Don't expect a rookie WR to help us.

[Tatonka]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfldraft/draft04/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=1760935

"For whatever reason," allowed Buffalo Bills rookie coach Mike Mularkey at the recent combine sessions in Indianapolis, "(wide receiver) is a more difficult position to project than most people might think. I mean, it's a skill position, one where you think guys are going to come in and be ready to play quickly. But it's tough. It often takes those guys two or three years to get over the hump. Just look at the first-year numbers, even for the (wide receivers) taken in the first round, and they're pretty interesting."

[Patrick76777]

I've always said that.

It usually takes a WR 3 or 4 years to really break out!

[Hermanator21]

True , but in alot of cases the teams that draft a reciever early are the teams that don't have a #1 reciever. I think that if we can draft the right reciever he would be able to mature easier due to the fact the double teams would still be on Moulds and he would be able to learn from Moulds aswell. I dont think we need a 1000 yard reciever on the other side, we NEED a reciever with size and speed who can be usefull one the other side. Josh and Bobby are not the answer,their more like slot recievers.

[Earthquake Enyart]

Originally posted by Tatonka
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfldraft/draft04/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=1760935

"For whatever reason," allowed Buffalo Bills rookie coach Mike Mularkey at the recent combine sessions in Indianapolis, "(wide receiver) is a more difficult position to project than most people might think. I mean, it's a skill position, one where you think guys are going to come in and be ready to play quickly. But it's tough. It often takes those guys two or three years to get over the hump. Just look at the first-year numbers, even for the (wide receivers) taken in the first round, and they're pretty interesting."


The same is generally true of FA WR's during their 1st year with a new team. I try to stay away from them in fantasy football.

But there are exceptions (Bolden last year for one)

[Romes]

A DT wouldn't have much impact either with Williams and Adams infront.

The success of first year DE's, in general, isn't very good either, there are always execeptions, though.

Despite the fact that WR still generally need time to develop. I think that Roy/Reggie Williams could help this team next year more than anyone else expected to be there at #13. We can still pick up a contributing G/C in the 2nd round.

[Tatonka]

i disagree with the DT statement.. considering how much justin bannan ends up on the field because sam cant stay out there.

[Lone Stranger]

This draft is too deep in quality receivers for the Bills to pass one up, particularly, when Moulds in getting up in years.

[Tatonka]

i am not saying pass on one.. but like you said.. it is deep.. get one later.. dont use a pick on one in the first.

[Hermanator21]

Just because the draft is "deep" doesnt mean we are guaranteed a quality reciever in the later rounds. The top recievers is were the quality is at. We will need to groom a great reciever after Moulds slows down abit. Considering it takes a reciever 3-4 years to fully develope I dont think we should pass up on that opportunity since hopefully we wont be drafting this low for awhile.

[TheGhostofJimKelly]

It depends. Last years top WR was Charles Rogers. Now IMO there are four, possibly five of the receivers in this years draft that are better prospects than him, and if not better, as good or very close. It also depends on the team that they go to. This is what happened with last years crop:

Charles Rogers - only played in five games. 22 catches - 243 yards - 3 tds
Andre Johnson - 66 catches - 976 yards - 4 tds
Bryant Johnson - Got overshadowed by Bolden and adds to the argument with only 35 catches - 438 yds - 1 td

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by Hermanator21
Just because the draft is "deep" doesnt mean we are guaranteed a quality reciever in the later rounds. The top recievers is were the quality is at. We will need to groom a great reciever after Moulds slows down abit. Considering it takes a reciever 3-4 years to fully develope I dont think we should pass up on that opportunity since hopefully we wont be drafting this low for awhile.


there are alot of receivers that are not in the top tear this year that would be in, say last years draft.. like clayton, moore, jenkins, henderson, ect.. that could just as easily be studs.

[Throne Logic]

I think the general lack of immediate success experienced with WR's is related to the systems they play in.

More than any other position, WR's are reliant on the systems they play in. Routes are often very similar, but the particular routes they excelled in while in one system may not offer them success in another system. A WR finds his new teamates are now running routes that put defenders in the way instead of opening that subtle whole he had learned to exploit. It takes time to determine new ways to beat people consistently. New Offenses on the same team would tend to bring out the same problem - I'm somewhat concerned here. Run, baby, run. Although, Mularky will most likely have a similar system with better pieces and smarter play calling. So, hopefully, the impact on our WR's will be positive.

Furthermore, WR's are nearly 100% reliant upon their QB's. How often do WR's get a ball put in their hands that hasn't been tossed by the QB? This brings in a timing issue - both that of the QB and receiver and that of the overall offensive system. More margin for error, therefore more time is required to get it down pat.

Rookies have to adjust to the overall game speed on top of this.

Speed WR's that just outrun their cover man seem to do better than possession guys who have to time their routes properly. Kind of makes sense, does it not? Less precision required. Randy Moss pretty much just used his speed and jumping ability his rookie year. I don't remember too many huge possession routes from him in the highlights.

LOG, I take it you've come to many of the same conclusions based upon your FF philosophy concerning WR's.

[Tatonka]

i didnt know EE had any fantasy football philosophies after seeing his performance last year.

:idunno:

:rofl:

[Tatonka]

good points, throne.

[Tatonka]

coy wire is still fast.

[lordofgun]

Originally posted by Tatonka
i didnt know EE had any fantasy football philosophies after seeing his performance last year.

:rofl:

:couch:

[Throne Logic]

Wire may still have to proove some things to me on the field, but I ain't about to pick his pocket. . .

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by Throne Logic
Wire may still have to proove some things to me on the field, but I ain't about to pick his pocket. . .

well.. you look pretty tuff in your avatar.. i think you could take him.

[Halbert]

Originally posted by Hermanator21
Josh and Bobby are not the answer,their more like slot recievers.
I still think Reed could easily become an excellent #2. In fact, I expect him to have at least 800 yards receiving this coming year. This will be his third season and he looks to me to be ready to take that next step.

[Throne Logic]

:earpoke:

[Earthquake Enyart]

Originally posted by Tatonka
i didnt know EE had any fantasy football philosophies after seeing his performance last year.

:idunno:

:rofl:


Originally posted by lordofgun
:rofl:

:couch:


:mad:

[Throne Logic]

I have high expectations for Reed this year, also. He settled in nicely during the second half of last season. And that was after Mould's injury and the utter collapse of the offensive philosophy.

I'm one of the minority around here that believe that we will be fine if we didn't bring in any more WR's this year. I wouldn't complain about fast guy with decent hands, but I don't want to use the #13 on one.

[Devin]

reed will have a solid year its magic #3 for him.

As T and others have said numerous times, WR take a couple years. Take one in the 2nd. TO wasnt a first round pick he was a 3rd. Look at his stats:

year 1 = 520 yards
year 2 = 936 yards
ding ding ding magical year 3 1097

Probably more later round recievers thriving then there are first in the NFL.

Take Rivers. End of argument.

[Bmax]

Remember we are not drafting just for this year. Wr in rd one could give us the offensive weapons we haven't had since james lofton and kenny davis was in buffalo. Remember 1990 the weapons we had .. Lofton, reed, meetzalars,mckellar,thomas, davis.

We had multiple weapons. A vet wr who had deep speed. Asolid back up running back and a blocking te and a guy who had speed at te to get deep down the middle. Let's go for reggie williams in rd one and Ben watson in rd two then we will have the weapons to attack any def any way we want....


Bmax

[lunatic_bills_fan]

I think one fact is, Josh Reed is never going to be this team's #1 reciever. Therefore this draft (on paper anyways) would be suited to find Moulds' replacement. Also take a look at what Charlie Rogers was doing last year before he got injured. There are a number of rookies WR's that end up making an impact early in thier years.