McKelvin re-signed

[BADOLBILZ]

The Bills were never in a position where the decision was "Spiller or Lynch". From even before Spiller was drafted, they were faced with "Lynch or Jackson".

 

Both Lynch and Jackson are the bruising workhorse type backs. The Bills wanted a Thunder and Lightning backfield with a workhorse and a flash-bang guy.

 

If you want to argue about the choice to trade Lynch, you also have to keep Jackson in the conversation. So between Lynch and Jackson, who would you have kept? Which do you think had more trade value at the time?

 

Let me get this straight......you are defending the decision to use your top pick on another RB......when the only position of any strength on the team was the RB position?

 

Look, I know you guys love Spiller and you want to defend the pick because......you love Spiller. But RB's aren't important enough to be that kind of focal point for an organization.

[JohnC]

Let me get this straight......you are defending the decision to use your top pick on another RB......when the only position of any strength on the team was the RB position?

 

Look, I know you guys love Spiller and you want to defend the pick because......you love Spiller. But RB's aren't important enough to be that kind of focal point for an organization.

 

Buddy Nix has had three full drafts. How many impact players has he drafted? I can think of only one player you can categorize as an impact player. That player is CJ. What should bother you more is not the player that Nix "hit" on but the rest of his body of work. His drafts have not transformed a mediocre team into a competitive team. It is fair to say that the roster is not much more advanced than when he took over.

 

As it stands Spiller is the only big play player on the team. It is not a stretch to say that he is the best player on the roster. As effective as he has been if he had a credible qb he would be even more effective because the defense wouldn't have to stack up against the run.

 

Would it have been smarter for Nix to draft for another position in the Spiller draft year? For sure a good argument can be made against taking a RB. But when you have a country GM who rarely drafts an exceptional player finally hits on that type of player then I'm going to direct my attention to his many misses and be satisfied with the rare player that he got right.

 

The Lynch trade is an egregious example of many examples of how this bumbling organization operates. He was traded to the Seahawks for a fourth round pick after other teams claimed that they offered a higher pick for him. A generation of futility is the outcome of ineptitude piled on top of previous ineptitude.

[QCity]

Let me get this straight......you are defending the decision to use your top pick on another RB......when the only position of any strength on the team was the RB position?

 

I'm not an advocate of taking a back that high either, but you have to realize we only had one RB - Jackson (who wasn't really established yet). Lynch was loooong gone in the minds of the front office. They weren't going to hand him a new contract with his past. They screwed up by not dealing Lynch at the draft, and thus painted themselves into the uncomfortable corner of having every single team in the league know that we were desperate to ditch Lynch. We even had to "showcase" him that year for the first 2 or 3 games which caused a lot of fan confusion.

[Bill from NYC]

Buddy Nix has had three full drafts. How many impact players has he drafted? I can think of only one player you can categorize as an impact player. That player is CJ.

 

John, for the sake of arguement, let's pretend that Spiller was responsible for each and every Bills win since the day he was drafted, ok? What my friend, is their record?

When a team wastes it's best resources on RBs and DBs, said team will lose football games. Teams need QBs, pass rushing DEs an LTs. This is how football teams win football games. And wasting top draft choices is the primary reason why the Bills lose football games. Even though Spiller is "good."

[dave mcbride]

John, for the sake of arguement, let's pretend that Spiller was responsible for each and every Bills win since the day he was drafted, ok? What my friend, is their record?

When a team wastes it's best resources on RBs and DBs, said team will lose football games. Teams need QBs, pass rushing DEs an LTs. This is how football teams win football games. And wasting top draft choices is the primary reason why the Bills lose football games. Even though Spiller is "good."

 

They need cover CBs as well. There are 32 GMs in the NFL, and every last one of them will tell you corners who can cover are as valuable as pass rushing DEs and LTs. Seriously. It's not even remotely arguable.

 

Bill, The rules in today's game give the offense a major advantage in the passing game. The receivers are at a major advantage over the DBs because they can't be bumped around. All CBs are going to be "frequently" beat.That is the nature of the game. McKelvin does have good cover skills while he also has atrocious ball skills. He often gets beat by the second and third move by the WR. I'm aware of his weaknesses. But you have to put those liabilities in the context that all CBs including the most elite DBs are vulnerable because of the rule changes inhibiting him.

 

McKelvin isn't getting paid as if he is an elite CB. He is getting paid a very reasonable and fair contract for his performance level. I'll take him over Aaron Williams any day of the week. In addition, McKelvin is a threat in the return game giving him added value to the roster.

 

Let's not mix the Levitre situation with the McKelvin situation. Levitre is a good player with a lot $$$$ value on the free market. His value on the market makes it very difficult for the Bills to keep him. That is the nature of the system. If the Bills can't work out a deal that makes sense within their cap structure then they "must" let him walk. All teams are subjected to the same required cold blooded cost/benefit analysis of their players. No team is immune from losing good players because of cap considerations.

 

While you are critical of the organization for "probably" losing Levitre to the market I am encouraged by the more analytical approach it seems to be taking. Look at the operation of the Pats, Steelers and Ravens. These are all superb organizations that allow good players to leave and rebound with good value replacements. You can't fight nature---you have to work within its confines. You have no option other than to work within the complex system that applies to everyone. Infatuation is not a trait that works well in a business set up for cold blooded behavior.

 

According to the Mark Gaughan piece about McKelvin in the Buffalo News, once McKelvin replaced Williams, he did not give up one significant pass completion for the rest of the season.

[Dibs]

The Bills were never in a position where the decision was "Spiller or Lynch". From even before Spiller was drafted, they were faced with "Lynch or Jackson".

 

Both Lynch and Jackson are the bruising workhorse type backs. The Bills wanted a Thunder and Lightning backfield with a workhorse and a flash-bang guy.

 

If you want to argue about the choice to trade Lynch, you also have to keep Jackson in the conversation. So between Lynch and Jackson, who would you have kept? Which do you think had more trade value at the time?

 

Though you are correct that the argument was never Spiller/Lynch......and people somehow have forgotten that when we drafted Spiller, Lynch had become a virtual non-factor for the Bills......I believe that the base point that many posters here are making still stands.

 

In 2009, Jackson produced 1062 yards at 4.5 Y/A in 11 starts. We also had Lynch.....who though troubled and lacking in production provided great depth at the position.

To go ahead and spend the #9 pick on a RB while in that situation was misguided, particularly when the team was weak in other areas.

 

The only justification that I can see is that the Bills went Best Player Available in 2010......and had rated Spiller as one of the top 3-5 Elite players in that draft. As it turns out.....if that was the case.....it looks like that rating was correct.

[dave mcbride]

Though you are correct that the argument was never Spiller/Lynch......and people somehow have forgotten that when we drafted Spiller, Lynch had become a virtual non-factor for the Bills......I believe that the base point that many posters here are making still stands.

 

In 2009, Jackson produced 1062 yards at 4.5 Y/A in 11 starts. We also had Lynch.....who though troubled and lacking in production provided great depth at the position.

To go ahead and spend the #9 pick on a RB while in that situation was misguided, particularly when the team was weak in other areas.

 

The only justification that I can see is that the Bills went Best Player Available in 2010......and had rated Spiller as one of the top 3-5 Elite players in that draft. As it turns out.....if that was the case.....it looks like that rating was correct.

 

All true, but it is the case that they massively misjudged Lynch's talent. The guy is clearly one of the best RBs in the league right now. I think he's got a lot of thug in him, but he's truly fun to watch.

[Dibs]

All true, but it is the case that they massively misjudged Lynch's talent. The guy is clearly one of the best RBs in the league right now. I think he's got a lot of thug in him, but he's truly fun to watch.

 

I don't think they misjudged his talent at all. If you recall, he was having off-field issues which not only effected his perceived long term value.....but it can be easily argued that perhaps his off-field issues affected his playing performance(which declined each year in Buffalo).

 

The main factor in my mind was FJ. He progressively got better at a similar time to Lynch declining. With roughly split starts in 2009, FJ was 4.5 Y/A.....Lynch only 3.8 Y/A.

 

It didn't mean that the Bills undervalued the talent of Lynch, they simply chose to go with FJ because he showed better potential.....and the decision was proved to be correct in terms of talent assessment as he developed into a legit league MVP contender(until his injury killed that dream in 2011).

 

To me, it was just one of those things. I don't see their treatment or assessment of Lynch to be anything but logical for the factors involved at the time.

 

 

The fact that Lynch turned things around after he left.....and the fact that FJ developed injury concerns....should not effect how one judges the decisions made at the time.

Similarly.....the fact that Spiller became great....and FJ developed injury concerns.....should not effect how one judges the decision to draft Spiller at the time.

Edited March 11, 2013 by Dibs

[JohnC]

John, for the sake of arguement, let's pretend that Spiller was responsible for each and every Bills win since the day he was drafted, ok? What my friend, is their record?

When a team wastes it's best resources on RBs and DBs, said team will lose football games. Teams need QBs, pass rushing DEs an LTs. This is how football teams win football games. And wasting top draft choices is the primary reason why the Bills lose football games. Even though Spiller is "good."

 

Bill, It makes no sense to blame the most talented player and most impactful player on the roster for the embarrassing record of this inept organization. The primary reason why the Bills consistently lose is because they don't have an authentic starting qb taking the snaps. I'm sure you are aware that a intriguing prospect (Kaepernick) was there for the taking in the second round two years ago. Nix preferred a big CB who appears to be too stiff for the position. I'm also sure that you are aware that another intriguing qb prospect was available (Russell Wilson) last year was also there for the taking instead of a "track" receiver who could have been had in a later round.

 

You watch the Bills games as much as I do. The one person you can't blame for their mounting losses is the only player who regularly makes scintillating plays for this very lackluster team. The problem with the Bils under Nix has little to do with the positions he drafts; it has more to do with drafting too many players who are busts. It is the mounting draft failures moreso than the position emphasis that has sunk this franchise.

 

I don't disagree with the central point that Nix is not only a failure in his evaluations of players but that he is clueless as to how to build a roster. The criticism I have with the Spiller critics is that he is the one person who is a success in a junkyard full of failures. If Jauron/Levy/Brandon/Nix were better at evaluating players regardless of position then other critical needs could have been addressed instead of going back and readdressing positions that should have already been solidified.

 

It is ironic that you harshly criticize this goofy franchise for over drafting DBs while the most successful franchise in this generation, the Pats, is a franchise that freguently drafts DBs. In general it is the organizational dysfunction that has suffocated this franchise more than anything else. I'm hoping that now that the inept owner is not involved in the operation that this organization can heal to the point that it becomes a more normally run franchise.

Edited March 11, 2013 by JohnC

[Tcali]

welll...if only 7.5 is guaranteed-- I doubt the experts on here know the details....-But this is the Buffalo Bills mgmt. I dont trust them as far as i can throw them.--I do suppose we didnt have much choice in the matter.I dont think we can blow another high pick on a DB when we have zero professional LBs on the team and no starting and one back-up QB.

[JohnC]

They need cover CBs as well. There are 32 GMs in the NFL, and every last one of them will tell you corners who can cover are as valuable as pass rushing DEs and LTs. Seriously. It's not even remotely arguable.

 

 

 

According to the Mark Gaughan piece about McKelvin in the Buffalo News, once McKelvin replaced Williams, he did not give up one significant pass completion for the rest of the season.

 

As I stated in a prior post the team that drafts DBs more than any other team is the Pats. They are always searching for DBs. Next to the qb position it is arguably the toughest position to play, especially with the rules working against them.

 

McKelvin is a special physical talent. Without a doubt he has his mental lapses. But in general he plays his man fairly well. It is well documented that his ball skills need work. But even acknowledging his liabilities the nature of his position is that CBs are going to be frequently beaten. The way the rules are applied if your CB can somewhat contain the receiver then he is doing a good job.

 

I challenge anyone to review the playoff games in the NFC and AFC and the SB. The DBs were constantly getting beaten. If your CB can slow down the passing onslaught then he is doing a credible job playing an impossible position.

[Dibs]

.......It is ironic that you harshly criticize this goofy franchise for over drafting DBs while the most successful franchise in this generation, the Pats, is a franchise that freguently drafts DBs.

 

It is perhaps where the DBs are drafted that makes the bigger difference.

 

Draft picks within the top 2 rounds since 2000....DBs in red.

 

Bills:

3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13, 21, 22, 23, 26, 26, 28, 34, 34, 36, 41, 41, 41, 42, 46, 48, 51, 55, 58, 58, 61

 

Patriots:

6, 10, 13, 17, 21, 21, 21, 21, 24, 25, 27, 32, 32, 33, 34, 36, 36, 40, 41, 42, 45, 46, 48, 48, 53, 56, 58, 62, 62, 63, 65

 

 

Both teams drafted 7 DBs in the first 2 rounds over the 13 years.

Inside top 10...

Bills 3 of 9 (33%)

Patriots 0 of 2 (0%)

 

Inside top 15...

Bills 4 of 10 (40%)

Patriots 0 of 3 (0%)

 

Inside top 21...

Bills 4 of 10 (40%)

Patriots 0 of 8 (0%)

 

 

Comparing the two team's DB selections actually backs up Bill's views.

[JohnC]

It is perhaps where the DBs are drafted that makes the bigger difference.

 

Draft picks within the top 2 rounds since 2000....DBs in red.

 

Bills:

3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13, 21, 22, 23, 26, 26, 28, 34, 34, 36, 41, 41, 41, 42, 46, 48, 51, 55, 58, 58, 61

 

Patriots:

6, 10, 13, 17, 21, 21, 21, 21, 24, 25, 27, 32, 32, 33, 34, 36, 36, 40, 41, 42, 45, 46, 48, 48, 53, 56, 58, 62, 62, 63, 65

 

 

Both teams drafted 7 DBs in the first 2 rounds over the 13 years.

Inside top 10...

Bills 3 of 9 (33%)

Patriots 0 of 2 (0%)

 

Inside top 15...

Bills 4 of 10 (40%)

Patriots 0 of 3 (0%)

 

Inside top 21...

Bills 4 of 10 (40%)

Patriots 0 of 8 (0%)

 

 

Comparing the two team's DB selections actually backs up Bill's views.

 

The Bills draft CBs at a higher draft position than the Pats because we are a loser organization that drafts at a higher point than the winning Pats organization that drafts at a lower point in the draft.

[Dibs]

The Bills draft CBs at a higher draft position than the Pats because we are a loser organization that drafts at a higher point than the winning Pats organization that drafts at a lower point in the draft.

 

Ignore the actual numbers if that makes it easier for you.....let's say that the numbers are comparable. The Bills had a lot of red to the left on the number list(their earlier picks) than the Patriots. How can you not see this?

 

Both teams had a comparable number of picks inside the top 21.

The Bills had 10.....the Patriots had 8.

The Bills chose to use 4 of those picks on DBs.......the Patriots Zero.

 

First round.....Bills had 15 picks.....Patriots 13 picks.

Bills selected 4 DBs.....Patriots 2.

 

Top 15.....Bills indeed had a lot more.....10 compared to the Patriots 3......but the Bills chose 4 DBs there......while the Patriots chose ZERO.

 

 

EDIT:

Looking at it another way.....

Of both teams most valuable 7 picks......the Bills selected DB 3 times.....Patriots ZERO.

Edited March 11, 2013 by Dibs

[billsfan714]

Haven't the Steelers had one of the best defenses over that past decade. How many first round corners have the Steelers drafted over that time? Yes they have used a 1 on Polamalu, a SS. How many first round corners have the Steelers even started recently? Maybe defense is about stopping the run and pressuring the QB, things the Steelers excel at and what Bills haven't done well during the millenium of misery. How about the dream team Eagles and the money they spent on corners, what did that get them?

[Dibs]

Haven't the Steelers had one of the best defenses over that past decade. How many first round corners have the Steelers drafted over that time? Yes they have used a 1 on Polamalu, a SS. How many first round corners have the Steelers even started recently? Maybe defense is about stopping the run and pressuring the QB, things the Steelers excel at and what Bills haven't done well during the millenium of misery. How about the dream team Eagles and the money they spent on corners, what did that get them?

 

Though it doesn't specifically highlight the Steelers, have a look at this study I did on drafting trends: http://forums.twobil...t/#entry2743099

 

It covers the 6 years of drafting leading up to a SB appearance for all teams that made a SB since 2000......as well as the worst group of teams(of which the Bills are obviously one of)......as well as the rest of the teams...........and then compares the three groups against each other.

 

The two major standout statistics that the study highlighted were:

 

SB teams drafted DB inside the top 15(particularly top 10) at a much lower rate than the non SB teams.

The Dumbass teams selected LB inside the top 15 at a much lower rate than the rest of the league.

 

 

EDIT:

In answer to your question.....The Steelers have only used 3 1st/2nd round draft picks on DBs since 2000. #16, #38 & #62

Edited March 11, 2013 by Dibs

[JohnC]

Ignore the actual numbers if that makes it easier for you.....let's say that the numbers are comparable. The Bills had a lot of red to the left on the number list(their earlier picks) than the Patriots. How can you not see this?

 

Both teams had a comparable number of picks inside the top 21.

The Bills had 10.....the Patriots had 8.

The Bills chose to use 4 of those picks on DBs.......the Patriots Zero.

 

First round.....Bills had 15 picks.....Patriots 13 picks.

Bills selected 4 DBs.....Patriots 2.

 

Top 15.....Bills indeed had a lot more.....10 compared to the Patriots 3......but the Bills chose 4 DBs there......while the Patriots chose ZERO.

 

 

EDIT:

Looking at it another way.....

Of both teams most valuable 7 picks......the Bills selected DB 3 times.....Patriots ZERO.

 

You are missing the point as to why the Bills have a tendency to over draft CBs. They have a tendency to draft them high and then release them often due to contract reasons. Clement, Winfield Whitner, Greer etc. were shuffled off not so much for talent reasons but primarily for $$$$$ reasons. In a cap system you can't keep all your quality players when they enter the market. The Bills to a greater extent than most teams had a business model that promoted this replacing of players with cheaper players This cycle of acquire and replace has hurt us in addressing other positions.

 

I was very much in accord with the McKelvin signing because it allows the front office to focus on other positions in the draft and free agency.

[DrDawkinstein]

Let me get this straight......you are defending the decision to use your top pick on another RB......when the only position of any strength on the team was the RB position?

 

Look, I know you guys love Spiller and you want to defend the pick because......you love Spiller. But RB's aren't important enough to be that kind of focal point for an organization.

 

I like how you argue every point in a vacuum, yet use completely separate factors to argue your point. Excellent strawman as well...

 

I'm not defending anything. Simply adding to the discussion that if you are talking about the Spiller pick, and the Lynch trade, you also have to include the choice to keep Freddy. And the fact that he and Lynch were the same type of RB.

 

Otherwise, the entire discussion looks like the one in this thread. Where someone brings up Point #1, and gets countered with completely separate Point #2, but then retorts with completely separate Point #3, and so on...

 

They all have to be factored in together.

[peterpan]

So ok. 5 mil a year for a below average CB is OK but 6-7 mil a year for a great Safety or G is too much?

 

This is why the Bills stink. They make McKelvin a priority when any ole' FA CB could not cover his WR just as poorly. I get he is a good return man but come on! Bryd and Levitre should have been much much much bigger priorities.

[dave mcbride]

Though it doesn't specifically highlight the Steelers, have a look at this study I did on drafting trends: http://forums.twobil...t/#entry2743099

 

It covers the 6 years of drafting leading up to a SB appearance for all teams that made a SB since 2000......as well as the worst group of teams(of which the Bills are obviously one of)......as well as the rest of the teams...........and then compares the three groups against each other.

 

The two major standout statistics that the study highlighted were:

 

SB teams drafted DB inside the top 15(particularly top 10) at a much lower rate than the non SB teams.

The Dumbass teams selected LB inside the top 15 at a much lower rate than the rest of the league.

 

 

EDIT:

In answer to your question.....The Steelers have only used 3 1st/2nd round draft picks on DBs since 2000. #16, #38 & #62

 

Let's not just focus on SB winners but relatively consistent winners using playoff appearances as a benchmark (i.e., teams that have made the playoffs 4+ times over that 13 year period). The number below is the quantity of DBs drafted in the first two rounds:

 

Giants since 2000 - 7 DBs in first 2 rounds; 4 first rounders (same as Bills). (7 playoff appearances, 3 SB appearances, 2 victories)

 

Colts since 2000 - 6 DBs taken in first two rounds (11 playoff appearances)

 

Packers - 3 (9 playoff appearances)

 

Cowboys - 6 (4 playoff appearances)

 

Chargers - 9 (4 first rounders); (5 playoff appearances)

 

Eagles - 5 (9 playoff appearances)

 

Seahawks - 6 (7 playoff appearances, believe it or not)

 

49ers - 3 (4 playoff appearances)

 

TB - 2 (5 playoff appearances plus 1 10-win non-playoff season)

 

Bears - 3 (all second rounders); (4 playoff appearances)

 

Bengals - 6 (four playoff appearances)

 

Broncos - 4 (6 playoff appearances)

 

Falcons - 5 (6 playoff appearances)

 

Pats - 7 (11 playoff appearances)

 

Vikings - 5 (4 playoff appearances)

 

Rams - 5 (4 playoff appearances, but none in a long time)

 

Steelers - 3 (8 playoff appearances)

 

Titans - 5 (5 playoff appearances)

 

Saints - 5 (5 playoff appearances)

 

Ravens - 3, but 5 if you go back to 1998. In 1998 and 1999, they picked both McAllister and Duane Starks in the top 10 (9 playoff appearances)

 

Jets - 5 (6 playoff appearances).

 

The average: 5. So the Bills are above average.

Edited March 11, 2013 by dave mcbride