Darius Slay claimed on waivers by Buffalo

[Bockeye]

14 hours ago, BigAl2526 said:

Since Buffalo put Slay on the "reserved did not report" list, I wonder if they will release him after Buffalo plays Philadelphia.  There is no reason for Buffalo to keep him there indefinitely besides spite.  At the same time, I don't especially want to help a future opponent.

I don’t think they will. As someone pointed out, Boldin actually signed with us, retired, then subsequently asked Beane/Bills to release him so he could sign with another team. Beane said Nope!

 

Hopefully he does the same in this situation. 

[Tanoros]

7 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Exactly.  Why hypothesize otherwise?

 

The results are that, after 12 games, Allen has already been sacked twice as many times as last season and will easily ecclipse his # of scrambles (already at 38 compared to 42 last season) and pressure %

Honestly, at this point I really have to applaud the consistency, not in your logic, but in your commitment to avoiding it.

 

We’ve now gone from:

 

“Number of sacks doesn’t mean anything about the O-line.”

 

to

 

“Allen has more sacks this year, so the O-line must be bad.”

 

…all while completely sidestepping pass block win rate, which has now been brought up twice and somehow keeps getting ignored like it’s in witness protection.

 

Just to remind you: PBWR specifically removes QB mobility, escape ability, scramble rate, extended plays, and all the things you keep trying to blame for last year’s excellent pass protection numbers. It measures only whether the lineman holds his block for 2.5 seconds. That’s it. None of the other noise factors in.

 

But since PBWR is apparently off-limits in this conversation, let me add one more inconvenient piece of objective data you’ll probably pretend not to see. I’m linking a composite chart that averages three independent analytics sources,  PFF, ESPN, and SIS. This isn’t one metric. It’s three combined. Guess where the Bills land?

 

Top right quadrant.

 

Which, in case the axes are tricky:

• higher pass protection efficiency

• better EPA per dropback

• better overall performance

 

Basically: “this O-line is good.”

 

But I’m sure when you see it, we’ll get Installment #3 of the ongoing saga “Metrics Don’t Count Unless They Agree With Me.”

 

Because we’ve already watched you redefine the meaning of sacks twice in the same thread, first they were meaningless, now they’re definitive proof, and the only consistent thing so far has been your determination to ignore anything measurable when it contradicts your conclusion.

 

That’s not analysis. That’s stubborn narrative maintenance.

 

Look, you’re absolutely entitled to your opinion. If you feel the O-line is bad, nobody can stop you. But pretending the data is on your side while actively avoiding the data? That’s a different conversation entirely.

 

Anyway, take a look at the chart or enjoy selectively ignoring it.

[HOUSE]

I completely understand how Slay would pick the warmer weather in Philadelphia over Buffalo

The guy should sell used cars and give up football..

Edited 55 minutes ago by HOUSE

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, Tanoros said:

Honestly, at this point I really have to applaud the consistency, not in your logic, but in your commitment to avoiding it.

 

We’ve now gone from:

 

“Number of sacks doesn’t mean anything about the O-line.”

 

to

 

“Allen has more sacks this year, so the O-line must be bad.”

 

…all while completely sidestepping pass block win rate, which has now been brought up twice and somehow keeps getting ignored like it’s in witness protection.

 

Just to remind you: PBWR specifically removes QB mobility, escape ability, scramble rate, extended plays, and all the things you keep trying to blame for last year’s excellent pass protection numbers. It measures only whether the lineman holds his block for 2.5 seconds. That’s it. None of the other noise factors in.

 

But since PBWR is apparently off-limits in this conversation, let me add one more inconvenient piece of objective data you’ll probably pretend not to see. I’m linking a composite chart that averages three independent analytics sources,  PFF, ESPN, and SIS. This isn’t one metric. It’s three combined. Guess where the Bills land?

 

Top right quadrant.

 

Which, in case the axes are tricky:

• higher pass protection efficiency

• better EPA per dropback

• better overall performance

 

Basically: “this O-line is good.”

 

But I’m sure when you see it, we’ll get Installment #3 of the ongoing saga “Metrics Don’t Count Unless They Agree With Me.”

 

Because we’ve already watched you redefine the meaning of sacks twice in the same thread, first they were meaningless, now they’re definitive proof, and the only consistent thing so far has been your determination to ignore anything measurable when it contradicts your conclusion.

 

That’s not analysis. That’s stubborn narrative maintenance.

 

Look, you’re absolutely entitled to your opinion. If you feel the O-line is bad, nobody can stop you. But pretending the data is on your side while actively avoiding the data? That’s a different conversation entirely.

 

Anyway, take a look at the chart or enjoy selectively ignoring it.

 

Well, I didn't say the number of sacks is meaningless.  I said he doesn't take nearly as many if he was a non mobile QB behind that line.  Pretty simple. The logic of mentioning sacks (and pressures) is to point out  that the O-line, as far as how it protects Josh Allen this year, is both subjectively and objectively worse based on end results.  

 

I guess Allen is just squandering this top notch protection with poor QB play, no?

[Tanoros]

7 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Well, I didn't say the number of sacks is meaningless.  I said he doesn't take nearly as many if he was a non mobile QB behind that line.  Pretty simple. The logic of mentioning sacks (and pressures) is to point out  that the O-line, as far as how it protects Josh Allen this year, is both subjectively and objectively worse based on end results.  

 

I guess Allen is just squandering this top notch protection with poor QB play, no?

Has the O-line performed worse this year than last? Yes, it has. That’s not a revelation, it’s a reality across several areas of the offense. But even with regression from last year’s elite standards, the Bills’ O-line is still performing at a top-tier level relative to the rest of the NFL. That part hasn’t changed.

 

I want to remind you why I originally responded: you said, “When the O-line is healthy they are bad at pass protection.” That was a bold claim, and it simply wasn’t supported by any available data. Since then you’ve shifted the goalposts to, “Well, the O-line isn’t as good as last year,” which is true, but irrelevant to your original statement. The discussion wasn’t about this year vs last year. It was about whether this line is “bad” at pass protection. The evidence says it isn’t.

 

And if we’re talking about the passing offense struggling this season, the O-line is one of the last places to look. There are multiple, far more plausible reasons:

• Joe Brady’s inconsistency

• lack of top-end receivers

• missing Kincaid and Palmer

• Beane’s overall WR room construction

• and yes, Allen himself at times

 

It’s not a mystery the pass game hasn’t reached expectations. But reaching for the O-line, one of the clear strengths of the roster, as the culprit simply doesn’t make sense. If anything, the O-line (in both run blocking and pass protection), Cook, and Allen (to be clear, Allen has had his moments which is why I noted him above too) have been the stabilizing forces of the offense while everything around them has fluctuated.

 

At this point, it’s fair to simply acknowledge that your original claim,  that the O-line is bad at pass protection when healthy,  was inaccurate. That’s why I responded in the first place: because it was an extreme statement that didn’t align with anything objective. Frustration with the broader offense is understandable, but attributing that frustration to the one unit that consistently grades near the top of the league is not.

 

We can disagree on interpretations, but we can’t ignore what the data shows. And the data has not supported your position from the start.