Dawgg

I disagree with this. First of all, some mocks are better than others. That being said, many mocks are produced by people who are intimately close to the industry. They speak to teams year-round and in a sense, know where players will fall in terms of pick #. Take a look at the mocks... for the most part projected mid first rounders ended up becoming projected mid first rounders. Projected top 10 picks, for the most part were top 10 picks. Where there exceptions? Sure... but for the most part, they did predict to that extend fairly well.

http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showt...ndpost&p=688483

Are you aware that a gamble never gives you 100% odds? Well if you are, please let me know because I'm in. Jokes aside, the whole point of this is that there are times when a gamble is worth taking. There are times in which a gamble is not worth taking. King uses his sources around the league to state that the gamble was worth taking IN HIS OPINION. Clearly, the Bills brass felt otherwise. I agree with King. If this Denver trade was indeed an option, a team coming off a 5-11 season like the Bills should not be focusing in on one player.

I will say this, syhuang... mock drafts are not a necessarily a good indicator of mapping specific players to specific teams. But that does not render mock drafts useless. Mock drafts are good for projecting the general range of picks at which a player will go. For example: In general, the consensus among mock drafts was that AJ Hawk would go somewhere between 5-7. In general, the consensus among mock drafts was that Ernie Sims would go somewhere from 8-12. They are very useful in determining where in the draft a player is supposed to go -- not to the team and pick #, but on a more qualitative basis. Whitner, by virtually all accounts, was after the top 10 and in many cases on or after pick 15.

Personal insults aside, did you read my post? http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showt...ndpost&p=688430 I'd appreciate a response, rather than watch your childish arguments with Scraps. What is your response?

Put some more smiley faces in your post please.

I want to take you back to 2001. The Bills were coming off an 8-8 year and had new coaches and new management. The management purged the entire roster leaving plenty of holes on both sides of the ball. But one of the most glaring needs on that roster was a left tackle. The Bills' offensive line was arguably the worst unit in football. Bills QBs simply couldn't sit in the pocket for maybe 2 seconds. The consensus top OT on the board was a guy by the name of Kenyatta Walker. When it came time to make their selection at 14, Kenyatta Walker was sitting there, ripe for the taking. Fans of TBD were going nuts, screaming his name and imagining the day they would don his jersey. To their dismay, the Bills did not take him. Realizing this team had too many holes to fill, the Bills traded down 7 spots from 14 to 21 with the Bucs in and aquired their 2nd rounder (51st overall). The Bills had targeted Clements all along. He was the #1 corner in the draft and they gambled that he would be there, knowing full well that he very well might not be. In fact, mocks had Clements going earlier, as high as 17. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/...ockdraft_april/ http://espn.go.com/nfl/s/pfw/2001mockdraft2.html http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/archive/2001/mock.html Did the Bills have their panties up in a wad? Were they shuddering at the thought of losing out on the player they had rated so highly? Why not just PLAY IT SAFE and take Nate Clements at 14? Afterall, if he's good it won't matter where he was picked. Right???? WRONG. That risk paid off bigtime and allowed the Bills to draft Travis Henry. Say what you want about Travis, but while he was in a Bills uniform, he was a beast. Not to mention trading him yielded a 3rd round pick which allowed the team in turn to trade up to draft John McCargo. When you are a playoff caliber team, you play it safe and target very specific players who will help you win a championship. When you are a small market team coming off a 5-11 season, you simply MUST maximize the value out of your draft picks and be versatile.

LOL... This is far from rocket science, my friend.

The Bills signed Josh Reed and Peerless Price to deals similar to one another. I would rather combine those two salaries and get a more talented receiver... in any case, I'm not vehemently against the signing -- just don't necessarily agree. The guy was out of the league, and couldn't even crack the Cowboys' squad. That does make me worry....

I have answered this numerous times. Ozymandius suggests David Joseph - not a bad choice. If defense was Marv's preference, perhaps (in no particular order): Chad Greenway: Posey can (and should) be replaced. Fletcher is not getting any younger and his contract is running out. Spikes, no matter what his PR campaign wants you to believe, is coming off an injury in which most athletes are never the same again. Tye Hill: Would step right in as the starter opposite Nate Clements -- has the talent to become a #1 corner and could step right in if Clements leaves. Moves McGee to the nickel spot and gives the team a formidable 3-some at cornerback. This, of course assumes the extremely unbearable tragic scenario in which Whitner is taken before pick 15, which in and of itself may very well NOT have happened.

It's truly amazing how brainwashed some people are to the point where they concoct radio shows to justify what happened.

For the record, I like virtually every move Marv has made in the offseason from the head coach to free agency (Peerless aside)... the first pick is the only gripe I have... we'll see how it goes.

Yes, exactly. If someone disagrees with the Bills' strategy, they are not Bills fans.

I disagree. Whitner was the one and only player to take in this draft.

Again, for the 100th time, you are fixated on Whitner. It's Whitner or bust. If the only option in this draft is to come out with Donte Whitner, then yes, you stay at 8 and pick him. However, if there are other players of his caliber later in the draft (and yes, there were whether you believe it or not), then it makes prudent sense to trade down and acquire quality picks. 2 starters are better than 1 -- especially for a team coming off a 5-11 season with holes at every position except punter.

Yes, he did not mention that particular scenario and perhaps 95% is an exaggeration on his part. But the fact remains: it is a gamble -- and by and large, the gamble was worth the risk, given his experience and knowledge of the teams picking behind Buffalo -- and he does have credibile sources from around the league.

Is there a rule that says they had to take the (as you say) "broken hip guy" if Whitner was off the board? They should have had a draft board rank ordering their players by preference and grade. Who was next on that list? I would say take him, be it Bunkley, Greenway, Hali, or Joseph. I have a hard time believing the difference in quality between Whitner and the next available guy on their board is that steep. And if there was a drop-off in quality, the extra picks make up for it. In any case, I don't necessarily think that they took the lower-risk move. Taking the second safety off the board at #8 and paying him what they are going to pay him... it's no small risk.

FYI, I responded to your original inquiry in a previous thread.

WRONG! Who cares if someone moved ahead to take Whitner? NEWSFLASH: Whitner was the only good player in the first round. This was an extremely deep draft and the Bills could have taken a starting caliber (and potential star-caliber) player at #15. Add to it they gain 2 quality draft picks, the risk of losing Whitner is worth it. That's what everyone keeps missing.

Wow, haven't seen a post from you in years!

Indeed. But that's besides the point. Ultimately, what he's saying is that a 2nd round pick and a 4th round pick is generous compensation for moving from #8 to #15. The 15th pick (whoever that may have been) plus the solid players we obtain from the 2nd and 4th rounders we gain could very well be worth more than Whitner alone. That is what King is saying. And in addition to that, there is a decent chance (not a sure thing by any means) that Whitner would have fell back to us at that point. Of course you can never be 100% certain, but what King is eluding to is that the compensation Denver was offering made moving down a solid risk/reward proposition.

I disagree with this logic. Yes, the Bills value the players based on their draft board, not others outside of the Bills' organization. That is to be expected in any marketplace with multiple buyers -- different people value commodities differently. That being said, this can be leveraged to one's benefit. If Denver valued Cutler enough to move up to #8 and surrender a 2nd rounder and 4th rounder, the Bills should have taken advantage of that, even at the prospect of losing Whitner. We'll see if Whitner is the BEST DB available in this draft... that is extremely doubtful IMO.

My point exactly. Right on.

First of all, I wouldn't necessarily say that there were 13 top-impact players int he draft, after which there was a significant drop-off. To me, there were really 8 players in this draft who are considered to carry "blue-chip" value: Mario Williams Reggie Bush D'Brick Vernon Davis AJ Hawk Leinart Cutler Young If D'Brick, Hawk or Vernon Davis miraculously fall to the Bills at #8, close your eyes and take him. If not, look for suiters, trade with Denver, and move to #15. In moving down to #15, you grab an additional 2nd round pick and 4th round pick. At 15, there are plenty of starting-caliber, impact players available: Tamba Hali - would provide a nice pass rush boost opposite Schobel Chad Greenway - instant replacement for Posey and eventually perhaps Fletcher (who is not young). Let's not forget Spikes may not be the same (no matter what his PR campaign spits out, the great majority of athletes coming from this injury aren't) With the second rounder, you can grab a solid OL prospect (Latui, Spencer, or Tapp). Or better yet, use it to move back into the first and make that McCargo trade... and bingo, we still have our original second rounder left to nab another quality player. With the added fourth rounder, who knows... but considering Ko Simpson was available there were probabably many options. This draft was very deep and Whitner, while a very good player was NOT the only good player in the first round. People are fixated on the fact that someone behind us could/would have taken him. Of course trading down is a risk. The question boils down to this: Do the additional picks we would get in a trade down represent adequate compensation fo incurring such a risk? An extra 2nd and 4th rounder absolutely does.

Wow, someone who understands... Thanks, couldn't have said it better myself.