Whitner gone?

[BADOLBILZ]

Badol, if they take that money and spend it on offensive or defensive linemen instead, I'm with you. But chances are, they won't - they'll just hand it to the next unproven DB draft pick. At least Whitner stays healthy and is versatile. Is he elite? No. But he's a good player and far harder to replace than Kelsay, IMO. The problem is that the Bills repeatedly create holes in their defensive backfield and then fill them with high draft choices. I am not convinced anything has changed.

 

I'm not for saving Ralph's money either. But i disagree about replacing Whitner. I don't think it will be difficult to replace Whitner. They have played plenty of football without Whitner, he's never played a full 16 game season, and when he wasn't in there they often played better.

 

It's interesting that you mention Kelsay. On paper Kelsay is a decent DE and stays healthy. And while Kelsay technically is versatile because he can play OLB, we all know he can't play it well. Likewise, Whitner can play corner but not play it well.

[dave mcbride]

I'm not for saving Ralph's money either. But i disagree about replacing Whitner. I don't think it will be difficult to replace Whitner. They have played plenty of football without Whitner, he's never played a full 16 game season, and when he wasn't in there they often played better.

 

It's interesting that you mention Kelsay. On paper Kelsay is a decent DE and stays healthy. And while Kelsay technically is versatile because he can play OLB, we all know he can't play it well. Likewise, Whitner can play corner but not play it well.

It's not that I disagree with your basic assessment of Whitner (although I think he's more productive than your assessment suggests), but I do want to point out that I think you made almost precisely the same evaluation of Antoine Winfield in 2003-04 prior to his departure for MN and a very good career with the Vikings. Moreover, you have also praised Nate Clements to the high heavens for years, yet he has essentially been a major liability for SF. In practically every game I watch (I have the NFL ticket), OCs target him relentlessly. He's an average-at-best CB.

 

Having said all of this, I realize that I've been wrong before too, and that I live in a glass house also (as we all do when it comes to predictions).

[Coach Tuesday]

It's not that I disagree with your basic assessment of Whitner (although I think he's more productive than your assessment suggests), but I do want to point out that I think you made almost precisely the same evaluation of Antoine Winfield in 2003-04 prior to his departure for MN and a very good career with the Vikings. Moreover, you have also praised Nate Clements to the high heavens for years, yet he has essentially been a major liability for SF. In practically every game I watch (I have the NFL ticket), OCs target him relentlessly. He's an average-at-best CB.

 

Having said all of this, I realize that I've been wrong before too, and that I live in a glass house also (as we all do when it comes to predictions).

 

And that highlights the problem. It is so hard to evaluate Bills players because the coaches and supporting casts have been so bad. And the Bills are notoriously bad at evaluating their own roster. They usually get it wrong. I've come to think that the market is a better indicator than the Bills' FO. In other words, if Condon thinks he can get a large contract for Whitner, it probably means he and the market (i.e. other teams) know better than the Bills. Sad but true, and it's part of why being a Bills fan screws with your head so much.

[dave mcbride]

And that highlights the problem. It is so hard to evaluate Bills players because the coaches and supporting casts have been so bad. And the Bills are notoriously bad at evaluating their own roster. They usually get it wrong. I've come to think that the market is a better indicator than the Bills' FO. In other words, if Condon thinks he can get a large contract for Whitner, it probably means he and the market (i.e. other teams) know better than the Bills. Sad but true, and it's part of why being a Bills fan screws with your head so much.

Excellent point.

[BADOLBILZ]

It's not that I disagree with your basic assessment of Whitner (although I think he's more productive than your assessment suggests), but I do want to point out that I think you made almost precisely the same evaluation of Antoine Winfield in 2003-04 prior to his departure for MN and a very good career with the Vikings. Moreover, you have also praised Nate Clements to the high heavens for years, yet he has essentially been a major liability for SF. In practically every game I watch (I have the NFL ticket), OCs target him relentlessly. He's an average-at-best CB.

 

Having said all of this, I realize that I've been wrong before too, and that I live in a glass house also (as we all do when it comes to predictions).

 

I don't think it's fair to compare Winfield and Whitner. Actually, it's just crazy. Winfield didn't make plays on the ball either, but he was a great tackler and excellent in coverage. Whitner is just a good tackler with little range in coverage. Predictably, the Dolphins threw the ball a lot today and he was a non-factor. His one chance to make a big play at the LOS was on a run by Ronnie Brown on the Fish second to last drive where Whitner had the angle and Brown made him look ridiculous. Yeremiah Bell, the Dolphins starting safety and a former 6th round pick, makes that play. I'm not saying Whitner is bad, but he isn't special. Winfield was not Champ Bailey, but he was very good.

 

As for Nate, I definitely have been a big supporter of Clements. His first season in SF was arguably his best in the NFL. His second year was down, but still good. The past couple seasons he hasn't played as well. But my issue with losing Clements wasn't just losing a good player, it was the repercussions.

 

First, I knew they would just take another CB in round 1 to replace him and that this new player might not be as good or durable as Nate. Which has been the case.

 

Secondly, they let him walk for nothing when they could have franchised him and traded him. He was maybe the hottest commodity on the free agent market.

 

That transaction was a net -4 for the Bills. First, they lose a good player. Second they don't get value for him when they had his rights and badly needed draft picks. Third, they expended a very high first round pick to replace him. Fourth, that replacement has been a huge disappointment.

 

That is to say nothing of the fact that their pass defense went from near the top of the league to the bottom in that first season without Clements.

 

The offseason of Clements departure was a critical time for the Bills. They struggled early in the season but behind an opportunistic defense and a play-action passing attack they appeared to be a team on the rise.

 

Then they let Clements, Fletcher and Spikes walk and dealt McGahee and hit the reset button on their rebuilding yet again. Combine that with dumping Milloy the offseason before and using a first on Whitner.........the Bills have basically expended most of their early picks since then to replace those players. Not surprisingly, they aren't any better for it.

 

And let me add that one of the ridiculous arguments made by Bills fans for not franchising Clements was that it would make the Bills look more player friendly and help them attract free agents. I think that myth has been dispelled.

 

I don't think losing Whitner means having to draft a SS early. They have capable players in reserve and could find more as deep as into UDFA.

[Dawgg]

I don't think it's fair to compare Winfield and Whitner. Actually, it's just crazy. Winfield didn't make plays on the ball either, but he was a great tackler and excellent in coverage. Whitner is just a good tackler with little range in coverage. Predictably, the Dolphins threw the ball a lot today and he was a non-factor. His one chance to make a big play at the LOS was on a run by Ronnie Brown on the Fish second to last drive where Whitner had the angle and Brown made him look ridiculous. Yeremiah Bell, the Dolphins starting safety and a former 6th round pick, makes that play. I'm not saying Whitner is bad, but he isn't special. Winfield was not Champ Bailey, but he was very good.

 

As for Nate, I definitely have been a big supporter of Clements. His first season in SF was arguably his best in the NFL. His second year was down, but still good. The past couple seasons he hasn't played as well. But my issue with losing Clements wasn't just losing a good player, it was the repercussions.

 

First, I knew they would just take another CB in round 1 to replace him and that this new player might not be as good or durable as Nate. Which has been the case.

 

Secondly, they let him walk for nothing when they could have franchised him and traded him. He was maybe the hottest commodity on the free agent market.

 

That transaction was a net -4 for the Bills. First, they lose a good player. Second they don't get value for him when they had his rights and badly needed draft picks. Third, they expended a very high first round pick to replace him. Fourth, that replacement has been a huge disappointment.

 

That is to say nothing of the fact that their pass defense went from near the top of the league to the bottom in that first season without Clements.

 

The offseason of Clements departure was a critical time for the Bills. They struggled early in the season but behind an opportunistic defense and a play-action passing attack they appeared to be a team on the rise.

 

Then they let Clements, Fletcher and Spikes walk and dealt McGahee and hit the reset button on their rebuilding yet again. Combine that with dumping Milloy the offseason before and using a first on Whitner.........the Bills have basically expended most of their early picks since then to replace those players. Not surprisingly, they aren't any better for it.

 

And let me add that one of the ridiculous arguments made by Bills fans for not franchising Clements was that it would make the Bills look more player friendly and help them attract free agents. I think that myth has been dispelled.

 

I don't think losing Whitner means having to draft a SS early. They have capable players in reserve and could find more as deep as into UDFA.

First off, as a Bay Area resident I'll say that although Clements take chances and gets burned from time to time, he has also made a number of plays for SF (something Whitner has not done).

 

Second, after letting Whitner walk, the Bills used the saved funds to spend heavily, signing Derrick Dockery to what was then the richest contract in the history of Buffalo sports and following that up with the asinine signing of Langston Walker to a 5-year deal. While posters on this board were lauding those moves as addressing the offensive line, those who actually knew what they were talking about knew that these signings were suspect from the beginning.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Clements was let go in free agency because Marv Levy made a gentleman's promise to him that he wouldn't franchise him again. The clear problem there being that a GM's job should be about stocking the team with the best talent in players and coaches possible and not about making gestures that compromise the team's ability to be competitive.

[Orton's Arm]

I don't think it's fair to compare Winfield and Whitner. Actually, it's just crazy. Winfield didn't make plays on the ball either, but he was a great tackler and excellent in coverage. Whitner is just a good tackler with little range in coverage. Predictably, the Dolphins threw the ball a lot today and he was a non-factor. His one chance to make a big play at the LOS was on a run by Ronnie Brown on the Fish second to last drive where Whitner had the angle and Brown made him look ridiculous. Yeremiah Bell, the Dolphins starting safety and a former 6th round pick, makes that play. I'm not saying Whitner is bad, but he isn't special. Winfield was not Champ Bailey, but he was very good.

 

As for Nate, I definitely have been a big supporter of Clements. His first season in SF was arguably his best in the NFL. His second year was down, but still good. The past couple seasons he hasn't played as well. But my issue with losing Clements wasn't just losing a good player, it was the repercussions.

 

First, I knew they would just take another CB in round 1 to replace him and that this new player might not be as good or durable as Nate. Which has been the case.

 

Secondly, they let him walk for nothing when they could have franchised him and traded him. He was maybe the hottest commodity on the free agent market.

 

That transaction was a net -4 for the Bills. First, they lose a good player. Second they don't get value for him when they had his rights and badly needed draft picks. Third, they expended a very high first round pick to replace him. Fourth, that replacement has been a huge disappointment.

 

That is to say nothing of the fact that their pass defense went from near the top of the league to the bottom in that first season without Clements.

 

The offseason of Clements departure was a critical time for the Bills. They struggled early in the season but behind an opportunistic defense and a play-action passing attack they appeared to be a team on the rise.

 

Then they let Clements, Fletcher and Spikes walk and dealt McGahee and hit the reset button on their rebuilding yet again. Combine that with dumping Milloy the offseason before and using a first on Whitner.........the Bills have basically expended most of their early picks since then to replace those players. Not surprisingly, they aren't any better for it.

 

And let me add that one of the ridiculous arguments made by Bills fans for not franchising Clements was that it would make the Bills look more player friendly and help them attract free agents. I think that myth has been dispelled.

 

I don't think losing Whitner means having to draft a SS early. They have capable players in reserve and could find more as deep as into UDFA.

A very solid post! You did a good job of describing the hamster wheel the Bills have been running on at CB. Draft Clements, let Winfield walk. Let Clements and Greer walk, draft McKelvin. The hamster wheel keeps spinning, and the Bills don't get anywhere.

 

As you hinted at in your post, a similar hamster wheel has been in place at RB. A second round pick was used on Henry, despite the fact he wasn't a significant upgrade over Antowain Smith. A few short years later, the Bills squandered a first round pick on a RB with Willis McGahee. Then they traded McGahee away and used a first rounder on Lynch. Most recently, Lynch has been traded away, with a top-10 pick used on Spiller. That's three first rounders and a second rounder on RBs in just the last ten years alone! (Plus another first rounder in the late '90s for Antowain Smith.)

 

I think you've done a good job of describing Whitner's limitations as a coverage SS.

[LGB]

First off, as a Bay Area resident I'll say that although Clements take chances and gets burned from time to time, he has also made a number of plays for SF (something Whitner has not done).

 

Second, after letting Whitner walk, the Bills used the saved funds to spend heavily, signing Derrick Dockery to what was then the richest contract in the history of Buffalo sports and following that up with the asinine signing of Langston Walker to a 5-year deal. While posters on this board were lauding those moves as addressing the offensive line, those who actually knew what they were talking about knew that these signings were suspect from the beginning.

 

If only this was true?...you must mean Clements. IMO, Clements wanted too much money and in hindsight the Niners haven't won on the cost/benefit from signing Clements.

 

A very solid post! You did a good job of describing the hamster wheel the Bills have been running on at CB. Draft Clements, let Winfield walk. Let Clements and Greer walk, draft McKelvin. The hamster wheel keeps spinning, and the Bills don't get anywhere.

 

As you hinted at in your post, a similar hamster wheel has been in place at RB. A second round pick was used on Henry, despite the fact he wasn't a significant upgrade over Antowain Smith. A few short years later, the Bills squandered a first round pick on a RB with Willis McGahee. Then they traded McGahee away and used a first rounder on Lynch. Most recently, Lynch has been traded away, with a top-10 pick used on Spiller. That's three first rounders and a second rounder on RBs in just the last ten years alone! (Plus another first rounder in the late '90s for Antowain Smith.)

 

I think you've done a good job of describing Whitner's limitations as a coverage SS.

The Bills have not been able to replace Pat Williams either.

 

The whole let good someone walk and sign someone else has not been a successful strategy, but the reason there have been no playoffs here for ten years is Bills have not been able to get much value with their high draft picks.

[dave mcbride]

I don't think it's fair to compare Winfield and Whitner. Actually, it's just crazy. Winfield didn't make plays on the ball either, but he was a great tackler and excellent in coverage. Whitner is just a good tackler with little range in coverage. Predictably, the Dolphins threw the ball a lot today and he was a non-factor. His one chance to make a big play at the LOS was on a run by Ronnie Brown on the Fish second to last drive where Whitner had the angle and Brown made him look ridiculous. Yeremiah Bell, the Dolphins starting safety and a former 6th round pick, makes that play. I'm not saying Whitner is bad, but he isn't special. Winfield was not Champ Bailey, but he was very good.

 

As for Nate, I definitely have been a big supporter of Clements. His first season in SF was arguably his best in the NFL. His second year was down, but still good. The past couple seasons he hasn't played as well. But my issue with losing Clements wasn't just losing a good player, it was the repercussions.

 

First, I knew they would just take another CB in round 1 to replace him and that this new player might not be as good or durable as Nate. Which has been the case.

 

Secondly, they let him walk for nothing when they could have franchised him and traded him. He was maybe the hottest commodity on the free agent market.

 

That transaction was a net -4 for the Bills. First, they lose a good player. Second they don't get value for him when they had his rights and badly needed draft picks. Third, they expended a very high first round pick to replace him. Fourth, that replacement has been a huge disappointment.

 

That is to say nothing of the fact that their pass defense went from near the top of the league to the bottom in that first season without Clements.

 

The offseason of Clements departure was a critical time for the Bills. They struggled early in the season but behind an opportunistic defense and a play-action passing attack they appeared to be a team on the rise.

 

Then they let Clements, Fletcher and Spikes walk and dealt McGahee and hit the reset button on their rebuilding yet again. Combine that with dumping Milloy the offseason before and using a first on Whitner.........the Bills have basically expended most of their early picks since then to replace those players. Not surprisingly, they aren't any better for it.

 

And let me add that one of the ridiculous arguments made by Bills fans for not franchising Clements was that it would make the Bills look more player friendly and help them attract free agents. I think that myth has been dispelled.

 

I don't think losing Whitner means having to draft a SS early. They have capable players in reserve and could find more as deep as into UDFA.

I have to say that I disagree with this. Watching the Jets the last few games, it's very apparent that now that Leonhard (a decent player) is out, they simply can't cover the middle of the field (they're fine at the corners). Unlike the Jets, the Bills have good depth at safety, and losing their best safety (yes, Whitner is by far and away their best one) will hurt it a lot. More to the point, it's all well and good to say, don't overpay pretty decent players who want to be here, but please tell me who they'll replace him with. No decent free agents come to Buffalo. The last impact FA to sign with this team was ... well, I can't even remember. And I bet you can't either. If they let Whitner go, they're going to be relying on Bryan Scott, who has LB speed, George Wilson, who is easy to love but is not a good tackler at all, and Byrd, who remains a mystery (good instincts, lousy tackler). That's it. Moreover, the Bills run defense sucks, and they have to address it (obviously). Yet judging on a positional basis, Whitner is probably their best run defender overall. If the Bills end up in a situation, where they let Whitner go, they'll have to address the situation pretty early on. Not the first round, but probably in the first three. Lest you think I'm wrong, remember Travares Tillman - taken one pick after one of the two safeties the Bills coveted (Deon Grant, who is still pretty good) was taken. The other was Mike Brown.

 

As for Whitner's durability, come on. He plays at least 13 games every season, which is excellent for a safety given the high injury toll at that position. You think Polamalu, Ed Reed, and Bob Sanders play every game?

 

Finally, re Dawgg's point about Clements, yes, he has made some plays. I would argue, however, that every CB who gets targeted on a regular basis makes some plays, And there is absolutely no arguing that that teams haven't gone after Clements every week the past couple of seasons. He's not nearly the player Winfield is now even if he may have been better earlier in his career. I do think the Bills should have kept him, but let's not exaggerate his prowess to make a point in a crusade against Whitner.

Edited December 20, 2010 by dave mcbride

[Dawgg]

I have to say that I disagree with this. Watching the Jets the last few games, it's very apparent that now that Leonhard (a decent player) is out, they simply can't cover the middle of the field (they're fine at the corners). Unlike the Jets, the Bills have good depth at safety, and losing their best safety (yes, Whitner is by far and away their best one) will hurt it a lot. More to the point, it's all well and good to say, don't overpay pretty decent players who want to be here, but please tell me who they'll replace him with. No decent free agents come to Buffalo. The last impact FA to sign with this team was ... well, I can't even remember. And I bet you can't either. If they let Whitner go, they're going to be relying on Bryan Scott, who has LB speed, George Wilson, who is easy to love but is not a good tackler at all, and Byrd, who remains a mystery (good instincts, lousy tackler). That's it. Moreover, the Bills run defense sucks, and they have to address it (obviously). Yet judging on a positional basis, Whitner is probably their best run defender overall. If the Bills end up in a situation, where they let Whitner go, they'll have to address the situation pretty early on. Not the first round, but probably in the first three. Lest you think I'm wrong, remember Travares Tillman - taken one pick after one of the two safeties the Bills coveted (Deon Grant, who is still pretty good) was taken. The other was Mike Brown.

 

As for Whitner's durability, come on. He plays at least 13 games every season, which is excellent for a safety given the high injury toll at that position. You think Polamalu, Ed Reed, and Bob Sanders play every game?

 

Finally, re Dawgg's point about Clements, yes, he has made some plays. I would argue, however, that every CB who gets targeted on a regular basis makes some plays, And there is absolutely no arguing that that teams haven't gone after Clements every week the past couple of seasons. He's not nearly the player Winfield is now even if he may have been better earlier in his career. I do think the Bills should have kept him, but let's not exaggerate his prowess to make a point in a crusade against Whitner.

 

1) Losing Whitner will not hurt the Bills provided they can find a credible veteran in his place.

 

2) Credible free agents do come to Buffalo. The only reason you can't remember the last impact signing is because the Bills never really bid for them. They were busy wooing the likes of Derrick Dockery and Langston Walker! At the end of the day, there are 32 starting positions available at SS and the Bills hold one of them.

 

3) Now suppose you are correct and that no viable free agent safety will want to play in Buffalo once Whitner departs. The drop off from Whitner to Scott/Wilson is not significant enough to justify paying Whitner top-5 money. That money is better utilized toward extensions for Parish, Stevie Johnson and Kyle Williams.

 

4) Another factor to consider: Drayton Florence is a free agent and will likely command a hefty pay raise. He's far more valuable to this secondary than Whitner.

 

5) Clements is not the second-coming by any means... just merely stating that keeping him was a better option than using the money to sign ineffective offensive linemen.

[dave mcbride]

1) Losing Whitner will not hurt the Bills provided they can find a credible veteran in his place.

 

2) Credible free agents do come to Buffalo. The only reason you can't remember the last impact signing is because the Bills never really bid for them. They were busy wooing the likes of Derrick Dockery and Langston Walker! At the end of the day, there are 32 starting positions available at SS and the Bills hold one of them.

 

3) Now suppose you are correct and that no viable free agent safety will want to play in Buffalo once Whitner departs. The drop off from Whitner to Scott/Wilson is not significant enough to justify paying Whitner top-5 money. That money is better utilized toward extensions for Parish, Stevie Johnson and Kyle Williams.

 

4) Another factor to consider: Drayton Florence is a free agent and will likely command a hefty pay raise. He's far more valuable to this secondary than Whitner.

 

5) Clements is not the second-coming by any means... just merely stating that keeping him was a better option than using the money to sign ineffective offensive linemen.

I was in favor of keeping Clements, mind you. Re: Whitner, I doubt he's asking for ridiculous money, although I could be wrong. I jut don't think he's the problem by any stretch. It's not a horrible thing to overpay a little bit for a solid player. Re: 32 starting positions at SS, yes, but half the guys playing that position are below average by definition. I'd definitely put Whitner in the top half. He's not an all pro, but he's probably in the top 12-14. He's as good as Patrick Chung, for instance (at least I think he is). The Pats pass defense is a mess - worse than the Bills.