Kelly the Dog Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 (edited) Let me start by saying this isn't the player I want. I would like Ebron or Evans (who I doubt will be there). But I have also expressed the thought that I don't want an OT at #9 because, to me, that means we almost automatically lose Cordy Glenn in two years. But Martin may be different. Mayock came out today and had Martin rated as his #1 C, #1 OG and #4 OT, just behind the top three. Said he was the safest pick in the entire draft, and the only OL who could play all five positions at a high level in the NFL. That may be more valuable to a team than a guy like Matthews or Lewan. If Urbik or Williams or Wood goes down, it's easy to imagine that Hairston or Pears is our next best player. It also MAY, I repeat, MAY, eliminate the idea that the Bills have their next LT in waiting and they would then re-sign Cordy Glenn and keep Martin, hoping to sign him, too. I see very little chance of the Bills re-signing Glenn and then re-signing Robinson, Matthews or Lewan, provided they turned out to be very good players. Martin, however, may not need to be paid $10m a year or be moved to LT and therefore may be a much better selection. A guy like that is very valuable, especially if you have a budding star LT and a few holes throughout the rest of the line. http://blogs.buffalo...ot-zack-martin/ Edited May 1, 2014 by Kelly the Dog
Ramius Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 Martin at #9 would be supremely disappointing next Thursday. About as bad a pick as you could get.
Kelly the Dog Posted May 1, 2014 Author Posted May 1, 2014 Martin at #9 would be supremely disappointing next Thursday. About as bad a pick as you could get. If, out of 100, you had a guy like Martin rated a 90, and Lewan rated a 92, I would take Martin in a heartbeat. He would be a much more valuable player to have on your team, IMO, if they both played up to their potential. If the difference in their rating as an OT is more than, say, the 2 points out of 100, then I think you have to take the significantly better player. I also do not think the future LT concept can be overstated. If we draft, Robinson, Matthews or Lewan, IMO, there is a 90% chance we don't re-sign Glenn.
swnybillsfan Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 i definitely understand the value of that kind of versatility, but i just can't help but want to see the bills draft some kind of offensive playmaker. if he is the pick i will be behind him, and the bills, 100%. but i would have to allow myself a small window to be somewhere between disappointed and furious for at least a little while. i know the draft is more than just the first round pick, but we've been waiting for this for what seems like an eternity.
Johnny Hammersticks Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 I can't remember who it was today on NFLN (I think it was Mayock) who said that Martin is the next Logan Mankins. Said that he was the most underrated OL prospect in the draft, and that he spoke to at least 3 NFL General Managers who had him rated as the top OT. Pretty high praise.
Astrobot Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 In Martin, you'd be taking a Pro Bowl OG at the very least and I assume 2 RD2 players in the trade-down. To me, that's better than Matthews and one RD2 player. We have Martin going at #19 to Miami right now, so a trade with Baltimore at #17 is a possibility. Ravens are looking for (RT, DE, and S) so they might trade up for Matthews or Clinton-Dix at 9. 17 up to 9 will cost them a RD2 this year and a RD3 next year. Here's one way that plays out: BUF RD1---Martin OG RD2---Seferian-Jenkins TE RD2---Breeland CB/S RD3---Moncrief WR RD4---Hill RB
Tipster19 Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 I don't believe that that Brandon, Whaley, Marone & Associates (sounds like a law firm, doesn't it? Lol!) will trade down at all but with that being said if Martin were to be the pick then that would be the only way that I could be on board with. #16 might be the magic number again. If Jerry Jones really does want Manziel then Dallas would be a perfect partner for us in a trade down for Martin. I'm sure that Old Jerrah would pay a pretty penny to get in position to secure Manziel if that's really an accurate rumor. Of course Manziel would have to be there at #9 for this to even happen. With the extra early pick(s) I could see the Bills taking a DB with it.
Astrobot Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 Dallas would have to give us their 16 and 47 for the 9; we'd likely have to give them our 4th to make it even: http://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp?RequestTeam=DAL I'd think about repackaging the 41-47 and move back up into the first. But it doesn't work out badly 1 16 Buffalo Eric Ebron TE North Carolina 2 41 Buffalo Stephon Tuitt DE Notre Dame 2 47 Buffalo Carlos Hyde RBF Ohio State 3 73 Donte Moncrief WRF Ole Miss 5 149 Kenarious Gates OG Georgia 7 224 Phillip Gaines CB Rice
KOKBILLS Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 Dallas would have to give us their 16 and 47 for the 9; we'd likely have to give them our 4th to make it even: http://www.drafttek....RequestTeam=DAL I'd think about repackaging the 41-47 and move back up into the first. But it doesn't work out badly 1 16 Buffalo Eric Ebron TE North Carolina 2 41 Buffalo Stephon Tuitt DE Notre Dame 2 47 Buffalo Carlos Hyde RBF Ohio State 3 73 Donte Moncrief WRF Ole Miss 5 149 Kenarious Gates OG Georgia 7 224 Phillip Gaines CB Rice Astro...You've GOT to re-evaluate Phillip Gaines...He'll be long, long, long gone by the time the 7th round comes...
Kirby Jackson Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 Can you imagine if in the deepest draft in 30 years the Bills use a top 10 pick on the 4th OT off the board to play RT?!? I cannot fathom this. Maybe they like Martin but they are not taking him at 9.
enlightener Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 dont u mean martin after a trade back? who cares if he wont upset glenn, id be upset if we drafted a guard at 9!
Kelly the Dog Posted May 2, 2014 Author Posted May 2, 2014 I'm not looking for versatility at 9 It's not really versatility if you can possibly be a star at five positions. Obviously, if the other OTs are clearly better you take the clearly better one. But if your evaluators like him just as much, he's a much better choice. The Bills have a budding star at LT, a very good C and an adequate RG. If you draft Martin he starts at RT and could be a fixture for 10 years. If Wood goes down you have the best C in the draft to play C and Hairston or Pears to play RT. If Urbik or Williams go down you have the best OG in the draft and Hairston. If Glenn goes down you have between the 1-4 best OT in the draft to play LT. That, to me, is WAY better than Lewan playing RT and our crappy back-ups at G and C.
Beerball Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 Passing on the #1 or #2 OT (depending on who you believe, if he's available) for the #4 OT doesn't appear to be a good move.
Kelly the Dog Posted May 2, 2014 Author Posted May 2, 2014 Passing on the #1 or #2 OT (depending on who you believe, if he's available) for the #4 OT doesn't appear to be a good move. Based on what? Mel Kiper? If Mayock is correct, and at least three GMs have Martin rated the #1 OT then he is not #4 IMO, if your own scouts and GM also have him highly rated. Also, if the 2 or 3 guy is just barely better, but this guy can play all 5 positions, as well as not demand a huge LT contract down the line and be a malcontent if you re-sign Glenn, then overall it may be a much wiser decision. I'm not even saying he is a very good player. I've never watched him myself. The point of the post is, if Mayock is correct, and the Bills like this guy as much or very close to the other three, he may be a shrewd, wise, extremely beneficial and valuable pick.
bowery4 Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 I kind of trust the FO this year, weird. That said, I would hope it was a trade down if they took him.
purple haze Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 (edited) Let me start by saying this isn't the player I want. I would like Ebron or Evans (who I doubt will be there). But I have also expressed the thought that I don't want an OT at #9 because, to me, that means we almost automatically lose Cordy Glenn in two years. But Martin may be different. Mayock came out today and had Martin rated as his #1 C, #1 OG and #4 OT, just behind the top three. Said he was the safest pick in the entire draft, and the only OL who could play all five positions at a high level in the NFL. That may be more valuable to a team than a guy like Matthews or Lewan. If Urbik or Williams or Wood goes down, it's easy to imagine that Hairston or Pears is our next best player. It also MAY, I repeat, MAY, eliminate the idea that the Bills have their next LT in waiting and they would then re-sign Cordy Glenn and keep Martin, hoping to sign him, too. I see very little chance of the Bills re-signing Glenn and then re-signing Robinson, Matthews or Lewan, provided they turned out to be very good players. Martin, however, may not need to be paid $10m a year or be moved to LT and therefore may be a much better selection. A guy like that is very valuable, especially if you have a budding star LT and a few holes throughout the rest of the line. http://blogs.buffalo...ot-zack-martin/ He shouldn't be taken at pick 9. Being a safe talent does not an elite talent make. In the top 10 a team should be getting a difference maker. If that can't be obtained at 9 then the Bills either need to trade up and get that talent or trade down and see if Martin is still there at that point. Whaley and co. have me utterly confused so they are doing a hell of a job leading up to next week. I can see them trading up, trading down or staying put and taking a WR, TE, OL, DL or LB. LOL Edited May 2, 2014 by purple haze
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts