JohnC

I thought Rodrigues was very active and didn't look out of place. The TV analyst made reference to him on a few occasions. Kane slowly but steadily is starting to integrate his play more with his line mates. As the announcer said he is getting to the spots and shooting with a quick draw. Kane plays on the power play and penalty kills. He is also our best scorer on five on five. In addition, he is a hard and determined checker. And still there is a persistent sentiment to trade him. It befuddles me.

What's the condition of Butt? Will he be ready by the start of the season? Even not he would be a terrific investment pick to stash away until he is healthy. I hate it when Whaley gratuitously gives up picks. They could be used for this kind of injured player who might at a later time be a contributor.

Lehner was by far the first star of the game. The first period we were the superior team. The last two periods we were under siege. For those misguided good fellows who insist on having Kane traded my response is simple: Cease and desist!

Can I reserve a seat on the band wagon----I mean train? I'm a caboose kind of guy.

I don't understand your response and reasoning. This was the last game of the year where the front office ordered the starter to the bench for contract reasons. Not only did the organization firmly conclude that EJ wasn't good but they also knew that after this game he would no longer be associated with the team. Yet the staff wasn't willing to expose him as a starter. Cardale had a year to prepare, even if it was a third string practice player. At the minimum he should know the plays. If the staff was reluctant to play him in this meaningless last game of the season then what does it tell you where he is at as a player? (Polish Dave's point)Even if CJ wasn't fully ready to start a game what would be the harm to allow him to be exposed to the speed of an actual game? The argument that he could be set back by being overwhelmed in his first game is an insulting condemnation of the fragility of his psyche. If Whaley made the determination that TT shouldn't play then it is not unreasonable to believe that he entertained the possibility that Cardale should start in this game. It's not too difficult to then make the leap that the coaches told Whaley that his pet projection was still too ill-equipped to even handle such an inconsequential last game between two sad sacked teams. That in itself is troubling when considering Cardale's prospects.

The best part of the story was his father. Roger Stauback was the model for football players to follow in the real world of business.

The Jets' Hackenberg selection never made sense to me. Their intention was not to play him his first year and spend it on modifying his mechanics. So clearly they knew there were issues with him as a passer. The word leaking out of their facility at an open fire hydrant rate is that he is still hideously inaccurate. When a qb is inaccurate in college the odds are against you that he will be accurate in the pros where it is even a more daunting task to complete passes. It is understandable that scouts are enamored with classic physical traits for a position (Nix syndrome). But there are some essential traits that you can't' overlook. No amount of work in correcting sloppy mechanics is going to sufficiently overcome the natural inaccuracy of a qb prospect. A college qb can have mechanical problems and still be an accurate passer. That is the type of prospect one should be willing to work with. On the other hand if the prospect doesn't demonstrate accuracy, with a flawed or not motion, then don't waste your time with him. side notes: It is widely reported that the Jets are attracted to Trubisky. That is not surprising. But they have so much to do reworking that roster that I don't believe they will select a qb with their first pick. The Jets being receptive to TT or another qb off the market makes more sense to me. (Simply my opinion.) Whatever opinion Whaley has of TT (clearly not enamored with him) when he goes through his options at qb with his new staff the same conclusion is arrived at that he has no other better choices on hand. What would be the point of bringing in another veteran qb to replace him when TT is better than the replacement?

I go back and forth on how good this roster is. My take is that it is a fringe playoff team at best. There certainly are holes in the roster but because of the cap system all teams have incomplete rosters. Smartly coached teams not only know how to maximize their assets but also know how to minimize their liabilities. An interesting bar room debate can be made over whether if Marrone would have stayed and he had TT as a qb would the Bills have been a playoff team at least a couple of times? Under Marrone I saw progress from his first to second year. It is frustrating yet futile to assess the damage that Rex did in handling the roster delivered to him. What was even more regrettable was that after his first year the front office wasted that year trying to accommodate his needs. Now the organization is swinging back to a more updated defensive scheme which will require further player shuffling. I'm reluctant to bring up the qb issue responding to your post because that issue seems to permeate every discussion. But it is well known that the best equalizer for a flawed roster is to have a caliber of qb that can overcome the liabilities of the roster. In my estimation TT is a holding pattern caliber of qb who is not going to mask the team's vulnerabilities. There will be intervals where he will raise your expectation of what he is capable of but when all is said and done he is average at best.

Bill, I'm not there yet. It is unfair to point out particular selections and then make a declaration that he failed in his job. In general I would say his drafting and even his draft strategy have been average to mediocre. The area I think he does reasonably well is find mid-range good value free agents. From an evaluation standpoint it is obviously easier to evaluate a player who is already playing in the pros than a prospect from the college ranks. Another aspect of Whaley that I find disappointing is that he has a tendency to over rate his roster. For the past couple of years he has publicly stated that he felt that his team was a playoff team. He can make the claim that bad coaching diminished his roster but the reality is that this team isn't as good as he thinks it is. In my opinion next year's team is not a playoff team. The hiring of Rex set this franchise back by a year or two. side note: I believe that Whaley's preferred qb on this roster is Cardale Jones. It seems to me that he is not enamored with TT and wouldn't mind cutting the cord with him. But he may be boxed in because his options are limited. Again, he has a tendency to over rate his own players. I don't see the Bills using either of their top two picks on a qb.

Thank you for your thoughtful responses. All your responses were concisely explained. We are very much in agreement. With respect to drawing the line on qbs prospect you have to make the calculation that the person you are selecting has the potential to be a franchise qb. If there is a grouping of qbs that you believe are capable of developing into good pro qbs then a good strategy to take is to hedge your bets and trade down and get an extra pick or so. The organization did it with EJ but the problem still revolved around the poor evaluation of him. Don't misunderstand my position. I'm not suggesting that the Bills should act out of desperation and take the plunge on a qb for the sake of taking the plunge. Isn't it about time that this dour organization used some creativity and flexibility when evaluating the position? As you and others have pointed out Russell Wilson was rated high in all the traits required to be a franchise qb other than height. A third round pick on him would have been a good calculated risk. The problem was that Country Buddy believed in bigger players over smaller players. His rating scale over emphasized one's physical profile over actual football ability. The Kirk Cousins bypass is another illustration of how this front office operates. Hesitation is not an asset in the pursuit of a qb. This is the one position where judiciously over-drafting by one round makes sense. The EJ example was a boondoggle from a variety of fronts. My complaint is that for this qb deficit franchise to be consistently hesitant as reflected in the Wilson and Cousins's draft year made no sense to me. "What ifs" are a losers lament. Although it is just wishful thinking if the Bills would have taken the opportunity to draft Carr, Wilson or Cousins etc our outlook on this franchise would have a much different tinge to it. We need to stop doing what we usually do.

You are redeemable. Hallelujah!

I'm not arguing with your comment because the analyst didn't closely watch his games. However, how many throws does he make in the middle? Does he throw seam routes? His short and medium passes aren't consistently accurate and on those routes the ball placement isn't good. I don't know how anyone can say that he doesn't have a strong arm because it is clearly evident. TT throws a beautiful long ball. One of the best long passers in the league.

If you start talking about DBs I will go crazy on you, and so will NYC Bill!

If you replace the name WALTER to Watkins or Clay you have a strong case.

My preference would be to keep him and draft a successor sooner rather than later. Would that be a healthy situation for TT or the team? I'm not sure---I don't think so. The one consideration that many people are reluctant to acknowledge is just maybe the front office doesn't think much of TT. His performance last year did not demonstrate a progression. That had to be very disappointing to the team. Regardless of anyone't feeling toward TT, pro or con, it is apparent that he is not a conventional franchise qb. He throws a beautiful long ball but his short and medium range passes are inconsistent. There are other issues relating to reads and throwing to spots (anticipatory passes) instead of to the receiver. The crux of the issue that the organization has to decide on relates to what are the ultimate goals of this franchise and can he take us there. It goes beyond the next two years of his contract. It comes down to what is the most he can give us. If your ultimate goal is to be a fringe playoff team then the answer is very easy: Keep him. If you set your goals much higher then the decision is obvious: Let's move on. There are people on both sides of this issue and each side has merit. It is not a simple issue and it is a tough call.

In a back handed way I did address your point about the degree of importance for certain position. There is no doubt as NY Bill stated that some positions are more important than others. On the flip side of the issue is that finding players to play those positions at a high level are more difficult to accomplish. What the Patriots demonstrated is that the best way to compensate for personnel limitations is to collectively play better as a unit. DE Long didn't play on a full time basis in the SB. He's not nearly as good when he was in his prime. However, as a situational player he was effective. There is no doubt that an elite DE or OLB pass rusher has a disproportionate influence on the defense from a positional standpoint. But by mixing and matching smartly you can somewhat overcome the absence of those type of elite players at those positions. We are not necessarily in disagreement here. But NY Bill's point that there are clearly more valued positions becomes evident when a talented player at the positions Bill mentions is on the draft board. Then it becomes evident by the early selection. When a player at a priority position's contract expires the settlement for the next contract is usually very grand, an expression of the importance of the position.

I would prefer to keep him as a bridge qb. However, it seems that the people who are the most torn about keeping him reside in the organization. Many people make the argument that he is by far our best qb since Kelly. Without question that is a fair judgment. But he being our best option at qb right now isn't the bigger issue facing this front office. The crucial issue for them is whether TT as our franchise qb beyond the next couple of years is our best option at qb to compete on a bigger stage. The next sequential question becomes if you commit to him are you foreclosing other better options at that position? This is not a simple issue and there are merits on both sides of the argument. It has to be remembered that what brought on this hot contested issue is that TT's play last year didn't indicate a progression from his first year here. If he would have made more progress in last year there would not be an issue surrounding the qb position. It's what happened on the field that made the organization re-visit the qb issue. That point has to be remembered.

One of the best defensive players in the SB game was Alan Branch. He plugged up the middle and added interior pressure. BB got a former Bill with a history of laziness and inconsistent effort and got him to maximize his talents. They also added a number of pieces through trades and signings such as TE Bennett and WR Hogan, also formerly from Buffalo. There are a variety of avenues beyond the draft to address roster weaknesses and still maintain a good cap structure. So the argument that many use that our first round pick has to be used for a critical need instead of using it for a qb prospect doesn't have much merit with me. There is a consensus that the Bills need to address the receiver unit. The Falcons added Garbriel from the street and he was effective in the SB. And the Pats used a third round pick on Mitchell, a rookie, who also was an effective player in this game.

Excellent post as usual. I want to reiterate that the Bills are built to be on the near plus and minus side of 8-8. The Bills have mastered the concept of systemic mediocrity. I don't care what assets the Bills accumulate they won't have the resources to pry away an elite qb prospect in any year from a top drafting team that will have the same dire need at qb. A deficit at the qb position is usually the primary reason those bottom feeding teams are in those ignominious positions. If the Bills are impressed enough with the grouping of the top 4 qbs in this draft and are not invested in any one in particular but interested in all I would love to see a trade down. In hindsight the trading away of a first round pick for Watkins was a mistake for a couple of reasons. The first was it was a receiver rich year and the second reason was that franchise didn't have a qb good enough to maximize his scintillating talents. I'll use the same reasoning for Clay who I consider an upper tier receiving TE. He hasn't come close to fulfilling his talents because of the caliber of qbing. Let me just add a comment on Trubisky. When assessing him you have to factor in that he has been only a one year starter. From a developmental standpoint he should have stayed in for another year. From a financial standpoint I understand why he entered the draft. My belief is that if he would have stayed he would have been a much more developed qb and pro ready qb. So when assessing him you have to make a greater projection on him to fairly evaluate him. As much as I have commented on my desire to draft a qb in this draft I realize that it probably won't happen this year, at least with our top pick. Why do I say that? The Bills are a staid and unimaginative franchise. They are who they are and their record reflects it. My betting is that this dour franchise will take a DB with their first pick. I will as usual be disappointed.

You are a rascal and provocateur! If Beerball didn't fade away I would have him discipline you.

Your post is excellent in pointing out how an organization should approach drafting qbs especially with high draft picks. There is nothing that you stated that I can disagree with. The problem I have with the Bills is that I'm not sure that they are adept at scouting and evaluating this position. Where I may have a slight disagreement with you (maybe not) is that I believe that a team that doesn't have a franchise (for twenty years) should exhibit more urgency in addressing such a critical need. All teams have draft boards and rank players. For a team with a deficit at the most important position it shouldn't mechanically follow the ranking script. It might be wrong to take a second round valued receiver in the first round but not necessarily wrong to take a second round graded qb in the first round, ideally lower in the first. I would have had no problem drafting Carr in the first round even with a second round grade. I would have had no problem drafting Prescott in the third round even if he had a fourth round grade. You and I have been jousting on the qb issue for some time. For the most part we are actually in agreement. Where I deviate from your position somewhat is that I am more willing to be more aggressive and less cautious than you in taking the plunge. Make no mistake what I'm saying here. I have never promoted acting out of desperation. I just think I am less afraid to take a calculated risk when it comes to this essential position. If wrong, then go back and do it again. If still wrong, keep at it until the deed is done.

Do you know who was surprised by his selection in the first round? His college coach. So much for due diligence!

Who said move up for any qb in this draft? You are manufacturing an issue that doesn't exist.

The Bills were a team that had a qb need. Over-drafting by one round if that is the case is not an unreasonable strategy to take if you have that need. Yes, Whaley gave up a pick to move up for Ragland but he was still in a good position to select Prescott in the the third round. The DT from OSU was not necessarily a special prospect. He was a lazy and undisciplined player in college who turned out to be a lazy and undisciplined player in the pros. The organization was also hesitant and waited for their qb of choice in the Wilson and Cousin draft year. Again, we waited and got nothing worthwhile.

The conclusion I come away with from your excellent post is that the mediocre status of our team has little to do with the positions they are drafting for as it does with the inability to adequately evaluate players. That's the issue, and it is troubling. We can argue about need and positions until we are exhausted. But if the end result is on balance more misses than hits then the record is going to reflect the talent level of the team. And it sadly does. I have stated it before and I will state it again because the wrong lesson is imputed from the EJ selection. The core problem with the EJ pick and many other picks regardless of position is the poor evaluation of players. That year was a blatantly poor qb draft year. Everyone in the business who was not comatose was aware of that. The other qbs who were of similar talent were drafted in the fourth round or so. The EJ selection was an abysmal selection because he was poorly evaluated as a player. I believe that there are at least 4 good qb prospects. None are elite and non probably will be ready in their rookie year. So what! The Bills desperately need a well rounded qb on the roster sooner rather than later. Isn't 20 years long enough in having a void at the qb position? Drafting a qb in the first round is going to give this team the best opportunity to get a qb who has the best chance to make it as a franchise qb. If it doesn't work out then so what? It's only one pick. You're not mortgaging the future with that one high selection as so many portray it. How much did our top two picks play last year? The argument that his draft doesn't have elite qbs has little sway with me. The Bills are built to be a 7-9 to 9-7 caliber team. Not wretchedly bad but wretchedly mediocre. The odds are that if there were elite prospects in the draft we still wouldn't be in position to select one. Let's look at this year's draft. If an Andrew Luck caliber qb/s was in the draft do you think that the top two drafting teams would decline to select one of them? It's not going to happen no matter how much you offer to move up. Derek Carr was not considered to be an elite prospect. He was good enough to change the trajectory of that franchise. We let him pass. Russell Wilson and Prescott were not elite prospects and without a doubt they made impacts on their team. We let them pass. Isn't it about time that this dullard organization become more aggressive in filling the one position that will most upgrade the team? It seems every year it allows teams to benefit from our plague of bypassing good (not great) prospects that have a significant effect on them. There comes a point where enough is enough. You either do it or you don't. We are in a good position to select a good qb prospect. No more excuses!