Mikie2times

It just gets tiresome, the constant negativity, all the time. It's never ending, it makes me take weeks off from the board because I just can't take it anymore. It's one thing to be critical, present some reasoning why your being critical, have discussion etc. It's another to always be critical, never present anything worth discussion, never do anything but say the Bills suck, the Bills draft sucks, the Bills cheerleaders suck, Ralph sucks, field turf sucks, the uniform suck....These people add nothing to the board, they seem to be multiplying daily, and this thread is a perfect example of it. This draft sucks because of the positioning......... OK then, what would have made it not suck in terms of positioning? Why would drafting only by positional needs be a draft strategy that is better BPA? What particular positions should we have avoided the BPA theory for to draft? He adds no substance or reason for logical debate, just "this draft sucks because of positioning". Sorry if we don't welcome such rare insights with open arms.

If you liked the Patriots you would be crying about Mayo being taken so high, or O'Connell being picked in the 3rd.

Most people you mentioned just get irritated at the constant sky is falling posts that happen to overtake this board 75% of the year and 99% of the time when the draft is on. People get mad that player A or position B wasn't selected, when these same people have absolutely no clue what our coaches know about the current roster or what our talent evaluators know about the draft. They constantly B word that they know whats best over people who have been doing this for a life time, have 100 times more access to evaluation tools, and actually know who on the roster might be up and coming, who won't, and who might not even be with us soon. Our evaluators and coaches are not perfect, no coaches are perfect, no GM's are perfect, but anybody who presumes this draft to be a failure before it's even over, before at least 3 years has elapsed, based on position selected or the players selected, is a flat out idiot.

I was playing around with my TV one day and unintentionally blocked ESPN. I don't know the code I blocked it in, but I know I haven't missed the channel one bit. I'm glad I did. I get the NFL network and what they did exceeded ESPN 100 times over. Kiper is nothing. He's a fan, never played the game, has no real knowledge to add thats relevant. At least NFL network had guys who played the game, and watched film. They had reporters who seemed to be 1000 times more entrenched in what was really happening then ESPN ever could. I'm all NFL network for my draft needs from this point forward. For awhile I thought NFL network was getting inside information, they just didn't miss very often. Wouldn't surprise me if they did, even if that wasn't the case, I'm sure as hell not going to feel sorry for MTVESPN. That network is a joke.

I would rather to that to, I just don't expect we will.

He runs in the 4.7's, I'm not saying he doesn't have pass coverage ability but he's limited in speed, he's not flexible either. He wastes movements when he runs, he doesn't accelerate well. He is not an athlete, he is a VERY smart, VERY hard worker, who adds great depth, but should never be considered a starter for this team, outside or inside.

I love DiGiorgio, followed him dating back to high school. But this is a defense predicated on speed, and athleticism, and as much heart as DiGiorgio has, he's very limited in that department. He also doesn't play OLB. Again we would be morons to pass on Conner with Angelo's contract situation.

And AC is guaranteed to be in a Bills uniform after this season? How don't we need a guy who has 1st round potential as a replacement for Angelo. AC will demand excessive amounts of money, and it's more then possible he doesn't get retained. Add in the versatility Conner brings from OLB to MLB, the chemistry with PP, and we would be complete morons to pass on him if he's available in the 3rd.

I don't think we should draft Mario, he loses concentration to often, and tended to only make damage in the deep passing game which isn't what I envision our offense moving forward. I still like the idea of going for a TE. If your looking for a vertical threat my guys would be Rucker or Tamme, but both are very limited in terms of blocking ability. If your looking for a blocker, my guy would be Craig Stevens out of Cal, who's essentially a third Tackle. I expect a FB, my preference is towards Peyton Hillis or Jacob Hester, who bring power running (again RZ production) and more of a west coast style to them (what I envision as our offense moving forward). Fill it in with a C, DE, OG, OLB, FS....I would get more specific but I'm about to hit the town. Have a good night.

McKelvin was the best CB in the draft hands down, he was always my #1, I just didn't think we would get a chance at him. We needed to abandon the zone scheme against the Patriots because we can't release Moss to a FS or SS in stride (see George Wilson, see the play when the Giants nearly lost the SB at the end with a corner AND safety help on Moss). In 2006 when we played the pass reasonably well, we switched at the bye to isolating Nate on one side and played zone on the opposite. The following year when we lost Nate we dropped to the bottom of the barrel in pass defense. No matter how many want to downgrade corner because of the system we needed a player like this. Not only that but it moves one of our other CB's to nickel, which either Greer or McGee would be best served anyway (opposite smaller quicker WR's). Overall, I think we should see a considerable improvement in the pass defense with the interior upgrades and addition of a player like McKelvin. As for Hardy, I will admit I was never a big fan of his, but I see why we made the move and can be happy with it so long as we retain Evans. I don't feel Hardy has any chance in his career of developing into a #1 WR. He just doesn't have the fluidity and separation ability you need in that role. He's a stride runner, which lends itself to decreased acceleration times and less explosiveness. Having said that two things are very clear to me at this point, Buffalo needs to score more TD's in the RZ, and Hardy is the best RZ target in this draft. You just can't match up with that height, length, and leaping ability. I don't expect big numbers in terms of yards, YAC, or even catches, but I do expect 6 to 7 TD's as a rookie, with the potential to reach double digits later in his career. That, IMO, is great value in the second round, no matter if he's #1 material or not. Your thoughts on the draft Pete?

Watched him since he was a freshman. A clone of Drew Bledsoe, with half the skill. Welcome with open arms to the east Mr. Henne.

Rock on man, I think thats pretty sweet. Would make for a good fantasy football draft board also.

I don't care how he's slotted, and I'm not saying he should go in the first. I'm saying I still think he's the best WR in this class. I'm also not watching who he plays, I'm watching him. I'm not going to get into a debate over this, already had enough of that. It's irrelevant at this point anyway, we will find out at the end of the year who had the biggest impact as a rookie, and then a few years from now, who turned out to be best.

Sarcasm- a form of irony that is widely used in English especially when people are being humorous. Generally the sarcastic speaker or writer means the exact opposite of the word they use, often intending to be rude or to laugh at the person the words are addressed to.

Damn the numbers, I still think Kelly is the best WR in this class.

It still wouldn't make a difference, correlation does not equal causation. ANYBODY who works with numbers will tell you that. I guarantee if you input overall wins over the last decade, with frequency drafted early at any position, side of the ball, group of players (like OL or DL) the correlation will not be stronger then .35 or -.35 for any of the positions you use. Your evidence when left without the outside variable of human manipulation will erode to nothing of statistical merit. Hence the reason no GM uses formulas such as this or ever will. All teams value certain positions more then others, so GM's balance the risk of taking the 4th best CB or DT, and having him bust, then taking the first TE or OLB and having more potential for him to pan out. Some teams run systems that require more players at certain positions. Some teams fill needs by plugging in FA's. Each team is different. Over the long run you don't just draft a position, and magically become successful. It's far more important to draft good players, period. Any GM in football would agree with that.

My birthday is May 13th. I just got an early present.

Jesus, rebirth of the Purple People Eaters.

Even if that was proven I still wouldn't agree that it has statistical merit. I'm not acting like the top dog, but I know I do more football statistic work then any 5 posters combined threw out the course of the year. I've had to of logged well over 7500 hours with football stats on excel. Irregardless of that, one thing I have learned beyond any reasonable doubt, is correlation does not equal causation. I find correlations all the time, some dating back for decades, but inevitably these correlations have zero impact on being able to accurately predict future statistical patterns. In this case I applaud the efforts to bring statistics or tangible evidence to any discussion, as few even attempt to do that, especially to the extent the original poster did, HOWEVER, the original poster would never be able to prove that drafting at blank position, for blank percentage, of blank early picks, means anything to overall chances of success. If that was the case all GM's would follow the same pattern, because by definition, that pattern would be the most successful. Instead, as we all know getting a good player at any position means more to the overall success level of teams, and the formula in which those players are drafted for all teams, both good and bad, is completely unique to that team.

Sept. 7 Seattle Seahawks 1 p.m. Win Sept. 14 at Jacksonville Jaguars 1 p.m. Loss Sept. 21 Oakland Raiders 1 p.m. Win Sept. 28 at St. Louis Rams 4:05 p.m. Win Oct. 5 at Arizona Cardinals 4:15 p.m. Loss Oct. 12 Bye Oct. 19 San Diego Chargers 1 p.m. Loss Oct. 26 at Miami Dolphins 1 p.m. Win Nov. 2 New York Jets 1 p.m. Win Nov. 9 at New England Patriots* 1 p.m. Loss Nov. 17 (Mon.) Cleveland Browns 8:30 p.m. Win Nov. 23 at Kansas City Chiefs 1 p.m. Win Nov. 30 San Francisco 49ers 1 p.m. Win Dec. 7 Miami Dolphins (at Toronto) 4:05 p.m. Win Dec. 14 at New York Jets 1 p.m. Loss Dec. 21 at Denver Broncos 4:05 p.m. Loss Dec. 28 New England Patriots* 1 p.m. Win 10-6

Ditto

Crowell is a good cover 2 OLB, but not the ideal cover 2 OLB. Looking at the market this year you know he will demand a heck of a lot of money next year. I think a pretty good chance exists that he will not be in Buffalo after this season. If the Bills feel the same the need at the position becomes MUCH larger then anybody has given it credit for. Mayo is a stud, and perfect fit for what we do on defense. He combines great speed, size, football smarts etc. If most the top talent is off the board (as projected), and we stay put, I see few who we can feel as confident in as Mayo. So what you have is a great player, fitting our scheme perfectly, in a potential need area..... We've shown in this regime that we will pick who we want no matter what the gurus say. As it stands Mayo is getting closer and closer to not even being considered a reach. We have a defensive based head coach. He's one of a handful of players we know the Bills have brought in for an interview. The more you break it down, the less he belongs in the "surprising" thread.

Ever say things out of anger or frustration that are in the heat of the moment? If people summarized your maturity and character by these isolated situation would that be indicative of who you are? The guy was questioned before the dust even settled. He didn't even walk off the field before he was inundated by reporters . This was very important to him, for a million reasons. Nobody from Oklahoma ever had a problem with him. They all vouch for his character, I think most teams are putting the situation in proper context. Overweight and out of shape in the midst of an injury, which is why he couldn't perform. How in shape can you expect him to be when you can't perform any physical activity and his body is used to extremely high levels of physical activity? He's not supposed to be a speed racer. He's a possession/red zone/over the middle player, who on film, has very good playing speed (not according to just me, but several scouts, including our own). If you judge even WR's by just 40 times, you'll miss a thousand times over. For who he is, and what he brings, his low 40 only devalues him a round, maybe two.

That would be my guess for a shocker pick.

http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showt...=64511&st=0