The AJ Green dilemma

[BuffaloBillsMagic1]

You speak of holes, but there is something far more important. The Bills are small and weak at almost every position. Kyle Williams, our best defender, is a small nose tackle and will never be able to occupy blockers ala Ted Washington. Bell is a small, weak LT. Sadly, the list goes on.

If they keep using our best resources on skill positions, the Bills will remain small and weak. They will continue to forfeit home field advantage and lose.

 

Sometimes we need to put stats aside and look at what is staring us in the face. You and I both know why this team sucks. Now is the chance to build a big, strong football team that can play in the elements. One that doesn't get shoved around at will. If it takes trading down so be it, but we have to strengthen the OL and front 7.

 

If they draft Green at #3, it will be a ploy to sell tickets. If they draft Peterson at #3, they are just complete idiots and will never, ever build a winning team.

 

It really is that simple.

We have to get bigger on the defense. Does anyone think it is a surprise that the NY Jets will place the franchise tag on David Harris rather than Santonio Holmes or Edwards, two potentially great WRs? There is a reason for this. There are only so many good big guys avaialble that can affect a game. :Little skilled guys are just like desert, we need the meat and ppotatoes guys on this team.

[Nasty]

What if Nick Fairley has been taken, AJ Green is still sitting there at #3 and no one wants to trade into the Bills pick?

 

This is a major dilemma, for I think that the Bills will certainly rue the day they select marginal talents like Miller, Dareus or whomever over Green.

 

If this scenario plays out I hope that the Bills select the BPA Green because of the bust (mediocre player) potential of all the other guys we would select over him. We already have a Von Miller type in Moats and we do have an early second round pick where there will certainly be a starting ILB for us.

"Marginal talents like Miller", your crazy if we take Green another luxury pick over someone as talented as Miller in a position of Need we are stupid. Remember the Spiller pick last year, or the project called Maybin when we could have taken the safer road in Orakpo. No more luxury picks please. No more picking players at a position we are stacked in please. We have a lot of projects in the LB corp and not enough answers. We need to resign Poz (not the best LB but he is a tackler) and draft Miller. Forget about that luxury pick Green. See what Detroit did all those years picking WR in the first round with there top 5 draft choice. The only one that panned our is Johnson, where is Roy, the other Johnson, I am just saying you very seldom go wrong with a defensive player at the top of the board. Look at Williams for the Texans, everyone laughed in their face a critisized them to no end for not taking Bush that year, who is laughing now. Suh that was the smartest pick the Lions could have made, they finally got someone in office making the right choice (i.e. Stafford, Suh). Miller is anything less then a marginal player. His pass rush skills are measurable to those of Mathews (who I don't think can cover as well as Miller) and Miller has more experience then Mathews had coming out of college. He is a can't miss prospect. There are a few others in this draft class (Fairly, Darus) to name a few but we don't really need those positions. I have said it before and I will say it again "We need LB Miller in the first and NT Taylor in the late first or second" A good rotation of Troupe and Taylor at NT and move Williams to DE who has the size and motor to be a great 3-4 DE then we have Williams Taylor (like 6'6" 350 easy reminds me of Washington back in the day) and Edwards with Johnson and Carrington backing them (DE) up. That would be a good rotation I think and give our LB's a chance to roam like they should in a 3-4. I think that is what we should do for an instant upgrade. Especially if no barginning agreement is in place, you never know what is going to happen in free agency then and who you can get. Build through the draft.

[1B4IDie]

What are you talking about? The top three "elite" type players in last years draft were Bradford, Suh and McCoy.

 

This year, it appears that there's again only three "elite" player types which are shaping up to be Fairley, Green and Peterson. That doesn't mean that Dareus won't be an elite player, it's just that he doesn't project to be an elite player. So with the #3 pick overall, the Bills should avoid drafting for need over one of the "elite" type of players. You should never ever use a #3 pick on a reach/need player. That's NFL reality.

 

As for my 300lb comment…sorry but with these big fat men, I worry about the Mike Williams syndrome. Just another reason I'd take the elite playmaking athletes in Green or Peterson over Dareus.

Right, because Gerald McCoy wasn't as good as a once in a generation talent like Suh therefore Daraus cannot be in the same class as Fairely, genius use of logic there . . .

 

You might want to do some more research before you say foolish things about draft prospects.

 

What you fail to understand is that Marcell Dareus is an elite level athletic that is very difficult to find. Calling him fat shows you really don't get it. Marcell Dareus is a much more difficult to find body type than a WR or a CB.

 

 

 

That's why in NFL reality most teams don't draft body types that are easier to find later in the draft. You can get a very good WR, CB, or LB in the 2nd round of the draft. It would take a special talent , a once in a decade type of scouting report to push that player to the top.

 

The athletic Big Men Go early in the actual NFL draft because they're hard to find.

 

Any real GM would covet a sideline to sideline pursuer and pocket collapser over a WR except for Matt Millen.

 

Here is an example of a draft report you need to read.

 

Proto-typical five technique who could also play under tackle

Good pursuit for a big guy

Thick build - looks like a tree trunk

Athletic 300 pounder

Powerful - Pushes the pocket

Uses his hands well

Good motor - active

Occupies blocks - stout at the point of attack

Experience playing in a 3-4

Makes plays in the backfield - 11 TFL in 2010

Defensive MVP in 2009-2010 National Championship game

 

No matter what Todd McShay and Mel Kiper say the ? Marks around Peterson's NFL potential are going to be too worrisome to take him at #3 overall. A CB with stiff hips is like taking a WR with bad hands.

 

AJ Green does seem to be more NFL ready than most WRs that come into the league plus he has size. His 40 time might actually play a role because he is fast in College but does he have NFL speed. Green had a 4.37 in college which almost always is inaccurate. If he pulled that in the Combine it would make him look like a special player.

Edited February 7, 2011 by Why So Serious?

[NewEra]

i like AJ Green, but on THIS bills team, I'd take Dareus/Quinn/Bowers/Fairley all before AJ. Why? Charles Rogers, Roy Williams, Mike Williams, and Calvin Johnson...and detroit is still nowhere to be seen.

 

Detroit drafts Suh: instantly better.

 

End of story.

 

Suh isn't in this draft. Re write the final chapter.

[CookieG]

I'll grant that the Bills thought very highly of Whitner. But their decision to take him eighth overall was not due solely to the bad player evaluation that implies. They went into the draft with the mindset that they needed to come away with a SS and a DT with their first two picks. That right there gave them much less flexibility than a team with as many holes as the Bills should have had.

 

The benefit of flexibility is the following. Let's say you're focused in on position A, and the best player there is a 70. But there's a guy at position B who's a 90. The flexible team will take player B; the team that's dialed into a few specific needs will take player A. Over the course of several years, having a bunch of 70s on your roster (who could have and should have been 90s) will create a talent gap between your team and the best teams in the league.

 

You correctly pointed out another reason why Marv's drafting approach lacked flexibility: players were chosen to fit the Tampa 2 scheme. Vic Carucci noted that he personally didn't have Whitner rated as a first round talent, but a team that ran a Tampa 2 could have a significantly higher grade on him. Likewise, McCargo was also seen as a good fit for the Tampa 2.

 

Marv and Jauron went into that draft looking for a SS and a DT. But not just any old SS or DT: they had to be a specific type of SS and DT to fit into the Tampa 2! Because they gave themselves so little room to adapt to the actual player talent available, they set themselves up for failure.

 

The problem is we're not talking about drafting a 70's rated player vs. a 90's rated player. You're really talking about, depending on who is doing the rating....you may be talking about taking a 95 in a position of non-need vs. taking a 90 rated player in a position of need.

 

Fairley

Bowers

Dareus

 

Each can be dominant if used correctly and if they play to their potential. As with every top 5 pick, each comes with a bust factor.

 

Fairley has the Warren Sapp first step and can take over a game, like he did in the NC game. He comes with a bust factor, probably higher than the other 2.

 

Bowers looks to have the big DE athleticism of Mario Williams or Julius Peppers. If you watch him, he can hold his ground against a RT, but is better getting in the backfield.

 

Dareus can be used in a number of positions, can definitely hold his own in a 2 gap system, but for a guy that strong, has the ability to get in the backfield and move laterally very well.

 

I'm really curious as to how each tests out at the Combine, but these aren't average players.

 

The key is finding the least lazy one and then using him correctly.

[Orton's Arm]

The problem is we're not talking about drafting a 70's rated player vs. a 90's rated player. You're really talking about, depending on who is doing the rating....you may be talking about taking a 95 in a position of non-need vs. taking a 90 rated player in a position of need.

 

Fairley

Bowers

Dareus

 

Each can be dominant if used correctly and if they play to their potential. As with every top 5 pick, each comes with a bust factor.

 

Fairley has the Warren Sapp first step and can take over a game, like he did in the NC game. He comes with a bust factor, probably higher than the other 2.

 

Bowers looks to have the big DE athleticism of Mario Williams or Julius Peppers. If you watch him, he can hold his ground against a RT, but is better getting in the backfield.

 

Dareus can be used in a number of positions, can definitely hold his own in a 2 gap system, but for a guy that strong, has the ability to get in the backfield and move laterally very well.

 

I'm really curious as to how each tests out at the Combine, but these aren't average players.

 

The key is finding the least lazy one and then using him correctly.

You've made some solid points. And don't think I'm necessarily sold on the idea of Green over a front-7 defensive player. My focus right now is more on how the question should be analyzed rather than which solution we should ultimately arrive at.

 

Let's say that step 1 is to put a grade on each player based on the kind of career you think he'll have. Then step 2 is to put a value on each position based on the importance that position has. Clearly QB gets the highest value, LT and RDE the next-highest, and so on. Then to get a rough gauge of what a player can offer, you multiply his player grade by the value of his position. If QB is worth 100 and Luck's grade is a 95 (out of 100), Luck's potential value to your team is 9500. If WR is worth 65 and Green's grade is a 95, his potential value to the team is 6175. That probably understates the gap between Luck and Green--by a lot!--but you get the general idea.

 

Another factor to take into account is to ask, "who do we have to send to the bench to get our draft pick on the field?" Whenever you take a RB early, it usually means that you're going to have to bench your current starting RB to get the new guy on the field. If your RB is good, that means the "bench cost" associated with your draft pick RB is high.

 

You'll notice I'm using the phrase "bench cost" rather than "need." There's a reason for that. Let's say you have two really good DEs--guys who can play on either side. You're thinking of adding another. Some might say that you don't need another DE. And they'd be right! But if you had three really good DEs--guys who could play either side--odds are you could get each DE an appropriate number of snaps over the course of the game. You wouldn't be wasting talent. So your bench cost for adding another DE is low, because you're not wasting existing talent by sending it to the bench.

 

The bench cost for Spiller was Fred Jackson. That's a really high cost, and is one of the disadvantages of taking a RB early. But the bench cost of Green would be much lower. The bench cost of a front-7 player would likely be lower still.

 

Whatever a player's bench cost is should be subtracted away from the value I described above. That will give you at least a rough idea as to what he's likely to offer your franchise.

 

But there's another factor to consider as well--what you called "bust factor." If you feel there's a 50% chance a defensive front-7 player will bust, you have to multiply his value by 50%. Odds are every player will end up having his value multiplied by some percentage less than 100. Even a very low risk pick (as Peyton Manning had been) is still associated with some degree of uncertainty.

 

To sum things up, the formula to use is: [ (player grade x position importance) - bench cost] x (1 - probability of being a bust).

 

Finally--just because the above model isn't complicated enough!--I want to add in one last factor. What I'd call "chance of greatness." If two players had similar ratings with the above system, my bias would be in favor of whichever player had the higher chance of greatness. Players like those are the difference makers I talked about earlier.

[truth on hold]

Very good post! Doing the above sure worked with Spiller!!! We are winning so many games with this wonderful philosophy, why stop now?

Folks get a grip. Spiller was not BPA. He was need. Writing was on the wall Lynch would not be a Bill by the end of the season. They first tried moving him in the offseason, unsuccessfully. And as the trade deadline loomed it forced them to move him for less than they wanted. In any case, Lynch's day in a Bills uniform were clearly numbered even before the Spiller pick. He didn't want to be here, they didn't want him ... does that sound like the basis for a long term plan?

Edited February 8, 2011 by Joe_the_6_pack

[Sisyphean Bills]

You've made some solid points. And don't think I'm necessarily sold on the idea of Green over a front-7 defensive player. My focus right now is more on how the question should be analyzed rather than which solution we should ultimately arrive at.

 

Let's say that step 1 is to put a grade on each player based on the kind of career you think he'll have. Then step 2 is to put a value on each position based on the importance that position has. Clearly QB gets the highest value, LT and RDE the next-highest, and so on. Then to get a rough gauge of what a player can offer, you multiply his player grade by the value of his position. If QB is worth 100 and Luck's grade is a 95 (out of 100), Luck's potential value to your team is 9500. If WR is worth 65 and Green's grade is a 95, his potential value to the team is 6175. That probably understates the gap between Luck and Green--by a lot!--but you get the general idea.

 

Another factor to take into account is to ask, "who do we have to send to the bench to get our draft pick on the field?" Whenever you take a RB early, it usually means that you're going to have to bench your current starting RB to get the new guy on the field. If your RB is good, that means the "bench cost" associated with your draft pick RB is high.

 

You'll notice I'm using the phrase "bench cost" rather than "need." There's a reason for that. Let's say you have two really good DEs--guys who can play on either side. You're thinking of adding another. Some might say that you don't need another DE. And they'd be right! But if you had three really good DEs--guys who could play either side--odds are you could get each DE an appropriate number of snaps over the course of the game. You wouldn't be wasting talent. So your bench cost for adding another DE is low, because you're not wasting existing talent by sending it to the bench.

 

The bench cost for Spiller was Fred Jackson. That's a really high cost, and is one of the disadvantages of taking a RB early. But the bench cost of Green would be much lower. The bench cost of a front-7 player would likely be lower still.

 

Whatever a player's bench cost is should be subtracted away from the value I described above. That will give you at least a rough idea as to what he's likely to offer your franchise.

 

But there's another factor to consider as well--what you called "bust factor." If you feel there's a 50% chance a defensive front-7 player will bust, you have to multiply his value by 50%. Odds are every player will end up having his value multiplied by some percentage less than 100. Even a very low risk pick (as Peyton Manning had been) is still associated with some degree of uncertainty.

 

To sum things up, the formula to use is: [ (player grade x position importance) - bench cost] x (1 - probability of being a bust).

 

Finally--just because the above model isn't complicated enough!--I want to add in one last factor. What I'd call "chance of greatness." If two players had similar ratings with the above system, my bias would be in favor of whichever player had the higher chance of greatness. Players like those are the difference makers I talked about earlier.

I prefer the method of listening to Kiper, McShay, et.al. and use a finger in the wind to measure the hype for setting a draft board.

 

(Seriously though, you have some interesting ideas there, Arm.)

[NoSaint]

Folks get a grip. Spiller was not BPA. He was need. Writing was on the wall Lynch would not be a Bill by the end of the season. They first tried moving him in the offseason, unsuccessfully. And as the trade deadline loomed it forced them to move him for less than they wanted. In any case, Lynch's day in a Bills uniform were clearly numbered even before the Spiller pick. He didn't want to be here, they didn't want him ... does that sound like the basis for a long term plan?

 

Not saying spiller was definitely bpa buuuut who else would have been considered bpa besides him?

[truth on hold]

Not saying spiller was definitely bpa buuuut who else would have been considered bpa besides him?

Good question. Maybe Pouncey, but Bills thought they were set at Center with Hangartner and Wood.

Edited February 8, 2011 by Joe_the_6_pack

[NoSaint]

Good question. Maybe Pouncey, but Bills thought they were set at Center.

 

I guess... Just thinking back though, iupati was the next interior lineman on almost every board and pouncey was consistently around #20 in rankings I remember. When was the last time a center went top ten? Not meant as an insult, I'm actually curious. I never saw spiller outside 5-10 at the very latest last year. I think he was BPA and it helped that we had marshawn on the way out and fjack being older.

[DreReed83]

Not saying spiller was definitely bpa buuuut who else would have been considered bpa besides him?

 

Dez Bryant. Yes. Definately Dez Bryant.

[1B4IDie]

I guess... Just thinking back though, iupati was the next interior lineman on almost every board and pouncey was consistently around #20 in rankings I remember. When was the last time a center went top ten? Not meant as an insult, I'm actually curious. I never saw spiller outside 5-10 at the very latest last year. I think he was BPA and it helped that we had marshawn on the way out and fjack being older.

 

Yeah I agree, I think Spiller was BPA on everyone's board when the Bills picked.

Tyson Alualu would have actually helped this team, but he was considered a huge "reach" at the time. He panned out so far with Jags.

 

Anthony Davis had tons of ??? and still does.

Mathews wasn't hands down considered better than Spiller

Graham can't play LB in a 3-4 or D-Line in a 3-4

Earl Thomas maybe you can argue Earl Thomas was ranked higher than Spiller but; another Saftey?

Pierre-Paul and Derrick Morgan are in the same boat as Graham - tweeners that are better in a 4-3.

 

In hindsight you can say Pouncey because he turned out to be a day1 stud. However its hard to say that CJ Spiller was not BPA in the 2010 draft when the Buffalo Bills were picking #9

 

Dez Bryant took a year off of football, he would certainty have been a top 10 pick without the suspension. For a team that needed a sure thing with the 1st round pick, Spiller looked like the surest thing AT THE TIME.

 

Here are the actual picks:

 

1 9 Buffalo Bills C. J. Spiller RB Clemson ACC

1 10 Jacksonville Jaguars Tyson Alualu DT California Pac-10

1 11 San Francisco 49ers Anthony Davis OT Rutgers Big East from Chicago via Denver [R1 trade 1] [R1 trade 2]

1 12 San Diego Chargers Ryan Mathews RB Fresno State WAC from Miami [R1 trade 3]

1 13 Philadelphia Eagles Brandon Graham DE Michigan Big Ten from San Francisco via Denver [R1 trade 4] [R1 trade 5]

1 14 Seattle Seahawks Earl Thomas S Texas Big 12 from Denver [R1 trade 6]

1 15 New York Giants Jason Pierre-Paul DE South Florida Big East

1 16 Tennessee Titans Derrick Morgan DE Georgia Tech ACC

1 17 San Francisco 49ers Mike Iupati G Idaho WAC from Carolina [R1 trade 7]

1 18 Pittsburgh Steelers Maurkice Pouncey† C Florida SEC

1 19 Atlanta Falcons Sean Weatherspoon LB Missouri Big 12

1 20 Houston Texans Kareem Jackson CB Alabama SEC

1 21 Cincinnati Bengals Jermaine Gresham TE Oklahoma Big 12

1 22 Denver Broncos Demaryius Thomas WR Georgia Tech ACC from New England [R1 trade 8]

1 23 Green Bay Packers Bryan Bulaga OT Iowa Big Ten

1 24 Dallas Cowboys Dez Bryant WR Oklahoma State Big 12 from Philadelphia via Denver and New England [R1 trade 9] [R1 trade 10] [R1 trade 11]

1 25 Denver Broncos Tim Tebow QB Florida SEC from Baltimore [R1 trade 12]

1 26 Arizona Cardinals Dan Williams DT Tennessee SEC

1 27 New England Patriots Devin McCourty† CB Rutgers Big East from Dallas [R1 trade 13]

1 28 Miami Dolphins Jared Odrick DT Penn State Big Ten from San Diego [R1 trade 14]

1 29 New York Jets Kyle Wilson CB Boise State WAC

1 30 Detroit Lions Jahvid Best RB California Pac-10 from Minnesota [R1 trade 15]

1 31 Indianapolis Colts Jerry Hughes DE TCU MWC

1 32 New Orleans Saints Patrick Robinson CB Florida State ACC

Edited February 8, 2011 by Why So Serious?

[truth on hold]

Dez Bryant. Yes. Definately Dez Bryant.

There's one for sure. Some others I can recall projected top 10 that were available @9 were Brandon Spikes, Jimmy Clausen and Derrick Morgan. NoSaint probably right on Pouncey not being that high a projection (had to jog memory to last year's draft, not this year's performance.)

 

I would add that BPA mentality does not mean taking consensus BPA, it means taking who you rank BPA.

Edited February 8, 2011 by Joe_the_6_pack

[stony]

Yeah I agree, I think Spiller was BPA on everyone's board when the Bills picked.

Tyson Alualu would have actually helped this team, but he was considered a huge "reach" at the time. He panned out so far with Jags.

 

Anthony Davis had tons of ??? and still does.

Mathews wasn't hands down considered better than Spiller

Graham can't play LB in a 3-4 or D-Line in a 3-4

Earl Thomas maybe you can argue Earl Thomas was ranked higher than Spiller but; another Saftey?

Pierre-Paul and Derrick Morgan are in the same boat as Graham - tweeners that are better in a 4-3.

 

In hindsight you can say Pouncey because he turned out to be a day1 stud. However its hard to say that CJ Spiller was not BPA in the 2010 draft when the Buffalo Bills were picking #9

 

Dez Bryant took a year off of football, he would certainty have been a top 10 pick without the suspension. For a team that needed a sure thing with the 1st round pick, Spiller looked like the surest thing AT THE TIME.

 

Here are the actual picks:

 

1 9 Buffalo Bills C. J. Spiller RB Clemson ACC

1 10 Jacksonville Jaguars Tyson Alualu DT California Pac-10

1 11 San Francisco 49ers Anthony Davis OT Rutgers Big East from Chicago via Denver [R1 trade 1] [R1 trade 2]

1 12 San Diego Chargers Ryan Mathews RB Fresno State WAC from Miami [R1 trade 3]

1 13 Philadelphia Eagles Brandon Graham DE Michigan Big Ten from San Francisco via Denver [R1 trade 4] [R1 trade 5]

1 14 Seattle Seahawks Earl Thomas S Texas Big 12 from Denver [R1 trade 6]

1 15 New York Giants Jason Pierre-Paul DE South Florida Big East

1 16 Tennessee Titans Derrick Morgan DE Georgia Tech ACC

1 17 San Francisco 49ers Mike Iupati G Idaho WAC from Carolina [R1 trade 7]

1 18 Pittsburgh Steelers Maurkice Pouncey† C Florida SEC

1 19 Atlanta Falcons Sean Weatherspoon LB Missouri Big 12

1 20 Houston Texans Kareem Jackson CB Alabama SEC

1 21 Cincinnati Bengals Jermaine Gresham TE Oklahoma Big 12

1 22 Denver Broncos Demaryius Thomas WR Georgia Tech ACC from New England [R1 trade 8]

1 23 Green Bay Packers Bryan Bulaga OT Iowa Big Ten

1 24 Dallas Cowboys Dez Bryant WR Oklahoma State Big 12 from Philadelphia via Denver and New England [R1 trade 9] [R1 trade 10] [R1 trade 11]

1 25 Denver Broncos Tim Tebow QB Florida SEC from Baltimore [R1 trade 12]

1 26 Arizona Cardinals Dan Williams DT Tennessee SEC

1 27 New England Patriots Devin McCourty† CB Rutgers Big East from Dallas [R1 trade 13]

1 28 Miami Dolphins Jared Odrick DT Penn State Big Ten from San Diego [R1 trade 14]

1 29 New York Jets Kyle Wilson CB Boise State WAC

1 30 Detroit Lions Jahvid Best RB California Pac-10 from Minnesota [R1 trade 15]

1 31 Indianapolis Colts Jerry Hughes DE TCU MWC

1 32 New Orleans Saints Patrick Robinson CB Florida State ACC

 

Yup. Only guy I think is in the conversation was Bryant. But too many red flags at the time. It's not like anyone dominated that went a few picks later.

 

FWIW, Herm Edwards is saying Patrick Peterson is the best prospect in the draft this year by a mile. Probably some DB on DB love, but still interesting.

[NoSaint]

There's one for sure. Some others I can recall projected top 10 that were available @9 were Brandon Spikes, Jimmy Clausen and Derrick Morgan. NoSaint probably right on Pouncey not being that high a projection (had to jog memory to last year's draft, not this year's performance.)

 

I would add that BPA mentality does not mean taking consensus BPA, it means taking who you rank BPA.

 

Pure talent Dez was in the discussion but had many question marks on work ethic and attitude. Still a lot of questions a year in to his career.best case scenario I couldnt see him staying in buffalo a day longer then he had to.

 

Derrick Morgan seems like a 4-3 end to me. Gailey coached him at tech so I have to imagine they had a good read on his ability to contribute to the plan.

 

The other two were available and we passed on them in the second round.

 

Spikes almost made it to the third.

 

I really do think spiller was at lowest a top ten pick on any board, and possibly at the top of ours(I think lowest he was ranked was 4-5). Suh may have dropped a little being evaluated for a 34 defense, and bradford wasn't a gimme coming from a spread and off an injury.

[Bill from NYC]

Folks get a grip. Spiller was not BPA. He was need. Writing was on the wall Lynch would not be a Bill by the end of the season. They first tried moving him in the offseason, unsuccessfully. And as the trade deadline loomed it forced them to move him for less than they wanted. In any case, Lynch's day in a Bills uniform were clearly numbered even before the Spiller pick. He didn't want to be here, they didn't want him ... does that sound like the basis for a long term plan?

 

I think you really do miss the point. It is sad how Bills fans cannot recognize, and sometimes even condone stupid moves.

 

I never said, nor do I believe that Spiller was the BPA. He was the BTSA (best ticket seller available). Mr. Wilson commented how Spiller would "add excitement" to the team.

 

As for the Lynch situation, the fact that he didn't want to be here was his problem, whereas he was under contract. Besides, even if they wanted to dump him, did you ever wonder why he HAD to be replaced by a first round pick, let alone a #9?

 

They do the same thing in the secondary and it's just as stupid, perhaps worse. If Florence walks, must we draft Peterson? What would Peterson be, the BPA or a "need" pick? He has been called both on this board, as has Spiller. Our corners would consist of a #3 and #11. That is WAY too much to allocate to the secondary. And before you point to the Jets, they built a strong team (both lines and lbs) before they addressed the secondary. In fact, their starting safety is a Bills castoff, hardly the reference, right? This is how to win in the elements, or perhaps anywhere. Strong lines and good quarterback play wins.

 

Knowing the Bills history, I think they will draft Green, with visions of him making acrobatic catches. This will draw fans, but the team will lose because it is small and weak.

I hope that I'm wrong, because this would be a dumb move, BPA or not.

[truth on hold]

Pure talent Dez was in the discussion but had many question marks on work ethic and attitude. Still a lot of questions a year in to his career.best case scenario I couldnt see him staying in buffalo a day longer then he had to.

 

Derrick Morgan seems like a 4-3 end to me. Gailey coached him at tech so I have to imagine they had a good read on his ability to contribute to the plan.

 

The other two were available and we passed on them in the second round.

 

Spikes almost made it to the third.

 

I really do think spiller was at lowest a top ten pick on any board, and possibly at the top of ours(I think lowest he was ranked was 4-5). Suh may have dropped a little being evaluated for a 34 defense, and bradford wasn't a gimme coming from a spread and off an injury.

fair enough, maybe he was BPA. But there's also a case to be made he was "need" from Bills perspective given the Lynch situation. Could be a rare instance where he satisfied both. So let's not use him in the debate any longer. Also, he's only been in the NFL a year. He had a great preseason and then disappointing regular season. But he did have some highlights as runner, WR and return man. So way too early to label a bust. Another reason to keep him out of the debate.

 

I think you really do miss the point. It is sad how Bills fans cannot recognize, and sometimes even condone stupid moves.

 

I never said, nor do I believe that Spiller was the BPA. He was the BTSA (best ticket seller available). Mr. Wilson commented how Spiller would "add excitement" to the team.

 

As for the Lynch situation, the fact that he didn't want to be here was his problem, whereas he was under contract. Besides, even if they wanted to dump him, did you ever wonder why he HAD to be replaced by a first round pick, let alone a #9?

 

They do the same thing in the secondary and it's just as stupid, perhaps worse. If Florence walks, must we draft Peterson? What would Peterson be, the BPA or a "need" pick? He has been called both on this board, as has Spiller. Our corners would consist of a #3 and #11. That is WAY too much to allocate to the secondary. And before you point to the Jets, they built a strong team (both lines and lbs) before they addressed the secondary. In fact, their starting safety is a Bills castoff, hardly the reference, right? This is how to win in the elements, or perhaps anywhere. Strong lines and good quarterback play wins.

 

Knowing the Bills history, I think they will draft Green, with visions of him making acrobatic catches. This will draw fans, but the team will lose because it is small and weak.

I hope that I'm wrong, because this would be a dumb move, BPA or not.

And like McCargo, Whitner or anyone else in the secondary was? Seriously who comes out to see a rookie secondary player unless his name was "Deion"? Bills have spent plenty of high picks on linemen other than McCargo ... Wood, Levitre, Troupe, Carrington of recent note. Come on Bill, you're over playing your hand here.

Edited February 8, 2011 by Joe_the_6_pack

[mrags]

Rice #16 overall, 3 rings

Holmes #25 overall, 1 ring and super bowl winning catch 2nd year in league

Irvin #11 overall, 3 rings

Swann #21 overall, 4 rings

 

There are others.

 

Seriously just go away, you're making a complete fool of yourself

actually, your making a complete fool of yourself. Every player you mentioned played in a team that was dominant in the time they played. The 90 49ers and 90 Cowboys all have multiple rings. The 70s Steelers and 2000 Steelers also have 6 or 7 rings between them. So by saying that thier WRs was the only reason they were dominant is an actual joke. FYI Andre Reed has much better statistics than Michael Irvin and he STILL isn't in the HOF and he made it to more SBs than Irvin did. It's all about being on a TEAM that is dominant. Our entire team needs to get better, from top to bottom at every position.

[truth on hold]

actually, your making a complete fool of yourself. Every player you mentioned played in a team that was dominant in the time they played. The 90 49ers and 90 Cowboys all have multiple rings. The 70s Steelers and 2000 Steelers also have 6 or 7 rings between them. So by saying that thier WRs was the only reason they were dominant is an actual joke. FYI Andre Reed has much better statistics than Michael Irvin and he STILL isn't in the HOF and he made it to more SBs than Irvin did. It's all about being on a TEAM that is dominant. Our entire team needs to get better, from top to bottom at every position.

Where in the world did I say that? 11 guys on the field, 22 considering both units ... no single player is "the only reason" for dominance.