Thoner7 Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 It sounds like every fan has agreed our three biggest needs are OL/LB/QB in no particular order. As I watched games this long weekend, I couldn't help but notice how many rookie OL and LBs there were around the league playing and starting... so I did some research. In 2008 there were 9 OL and 5 LBs drafted in the first two rounds. Of those 9 OL, 6 started from day 1 and have played every game unless injured, the remaining 3 played roughly half the 08 season(their rookie year), and have worked themselves in as full time starters in 09. Of the 5 LBs, 3 have been day 1 starters, and 2 don't play. 1 is Gholston who does play for a talented Jets D, but was a college DE and looks like a bust. The other is Jordan Dizon who plays for the Lions and I have no idea who he is. In 2009 there were 12 OL and 8 LBs drafted in the first two rounds. Of those 12 OL, 9 have started from day 1 and have played every game unless injured, of the remaining 3 - 1 is Andre Smith who is injured, which really is no surprise after his combine/40 debacle. the other 2 are Sebastian Vollmer - who has played in 10 games, starting 5, for the Patriots. He played extremely well replacing Matt Light at LT as I had to opportunity to watch him. The other is William Beatty who has played in every game and started 1 for the Giants. IMO Beatty and Vollmer would be starters if the teams they are on weren't as staked at the OL position as they are (they no doubt would be starting for our Bills) Of the 8 LBs, 6 have been day 1 starters. Of the two that don't start, 1 is Larry English who has played in every game and has two sacks, if not for playing behind 2 all pro caliber players in Merriman and Phillips he would be starting IMO. The other I have never heard of and is Cody Brown in Arizona. I think he may be on IR but not sure, NFL.com had no stats on him(?). If you do the math over the past 2 drafts: 21 OL were drafted in the first 2 rounds, and 15 started from day 1 - a percentage of 71.4%. If you add in the rookies from 08 who start now, that increases to 18/21, or 85.7%. If you assume (which I feel is a very safe assumption) Vollmer and Beatty will see either a similar increase in playing time for their teams in 2010 - just as the 08 rookies did in 09, or that they would be quality starters on other teams, that rises to 20/21, or an amazing 95.2% This does not include the potential for Andre Smith either. Similarly, 9 of the 13 LBs drafted the last two years were day one starters, or 69%. If you assume (again a very safe assumption) Larry English assumes the starting role once Merriman leaves via free agency, that increases to 10/13 in 2010, or 77% I know we need a QB badly, but I dont feel drafting a rookie this year will be the way to go. If we can trade some players/picks and acquire 4 picks in the first two rounds again this draft, and focus on OL and LB - our other top needs - we could easily have 3 day 1 starters, and 4 starters by 2011. Just an interesting tidbit about the success rate of the position we need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Syracuse Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 What difference does it make? No matter who we draft they'll be on IR by week 4 with a broken (insert bone here). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murra Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 The problem is that you're placing the success rate under the category of starting. I don't want to know how many people started from day 1 at their position. While immediate impact seems best judged by this statistic, it falls under a wide range of statistics pertinent to the player's position. Being a starting O-lineman means nothing to me. Personally, while its sad to see Wood go down, he and Levitre weren't world beaters out there. I strongly believe the quickest way to build the O-line is through Free Agency. Veteran big men, poised to deal with the speed of the league. If we draft a lineman based on the percentage starting, I'll be very upset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddog69 Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Just for arguments sake and using you methodology: 2008 - 3 Qbs were taken in Rd1 or 2 (Flacco, Ryan and Brohm) - 2 or 3 started immediately - 66% 2009 - 4 QBs taken in Rd 1 or 2 (Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman and Pat White) Stafford, Sanchez and Freeman are starting. White was never intended to be a starter right away. He is a Wildcat player and developmental Qb - so success rate of 75% or higher depending on your view of White. My point is, your argument does not hold water. You can find starters at any position if your front office is competent. Right n ow ours is not. Lets hope that changes otherwise it does not matter much where we pick in the draft or what positions we target, they will be mediocre at best (ala Lynch, Poz, Whitner, Leodis, McCargo, Maybin etc). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murra Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Just for arguments sake and using you methodology:2008 - 3 Qbs were taken in Rd1 or 2 (Flacco, Ryan and Brohm) - 2 or 3 started immediately - 66% 2009 - 4 QBs taken in Rd 1 or 2 (Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman and Pat White) Stafford, Sanchez and Freeman are starting. White was never intended to be a starter right away. He is a Wildcat player and developmental Qb - so success rate of 75% or higher depending on your view of White. My point is, your argument does not hold water. You can find starters at any position if your front office is competent. Right n ow ours is not. Lets hope that changes otherwise it does not matter much where we pick in the draft or what positions we target, they will be mediocre at best (ala Lynch, Poz, Whitner, Leodis, McCargo, Maybin etc). Right, but your ultimate conclusion should be that because starters can be found anywhere, that is certainly NOT the best way to value/assess draft picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 I would really like Fitz to be the guy to placehold for us next year while we get things in order....but he is so damn inconsistant on his accuracy...... Of course the ultimate dream scenario is that our latest Green Bay pickup regains the promise he had in college. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 It sounds like every fan has agreed our three biggest needs are OL/LB/QB in no particular order. As I watched games this long weekend, I couldn't help but notice how many rookie OL and LBs there were around the league playing and starting... so I did some research. In 2008 there were 9 OL and 5 LBs drafted in the first two rounds. Of those 9 OL, 6 started from day 1 and have played every game unless injured, the remaining 3 played roughly half the 08 season(their rookie year), and have worked themselves in as full time starters in 09. Of the 5 LBs, 3 have been day 1 starters, and 2 don't play. 1 is Gholston who does play for a talented Jets D, but was a college DE and looks like a bust. The other is Jordan Dizon who plays for the Lions and I have no idea who he is. In 2009 there were 12 OL and 8 LBs drafted in the first two rounds. Of those 12 OL, 9 have started from day 1 and have played every game unless injured, of the remaining 3 - 1 is Andre Smith who is injured, which really is no surprise after his combine/40 debacle. the other 2 are Sebastian Vollmer - who has played in 10 games, starting 5, for the Patriots. He played extremely well replacing Matt Light at LT as I had to opportunity to watch him. The other is William Beatty who has played in every game and started 1 for the Giants. IMO Beatty and Vollmer would be starters if the teams they are on weren't as staked at the OL position as they are (they no doubt would be starting for our Bills) Of the 8 LBs, 6 have been day 1 starters. Of the two that don't start, 1 is Larry English who has played in every game and has two sacks, if not for playing behind 2 all pro caliber players in Merriman and Phillips he would be starting IMO. The other I have never heard of and is Cody Brown in Arizona. I think he may be on IR but not sure, NFL.com had no stats on him(?). If you do the math over the past 2 drafts: 21 OL were drafted in the first 2 rounds, and 15 started from day 1 - a percentage of 71.4%. If you add in the rookies from 08 who start now, that increases to 18/21, or 85.7%. If you assume (which I feel is a very safe assumption) Vollmer and Beatty will see either a similar increase in playing time for their teams in 2010 - just as the 08 rookies did in 09, or that they would be quality starters on other teams, that rises to 20/21, or an amazing 95.2% This does not include the potential for Andre Smith either. Similarly, 9 of the 13 LBs drafted the last two years were day one starters, or 69%. If you assume (again a very safe assumption) Larry English assumes the starting role once Merriman leaves via free agency, that increases to 10/13 in 2010, or 77% I know we need a QB badly, but I dont feel drafting a rookie this year will be the way to go. If we can trade some players/picks and acquire 4 picks in the first two rounds again this draft, and focus on OL and LB - our other top needs - we could easily have 3 day 1 starters, and 4 starters by 2011. Just an interesting tidbit about the success rate of the position we need. nice work, Thoner. The one thing I think that you miss, is that we won't be having this kind of success with Modrak running the draft and Guy running the pro personnel department. We could trade away the entire team for draft picks, but Modrak will find a way to draft players that will either be constantly injured, gone in 2 seasons, or never make the squad. We need a real front office, a real, proven football GM, and then I will be more into trading and positioning in April. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike In Illinois Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 And just to mess it all up, the Raiders will swoop in and draft another speedster that either no one's heard of or is drafted well before their projected position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Even with the "day 1 starters" metric it is interesting to note that the Bills have drafted 10 players in the first 2 rounds in the Jauron era. 50% of these have been day 1 starters, which is well below the 70% figure thrown out above. If you factor in injuries, suspensions, and overall level of play, the Bills have sadly gotten far less value than even that. For a team that is exceptional young and barely mediocre at best and for a team that often paints themselves in a draft-for-need corner, 50% seems even more pathetic. C'mon, Ralph. Let's get some new football people in here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 What difference does it make? No matter who we draft they'll be on IR by week 4 with a broken (insert bone here). No see, that's why I just simply hate the negativity on this board. We're nearly half way through the season and Maybin has not missed significant playing time due to injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 when all is said and done we will need three at a minimum and more likely five or six new offensive linemen before ANY quarterback is going to be successful. Fitzpatrick looks like a quarterback moving from low mediocre to high mediocre with some hope of reaching low good. I say its O-line and Linebacker this year through the first four rounds. Even with that I would hope we would be aggressive in free agency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOBILLS78 Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 (insert bone here). Perv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thoner7 Posted December 1, 2009 Author Share Posted December 1, 2009 The problem is that you're placing the success rate under the category of starting. I don't want to know how many people started from day 1 at their position. While immediate impact seems best judged by this statistic, it falls under a wide range of statistics pertinent to the player's position. Being a starting O-lineman means nothing to me. Personally, while its sad to see Wood go down, he and Levitre weren't world beaters out there. I strongly believe the quickest way to build the O-line is through Free Agency. Veteran big men, poised to deal with the speed of the league. If we draft a lineman based on the percentage starting, I'll be very upset. Obviously just because these players start does not mean they play well. I just wanted to point out that this team needs help - especially at OL and LB, and that LBs and O lineman can help out/start immediately. No draft pick is a guarantee, but as far as getting the most out of your picks in terms of playing time, OL would be the way to go, with LBs being a close second. I also read an article a couple years back that said OL were the easiest to scout accurately... ie OL drafted early "pan out" more than any other position. Its not secret we need OL and Lbs asap, and this cannot hurt our cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 No see, that's why I just simply hate the negativity on this board. We're nearly half way through the season and Maybin has not missed significant playing time due to injury. Are you sure? He must have a few splinters from all that time on the bench. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bananathumb Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 could you f'n shrten it up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts