shrader Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 There was something in the water that year because the Sabres draft was horrible too. Gaustad in the 7th was the only player to even make it to the NHL (except for one game out of convicted drug smuggler Sean McMorrow).
BringBackFergy Posted January 31, 2013 Author Posted January 31, 2013 If you really want to be sick, take a look at the succession of drafts from 2003-2008 as a whole. Those are the drafts that produced players that are in their prime right now. Out of those drafts, the Bills have: Kelsay McGee Kyle Williams McKelvin Steve Johnson That's all the Bills have from the period of time that the core of this current team would have been drafted. That's !@#$ing horrible. 5 players from the hundreds and hundreds available during those years are still part of our team....good point. I guess that's why Brandon was handed the reigns by Ralph. He better do us proud...Let Whaley and Marrone pick the Draft- they can't do any worse.
TheKickIsGood Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 That 2000 draft was the worst. It was like John Butler was trying to stick it to Ralph. Butler wasn't around long after that one.
dave mcbride Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 In 2006, the Bills had the 8th overall pick; which they used on Donte Whitner. Several years later, Whitner hit free agency in the prime of his career. This was a chance for general managers around the league to evaluate his play, and to offer him a salary consistent with what he'd proven over the past few years. He was offered the kind of salary normally associated with a quality backup SS, or else with a below-average starter. And it's not like he's become a whole new player after switching teams. His admission to the Pro Bowl was based more on name recognition and on a few highlight reel hits than on him suddenly starting to play at a Pro Bowl level. In 2007, the Bills had the 12th overall pick. They used it on Marshawn Lynch, who was traded for a 4th + 6th rounder just a few years later. I don't think it's unrealistic to expect a team to do more with the 12th overall pick than just that. One could make the case that the Bills got too little for Lynch in the trade, as shown by the good year Lynch just had for the Seahawks. But I'll want to see more than just one good year from him, before deciding that his level of post-Buffalo play will be consistently higher than what he brought to the Bills. As for Sammy Morris: I'd argue that he was underrated, and deserved more playing time than he received. Neither the 2006 nor 2007 drafts brought the Bills any good, long-term answers at any positions, except for Kyle Williams. Um, Lynch was very good last year too. That 2000 draft was the worst. It was like John Butler was trying to stick it to Ralph. Butler wasn't around long after that one. See my post on page 3. That accusation simply isn't true.
Grondre Reed Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 Wow. That is insane. Out of an entire first round, who turned out to be an impact player in the pros? Lewis, Burress, Urlacher, Abraham, Peterson, Janikoswski, Pennington, Alexander, Hovan and Bulluck. I guess Shaun Ellis was OK. But even of those guys, none of them were insanely good except Urlacher. Perhaps the Raiders weren't so crazy taking Janikowski after all. I think there is a collective sinking feeling around here that this year's draft could turn out a lot like this one. + tom jones
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 I keep reading this subject line and thinking the OP is daring the front office to try and !@#$ up this next draft more than the 2000 draft -- the class of spare parts.
BringBackFergy Posted January 31, 2013 Author Posted January 31, 2013 I keep reading this subject line and thinking the OP is daring the front office to try and !@#$ up this next draft more than the 2000 draft -- the class of spare parts. Wasn't my intent...but now that you mentioned it I rescanned this year's big board and, thankfully, there are no punters named Flowers.
BobChalmers Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 (edited) Warrick was far from a bust...he had 3 600 yard seasons followed by a 79 catch 800+ yard 7 TD season...hardly in the same category as someone like James Hardy...he just simply wasnt anywhere near as good as his draft status would have made you think...in that respect he is not much different than Donte Whitner... Hardy would not remotely have fit my description of "completely dominant player in college". He was one of half a dozen 2nd round WR's in a draft with no 1st round WR's. Warrick was THE MAN in college - one of the top WR stars in years. His projections were huge - it's not like he was drafted too high based on all the assessments. Edited January 31, 2013 by BobChalmers
BuffBill Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 I vehemently disagree. The 2006 draft was stacked with talent on positions of great need for the Bills. A draft should also be judged by who a team passed on. Levy/Jauron passed on great players in 2006 in order to draft primarily scrubs, and gave up an early 3rd round pick in the ugly process. Yea, most of the free world thought the Bills were going to draft Ngata, when Whitner's name was called, I am sure I wasn't the only with a "WTF" look on my face.
BobChalmers Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 (edited) Me and my bro were all about Gronkowski when they took Troup. I was obsessed with Kaepernick when they took Aaron Williams. Every single person I knew wanted Russell Wilson in the 3rd round. I was shocked when they took Cordy Glenn this year because that was the first time I can remember that the big, fat, softball pick- the consensus guy on the big boards- fell right into their laps and they actually took him. I would have expected this organization to take some obscure dude at a postion they didn't need that was slated to go in the 4th round, Glenn going the next pick and performing well on whatever team drafted him in his rookie year. That is what I have come to expect from this organization- them taking the "cute" pick, thinking they know something that no one else does. It took me til I was 34 years old to acknowledge that sometimes Joe from Tonawanda is right. My apologies if your name is Joe and you are from Tonanwanda. My name is Bob from Maryland and I'm right on with all of that. The amount of over-thinking or otherwise just plain stupid going on with some of these is evident by how easy it was for the slightly above-average fan to see immediately that they were reaching. You overstate a little on Whitner - by all accounts here in the Baltimore area, he was fully expected to be the Ravens pick - only a few spots after the Bills. They were delighted though to see Ngata fall to them, who EVERYONE had penciled in for the Bills. Last year, as it was happening, I was delighted with the Glenn pick (steal), shocked by Graham, and disappointed they passed over Russell and let Cousins get away to the Redskins. That's not hindsight - that's as it was happening. This is where it's clearly not the fans who are being stupid - we read all the stories about Ngata and didn't get why "he didn't fit the system" was a reason to ignore the obvious pick. It was obvious to everyone at the time watching at home - the Bills were being stupid - we were all right and they were wrong. Happened way too often with this team. Edited January 31, 2013 by BobChalmers
BringBackFergy Posted January 31, 2013 Author Posted January 31, 2013 My name is Bob from Maryland and I'm right on with all of that. The amount of over-thinking or otherwise just plain stupid going on with some of these is evident by how easy it was for the slightly above-average fan to see immediately that they were reaching. You overstate a little on Whitner - by all accounts here in the Baltimore area, he was fully expected to be the Ravens pick - only a few spots after the Bills. They were delighted though to see Ngata fall to them, who EVERYONE had penciled in for the Bills. Last year, as it was happening, I was delighted with the Glenn pick (steal), shocked by Graham, and disappointed they passed over Russell and let Cousins get away to the Redskins. That's not hindsight - that's as it was happening. This is where it's clearly not the fans who are being stupid - we read all the stories about Ngata and didn't get why "he didn't fit the system" was a reason to ignore the obvious pick. It was obvious to everyone at the time watching at home - the Bills were being stupid - we were all right and they were wrong. Happened way too often with this team. I like your use of the past tense with the word "happened"....nice to know the FO won't be reaching anymore in the future.
BobChalmers Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 I like your use of the past tense with the word "happened"....nice to know the FO won't be reaching anymore in the future. I don't know it won't happen again - part of that may tell us how much was Nix/Gailey vs. Whaley. The Whitner move was well before their time so I can't hold that against the current regime. I do tend towards optimism or at least giving a new staff enough fair treatment not to blame them for mistakes that weren't on their watch, or expect them to "repeat" mistakes they had nothing to do with. It's an odd thing, but many of us as fans have more of history with the team than the majority of folks in the front office - and we see things in the context of the whole history of the franchise probably much more than they would. If we want to be objective though, we have to realize that and that just because Levy or Donahoe had a pattern of doing something wrong really has no bearing on what Nix/Whaley might do. Right now it would be fair to blame Nx big time for not drafting a QB - I think the way to explain how he got there would be that he failed to understand that you have to "reach" past where you think a QB belongs because the league environment and demand for QB's has changed. Nix's failure to recognize this and adapt is a failure of his overall competence. On the other hand, going back to the Donohoe era and trying to project his mistakes onto the current guys is just silly and unfair.
Orton's Arm Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 You're basing your entire argument on the faulty premise that not keeping players somehow makes them a bad draft pick, when its an entirely separate issue. You rate a draft pick on how good a player turns out to be, not on whether the team keeps him or whether he lives up to his draft position. This draft is about the worst drafts of all time, and those 2 drafts weren't even close. No one is saying they are great, but when 2 drafts get you 4 quality players (1 great, 1 very good, 2 average), that's not horrible in the least. Whitner isn't great, but he's nowhere as bad as you portray him. You're simply still angry that the Bills drafted him, and letting that anger cloud your judgement. He's a solid SS that, as someone said earlier, probably ranks in the top half of SS's in the league. As for Lynch, he's got 4 1,000 yard seasons in his 6 years in the NFL, including 1200 and 1500 yards in the past 2 seasons (to go with 23 TDs) for Seattle. He's only been getting better since we traded him. > You're basing your entire argument on the faulty premise that not keeping players somehow makes them a bad draft pick, when its an entirely separate issue. When a player hits free agency, or is traded, in the prime of his career, it's a chance for the GMs around the league to collectively render a verdict on the player. When Antoine Winfield hit free agency, he was highly sought after by teams like the Jets and Vikings, and was richly rewarded with a big contract. This correctly reflected the fact that he was among the best DBs in the league. When Whitner hit free agency, other teams' interest in him was tepid; and he was ultimately signed to a below-average contract. This correctly reflected the fact that he was a below-average SS. Likewise, the fact that the Bills could only get a 4th + 6th for Lynch correctly reflected the fact that up to that point, the quality of his play did not justify a particularly high price in draft picks. The actions of GMs around the league inform us that, during their time with the Bills, Whitner and Lynch performed below the expectations associated with second round picks. Lynch has had one (not two) very good years since leaving Buffalo. Whitner's post-Buffalo play has not been much different than we'd seen in Buffalo.
BobChalmers Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 Likewise, the fact that the Bills could only get a 4th + 6th for Lynch correctly reflected the fact that up to that point, the quality of his play did not justify a particularly high price in draft picks. I think you are overestimating the going rate for 2nd hand RB's - it's not high. Very few RB's are even taken in the first round anymore, and they have the shortest careers in the NFL - a 4th and a 6th is really not an insult at all. Lynch also had off-the-field issues that lowered his value some - you could argue the Bills should have spotted that before drafting him, but it's not part of his "play" you were discussing.
Orton's Arm Posted February 1, 2013 Posted February 1, 2013 I think you are overestimating the going rate for 2nd hand RB's - it's not high. Very few RB's are even taken in the first round anymore, and they have the shortest careers in the NFL - a 4th and a 6th is really not an insult at all. Lynch also had off-the-field issues that lowered his value some - you could argue the Bills should have spotted that before drafting him, but it's not part of his "play" you were discussing. > I think you are overestimating the going rate for 2nd hand RB's - it's not high. Very few RB's are even taken in the first round > anymore, and they have the shortest careers in the NFL - a 4th and a 6th is really not an insult at all. For the sake of argument, let's say you're right. (As is probably the case anyway.) RBs have short careers, so it's unrealistic for a team trading away a used RB to expect to get anywhere near the compensation that the Broncos got for trading away Cutler. That being the case, why on Earth would the GM of a rebuilding team use the 12th overall pick on a RB with short-term value only? Why not take a player at some other position instead? Even if Lynch had been the best available player when the Bills picked--which he wasn't--the short-term-value-only nature of the RB position should have influenced Marv to go in a different direction. Unfortunately, Marv's entire tenure as GM was characterized by shortsightedness. He was fond of quoting the saying that if you build for the future, you're building for someone else's future. That wasn't just talk: like TD before him, he consistently sought out quick fixes; and lacked any viable long-term plan whatever.
Sisyphean Bills Posted February 1, 2013 Posted February 1, 2013 > You're basing your entire argument on the faulty premise that not keeping players somehow makes them a bad draft pick, when its an entirely separate issue. When a player hits free agency, or is traded, in the prime of his career, it's a chance for the GMs around the league to collectively render a verdict on the player. When Antoine Winfield hit free agency, he was highly sought after by teams like the Jets and Vikings, and was richly rewarded with a big contract. This correctly reflected the fact that he was among the best DBs in the league. When Whitner hit free agency, other teams' interest in him was tepid; and he was ultimately signed to a below-average contract. This correctly reflected the fact that he was a below-average SS. Likewise, the fact that the Bills could only get a 4th + 6th for Lynch correctly reflected the fact that up to that point, the quality of his play did not justify a particularly high price in draft picks. The actions of GMs around the league inform us that, during their time with the Bills, Whitner and Lynch performed below the expectations associated with second round picks. Lynch has had one (not two) very good years since leaving Buffalo. Whitner's post-Buffalo play has not been much different than we'd seen in Buffalo. Ramius has a point, but there is a difference between evaluating a draft based on the career production of the players selected and based on the ability of the GM to build a franchise capable of sustained success. While the 2007 draft had a Pro Bowl caliber player taken and that player has made a large impact elsewhere, that draft was a complete failure in terms of turning the franchise around. Not one of those players in the 2007 draft are still on the team at a time when they should be in the prime of their careers. While most of the Modrak era was nothing but failure in terms of team building, 2007 shouldn't be picked on in terms of talent. Lynch and Pos are still playing and Edwards is still a pre-season stud somewhere. Compared to 05, 06, or 08, the 07 draft is outstanding. <gack-spit>
jester43 Posted February 1, 2013 Posted February 1, 2013 Sammy Morris did good in Miami for a lot of years, so one out of 8 not bad & i bet Miami was thankful ! he did good in buffalo too while we had him
BobChalmers Posted February 1, 2013 Posted February 1, 2013 (edited) > I think you are overestimating the going rate for 2nd hand RB's - it's not high. Very few RB's are even taken in the first round > anymore, and they have the shortest careers in the NFL - a 4th and a 6th is really not an insult at all. For the sake of argument, let's say you're right. (As is probably the case anyway.) RBs have short careers, so it's unrealistic for a team trading away a used RB to expect to get anywhere near the compensation that the Broncos got for trading away Cutler. That being the case, why on Earth would the GM of a rebuilding team use the 12th overall pick on a RB with short-term value only? Why not take a player at some other position instead? Even if Lynch had been the best available player when the Bills picked--which he wasn't--the short-term-value-only nature of the RB position should have influenced Marv to go in a different direction. Unfortunately, Marv's entire tenure as GM was characterized by shortsightedness. He was fond of quoting the saying that if you build for the future, you're building for someone else's future. That wasn't just talk: like TD before him, he consistently sought out quick fixes; and lacked any viable long-term plan whatever. I think I'll cut Marv a bit of slack on htis one - it wasn't as obvious RB's had so little value back then as it has become since - and the other RB taken before Lynch - Adrian Peterson - was enough a difference maker to justify his pick. Having said that - it would be hard to defend anything Marv did as a GM. God bless him he was a wonderful head coach - as a GM - he was just plain awful. His FA moves were worse than any draft. Edited February 1, 2013 by BobChalmers
Orton's Arm Posted February 2, 2013 Posted February 2, 2013 Ramius has a point, but there is a difference between evaluating a draft based on the career production of the players selected and based on the ability of the GM to build a franchise capable of sustained success. While the 2007 draft had a Pro Bowl caliber player taken and that player has made a large impact elsewhere, that draft was a complete failure in terms of turning the franchise around. Not one of those players in the 2007 draft are still on the team at a time when they should be in the prime of their careers. While most of the Modrak era was nothing but failure in terms of team building, 2007 shouldn't be picked on in terms of talent. Lynch and Pos are still playing and Edwards is still a pre-season stud somewhere. Compared to 05, 06, or 08, the 07 draft is outstanding. <gack-spit> I partially agree and partially disagree with what you've written. In terms of the respective values of their careers, I see the following: Kyle Williams > Marshawn Lynch Donte Whitner < Poz 2006 draft = 2007 draft. From the standpoint of talent selection, neither draft had anything about which to get excited at all. (Except for the Kyle Williams pick.) As for Marshawn Lynch: remember that while he was with the Bills, Fred Jackson significantly outplayed him. Part of that is a credit to Fred. But part of that is because Lynch's play with the Bills wasn't what one would hope for from the 12th overall pick. Lynch's disappointing play--in combination with the fact that he plays a position Marv should not have been using first round picks on in the first place--makes him almost as disappointing as the Whitner selection. (At least from the Bills' perspective.) I'll grant that, of the two players, Lynch has produced the better post-Bills play.
Recommended Posts