Fake-Fat Sunny

There is no way i wouldtrade Clements for a 1st round choice as even in this draft where there are a few productive CBs available who would start immediately it would weaken this year's team for some hopeful butfar from certain future benefit. Clements is not the best CB in the NFL, but he is a Pro Bowler in development and can contribute a lot to the 2005 team with an acceptable number of hiccups assuming he learned from the error of not knocking the ball down against Jax instead of going for the INT. The fumble in the Pitts gsme was n error but one which can be accepted if he runs back great PRs from time to time and eleminates the foolish mental errors which costs us games as with Jax. He may walk after next year with no compensation for us, but if that happens though we should try to avoid it, it is a bad idea to trade the present for the future out of fear of losing an FA. Its part of the rules and simply the way things happen. The gift we got for PP from TD taking advantage of Arthur Blank's foolishness was the exception not the rule. Sometimes you lose a Winfield or a Jennings with no compensation, but you also can acquire a Spikes, or a Fletcher without giving up compensation so if you play the game well we can win at this. In my mind TD was a total screw-up in choosing GW over Fox and Lewis and we paid with a bad record, but I think he has done very well in the game of getting and losing FAs. In my mind, we should keep Clements this year and resign him if we can to a contract after 2005. If he suffers an injury as happens with pro football players we can get him on the cheap as we did with Andre Reed or simply let him go as damaged goods we do not owe anything to as we did with Sam Cowart. I think TD should resign Clements now if he can get him on the cheap, but I have no problem at all and in fact think it is the right thing to do to let it wait, get an incredibly productive year from him in'05 as he is playing for a payday. One can go from worst to first quicker than ever in this league today and the future is now. Folks who advocate planning for the future and trading Clements now for some draft picks that MAY payoff two years down the line will always see the golden ring coming two years down the line and will never get there. The furture is now and the Bills should go for it in 2005. If JP falters and Hiolcomb does not step up there will be time for as good HC and GM to retool and go for it next year, but lets not unilaterally give up on making the playoffs before we are forced to. If you don't give up after an 0-4 start and you come within winning a game we should have won of making it, then why give up when we are 0-0, have a favorable schedule and have a team coming back that looks better than the 04 team to me.

Bill- The other interesting thing for us board faithful will be to see how you handle what reality has to offer regarding TD's handling of the TH situation and of how professionals evaluate Henry;s worth as compared to the views of us psychotic fans. We will see as the dratt plays out over two days some results regarding these two issues. You have been a consistent voice labeling Henry as essentially a non-contributor who I believe you said at several points might as well be cut rather than waste time on this bad player. Others (foolishly in my mind) said we would get a first round pick for TH. While I still think that both these views are extreme and wrong, certainly the one which looks more realistic even if its unlikely is the second view that in the draft furor there may even prove to be a first for Henry (though I really doubt this will happen). The Iggles, AZ. TB and Miaimi are all publicly on record paraising Henry and setting up an expectation for their customers and players that they will get him or a player of equivalent quality at RB this year. I think the views you have expressed not only say that Green is blowing smoke but in fact all four of these teams are blowing smoke onHenry. Maybe, but the idea that none of these 4 are serious at all seems to be quite unlikely. At any rate we will see this weekend and you have been so consistent and strident in your views that if it turns out the way things are headed that the Bills will get at least the #2 thet have publicly stated was Henry's worth, if this turns our to be the case a post from you that acknowledges this reality would seem to be merited lest you would like a place in the TSW Hall of Humor next to ICE. All the tea leaves certainly point to TD handling this situation just about perfectly. he got: 1. Through the season with TH keeping his mouth shut while WM took his job and the Travis haters were pretty much reduced to some weird reading of his body language and pouting to claim he was a cancer (Wickey Williams is a cancer. at wrse Henry is a easily ignored cold). 2. TH's agent to do the work of soliciting interest in Henry and surveying the market for TD. Judging from the public outcome of 4 teams going on record stating their interest when TH\s crew placed the number at 5 is pretty good. 3. Used TH's agent doing the selling to allow him to not make any promises to potential buyers to solicit their interest in Henry. This put the Bills in a command position in any trade talks as the other teams came to us first presenting their offers to buy rather than the Bills coming hat in hand making low enough offers to sale. 4. Provided a clear contrast to how Green and AZ managed trading Shelton vs TD trading Henry. By bad-mouthing Shelton and acquiring his high priced replaments making getting rid of Shelton essential for AZ, Green has effectively destroyed his market value. On the other hand TD has continually stated he would love to have Henry back unless he gets a good deal. I don't think TD wants him back at all, but by ignoring Henry's "I ain't comin back bleating" he has maintained Henry's trade value. It may still turn out that the draft goes poorly and the 3 high-profile RBs last until the #8 pick but it is hard for me to see where TD has not handled this situation as well as it could be handled and thank gosh he did not panic and cut Henry when folks suggested it, You may laugh last if some extraordinary things happen, but methinks you should prepare yourself to simply admit you were all wrong in assessing what the professionals thought (rightly or wrongly) and about how TD has handled this. I think it is pretty clear that TD handled this about as well as it could be handled and even if through the draft going in a bas way for Henry's value I think it will be hard to credibly fault him as the situation appears to me that should the Bills choose to keep Henry, it will be rough dealing with fence-meding which needs to happen. but Henry will have few other options than to put on a happy face and suck it up and hope for a not impossible injury to WM so he can get in and roll up some rep for when he hits the FA market at the end ofthe year.

Agreed that PW was mostly in on expected running plays and thus was in on 1s and 2nd rather than on 3rd and their is a skew as to whether teams are more likely to run or pass on these downs. However, i think this is quite likely skew rather than an absolute commitment to run on 1st and 2nd and an absolute conmmitment to pass on 3rd. 64% of plays I think that was the number but ould be off =/- 4) actually surprised me to find out that number was so low. While it is still closer to the rule than the exception that PW was in, the number allows for a fair number of potential run ning plays that I see no sign from these numbers on the part of Gray to go with other players beside PW a significant amount of the time. Usually friom my memory this was mostly Edwards, but occaisonally we would go with runblitz scheme used in an unusal way and it was Denny who was lined up on the inside. My sense that the DT position is not in crisis, but there is now grave uncertainty and if things go badly I'm not sure we have a lot of options: 1. As folks have pointed out if Adams goes down we are probably cooked. Edwards elevated his play and was quite comfortable for me as a reserve and if he needed to step up and start a game or two. However, we need Anderson to really step up and threaten to start because then I think we have a more certain plan B. Any doubts the braintrust has about Edwards or Bannan makes DT a priority get for us. 2. We actuallty only went with three DEs last year which struck me as thin. Either Ritzmann needs to be the real deal or its drafting yet another DE (following Denney and Kelsay that is a need for our DL. I think more likely we will want to acquire a swing guy who can comfortably play both DT or DE. A player with this flexibility has become more of a rarity as DTs bulk up in this league and use of the DE as an outside speed rusher expected to be quick both increase. Our use of the run blitz puts an even higher premium on our DEs needing speed and agility to cover the short and medium zone on pass plays. I hope we are blowing smoke to confuse the enenmy by listing Bannan as an OG. For now we have but three players manning the DT slot and this does not sound like much of a rotation for the DL to me. Drafting or signing another DL person may be a key need for this team.

Months? I've given this rant for years and still Bills partisans launch into diatribes about how picking a player like Harrington is a no-brainer for us. They seemed unmoved by the facts such as Aikman being the last 1st round QB to lead the team which picked him in 1989 tio an SB win. Folks want to declare Trent Dilfer as an aberration which he was, but the teams which have won the SB since Dallas are finding their version of an aberration among failed cap casualties (Johnson, Dilfer), among UDFAs whose recent work was as a box-boy at Wal-Mart (Warner), trade bait (Elway, Farve) or late round draftees (Brady) and never from 1st round picks. The draft is a fun event. but picking a QB in the first is not a reasonable method for producing an SB winner (or usually even an SB appearance- McNabb finally broke a streak that was saw the last appearance by Steve McNair leading a team in 1999. Once every 5 years does not cut it for this huge investment to simply appear there. I'd rather spend chump change on a UDFA like Jake Delhomme. Manning Schmanning. He is the best QB in the league right now but this has not translated into the ultimate goal of an SB win or even appearance. His cap drag is so huge that even with the help of one of the best GMs in the league to acquire a supporting cast, the best WR and a good RB to make the O work, one of the more reliable PKs in the league to gurantee them at least 3 and one of the best defensive HCs in the league to make up for the non-investment on D this team cannot even get the homefield advantage necessary to make them win. It was n;y season before last that Manning pulled ahead of Ryan Leaf fordelivering playoff wins to the team which drafted him. He's a stud and a rich stud ut a disappointing rich stud and I'm glad the Bills have not devoted their #4 and #13 picks to QBs. We'll see how the Losman pick works out and I am hopeful (though scared) that by making him the second player we took, giving him a year to learn the game, and MM saying that our strategy is to run and then run again that we can work with JP to make him the exception that proves the rule.

What is your doable dream draft and if you are so bold and knowledgable how can we make it happen? Believe me, even as a true stats junkie, I find the draft pretty impossible to figure out how to make what I would love to see happen come about because trade possibilities aand the market determining the value of trades shifts and is a black-box to me. However, I do see some scenarios based on the rumors I hear and us having the resource of Travis Henry tradeable for the best available offer (some say this a 5th rounder, some say this may be a 1st, who knows for sure) that I think the following outcome can probably be done (heck I'm even wiling to trade our 2006 1st round pick at the last minute for the right player). To me, I will be overjoyed if this draft produces for us: Matt Jones (maybe with a swap of seconds with AZ but I doubt he drops that far unless everybody is shining folks on in the hopes someone will expend a first on this player who may well fit into pre-existing plans but even worse for most team braintrusts may clearly be a better player at some other position and force them to do the really hated thing of changing their plans). I think the likeliest way to get him is if the market and competition maks someone so desparate for Henry we get a high enough pick for him but this looks unlikely. David Baas- I'm not sold on Anderson yet and see some real flexibility comes if Teague can make the jump back to LT and Baas provides 2005 potential (though potential simply means you haven't done anything real yet) to deal with either of these issues. If we flip picks with AZ we probably can get him. If not then I hope the combine has given us the confidence to think Spencer can fill this role. Mike Nugent- I really really doubt this will happen because TD sees the improvement in Rian Lindell in 2004 in his disappointing 2003 work (believe it or not despite his miss of the chip shot he should have hit against Pitts he did improve statisitcally. I think this and his superb performance working with the ST, and a couple of plus 40 yard makes of his coming off the board due to TOs and the cap hit for cutting him will keep him here. However, missing the chip shot still sticks in my craw and if the braintrust were to make the judgment that he can do the ST work well that is actually more important to me than the placekicking I will be psyched if the braintrust makes that judgment (though I am hopeful if not content about us sticking with Lindell for another year and demanding improvement). Luis Castillo- A bout with steroids in an attempt to be ready for the Combine but seems to be counter to his usual ethic shown in his college career may push him down the draft board where we can get this talented player with a later pick. If he goes to someone early so be it because we will need to depend on Edwards and/or Anderson showing more than they have shown in the past, but if the market drops this player I hope we get him. Overall, the AZ wildcard is the big one. It actually looks to me like AZ will actually get no takers for Shelton because folks see him as a likely cap casualty and the Bills will have a reasonmable shot at picking him up at no trade cost but the downside is that he doesn't get here until June and misses at least one (if not two) "voluntary" minicamps. However, the pain to me of not doing this trade is actually missing out on the flip of picks with AZ and it becomes incumbent on us to get higher picks using the Henry resource. I'd much rather have a proven vet (even a marginal one that we feel can fill a need) that to take a crapshoot on the draft where a player is unlikely to provide a 2005 contribution unless he is among the 1/3 or so of even 1st round picks who contribute their first year. Anywho, i would be overjoyed if the draft produced these 4 players for us and uising the Henry resource and potentially even the 2006 #1 this is potentially doable for us. As usual the key to this happening is TD, MM, TC amd JG judging these players to be worth the investment. As neat as the internet buzz makes Jones look I'm still uncertain about this and only those who can talk to him eye to eye and see him work can know this for sure. What is your doable dream draft and if you are so bold and knowledgable how can we make it happen?

I certsinly agree with you Simon and a poster above that as hopeful as i am about the DT situation, I was impressed that Edwards showed a lot of improvement (finally) as a sub last year, but he was so disappointing as a rookie and he failed to step up in his second year (unlike Denney who also was a rookie wipe out but definitely showed signs of improvement his second year and allowed us to go with only DEs last year unlike the five DTs we needed to man and have prospects at that position) that he remains to prove himself as anywhere near being an adequate replacement for the good work that Phat Pat did for the Bills. I have enough doubts about Edwards and Anderson that I can easily see the DT interest and wonder whether the Bannan shift to OG is merited or prudent. The main reason for my hope is that actually I think you exaggerate in the importance you acribe to PW. He was a very good player for the Bills, but the fact is that he only played 60% or so of the D downs last season which means not only did we rely on other roster players more than a third of the time (giving them real work) but it shows that we can do without PW and still perform under the right cuircumstances. The outstanidng questions to me are whether we will miss the twin bulk (and actuall greater speed and better play of Adams) on the intial downs or whether Adams will miss his buddy PW which I'm sure played a role in him playing harder than he ever played before and we in essence will be missing two DT talents that made our D formidable last year.

Agree totslly with thid post. Application of the logic you lay out does revolve around how JP works out (if he is our QB for the future it was a greatmove trading last year, and if he sucks the deal blows). However, it also revolves around the hypothetical of us holding on to the pick and trading it now for a QB we would need to either replace Bledsoe if we cut him with no one on the roster or to challenge him in camp (can you say QB controversy). Following your thread of logic you would need to identify the vet QB we would get by trading a #20 for him or actually put us in the position of having to trade the #20 plus Henry for Miami or someone else\s pick to be able to draft one of the rookies (who I assume would sit behind a theoretical signing of Holcomb who would now be our #1 and we would have to have paid him accordingly. Who knows how JP will really turn out (I hope MM. TC and Wyche) but the amount that we paid for getting the man thought by many pundits to be a far better prospect than any QB in this draft if he decided to stay in last year appears to be a small price given how much had to be paid for Jolley this year. Add to this that by making the move last year our QB of the future starts this year with a year's experience as a vet and the trade seems pretty justified by the logic you lay out.

The information would also be alot more valuable if in addition to a comparison of the higher round to the lower rounds, it also factored in the salary cap investment in a player and its impacts on building a winning team. Obviously the addition of accurate stats that take a fuller picture into account makes the conclusiom (actually more accurately one should call it an indication rather than a conclusion) much more convoluted, difficult to understand and easier to attack. A comparison of 1st rounder success to lower rounder success would correctly indicate that 1st round players are better than later round players (well duhh) but it would be false to draw a CONCLUSION from this indication that one should go all out to get a 1st round pick, because when you factor in the huge investment a 1st round slot brings with it, a failed 1st rounder does far more damage to your team than a failed pick at a lower slot. Thus, I don;t care if a 1st rounder is 3 times as likely to suceed as a later pick if the first rounder hits to the salary cap are 10 times worse than a lower drafted player. I can absorb the failures or work around the limitations of a lower drafted player far easier than I can deal with it if my first round choice turns out to be one of the 2/3 of picks I deem not to be worthy of resigning or at worst a bust of Ryan Leaf like proportions. I think that TD has made a great move by getting rid of our 1st round pick in a draft judged by most pundits to be one of the worst selections ever. A team would actually be better off simply passing on making a first round choice if they do not judge any of the talents to be worth the multi-millions of $ his slot will bring him. In fact, if the draft plays out like 2003 and the rush of picks at a certain position (DL that year) leaves a team willing to risk passing on their need (a DE in our case) because we think we can get the same player in the second round. As it turned out, this is exactly how TD correctly played it. People at least would have understood if he had used our pick at #23 in 2003 to take Chris Kelsay who was predicted by many pundits to be a talent worthy of a 1st round pick. Observers would have in retrospect called the Bills picking Kelsay in the 1st a good move as he earned a starting job in his second year and it would have been noted the #23 pick was a gift to the Bills from AT anyway. TD in essence passed with the #23 pick for help in the 2003 season as his selection McGahee needed a year off to recuperate. TD turned this "pass" into gold for te Bills as he both was able to get the player we needed in the 2nd and he was able to not only get a top 5 talent player in WM at $23 but negotiated a cap friendly contract with him with a bisected bonus. 1st round draft picks are simply over-valued by most fans and I would much rather follow the George Allen track of getting a healthy vet of lesser potential talent than a draftee but know what I'm getting and get a contribution sooner.

The salary cap really makes good budgetting a significant part of building your team adding to the difficult crap shoot of player talent evaluation. Folks routinely want to treat the NFL process of merely an exercise in picking better players, however, it is not merely this exercise but doing this within the reality of the cap and also plaind dumb luck which means the difference between winning and losing in this league (do folks really think that Bill Belicheck would be considered a living legend without the help Lewis (NYJ) provided him by collapsing Bledsoe's lung: There's a credible argument to be made that BB would never have won an SB ever if Lewis had not forced NE to give Brady the reins, and caused the team to rally around him. Add into that the refs making the no-fumble call against the Raiders and dumb luck has had a ton to do with the BB success. This is no knock on BB cause you gotta be good to take advantage of luck, but the gods smiled heavily on NE in odd ways). If your team was as close to making the playoffs as we were last year, stockpiling late choices makes a lot of sense as a strategy.

Thanks for the numbers! The other things to factor into this when assessing the Bills and GM performance is not simply how many players are first rounders, but also how many of these first rounders were originally drafted by the Bills. On both the O and D side of the ball from a quick look at your info slightly less than half (5/11) players starting for the Bills were drafted by the Bills. I think this shows that while the draft is a critical resource for building the team, it is slightly less than a majority resource. In particular when you factor in the cap management issues where UDFA starters are generally cheap and allows you to acquire the best depth possible on ST (shades of the Homerun Throw-up) this shows the even hieghtened importance of great non-draft work for building a team. The draft is critical (good players have to come from somewhere) but I think the numbers support that folks tend to have an over-inflated sense of the value of draft picks as even these numbers show their import to be 50/50 at best, show that though more talented players are drafted higher, one cannot ignore the contribution of second day picks and that when one factors in the growing import of the salary cap the draft is an important but declining part of building a winning team.

There is no confusion at all. Ronnie was an old buddy and in the good old boys network that is what matters. It is amusing to see all the doctrinair rants against affirmative action efforts as applied to minority coaches as though merit were the only thing that has an impact on NFL hiring decisions. The facts seem to be that routinely NFL teams refused to hire coaches who could do better than other coaches simply because of their race. This seems to be a fact due to the historic wide disparity between the percentage of African-American coaches hired (particularly HCs) and the pool of available talent. Fortunately, these numbers slowly seem to be changing, but unfortunately it has taken an affirmative action by the NFL to make sure that the pipeline of qualified candidates is kept filled and that the bad tendencies of non-merit hiring which seem inherent in the good ol boy network are beaten back and coaches most capable of winning are hired. The Ronnie Jones record seems to be one more example of the failings of the good ol boy network.

The key to comparing one year's draft move to another year's is that all drafts are not created equal. A 1st round pick in 2005 does not appear that it will produce anywhere near the quality of player produced by a 1st round pick in 2004 and to simply state that they are equivalent or that there is some absolute value to a 1st round pick is simply incorrect, The market determines the value of a pick and the market is different from year to year. Even more o the point, the market varies from team to team as team needs are quite different. 2004 was a great draft if QB is your primary team need to make you a winner as 3 players slated to start went in the first round and the 1 who won't is behind an unexpected Pro Bowler and may well be traded. Though QBs appear likely to go early in this draft as teams are addicted to picling alleged stud QBs so they can market hopes and dreams. spme pundits judge Losman (the 4th QB piccked last year) as better than any of the QBs available this year. It also must be recognized that the market changes within a draft based on who is picked. TD does a fabulous job recognizing this and assessing opponent need as he was comfortable passing on Chris Kelsay and taking WM because he read the market that 8 or so other teams already having chosen DL players that he could get Kelsay (who some evaluated as a 1st round talent with the second round pick. The 2004 Bills trade looks drastically different than the 2005 Skins trade because the qua;ity of the players looks so drastically different.

I hope not. A proven vet strikes me as doing a lot for the Bills W/L than the usual crapshoot of rookie talent (which TD puts at a 50/50 chance for even a first rounder). If the Bills docs say a player like Shelton is OK physically this type of cap casualty can give the Bills the same cap flexibility that a rookie contract brings. Given that most rookies fail to payoff immediately like an Evans we are far more likely better off with TD using the trade resource on a proven vet for Henry than getting a simple trade payoff (even a 1st). The draft is fun for us stat fanatics, but is at best a part of building a winning team. Judging from examples like tehe Pats who built their team around acquiring about of a third of their players their first SB year after the June cap casualty deadline andund key FA pick-ups like Harrison rather than the nice but replaceable contributions of 1st round choices like Seymour shows the subordinate role of the draft to building a winner. Don't get me wrong the draft has been a useful tool for the Pats, but even when it has it comes from their 6th round picks of players like Brady rather than from their high profile (and high cost) picks. I hope the Bills get better value than even a first for Henry by instead picking up a vet who can contribute even if we judge him a lesser potential talent than Henry or a 2nnd.

NFLE players receive a roster exemption until late in pre-season so the Bills will be able to keep 4 QBs until late in pre-season. This means several things: 1. There is zero pressure on the Bills to make a QB decision until the last cut down date. 4 QBs, 3 of whom will have focused primarily on running the Bills O will be throwing passes in practice to Bills receivers virtually all camp. 2. When this late decision gets made, Thompson will have to show on the field that he is a pro prospect (NFLE can demonstrate a player is a pro athlete but still falls short of proof that he can make the Bills). Even if he doesn't it becomes pretty doubtful that he would catch on with another team if we offer him a spot on our PS. It will be likely too late for him to master a new system or merit upsetting a team's plan to have another QB as their number 3. Even if a team gets hit by the injury bug at QB as we were last year, they will likely be far more interested in a vet sitting at home like a Matthews was rather than a rookie with upside like Thompson. The greatest likelihood seems to be that Thompson won a place on our PS with his NFLE performance and Matthews will be a good #3 for us.

I saw one post (which may be wrong so if anyone knows the truth please share and provide a link so we know its more than rumor) that Price has an injury which may explain why he seems out of the Bills plans.

Bills' Daily mock draft takes the sane approach of identifying the best players availableto fill our needs with the picks we now have. It again correctly identifies Adam Terry as the BPA at #55 and lays out a reasonable plan that he can be trained to one day in the future fill our LT need (he appears to have too many learning needs and physical development needs to be slotted in as an immediate starter at LT). It then lays out the hope that Wilkerson (again the BPA with Baas and Spencer long gone by the time our 2nd pick rolls around) might be able to step into the center slot in his first year and allow us to move Teague to LT to deal with the hole left by Terry not being read yet. Though I can see the logic behind this wishful thinking, it strikes me as so unlikely that I really doubt the Bills will go this way. 1. There is an inherent contradiction here- In order for this to work JMac will need to prove he is a development god. Maybe he is (he did a great job getting to the SB with Ziegler and Parker as keys to the NYG line), but if he is then he will squeeze development out of Gandy/Anderson whom we currently have as our LT/LG. If he does, then the picks of Adam/Wilkerson are unecessary as they are unlikely to unseat the JMac revved up Gandy/Anderson for a couple of years. If he fails to develop Gandy/Anderson then I think it is pretty questionable that he somehow is going to turn Wilkerson into a first year starter at C AND revive Teague at LT (while simultaneously reviving Anderson and continuing MW's development), The Terry/Wilkerson course seems unnecessary if JMAC does what we hope OR unlikely to give us much besides learning in 2005 if JMac does not fulfill our hopes with the OL players we currently have. Either way the first two picks should be used for other needs rather than for players who contribute nothing or not enough this year. 2. Who gets cut in this scenario- The Bills seem committed to MW (RT), CV (RG), TT (C or LT), BA (LG), FG (LT or back-up), RT (back-up OL), LS (back-up OL), and JP (back-up OL). Add to this several development projects the Bills have sown interest in from Dylan McFarland, to Sobieski, Pruce, Epositon etc. The Bills are expected to keep 9 or 10 OL players. the addition of these two adds two players to the OL which forces the cut of several development players which seems unlikely (I don't think they are done with McFarland yet, JMac believed enough in Smith to have him start last year and add to this that Bannan is moving to the OL side) that adding on a likely development player like Terry and probable development player like Wilkerson seems unlikely. I think the bottomline here is that the Bills are actually going to have to cut some possibly productive OL players as camp moves on. the test will be who JMac thinks can contribute most right now as to who gets kept. Thus, I agree the Bills will likely make 2 OL acquisitions in conjunction with draft day, but these players are at worst going to be only 1 2006 and beyond contributor and 1 2005 contributor. I don't think that it is likely that these two will be an LT prospect and a 3rd round center draftee who must contribute this year. I think that it is by far more likely we will make a trade for a vet and this possibility is near impossible to predict with any accuracy.

You do your arguments against Henry a disservice by making unsupportable claims of his failings. What about the actual events leads you to say that Henry was a MAJOR (your capitalization not mine) contributor to 4 straight losses. Game 1- 13-10 loss to Jacksonville- Henry did not play a great game by any means as he got a mere 3.3 yards per carry. However, his 75 yards seem pretty far from a major contribution to the loss. The Jax D was a good one and tough against the run and while Bill's Daily is not the Bible in terms of the spoken word they gave a grade of B to a running game which Henry was the bulk performer. I think folks point to an overall failure of the O as a lead factor in the lost and Henry was a certainly a part of the O, but given the poor Bledsoe performance even allocating his share takes him pretty far away from major. In fact anyone casting blame probably points to the D and Clements going for the INT when knovking it down would have put up the W as the play that stands out along with a couple of other bad plays by the D on that drive. In addition, lest you want to somehow try to build a case for a switch to WM being the key factor, Henry actually suffered an injury that saw WM get cnsistent action for the 4th quarter and he also was able to log a massive 3.4 ypc on his 9 carries. Game 2- 13-10 loss to Oakland- A worse performance by Henry in this game, but still falls short of your diatribe as a major factor. Again he registered 3.2 yards a pop and his total of 67 yards was not good and one might even throw in hi couple of drops and his rumbling bumbling stumbling failing to get into the endzone to earn him the title of being bad that day. However, to site his play as the MAJOR factor and let Bledsoe, other players and even the refs who missed so many pivotal calls even the NFL was forced into a meaningless apology really les a bunch of miscreants off the hook merely to try to prove your point rather than describe reality. Again, if you wan t to try to hold your all we needed was to switch RBs point, WM certainly did not get enough carries this game to establish a rhytym, but losing 10 yards on his firstcarry probably had something to do with that. Also of interest there was a missed blitz pick-up this game but it was by Shelton rather than the usual whipping boy Henry. I think it is fair to ding Henry as a contributor to this loss, but MAJOR is not the case. Game 3- 31-17 loss to NE- I think bills' Daily is being quite charitable to Henry summarizing this outing as solid and pointing to his 98 yards gained on 24 carries to support this claim. They do make mention of him falling down on a 3rd and 1 and do not attribute his likely role in the NE TD fumble where he and Bledsoe went different ways. However, even if you want to blame both of these plays totally on Henry (you really have to be in love with Bledsoe to do this) the Henry performance is at worst a mixed bag some good some bad performance rather than the major cause of this loss. Game 4- 16-14 loss to NYJ- This is perhaps the most inexplicable of the claims that Henry was a majpr factor in this loss as he suffered and injury and only got 12 carries. Maybe he was the MAJOR contributor here because he should have got injured sooner. I would label him as being more of a non-factor when we want more from our RB, but if he was a major factor in this loss then was WM who got 42 yards on his 8 carries (21 of which came on one play actually) also a major factor as he and TH really split responsibility in this game due to the TH injury. At any rate in total, i think it is fair to say that Henry was a key factor (though not the major one as Bledsoe lays first claim to this apellation for almost all losses) in the Oakland loss, a mixed factor in the NE game, a non-facor in the NYJ game and a tough contributor in the Jax game at worse.

I thiink its more like the analogy of the broken clock. At least it is accurate twice a day.

Yeah, but all you need is one partner to make a deal and the Bills appear to have at least 3 candidates who are in the Henry market: 1. AZ needs an RB after Smith retired, but even thouh there is a deeper than usual pool of draftable RBs, they also have a critical need at CB and the draft pool will not allow them to get both one of the top 3 RBs and a top CB with the their first and second round picks. 2. TB has Pittman as their RBH option and he is simply not of starter quality and they have other needs like QB and they are salary cap stressed but draft pick rich making a 2005 former Pro Bowler like Henry attractive. 3. Miami has hired a new offensive minded HC who after the Wickey Williams debacle, Fiedler debacle, and Boston debacle has needs all over the place, no second round draft pick and acquiring a former pro Bowl RB (even one you feel sucks) would do a lot to create a new feel for marketing their product. There are apparently 1 or 2 other teams that expressed interest in Henry through his agent doing TDs work for him. Even if one (likely) or two (unlikely) of these teams expressed interest in Henry merely to create disinformation, this still leaves a trade partner(s) for the Bills. Do you disagree that there is at least some sense Henry is a sought after commodity and you can present some indication or evidence (besides theory) that they are all fooling the Bills (and their customers and team in AZ's case).

Yeah, I am willing to take that risk and a Bills teams which has seen Jennings and Phat Pat, and Winfield walk out the door with good wishes for them but no compensation for us show the Bills understand these are the rules and we all have to live with them. The Peerless situation was a rarity as Arthur Blank guranteed a market for us by publicly promising his fans and more importantly Vick that he would get Price who by far was the most prominent WR out there. The Bills would love to get some compensation for Clements, but as this team has gotten players like Spikes and Fletcher (and even Adams) while giving no compensation to their former teams, losing players is something to be avoided if possible but usually is not. If Clements takes an extension now at a lower rate than he would get as an FA, goo for us as we got him cheaper than for $15 million and actually good for him as he need not worry that he will suffer some Andre Reed like injury in his FA year which destroys his negotiating leverage. I think it is unlikely that he and the Bills work out a cap friendly compromise deal but that possibility strikes me as far more likely than trading him now and forgoing his contribution to the '05 team merely out of fear of the rules happening and us losing him without compnsation.

At least a month ago. The number change is interesting as given our needs at DT after the loss of Phat Pat, I had thought the talk of Bannan at guard was mostly to confuse the enemy about our needs and desire. However, maybe this is a serious move prompted by some sense that the positive of JMac being psyched about him or the negative of Krumrie telling him there is no future for him at DT. Neither occurence seems likely to me as JMac had a lot of other options at G now so that a player making a switch of units being more than a PS level development option seems unlikely to me and even if Bannan has not lived up to his rookie promise, Krumrie challenging him to change and improve seems more likely than giving up on his DT past.

This has got to be one of the dumbest comments from someone who allegedly knows the game. Sully says: Donahoe created this problem for himself. He knew from the moment he drafted McGahee that he'd eventually have to deal Henry. Last summer, he could have traded Henry from a position of strength. He waited, and now he has to deal Henry from a weakened position. 1. Look, rather than this being a problem, the Bills (as the next article in TBD says) are in a position of strength heading into this year's draft having WM starting and a former Pro Bowler as a back-up who is under contract at a $1.25 million cap hit. Teams wish they had problems like this. AZ has an RB PROBLEM caused by the retirement of Smith with no credible replacement on the roster. TB has an RB PROBLEM with Pittman as the lead candidate on their roster to start. Miaimi has an RB PROBLEM with Wickey having flown the coop and Lamar Jordan as their starter on their roster. The Bills certainly have an RB issue to be dealt with but describing a situation where a team has a top 5 draftee talented who thanks to a good read by the Bills docs and cojones by TD they got with a pick in the 20s and he is backed up by a former Pro Bowler with zero leverage to never suit up as a Bill again if they want him to is only insanely referred to as a problem compared to other situtations. 2. TD fooled people in 2003 because they made the false assumption that we would not go for an RB because we had Henry. Intelligent people have now realized that it was the prescence and play of Henry which only made the idea of drafting WM a rational thing to do because his rehab from a devastating knee injury (more tears than Edggerin James who needed a year and a half of reha before he became a semblance of his former self) made having him sit the entire 2004 season a necessary thing to do. Sullivan gets paid to watch the game but proved himself a Klondike once again by offering up the concept that the Bills created a problem by adding the WM resource once TH gave the Bills the giftof an extra year if owning him for NFL chump change. 3. Finally he claims that by not trading Henry before WM had shown he could withstand a hit and resume his former level (it was after 3 o4 4 games of the season that word began to come out of practice that WM had found a new gear in his rehab and game) that the Bills put themselves in a weakened position. Beyond the insane risk that the Bills were supposed to somehow go into last season with Joe Burns and Shaud Williams as their RBs if WM developed slowly, not at all or got hurt again, Sully ignores the real potential that we are going to leverage AZ (they certainly are moving in our direction having given up on their initial demand for Henry and a draft choice and Green is on record saying we are close when the discussion of us flipping picks is what folks are talking about) or that there are a couple of possibilities for trade partners in TB and Miami that cannot be ignored. He needs column inches and it is the deadtime for real news just before the draft. but this column is wrong-headed and silly.

Yeah, but do you think that is the TD plan? I simply do not see him going into the season saying, OK at CB we are going to depend on our Pro Bowl KR who was burned several times last year focusing on not getting burned as much and still being a KO threat. Further, we are going to take the player who got hurt last year and who clearly we and he visualized as a safety with his contract and squeeze another year or two out of him at CB. Further, our 7th rounder Smith looked good on PR so we are going to invest totally in him eliminating his mecuric rookie ways. I will do this because it avoids me and the Bills dealing with a potential future problem even though that same problem can be avoided if Clements were to take a cheaper long-term deal which gurantees him for life now without having to risk injury or perform again at a Pro Bowl level in order to get a big FA deal next year. The risks of moving him now seem far too high and their are simpler methods for getting to a good outcome for the future with Clements which allow the Bills to enjoy his skills this year. Why give him up at a guranteed immediate cost now when there is the potential to have our cake and eat it too.

Folks interest in this draft and the absence of a first makes emphasizing acquiring one of at least flipping 2nd rounders understandable, but the emphasis that some seem to put on this as a goal and hatching bizarre stategies for trading Clements to the Skins now for future benefits (a draft pick in 2006 or even a 1st rounder this year that must develop) seems strange moves to me. TD is a GM and many of his moves like drafting Reed so he could move and ultimately tag Peerless, picking WM and allowing him to rehab for a year, picking Losman and allowing him to train for a yearwere certainly more far sighted than most. However, worst to first is possible in this league like never before, we are coming off of barely missing the playoffs last year, our ST and D are among the NFL best right now and the future is now is a strong drive in the NFL which may not be the only way a GM thinks but certainly has to be at least a factor in how he operates. TD is definitely not taking a George Allen/Dan Snyder approach of every move needs to mostly deliver results now. However, I have yet to see him invest in a future return unless he has some immediate way of realizing a return now. 1. He needed Henry to be comfortable letting WM sit. 2. He needed Reed to be comfotable dickering with Peerless as fodder to get a #1 rather than dicker with him to keep him. 3. He needed Bledsoe in place to be comfortable developing Losman. I think the overwhelming keys to trading Clements are what will the Bills have at starting CB in 2005 (McGee and Vincent are unlikely to cut it as our starters in my book. The Bills seem to see Vincent as an eventual safety in all cases and actually as one sooner rather than later in reality. Clements has finally achieved the Pro Bowl level as a CB we wanted though just barely and McGee is a return guy as a Pro Bowl talent and well short of the Clements level as a CB) and what will the Bills get in exchange for him now for trading him. I see nothing offered to the Bills in the proposed deals but future considerations and as TD has been happy to trade next years 1st rounder for benefit now the proposals people offer simply do not provide enough immediate upside to be credible suggestions.

Draft schmaft. I think that TD at least wants to win now and its his job to do so with the added pressure of a losing record in his tenure making win now all the more important. If TD has any other major impetus rather than win now it is REALLY WIN NOW because the team came so close to the playoffs last year.