syrcuse315 Posted January 16, 2012 Author Posted January 16, 2012 An interesting point that has been coming up is talk of the bengals possibly trading up to get Trent Richardson. They are going to part ways with benson and they hold two 1st round picks this year, both of which are too far back to land richardson.They most likely want richardson more than any other team and they have pick 17 & 21 and realistically might try to trade up to 10 to land him. If Buffalo was to trade back to 17 and land an extra 1st or 2nd round pick it might help having extra picks early.
BobChalmers Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 I might be in the minority in this, but I think they are pretty much set at the tackle position. Even this year, when both Hairston and Bell were beset by injuries, the tackle spots held up fine. With a little better health, the tackle position could be a real strength, as I think Bell could be a top tier tackle when healthy. The best use of resources would be for the Bills to resign Bell, and either sign a mid-priced free agent or draft a 3 or 4th round tackle prospect. I think relinquishing Bell while drafting Rieff or Martin, at least for the short term, would only be a lateral move for the franchise, and that is the same reasoning why I would be deadset on letting SJ walk and then drafting Floyd or Jeffrey. The issue - as Nix was getting at in his press conference - is that Bell can't seem to stay healthy at all. IF he could stay healthy, as Nix also said, Bell has all the tools you want - and he's shown them. The issue is - will he ever make it through a season? If the answer is no, then drafting a good OLT is an upgrade. Use the FA money you save not resigning Bell on your WR (Jackson, Bowe, etc.) or pass rush help (Mathis, Williams...?).
nbash Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 How insane is it that we let Jason Peters go? You can't win when you let elite LT's leave town
RyanC883 Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 Very well put. I never thought how many bad teams have great OTs. I still say pass rush...and then a DE. Our front 7 sucks. Period. Beginning and End of the story. I'd imagine there is a FA OL out there somewhere. Re-sign Bell, and draft an OT later in the draft. There are several good talents available at 10 (Upshaw, Still, Merculious (sp)).
JPS Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 I'd imagine there is a FA OL out there somewhere. Re-sign Bell, and draft an OT later in the draft. There are several good talents available at 10 (Upshaw, Still, Merculious (sp)). Yep.
JohnC Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 It may be the most valuable position on the O-line, but the overall value of the spot doesn't warrent a top 10 (or 11) pick. The impact the player will have is limited by the position. Mediocre to bad teams often look to LT in the first round as one way out of their poor performance--yet it rarely has any impact on the team's fortunes. Skins, Browns, Jags, Seahawks-Fins-Bears-Rams (all twice in the past several years) have taken LT in the first and it has been in vain. The Browns and Fins have Pro Bowlers at the position--so what? Their offenses still aren't good because their QBs suck, no matter who's protecting their "blind side". Philly has Peters, an all pro--yet Vick gets pounded every game and has yet to complete a season with that team. The top offensive teams have found LTs everywhere but the first round, with the exception of Detroit. GB (5th), Giants (2nd), Atl (6th), SD (udfa), NE (2nd), Saints (4th)... A couple of years ago I said that a very good or elite TE is far more valuable than a very good or elite LT. I think what we have seen this year makes this more obvious than ever. You can make the point that quality players, no matter the position, can be found in later rounds. You are stating the obvious. However, high caliber LTs are more often than not drafted in the top ten because they are so difficult to find. Your reasoning that the lower echelon teams you enumerated still struggled after drafting a LT early in the draft leaves out the fact that the LTs taken so high in the draft are going to some of the worst teams and franchises. No one pick by itself is going to alter that losing dynamic . I strenuously disagree with you over the value of a good TE. The position that adds value to the tight end position is the qb. Without the elite qbs such as Brees, Brady etc the TE can not be impactful. Don't get me wrong I readily acknowledge that Graham, Gronkowski etc are very talented and impactful players. But the facilitator in their success has a lot to do with the exceptional qbs they play with. There should be no surprise that TEs, even high caliber TEs, usually are not drafted in the first round while high valued LTs are drafted very early in the first round.
Bill from NYC Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 Let me propose a scenario for you? If the Bills were in a position to draft the Blackman (sic), the receiver from OK ST., would you pass on him to address some other need? I wouldn't. I would snatch him up because he would be the best player on the board and would also fill a critical need. There is nothing wrong taking the best player available and also addressing one of the numerous needs. I appreciate quesions/dialogue like this. However, this one is tough to answer, but I'll try. I would draft Blackmon ONLY if I thought he was a superstar AND there were no OLBs, LTs, or QBs who I thought would be very good. In other words, if I thought that Blackmon was a 10 and Upshaw or a LT was a 9, I would pass on Blackmon. As you are well aware, receivers are easier to get than LTs or pass rushers. And again, the need at LB is nothing less than alarming.
Mr. WEO Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) You can make the point that quality players, no matter the position, can be found in later rounds. You are stating the obvious. However, high caliber LTs are more often than not drafted in the top ten because they are so difficult to find. Your reasoning that the lower echelon teams you enumerated still struggled after drafting a LT early in the draft leaves out the fact that the LTs taken so high in the draft are going to some of the worst teams and franchises. No one pick by itself is going to alter that losing dynamic . I strenuously disagree with you over the value of a good TE. The position that adds value to the tight end position is the qb. Without the elite qbs such as Brees, Brady etc the TE can not be impactful. Don't get me wrong I readily acknowledge that Graham, Gronkowski etc are very talented and impactful players. But the facilitator in their success has a lot to do with the exceptional qbs they play with. There should be no surprise that TEs, even high caliber TEs, usually are not drafted in the first round while high valued LTs are drafted very early in the first round. The bolded part isn't always true. You could have gone further--with a high quality or elite QB it doesn't matter where you got your LT. Problem is all of the bad teams listed haven't made an intelligent move at QB. A mediocre to bad QB is not made any better by picking a top LT in the draft. But a top TE will be a much bigger asset to a struggling QB than any other single lineman--that is my point. It's a position of impact. It's an active position (tring to make something happen), not a passive position (trying to prevent something from happening), like LT. The fact that LTs are drafted high in the first round is not, to me a compelling argument that they should be. The fact that the same teams are picking LT in the first round several times in a fairly short time span shows the futlity of it. My guess is that if you asked who Fitz would rather have in front of him, Gronk or Joe Thomas, you wouldn't even be able to finish your question before he answered it. Edited January 16, 2012 by Mr. WEO
JohnC Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) I appreciate quesions/dialogue like this. However, this one is tough to answer, but I'll try. I would draft Blackmon ONLY if I thought he was a superstar AND there were no OLBs, LTs, or QBs who I thought would be very good. In other words, if I thought that Blackmon was a 10 and Upshaw or a LT was a 9, I would pass on Blackmon. As you are well aware, receivers are easier to get than LTs or pass rushers. And again, the need at LB is nothing less than alarming. The majority of rankings (some credible and some not) have Blackmon rated in the top five or so. Upshaw is ranked lower. The attached linked (just a sample that might be meaningless at this point) has Blackmon more highly rated. From what I have seen of Blackmon on at least four games I consider him to be an elite prospect where I can't say the same for Upshaw whom I believe will be a good pro. It is my inclination that if you can get an exceptional player, no matter the position, with your first round pick then you should add that level of talent to the roster. If the scouting department knows what it is doing you should be able to get contributing players in the next two rounds. As you are very well aware of this franchise had made a lot of draft blunders reaching for needs instead of valuing talent in general. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings Edited January 16, 2012 by JohnC
The Senator Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 Drafting a useless Wang was a huge disappointment - now the Bills need to Adcock (Kind of reminds me of a Kent-Hull-good-ol'-country-boy type of guy - if he's there in round 2, the Bills should grab him.)
Geno Smith's Arm Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) It may be the most valuable position on the O-line, but the overall value of the spot doesn't warrent a top 10 (or 11) pick. The impact the player will have is limited by the position. Mediocre to bad teams often look to LT in the first round as one way out of their poor performance--yet it rarely has any impact on the team's fortunes. Skins, Browns, Jags, Seahawks-Fins-Bears-Rams (all twice in the past several years) have taken LT in the first and it has been in vain. The Browns and Fins have Pro Bowlers at the position--so what? Their offenses still aren't good because their QBs suck, no matter who's protecting their "blind side". Philly has Peters, an all pro--yet Vick gets pounded every game and has yet to complete a season with that team. The top offensive teams have found LTs everywhere but the first round, with the exception of Detroit. GB (5th), Giants (2nd), Atl (6th), SD (udfa), NE (2nd), Saints (4th)... A couple of years ago I said that a very good or elite TE is far more valuable than a very good or elite LT. I think what we have seen this year makes this more obvious than ever. You are correct, sir! The majority of rankings (some credible and some not) have Blackmon rated in the top five or so. Upshaw is ranked lower. The attached linked (just a sample that might be meaningless at this point) has Blackmon more highly rated. From what I have seen of Blackmon on at least four games I consider him to be an elite prospect where I can't say the same for Upshaw whom I believe will be a good pro. It is my inclination that if you can get an exceptional player, no matter the position, with your first round pick then you should add that level of talent to the roster. If the scouting department knows what it is doing you should be able to get contributing players in the next two rounds. As you are very well aware of this franchise had made a lot of draft blunders reaching for needs instead of valuing talent in general. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings You are correct as well, sir I will be disappointed if they draft a LT in the 1st. Edited January 16, 2012 by Matthews' Bag
JohnC Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 The bolded part isn't always true. You could have gone further--with a high quality or elite QB it doesn't matter where you got your LT. Problem is all of the bad teams listed haven't made an intelligent move at QB. A mediocre to bad QB is not made any better by picking a top LT in the draft. But a top TE will be a much bigger asset to a struggling QB than any other single lineman--that is my point. It's a position of impact. It's an active position (tring to make something happen), not a passive position (trying to prevent something from happening), like LT. The fact that LTs are drafted high in the first round is not, to me a compelling argument that they should be. The fact that the same teams are picking LT in the first round several times in a fairly short time span shows the futlity of it. My guess is that if you asked who Fitz would rather have in front of him, Gronk or Joe Thomas, you wouldn't even be able to finish your question before he answered it. Just about every franchise in the NFL would take an elite LT over an elite TE in the draft. An elite OT usually is gone within the first four or five picks. This year LT KaliL from USC probably will be taken with the second pick in the draft while a TE most likely won't be taken in the first round. I'm not saying you are wrong in your position rankings---what I'm saying is that your position is not in the mainstream, at least with the NFL talent evaluators. With respect to your comments that the mentioned losing franchises made bad decisions regarding the qb position I have a different perspective. Acquiring an elite qb is a major challenge. There are few opportunities to be in position to grab one. Last year Chan Gailey was very candid that if he had the opportunity to draft Newton he would have done so. As you know Carolina took him with the first pick. You made the conjecture that if Fitz had his druthers he would prefer an elite TE over an elite LT. I'm not sure that is the case, especially if you asked him after he was pummeled by the defense. Maybe there is a question whether Fitz prefers a TE over a LT, but I have no doubt that if you asked Nix or Gailey they would in unison dismiss the TE thought and run to the podium to announce the selection of a LT.
syrcuse315 Posted January 16, 2012 Author Posted January 16, 2012 You made the conjecture that if Fitz had his druthers he would prefer an elite TE over an elite LT. I'm not sure that is the case, especially if you asked him after he was pummeled by the defense. Maybe there is a question whether Fitz prefers a TE over a LT, but I have no doubt that if you asked Nix or Gailey they would in unison dismiss the TE thought and run to the podium to announce the selection of a LT. agreed. An elite LT can give the TE enough time to get open and the TE would benefit greatly from his QB having more time in the pocket. Even if you have gonk, if your quarterback is constantly pressured and being sacked the tight end isn't going to be productive. An elite LT can benefit an offense more greatly than an elite TE, LT just are the unsung heroes of the passing game. Picking them isn't as appealing to many because it's not the flashy type of pick people want to see.
JohnC Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 agreed. An elite LT can give the TE enough time to get open and the TE would benefit greatly from his QB having more time in the pocket. Even if you have gonk, if your quarterback is constantly pressured and being sacked the tight end isn't going to be productive. An elite LT can benefit an offense more greatly than an elite TE, LT just are the unsung heroes of the passing game. Picking them isn't as appealing to many because it's not the flashy type of pick people want to see. If you go over the history of the draft for the past decade or so you will usually see an elite LT drafted in the top five. That is not the case for the TE position. Few TEs get drafted in the first round. My basic point is that the league overwhelmingly (if not unanimously) values quality LTs over quality TEs in the draft. Another factor to consider is that the Bills have invested a lot of resources in their running backs, Jackson/Spiller. Doesn't it make sense to maximize their utility by having a quality OL?
atlbillsfan1975 Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 There is usually only one or maybe two 'elite' LT that come out of college every year. By elite i mean dominant starter from day one. These guys go in the top 5 picks. I do not think the Bills will have a shot at the best Tackle in the draft. Why not get one again in the 3-4 rounds, and groom him for a year or two. Heck even Hairston looked solid and he was a 4th rounder. We know the Bills have no pass rush and need one badly. Focus on D.
BobChalmers Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) If you go over the history of the draft for the past decade or so you will usually see an elite LT drafted in the top five. That is not the case for the TE position. Few TEs get drafted in the first round. My basic point is that the league overwhelmingly (if not unanimously) values quality LTs over quality TEs in the draft. Very good point. TE's in particular might seem undervalued though, based on how dominant they have been in the league this year. The other interesting thing about drafting 1st round TEs - they are almost never busts - far lower bust liklihood over the last 20 years or so than any other position - which probably goes hand-in-hand with teams taking them later than they should. Another factor to consider is that the Bills have invested a lot of resources in their running backs, Jackson/Spiller. Doesn't it make sense to maximize their utility by having a quality OL? Agreed - BUT The Bills already have a very good OL. Anyone who doesn't think they do seems to me as having not been following the team very closely the last two years. Maybe it depends on what the definition of "quality" is, but they got pretty good results even with a lot of injuries. They did just finish the year with the fewest sacks allowed AND were among the best rushing teams - particularly impressive given that they were badly behind in a lot of games. Gailey's scheme and Fitz' quick release are some of that, but there were also a lot of plays where Bell and company made highlight reels for Brian Baldinger on NFL network. They have VERY good C and G's - among the best in the NFL - and they are young with lots of room to improve. Factoring in their youth, I wouldn't trade Wood/Levitre/Urbik with any threesome in the league. They are 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round draft picks, respectively - so it should come as no shock. Pears is a decent starter at RT who they just extended - I doubt they want to abandon him already. (edit: although I'm not sure why they extended him - he's definitely the weak link, particularly on pass blocking) As Nix has said - Bell is excellent WHEN he's healthy - problem is can he stay healthy. Hairston is still an unknown. If you don't think Bell will find a way to survive a season AND you aren't convinced Hairston will improve enough, then they should look for another answer at OLT. Nix seemed to be implying he at least intends to bring in another option. A lot depends on where they stand as FA happens. If they re-sign Stevie as they seem to intend, and add the second stud WR Nix said he was targeting, then that's really not a need at all. Same to a lesser extent with the pass rushers they need more than anything. I imagine once they are in the draft it will come down to quality and who slips to them. If the #1 guy at OLT (Reiff?) slips to them at 10, and FA went well, I would imagine they take him. OTOH, suppose the top 2 OLT prospects are gone - well they sure don't want OLT #3 with the #10 pick - that's how we got Losman and McCargo as reach 1st rounders - yuck. Edited January 16, 2012 by BobChalmers
JohnC Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 Very good point. TE's in particular might seem undervalued though, based on how dominant they have been in the league this year. The other interesting thing about drafting 1st round TEs - they are almost never busts - far lower bust liklihood over the last 20 years or so than any other position - which probably goes hand-in-hand with teams taking them later than they should. Agreed - BUT The Bills already have a very good OL. Anyone who doesn't think they do seems to me as having not been following the team very closely the last two years. Maybe it depends on what the definition of "quality" is, but they got pretty good results even with a lot of injuries. They did just finish the year with the fewest sacks allowed AND were among the best rushing teams - particularly impressive given that they were badly behind in a lot of games. Gailey's scheme and Fitz' quick release are some of that, but there were also a lot of plays where Bell and company made highlight reels for Brian Baldinger on NFL network. They have VERY good C and G's - among the best in the NFL - and they are young with lots of room to improve. Factoring in their youth, I wouldn't trade Wood/Levitre/Urbik with any threesome in the league. They are 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round draft picks, respectively - so it should come as no shock. Pears is a decent starter at RT who they just extended - I doubt they want to abandon him already. As Nix has said - Bell is excellent WHEN he's healthy - problem is can he stay healthy. Hairston is still an unknown. If you don't think Bell will find a way to survive a season AND you aren't convinced Hairston will improve enough, then they should look for another answer at OLT. Nix seemed to be implying he at least intends to bring in another option. A lot depends on where they stand as FA happens. If they re-sign Stevie as they seem to intend, and add the second stud WR Nix said he was targeting, then that's really not a need at all. Same to a lesser extent with the pass rushers they need more than anything. I imagine once they are in the draft it will come down to quality and who slips to them. If the #1 guy at OLT (Reiff?) slips to them at 10, and FA went well, I would imagine they take him. OTOH, suppose the top 2 OLT prospects are gone - well they sure don't want OLT #3 with the #10 pick - that's how we got Losman and McCargo as reach 1st rounders - yuck. I'm not wedded to the notion of taking an OT with our first pick. With the first pick I want a good ratio of talent and need. If one of the top two rated LTs fall to us, Khalil or Reiff, then I'm not adverse to bolstering the OL. The statistic that the Bills gave up very few sacks is deceiving because most of our passing plays were quick hit passes. As I stated in a prior post I prefer taking an elite player with our first round selection, no matter the position, if we have the opportunity. Justin Blackmon, a receiver from OK STate is a player I wouldn't hesitate to take if he is on the board when our pick comes up. Many fans get fixated with the first round selection and the desire to fill a need. If there is a need draft requirment it can also be fulfilled in the second and third rounds. The bottom line is no matter what position is drafted the best way to achieve long term success is by making your picks count, especially the early rounds. The best way to accomplish that draft efficiency goal is to go after the best talent without (in general) regards to the position.
PDaDdy Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 Throughout all the talk of who to get in the first round of the draft I've always been for going after and OLB/DE for a pass rush. While I still do want that position badly watching how much of a difference these offensive tackles are making in these playoff games is making me lean more and more toward getting Reiff or Martin with the first pick. I've always valued OT highly but when in the Saints game the LT shut down Aldon Smith most plays during their one on one's really shows just how much of a difference it can make for a quarterback. These LT for these teams are shutting down some of the best pass rushers in the game like smith and suggs for a majority of the game. Just out of curiosity, is watching these games making anyone lean more or less toward an OT with the 10th pick in the draft? I am still for drafting a pass rusher DE or OLB/DE. It's our biggest need. The problem is is that if that elite day 1 starter at one of those positions isn't there at #10 and one of the premier LTs is....you get the LT plug him in and the Left side of your line is set for years with Levitre and Wood. People that keep banging the QB drum don't often pay attention to the fact that those guys have SOLID LTs. Pass rusher first no doubt ...but if that guy isn't there and a premier day 1 starter LT is ....you run up to the podium with the card.
BillsVet Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 How insane is it that we let Jason Peters go? You can't win when you let elite LT's leave town That trade could go down as one of the worst of the decade, and I know it allowed Buffalo to select Eric Wood. Teams don't deal All-Pro OT's for draft picks. Unless they're looking to dump salary and have maligned the player in advance to make said deal more palatable to a fan base. Meanwhile, Peters is 1st Team All-Pro in 2011 by a wide margin and the Bills are debating whether to sign an oft-injured type or start a bad bodied 2nd year man more suited to the right side.
bouds Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) ex-scout on the top two tackles. If the best player is Rieff you pull the trigger at ten. Everyone keeps yapping about pass rushers but no mentions the elephant in the room, most of the class ****. No Von Miller, no Aldon Smith, not even a JJ Watt. None of the pass rushers are close to any of these guys. Why reach for a guy just for the sake of taking one. That's how you end up with the McKelvins and Maybins of the world. Edited January 16, 2012 by bouds
Recommended Posts