ctk232
-
Posts
1,144 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ctk232
-
-
1 hour ago, starrymessenger said:
What you say makes sense to me. I'm happy with either one, but would like to know the basis for the Bill's decision. They will never get into it tho.
I’m curious where they fit him in - he’s a talent that could start Day 1. But without considering time between now and then, I’ll be curious to see how he competes with Nsekhe at RT. A lot of people are sleeping on that FA pickup and I feel will be pleasantly surprised.
That to say, I’d like to see what he can do at Guard, but for a team looking to fill its line out, and given the current roster following FA, I just get Risner to be the better talent for us at our pick (wouldn’t have had to trade up either).
Could’ve been much worse (*cough DK cough*), and I always love me some OL picks - let’s get it.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Formerly Allan in MD said:
He can play guard or right tackle.
Hope they play him at Guard tbh - I'll be the guy with all the confused and sad faces here, but I was one in the Risner pool over Ford. I wasn't a fan of his lack of quick feet for being a Tackle in the NFL attempting to handle the new speed power based edge rushers, and I felt Risner was the much more complete Tackle with even greater utility value as well. My inclination is they will try and start Ford at RT as an immediate upgrade given the Guard depth we added in FA, but they may look to fill him in at both.
Before I garner all the hatred of the board, Ford is a great OL talent that still needs refinement at the next level, but I must say that at the end of the day I'm still happy with this pick and even happier we didn't give up too much to move up two spots.
-
1 hour ago, Just Joshin' said:
Would rather let BPA come to us @40 and move back into 2nd with 3rd and 3rd with 4th.
^This - player wise my preference would be for Butler and/or Risner as I feel we can keep our 2nd and still package picks to move back up to a similar spot to get both.
-
36 minutes ago, ExWNYer said:
Agreed. I posted this in the other draft thread...
Pete Prisco (for what little it's worth):
3 (Jets) Quinnen Williams, DT, Alabama
I love this pick. I could make a case for Josh Allen as the Jets needed more of a pure pass rusher, but this kid will be dominant. People in the league have compared him to Reggie White, let's slow down a bit on that, but this kid is a dominating player. Grade: A
9 (Bills) Ed Oliver, DT, Houston
I thought he was misused at Houston. I think this kid is going to be special at the next level. He is not Aaron Donald, I don't like that comparison. He plays a lot like John Randle and Randle was a Hall of Famer. This kid is going to be a good player for Buffalo. Grade: A
13 (Dolphins) Christian Wilkins, DT, Clemson
This is my favorite pick of the entire draft so far. Love this pick. I think this kid is going to be a star. I was all over Grady Jarrett when he was picked and I think Wilkins could be even better. This is a good building block for Brian Flores and his staff. Grade: A+
32 (Patriots) N'Keal Harry, WR, Arizona State
I watched every one of his games and believe me it pains me to give this a 'C+,' but I just think there were better options. One thing when you look at the Patriots is they don't play fast outside, they needed to get faster. Maybe they expect Josh Gordon to come back at some point, but, for me I would have taken Parris Campbell or one of those guys, a faster, more athletic receiver. I don't love this pick. Grade: C+
Couldn’t agree more with that assessment - I can’t really see the Donald comparison. To that, I would liken Quinnen Williams. That being said, I much prefer the Randle in our D. Watching more of the tape his speed and strength provide an incredible opportunity for mismatches across the line. On early downs he can be effective from the interior and stout against the run as a three tech, however, while he could certainly generate pass rush from the same position I would actually entertain the idea of putting him outside at 5-tech where he can use his bullish speed/power combo to really get in the way of OTs.
Needless to say I’m stoked about this one. Any one (or dare I say both with a trade up) of Risner/Butler and I’m going to have a hard time waiting for September.
-
5
-
-
3 minutes ago, JayW said:
Im not skeptical at all i been watching and ive heard many people say there is still medical people disagreeing and that the new report was put out with his agents help to push him back up boards. Real peculiar that it came out 6 hours before the draft. Sounds like an agent helping his client to me. Note: i still think he is a first rounder myself.
For sure, it certainly has the makings of an agent release for that purpose. But I'm still skeptical on the whole evaluation of his medical condition as a lot of pieces don't add up.
Needless to say, I doubt they'd target Sweat at 9 healthy or not.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, JayW said:
Last time i started a thread with insider info it was dead on, i know someone who works for the Bills and this is some info he gave me. he is currently in the war room i cant attach the screenshot for some reason keeps saying its too big no matter what i do so im just gonna type what he said:
They like Oliver, but Beane will not move up for a rotational DL.
Sweat has a 100% medical “F” grade.
“He heart condition is mild, but high-risk. Could play whole career with no problems or it could progress and he's not be able to play anymore in the future. Hard to predict. He was late to two team meetings as well”.
Nothing earth shattering but interesting nonetheless.
Highly skeptical of this. Might also be worth checking with your friend how they feel about this report^
-
2 hours ago, mikemac2001 said:
If there guy isn’t there I’d like a trade down
gain an extra first next year or this year
then do a trade up with our 3-5rds back into the 2nd
That would give us 4 picks in top 60 or 3 picks in top 60 and 2 1st next year
we need to move picks either way.
While awesome, it's so hard to account and plan for a trade down scenario. it's been beaten to death on here, but the suitor needs to be there on the other end as well. Needless to say, I do think you'll see, or at least hear afterwards of an attempt, to package our late round picks to move back up into the 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th rounds depending on who the sleeper falls are - especially when it comes to the depth at DL, WR, and TE in this draft, Beane may only get a suitor to trade back up into this year's 2/3/4th rounds.
If we could get a trade to gain an added first for next year, I'm not sure what that might look like unless a team is again actively looking for our 9th pick from pretty low in the first (comparable value and what not). That to say, I'm not sure there's a team down there that would do this outside of the Pats - though they would seem content to pick whoever falls to them at 32. There's still the hope that the Redskins try and trade up, or another team looking too far down the future and not at the massive DL feast in front of them this year - but not sure how much, if at all, we can bank on it. But look on the bright side - our scouts and FO have at least landed on late round picks and UDFA pick ups to the point where we need those guys just as much as our star talent to fill out the roster and make the team affordable. Let's not forget, we still need to work on getting ST guys which those late round picks come in handy for.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:
No disagreements here. It comes down to value, our board and teams above and below wanting to move or stay put. Top notch talent seems to be the DL in general at the top end and a move up in RD1 for that would be for one of those guys. Otherwise I'm not sure how much we would slide back in RD1 unless we can pick up a 2nd rounder this year.
I can definitely see us moving up in RD2-7
For sure, and it's difficult to gauge. There's still the chance that Beane makes a move for Clark or Clowney as well on draft day which would ultimately affect whether we accrue more early picks or end up trading into different rounds.
My current hope is we're able to trade up into the 2nd for an additional pick if we can - or down in the first adding an extra second just to capitalize on the mid-round depth of talent for WRs and TEs in addition to hopefully adding an OL to the stable we've brought in. I'm not as high on drafting an RB in this class, and would be fine spending a 5th or lower there, but otherwise waiting for next year.
The bottom line is that the fact we are even able to discuss all these options as possibilities is enough to say that our Front Office has done absolute work in setting themselves up for however the cards may fall on draft day, and make the most of any situation.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Reed83HOF said:
2017 was not Beane, I hesitate how much you use that draft as a trade up and trade down example. I excluded that draft for my thought process since the entire front office changed right after the draft.
2018 on is what to look at. We seem to be aggressive when we zero in on a player - Allen and they had no scenarios where Edmunds was available at 22, he slid enough to make them move. I expect us to be aggressive here if they have someone ranked highly enough the depth below them...
Exactly - while I appreciate OP's thoughts, you kind of need it to happen more than once for a pattern to be established...considering Beane's only been here for one draft I'm not sure what kind of pattern there is to discern. Speculation based upon events that have happened so far? Sure.
That being said, it's difficult to draw any kind of scenarios for how we approached the early rounds last year into this year. While the similarities are that we are going into draft day with a good number of picks, we do not have two first round picks nor are we looking for a QB in the first. I do agree that Beane demonstrated he's not afraid to be aggressive and trade up for his guy, but having a good number of picks is better than not as a GM so it only makes sense he'd try and give himself the best situation possible to achieve multiple outcomes (i.e. trade up, trade down, player trades for picks, etc.) should he choose to do so. I wouldn't say this is a guarantee that he will move up in the draft.
There's nothing to say we won't just pick ten players where we currently fall in any order based upon his historical draft record...
-
3
-
-
14 hours ago, wppete said:
Brian Burns looks like a longer version of Von Miller. His length, speed and athleticism is unreal. He has been to Buffalo for a visit already and would love to see us trade back to mid teens pick up an extra 2nd and take Burns. He is going to be a star in the NFL especially if he adds some weight. I’d draft him over Bosa and J. Allen. If we don’t draft him I hope he stays out of the AFC East.
-Brian Burns
“I actually try to pattern my game after a lot of people. I feel like I take bits and pieces from the people I like to watch as far as Khalil Mack, Von Miller, Leonard Floyd, Dee Ford. There’s a lot of dudes. I just look at them. Whatever I see from their game I try to take bits and pieces and combine it to my own.”
The more I look at our pick at 9 I honestly wouldn't care, and would even prefer it if we took Burns over the likes of Metcalf, Hock, and yes, even Oliver. Taking on another potentially unpopular opinion here, while both Bosa and Allen are clear talents likely to go in the top 5, I would consider Burns to be comparable in terms of how each might perform at the next level, and would even go as far to say Burns might have a higher ceiling of potential growth. Even though his projection is in the middle of the first, I don't think a pick at 9 would constitute a reach here, but he is the lesser talked about pass rusher that I agree with OP in likening to Von Miller more so than any other true pass rusher in the draft class.
But because I'd like it to happen, it won't...
-
1
-
-
58 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:
I will agree to disagree on Ngata. He's a defensive lineman. Maybe he wouldn't have been AS good, but while it can't be PROVEN, there is no reason to believe he wouldn't have had a stellar career regardless of draft team.
The question is much more interesting when you add QB to the equation. I personally think Jared Goff is a below average QB who would play below average if not for McVay. Tom Brady? Who in the world knows? You could definitely play that game forever when it comes to QB's.
Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying he definitely wouldn't have been great, just that we can't ever know for certain and to say so isn't entirely accurate as any one of those things could have impeded him in that trajectory - hell, he could've been injured and ended his career. Just noting the reasons why we can't say so.
While you definitely can play that game more so with QBs - I don't think DL/DT is exempt from the same considerations. So much of their success is dependent upon their role in the system and the guys next to them being able to execute their roles as well. Talent can combat this to varying degrees but it's often not enough if the rest of the picture isn't there, too. I won't ever argue Ngata wasn't a stud, five time pro-bowler speaks to itself; however, he was a part of a Ravens defense that is arguably among the best of all time - easy for talent to shine there and continue to do so when the opposition has to consider the likes of the other guys they had at every level of the defense for several consecutive years.
-
1
-
-
On 4/15/2019 at 5:06 PM, LSHMEAB said:
Ngata is a great player. Great players tend to..play great.
Not following the logic. What would have derailed a defensive lineman's career in Buffalo?
Different schemes, different coaches, different players around him on the line, different division, different field/arena environment - regardless, it's a logical fallacy to say that had Ngata been drafted by the Bills (or any other team) that his career would have taken the same trajectory and seen the same success. It's just simply something that cannot be proven, just speculated on.
Many things can derail a player's development regardless of their inherent talent, including injuries. Now he could have very well performed comparably or even equally had he been drafted by the Bills, but to use that as an absolute or in an argument to prove something would just be false.
To round it out, there are many players who perform at a top level on one team and leave for another and don't perform for x/y/z reason. Along those lines, I've always wondered what kind of QB Brady would've been had he played for any other coach.
-
On 4/14/2019 at 12:11 PM, Doc Brown said:
Wish they would've separated DE and DT.
Actually though - they did it for OL why just blanket DL and dismissively address it throughout? Granted, the fact this article came out in 2015 means it wouldn't have exactly addressed DL in the context of this year's class, being that it has unprecedented talent depth at those positions. But an armchair analysis and eye test would have me believe that the greater risk is with the DT position specifically, as opposed to the pass rusher/DE profile players - particularly as of recent years.
Outside of coaching, scheme disparities and transition to the NFL are substantial variables for determining this, but I would almost feel that DE/pass rushers are safer bets in the first round than interior DL. I'm curious what that breakdown would look like here, but also not sure this study could really tell us that either - it still manages to interpret data applications that are otherwise statistically flawed, and doesn't consider other variable factors in terms of scheme evolution and position importance over the course of those year ranges.
-
4 minutes ago, Augie said:
Hey, it’s not MY money! But the problem comes when you give away too much so you can’t afford the better players we want. There is a relationship that has to be considered.
Kinda like how Seattle can't afford a team now that they paid Russell; the better players being Clark and Wagner.
That being said, I wouldn't hate us making a reasonable move for Clark here, but with due consideration on player contracts the concerns on this board are justifiable when it comes to fielding a sustainable, competitive team. Especially one that still has to pay Allen should he continue to progress, in addition to Edmunds, White, Dawkins, etc.
Edit: it'll be interesting to see if Seattle doesn't deal Clark this year how they might look to keep him on that 5th year option while Russell's contract ends. While both sides compromised, pretty sure the 4 year mark was a max, non-negotiable on behalf of the GM to entertain the hope of retaining Clark and Wagner long term.
-
15 hours ago, Zerovotlz said:
It's fluid enough right now that I wouldn't either bet for or against what you are saying here.
16 hours ago, Zerovotlz said:3. Combine the idea here that it's a one QB draft, and that the blue chips will be available into the 20's and that means your going to have a draft with little or no trading at the top. With no QB to go up for, none of the teams like Washington or Miami will be inclined to pay a price to move up for the 2nd QB in this draft who is probably every bit as good (or bad as the case may be) as the 8th QB. Also, if you can get a Blue chip defender at 20, why trade up to 8, 9 etc? The market conditions aren't going to be there for teams to want to pay to move up.
So here's the thing - I agree with you in regards to your assessment of this QB class, and will even go so far as to say that there isn't a QB in this draft class worth taking in the first round. However, this is the NFL and the premium that is placed on the QB position gives it this unicorn draft value every year that, regardless of the talent, there will be at least one team reaching for a QB in the first. And at the rate teams have done so in the past I wouldn't be surprised to see 2-3 drafted in the first round.
Now to your point of trading up/down/sideways/whatever - teams trade up for other positions that aren't QB. This is just a matter of fact. Maybe not with equivalent frequency but certainly in good number, considering it's how we got our LB last year. While this class is littered with DL depth, there are other positions with players that teams may consider to be exceptionally high value and trade up for that specific player. Additionally, teams may value one specific player as a scheme fit or for various scouting superlatives that, to them, stands out among the entirety of the rest of the class and would like to trade up for that one player regardless of position. Nothing about this QB class, or the classes in any year for that matter, precludes a trade scenario for any team. It may make the forecast more cloudy than sunny - but marginally so, if at all.
I can never fully understand the talks about pick values and the chart for this reason either - every year is a different class of talent, at different positions, with variable depth. The first overall pick is not equivalent to the first overall pick from previous year's drafts - nor are the players comparable in the least at that pick. Further, the same can be said for the value of pick 75 in this class compared to other year's, since the depth of talent is so much greater this year. You can also bet that teams value these picks and players very differently, and there will be GMs calling for potential trades come draft day. But all this to say, we can guess all we want with varying degrees of accuracy and logic - the Bills' chances of trading down/up/or out of the draft altogether are still all the same.
This is about par for this time of year...next two weeks will see exponential spikes until the 25th.
-
1 hour ago, Jay_Fixit said:
Ben Burr-Kirven is my boy!
I really hope he's that 5th round pick for us this year - was thinking it watching him here all season that he could be that LB/S hybrid with high football intelligence we snag in the 5th. But since I want it to happen, likely won't turn out that way either...
-
22 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:
I dont think there is much chance we will take a RB in round 1. I agree, all bets are off, but I just don't see any scenario where BPA on Beane's board with be a RB in the first round. So much DL, WR, TE, OL talent there when we trade down that I just don't see it. Especially after Jacobs ran so slow. Now had Jacobs ran fast, then I think it may have had a bit more possibility.
But I do think we will take a guy in the first 4 rounds with rounds 3 or 4 being the most likely. I think Love, Henderson, Snell, Singletary, etc are all in play there.
If Jacobs slips to the 2nd round though, then maybe Beane goes for RB earlier and takes him. But I think there are some other players in the 2nd that will be higher on the board like Ximines, Irv/Fant, Simmons, Tillery, several WR's, Risner and other OL guys that would make more sense with then us coming back and getting a RB with one of our next 3 picks overs round 3 and 4.
TBH, I would be pretty surprised to see a RB taken before round 3. I wont be upset, just think this draft is deep in RB in rounds 3, 4, and even 5 this year. And just don't see enough separation in them to point at one and say he is a must get guy in rounds 1 or 2.
At the rate we're averaging posts created about drafting a RB, most with high picks, you'd think we'd be bringing in seven of them next year....
But agreed - from the armchair perspective, it's more likely that RB will be addressed in rounds 3+ given the depth of talent at other positions for the value pick needed. Frankly, I don't see a single RB in this draft worth a 2nd round pick, even Jacobs, for what other talent value can be had in that round at DL, OL, WR, and TE. All of which are likely of a higher BPA value than RB at the present time. If the trigger is pulled, I believe it would be Singletary in the 4th/5th pending availability of Henderson, Snell, and Love.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, BuffaloRebound said:
Please stop putting Burns and Maybin in the same sentence. The fact that Burns can move like that after putting on the required weight is what separates him from guys like Maybin. And he’s had solid production for over 2 years. I’d have no problem taking him at 9.
Exactly - while I'd be happy with a couple guys at 9, the more I look at it I would love to have Burns added to the DL. If 3-4 QBs don't end up going before us and Allen doesn't fall as a result, I would like to see Burns as our added pass rusher.
I'd still be happy with someone like Oliver, Wilkins, etc. - I just think our disruptive pass rush is better suited coming from the edge than the DT position in our defensive scheme, as much as we could use another DT.
-
Certainly would pick it up for the depth in rotation if nothing else - while he may never live up to his pick, I like the guy and his work ethic on the DL. He's willing to play multiple tech roles and while he hasn't been dominant, he has shown he can at least be effective at each. See how this year goes and since he likely won't command a huge payday, we'll have the additional option to re-sign him if this year goes well.
At least the FO gets to go through the draft before deciding. Wouldn't make sense to pick it up prior to the draft.
-
1
-
-
16 hours ago, Aussie Joe said:
Why move Edmunds outside?
He is 20 yrs old and has just done a crash course as MLB and improved throughout the season..They thought so much of him last year.. give him another season at least..
Also, they play a lot of nickel with Taron Johnson on the field for about half the snaps meaning that Edmunds and Milano can be the 2 LB’s
It just seems a wasted use of a Top 10 pick..
I wouldn't say it would be a waste, but important point here is scheme. Given our primary base, we only really ever play 2 LB packages - wouldn't make sense to make the impact pick there.
That being said, I don't disagree with OP and the evaluation of White - he's a special talent for the position. I just don't see us going here at 9 unless they do so as early contingency and decide to let Milano walk (not necessarily something I'm for), but they would have to be pretty high on a Edmunds/White duo to bypass other greater potential value added at 9 along the DL.
-
17 hours ago, Laughing Coffin said:
Bills probably laid out their offer, and he still wants to shop himself around. I'm not butthurt if he doesn't sign with us. I feel like Buffalo would have to give him a lot here and he's been injury prone most of his career, with inconsistencies to boot.
For some reason I'm not as concerned with his injuries as I am simply for the cost/benefit analysis for what he'd likely sign for. If Beane laid out a "judicious" offer and is okay if Ansah ends up taking it as the best offer at the end of the day, or goes elsewhere, I'm thrilled with that.
Selfishly, I'm still hoping for a marquee trade with our remaining cap whether it be for a WR or DL. Tangentially, watching how much a lot of these players are getting [over]paid this year, I'd really like to use our considerable cap situation this year and next to either extend or re-sign some of our younger as well as foundation guys before Josh is up. Inflation is going to be crazy in the next few years under the cap, depending on the upcoming CBA too.
-
2
-
-
17 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:
Best argument I have is this: when was the last time that a top-10 TE went on to have a great career?
Matter of fact, when was the last time that a 1st-round TE went on to have a great career?
Moreover, who are the best TEs in football in the last half-decade? How many of them were 1st-round picks, let alone top-10 picks?
Unpopular opinion around here: I would not be okay with Hock at 9. There is much better value to be had still at positions of need, and while FA helped us to address quite a number of holes in the roster - far more than I honestly expected in one off-season - this does not make TE our number one priority. While Hock may be the best TE in the draft to most, I don't believe he is the 9th best player overall, nor will he likely be the BPA at a position of need for us at 9.
We can address this need in myriad ways and doesn't warrant us spending a 9th overall on him. I'm constantly wary of drafting TEs in the first, as many do not have the experience to directly translate their skills to a first round pick value level and contribute in their first year. The TE position plays very differently in the NFL than in college, and while Hock may very well have the skills to make that transition, I don't see it happening in the first year. For the value, there are many more options in an otherwise unprecedentedly deep TE draft where great potential value can be had as late as the 3rd and 4th rounds. Not opposed to it in the 2nd again if the value is there, or in a trade back scenario, but be wary of TE's in the first.
-
1
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, BakersBills said:
havent signed any DT and just seems to make sense at 9.
They re-signed J-Phil, not that that should be any indication they are done with the position, but would doubt their eyeing it as a high need.
10 hours ago, matter2003 said:They are going to draft the best player in the highest rated group on the board at their draft position.
If that group contains a DT, then it might be DT, if that group doesn't contain a DT then it won't be a DT. They are not "eyeing" anyone at this point.
^This - regardless of how the rest of FA goes, or doesn't
-
9 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:
I'd still love to add Cook or Eifert, and Houston or Suh. And Williams and Saffold.
Getting Eifert could be an incentive-laden deal. When healthy, he's the best catching TE in the red-zone.
the NFL network is now garbage. There is no place to turn for around-the-league coverage. Literally, the most interesting thing on the NFL network is the ticker at the bottom telling you the news around the league. Coverage: limited to splash players for hours on end. It's like ESPN.
Didn't Saffold sign with TEN?
-
1
-
RD 6, Pick 181: S Jaquan Johnson, University of Miami
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Idk, I like the kid (Johnson is quickly becoming the new Williams, dare I say). Overall, depth is fine and ST help is much needed, but I honestly would’ve rather taken a flyer on Kelvin Harmon here to add to the corps. I get next year has more depth of talent at the skill positions but for the value in the sixth he was there.