Who genuinely thinks they can scout college talent better than Nix?

[Reed83HOF]

Point was simply made. Jauron drafted starters, despite his reputation as a clown. So far, Buddy has drafted depth players. Maybe they will someday start--every draftee is a potential starter, no? Jauron's last draft yielded starters right off the bat, so it's a fair point.

 

Guys say that Buddy "had to start from scratch" and "blew up the roster". This is not true.

 

I was no fan of Whitner, but he wasn't quite the f-up that Maybin was. Troup (over Gronk) is looking like more of a f-up than Whitner.

 

He didn't start from scratch and blow up the roster; this is a slow turnover. He drafted depth and had very few FA signings, those old players are finally starting to get replaced now.

 

I would say there is some logic behind it. They limited cap hits from cuts and didn't overpay to replace who they cut, which would hurt the cap situation. Up until this year no one would or wanted to come here. He built the locker room reputation back up and got a couple players who spread the word about the culture change. This was really the only way to rebuild this team. Pretty good plan so far...Now the bigger changes can start to happen.

[deep2evans]

Point was simply made. Jauron drafted starters, despite his reputation as a clown. So far, Buddy has drafted depth players. Maybe they will someday start--every draftee is a potential starter, no? Jauron's last draft yielded starters right off the bat, so it's a fair point.

 

Guys say that Buddy "had to start from scratch" and "blew up the roster". This is not true.

 

I was no fan of Whitner, but he wasn't quite the f-up that Maybin was. Troup (over Gronk) is looking like more of a f-up than Whitner.

 

Troup over Gronk was awful, but only revisionist history says Gronk would be the player he is now. I'm pretty sure he failed a bunch of physicals given by other teams. But yea, i'm still pissed about that too.

 

Why are you leaving out the 2011 draft in your assessment? The first 4 picks might all be starters as sophomores. that's !@#$ing good.

 

Your point about Jauron's last draft sucks. He took Maybin. That in itself is unforgivable.

 

Last edit: Whitner was a f-up, big time. Our DT starters in 2005 were Tim Anderson, Justin Bannan, and Sam Adams. How we didn't take Ngata is beyond me.

Edited March 23, 2012 by deep2evans

[JPS]

Okay, then whoever is putting together the magazine boards will do. I'm pretty sure there are at least some magazines that are sourcing their information from professional scouts. For instance these guys http://ourlads.com/

 

I know, next you are gonna say "that's not a magazine! You said MAGAZINE!!!"

 

Again...wow! Magazine writers ask people who know, then write so you will buy their magazine. You think they care if they are right? They will point out their limited successes, but never their massive failures. They have never interviewed prospects.

 

Oh..... Enough of this nonsense.

[Mr. WEO]

Troup over Gronk was awful, but only revisionist history says Gronk would be the player he is now. I'm pretty sure he failed a bunch of physicals given by other teams.

 

And why are you leaving out the 2011 draft in your assessment? The first 4 picks might all be starters as sophomores. that's !@#$ing good.

 

Didn't leave them out. Reread. Said they were depth guys. And acknowledged that they may be starters a t some point, which is what you just said.

 

Troup was a stretch, regardless of what Gronk became. Buddy had no trouble picking up a recently injured Merriman (who somehow passed 2 Bills physicals--each before returning to th IR). If you think Gronk failed other physicals Gronk failed other than the Colts, you can tell us why you're "pretty sure he failed a bunch of others".

 

Nix didn't see in Gronk what the pats saw in him.

 

Anyway, back to my point--Buddy has put more true starters on the roster outside the draft than in it (Merriman, Pears, Urbik, Barnett, Wilson)

[deep2evans]

Didn't leave them out. Reread. Said they were depth guys. And acknowledged that they may be starters a t some point, which is what you just said.

 

Troup was a stretch, regardless of what Gronk became. Buddy had no trouble picking up a recently injured Merriman (who somehow passed 2 Bills physicals--each before returning to th IR). If you think Gronk failed other physicals Gronk failed other than the Colts, you can tell us why you're "pretty sure he failed a bunch of others".

 

Nix didn't see in Gronk what the pats saw in him.

 

Anyway, back to my point--Buddy has put more true starters on the roster outside the draft than in it (Merriman, Pears, Urbik, Barnett, Wilson)

 

Dareus and Aaron Williams are starters for sure - so that's 2. 95% chance Sheppard starts unless we draft the BC LB and he kills it in camp - so that's 3. And Hairston is in line to start as well. Where are you getting "1 starter" from?

 

I don't know why people make such a fuzz about the Merriman signing. It was/is a low risk/high reward move, and so far it hasn't worked out. It's nothing like a low 2nd round pick.

 

And who's Wilson? George Wilson? Ralph Wilson? because they've both been here a while.

Edited March 23, 2012 by deep2evans

[Mr. WEO]

Dareus and Aaron Williams are starters for sure - so that's 2. 95% chance Sheppard starts unless we draft the BC LB and he kills it in camp - so that's 3. And Hairston is in line to start as well. Where are you getting "1 starter" from?

 

I don't know why people make such a fuzz about the Merriman signing. It was/is a low risk/high reward move, and so far it hasn't worked out. It's nothing like a low 2nd round pick.

 

And who's Wilson? George Wilson? Ralph Wilson? because they've both been here a while.

Williams only appeared in 9 games. Started in 6, beginning week 10. The only week one starter is Dareus. I only mention Merriman to refute the inference that the Bills were leary of picking up players with history of injury.

[mjt328]

Having said all of that can you answer the original question? Who thinks they can scout college better than Nix? I'm guessing your answer should be NO. Yes?

 

 

 

 

Wow. This page has gone about 4 pages longer since I checked it. I think I lost track of the conversation.

 

To answer your question, I think Nix is a great judge of talent and YES, definitely a better scout than me. My problem with the original post was that I felt he was "suggesting" (maybe I took it wrong) that fans have no business ever criticizing Nix or his draft selections, because they don't know what they are talking about. Fans should just accept and trust whoever the front office selects, no matter what they think about his play.

 

And I don't agree with that.

I believe there are many knowledgable fans out there - including many on this board, who have proven they have a great eye for talent. It's not all done in RETROSPECT. And it's not all done with a draft magazine or because of an ESPN analyst.

 

For instance, there were many on this board that were upset ON DRAFT DAY when Nix took Terrell Troup instead of Terrence Cody or Rob Gronkowski. Both would have been significantly better selections.

[Reed83HOF]

Williams only appeared in 9 games. Started in 6, beginning week 10. The only week one starter is Dareus. I only mention Merriman to refute the inference that the Bills were leary of picking up players with history of injury.

 

I am still amazed we picked Merriman up. That was all Buddy love.

 

I will say with him not wanting to come here and now trying to get others to come was huge, regardless if he actually plays or not.

[mjt328]

Are you delusional?

Cam Newton you were dead wrong.

Von Miller you were dead wrong, he was rookie of the year and was great in a 4-3.

Marcel Dareus you were dead wrong, 43 tackles and 5.5 sacks for a rookie DT are EXCELLENT stats

AJ Green didn't take 2-3 years, he was a pro bowl starter as a rookie.

Patrick Peterson you have been right on so far as he got burnt a lot as a rookie.

 

1 out of 5 is really good though.

And here is your quote about Sanchez, "And while it can't always be put on the quarterback, it seemed that Sanchez came up big in big games."

 

You are nitpicking here.

 

> I said that Marcel Dareus would be a "very good player" (direct quote). He's shaping up to be EXACTLY that. The reason I brought up statistics way back then, was because some people on this board were expecting him to be the next Bruce Smith. I wanted to point out that he was never going to be a player that racked up big sack numbers. By the way, Dareus played 3-4 defensive end most of last year (not DT), just like Bruce Smith. And his "excellent" 5.5 sacks was good enough for him to tied for 59th in the NFL.

 

> I said that AJ Green would develop into a "regular Pro Bowler" (direct quote). His stats (65 catches, 1057 yards, 7 tds) were good - especially for a rookie, but not exceptional. Most of the time, those numbers would fall short of making the Pro Bowl. I guess the voters happened to like him this year. I still don't see him reaching his potential until about season three. So honestly, how can you say I was wrong about him?

 

> My thoughts on Von Miller (saying he would only be "alright") were more of a reflection on him going into a 4-3 defense than on his talents as a player. That was stated in the original post. Why? Because Miller's talents were clearly in rushing the passer. And in most 4-3 defenses, the linebackers are responsible for stopping the run and dropping into coverage. I never said he was going to suck or be a bust. But since I didn't give a full explanation, you can go ahead and say I was wrong.

 

> Cam Newton was ABSOLUTELY a bad call on my part. He was always going to be a high-risk, high-reward player. His mechanics were awful, he never progressed through his reads and he always looked to run first. Most of the time, those kinds of players have bust written all over them. I would have never expected Newton to develop so much in his rookie year.

 

 

 

And I completely stand behind that comment about Mark Sanchez. I never called him a "big game quarterback" or suggested that he was some kind of stud. I simply pointed out that he seemed to play better in big games - specifically the playoffs. Which was absolutely true.

[hondo in seattle]

Personally, I think I can scout college talent better than Nix.

 

I can also pilot the airplane better than the "captain", drive better than whoever is in the car in front of me (especially if that person doesn't have a Y chromosome), and coach any NFL team to more wins than Gailey.

 

But I'm kinda awesome at stuff.

 

Rumor has it that Marv wanted to bring you in as his replacement but the Competition Committee disallowed it citing "unfair advantage."

[Sisyphean Bills]

I'm with you. Scouts are hired in the first place because they really know this business.

That may be true. It is not a given.

After being hired they spend ungodly hours analyzing tape, interviewing coaches, interviewing players, etc. Somebody who does this as a hobby just can't compete.

There is no reason a professional scout cannot post on this site. Just sayin'.

It's both arrogant and insulting for us to think we can do a GM's or scout's job.

 

If any of us were really that smart, some team would pay us. But good luck to anyone here trying to find a job as a scout.

Matt Millen was paid to be a GM. In fact, he was the highest paid GM in the NFL.

 

 

Anyway, what were the criteria for evaluation of the "bet" angle? If Matt's Bag says that he'd have selected some set of players and Buddy selected some other set -- we'll have unimpeachable evidence as to whether Buddy "got it right" but the choices Matt's Bag makes would be totally uncertain ... assuming they are not drafted by the exact same team other than the Bills. Anyway, just curious... interesting thread by the way.

[todd]

I started a similar thread a month or two ago. Yeah, it was hilarious. There's lots of people here who apparently who have access to the coach's tape and missed their calling as GM / Scout, and are working in a machine shop instead. Unfortunate, because if the Bills would just follow their direction (ignoring their grammar of course), the Bills would be in the SB 5 years running.

 

Sure, he has/will make mistakes evaluating and drafting players, although a lot less mistakes than you.

 

The point of this is only to say that after much thought on who I want the Bills to draft, I've concluded that if they draft ANY Left Tackle at #10, I will be thrilled, regardless of the player, because that means Nix and his Bills scouts absolutely loved this guy. They are not going to take a LT if they don't, even if they really like him as a prospect. So it means if they take Reiff or Adams or Zebrie Sanders over my choice at the moment. Jonathan Martin, I'll be thrilled they didn't take Jonathan Martin because they think the guy they took at LT is better than Martin, and that's okay with me, because I really don't believe I can tell which LT pro prospect is more likely to be a top quality starter.

 

Especially if we sign Mark Anderson, I want an LT (unless we re-sign Bell and then I still wouldn't mind an LT at 10 or in round 2). I watch video and read scouting reports and hear arguments pro and con from all kinds of good and bad sources and I have my strong opinions about players being better or worse than others. I will especially love if I hear Jonathan Martin's name called out at #10 because that means I got my LT and Nix and the scouts agreed with me. But I will be happy with any name, and immediately think he is likely (but not certainly) going to be better than Martin.

 

This isn't to say pre-draft fan grading is a waste of time, it's fun as hell. And I could ultimately be right on Martin four years from now even if Nix picks Adams or Reiff or anyone else available at LT at #10. But I really do not believe that if the Bills choose a different guy than my guy, that it was a huge mistake, and they will rue the day they chose Reiff or Sanders or Adams over what was staring them right in the face, the obvious choice of Jonathan Martin.

 

As a caveat, I just happen to think Martin will be very good, from what I have seen myself, read and heard. It's not like he is well above other prospects, they all seem to have their strengths and weaknesses. He is a shade above the others, IMO, with the best chance of being a franchise LT.

 

Caveat #2, even though I really want a LT, I would not at all be disappointed if they chose Michael Floyd because he does two things: 1] He fits an immediate need of a big, fast #2 WR who can stretch the field and make plays, opening up the field for all of the various weapons AND 2] at the same time, he has a chance to be an absolute star and stud #1 WR down the line. Not many guys at any position in this draft would start right away on the Bills and have all the tools you need to be a star in this league, and Floyd has all the tools. Kirkpatrick probably wouldn't start day one. So we get immediate benefit, can plug Floyd in right away, and if we get lucky, we have a star on our hands alongside Stevie.

[CosmicBills]

Rumor has it that Marv wanted to bring you in as his replacement but the Competition Committee disallowed it citing "unfair advantage."

The man's always gotta be holding me down.

[Geno Smith's Arm]

I never claimed that I would be a better GM than Nix. I think he is doing a great job, and there is way more to it than just drafting guys. I also don't think I am a better talent evaluator than Nix, just that I think I could draft comparably over say, a 5-year time span. I think many others here could too.

 

The original question posed by Kelly the Dog is completely tied to his drafting (or what's the point of having the ability to scout college talent? This thread did not go off topic.)

I think that with the amount of scouting coverage available these days, that it's not that difficult to put together a reasonable draft board. Anyway, if there is a weak point in my stance, it is that I don't know as much about the guys in the lower rounds, and undrafted guys.

 

There are many draft sites that have knowledgeable scouts contributing.

Edited March 24, 2012 by Matthews' Bag

[truth on hold]

This guy could have made better draft picks.

http://i368.photobucket.com/albums/oo123/jg1010monk/chimpdart.jpg

[Lurker]

There are many draft sites that have knowledgeable scouts contributing.

You mean like this guy?.

 

He all but claims to walk on water, yet his Bills pick is a real hoot...

[hondo in seattle]

That may be true. It is not a given.

There is no reason a professional scout cannot post on this site. Just sayin'.

 

Matt Millen was paid to be a GM. In fact, he was the highest paid GM in the NFL.

 

 

Anyway, what were the criteria for evaluation of the "bet" angle? If Matt's Bag says that he'd have selected some set of players and Buddy selected some other set -- we'll have unimpeachable evidence as to whether Buddy "got it right" but the choices Matt's Bag makes would be totally uncertain ... assuming they are not drafted by the exact same team other than the Bills. Anyway, just curious... interesting thread by the way.

 

Professional scouts here? It may be true. We have professional sports journalists posting here from time to time. I suspect players/ex-players visit TBD occasionally. Why couldn't a scout post?

 

Matt Millen? I mentioned him earlier and you are right. Most GMs and scouts know more than the average fan. Not sure about Matt.

 

Here would be a good test of a fan's ability to draft... During the draft, when ever the Bills have a pick, we could make our own pick. Then evaluate our picks in 3 years.

 

"Sisyphean Bills" is a great nickname by the way, an accurate if depressing one.

[Malazan]

It's amazing how many people think they could draft better than Nix when they don't even know when Nix joined the organization.

[spartacus]

Troup over Gronk was awful, but only revisionist history says Gronk would be the player he is now. I'm pretty sure he failed a bunch of physicals given by other teams. But yea, i'm still pissed about that too.

 

Why are you leaving out the 2011 draft in your assessment? The first 4 picks might all be starters as sophomores. that's !@#$ing good.

 

Your point about Jauron's last draft sucks. He took Maybin. That in itself is unforgivable.

 

Last edit: Whitner was a f-up, big time. Our DT starters in 2005 were Tim Anderson, Justin Bannan, and Sam Adams. How we didn't take Ngata is beyond me.

 

Jauron may have made the selection, but Buddy blessed Maybin as the pick

 

 

He was brought in specifically for his draft expertise and to think Buddy was totally ignored on the MAybin is simply ignorant

 

 

[Geno Smith's Arm]

I don't think I'm making an outrageous claim, and as I said, I think there are more than a few other posters here that could, given some time to prepare, put together a good draft board. The real point is I think most teams have pretty similar draft boards, particularly in the higher rounds.

 

I'm not claiming to have some kind of advanced football mind. Being a GM, and building a team involves so many other decisions. I think people are underestimating the importance of the other aspects of GMing and developing the culture of the team (like coaching, the role of the owner, how much money, where to spend the money, etc,...so many things to consider), and just focusing on the draft. Probably because it is public event, easy for the fans to relate to and observe, and the draft results are usually easy to evaluate, after some time.

Edited March 24, 2012 by Matthews' Bag