Numark Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 (edited) TBD Roster Assessment! First off thanks everyone for voting! There were more votes and discussion than I thought there was going to be, and it is going ot be fun doing this again after the draft and see how this team has (not) changed. Anyways, here is how we as a community assessed the Bills roster. Our Starters Offense QB :::: 2/5 :::: (Below Average) RB :::: 5/5 :::: (Good) WR #1 :::: 4/5 :::: (Above Average) WR #2 :::: 1.5/5 :::: (Below Average/Bad) TE :::: 3/5 :::: (Average) LT :::: 4/5 :::: (Above Average) RT :::: 3/5 :::: (Average) LG :::: 5/5 :::: (Good) ***With levitre RG :::: 3.5/5 :::: (Average/Above Average) C :::: 4.5/5 :::: (Above Average/Good) Defense LE :::: 5/5 :::: (Good) RE :::: 3/5 :::: (Average) DT :::: 5/5 :::: (Good) LB :::: 1/5 :::: (Bad) CB :::: 3/5 :::: (Average) FS :::: 5/5 :::: (Good) SS :::: 2.5/5 :::: (Average/Below Average) Areas of Major Improvement = QB, WR #2, LB Areas of Minor Improvement = TE, RT, RG, RE, CB, SS (LG if Levitre goes) _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Our Depth Offense QB :::: 2.5/5 :::: (Below Average/Average) RB :::: 5/5 :::: (Good) WR :::: 1/5 :::: (Bad) TE :::: 1.5/5 :::: (Below Average/Bad) OT :::: 3/5 :::: (Average) OG :::: 3/5 :::: (Average) C :::: 3/5 :::: (Average) Defense DE :::: 2/5 :::: (Below Average) DT :::: 3.5/5 :::: (Above Average/Average) LB :::: 1/5 :::: (Bad) CB :::: 2/5 :::: (Below Average) S :::: 2/5 :::: (Below Average) Areas of Major Improvement = WR, TE, DE, LB, CB, S Areas of Minor Improvement = QB, OT, OG, C, DT Edited March 12, 2013 by Numark
San Jose Bills Fan Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 Thanks for doing this Numark. I enjoyed the exercise. I still strongly disagree with the great majority here as far as the Bills running back depth. Basically we're two deep with nothing in reserve. One of our backs is a bit undersized and the other one is a bit old. We're one injury away from being very thin there. That's not good depth and it's not even above average depth. You want a team with running back depth look at New Orleans. Pierre Thomas, Mark Ingram, Chris Ivory, Darren Sproles. THAT'S DEPTH. A team should have three good running backs in order to be considered above average. How we rate as having good depth (the highest grade), I have no idea. The other positions I more or less agree with.
Johnny Hammersticks Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 Thanks for doing this Numark. I enjoyed the exercise. I still strongly disagree with the great majority here as far as the Bills running back depth. Basically we're two deep with nothing in reserve. One of our backs is a bit undersized and the other one is a bit old. We're one injury away from being very thin there. That's not good depth and it's not even above average depth. You want a team with running back depth look at New Orleans. Pierre Thomas, Mark Ingram, Chris Ivory, Darren Sproles. THAT'S DEPTH. A team should have three good running backs in order to be considered above average. How we rate as having good depth (the highest grade), I have no idea. The other positions I more or less agree with. We will easily be able to fill that #3 RB spot with an UDFA. Hell, Green Bay was plucking guys out of the stands last year to play RB. RB depth is amongst the least of my worries.
Numark Posted March 12, 2013 Author Posted March 12, 2013 Thanks for doing this Numark. I enjoyed the exercise. I still strongly disagree with the great majority here as far as the Bills running back depth. Basically we're two deep with nothing in reserve. One of our backs is a bit undersized and the other one is a bit old. We're one injury away from being very thin there. That's not good depth and it's not even above average depth. You want a team with running back depth look at New Orleans. Pierre Thomas, Mark Ingram, Chris Ivory, Darren Sproles. THAT'S DEPTH. A team should have three good running backs in order to be considered above average. How we rate as having good depth (the highest grade), I have no idea. The other positions I more or less agree with. I surprisingly agreed with most of it, but not all of it and thanks (appreciated)! I don't think our RB depth as it is right now is good or bad. I actually think getting a good 3rd RB should be a minor priority this offseason.
ny33 Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 Thanks for doing this Numark. I enjoyed the exercise. I still strongly disagree with the great majority here as far as the Bills running back depth. Basically we're two deep with nothing in reserve. One of our backs is a bit undersized and the other one is a bit old. We're one injury away from being very thin there. That's not good depth and it's not even above average depth. You want a team with running back depth look at New Orleans. Pierre Thomas, Mark Ingram, Chris Ivory, Darren Sproles. THAT'S DEPTH. A team should have three good running backs in order to be considered above average. How we rate as having good depth (the highest grade), I have no idea. The other positions I more or less agree with. Sproles is a fascinating player- he's had more receiving than rushing yards in the past three seasons. He's a poor man's Percy Harvin of sorts, except primarily lines up in the backfield.
Bill from NYC Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 Thanks for doing this Numark. I enjoyed the exercise. I still strongly disagree with the great majority here as far as the Bills running back depth. Basically we're two deep with nothing in reserve. One of our backs is a bit undersized and the other one is a bit old. We're one injury away from being very thin there. In another thread, a poster put up highlights of Trent Edwards. A few of the plays were passes to Fred. I can tell you that he has lost a full step. Seriously, he might not be what we expect/hope for next season.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 We will easily be able to fill that #3 RB spot with an UDFA. Hell, Green Bay was plucking guys out of the stands last year to play RB. RB depth is amongst the least of my worries. It should be very easy to fill the third spot but we have poor depth there with two co-starters and not a single quality reserve. And yet the posters here gave our running back depth the very highest grade. That is my point.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 TBD Roster Assessment! First off thanks everyone for voting! There were more votes and discussion than I thought there was going to be, and it is going ot be fun doing this again after the draft and see how this team has (not) changed. Anyways, here is how we as a community assessed the Bills roster. Our Starters Offense QB :::: 2/5 :::: (Below Average) RB :::: 5/5 :::: (Good) WR #1 :::: 4/5 :::: (Above Average) WR #2 :::: 1.5/5 :::: (Below Average/Bad) TE :::: 3/5 :::: (Average) LT :::: 4/5 :::: (Above Average) RT :::: 3/5 :::: (Average) LG :::: 5/5 :::: (Good) ***With levitre RG :::: 3.5/5 :::: (Average/Above Average) C :::: 4.5/5 :::: (Above Average/Good) Defense LE :::: 5/5 :::: (Good) RE :::: 3/5 :::: (Average) DT :::: 5/5 :::: (Good) LB :::: 1/5 :::: (Bad) CB :::: 3/5 :::: (Average) FS :::: 5/5 :::: (Good) SS :::: 2.5/5 :::: (Average/Below Average) Areas of Major Improvement = QB, WR #2, LB Areas of Minor Improvement = TE, RT, RG, RE, CB, SS (LG if Levitre goes) _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Our Depth Offense QB :::: 2.5/5 :::: (Below Average/Average) RB :::: 5/5 :::: (Good) WR :::: 1/5 :::: (Bad) TE :::: 1.5/5 :::: (Below Average/Bad) OT :::: 3/5 :::: (Average) OG :::: 3/5 :::: (Average) C :::: 3/5 :::: (Average) Defense DE :::: 2/5 :::: (Below Average) DT :::: 3.5/5 :::: (Above Average/Average) LB :::: 1/5 :::: (Bad) CB :::: 2/5 :::: (Below Average) S :::: 2/5 :::: (Below Average) Areas of Major Improvement = WR, TE, DE, LB, CB, S Areas of Minor Improvement = QB, OT, OG, C, DT Thanks for the series, and for putting all this data together!
Numark Posted March 12, 2013 Author Posted March 12, 2013 Thanks haha, it was fun. And I am really excited at free agency, and I may be in hte minority but I really think we can address a chunk of this in FA
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 Nickel corner is an important spot in today's NFL. Most of the time he will be on the field as opposed to your base defense. Brooks may have a chance to be a player, Aaron Williams appears hopeless right now. CB is a real question mark right now. I'm not certain Gilmore is a number 1, and I'm not certain McKelvin is good enough to start full-time. Certainly LB is more dire but I'd think we have to look to at least add depth.
4merper4mer Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 Great survey and even better job pulling together the results. Thanks.
Dorkington Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 Spotty talent and no depth. Sounds about right.
HankBulloughMellencamp Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 Nickel corner is an important spot in today's NFL. Most of the time he will be on the field as opposed to your base defense. Brooks may have a chance to be a player, Aaron Williams appears hopeless right now. CB is a real question mark right now. I'm not certain Gilmore is a number 1, and I'm not certain McKelvin is good enough to start full-time. Certainly LB is more dire but I'd think we have to look to at least add depth. I agree on the importance of 3 dependable CBs ... and I have no issue with the McKelvin re-signing and/or paying him starter money. His punt/kick returning abilities alone make him worth the cash. Not sure why you wonder about Gilmore - he was bound to take a lump or two as an NFL greenhorn guarding the likes of Larry Fitz, but has been a solid CB1 from day one. To me, he looks like he will approach greatness at the position. Leodis is, at worst, an athletic CB2 whose only knocks are poor ball skills and public speaking ability. If Aaron Williams blossoms under Pettine, even better, but at least we don't have to pin our hopes on that and/or draft another CB very high to replace Leodis. Come to think of it, #21 and #23 are quite similar players in terms of size and athletic ability ... although McKelvin is usually in position but out-muscled for the ball, whereas Williams has been badly juked out of position and/or flagged quite regularly. Ron Brooks can hopefully come along nicely and stake a claim to some extended playing time opposite Gilmore or as CB3 as well. A quick shout-out to all Bills 'glory years' veterans who know that Marvcus Patton = CB4 ... (and that his mom also played pro ball). Here's hoping free agency will give us an NFL-caliber MLB and a decent safety to pair with Jairus ... I would be pleased as punch. In other words, no thank you on Sheppard or Searcy as our penciled-in starters heading to camp.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 ^^^^^^^ Aaron Williams and Leodis McKelvin are very different players. McKelvin is thin, wiry, and very fast. Williams is thick, physical and lacks top end speed. As for Marvcus Patton, he played linebacker so I'm not sure what you're "=CB4" refers to.
bowery4 Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 ^^^^^^^ Aaron Williams and Leodis McKelvin are very different players. McKelvin is thin, wiry, and very fast. Williams is thick, physical and lacks top end speed. As for Marvcus Patton, he played linebacker so I'm not sure what you're "=CB4" refers to. Hey he's HankBulloughMellencamp what do you expect from him/them?
HankBulloughMellencamp Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 ^^^^^^^ Aaron Williams and Leodis McKelvin are very different players. McKelvin is thin, wiry, and very fast. Williams is thick, physical and lacks top end speed. As for Marvcus Patton, he played linebacker so I'm not sure what you're "=CB4" refers to. As far as them being very different players, I would agree in the sense that McKelvin is at least adequate in coverage and Williams is not. His efforts in the SF game made it necessary for him to make a quick run to Target for more underwear before flying back with the club. #21 is listed as 5'10", 185, and #23 is 6'0", 199 ... so OK, Leodis is a bit more 'wiry', but I am not sure what benefit 'thick' is when it prevents you from being in position. And McKelvin is not quite as physical as Williams, assuming that is what you meant, but he is not deficient in throwing his body around either - see any of his punt return highlights. And I do know that Marvcus played LB for us, and quite well, since he looked like he was chiseled out of granite. But I'll hold on to see if someone else remembers the reference ...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 And I do know that Marvcus played LB for us, and quite well, since he looked like he was chiseled out of granite. But I'll hold on to see if someone else remembers the reference ... Well you have me stumped then. I'm assuming you meant cornerback 4.
HankBulloughMellencamp Posted March 12, 2013 Posted March 12, 2013 Well you have me stumped then. I'm assuming you meant cornerback 4. Not really a great bit of trivia or anything, but Marvcus played college ball at UCLA, and I remember him always sporting a lid with 'CB4' on it when that movie came out in '93 ... I think he might have met/known Chris Rock or whatever ... but I was talking CB1-CB2-CB3 and it just reminded me of this obscure tidbit.
Numark Posted March 13, 2013 Author Posted March 13, 2013 hmmmmm, maybe we will address all this tomorrow?
Recommended Posts