billsfan1959

Tis the season... As long as we are on Christmas analogies, I wonder which Ebenezer Scrooge poster will utter the first post draft pick, "Bah! Humbug!" My money is on....

Actually, Gronk should be thankful he wasn't taken in the 1st round because I heard, right here on this forum, that the outlook is very bleak for a tight end taken in the first round of ever becoming great... But I digress. As for my worst pick candidate of the 2010s: Sammy Watkins. I liked Watkins; however, 2 1st round picks and a 4th round pick could have been spent more wisely for a team with greater needs. Getting Watkins for EJ Manuel was like giving a Ferrari to someone who would only ever be able to master driving a moped...

I had two points regarding your assertions. First, you can make the same argument (specious as it is) about any position drafted in the first round, as success (per your definition) rates are low for all of them. Second, draft history has no predictive value regarding individual players. I have addressed this same argument with posters who cite the lack of success of QBs in the NFL that had sub 60% completion rates in college as a predictive indicator of Josh Allen's success/failure. (1) The sample size of TEs drafted in the first round is too small to draw any significant statistical conclusions and (2) even if there was a large enough sample size, it would have no relevance whatsoever regarding whether or not Hockenson should be selected in the first round or whether or not he will be successful. Those are group statistics. For example, if I told you that the average life expectancy of a male in the US was 72 years of age and that 70% of all men die by the time they are 82, it would not mean that you have a 70% chance of dying by the time you are 82 years old. As a matter of fact, it would mean nothing at all in regard to your personal life expectancy. That would depend on variables unique to you. Statistics might suggest that 70% of all men die by the time they are 82 years old; however, they cannot in any way say whether you are in the 70% that will die by age 82 or the 30% that will live longer. It is the same with Hockenson. He will succeed or fail based solely on variables unique to him. The statistical analyses of any group of tight ends, or how well or how poorly any specific tight end played, or where they were selected in the draft, in the entire history of the NFL, has no relevance at all to Hockenson. None.

You can make the same argument for virtually every position chosen in the first round throughout the history of the draft and, yet, it still hs no significance when it comes to assessing individual players.

The success or failure of any other tight end chosen in round 1 (or any round) is irrelevant to Hockenson.

I can see Beane moving around the draft board - but not at the expense of next year's #1.

I’m a subscriber and it is well worth the subscription. Some of the best work I’ve seen regarding the Bills.

OL at 9 wouldn't bother me. Perhaps the quickest path to improving Allen's play and taking advantage of his strengths is to build a strong offensive line.

Well, that might make the pick something less than an A+...

I'm more tired of the talk about the Carolina connection than any actual Carolina connection...

Agree. I think BPA at 9 will be DL; however, it would not surprise me in the least to see Metcalf or Hockenson as the pick.

Kelvin Benjamin looked the part of the Pillsbury Doughboy...

No. He's a wide receiver.

You won't know for a fact that Gary, Sweat, or any player the Bills choose at 9 will be worth the pick - that is the nature of the draft. There is nothing to say that Hockenson won't be a better pick, or that the Bills' defense will be shredded every week if they don't pick a defensive player at 9....

Beat me to it....

I say yes

This statement is so lacking in any sort of objective observations of what this team is doing that it borders on completely nonsensical....

For me, I don't mind Ice Bowl, as he is generally a "wish you guys luck" kind of poster as opposed to ZerovoTLZ, who tends to sound like he is lecturing us about our own team...

Are we back in the Cynthia Frelund thread?

Really? And here all of us were, thinking it meant he was a lock to be the Bills' first pick...

So, we can put you down as a "no?"

I am really on the fence with this pick. I think DL is deep in this draft; however, a true impact DL player the Bills really need is probably not going to get out of the top 10. On the other hand, I think Beane would love to have a legitimate top receiving talent for Allen. I lean toward a real difference maker on the DL; but, like you, I wouldn't dislike Metcalf (particularly if he ever reaches anything close to his potential).

Actually, you have spent a great deal of time criticizing Allen and, IMO, it has for the most part, not been accurate. As an aside, whether any other QB that ever came into the NFL was successful or not successful has zero relevance to Allen. Zero.

Except it isn't semantics. If you don't understand the difference between a running QB and a pocket passer that has mobility and the ability to run, then it really says a lot about your ability to accurately assess the QB position. As for the need for Allen to improve, there is really no debate that, like any other QB coming into the NFL, he has a lot to learn and much to improve on. That wasn't my point. My point was you have a history of turning any topic into a criticism of Allen - and that criticism is typically as accurate and insightful as your statement that the difference between a running QB and a pocket QB that can run is "semantics." I have no problem if you want to criticize Allen. Heaven knows there is plenty to criticize at this point. However, most of your criticisms are so clearly skewed to fit a narrative that they tend to lose credibility.