thebandit27 Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 Offensive line was a below average in most games. Talent upgrade is a must. If you wait until the later rounds you will miss out on a chance to have solid bookend tackles. Skill players need a line that can sustain blocks for the run an pass block. Ignore the line at the Bills peril. Go OT in the first and EJ and the skill guys will be happier next season. The whole "skill player needs OL" thing is widely overblown IMO. You can look no further than teams like Seattle, Philadelphia, Detroit, & Green Bay as examples. Is the OL in need of upgrades at LG an RT? Absolutely. They're not the most dire needs on the team by a long shot though.
4BillsintheBurgh Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 The whole "skill player needs OL" thing is widely overblown IMO. You can look no further than teams like Seattle, Philadelphia, Detroit, & Green Bay as examples. Is the OL in need of upgrades at LG an RT? Absolutely. They're not the most dire needs on the team by a long shot though. I just think our QB situation makes our need great enough to take the OT. And I think that also plays into your teams mentioned in that their qb's have overcome the line shortcomings. In our case I think we need our line to overcome the qb shortcomings at least (hopefully) in the short term.
aristocrat Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 I'd think about moving wood over to guard and bring in alex mack at center. There's a guy we throw big money at and solidify the interior of our line.
RuntheDamnBall Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 I'd think about moving wood over to guard and bring in alex mack at center. There's a guy we throw big money at and solidify the interior of our line. Is Wood as good or valuable at OG as he is at center? I didn't think so when he was there.
Astrobot Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 I think you mean Robinson (Auburn OT). I think there is an OG later named Richardson. RT at #9 may be a stretch, but these (Matthews and Robinson) are guys who could play LT if Glenn had an injury. That is the value of a great RT at #9. I would prefer to go another way, Watkins or Mack if available. Don't know if Mosely is worth it at 9. Trade down would be great, given the depth of this draft. You made three very important points, Dennis. Matthews-Robinson are the swing guys that the Bills could take in the first round. Lewan is not a RT, nor could he move inside (although he'll make a nice LT for CIN, NO, or STL, each of whom has less need for the RT). Watkins, and to a lesser extent, Mack, would be sheer value at 9. I'm staying in the camp that says we need ILB not OLB for Alonso to increase his effectiveness. Both are gone by 9 in our next DRAFTSIM. Finally, a trade-down would let us get four top 100 players instead of three as it did last year. I ran a sim yesterday netting Robinson RT, Skov ILB, Seferian-Jenkins TE, and Brandon Coleman WR in the top 3 rounds.
RuntheDamnBall Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 You made three very important points, Dennis. Matthews-Robinson are the swing guys that the Bills could take in the first round. Lewan is not a RT, nor could he move inside (although he'll make a nice LT for CIN, NO, or STL, each of whom has less need for the RT). Watkins, and to a lesser extent, Mack, would be sheer value at 9. I'm staying in the camp that says we need ILB not OLB for Alonso to increase his effectiveness. Both are gone by 9 in our next DRAFTSIM. Finally, a trade-down would let us get four top 100 players instead of three as it did last year. I ran a sim yesterday netting Robinson RT, Skov ILB, Seferian-Jenkins TE, and Brandon Coleman WR in the top 3 rounds. That last scenario would be absolutely frickin' stellar, though I'd love to see what other receiver options besides Coleman were available there.
Big Blitz Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 (edited) This isnt talked about enough because its not a sexy position and all the clamoring for more weapons. Our Oline was a MESS last year. I dont care where we ranked rushing. How much of that was Fred was just nasty. But protection wise it was awful. If Urbik plays sub par again this year, it could be an epic disaster. And the lack of depth...ugh. If Watkins and Mack are gone and Robinson is there im taking Robinson. My board (who I value for the Bills more and could be there at 9): Watkins Mack Robinson Evans Ebron My ideal: Draft Robinson. Trade back into the 20's and draft Skov or Benjamin. That would be a great first day. Edited February 16, 2014 by Big Blitz
billsfan_34 Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 Taking a stud LT high in the draft is pretty common these days. However we have one in Glenn. No way we take a tackle until maybe the 4th. In the first We will go LB or TE.
purple haze Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 (edited) I like Robinson as a player so I guess it would be ok. But take about deflating. Especially when so many good Ts are found later in the draft. I want a difference maker and RTs aren't IMO. A RT could make a difference in the Bills ability to control the clock in the run game and protect EJ in the pass game. A flashy pick? No. An effective pick that leads to differences made in the win column? Yep. I think that the Bills will be targeting players and not positions in this draft. Last year they targeted position (QB). There are a bunch of needs (WR, TE, RT, LG, LB). The Bills will be targeting the highest rated overall players within those positions. I don't see the Bills wasting the 9th pick (I did say wasting) on Taylor Lewan for example. The value just isn't there. I could see Greg Robinson because the value would be there. Watkins and Mack would be my targets and if neither is there I would look to trade back. I just don't see them reaching for any position. It will be about value and specific players. I like Watkins and Mack too. But you wouldn’t take Mosely if the other two were already selected? I think he could be dynamite next to Kiko. You made three very important points, Dennis. Matthews-Robinson are the swing guys that the Bills could take in the first round. Lewan is not a RT, nor could he move inside (although he'll make a nice LT for CIN, NO, or STL, each of whom has less need for the RT). Watkins, and to a lesser extent, Mack, would be sheer value at 9. I'm staying in the camp that says we need ILB not OLB for Alonso to increase his effectiveness. Both are gone by 9 in our next DRAFTSIM. Finally, a trade-down would let us get four top 100 players instead of three as it did last year. I ran a sim yesterday netting Robinson RT, Skov ILB, Seferian-Jenkins TE, and Brandon Coleman WR in the top 3 rounds. Man, if the Bills had that draft I would pass out from joy. Edited February 16, 2014 by purple haze
Kirby Jackson Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 (edited) I just keep thinking about it and I don't think that it will be tackle at 9. They may be trading down if others are off the board. I said it earlier in the thread but I do not think that there is 1 tackle in the NFL, drafted in the top 9 without the intention of them blocking the blindside. Some play the right side (ie Andre Smith) but it is because he wasn't capable of playing the left. It just doesn't happen. Robinson could be an exception based on value but I cannot think of 1 example where a team has done this? Anyone name a tackle drafted in the top 9 without the intention of blocking the blindside? LT would be different but the Bills have a great LT who was recently named 1 of the 2 OT on the NFL under 25 team. Edited February 16, 2014 by Kirby Jackson
RK_BillsFan Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 In you're draft sim, were Donte Moncrief(WR) and Martavis Bryant(WR) already gone when u selected Brandon Coleman, or do you see him as higher than those 2? Also who did you trade back with?
Bill from NYC Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 Anyone name a tackle drafted in the top 9 without the intention of blocking the blindside? Mike Williams. DJ Fluker was drafted #11 and I credit him in a big way for getting his team to the playoffs. I think that with the new CBA we might be seeing more of this. Draft picks are just not that expensive any more.
Kirby Jackson Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 (edited) Mike Williams. DJ Fluker was drafted #11 and I credit him in a big way for getting his team to the playoffs. I think that with the new CBA we might be seeing more of this. Draft picks are just not that expensive any more. Wasn't the plan to move Mike Williams to the left side? Who was the LT then, Jonas Jennings? Jennings was good by the way. Fluker is a stud, no doubt. My thinking is that teams picking in the top 10 typically have more important needs than RT. A team can raise their record quicker by getting a QB, 10 sack guy or an elite playmaker more so than RT, S, etc... I think that is why it is so rare. I do believe that the Bills have really good talent for a team picking in the top 10 so maybe they can afford to do this. I am just saying there is not a lot of precedent for a move like this. I would think if they are set on taking a RT they will be trying to do so somewhere between 15-25 -not 9. Edited February 16, 2014 by Kirby Jackson
Bill from NYC Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 Wasn't the plan to move Mike Williams to the left side? Who was the LT then, Jonas Jennings? Jennings was good by the way. Fluker is a stud, no doubt. My thinking is that teams picking in the top 10 typically have more important needs than RT. A team can raise their record quicker by getting a QB, 10 sack guy or an elite playmaker more so than RT, S, etc... I think that is why it is so rare. I do believe that the Bills have really good talent for a team picking in the top 10 so maybe they can afford to do this. I am just saying there is not a lot of precedent for a move like this. I would think if they are set on taking a RT they will be trying to do so somewhere between 15-25 -not 9. I don't disagree with any of the above. That said, if Fluker was there this year at 9 I would want the Bills to jump all over him.
ColdBlueNorth Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 Here is the laundry list: I've listed players who will go in the Top 3 Rounds (Top 100) LT---P1=Miami. P2=New Orleans. P3=ARI, CAR, CIN, STL. 6 needed (Matthews, Robinson, Richardson, Kouandijio, Lewan, Martin, Mewhort) RT---P1=None. P2=Baltimore, Buffalo, Miami. P3=CAR, STL, WAS. 6 needed (Matthews, Robinson, Richardson, Kouandijio, Henderson, Moses, Mewhort OG--P1=None. P2=BUF, IND, MIA, NO, SEA, STL, WAS. Need 7: Yankey, Su'a-Filo, Martin, Richardson, Steen, Jackson, Groy http://bit.ly/Ir8MTi You can see the problem and the solution here. Several LT's can also play RT. We think LTs Lewan (LT only) and Martin (could be good OG) are less-likely successful on the opposite side of the line. Likewise, RTs Henderson and Moses (both RT only). Thanks Astro - nice job of breaking that down.
Astrobot Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 That last scenario would be absolutely frickin' stellar, though I'd love to see what other receiver options besides Coleman were available there. RD3 Brandon Coleman WRF Rutgers Jared Abbrederis WRF Wisconsin Bruce Ellington WRS South Carolina Mike Davis WRF Texas Donte Moncrief WRF Ole Miss For me, Moncrief has the most to gain and Mike Evans has the most to lose at Combine.
Kirby Jackson Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 RD3 Brandon Coleman WRF Rutgers Jared Abbrederis WRF Wisconsin Bruce Ellington WRS South Carolina Mike Davis WRF Texas Donte Moncrief WRF Ole Miss For me, Moncrief has the most to gain and Mike Evans has the most to lose at Combine. I'm not a big Evans fan and I am with you. He is a guy that I could see sliding. I don't like the seperation that he gets and made a lot of plays on broken plays. He could be Alshon Jeffery or he could be James Hardy IMO.
Astrobot Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 The buzz now is that the Bills would be more likely to get their WR via FA rather than the draft, so this may be a moot point. I'm not kicking Anquan Boldin (49ers) or James Jones (Packers) out of bed for eating crackers. Boldin's more likely to re-sign, but he'd be a good 2-3 year contract, while a 4-5-year contract might interest the younger Jones, who's set to explore FA.
thewildrabbit Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 As a big fan of building a top O line for the young QB's on this team. I'm just happy to see more and more Bills fans acknowledging, and recognizing the need for a better line. The Bills were able to find Cordy Glenn in the 2nd round in 2012, and were able to find Kiko Alonso in the second round in 2013. If I thought for a second that they could do that again, and find top talent like those two for the RT- LG positions. I'd say find a trade partner that covets a player at #9 and then rape them for multiple picks. In regards to adding a player to the defense with the #9 player. Currently nine of eleven of the starting players on the defense are already #1 & #2 draft picks. The Bills were the #1 team in the NFL in tackles. The #2 team in the NFL in sacks. The #4 team in the NFL in pass defense because its a passing league right? Where did all those top picks get them? Oh Yea, 6-10 again!
Astrobot Posted February 16, 2014 Posted February 16, 2014 I'm not a big Evans fan and I am with you. He is a guy that I could see sliding. I don't like the seperation that he gets and made a lot of plays on broken plays. He could be Alshon Jeffery or he could be James Hardy IMO. I'm glad you agree. There is some ballwashing going on ("He made Manziel who he is" etc.), and I just tweeted that Evans' leaps sometimes don't clear the CB's ankle socks.
Recommended Posts