Dibs

Hi....& welcome. Some good points. If I may be so bold though......break up your writing into paragraphs, it's a lot easier to read in smaller chunks. I liked what you wrote though.

OK...I lied. 1 more. Well mainly addressing their list. I'm near certain that the list is put together by a bunch of their staffs "I reckon" oppinion & has nothing at all to do with stats. Often there are players with.....say....more ints, sacks, tackles, FF, & FR but are lower on the list than somebody who has less. Their rankings are at best a joke & at worst a con. 4 starting DBs 32 teams That is 128 starting DBs They are saying that 19 backups & every single starting DB in the league is better than Whitner. Again......I feel this is pointless. Why am I having to put forward an argument to soooo many that Whitner has performed exceptionally well for a rookie....of any possition....from any numbered selection.....in any year. I don't understand.

Do you think you'd be half way for a Manning trade with any of the top 10 picks??? Unlike 80% of the 1st round.....including most of the top 10, Whitner looks like he certainly will be a 'very good'(minimally) player. That means......at this point he is looking like one of the BEST 1st round picks. I am speaking English here aren't I? OK, this is my last post on the topic(for now ). I give up(not just with you HA....all of this has got me feeling ) Why do so many people seem to think that..... the higher the draft pick, the better the player will be??????????? That is totally incorrect. The higher the draft pick (theoretically) the higher the chance that you draft a top calibre player. Brady, Favre, Barber, Portis, Alexander, Gates, Moss, Marvin Harrison, Owens, Chad Johnson, Jason Taylor, Strahan, Ray Lewis,Ed Reed, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc Position taken in the draft does not seem to effect the upper potential of the draft picks. The only position I can see that pretty much requires it's upper echelon to be drafted in the top 10 is OT. Every other position has HOFers coming from all over the draft. To assume that Whitner will have little upside is going against the odds. Whitner has shown he is one of the best 1st round picks(in Bills history....look it up) after 1 year. With such a good rookie year, you'd think there would be a higher chance....not a lower chance....that he improves to be a play-maker. Lets say....for the sake of argument....that both N'Gata & Mangold had better rookie seasons than Whitner & will both become HOFers whereas Whitner will be a solid 'very good' player. SO WHAT?????? So the Bills draft wasn't THE ABSOLUTE BEST it could possibly be. The draft we did have....as opposed to the hypothetical BEST draft we could have.....was (at this point) one of the best in Bills history & one of the best league wide. My problem is that people are basically saying..... "Since it wasn't the BEST, it was garbage." My other problem is the same argument but with Whitner as an individual. "Since he wasn't the BEST, the selection is garbage." I shake my head in astonishment.

I'm not sure what you want from your 'replacement 1st round RB'. I want better production than we got from WM.....NEXT SEASON!!!!.....which I believe we will easily get from WM if we FIX THE OL & address our biggest area of need the OGs. Benson.....we are talking about slotting in a RB who can get the job done. He may turn his career around but for our purposes he would basically leave us with A.Thomas as a leading back. Thomas Jones is a bust for similar reasons to Benson...373, 380, 511 yards in first 3 seasons then the Cardinals gave up & said goodbye. Again, that is not what we want from our 1st round pick that should be spent on areas of need. Tyrone Wheatley 245, 400, 583....see above Napoleon Kaufman...see above Robert Edwards & Ki-Jana Carter injury is all part of not making it.....RB is an injury prone position, the change up from College to pros may well be the reason for so many early RB injuries.....maybe not but one certainly can't count these guys as non-busts. T.J. Duckett 507, 779, 509, 380....bye bye, new team. See above yet again. James Stewart...see above Rashaan Salaam 1000 yards rookie season followed by 496 then 112. Is that what you want? Antowain Smith Obviously he wasn't good enough for us.... Michael Bennett Nearly 1300 yards in 2002????? Nearly 700 in 2001 & nearly 450 in 2003.....280 in 2004 Kevin Jones - 1100 yards his rookie year......& nothing since. Thankyou for making me justify my list. Simply, none of those guys achieved consistently what WM has done for us behind a garbage line......from their rookie years. That's not to say WM is great.....it is simply saying that 1st round RBs.....like ALL 1st round picks.....are at best a 50-50 proposition.

Oh, please. 1st off, who is this 500 point player we could have traded down to get & gotten a 2nd round pick as well? N'Gata? I'm am certain that this entire argument is based upon us not selecting him. If we traded down, the 20% for star potential should reduce also. I don't agree with your numbers. What about the difference between star & starter? On a sliding scale that would look like...... Option 1, expected value: (50% * 0) + (20% * 500) + (8% * 100) + (7% * 200) + (8% * 300) + (7% * 400) = 158 Option 2, expected value: (25% * 0) + (10% * 500) + (20% * 100) + (17% * 200) + (16% * 300) + (12% * 400) = 200 Whitner looks like about a 350 at this point wouldn't you say? Based on his rookie performance & his own potential. It's amazing how one can make arbitrary numbers look meaningful. I'm not against gamble picks. I prefer safer picks when we have very few 'good' players. We were not in the position to end up with another 1st round bust. In the end, the argument is about how he is compared to his peers(present & past) & he is well, well, well, above the average(at this point).

I'd think there is a lot of truth in what you say here....but.....it's not to say that simply spending your 1st round pick on a RB will mean you have said 'halfway decent back'. Here is a list going back to 1995 of all 1st round RBs.....BUSTS IN BOLD #1 Ki-Jana Carter #2 Ronnie Brown #4 Edgerrin James #4 Cedric Benson #5 Curtis Enis #5 Ricky Williams????? #5 Jamal Lewis #5 LaDainian Tomlinson #5 Cadillac Williams????? #6 Lawrence Phillips #7 Thomas Jones #8 Tim Biakabutuka #9 Fred Taylor #11 Ron Dayne #12 Warrick Dunn #14 Eddie George #16 William Green #17 Tyrone Wheatley #18 Napoleon Kaufman #18 Robert Edwards #18 T.J. Duckett #19 James Stewart #19 Shaun Alexander #21 Rashaan Salaam #23 Antowain Smith #23 Deuce McAllister #23 Willis McGahee????? #24 Steven Jackson #26 Chris Perry #27 Michael Bennett #27 Larry Johnson #29 John Avery #30 Kevin Jones #31 Trung Canidate That's 34 RBs with 20 definitely BUSTS.....with another 3 ?????. That's 16 RBs within the top 14(where we are looking).....with 7 busts & 2 ?????. As you can see, spending your 1st pick on a RB when you already have one is excessive luxury since MOST end up being BUSTS.

I don't know about the little potential for greatness....but....essentially that is exactly correct. Let me ask you....would you prefer a player who has say..... 50% of bust with 20% chance of star.... or.... 25% chance of bust with 10% chance of star? Did anyone really want another M.Williams, E.Flowers, A.Smith, or hell WM? In the end, we are pretty sure we have a 'very good' player in Whitner. I'd say there are only a handful or so teams who feel as confident as us that their 1st pick will not be a bust. But no....I must be wrong. Aaaaall the other 1st rounders who didn't have as good rookie seasons as Whitner are better picks because they have 'potential'.

My perceptions were/are similar to yours in regards to expectation of talent level of players.....we have had....however....1 year of results.....and as time goes on, our expectations will...or won't be backed up. As history shows, around half of those can't miss top 5-6 players that you/me/everyone expects to be champion players will be busts. Therefore, if Whitner is looking like a near-certain 'good player', that(at this point) is showing to be greater than any perceived possible potential of others. You need to find around 50% of teams who did better with what they had to work with to justify a stance that we had a poor draft. *keep in mind, I would prefer not to assess things after 1 year....but it was raised....and was claimed that we had a bad draft....in particular Whitner* When looking at how our rookies performed after 1 year.....& comparing them to not only every team this year......& the average performances throughout history.....and in particular teams in the top 10.....and in particular the individual performance of our top pick.....I can see no logical justification for saying that our draft(at this point) looks even minimally average...let alone below average or bad. "I reckon we should have done better." Compare it to what is there.....not what you figure will be there. That was for post draft assessment. This is now '1 year later' assessment.

That's ignoring reality. What you...or I....or Marv....or anyone thinks about how a player will pan out has no baring on how they actually do pan out. Reality = Expect 50% of all 1st round picks to be total BUSTS. If one is grading/rating/assessing a draft.....which is what you/we are doing here......you simply HAVE to compare it to the rest of the league. Is it logical/reasonable for me to expect instant pro-bowlers from every draft pick? Of course not. What is logical/reasonable to do is to figure out what occurs on average to an teams draft selections......compare yours to that......& if it is above the average, assess it as so. Our 2007 draft was weeeeell above the average draft for the NFL. Whitner performed weeeeell above the average for a 1st round rookie.....& a top 10 rookie. If you wish to base your expectations on your arbitrary perceptions......at least acknowledge that the standards you are basing things upon are far higher than you place upon every other team in the NFL.

Which is a great reason for us....with so much cap space & needy for OG help....to be looking closly at Kris Dielman since he will be a FA this year.

Good post. I've been toying with creating a thread saying the exact same thing for days now. One additional point to yours....... Most would consider our biggest need to be OG(the rest would say DT)......either way, OG is a very big need for us. What is it that OGs do? If we improve the interior of the OL, it is only logical that WM has a much better season in 2007. Then, he will be a FA & we can do with him as we like. We can tag him & trade him. If he shows he can be really productive behind a good OL, we can re-sign him. Basically, we could well have a hot commodity with some form of controlling power. Who would want to give much for him at the moment? It all comes back to.....FIX THE OL

Ooops....I brain freezed & misread Taylors Ints at the end there....edited & fixed now though. My point isn't how good Whitner will become.....who knows, he may BUST after all....or he may become SUPER PLAYMAKER GUY & go to the HOF. What my point is about is he has certainly shown enough in the first year to be considered a very, very, good pick. I keep using the word perspective because it seems nobody here has any. If you think they should have done better, what are you basing your expectations on? Surely expectations should be based on league averages. Our draft was better than league averages in ALL areas. We had a better 1st day than most teams(many think we didn't but we actually did).....we had a magnificent 2nd day at the draft. OVERALL we had a very, very good draft. That isn't to say that the players who have shown promise can't regress.....it is simply saying that....seeing so many wish to grade the draft now......that we had a far better draft than most of our peers. If you think we should have traded etc.......we didn't & there is no way to know whether things would have worked out as well as they have for us. It seems people quibble over individual specifics to point out negative things when OVERALL the 2006 draft & Whitner in particular are looking.....in perspective....to be great for us.

Good point.....though I still think that when looking at 'the pick'.....any non bust is better than a bust(which is 50%). I was mainly trying to counter the concept of what Matt in DC said in post #65(after my post too)....."A) I think that Whitner will be good, but not worth the #8 pick." By perspective, I meant that if half of the #8 picks are busts........how is it possible for everyone to continually expect the player to become a HOFer. Surely a 'good' player is a result well above the odds & therefore the player is a good pick. ....but I digress from your point Let's compare Whitners rookie year to those guys. Whitner....15 games, 104 tackles, 1 int, 0 sacks Huff....16 games, 78 tackles, 0 int, 0 sacks Allen....16 games, 20 tackles, 1 int, 0 sacks Taylor....15 games, 76 tackles, 4 int, 1 sacks Polamalu....16 games, 38 tackles, 0 int, 0 sacks Williams....16 games, 55 tackles, 5 ins, 2 sacks Reed....16, 85 tackles, 5 int, 1 sack As we can see.....in perspective to his modern day peers.....he is certainly in the mix.....better than most....most tackles by far....only one int which is only bettered by 3 players. but wait.....you forgot a few safeties...... 2005: Thomas Davis(converted to OLB)....16 games, 38 tackles, 0 int, 1.5 sacks 2002: Mike Rumph....16 games, 49 tackles, 0 int, 0 sacks ....and I think to be fair, we should grab more 1st round safeties from further back in time. In recent times there has been a few BIG successes more than the usual I'd think.....only fair to compare in proper perspective.(A bit like in recent times high 1st round OTs have been busts.....we don't expect all high 1st round OTs to be busts based on that anomaly) 2001: Adam Archuleta....13 games, 56 tackles, 0 int, 2 sacks 2001: Derrick Gibson....16 games, 15 tackles, 1 int, 0 sacks 1999: Antuan Edwards....16 games, 36 tackles, 4 int, 0 sacks 1998: Tebucky Jones....16 games, 29 tackles, 0 int, 0 sacks 1998: Shaun Williams....13 games, 34 tackles, 2 int, 0 sacks 1998: Donovin Darius....14 games, 76 tackles, 0 int, 0 sacks OK....that's 10 years of the first season for 1st round Safeties drafted. 15 in total Whitner had the highest tackles.....equal 6th in ints & along with 9 others, 0 sacks. OK....the top 10 picks are..... Huff....not as good Taylor....more ints....less tackles Williams....more ints....less tackles Again.....when looked at in perspective.......Whitner is showing himself to be a very good pick.

His point was in relation to people apparent precognitive abilities.....all stated in hindsight.....not about the concept of overall discussion.

Well summed up. I don't get half(most?) of you guys. PERSPECTIVE!!!!! It's a wonderful thing. Over half of first rounders are busts....PERIOD......including the top 10! When we can finish the season with the near certain knowledge that our top 10 pick is not only not going to be a bust....but looks like he will minimally be a 'very good' player for years to come......IT IS A GOOD PICK. I'll grab two drafts top 10 at random....2000 & 1995 Let's see.....2000 1. Courtney Brown....Hmmm 2. LaVar Arrington....Good/Hmmm 3. Chris Samuels....Good 4. Peter Warrick....Hmmm 5. Jamal Lewis....Good 6. Corey Simon....Good/Hmmm 7. Thomas Jones....Hmmm 8. Plaxico Burress....Decent 9. Brian Urlacher....Good 10. Travis Taylor....Hmmm 1995 1. Ki-Jana Carter....Hmmm 2. Tony Boselli....Good 3. Steve McNair....Good(though took his time) 4. Michael Westbrook....Hmmm 5. Kerry Collins....Good/Hmmm 6. Kevin Carter....Decent 7. Mike Mamula....Hmmm 8. Joey Galloway....Decent 9. Kyle Brady....Hmmm 10. J.J. Stokes....Hmmm Do I need to list off every top 10 in history????? PERSPECTIVE Not being a bust is better than half the picks in the top 10. Where did the mentality come from that all of our top picks have to be HOFers in their first season to be considered decent picks? Even McCargos performance was better than probably half of the first rounders first season in the league.

Post 2000 seems to have been not so good for highly drafted OTs....Gallery #2, Williams #4, Davis #2. 2000 & back were extremely productive. Samuels #3, Turley #7, Pace #1, Ogden #4, Boselli #2, Roaf #8 It seems the only place one can find a HOF calibre OT is inside the top 8 of the draft.....or Jason Peters(fingers crossed).

According to the Draft Value Chart a drop from 12th to 20(ish) is worth around 400 points......the equivalent to a mid 2nd. Mind you.....it's just a guide......and......there is little chance we trade WM IMO anyway.

Under contract to(& including) 2009

Wasn't the same thing said last year?

Apart from the whole...."I wanted us not to draft a DB".....thing, I don't understand how you can be so displeased with day 1. Looked at in perspective......that means comparing this 1st day to the 'average' first day after 1 year & you'll see that it is probably one of the better ones. Comparing quickly to the East(AFC&NFC)....1/4 of league. BUF 1/DB Whitner(15 starts)....rookie of month, one of best 1st rounders 1/DT McCargo(0 starts)....looked to be 'getting' it, then injured 3/DB Youboty(0 starts)....no play time due to totally non football situation...no reason to expect his potential to be reduced in any way. NE 1/RB Maroney(no starts)....Good but Whitner was better 2/WR Jackson(1 start, 12 games played)....Not showing much on team with no WRs 3/TE Thomas(3 starts)....(3 starts, 1 decent game)....added not much more to team than Youboty did for us. MIA 1/DB Allen(no starts)....20 tackles total for year 2/WR Hagan(no starts)....21 catches looks OK....comparable production to McCargo NYJ 1/OT Ferguson(16 starts)....Very good but not quite as good as Whitner(?)(comparable) 1/C Mangold(16 starts)....One of the better 1st round picks 2/QB Clemens....virtually did not play 3/LB Schlegel....virtually did not play 3/DB Smith(no starts)....played 15, decent helper with 27 tackles & 2 ints PHIL 1/DT Bunkley(no starts)....virtually a non-factor...McCargo did better in his 5 games 2/OT Justice....did not play 3/DE Gocong....did not play DAL 1/LB Carpenter(1 start, week 17)....virtual non factor 2/TE Fasano(5 starts)....14 catches....helped, but not much 3/DE Hatcher(0 starts)....played 15 & helped with 2.5 sacks NYG 1/DE Kiwanuka(9 starts)....Did pretty well with 4 sacks & 2 ints 2/WR Moss....virtual non factor 3/LB Wilkinson(2 starts)....played 16 games & did OK with 27 tackles WASH 2/LB McIntosh(1 start)....played 16 games & did OK with 28 tackles As you can clearly see..... Only the Jets could really be considered to have had a definitively better day 1 than us. We had(IMO) a definitively better day 1 than MIA, PHIL, DAL & WASH. Comparable day 1 to NE & NYG I think it crazy to assess after 1 year but.....basically.....the comments that our day 1 was "disastrous" or terrible are not only premature but....as I hopefully have shown.....out of context & incorrect.

How about Deilman or Davis? There are a few 'good' OGs out there this FA period......we HAVE to get one. Well......we don't have to......but it would be nice.

New regime....fair enough an old player who was malcontent like Adams was not re-signed....regardless of system. Sands was never passed up on(was not a FA).....& how good is he anyway???? We had Pickett in for an interview didn't we......didn't we even make him an offer? Who the hell was Ma'ake Kemoeatu last FA season anyway......then again, who is he now? New Regime bring in a 10 year vet that the Packers didn't want? N'Gata was realistically the only 'sought after' or 'target' player that didn't fit our system that was available to us which we ignored.

I'm confused.....the last time I voted(within a week of finish), the deaf chick had 34% & Gino had 24%. Did I see that wrong or....????

Welcome.

Easier said than done......& in our case, we had fast DEs, fast LBs, fast CBs, no DTs & old(needed replacing soon) Ss. The cover 2 fit probably more than other forms of D. I can't see how DJ has tried to get his players playing in manners not suited to them at all. Is this a N'Gata reference? He is the only 'target' player that didn't fit our system that was available to us which we ignored.