NoSaint Posted April 12, 2012 Posted April 12, 2012 It doesn't change my mind as I was already convinced. The only problem is that he is listed at MLB. Wansted has already said that Sheppard is his guy at that spot. That being said I don't have much doubt Keuchly could play OLB with all of his speed and skill. Some have mentioned that we play nickel defense quite a bit but with a guy like this we might be able to stay in our base defense as he can cover TEs and defend the run. If we stay in our base defense more Keuchly might be able to cover the likes of Gronkowski and Hernandez considering our expected much improved pass rush. If we get him I assume he going to play OLB because Wanny likes Sheppard. WR, LT and "possibly" CB are just as big needs but we likely have a plethora of 3-4 LBs that might not fit in the new 4-3 scheme. As Nix said we need LBs and more than one. I think people hang in the shepherd comment to tightly. Yes, he was penciled to be the starter in feb. I don't think that's a depth chart written in ink and laminated though. He'd be ok starting, but not impossible to upgrade
Pete Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Keuchly or Gilmore I currently would like to see us draft if we stay at 10. Either would start from game 1 and be an immediate upgrade. And both would improve our defensive makeover much so
Reed83HOF Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 I think people hang in the shepherd comment to tightly. Yes, he was penciled to be the starter in feb. I don't think that's a depth chart written in ink and laminated though. He'd be ok starting, but not impossible to upgrade Sheppard was considered to be a hidden gem in the draft. If you look at his strengths and weakness from last years draft, you will see that he is a stop the run LB, who can go sideline to sideline with the power to drive through his tackles...All of his weakness had to do with the pass rush and being able to shed OLmen... First round LBs are very overrated in today's game. For every Patrick Willis there are countless AJ Hawk's, Aaron Curry's etc...
Spillered The Beans Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 I hope you're not serious. In my opinion, Kuechly would not be a reach if the Bills picked him at #10. The question is....where would he play on our defense? Barnett and Sheppard, by all accounts, seem to be firmly entrenched at the Will and Mike LB positions. They just re-signed Morrison, and it has been stated that he is the front runner to start at the Sam LB position. I would be disappointed if we drafted a player at #10, and he was not starting week 1. That's why I think WR or LT makes more sense in the 1st round. I don't know that Sheppard is entrenched as a starter
truth on hold Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Actually the tape reinforces the suspicion he will be too small, too slow and not be able to shed nfl blocks
Sniper Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 He is the top of our draft board for sure!! http://bit.ly/HPMVNC
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 These feel good stories you could write about any player in the draft. "Captain Hindsight never worked hard enough in school but in hindsight he says "I should have studied more"" Draft this guy! hes learned from his mistakes! I sure do prefer him to Ingram who was THE darling here a few weeks ago. I still prefer Ingram. Ingram is gonna be a wrecking ball, something Kuechly will never be. I think I still prefer David, too. I like Kuechly. I just think 10 is too high for him.
NoSaint Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Sheppard was considered to be a hidden gem in the draft. If you look at his strengths and weakness from last years draft, you will see that he is a stop the run LB, who can go sideline to sideline with the power to drive through his tackles...All of his weakness had to do with the pass rush and being able to shed OLmen... First round LBs are very overrated in today's game. For every Patrick Willis there are countless AJ Hawk's, Aaron Curry's etc... I'm not arguing sheps bad, im saying you take bpa and shep isn't a guy that stops that. Neither are Barnett or Morrison. I'm not even saying LK is bpa. Simply that those 3 should not exclude anyone from our draft board.
Andrew in CA Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Not really. Care more about whether he can cover Tight Ends and Running Backs. It's a passing league. Rather have a guy like David from Nebraska than a tackling machine like Kuechly. I agree with this: we should be drafting LBs that can cover Gronkowski, Hernandez, and Bush in passing situations. Now, I don't know if that's part of Kuechly's skill set, but if it is, then he's definitely worth #10. If not, then I'd pass.
34-78-83 Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 If Glenn's talent isn't coachable, why would we want him? The last thing we need is a renegade LT. Sorry that came out wrong... I meant talent that you cannot simply coach "into" a player.
Reed83HOF Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 I'm not arguing sheps bad, im saying you take bpa and shep isn't a guy that stops that. Neither are Barnett or Morrison. I'm not even saying LK is bpa. Simply that those 3 should not exclude anyone from our draft board. I wasn't trying to make it sound like I was arguing or being a dick lots of people count Shep out. Just saying don't underestimate him, I look forward to seeing where our D is with a pass rush. We will know after this season who needs to be upgraded... I would say no position is untouchable (except G - I just don't see great value in picking a G at 10), even RB (only if Richardson fell). I would hate it but understand
Wagon Circler Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Buffalo had Nick Barnett, 6'2", 228 lbs at wlb last year. Barnett is plus 30 and was released by GB because of frequent injuries. We were lucky to have had his services for all of last year. Can we count on having that luck this coming season? Buddy said we need linebackers and more than one. Kuechly is the best cover corner in the draft and led the nation last year in tackles. Why not select Kuechly at #10 and David at #41? Suddenly Buffalo's D become very Brady unfriendly. I'm convinced. Tackling machine- I like the sound of that. We need a stud middle linebacker. Haven't had one since Sam Cowart. Chris White comparison is unfair, especially since he hasn't had a chance to show what he can do.
ajzepp Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Wow, that sports science piece on him was pretty impressive. I was sold at, "hits with more force than Dwight Freeney"
eball Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Sorry that came out wrong... I meant talent that you cannot simply coach "into" a player. I know. It's my job to be a sarcastic ass.
roccitybillsfan Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 i would be estatic if we got him, i want an impact guy, he fits the bill.. i remember all the negatives said about clay matthews, i say if he is there, TAKE HIM! LBs typically don't fit the bill at #10. I would be surprised if he was the pick unless they strongly feel he is a Urlacher/Willis/Lewis type impact.....
Brainiac72 Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 no, LB's just aren't commonly difference makers in a pass dominated league, especially at the only open spot the Bills have... Strong side. that position is markedly devalued these days and not worth a top 10 pick at all. So in order for Kuechly to be worth it, he'd have to take either Barnett's spot (who played really well and is one of the better cover LB's in the league) or Sheppard (who i think the Bills really like and seems to have the tools). i know Barnett is aging, but he's still here now. Replacing either of them is just not as big of an updgrade as getting a LT or WR, "BPA" or no. BPA is largely a myth... when teams have needs they will find a reason to draft for one of them. even if LB is a need, it's a minor one relative to other things. the Bills are not drafting someone at 10 that is not going to make a difference immediately at a key position. he's a better fit, and maybe worth a high pick, for a team with a gaping hole at WLB or MLB, but I don't see him being worth it to the Bills for what they have already.
Billsrhody Posted April 13, 2012 Author Posted April 13, 2012 First round LBs are very overrated in today's game. For every Patrick Willis there are countless AJ Hawk's, Aaron Curry's etc... Not to harp but I really dont understand how you can use this argument.. you can say the same thing about almost every other position. QB: For every Peyton Manning, Ryan Leaf RB: For every Adrian Peterson, Cadillac Williams WR: For every Calvin Johnson, Mike Williams TE: For every Vernon Davis, Kellen Winslow OT: For every Jake Long, you know who OG: Dont feel like doing the research C: Same thing DT: Ndamukong Suh, Glenn Dorsey DE: Mario Williams, Vernon Gholston LB: You covered that CB: Darrel Revis, Pacman Jones S: Eric Berry, Laron Landry K: Sebastian Janikowski, the exception to the rule? P: Shane Lechler, ditto? Lets stop using the argument that "he could be a mediocre player". Its no more of a risk than any other position except for maybe G, C, K, P.
thebandit27 Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Unless we're drafting him to be an immediate replacement for Sheppard, which I think would be premature, I don't like the idea at all. I know it's been discussed before, but this team spent 60% of its defensive plays with 5 or more DBs and 2 or fewer LBs on the field in 2011. Why draft a guy that's only going to play 40% of the time? Unless, of course, they aren't comfortable with Sheppard, which I don't think is the case. No, this team can get a weakside LB to play 20 snaps per game in the 4th round. Spend the #10 overall pick on a guy that's going to play 70 plays/game.
BrooklynBills Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Unless we're drafting him to be an immediate replacement for Sheppard, which I think would be premature, I don't like the idea at all. I know it's been discussed before, but this team spent 60% of its defensive plays with 5 or more DBs and 2 or fewer LBs on the field in 2011. Why draft a guy that's only going to play 40% of the time? Unless, of course, they aren't comfortable with Sheppard, which I don't think is the case. No, this team can get a weakside LB to play 20 snaps per game in the 4th round. Spend the #10 overall pick on a guy that's going to play 70 plays/game. This is the exact line of thinking that got us into trouble for the years when donahoe and levy were running the drafts. Take lesser value prospects to fill immediate needs. Kuechly can play all three LB positions, would step into SLB spot from day one and would be our best cover LB. Would not come off the field on third downs as many are suggesting. He is compared to Urlacher in terms of coverage abiltiy. You want a guy to cover TEs, this is it. Franchise type LB. Tough, smart, leader. Pretty much everything we complain about the Bills not having on defense by about the middle of the season. This team has not had a dynamic player at the LB position since Takeo Spikes. There are prospects like Glenn or Reiff every year and possibly similar talents could be found later in this draft at OT. Glenn and reiff are not surefire LTs by any means. if they were we would be worried that would be gone by the 10th pick and not deciding which one we should take. We are not in a position to pass surefire players to fill needs.
Recommended Posts