Astrobot Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 QB---P5 RB---P5 WR---P4 OT---P2 Multiple (draft a second OT after RD3) TE---P6 OC---P5 NT---P2 DE---P2 OLB--P3 ILB---P4 All other positions P9 Let me know your thoughts before I submit them to DraftTek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 QB---P5RB---P5 WR---P4 OT---P2 Multiple (draft a second OT after RD3) TE---P6 OC---P5 NT---P2 DE---P2 OLB--P3 ILB---P4 All other positions P9 Let me know your thoughts before I submit them to DraftTek. If I understand correctly you have OT, NT and DE ranked highest? I can't argue with that, but...if a player is there, especially in rd 1 can you bypass the team needs? Reason I ask...Clausen...if he's there at #9 then he's the pick regardless of 'need' isn't he? Only thing I would change is switching OLB and ILB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobDVA Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 QB---P5RB---P5 WR---P4 OT---P2 Multiple (draft a second OT after RD3) TE---P6 OC---P5 NT---P2 DE---P2 OLB--P3 ILB---P4 All other positions P9 Let me know your thoughts before I submit them to DraftTek. Looks good to me, I like a RT in the 3rd as well. I like Kyle Calloway from Iowa, may as well have both of them as bookends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfaningeneseo Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 It looks ok to me, my only question would be ILB over QB. I think we have 2 between Poz/Mitchell/Davis. I would switch them, other than that, no complaints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthtobrint Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 3-4 DE isn't a high priority. We have Edwards, and then out of Stroud, Williams, Johnson, and McCargo, at least two or three of them should be able to transition to the position. It's also not a very high impact position. Quarterback should be much higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4BillsintheBurgh Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 QB---P5RB---P5 WR---P4 OT---P2 Multiple (draft a second OT after RD3) TE---P6 OC---P5 NT---P2 DE---P2 OLB--P3 ILB---P4 All other positions P9 Let me know your thoughts before I submit them to DraftTek. Signing Green, I don't know if Nix thinks we need two tackles, esp if he likes Merideth and Bell I like the idea of a guard instead of center because I assume Wood can move over there if we have another decent guard. I'm also in the mindset we don't need a DE or ILB with the Edwards/Davis signings. I like OLB as a higher need because we have a bunch of guys who may be able to do it but probably not. In using your simulator, I went with: OT P1 - Hopefully one will be there WRP P2 - We have two openings, kinda targeting D Thomas OG P3 - give Wood time to get back DT34, OLB P4 - Hopefully hit on these guys QB, RBF, TE, ILB, WRF P6 - to get best value in later rounds Everything else at 9 Came out with this by unchecking the lockouts/grabs and didn't add any myself 1 9 Buffalo Trent Williams OT Oklahoma 2 41 Buffalo Demaryius Thomas WRP Georgia Tech 3 72 Buffalo Jon Asamoah OG Illinois 4 107 Buffalo Brandon Lang OLB34 Troy 5 140 Buffalo Jeff Owens DT34 Georgia 6 178 Buffalo LeGarrette Blount RBF Oregon 6 192 Buffalo Andrew Quarless TE Penn State 7 209 Buffalo Jevan Snead QB Mississippi 7 216 Buffalo Dexter Davis OLB34 Arizona State Probably will change when you update the rankings, but for me this looks good at least positionally. Don't follow college football closely enough to like/dislike the guys in the later rounds. The simulator is fun to play with. This report was produced using Draft Tek's Draft Simulator: WWW.Drafttek.com. Posting this report without giving the foregoing information is a copyright violation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkc Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 Signing Green, I don't know if Nix thinks we need two tackles, esp if he likes Merideth and BellI like the idea of a guard instead of center because I assume Wood can move over there if we have another decent guard. I'm also in the mindset we don't need a DE or ILB with the Edwards/Davis signings. I like OLB as a higher need because we have a bunch of guys who may be able to do it but probably not. In using your simulator, I went with: OT P1 - Hopefully one will be there WRP P2 - We have two openings, kinda targeting D Thomas OG P3 - give Wood time to get back DT34, OLB P4 - Hopefully hit on these guys QB, RBF, TE, ILB, WRF P6 - to get best value in later rounds Everything else at 9 Came out with this by unchecking the lockouts/grabs and didn't add any myself 1 9 Buffalo Trent Williams OT Oklahoma 2 41 Buffalo Demaryius Thomas WRP Georgia Tech 3 72 Buffalo Jon Asamoah OG Illinois 4 107 Buffalo Brandon Lang OLB34 Troy 5 140 Buffalo Jeff Owens DT34 Georgia 6 178 Buffalo LeGarrette Blount RBF Oregon 6 192 Buffalo Andrew Quarless TE Penn State 7 209 Buffalo Jevan Snead QB Mississippi 7 216 Buffalo Dexter Davis OLB34 Arizona State Probably will change when you update the rankings, but for me this looks good at least positionally. Don't follow college football closely enough to like/dislike the guys in the later rounds. The simulator is fun to play with. This report was produced using Draft Tek's Draft Simulator: WWW.Drafttek.com. Posting this report without giving the foregoing information is a copyright violation. that is a good draft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 Defensive end as a P2?!?!?!?! A 3-4 defensive end isn't asked to do anything more than hold the point and set the edge. He is not expected to get sacks in this defense. More and more teams are simply moving DTs to DE to fill those positions. So in my opinion, having DE as a high priority is completely ridiculous. It is even more ridiculous when you see that DE is a higher priority than OLB, which are the players who pressure the QB in a 3-4 defense. I know everyone's got a woodie for a NT in this draft but the Bills will be decent in run defense this year. There are no nose tackles worth reaching for at #9 but there are elite rush linebackers. I know I'm in the minority on this but I would draft a pass rusher before a nose tackle at #9. Great defenses sack the quarterback. You can't have a great defense without being able to pressure quarterbacks. Third down defense is vitally important and that means pass rush. With our quality secondary, can you imagine the number of turnovers (ints AND coverage sacks) this defense could force with the addition of a good pass rusher? OLB should be a much higher priority than DE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Lightning Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 QB---P5RB---P5 WR---P4 OT---P2 Multiple (draft a second OT after RD3) TE---P6 OC---P5 NT---P2 DE---P2 OLB--P3 ILB---P4 All other positions P9 Let me know your thoughts before I submit them to DraftTek. What about punt catcher? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4BillsintheBurgh Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 that is a good draft Thanks, probably a pipe dream though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted April 16, 2010 Author Share Posted April 16, 2010 If I understand correctly you have OT, NT and DE ranked highest? I can't argue with that, but...if a player is there, especially in rd 1 can you bypass the team needs? Reason I ask...Clausen...if he's there at #9 then he's the pick regardless of 'need' isn't he? Only thing I would change is switching OLB and ILB. I'll put a Grab in on Clausen. That'll pick him if he is there. The other way to do it is to put QB at P1, but that would pick him ahead of a falling LT. My thinking with OLB/ILB is that Andra Davis is 31 in December. He can show a youngster the ropes, groom him. Are you thinking we want a specific ILB (Spikes? Butler?), cuz I can do that, too with Grabs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 If I understand correctly you have OT, NT and DE ranked highest? I can't argue with that, but...if a player is there, especially in rd 1 can you bypass the team needs? Reason I ask...Clausen...if he's there at #9 then he's the pick regardless of 'need' isn't he? Only thing I would change is switching OLB and ILB. I'll put a Grab in on Clausen. That'll pick him if he is there.The other way to do it is to put QB at P1, but that would pick him ahead of a falling LT. My thinking with OLB/ILB is that Andra Davis is 31 in December. He can show a youngster the ropes, groom him. Are you thinking we want a specific ILB (Spikes? Butler?), cuz I can do that, too with Grabs. Okay so let me get this straight. Neither of you think it's important to get a pass rusher in this draft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted April 16, 2010 Author Share Posted April 16, 2010 I'm comfortable with dropping the "Multiple" designation for OT. It's possible that another one falls to us in later rounds because it's a deep position. I can name 6th rounders who could make most NFL rosters. I'm also comfy with making our DE need a P3 and our LB's both P2's...In the event a LT and a NT and a ILB are there when the computer picks, it first checks for our priorities (all P2), then takes the BPA from our Big Board http://drafttek.com/2010players.asp In summary, our new Positional Needs for the final mock: QB---P5 / Grab Clausen RB---P5 WR---P4 OT---P2 Multiple P5 (OT after Round 4) OG---P4 TE---P6 OC---P5 NT---P2 DE---P3 OLB--P2 ILB---P2 All other positions P9 I'll keep checking comments up until 9pm EST tomorrow night. Thanks for your input thus far...Astro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobDVA Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 I'm comfortable with dropping the "Multiple" designation for OT. It's possible that another one falls to us in later rounds because it's a deep position. I can name 6th rounders who could make most NFL rosters. I'm also comfy with making our DE need a P3 and our LB's both P2's...In the event a LT and a NT and a ILB are there when the computer picks, it first checks for our priorities (all P2), then takes the BPA from our Big Board http://drafttek.com/2010players.asp In summary, our new Positional Needs for the final mock: QB---P5 / Grab Clausen RB---P5 WR---P4 OT---P2 Multiple P5 (OT after Round 4) OG---P4 TE---P6 OC---P5 NT---P2 DE---P3 OLB--P2 ILB---P2 All other positions P9 I'll keep checking comments up until 9pm EST tomorrow night. Thanks for your input thus far...Astro You had it right the first time, 2 OT in the first three rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 Okay so let me get this straight. Neither of you think it's important to get a pass rusher in this draft? That's why I would switch OLB and ILB. Let's face it...we need lots of help in lots of places! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 Let's face it...we need lots of help in lots of places! Too true, Beerball. Too true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted April 16, 2010 Author Share Posted April 16, 2010 You had it right the first time, 2 OT in the first three rounds. The feeling around here is that Green or Bell will be the RT, so I'll keep the Multiple on, but elevate the LT position to P1. I will raise WR to P3 to get a midround WR. Yes, and the simulator is fun to use. Make your changes (draft order, trade, Grab player, Lockout player), then hit Proceed until you see the results of your scenario. http://drafttek.com/new%20simulator/ Positional Needs for the final mock: QB---P5 / Grab Clausen RD1 if available, else OT (won't reach if a P2 pick is closerto BPA) RB---P5 WR---P3 OT---P1 Multiple P5 (OT after Round 4) OG---P4 TE---P6 OC---P5 NT---P2 DE---P3 OLB--P2 ILB---P2 All other positions P9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted April 17, 2010 Author Share Posted April 17, 2010 Optimized draft with the above positional needs and the grab on Clausen: 1 9 Buffalo Jimmy Clausen QB Notre Dame 2 41 Buffalo Rodger Saffold LT Indiana 3 72 Buffalo Cam Thomas NT North Carolina 4 107 Buffalo Brandon Lang OLB34 Troy 5 140 Buffalo Jason Fox RT Miami 6 178 Buffalo Jordan Shipley WR Texas 6 192 Buffalo Micah Johnson ILB Kentucky 7 209 Buffalo John Fletcher DE34 Wyoming 7 216 Buffalo Dexter Davis OLB34 Arizona State Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Rob Johnson Posted April 17, 2010 Share Posted April 17, 2010 Optimized draft with the above positional needs and the grab on Clausen: 1 9 Buffalo Jimmy Clausen QB Notre Dame 2 41 Buffalo Rodger Saffold LT Indiana 3 72 Buffalo Cam Thomas NT North Carolina 4 107 Buffalo Brandon Lang OLB34 Troy 5 140 Buffalo Jason Fox RT Miami 6 178 Buffalo Jordan Shipley WR Texas 6 192 Buffalo Micah Johnson ILB Kentucky 7 209 Buffalo John Fletcher DE34 Wyoming 7 216 Buffalo Dexter Davis OLB34 Arizona State I'd be happy with that draft, Saffold can play LT or kick inside at some point if Meredith, Bell, or Fox develop. The only change I might like to see is swap in O'Brien Schofield for Brandon Lang as your sig shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munch Posted April 17, 2010 Share Posted April 17, 2010 Optimized draft with the above positional needs and the grab on Clausen: 1 9 Buffalo Jimmy Clausen QB Notre Dame 2 41 Buffalo Rodger Saffold LT Indiana 3 72 Buffalo Cam Thomas NT North Carolina 4 107 Buffalo Brandon Lang OLB34 Troy 5 140 Buffalo Jason Fox RT Miami 6 178 Buffalo Jordan Shipley WR Texas 6 192 Buffalo Micah Johnson ILB Kentucky 7 209 Buffalo John Fletcher DE34 Wyoming 7 216 Buffalo Dexter Davis OLB34 Arizona State This would be a dream draft IMO. A++ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts