Luke Kuechly discussion

[loserlovers]

i would love to trade back to 14 as long as we wait until our pick at 10 and make sure no one slipped trough from the top 6-7 guys

[Buffalo Barbarian]

You didn't see the 17 page thread on Kuechly?

[jjmac]

The Bills have solidifed their D-line, but are desperate for a 3 down LB to play in their new 4-3 defense along with fellow LBs Barnett, Sheppard, Morrison, and Moats. Keuchly could start ahead of Morrison as an OLB along with Sheppard and Barnett. Keuchly's versatility and productivity at a position of great need gives the Bills the most bang for the buck.

 

The only question is, do the Bills take Keuchly at #10 overall or do they roll the dice and trade back a few spaces to pick up more picks and THEN take Keuchly??

 

The Bills won't take an OT at #10 overall because the value is not there at that spot, but Keuchly has good value at #10 and even better value at, say, #14 overall. There is a big dropoff at LB after Keuchly so the Bills would be wise to take him when they can.

 

Some think that S M. Barron will be the pick at #10, but the Bills don't need a SS with G. Wilson on the roster. Wilson is viewed as as one of the top two or three safeties in the league so why would the Bills use their #10 pick on him when they have a glaring need at LB. Instead, expect the Bills to use Barron as bait to obtain more picks from teams bidding to obtain his services and then use their pick to draft the versatile Keuchly.

 

I'd like to see a trade back with Dallas for their R1 (#14), R2, and R5 picks. The Cowboys would trade up to Barron, whom they covet very much. The Bills would get LB Keuchly (an instant starter) along with R2 and R5 picks. That would give the Bills the following 12 picks in the 2012 Draft and NINE picks in the first five rounds: R1 (LB Keuchly), R2a, R2b, R3, R4a, R4b, R5a, R5b, R5c, R6, R7a, R7b.

 

You're not concerned some other team would take him first?

[ChanOverChin]

I think the Bills can get Keuchly at #10. If they trade out of that spot I think they would be taking a calculated risk.

 

the Cowboys are known to covet S M. Barron who is quickly rising up draft boards because he's believed to be a dominant SS and the talent at S drops off sharply after he gets drafted. Thus, teams in need of a difference-maler at S are likely to overpay to get him.

 

I think Barron will be a top 10-12 pick. A team from the back of the line (i.e. not in the top 12) will likely trade up to get him.

 

there appear to be two players that teams are willing to trade up to get: QB Tannehil and S Barron. Bills fans should pray that these two guys last until the #10 pick because there will definitely be teams offering to trade up to obtain these guys.

 

because Tannehil is a QB, I don't think that he'll get past the #8 spot, but barron could make it to #10 and that would put the Bills in an enviable position.

[You herd it hear last]

But everyone will be disappointed when they figure out how to pronounce his name...

[Tcali]

But everyone will be disappointed when they figure out how to pronounce his name...

pronounce it quickly--whatever you do

[San Jose Bills Fan]

… I'd like to see a trade back with Dallas for their R1 (#14), R2, and R5 picks. The Cowboys would trade up to Barron, whom they covet very much. The Bills would get LB Keuchly (an instant starter) along with R2 and R5 picks. That would give the Bills the following 12 picks in the 2012 Draft and NINE picks in the first five rounds: R1 (LB Keuchly), R2a, R2b, R3, R4a, R4b, R5a, R5b, R5c, R6, R7a, R7b.

Good post.

 

BTW, there is a case where you can have too many draft picks and your scenario above is one of them. You can only bring along so many young players and you have to maintain a good balance of rookies, 2nd year guys, and veterans. When the Cheatriots* traded their way into an over-abundance of draft picks, they reversed the process and traded some away for future years.

 

You don't want to be able to draft 12 players only to cut 5.

 

You're better balancing out a good number every year… maybe never fewer than 7 but no more than 10, depending on the state of your team.

 

Remember, some day soon (hopefully) the Bills first rounder will not automatically be expected to start.

 

i would love to trade back to 14 as long as we wait until our pick at 10 and make sure no one slipped trough from the top 6-7 guys

They wouldn't make a trade until they are on the clock.

 

 

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Good post.

 

BTW, there is a case where you can have too many draft picks and your scenario above is one of them. You can only bring along so many young players and you have to maintain a good balance of rookies, 2nd year guys, and veterans. When the Cheatriots* traded their way into an over-abundance of draft picks, they reversed the process and traded some away for future years.

 

You don't want to be able to draft 12 players only to cut 5.

 

You're better balancing out a good number every year… maybe never fewer than 7 but no more than 10, depending on the state of your team.

 

Trading back and trading up with latter picks would go a long way toward bringing Quality players in here, not a bunch of bodies.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

"On a recent conference call, Mayock said, “Kuechly to me is one of the 10 best players in this draft. The intriguing thing about Luke Kuechly is historically inside linebackers are not valued, mostly because they get replaced in sub packages and nickel packages. Kuechly is the opposite. Kuechly’s strength lies in the pass game. He’s the best pass-dropping linebacker from the inside I’ve ever seen coming out of college football.”

 

 

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20120422/SPORTS03/304210035/twobillsdrive

[RTW2012]

Kuechly- pronounced "KEEK-lee"

[BillsWatch]

Anymore, the 1st round LB success stories play in a 3-4, not in a 4-3, and many play outside (pass rush specialists),... high motor 4-3 LBs are a dime-a-dozen, burning the #10 pick on one just doesn't make sense. Now maybe Kuechly ends up being an exception to the rule like Urlacher, but I don't think it is worth the risk, let some other team go for it & congrats to them if he makes it big.

 

Difference appears that Kuechly does not appear to be a liability in coverage / passing downs; I do not know if it will be enough to get him taken in top 10.

[bluenews]

Keel lee = Fletch ER

 

 

Another downfield tacking machine!

[stony]

Keel lee = Fletch ER

 

 

Another downfield tacking machine!

 

It's funny, because Fletcher is doing the same thing he did here for Washington to widespread accolades. You can knock him for not being Patrick Willis, but he was a solid player for us that gets a bad rap when he played on some BAD team defenses. Sometimes it takes a player to leave to really appreciate what he did.

 

I'm real excited to see what our LBs can do with our new DL. He's not my 1st choice, but Keuchly would be a starter day one with the Bills and might even excel with the studs he's got in front of him.

[sllib olaffub]

Good post.

 

BTW, there is a case where you can have too many draft picks and your scenario above is one of them. You can only bring along so many young players and you have to maintain a good balance of rookies, 2nd year guys, and veterans. When the Cheatriots* traded their way into an over-abundance of draft picks, they reversed the process and traded some away for future years.

 

You don't want to be able to draft 12 players only to cut 5.

 

You're better balancing out a good number every year… maybe never fewer than 7 but no more than 10, depending on the state of your team.

 

Remember, some day soon (hopefully) the Bills first rounder will not automatically be expected to start.

 

 

They wouldn't make a trade until they are on the clock.

Excellent point! It is true - and not often considered. It really puts pressure on the F.O. to make the right moves for the right players, and not end up being a few picks too late every round. I looked at the top 100 players, as ranked by profootballweekly, and isolated the players the Bills would be interested in - and of the top 100, surprisingly, I'd say 65 - 70 percent of the players they'd likely want to pick, and who would have a chance to start, were slated between 20-60. It ends up meaning that the guys Buffalo is likely to want are going to be going AFTER their first pick, yet BEFORE their 3rd pick.

 

Now, of course that holds loosely true about a lot of teams, but, considering Buffalo's particular needs, if would benefit them greatly to increase the number of picks they have in the lower 1st, 2nd rounds, and upper part of the 3rd round. I think that is where they'll maximize their value at.

 

I'm really looking forward to seeing how the Bills go about this draft. They stand to really put themselves in position to compete with the good teams, with the right picks, or, if they draft poorly, fall behind yet again.

[Doc]

I can see Kuechly being the pick. Looking at the starting LB corps, MLB is set with Sheppard and WLB is set with Barnett. Morrison is pencilled-in as the SLB, but he's only played MLB in his time in the NFL. I don't know how he'll fare at SLB, so drafting Kuechly would make sense.

 

I don't see a LT that can start over Hairston outside of Kalil, or even a CB that can start over McKelvin, McGee, Williams, or Rogers. And this is a deep draft for WR's and they can get a #2 in round 2.

[billsfan89]

My concern with David is his size, we have safeties that are his size. Most scouts believe he's reached his max. that said, he's very talented and wouldn't be sad if he ends up in buffalo.

 

Since when did 6 foot 3 243 become small for a 4-3 LB? 240 is considered average size for a 4-3 OLB. Yes in a 3-4 you might want guys in the 250-260 range esp for a MLB. But for a 4-3 you don't need a guy to be huge. Hell Patrick Wills is only 6 foot 1 240 when he came out and he is still playing around that weight.

[KOKBILLS]

Some Scouting Reports are better than others on Kuechly...I know Mayock loves the Kid...But Mayock went to BC...Then I read some of PFW's Report on him...Makes me wonder if you can really go wrong with this Kid...I know the perception about him being a high-motor, 10 yards downfield tackling machine...But good greif some Scouts RAVE about Kuechly...

 

A couple quotes fro the PFW Report...

 

"Exceptional football character and makeup — smart, hardworking and has a passion for the game. Lives, breathes and sleeps football. Was described as the type of guy executives would want their daughter to marry during the interview process and as one of the best interviews in the past decade."

 

 

"One of the safest picks in this year’s draft, the Butkus Award winner is capable of playing any LB position and will anchor a defense for the next 12 years and become a perennial Pro Bowl player. Compares very favorably to Vikings 2006 18th overall pick Chad Greenway, but lack of arm length should keep him inside in a finesse 40 front in the pros. A can’t-miss selection who will challenge the NFL’s all-time tackle records."

 

PFW On Kuechly

[PaattMaann]

Since when did 6 foot 3 243 become small for a 4-3 LB? 240 is considered average size for a 4-3 OLB. Yes in a 3-4 you might want guys in the 250-260 range esp for a MLB. But for a 4-3 you don't need a guy to be huge. Hell Patrick Wills is only 6 foot 1 240 when he came out and he is still playing around that weight.

 

david is NOT 6'3 and 243, unless he grew 2 inches and put on 25 pounds since the football season ended...but thats a helluva growth spurt for a 21 year old man

[BrooklynBills]

The Bills have solidifed their D-line, but are desperate for a 3 down LB to play in their new 4-3 defense along with fellow LBs Barnett, Sheppard, Morrison, and Moats. Keuchly could start ahead of Morrison as an OLB along with Sheppard and Barnett. Keuchly's versatility and productivity at a position of great need gives the Bills the most bang for the buck.

 

The only question is, do the Bills take Keuchly at #10 overall or do they roll the dice and trade back a few spaces to pick up more picks and THEN take Keuchly??

 

The Bills won't take an OT at #10 overall because the value is not there at that spot, but Keuchly has good value at #10 and even better value at, say, #14 overall. There is a big dropoff at LB after Keuchly so the Bills would be wise to take him when they can.

 

Some think that S M. Barron will be the pick at #10, but the Bills don't need a SS with G. Wilson on the roster. Wilson is viewed as as one of the top two or three safeties in the league so why would the Bills use their #10 pick on him when they have a glaring need at LB. Instead, expect the Bills to use Barron as bait to obtain more picks from teams bidding to obtain his services and then use their pick to draft the versatile Keuchly.

 

I'd like to see a trade back with Dallas for their R1 (#14), R2, and R5 picks. The Cowboys would trade up to Barron, whom they covet very much. The Bills would get LB Keuchly (an instant starter) along with R2 and R5 picks. That would give the Bills the following 12 picks in the 2012 Draft and NINE picks in the first five rounds: R1 (LB Keuchly), R2a, R2b, R3, R4a, R4b, R5a, R5b, R5c, R6, R7a, R7b.

 

I'm sorry, what? Top 2 or 3 safety in the league? Really? He played well, but the defense still gave up tons of plays up the middle of the field. He is a good player, but he will not be factor in whether or not we draft a safety at #10.

 

Despite the fact that I like Mark Barron and like the idea of taking him at 10, I do like your trade down scenario but don't think the Cowboys are going to give up a 2nd rounder to move up 4 spots. If that offer was on the table though, I think the Bills take it.

[Dragonborn10]

Making plays against Notre Dame and Miami are not the same as in the NFL