Luke Kuechly discussion

[thebandit27]

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.

 

#1, there's no such thing as a "surefire player"...not Keuchly, not Luck, not Griffen, not anyone, so toss that idea out the window. Everything you stated about Keuchly as a LB was said about guys like A.J. Hawk, Aaron Curry, Rolando McClain, and Keith Rivers too. Nobody is a sure thing.

 

#2, I think you've missed my point. It's not about filling needs, it's about getting value. If Keuchly is far and away the best player on the board, which I don't believe at all, then fine, take him. However, as I said, I don't believe he is, and so it doesn't make sense to me to take him at 10 and then relegate him to playing 40% of your defensive snaps if he doesn't win the starting MLB job over Sheppard.

 

#3, suppose the team "reaches" to fill a need and takes a guy like Glenn or Martin. If that guy becomes your starting LT for the next 5 years, who cares if he was perceived as a "reach" at the time? All that matters is how the guy performs.

[richNjoisy]

Poz clone- PASS!

 

 

I don't see how he can be a Poz clone - this guy CAN cover people. Poz was simply AWFUL

[Billsrhody]

http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/09000d5d8283fb80/article/quinton-coples-has-high-bust-potential-mike-mayock-says?module=HP11_hot_topics

 

First couple minutes features Mayock on Kuechly if anyone is interested.

[TC in St. Louis]

I would draft him. He's a beast who can cover, and does not miss tackles. He will be dominant for years to come. Imagine having a DL with 3 Pro Bowlers, a Pro Bowl ML, and who knows? Aaron Williams might turn out to be a star too!!

[BuffaloATL]

It seems like a lot of posters think it would be a mistake for Buffalo to draft Kuechly at #10. There's a good article on Espn right now about the linebacker so see if this changes your mind?

 

Kuechly

 

Are you convinced?

 

You can convince me of a few different options at the #10 spot, but I realy like the idea of adding an LB like Kuechly because IF he ends up being the next Urlacher-type LB then our DEF can be scary good for a long time. Like others, I'm not comfortable with our LB core, both in the short and long term. Love to have a guy step in and have a long career behind that nasty D-line.

[BrooklynBills]

#1, there's no such thing as a "surefire player"...not Keuchly, not Luck, not Griffen, not anyone, so toss that idea out the window. Everything you stated about Keuchly as a LB was said about guys like A.J. Hawk, Aaron Curry, Rolando McClain, and Keith Rivers too. Nobody is a sure thing.

 

#2, I think you've missed my point. It's not about filling needs, it's about getting value. If Keuchly is far and away the best player on the board, which I don't believe at all, then fine, take him. However, as I said, I don't believe he is, and so it doesn't make sense to me to take him at 10 and then relegate him to playing 40% of your defensive snaps if he doesn't win the starting MLB job over Sheppard.

 

#3, suppose the team "reaches" to fill a need and takes a guy like Glenn or Martin. If that guy becomes your starting LT for the next 5 years, who cares if he was perceived as a "reach" at the time? All that matters is how the guy performs.

 

I see your point. Sure fire player is probably an exaggeration on my part.

 

I just don't view reiff or Glenn as top ten talents. I don't want a 5 year starter with the 10th overall pick. I want a potential pro bowl player at their position.

 

The LBs you mentioned have underachieved. But Patrick Willis and Brian Cushing have been great players.

 

Also, I could mention the names of Jason smith, Levi brown, Braden Albert, Robert gallery, mike Williams, etc.

 

But you are right, it really comes down to how these guys are stacked up on the bills board, which positions do not factor into.

[Rico]

Poz clone- PASS!

They are both high motor...maybe the Jags take him at #7.

[thebandit27]

I see your point. Sure fire player is probably an exaggeration on my part.

 

I just don't view reiff or Glenn as top ten talents. I don't want a 5 year starter with the 10th overall pick. I want a potential pro bowl player at their position.

 

The LBs you mentioned have underachieved. But Patrick Willis and Brian Cushing have been great players.

 

Also, I could mention the names of Jason smith, Levi brown, Braden Albert, Robert gallery, mike Williams, etc.

But you are right, it really comes down to how these guys are stacked up on the bills board, which positions do not factor into.

 

Indeed, the bust factor is in play regardless of what position they draft. I just feel that a big-play WR, starting CB, or starting OT will be a better investment long-term than a LB.

[RyanC883]

The way I see it, the Bills need a WR, LB, and OT. I think everyone agrees on that. Ideally, they leave the draft with an impact, day 1 starter at each position. They should take the player at 10 who they think can fit one of those roles, also taking into account who is left on the draft board. I don't think any day one OT will remain. Therefore, I would take Kuechly or Irving. I think the WR talent pool is deep enough to provide a day one starter in Round 2 (Randel) or 3, and the OT talent you would get at 10 will be substantially similar to that available in the 2nd or 3rd. (Dartko, Fl. State).

[Billsrhody]

Lets assume Kuechly, Floyd and Martin all turn out to be great picks and have fantastic NFL careers. For sake of argument, pick one:

 

Patrick Willis

Larry Fitzgerald

Jake Long

 

Who would you pick and why? I'll take Patrick Willis because I don't think you need to have a stud wideout to win a superbowl. If you have a good enough quarterback then he'll make your WRs better. Having a Jake Long type would be great I have to admit. Taking a stud LT is hard to pass up, but I like having a leader on defense who can make all the plays.

[thebandit27]

Lets assume Kuechly, Floyd and Martin all turn out to be great picks and have fantastic NFL careers. For sake of argument, pick one:

 

Patrick Willis

Larry Fitzgerald

Jake Long

 

Who would you pick and why? I'll take Patrick Willis because I don't think you need to have a stud wideout to win a superbowl. If you have a good enough quarterback then he'll make your WRs better. Having a Jake Long type would be great I have to admit. Taking a stud LT is hard to pass up, but I like having a leader on defense who can make all the plays.

 

Great question, one that probably deserves it's own thread (to avoid any threadjacking since I think it'll provoke some long and well-thought-out discussion).

 

For this team, right now, I'd take Long. I just think that, of the 3 positions, none raises the level of play of the entire team more than a stud LT. It improves the running game, gives your QB more time, which gives your WRs more opportunity to get open, etc. I also think that a team's LBs will benefit from solid DL play, which we should have this year.

[NoSaint]

Lets assume Kuechly, Floyd and Martin all turn out to be great picks and have fantastic NFL careers. For sake of argument, pick one:

 

Patrick Willis

Larry Fitzgerald

Jake Long

 

Who would you pick and why? I'll take Patrick Willis because I don't think you need to have a stud wideout to win a superbowl. If you have a good enough quarterback then he'll make your WRs better. Having a Jake Long type would be great I have to admit. Taking a stud LT is hard to pass up, but I like having a leader on defense who can make all the plays.

 

Certainly not trying to bash but nfl GMs seem to overwhelmingly disagree in how they prioritize in the top ten. I'm not saying don't take him but at the intersection of impact vs scarcity it seems to run LT WR LB in most war rooms.

[Shoutbox]

The bottom line is that a lot of people posting in this thread are idiots and deserve to be called out for their idiocy. I, Mark Miller, at least have an IQ in the triple digits and so will help clarify a few things for those who occupy the lower half of the bell curve:

 

1. Kuechly would play Sam LB in The Stache's 4-3 defense. He would also play all 3 downs. Sheppard would remain at MLB.

 

2. Not all white linebackers are the same. Beneath the pasty white skin of Kuechly and Chris White and Poz are three completely different people with different skill sets.

 

3. Linebackers are important to a defense. NFL teams typically like to complete their roster with defensive players that play positions beside pass-rushing DE and CB.

 

4. The NFL draft normally consists of more than 32 overall picks. The Bills will, in fact, have 9 more opportunities to draft offensive tackles and wide receivers this year.

[Astrobot]

WR and LT and even CB are much higher need than MLB. Need to add a couple of LB's later in the draft but not at #10. Would rather have Decastro if going to go with BPA at #10 if people feel the LT's are reaches at #10.

http://www.drafttek.com/CMDRound1.asp

Read my comment under the Bills pick.

[thebandit27]

The bottom line is that a lot of people posting in this thread are idiots and deserve to be called out for their idiocy. I, Mark Miller, at least have an IQ in the triple digits and so will help clarify a few things for those who occupy the lower half of the bell curve:

 

1. Kuechly would play Sam LB in The Stache's 4-3 defense. He would also play all 3 downs. Sheppard would remain at MLB.

 

2. Not all white linebackers are the same. Beneath the pasty white skin of Kuechly and Chris White and Poz are three completely different people with different skill sets.

 

3. Linebackers are important to a defense. NFL teams typically like to complete their roster with defensive players that play positions beside pass-rushing DE and CB.

 

4. The NFL draft normally consists of more than 32 overall picks. The Bills will, in fact, have 9 more opportunities to draft offensive tackles and wide receivers this year.

 

Thanks for your all-knowing wisdom, Mark.

 

I actually don't think there are any idiots posting in this thread, just folks with opinions that differ from yours. There's a big difference, and not knowing that makes you ignorrant (not stupid, mind you, just ignorrant).

 

Now that we've cleared that up, allow me to respond:

 

1. Yes, Keuchly would play OLB. However, he'd probably play the weakside, since Barnett primarily played the strong side when he played OLB at Oregon State. My point regarding taking a LB that early was simply that the Bills already have 2 LBs that can play 3 downs, and don't need to spend a top 10 pick on a position that would relegate one of those 2 guys to playing 20 snaps per game when there are bigger needs that can be filled with players of equal (or greater) value to Keuchly.

 

2. I'm pretty sure most of us knew that already.

 

3. File this one under "Stuff Most of Us Already Knew" as well. See my response to #1 for an in-depth response to why I don't feel LB is the right pick at #10.

 

4. The NFL draft normally consists of more than 32 overall picks. The Bills will, in fact, have 9 more opportunities to draft outside linebackers this year.

 

p.s. Stash the IQ talk for your own sake. You have know idea who posts on these boards and have know way of telling if you're talking to a mouth-breathing neanderthal or a Yale MBA.

[eball]

Thanks for your all-knowing wisdom, Mark.

 

I actually don't think there are any idiots posting in this thread, just folks with opinions that differ from yours. There's a big difference, and not knowing that makes you ignorrant (not stupid, mind you, just ignorrant).

 

Now that we've cleared that up, allow me to respond:

 

1. Yes, Keuchly would play OLB. However, he'd probably play the weakside, since Barnett primarily played the strong side when he played OLB at Oregon State. My point regarding taking a LB that early was simply that the Bills already have 2 LBs that can play 3 downs, and don't need to spend a top 10 pick on a position that would relegate one of those 2 guys to playing 20 snaps per game when there are bigger needs that can be filled with players of equal (or greater) value to Keuchly.

 

2. I'm pretty sure most of us knew that already.

 

3. File this one under "Stuff Most of Us Already Knew" as well. See my response to #1 for an in-depth response to why I don't feel LB is the right pick at #10.

 

4. The NFL draft normally consists of more than 32 overall picks. The Bills will, in fact, have 9 more opportunities to draft outside linebackers this year.

 

p.s. Stash the IQ talk for your own sake. You have know idea who posts on these boards and have know way of telling if you're talking to a mouth-breathing neanderthal or a Yale MBA.

Whether intentional or otherwise, that's brilliant.

 

You're incorrect on at least one front, however. While I also value opinions of others that may differ from my own, there most certainly ARE idiots posting in this thread.

Edited April 13, 2012 by eball

[thebandit27]

Whether intentional or otherwise, that's brilliant.

 

You're incorrect on at least one front, however. While I also value opinions of others that may differ from my own, there most certainly ARE idiots posting in this thread.

 

I'll never tell...

[Dat Dude]

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.

[roccitybillsfan]

Not convinced. From what i've seen of him, he is not a #10 guy. While he is not Poz and has a different skill set, Poz did make a ton of tackles, but not before the guy was 3-4 yds down the field. That what his tape reminded me of(not because he's white) and what many bills fans would be complaining about 2 years down the road. I want a nasty SOB who can intimidate offenses and make plays behind the LOS.

 

Typically LBs make an impact on the team much quicker than a WR would, however, I think it all depends on what your working with. Floyd knows the entire route tree, has played in a spread offense and Pro style offense, in which he has been a BEAST in each of them and is known to be a good blocker. You never know if he will be a bust, but i'd be truly surprised if he was.

 

In regards to the question of taking Willis, Fitzgerald or Jake Long, it really comes down to what that team needs to take that next step. With the Bills needing all three it's a really tough position. Reality is that I don't believe that Keuchly is gonna be like Willis, I doubt Reif/Glenn/Martin will be Jake Long and I doubt Floyd will be Fitz, however I do think that Floyd will be a star in this league and will help take our offense to the next level.

 

Our Defense is already at least intimidating(possible sick) and can use a few more pieces, but let's use our #10 pick to take someone who immediately gives our offense some spark too! Get ur LT and LB later!

 

By the way, if Floyd is gone, I am still looking at Gilmore, Ingram and Kirkpatrick before Keuchy.

[Orton's Arm]

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.

I disagree: his line of thinking is the opposite of what had gotten the Bills into trouble during the TD and Levy eras!

 

Some positions are more important than others.

 

Tier 1: QB

 

Tier 2: LT, RDE, CB

 

Tier 3: RT, C, WR, DT

 

Tier 3.5: S, pass catching TE

 

Tier 4: RB, non-pass rushing LB, OG

 

A RB can bump his way up to tier 3 if he becomes a good receiver out of the backfield, like Thurman Thomas or Marshall Faulk. But a guy like Travis Henry or Marshawn Lynch is definitely tier 4!

 

Good GMs tend to be biased in favor of higher tier positions, especially early in the draft. They realize that a franchise QB is far more valuable than a non-pass-rushing LB, and that a franchise LT is worth a lot more than a franchise OG.

 

The above-described tier system is largely about long term value. Long term value was not necessarily the primary focus of Marv and TD. Their willingness to spend a king's ransom on upgrading the running back position--and to thereby obtain a "quick impact"--is an excellent example of their short term thinking. But over the long run, a successful tier 1 or tier 2 player will still be a lot more valuable than a successful tier 4 player. Someone who takes the long view will tend to give more weight to the tier system than someone who does not.

 

With Marv, and also with TD, the emphasis on draft day was generally on the quick fix. Marv's 2006 draft was an excellent example of this. He went into the draft determined to come away with a DT and an SS with his first two picks; on the theory that those two players could improve the defense right away. He ignored better players at more valuable positions in order to be able to achieve that. The 8th overall pick could have been used on Cutler; a QB who was later traded away for two first round picks + Kyle Orton. That's two more first round picks, and one more Kyle Orton, than the Bills received for Whitner's departure. The McCargo pick could, and should, have been used on Mangold; who many now feel is the best center in the league.

 

You might argue that a LB who can cover good pass catching TEs is at least a tier 3.5, if not a tier 3. However, putting just about any LB one-on-one against a good pass catching TE is generally considered a mismatch. If you're Tom Brady, and if before the snap you see Kuechley one-on-one against Gronkowski, do you think, Ooh wow. No way that guy is getting open! I'd better throw to someone else instead! In general, TEs like Gronkowski should be covered by safeties! It was Whitner's inability to effectively cover safeties which made him unworthy of a first or second round pick. If we're talking 10th overall for Kuechley, I need to be convinced he'll be significantly better at covering TEs than Whitner had been.

Edited April 13, 2012 by Edwards' Arm