And then they blitzed on the game winning TD to Plaxico, shortly after Asante Samuel dropped what absolutely should have been the game-ending interception. At any rate, the 2006 Pats were probably the most dominant team in NFL history, and just had a bad day. Their not winning the SB had nothing to do with the fact that Randy Moss was the top receiver on the team. It also had a lot to do with Spags. The same guy that’s had a big hand in ending our last 2 seasons 1 Quote
3rdand12 Posted July 19 Posted July 19 On 7/17/2025 at 6:55 PM, Mikie2times said: They had arguably the greatest offense of all time with Moss that year. If a few things happen differently in one game they’re considered the greatest team in sports history. I’m sure they would have been just fine with a star WR long term if they went that route. Brady didn’t need it, that is what they proved. Ball was always going to an open player at light speed. They didn’t need a guy like Moss to make it work, but it would have been just fine either way. That one year it produced results like we have never seen before or since. Brady couldn't make those throws all day long either. Brady set up the Offense's style of play. The deep throw he would make . That choice was a Brady/ Bill thang . And it worked even better over the long term one might suggest ? 1 Quote
3rdand12 Posted July 19 Posted July 19 2 hours ago, Don Otreply said: Depends how you measure, skill set; higher than his statistics show statistics; we all know the answers Concisely stated Agree and Thank you for the distilled answer in regard to K Shakir Also, Great back and forth folks ! 1 Quote
Sierra Foothills Posted July 19 Posted July 19 On 7/17/2025 at 11:37 AM, Kirby Jackson said: 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… Posters here very quickly lost, ignored, or forgot the bolded. On 7/17/2025 at 11:46 AM, WotAGuy said: Oh good! I love it when we fight! You got your wish... I hope it made you happy while the rest of us suffered... 🙃 On 7/17/2025 at 5:04 PM, wettlaufer said: Ranking primarily against slot receivers: Slot‑Receiver: Major Statistical Rankings for Khalil Shakir (2024) 1. Separation & “Wide-Open” Targets Shakir ranked 2nd in the NFL among all receivers in percentage of targets where he was “wide open” (two or more steps of separation), at about 71.3% of his targets while playing slot. That tied for third‑most “wide open” targets (85) league‑wide 2. Catches / Receiving Yards / Touchdowns 76 receptions, 821 receiving yards, and 4 receiving touchdowns on 100 total targets (or 115 slot‑based target volume in some PFF analyses) . Among slot receivers, he likely ranked in the top tier for receptions and yards, though exact slot-only peer-perfect positional rankings beyond PFF context aren't fully public. 3. Yards After Catch (YAC) Among all wide receivers in 2024, he ranked top three in yards after contact, missed tackles forced (25), and YAC per reception (≈7.7 yds). He also ranked 3rd in YAC per reception per another source (≈7.9 yds) among all WRs As a pure slot receiver, he was leading the position in these categories. 4. Catch Rate / Efficiency Shakir posted an NFL-best catch rate (among WRs with ≥40 targets) of ~93.3% in 2024, and 86.7% in 2023. These were all-time highs dating back to when targets were first tracked in 1992 Among slot receivers, that catch percentage likely placed him #1 by a wide margin. 5. Overall PFF Slot Grade Earned a PFF slot receiving grade of roughly 84.0, based on targets within ~9 yards of the line of scrimmage. That places him among the top three slot receivers nationally for the year PFF 6. Screens Caught 29 of 31 screen targets for 189 yards, with two touchdowns, 8 first downs, and an 83.5 PFF grade, making him 4th in receiving yards on screens among all receivers, and top among slot receivers . Shakir’s Rank (Slot WRs) Wide‑open target %. / total targets ~2nd (≈71.3%) Catches / Receiving Yards Top‑3 Receiving Touchdowns High but lower relative (4 TDs) Yards After Catch / Missed Tackles Top‑3 (leading slot WRs) Catch Rate #1 among slot WRs (≈93%) PFF slot receiving grade Top‑3 nationally Screen receiving yards & effectiveness Top‑1 among slot receivers Elite separation and “wide-open” opportunity rates. Exceptional catch efficiency, topping all WRs at his usage volume. Massive production after the catch, forcing missed tackles and generating big plays. Outstanding grade from PFF as a slot receiver, consistent with leading the position. Thank you very much for the compelling statistical breakdown. I think the argument that a top tier slot receiver is more valuable (and in retrospect might be drafted higher) than an average starting boundary receiver is a valid one. I could definitely see Shakir being drafted in the 25-28 range... it would only take one team that doesn't have that type of player to make the pick. 1 Quote
3rdand12 Posted July 19 Posted July 19 1 hour ago, Sierra Foothills said: Posters here very quickly lost, ignored, or forgot the bolded. You got your wish... I hope it made you happy while the rest of us suffered... 🙃 Thank you very much for the compelling statistical breakdown. I think the argument that a top tier slot receiver is more valuable (and in retrospect might be drafted higher) than an average starting boundary receiver is a valid one. I could definitely see Shakir being drafted in the 25-28 range... it would only take one team that doesn't have that type of player to make the pick. Thank you for " reposting " wettlaufers research. And when we drafted him I recall there was more focus on his seeming limitations. Wow has he grown ! Going to re mention here , He is my Freddy Jackson of the current regime 🧡 1 Quote
Sierra Foothills Posted July 20 Posted July 20 I'm reminded in Ryan O'Halloran's Buffalo News article today that the Bills traded up 20 picks to get Shakir... at #148 in the 5th round. Shakir is part of the larger discussion of the Bills 2022 draft. While the Bills whiffed on Kaiir Elam, they struck gold with James Cook in the 2nd round, Terrel Bernard in the 3rd, Shakir in the 5th, and Christian Benford in the 6th. Behind a paywall: https://buffalonews.com/sports/professional/nfl/bills/article_22add474-2a3b-4e78-804b-beddd4447c8c.html From the article: “He was a ‘Bills Blue’ player all the way – a guy who, the more time we spent with him, we knew he would be a great pro and a culture and Buffalo fit for us,” Bills' Assistant GM Brian Gaine said. “We didn’t have a fourth-round (pick), and we never thought he would be available in the fifth round. We were sweating it out in the fourth and the top of the fifth, and we traded up.” The Bears received the Bills pick #168 and drafted OT Braxton Jones. Jones has started all 40 games he's played for the Bears though he's only been healthy for 23 of the last 34 games. The Bears drafted OTs in the 2nd and 6th round this year. The Bears also received pick #203 in the Shakir trade, which they used on running back Trestan Ebner who's been out of the league since August 2023. 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.