Pyrite Gal

Actuslly, I was impressed with Fowler when he hit the draft a few years ago and here good things about his play in place of an injured starter last year. The word I hear is that he was available not because he was on his way out, but because the market was goimg to pay him starter center money and he was only gonna play back-up for the Vikes injured center and not start so away he went. The market did not give him the big bucks that a fulltime center commanded because he was not fulltime, but he is a pretty good bet by past play and age to step up to this level. He is not a sure thing and the Bills need a realistic Plan B (Preston impressed in spot duty last year and was an impressive C in college) but I do bit see how you do not view him as an upgarde over the backside of his career Teague. I see Peters as an improvement over MW but again he is no sure thing since he also impressed but has not played a full season yet. Gandy is the same (adequate but not a world-beater and I think our biggest problem at starter is that Villarial is unlikely to last all season and is the prime place I would look for an FA back-up. At any rate, I see us with upgrades at 3 of 5 slots. Our biggest issue is lack of Plan Bs when folks like Villarial go down or someone fails, but though I do not see the remaining FAs at OL (folks like Backus, Neal, Raymer. etc. being adeqaute starters I think we can find an adequate back-up there. In fact unless the draft delivered us a D'Brick or we stupidly rolled the dice on Justice I think that the remaining FAs (though not starters) are far more llikely OL contributors than this draft could have produced. We need work certainly, but this starter crew actually strikes me as exceedinf in skill level the NYG crew led by former Bills Glenn Parjer and Dusty Ziegler whom JMaccoached to an SN. Its not solved at all but not impossible at all either.

Getting to? He is at that point where nicks he might have played through in the past cost him a game and a minor injury may be more severe, We gotta back him up and that back-up should expect to play.

The depth chart is not reliable right now as it made no sense to update it prior to the draft. It also made no sense to put Reyes down as anything but 3rd string LG as it was unclear whether the Bills might land a G in the draft like Spencer who would have likely competed for a starting job somewhere and it makes more sense to slate Reyes to compete for LG, back-up Villarial, or back-up Fowler. It simply made no sense to signal determination about how he was going to be used or signal clearly the lack of confidence in Anderson until we saw how the draft went. I think we will still go fishing in the remnants of the FA pool for OL help, but as it stands I think that Reyes and Anderson simply compete for the LG job and it will ve determined on the field of play rather than someone awarding the job based on mere opinion or assessment.

This team is certainly not going to win the SB in 2006. This team is almost certainly not going to make the playoffs in 2006. However, if this team is competitive week in and week out and actually posts a record sbove .500 I do not consider this doing nothing. In fact, I think that this goal is the least which Marv and Ralph are after and that this was a NEED draft for them because after being blanked from the playoffs under TD, though the team is probably over a season away from making the playoffs, the chose players not based on a sense of accomplishing a goal a few seasons away but of winning now. I like this. In an NFL where worst to first is possible like never before, I think you need to go for it every year even though building slowly is probably a more reasonable approach. Several things strike me about this draft: 1. If we were on a 2-3 year plan a bias toward picking the best available player would be the correct thing to do. However, as the team is in the immediate mode I think the plan all along was to get Whitmer in the mid-1st, and hope that they coulf pick up an early 2nd or package somethings to trade into the late first and get McCargo. Instead the OAK pick killed us as we were down to only the one SS who might start and we could not trade down to get a shot at McCargo for fear of losing Whitmer. This le to us being forced to stretch for Whitmer and to trade value (actually fair valu according to value charts) to get McCargo. 2. A player can be both a bad draft pick and a good choice by the team. Whitmer is a great example of this paradox, He definitely was a stretch as a draft pick who was reasonably slated to go in the mid first. The Bills took him at a much higher spot than he reasonably should hae gone. However, we were simply forced to take him at an unreasonable slot becaise we could not risk losing him and either having to overreach for Bullocks or Manning (the next safeties taken) or play Bowen/Wire as our SS. The paradox is that though this was a bad draft pick, he is also probably a good choice for this team: A. We definitely upgraded over having to start Bowen or Wire. This is simply a much better team by this choice. B. He was a stretch at #8 but we expect an immediate starter out of any first round choice. Even if we had arranged to make a better draft pick by getting at 15 or 18, he would also be seen as a clear and reasonable starting candidate for this team and his skill set looks very good for playing SS in a Cover 2. C. The major hit we took in being forced to take him earlier than he merited was that we had to use other resources to move up. If we had instead felt comfortable trading down with a team like the Rams for an extra second, we then would have packaged this new pick with our original second to move up for Mccargo anyway. What this situation likely cost us was having another first day pick which we likely would have used for Winston, Spencer. or maybe Justice if things fell right. The Bills will likely need to go to FA looking for an overpriced and declininig OL guy with still some level of positive talent to give to sabilize the OL. This will be a tough find as guys like Allen from Dallas who were cut for contract reasons as much as anything else are snapped up. I have not looked at their injury situations or history but available folks from the likes of Stinhcomb, Backus, Broen, Neal, Mitchell, Raymer, etc. may be good enough to be a back-up for us when/if Villarial gets nicked, Peters turns out to not be a consistent fulltimer over a season or whatever. I do not know who yet, but we will need some help. All in all, the draft did not turn out like we hoped it would break, but I think we got a solid likely SS, a possible solid DT (though he will need some work from some of the write ups as to get him to work on staying low and not getting too upright, an interesting CB who was a possible 1st round talent and almost definite second rounder in the third and another good talent at safety who needs some work. 3. Overall, er seemed to draft young coachable players with some ST possibilies. I'd pretty easily judge this draft a B- at worst. If we can find another Peters in the UDFAs this will be a pretty good session for our team.

Though he sounds like a candidate for the Duke lacrosse team, my sense is that the Bills braintrust certainly would consider a malingerer or someone who had been charged with a crime a real character problem, they are quite comfortable with a player who has a bit of nastiness in the Chris Villarial mode. I think folks are probably grasping at straws hoping for any thing more than a back-up contribution to the OL for anyone taken in this draft. The Bills 3rd round pick of Yerbouty (or however you spell it) in the 3rd marked a shift from a Billsbias toward a NEED approach to drafting (reaching to get Whitmer because he likely was the last of 2 guys who they thought could start immediately to fill our SS starter hole and trading up to get McCargo who likely was the lone plyer left they judged could immediately contribute on as DT). They went with Yerbo who some had going as high as the 1st even though we are pretty set at CB for this year now that BC has been tagged, Competition is always good so glad to have him and this ratchets up negotiating pressure on NC another notch. Particularly on the second day there really is no one who should reasonably be expected to start for this team this year even with us rebuilding.

Exactly, he also sounds like a BAP pick as it is already quite crowded at LB contractually as they just agreed to extend the contracts of Crowell, Stamer and Haggan yet none of the these three were even starters last year (though I suspect Crowell will start this year and the turk may come to visit Posey (particularly if YKO's recovery continues on its current track). The best thing in the write up above about him was that it cited him as having shown good ST potential. He probaly comes into a good place to learn from Fletcher who has excelled at LB despite being undersized.

Its all about taking the Best Player Available from here on out (and has been since the 3rd round as we saw with our pick of Youbouty). Any OL person taken is depth at this point rather than a serious candidate to start or even contribute much beyond ST this coming season, I think folks had it right who said yesterday as we drifted through the second round that it appears the Bills braintrust is set on makin it work with the current roster. I do not think this is outlandsish as the talent we have starting here probably exceeds what JMac had to work with in NYG when he turned a crew led by former Bills Glenn Parker and Dusty Ziegler into a crew that played a big role in getting them to the SB. Though i can see us putting together a playable starting crew, I do do have real doubts about our back-up talent. However, FA looks like a better course for finding these back-up contributors rather than expecting them to come from this year's version of Geisinger or McFarland (past late draftees).

He sounds a lot like Mccargo (who sounds a lot like Triplett). A quick penetrating guy who is not a Ted Washington like bulwark against the run. This sounds quite interesting as it begins to look like the Bills are going to be a lot about putting pressure on the QBs in the cover 2 and the LBs are gonna be counted upon to stop the run. It underscores for me the thought that some folks are selling that McCargo and Triplett will never play together because they are the same tech 3 type (this mostly appears to be us amateurs using phrases to make it sound like we know what the heck is going on here, it is for me). All the DTs on the Bills roster appear to be quick penetrators with all of them weighing in at around 300lbs rather than the 340+ of a ngata. I think this team will put the two best DTs on the field and all these fan assumptions about whether an athlete plays a 1 gap, 2 gap, or tech 3 technique is little more than an assumption when none of us even knows in fact what the Bills D scheme is going to be except that we will do cover 2 rather than zone-blitz.

Who the heck is Zach Asman! He just was on ESPN radio's draft show. He is a 16 year old who ESPN has dubbed its draft wonder boy. Apparently he is a rampant draft fan who has a website compiling his review of tons of draft mags, tapes of games he made over the air and actually even some game tape he has acquired from college teams. At any rate, he was asked by the ESPN radio interview head about a variety of players and teams and he ended up with the announcer setting him up to rag all over the Bills (and probably make the requisite jokes of a 16 year old about Marv and Ralph having Alzheimers). Fortunately, he actually had a fact-based cut on things and said that even though he had Whitner going later in the draft he thought the Bills had picked a great player who would make a difference for the team. The announcer-boy did not go into any detail or depth with Asman which is too bad because I was curious whether his more than superficial examination of the draft had led to any conlcusions about McCargo (a reach IMHO in this draft crapshoot, bu one the Bills were forced into because they are taking a NEED approach to this draft and they viewed McCargo as poteentially picked before their second round choice and he was the only player they had on their board left with even a reasonable shot at being an immediate starter at our DT hole). However, though the ESPN talk-guy had already joked about Asman being the next Mel Kiper, it turned out this youngster still takes this stuff seriously and did not take the good business way out of using this as an opportunity to feel better about himself by ripping on someone who does this for a living. neat.

For considering what the Bills did with their selection at #8 it actuallty does not matter whether we had Huff or Whitmer higher because the deal was one (Huff) was gone and the team right behind us Detroit was apparently in the safety market. If you risked losing the last of the two draft candidates we judged capable of filling our SS holeto detroit but survived, there was talk of Whitner being looked at by the #12 ur #13 choice (or some unknown trades up) so the Bills had no real choice but to take the guy they wanted at SS at 8 unless they were comfortable with the guy they had 3rd at SS on their board being someone they could get with a later pick who could start (Bullocks or Manning were most likely next on their board but neither is judged an immediate starter). At any rate, it would have been tight anyway with only two candidates likely judged worthy of our 1st round pick at SS and actually maybe only 1 judged as reasonable by us at DT. However, OAKs pick really determined what we would do.

I think the whole D stunk last year, but would not identify TV as a particular problem which caused this. If you are looking for some though beyond the fact-free opinions of us fans, he tied for the team lead in both INTs (5 with McGee) and also tied for the lead in fumble recoveries (a paltry 2 tied for the team lead). Folks who rant against him should at least be able to produce some support for why this is the case. it ain't contract reasons as Milloy was cut rather than him because my understanding is the cap savings from cutting him are relatively small compared to the multi-millions saved by cutting Milloy. I can see complaints about his play last year mostly to the extent that in the Gray zone-blitz the safeties are relatively interchangeable in terms of duties and though TV seemed to like throwing his body around he was more of a cover guy than run support guy as Milloy was. The good thing for him with the cover 2 is that now our safeties will be cast in a centerfielder role dividing the field to back up press covering CBs. This diagnosis role has probably extended TVs career a year or two unless he really hits the wall covering field. he is on the baqckside of his career and has definitely lost a step but lost it from a CB speed base.

To make it reasonable for us to cut Vincent this year we will need to see a lof of turnover production and potential from the DBs. Like it or not he tied for the team lead in INTs with McGee and turnovers (a paltry two by several players). Turnovers win games and if you cut Vincent someone will need to demonstrate they can step up and noe of our other safeties have done that in pro ball and the rookies obviously have never played pro ball. In addition, the switch to a cover 2 from a zone blitz puts a premium of play diagnosis for the safeties and TV having seen a lot of snaps will come in handy. In general, it also should not be ignored of the youthfulness of this draft group and having a mentor in the form of TV may work well. I see the Bills keeping t least 4 safeties and probably 5 given that we drafted a couple. Right now it is Vincent and Bowen starting on the depth chart with Baker, Leonhard and Lee backing up at FS and Wire backing up at SS. My guess is that Whitnerand Simpson are obvious keepers. Bowen has great ST chops and was signed by the current regime. I think TV stays and starts due to his production last year. My sense is that Baker is the lead candidate for the remaining job as a past starter and relatively cheap player. Lee is camp fodder, Leonhard has some upside but has not shown enough in a crowded group to stick (his best shot is if we for some reason go 6 safeties but I doubt this. The odd man out in this equation it seems to me is Coy Wire. TV stayed over Milloy because even though he has lost a step since his Pro Bowl days he was a quicker player with a step to lose to become normal speed, his experience compensates for this as he needs fewer steps to get to the right spot. In addition, the cap savings from cutting TV are 200K and minimal compared to the multi-million cap savings when you cut a player like Milloy.

I think on of the big difference between the Bills braintrust and fans whining about these choices is that they have different goals for when they hope/expect to win. Many fans who do not have to worry about this as a business where the team must put butts in the seat every year and where worst to first is possible like never before as athletes leave their teams all the time do not seem to have the same commitment to the future being now like the Bills braintrust seems to. While many fans seemed quite happy to simply try to get the Best Player Available and build for the future even if it meant leaving an immediate need unmet, it seems pretty clear that Marv is sticking to his spoken promise to win now. We saw this in: 1, Despite it being likely it will take the Bills a while to rebuid and making a BAP approach make a lot of sense for this team, they instead showed a firm bias toward instead adopting a need strategy which focused like a lasar beam in getting ab SS and a DT where this team had no one on the current roster to fill these needs. 2. The need approach in fact was dominant, Marv broke away from his old habit of not trading on draft day to trade up. However, he traded up to seemingly reach for McCargo in the first to fill a need rather than trading up to try to get a BAP like Davis or Hawk who clearly were great players but did not fill out needs as we have contract commitment at LB this year and hipes at least at TE on the roster. So taking this assumption as a given that the team approach is one of the future is now for at least playing .500 and hoping for the playoffs rather than building for the future (if you want to argue this point feel free but one should acknowledge this is not the Bills braintrust approach as they stretched to pick Whitmer early for fear he would be gone and then realy stetched to take Mccargo in the 1st). Thw kwy question is who would you have taken instead. Its hard for me to see how some of the options folks have talked about are actually probably worse than what we got. So whine away if you want folks, but the real fans should at least be able to suggest a different approach though it will get woulda/coulda/shoulda pretty quickly as it would have been nice togo for D'Brick but he was long gone by the time #8 came around and it simply does not appear possible. I was disappointed yesterday as well, but it seems hard for me to see much alternative for us rather than stretching for Whitmer after OAH chose Huff at #7 and Whitmer might go as quick as #9 where Detroit had been talking Huff or in the mid-1st rather than 18 where many ore-draft boards had him. Likewise, we have a huge need on the current roster at DT and the word among many pundits is that McCargo was creeping up boards and might not be there when our second pick came around. Even worse, no other DT was even taken in the 2nd so with Bunkley and Ngota wrong, if we though McCargo was the thrid best DT at this position of desperate need for us, that is why we traded up to be sure we got him. Things broke badly for us so reach we definitely did, but i see few other reasonable alternatives being suggested while folks bleat this is a disaster.

It really depends on what the 2006 Bills D scheme looks like. All we know for sure is that we are going to employ a D like the Cover 2 scheme which Jauron has used and is familiar with rather than the zone blitz which Gray ran. It is a reasonable assumption that this cover 2 will actually be altered by the presences of Fennell to employ big parts of the Cover 3 schem which he has used before. Further,like any good coaches they will alter this cover 2 mutated to employ cover 3 schemes to put the players we have in the best position to make plays so that though it will tend toward the traditional covee 2 it is going to be the 2006 Vills D to employ new wrinkles designed for the O to be difficult to predict merely by looking at old Jauron/Fennell tape. Further add to this that one of the very good things about this very young crew of players we drafted in the first three rounds, the braintrust seemed to emphasize coachability and bright guys where it would be crazy to assume they are going to play the game exactly as they did in college. In other words, it is simply a false assumption for any of us fan observer to assume that Triplett and McCargo are goint o never play yogether or even that they will not be on the field together a majority of the time in the Bills D scheme. Outside of being told it will be a Cover 2 rather than a zone blitz there is no 2006 Bills scheme yet for us to make firm assumptions about. Just as back in the old days when the Bills ran a 3-4 but alteed it to often use a set called The Package which got similar big bodies Big Ted and Phat Pat on the field at the same time, i suspect that we will see our two best DTs (likely Yriplett and McCargo based on the 1st rounder we spent getting McCargo as soom as the coaches can make it sp on the field at the same time. How will they do this? I do not know, but that is why they are the professionals who get paid cause they know this stuiff and you and I are just very interested amateurs.

I disagree with your assessment that he was out biggest weakness and think you also may underestimate how much more appropriate Cover-2 is for a player of his type at this point in his career. If you want to peg him as our weak link then the splainin' you will need to do is how this weak link tied for the team lead in INTs (he and McGee both had 5) and also in fumble recoveries (his realtively platry 2 actually tied him for the team lead. The zone blitz as we played it actually used the safeties relatively interchangeably. He showed no fear of making a hit, but the centerfielder duties critical to a safety in a Cover 2 by far more fits his skillset than the run support mandated of safeties in the zone blitz. He certainly has lost a step from his younger Pro Bowl days at CB. Yet, he covered this career wise by moving to safett from CB where there us less of a speed mandate. He lost a step yes, but he had a step to lose and still be more than adequate for centerfielder rather than pinch cover duty. In fact, diagnosing the play to work on coberage or run support will be the primary factor in determing the quality of his play and here his experiences will be quite useful in performing well. Someone mentioned the role he can play as a mentor to the young Whitmer. I think he nat wekk prove to be one of the more valuable defenders on this team in 06.

One of the things which the HC and his coordinators do is put the players into the best positions for them to make plays. I think folks are out to lunch simply assuming that this player or that player fits into our D scheme this particular way when excuse me THERE IS NO DEFINED BILLS D SCHEME FOR THEM TO FIT INTO YET. True, Jauron has said we are going to run a Cover-2 and I think that is true to the extent that we are not gonna have the zone-bkitz as our base sheme as it was the last three years. However, the scheme which our DC ran in his last job was actually a Cover-3 which divided the field into thirds for DB coverage rather than halves for safety coverage in the Cover 2. Off the bat, I will be somewhat surprised (particularly after draftins an SS with CB speed who should play better pass coverage than the aging Milloy and stumbling upon a 3rd round drafted CB who some pundits had deserving a pick in the 1st) that our D doesn't tend toward some Cover 3 because we will have the DB talent to do this. In addition, folks seem to invest in the fantasy that there was no way we considering Ngota because he is a one gap guy and we needed a two gap in our alleged Bills 06 D. There is talk (though much of these conclusions as to whether a player is 1 gap, 2 gap, 3 tech or whatever is just talk quite frankly) that actually McCargo and Ngata share this same flaw that made us no interested in Ngata. It seems to me that while the '06 D will certainly be biased toward what has traditionally worked for Jauron with an overlay of what traditionally worked for Fenell, between now and camp Fenell will develop with strong guidance from Jauron a D which outs our two most effective DTs on the field at the same time with a rotation to buttress them. Just as Big Ted and Phat Pat had the same body and played the same way in our base 3-4, the Bills made liberal use of a D scheme known as the package that really was a 4-3 in order to get these two good players on the field at the same time. If McCargo proves to be a good plater, I have few doubts that the Bills will employ a D scheme which allows him and Triplett to take the field together.

One way thar pundits make a name for themselves is by swimming against the stream. The overwroght handwringing about our draft being a disaster (it was certainly questionable and did not break well for us at all but was NYJ fan like in the non-fact based reactions to what well may be an adequate draft at best) sets one standard that can be easily defensed. The other issue which will help revisionists is that there actually was a method to this madness. The method was lame, but we are a team which has failed each of the last 5 years so it is not exactly like we are building on strength here/ Overall, the first day strikes me as: Rd 1a: Whitmer clearly was a stretch to be picked at 8. Objectively, he could have gone as late at #18 and probably would have been around in the mid first. However, the surprising OAK pick of Huff at #7 sealed our fate. Whitmer was the only other SS who presented even a reasonable chance at saving us from having Coy Wire start at SS in 06. Detroit had its eye on Huff and word was that Cleve might go with Whitmer if available before the mid 1st. Apparently we tried to trade down a couple of spots but given that Ralph and Marv want to at least produce a .500 record this year they reached for Whutmer rather than risk ending up with Wire as our SS. Regrettable but understandable. 1b: This seemed to be a big stretch trading away first day picks to move up for a player when no other DY was even picked in the 2nd. However, a rational look at this fact indicates the Bills out of desperation that we needed a 1st or 2nd round choice to have any reasonable expectation of finding a first day starter at DT, The question is whether McCargo is good enough to be a 1st day starter but it is now clear that it is quite unlikely there is one in the draft at DT after Ngata and Bunckely were taken. A big part of the revisionist history will be several published reports from the pundits (though one is by PFW so maybe McCargo will not be good if they say he will) that McCargo actually was climbing up the boards and was even thought about as a first by some. The Bills did give up respurces to move up (a bad move in my view unless it is for a franchise player IMHO) but given there was no DT candidate chosen who even merited a 2nd round pick maybe the Bills were right. if one looks at the value charts we actually traded fair value to move up into the 1sy. 3: Ybouty is a choice that indicates the Bills switched to picking the BAP as he was generally rated the 2nd or so best CB in the draft who would go in the 1st in some mocks. I'm diappointed that fear and need seems to have forced us to do a couple of reaches for players to fill needs on a team that wants to improve now. However, the revisionist view will spring off of the difficult to support and superficial views of this being a disaster and harping on the point that the Bills got 3 1st rounde level players today, there will be alot of second looks at this draft.

As disappointed and doubtful as I am about our real draft, the one you suggest would have been worse. Ngata is interesting based on his resume, but even with his resume he would have to present as a person who is only gonna take 1/3 to 1/4 of plays off rather than the half of plays on vacation. If he only took 1/4 or less of plays off I think he would be fine as opposing OCs and Gs would not know whether he was going to play hard or not (this is why Sam Adams was great even though he took plays off). In addition to us fans really having no clue about what kind of man he is, we have not had our docs look at him to make a judgment whether he has a recurring injury issue or body. I could easily see how Marv might be impressed with him or how with professional weight and condidtioning traininf he could be a good choice but without this info I can easily see how he could be passed upon. Justice simply has character issues which caused him to plummet and the whines from fans if he had been picked in the 2nd would have been justified (particularly with us on record avoiding character issues. Out draft is questionable but yours looks worse.

I agree with your assessment of what we with JMac's leadership hope to do. I think it is unlikely this starting crew will be sufficient, but it is possible in that I actually think this crew is more talented than the NYG crew led by Glenn Parker and Dusty Ziegler that JMac coached into a SB worthy crew. I see the prob as being Plan B as our back-ups do not strike me as good enough to step up as will almost certainly be necessary due to injury or inadequate starter play. I think Gandy was adeqate (at best) at LT last year but we have no credible back-up even with shifting positions. Actually, LG is probably the position with most depth with the shift of Preston there, acquisition of Reyes and better (though still inadequate) play by Anderson last year in the last 5 games of 05. Fowler is someone I regretted we did not draft years ago and he lost the starters job after stepping in for the injured starter and not being worth the cap hit he would get from the market not to start. Geisinger however is unproven and I am more comfortable with Preston as back-up. A plan B at RG us essential since though I think Villarial is a solid player he is well into the backside of his career and will likely miss a couple of starts this year due to nicks and injury, It is doubtful this hole can filled through the draft anyway after the first couple of rounds so FA is it. Peters looks to be the real deal but there is no solid back-up here eother/ The draft is a crapshoot anyway and the second day is all about development project that will not serve us on the OL in 06 anyway so I think it is FA at best for useful OL help.

Actually I think this ocurrence leads to the opposite conclusion. It seemed to me the Bills reached up for McCargo out of fear that someone else would take him before they picked in the 2nd and that there was no other DT available in the draft with their 2nd round pick. The fact that no other team judged a DT worthy of a 2nd round pick confirms that they were correct in reaching up for McCargo (as long as he merits a shot at starting immediately for us as we expect from any 1st round choice). Since clearly the top 2 DT choices Ngata and Bunkley were not available for our #2 would have either been a stretch for a player not even picked in the 2nd or else leave our starting DT slot to a player who merited a 3rd round choice at best.

One thng true about most of the draft words that folks seem to convert into deadlock certainty is that most of that intelligence was flat out lies.

BAP

The Bills are looking to win now. I can see how someone might reject this notion because the feel that Whitmer is a #15 or so and that McCargo is a second rounder. I'm not arguing about their absolute quality as players. Instead, I think the keys to the Bills decision-making were the Bills listed much more to this being a NEED draft early than this taking a BEST PLAYER AVAILABLE spproach. The Bills seem far more interested in filling the holes in their starting line-up which are not filled by players on their current roster than on taking the BAP who might start but will not only force a current starter to the bench but leave a hole in the starting line-up. Once OAK picked Huff the Bills had Whitmer on their board as one of the few if not the only safety that could assure we were not going with Coy Wire as our starting SS. Then, having gone after an SS we had a hole at DT where Tim Anderson is first on the depth chart. Bunkley and Ngota both got picked and we decided to trade up to get the guy the Bills judged to be the 3rd DT capable of starting and traded up to get McCargo. They traded up to get him rather than waiting to see if he fell to them in the 2nd round. This risk would have been easier to take if we were on a 2 year curve. However, because we want to make sure we have a player who has a chance to start this year, we went that way. Apparently we have now gone to BAP with our roumd choice taking amother OSU DB who dropped on many boards. My sense is that as far as OL probably a couple of things are true: 1. By taking Eric Winston the Texans probably took the one OL player who had dropped who would have been a good pick-up for us. 2. The Bills actually feel JMac can make things work with the crew we have on hand. This looks doubtful to me but I think they are acrually better than the group led by Glenn Parker and Dusty Ziegler that JMac turned into an SB worthy OL for NYG a few years back. We'll see.

This is really a defensive draft. I'm referring to not just the fact both players are defenders, but it appears that the Bills reached well beyond where these players were seen by pundits. Apparently they did this to defend themselves from being forced to take the fourth best DT on their board to fill the huge hole at DT next Triplett and took Whitner after Huff got nabbed to defend themselves from filling the whole at SS with the 3rd best SS, Its a bummer but a major drive for RWS (and thus Marv) after 5 years of failing to make the playoffs under TD is to fill needs and win now.

I think they loved Whitner, but got afraid after Huff was gone that someone might grab Whitner so they reached for him rather than risk a tradedown. Likewise McCargo, though there were no DTs taken after picks of Ngota and Bunckley, perhaps they viewed onr of the DEs taken as being a flexile guy so that they did not have room to risk to take McCargo. If they had Whitner as the best SS on their board and enough questions about Ngota's inconsistency and Bunkley's character that they viewed MCargo as the best choice at DT this draft makes some sense. If they get an OL player with their 3rd who they wanted life is good.