Jump to content

Dawgg

Community Member
  • Posts

    2,715
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dawgg

  1. Yeah who needs the best player available? Modrak sux
  2. Rey Rey!!!!!!!!!!!
  3. Bring home Maauluga!!!!
  4. Trade down!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  5. Trade down!!!
  6. Pray for Raji!!!
  7. Wasn't saying trade down and get him. I was saying that rather than stay put and get Pettigrew, a better option would be to trade down a few spots, let someone else take Pettigrew, and take a lineman that fits that draft slot. Jared Cook should be available in the second round and I think that's the direction this team should go given the dire need on the lines.
  8. Agreed on that. I just think that the Bills should manipulate their position so that they maximize value and address the lines. If Pettigrew happens to be the best player available and they can move 5 spots down, acquire an extra pick and pick up a defensive lineman and playmaker, it might tilt the scales in their favor. Given that the Bills have the lowest number of "trade-downs" in the NFL, I doubt it will happen, but ya never know
  9. Not when the team is littered with holes on both lines. TE is a luxury pick. Guys like Anthony Fasano and Martellus Bennett were drafted in the second round... 4th round might be a bit too late, but a guy like Jared Cook can be had in the second round easily. This team is operating with an aging defensive line and a patchwork O-Line. If good linemen are available the Bills should simply close their eyes and pick them in Round 1.
  10. The scary thing is, they would.
  11. Sanchez -- Seattle Crabtree -- San Francisco Pettigrew -- Buffalo Raji -- Cleveland Orapko -- Jacksonville
  12. Unfortunately, the samples aren't independent. A poor rush defense is largely responsible for the comparably low number of passes attempted against the Bills' defense. And if you think Whitner was used solely as a pass defender, you're mistaken. To simply cherry-pick the pass defense ranking as an indictor of Whitner's play is rather misleading given the amount of time he spent in the box defending the run. Since the coaching staff has seen enough of him taking bad angles at running backs and moved him away from the very position he was drafted for, it'll be interesting to see how he fares defending the pass.
  13. I dispute your very premise that the Bills were successful in pass defense. You citing they were ranked 14th in pass yards allowed is also arguing by anecdote. The reason they had such a relatively high ranking is because they surrendered 120+ yards rushing and had very few passing attempts. Why take a low percentage pass play when you can just run it down their throat? As a strong safety often positioned in the box, Donte Whitner was a part of that. I look forward to Whitner's continued development... but now that 3 years have passed, I think evaluating his play is very relevant.
  14. That's a pretty misleading stat. If you're going to take the C.Biscuit method and use a team stat to extrapolate an individual player's performance, go right ahead, but make sure you understand the inherent caveats. The Bills ranked #14 in passing yards allowed. If you want to give Donte Whitner a prize for that, go right ahead. But know that they were also in the bottom third of the league in pass attempts. The Bills' run defense was so awful that teams didn't even bother passing on them. Only 10 teams had more rushing attempts against them than the Bills. Though I don't think a whole lot of Chris Brown, he explains it perfectly in his blog: While I understand the point you’re trying to make, the ranking of the pass defense in 2008 (13th) is a bit misleading. The reason why is because teams still had fair to good success running the ball against Buffalo when all was said and done. The Bills finished 22nd against the run and surrendered over 120 yards per game on the ground. When teams run that well against you they don’t have to throw as much reducing the yards a defense gives up passing thereby improving the ranking against the pass. The Bills had Donte Whitner in the box quite often in run support and there were numerous plays throughout the season where he took bad angles on the ball resulting in big gains for opposing running backs. He was certainly not the only culprit, but he was poor in run support (Sammy Morris notwithstanding). In fact, Bryan Scott was far more effective in stopping the run than our prized first round pick Donte Whitner... which explains why the coaching staff has decided that he not suited for the strong safety role. Whitner was also weak against tight ends. Sure a lack of pass rush doesn't help his cause, but when he had a chance to get his hands on the ball, he often whiffed (see Denver game for an example). He was also a liability when covering tight ends (see Miami game). I'm not going to regurgitate team stats to justify Whitner's individual play. I watched him play every single game and he simply did not play at a high level. I am glad, though, that he hosts film study sessions and movie nights at his house each week.
  15. That's what I'm saying! He did not play well last season by any measure. He's young, but after 3 years of watching his lackluster play, I am not optimistic.
  16. Exactly. Everyone has said "Give it 3 years." Well guess what? Three years have passed and suddenly there's no point in discussing it! If the Bills pull another '06 draft on Sat, I will get very drunk.
  17. If you think Whitner was the best available player then you're an idiot. Mayock never had Whitner going at 8 in his mock before the draft. Only the Bills were dumb enough to take a small, non-impact safety at #8.
  18. My bad bro... Your sarcasm was too good!
  19. You are retarded. That's a definitive statement, and it's correct!
  20. That's a figment of your imagination, not mine. Could he have been had for a first day pick? Absolutely. Definitely a second rounder and probably a first rounder. Yes, his value was that high. Nobody said it's not standard practice... but to let him walk for nothing was just plain stupid. Most teams who use the franchise tag do so because they have every intention to keep the player long-term. The history of franchise tags corroborates that fact. Teams that voluntarily remove that leverage the following year have pretty much resigned themselves to losing them in free agency. Again, this has proven to be universally true in the 3 instances such a move has occurred (Haynsworth, Samuel, Clements). If empirical evidence isn't enough to convince you, feel free to continue living your pipe dream. Fact is, you have very little objectivity anyway... can't blame you, for that's the typical fan mentality anyway
  21. You can see my posting history and I spoke about all these issues when they occurred. It's convenient for you to call it hindsight analysis now that I have ultimately been proven right. The team decided against re-signing Clements because they knew his price tag was astronomical. The market for #1 cornerbacks had blown through the roof in recent years and it was quite evident that the team was resigned to letting him walk. If they wanted to keep him, they would not have given up the key piece of leverage called the franchise tag. Just as the Patriots did with Samuel and the Titans did with Haynesworth, they promised not to franchise them knowing full well that their chances of retaining them would be essentially gone. That's basic common sense. There were no negotiations between Clements and the Bills during that season, period. Never dismissed it. I simply said that by removing the franchise tag designation in Year 2, they are essentially removing themselves from the bidding. New England, Tennessee, and Buffalo all had one thing in common in making that move: they had no plans to re-sign the player in question to a long-term deal. You think this was a handshake agreement? Clements' agent, Todd France, had the Bills assure in writing that by signing the one-year tender, they could not franchise him in Year 2. Same with New England, same with Tennessee. Read up on how the Bills handled the Peerless Price situation. Yet another foolish presumption. Peters got exactly the money he was looking for. So he didn't have to follow the owner's rules to get what he wants. That the bumbling Bills deemed him expendable and a perennial playoff contender considered him worth the money is fairly telling. If you can't see the irony, then you are yet another delusional Bills fan who thinks that this inept front office can do no wrong. Have you checked Donte's Facebook page lately? What is he saying now?
  22. Yet another mistake by the Marv Levy regime that needs to be undone.
  23. Contrary to your view of the world, not all situations are created equal. Clements was a pending free agent whom the Bills clearly had no intention of keeping due to the exorbitant price tag. Thus, they should have traded him the same way the Bills traded Peerless Price when his value was at its peak. Peters, on the other hand, was a building block the team wanted to build around. However, the team failed to anticipate the problems that would ensue by signing two inferior lineman for a combined $74M and leaving Peters' contract as-is. When the Bills re-signed Kelsay to a big contract, they knew Schobel would be upset -- thus, they redid his deal despite the fact that it had three years remaining. They did not show the same courtesy to Peters.
  24. New England and Tennessee were playoff contenders. Squeezing an extra year out of their asset for the sake of a deep playoff run was far more valuable to them than getting a draft choice in return. In Buffalo, they were clearly rebuilding with a brand new GM and the front office had no intention whatsoever to re-sign Clements. Why keep him around when his value was at its peak? It was fairly obvious where this was heading given that (a) Peters missed all voluntary workouts and (b) he wasn't returning phone calls or communicating with the team. It was also widely speculated throughout the offseason that Peters may hold out. Not to mention, it doesn't take a genius in the front office to predict what will happen when you pay Derrick Dockery and Langston Walker more than you're paying your best offensive lineman. While it is rare for players to not show up, it's also rare for a team to make their best offensive lineman the 3rd or 4th highest paid lineman on his own team!
×
×
  • Create New...