2011 Draft - Hansen / Maybin - Risk or Reward ?

[T master]

Reading a lot of the posts here i read a bunch about how we should take Fairley (which i really like) because he was such a monster player for Auburn last year .

 

Then i read posts about Cam Jordon like - I like him but not at #3 !! And with a roster in Buffalo that is a who's who of first round busts , or the possibility there of reading - Maybin , McCargo , Whitner , Mckelvin .

 

I as a Bills fan would rather at #3 take a Cam Jordon that could give the Bills a Phil Hansen type career , rather than risk taking a highly touted one year wonder like Fairley that "has the potential" of being a Maybin type & could possibly be just another name to add to the list above.

 

I'm not saying that either of these players are a sure thing or are a bust , because we all know and have made choices of players in drafts past that WE thought were going to be monsters that have fallen well short of our expectations or that WE thought weren't going to be very good & have had better than average careers!

 

But what i was wondering of you other Bills fans was ?

 

What would you rather have , a player that has more of a past resume that would indicate the possibility of a career say like a Phil Hansen (a solid , dependable player with good stats not great) over a player with say a one year wonder type of resume that may be more of a risk or reward type to be the next not so great thing in a Bills Uni ??

Edited April 9, 2011 by T master

[Mr. WEO]

Maybin was barely a one year wonder. Can you find anyone who spoke of Maybin his whole decent year of college in a way that everyone discussed Fairley last year?

[T master]

Maybin was barely a one year wonder. Can you find anyone who spoke of Maybin his whole decent year of college in a way that everyone discussed Fairley last year?

 

McShay had him as our pick & thought he was the next great thing & spoke highly of his upside & pass rushing abilities but has since admitted that he is a bust & Orapko would have been the better pick . Go Figure .

Edited April 9, 2011 by T master

[Thoner7]

I say we take the sure-thing pick that is also going to be super dominant. I see Fairley and Jordan in that light.

 

Maybin was barely a one year wonder. Can you find anyone who spoke of Maybin his whole decent year of college in a way that everyone discussed Fairley last year?

 

 

McShay had him as our pick & thought he was the next great thing & spoke highly of his upside & pass rushing abilities but has since admitted that he is a bust & Orapko would have been the better pick . Go Figure .

 

Exactly. McShay is a nobody.

[Original Byrd Man]

Reading a lot of the posts here i read a bunch about how we should take Fairley (which i really like) because he was such a monster player for Auburn last year .

 

Then i read posts about Cam Jordon like - I like him but not at #3 !! And with a roster in Buffalo that is a who's who of first round busts , or the possibility there of reading - Maybin , McCargo , Whitner , Mckelvin .

 

I as a Bills fan would rather at #3 take a Cam Jordon that could give the Bills a Phil Hansen type career , rather than risk taking a highly touted one year wonder like Fairley that "has the potential" of being a Maybin type & could possibly be just another name to add to the list above.

 

I'm not saying that either of these players are a sure thing or are a bust , because we all know and have made choices of players in drafts past that WE thought were going to be monsters that have fallen well short of our expectations or that WE thought weren't going to be very good & have had better than average careers!

 

But what i was wondering of you other Bills fans was ?

 

What would you rather have , a player that has more of a past resume that would indicate the possibility of a career say like a Phil Hansen (a solid , dependable player with good stats not great) over a player with say a one year wonder type of resume that may be more of a risk or reward type to be the next not so great thing in a Bills Uni ??

The 3rd pick should be a difference maker. Look at the heat the FO has taken for DW at #8, who has had a Hansen type career. There will always be expectations for that high of a pick, and a "solid" career will be considered a bust, so roll the dice. That being said I think Jordan has the potential for a career that be much more than Hansen's.

[maddenboy]

Given your question, I choose SOLID.

 

How many SOLID players does this team have on either side of the ball? Maybe 4? (K. Williams, D. Florence, G. Wilson, E. Wood, and barely F. Jackson and barely Fitz).

[Mr. WEO]

McShay had him as our pick & thought he was the next great thing & spoke highly of his upside & pass rushing abilities but has since admitted that he is a bust & Orapko would have been the better pick . Go Figure .

I'm talking about during the season, not draft time hype.

[Bill from NYC]

The 3rd pick should be a difference maker. Look at the heat the FO has taken for DW at #8, who has had a Hansen type career.

 

I couldn't disagree more. Hansen was a 10x better that Whitner who cost a ton more, and plays a much easier position to fill.

 

Looking back, Hansen was worthy of a very late first round pick, or at least a second rounder imo. Whitner has produced like a 3rd or 4th round pick. He was a colassal bust, a mediocre at best player.

 

But if we want to, we can all close our eyes and make believe that Whitner was/is especially good at any phase of his position.

[Original Byrd Man]

I couldn't disagree more. Hansen was a 10x better that Whitner who cost a ton more, and plays a much easier position to fill.

 

Looking back, Hansen was worthy of a very late first round pick, or at least a second rounder imo. Whitner has produced like a 3rd or 4th round pick. He was a colassal bust, a mediocre at best player.

 

But if we want to, we can all close our eyes and make believe that Whitner was/is especially good at any phase of his position.

This post was asking do you go Solid with few risks or impact with more bust potential.

If you take the blinders off you would see that Whitner has had a solid career. I didn't mention spectaular. If Whitner had been taken in the 2nd or 3rd round there would be an entirely different opinion of his career to date, but because he was a top ten pick there are and should be higher expectations of his performance. I remain a huge Hansen fan and always felt he was the "Class" of the organization but his career was solid but not spectacular. I have never heard anyone pushing for enshrinement in his case. That being said I still believe Whitner and Hansen have had similar careers in that both have been solid. Lets not forget the fact that Hansen also had much more talent surrounding him. I don't want to appear as a Whitner fan, as I think he has under performed for his position in the draft selection,but he is a solid player none the less. At #3 I would rather see an "impact" player as opposed to a "solid" player, otherwise you have the DW situation all over again.

[Nasty]

Maybin was barely a one year wonder. Can you find anyone who spoke of Maybin his whole decent year of college in a way that everyone discussed Fairley last year?

Still a one year wonder. Remember those guys are playing for paychecks too their senior or junior(with intent to come out) year. Just makes you question their work ethic and where was that work ethic their freshmen, sophomore, and junior years. Why turn it on the year they know they are coming out to go pro and play like that consistently. I would much rather have a constant pro (trade down and get Watt, Jordan, but not waste the pick on another one year wonder with lots of potential to only find out what his real work ethic is). Cam Newton is another one of those guys, one year wonder at Auburn (not someone I want), at least Gabbert if we get him played more then one year at a high level. I want someone like a Miller, or like I said Jordan, Watt, I would even take Quinn because he probably realized by sitting out last year what he has and is now willing to do whatever it takes to keep it (hopefully, its still a risk that I would only use if we traded down and he was there).

[T master]

This post was asking do you go Solid with few risks or impact with more bust potential.

If you take the blinders off you would see that Whitner has had a solid career. I didn't mention spectaular. If Whitner had been taken in the 2nd or 3rd round there would be an entirely different opinion of his career to date, but because he was a top ten pick there are and should be higher expectations of his performance. I remain a huge Hansen fan and always felt he was the "Class" of the organization but his career was solid but not spectacular. I have never heard anyone pushing for enshrinement in his case. That being said I still believe Whitner and Hansen have had similar careers in that both have been solid. Lets not forget the fact that Hansen also had much more talent surrounding him. I don't want to appear as a Whitner fan, as I think he has under performed for his position in the draft selection,but he is a solid player none the less. At #3 I would rather see an "impact" player as opposed to a "solid" player, otherwise you have the DW situation all over again.

 

Finally an answer to the post in the way it was given thank you !!!!

[Bill from NYC]

This post was asking do you go Solid with few risks or impact with more bust potential.

If you take the blinders off you would see that Whitner has had a solid career. I didn't mention spectaular. If Whitner had been taken in the 2nd or 3rd round there would be an entirely different opinion of his career to date, but because he was a top ten pick there are and should be higher expectations of his performance. I remain a huge Hansen fan and always felt he was the "Class" of the organization but his career was solid but not spectacular. I have never heard anyone pushing for enshrinement in his case. That being said I still believe Whitner and Hansen have had similar careers in that both have been solid. Lets not forget the fact that Hansen also had much more talent surrounding him. I don't want to appear as a Whitner fan, as I think he has under performed for his position in the draft selection,but he is a solid player none the less. At #3 I would rather see an "impact" player as opposed to a "solid" player, otherwise you have the DW situation all over again.

 

Of course I would rather have an inmpact player than a "solid player." Is this really an issue at all?

As for Hansen/Whitner, Hansen DID have quality players around him. That said, he made plays. Whitner tackles players in the endzone, or after long gains and has little to no "impact."

Edited April 11, 2011 by Bill from NYC

[AReed Deep For 7]

I understand minimizing risk but IMO playing to "not lose" is a losing mindset. The culture that everyone has found refreshing with Chan and co. isn't something I wanna go back on. Your at the #3 spot because we sucked and need a big time game changing player. You gotta go balls out here

[Spiderweb]

Of course I would rather have an inmpact player than a "solid player." Is this really an issue at all?

As for Hansen/Whitner, Hansen DID have quality players around him. That said, he makde plays. Whitner tackles players in the endzone, or after long gains and has little to no "impact."

 

Hansen's play during his career was far more than simply "solid" as others have stated. While not dominating, Hansen was a very solid and yes, talented player who did much of the dirty work. Had he not played on a line with Bruce Smith, I think he would have been held in much higher regard, especially around here. Hansen is one of my all time favorite Bills.

[Bill from NYC]

Hansen's play during his career was far more than simply "solid" as others have stated. While not dominating, Hansen was a very solid and yes, talented player who did much of the dirty work. Had he not played on a line with Bruce Smith, I think he would have been held in much higher regard, especially around here. Hansen is one of my all time favorite Bills.

 

Agreed. Hansen played "bigger" than he actually was. He got great angles on his pass rush, and when Bruce and Bryce were on the team, he was superb. He was a fierce hitter with great technique. And yes, he did a lot of dirty work.

 

I for one wouldn't mention Hansen and Whitner in the same sentence in terms of ability and making plays.

[DreReed83]

If Marcell isn't there and we're definately taking a defensive player at 3, then I'd prefer Quinn over any of the other guys.

[Nasty]

If Marcell isn't there and we're definately taking a defensive player at 3, then I'd prefer Quinn over any of the other guys.

If we go LB we go with Miller at #3. Quinn is still to risky to take right there after missing a year of contact football. If we trade down to like 7-10 then we take Quinn.