Whaley not happy Bills haven't done more to address OL

[papazoid]

When do we get Avon Barksdale? Our OL needs to be ruthless. Dude could put on some weight though.

 

prefer stringer bell

[GG]

 

 

it couldn't be clearer: Whaley is lamenting the fact that the two OL targets that the team identified and aggressively pursued did not end up here.

 

I wonder if I've heard this one before?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

 

Generally, teams that draft BPA are basically saying that they're taking the guy with the highest overall grade.

 

Here's a really good article on the process if you're interested:

 

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2014/3/6/5473554/2014-nfl-draft-scouting-process-big-board

 

This is a good article, thanks! I hadn't realized there were two such distinct schools of scouting "everybody watch separately" and "everybody watch together".

 

I think the key takeaway points are "There's evidently no hard-line guide to scouting -- it's as much an art as it is a science -- and the recent success by the two schools of thought reinforces this."

""From the scouts' perspective, they must know exactly what to look for at each position, and that comes with guidance from each position coach," Greg Gabriel, former scout and director of college scouting for the Giants and Bears, said. "The position coach must articulate what he needs and wants at his position because the scouts are the eyes and ears for the coaches" and "When we're putting our board together and we're choosing players," Seahawks GM John Schneider emphasized, "we're selecting players for the coaches that we know will fit the coaches' philosophy at each position and have a legitimate chance to compete."

 

This really highlights how much influence the coach's mindset and intended scheme have on the draft process.

 

So when I said "There's also the point that "BPA" is to some extent an artificial construct. How do you compare the talents of a DB, a OL, and a TE to decide which is the "best available"? There's a huge element of subjectivity there. I think the team's needs always influence the perception of "best player available", what I meant in the context of the process described in your linked article is: the scouts for each team are (or are supposed to be) evaluating the players at a position both in the context of what their coaches need/want, and in the context of other players available in that draft. There really isn't a great mechanism for going back and evaluating a player against previous drafts - that's where a bit of subjective memory may come into play, "he's the best WR in this draft, but this isn't a great draft for WR so I need to put him here not here in his grade." There's also the subjective element of the scout's understanding of what the position coach/coordinator/head coach wants and needs. So now you put it all together, and you're deciding whether the available DB or TE are a better choice for your team, yes BPA means you take the guy with the highest grade, but there's a lot of subjectivity that went into how that grade got there - not subjectivity in the sense of totally random throwing darts, but subjectivity in the sense of how sharp is one set of position scouts vs another, how clear are they both on what the coaches want - which may lead them to grade a player higher who is not as much of a baller but who "looks like" what the scouts are told the coaches want and so forth.

 

Anyway, thanks, great read!

[thebandit27]

 

I wonder if I've heard this one before?

 

Heard what? It was, quite simply, the explanation that Whaley gave in the article.

 

 

This is a good article, thanks! I hadn't realized there were two such distinct schools of scouting "everybody watch separately" and "everybody watch together".

 

I think the key takeaway points are "There's evidently no hard-line guide to scouting -- it's as much an art as it is a science -- and the recent success by the two schools of thought reinforces this."

""From the scouts' perspective, they must know exactly what to look for at each position, and that comes with guidance from each position coach," Greg Gabriel, former scout and director of college scouting for the Giants and Bears, said. "The position coach must articulate what he needs and wants at his position because the scouts are the eyes and ears for the coaches" and "When we're putting our board together and we're choosing players," Seahawks GM John Schneider emphasized, "we're selecting players for the coaches that we know will fit the coaches' philosophy at each position and have a legitimate chance to compete."

 

This really highlights how much influence the coach's mindset and intended scheme have on the draft process.

 

So when I said "There's also the point that "BPA" is to some extent an artificial construct. How do you compare the talents of a DB, a OL, and a TE to decide which is the "best available"? There's a huge element of subjectivity there. I think the team's needs always influence the perception of "best player available", what I meant in the context of the process described in your linked article is: the scouts for each team are (or are supposed to be) evaluating the players at a position both in the context of what their coaches need/want, and in the context of other players available in that draft. There really isn't a great mechanism for going back and evaluating a player against previous drafts - that's where a bit of subjective memory may come into play, "he's the best WR in this draft, but this isn't a great draft for WR so I need to put him here not here in his grade." There's also the subjective element of the scout's understanding of what the position coach/coordinator/head coach wants and needs. So now you put it all together, and you're deciding whether the available DB or TE are a better choice for your team, yes BPA means you take the guy with the highest grade, but there's a lot of subjectivity that went into how that grade got there - not subjectivity in the sense of totally random throwing darts, but subjectivity in the sense of how sharp is one set of position scouts vs another, how clear are they both on what the coaches want - which may lead them to grade a player higher who is not as much of a baller but who "looks like" what the scouts are told the coaches want and so forth.

 

Anyway, thanks, great read!

 

Indeed...the process is complicated to say the least. I believe Whaley and Co. use a horizontal board, so that may answer some of that question.

[YoloinOhio]

Wisniewski, blaylock, and barksdale are still unsigned. Curious as to whether the bills have any interest in any of these guys. Usually at this stage of FA, if guys are still available, it's because the value they (or their agents) have put on them is higher than teams in need of that position see them. That could change though I doubt the players are in any hurry. I do expect barksdale to return to StL.

Edited March 26, 2015 by YoloinOhio

[Hapless Bills Fan]

I actually don't want a clean sweep. I think Whaley is good and Nix was decent. I know that Nix was grooming Whaley to succeed him, it was widely reported.

 

My only point was that saying this regime is not connected to the one that picked Maybin is incorrect. That's all. Whaley could've hated the pick, who knows? But it's connected.

 

Then I guess I'm not quite sure what your points really are. I'm not sure I agree on Nix being decent. While the talent on the team certainly improved on his watch, he was "National Scout" when we drafted Maybin. His biggest failure as a GM was to go "all in" with Fitz and fail to develop a contingency plan at QB in the 2010 and 2011 drafts when he was GM. I hold him responsible for that, especially in 2011 when the talent was deep. The QBs drafted under his watch (Levi Brown and EJ Manuel) one is long gone and the other "TBD". Since QB is the most important player on the team, that's a giant downcheck on Nix.

 

The key point that I'm making ( and would like acknowledged) is that since Jan 2010, there has been double turnover at key positions: 2x at GM (Brandon (de facto GM) -> Nix -> Whaley. 4x at Director of Pro Personnel (Guy -> Whaley -> Gibbons -> open position? Monos/Whaley effectively?). and 3x at Director of College Scouting (Modrak (VP, same position) -> Chuck Cook -> Kelvin Fisher

 

You started out saying "This has been the main problem with this team for years, and years. It still hasn't changed under Whaley because If it did the 3 O line draft picks last year might have actually worked out.(....) The team paid 100 million to Mario because they couldn't distinguish the great talent at DE vs the bums ( Maybin). I know I'm not holding my breath when they draft an O line player in the second or third round again this year. .........The team knew they needed a top OG-RT, and when they didn't get their guy... they let it go. .......For some unknown reason these men in the FO who are paid millions to do their jobs just don't understand the basic reasoning behind needing top players on the offensive line.

 

My point is that this seems like total hyperbole. I don't understand why bring up years and years, when the key people are different. Sure, all of these people are connected - they all worked with each other at different times on different teams - but working with someone doesn't mean "adopted his brain and ability" "sees things the same way" "does things the same way" or even "strongly influenced by".

 

Let's break it down...you bring up paying 100 million to Mario because they couldn't distinguish great talent vs bums and mention Maybin. But on Nix's watch, they drafted Dareus the year before bringing in Williams and also brought in Manny Lawson. Whaley brought in Hughes and Other DE and DT acquisitions have been solid and some of those we've cut have gone on to play with other teams - Dwan Edwards who Nix brought in is still playing for the Panthers, Alex Carrington is playing for the Rams. There have also been strong acquisitions at LB and DB. Where is the evidence that the current team can't distinguish defensive talent vs bums? I don't see it. So why even toss that into the mix?

 

You bring up "this (OL) has been the main problem with this team for years. It still hasn't changed under Whaley". It's true that the team's record on OL acquisitions has been weaker. Draftee Hairston played decently and showed promise until injuries. Glenn showed great promise for 2 years until last years' dumpster fire. FA scrap heap guys such as Pears, Urbik, and Rinehardt played capably. The bad side of the ledger has included some draftees and some of the FA signings - 2010 was notably bad for Ed Wang and Cornell Green. Legursky (though he's playing C for San Diego) disappointed as a FA replacement for Levitre. Missing is acknowledgement that the OL was not as bad in previous years or under Gailey, with many of the same personnel. So even here, where I overall agree that the team needs to do more to address OL and the track record of the current FO is decidedly mixed - it seems hyperbolic and exaggerated to claim the OL has been the main problem for years and still hasn't changed.

 

Would I have liked the team to sign one or more quality FA OLmen? Yes, I would. Apparently they tried. If they don't feel some of the other FA on the market are worth their asking price, so be it. I think it's a reasonable and valid point that this FO has yet to show a solid track record on identifying and bringing in OL talent, but we also have to consider that the FO's job is to bring in the sort of players the coach says he needs, so that must be taken into consideration as well. If we start the season with this current OL, I will be very disappointed.

[FireChan]

 

Then I guess I'm not quite sure what your points really are. I'm not sure I agree on Nix being decent. While the talent on the team certainly improved on his watch, he was "National Scout" when we drafted Maybin. His biggest failure as a GM was to go "all in" with Fitz and fail to develop a contingency plan at QB in the 2010 and 2011 drafts when he was GM. I hold him responsible for that, especially in 2011 when the talent was deep. The QBs drafted under his watch (Levi Brown and EJ Manuel) one is long gone and the other "TBD". Since QB is the most important player on the team, that's a giant downcheck on Nix.

 

The key point that I'm making ( and would like acknowledged) is that since Jan 2010, there has been double turnover at key positions: 2x at GM (Brandon (de facto GM) -> Nix -> Whaley. 4x at Director of Pro Personnel (Guy -> Whaley -> Gibbons -> open position? Monos/Whaley effectively?). and 3x at Director of College Scouting (Modrak (VP, same position) -> Chuck Cook -> Kelvin Fisher

 

You started out saying "This has been the main problem with this team for years, and years. It still hasn't changed under Whaley because If it did the 3 O line draft picks last year might have actually worked out.(....) The team paid 100 million to Mario because they couldn't distinguish the great talent at DE vs the bums ( Maybin). I know I'm not holding my breath when they draft an O line player in the second or third round again this year. .........The team knew they needed a top OG-RT, and when they didn't get their guy... they let it go. .......For some unknown reason these men in the FO who are paid millions to do their jobs just don't understand the basic reasoning behind needing top players on the offensive line.

 

My point is that this seems like total hyperbole. I don't understand why bring up years and years, when the key people are different. Sure, all of these people are connected - they all worked with each other at different times on different teams - but working with someone doesn't mean "adopted his brain and ability" "sees things the same way" "does things the same way" or even "strongly influenced by".

 

Let's break it down...you bring up paying 100 million to Mario because they couldn't distinguish great talent vs bums and mention Maybin. But on Nix's watch, they drafted Dareus the year before bringing in Williams and also brought in Manny Lawson. Whaley brought in Hughes and Other DE and DT acquisitions have been solid and some of those we've cut have gone on to play with other teams - Dwan Edwards who Nix brought in is still playing for the Panthers, Alex Carrington is playing for the Rams. There have also been strong acquisitions at LB and DB. Where is the evidence that the current team can't distinguish defensive talent vs bums? I don't see it. So why even toss that into the mix?

 

You bring up "this (OL) has been the main problem with this team for years. It still hasn't changed under Whaley". It's true that the team's record on OL acquisitions has been weaker. Draftee Hairston played decently and showed promise until injuries. Glenn showed great promise for 2 years until last years' dumpster fire. FA scrap heap guys such as Pears, Urbik, and Rinehardt played capably. The bad side of the ledger has included some draftees and some of the FA signings - 2010 was notably bad for Ed Wang and Cornell Green. Legursky (though he's playing C for San Diego) disappointed as a FA replacement for Levitre. Missing is acknowledgement that the OL was not as bad in previous years or under Gailey, with many of the same personnel. So even here, where I overall agree that the team needs to do more to address OL and the track record of the current FO is decidedly mixed - it seems hyperbolic and exaggerated to claim the OL has been the main problem for years and still hasn't changed.

 

Would I have liked the team to sign one or more quality FA OLmen? Yes, I would. Apparently they tried. If they don't feel some of the other FA on the market are worth their asking price, so be it. I think it's a reasonable and valid point that this FO has yet to show a solid track record on identifying and bringing in OL talent, but we also have to consider that the FO's job is to bring in the sort of players the coach says he needs, so that must be taken into consideration as well. If we start the season with this current OL, I will be very disappointed.

I didn't say any of that. All those quotes are from a different poster.

 

Although, Whaley was calling the shots for the 2013 draft.

Edited March 26, 2015 by FireChan

[GG]

 

Heard what? It was, quite simply, the explanation that Whaley gave in the article.

 

 

Which was the same explanation to all the whiners two weeks ago.

[YoloinOhio]

Well here's one guy they won't be pursuing

 

@Rand_Getlin: The #49ers have waived OT Jonathan Martin.

[LA Grant]

Well here's one guy they won't be pursuing

 

@Rand_Getlin: The #49ers have waived OT Jonathan Martin.

 

Hahaha. Could you imagine though?

[thebandit27]

 

Which was the same explanation to all the whiners two weeks ago.

Ah...gotcha.

[FireChan]

 

Which was the same explanation to all the whiners two weeks ago.

Which part? Trying hard is good enough?

[GG]

Which part? Trying hard is good enough?

 

Yeah, basically that they didn't do anything to address the OL. When it turns out they were very aggressive and went after the best available guys, but couldn't close the deal - because one team didn't want to trade the guy they wanted and the other guy decided to stay home for less money.

[FireChan]

Yeah, basically that they didn't do anything to address the OL. When it turns out they were very aggressive and went after the best available guys, but couldn't close the deal - because one team didn't want to trade the guy they wanted and the other guy decided to stay home for less money.

I don't know anyone who claimed they didn't try. Aggressive is relative. Was Bulaga on the jet back and forth or was that Clay?

[thewildrabbit]

Wisniewski, blaylock, and barksdale are still unsigned. Curious as to whether the bills have any interest in any of these guys. Usually at this stage of FA, if guys are still available, it's because the value they (or their agents) have put on them is higher than teams in need of that position see them. That could change though I doubt the players are in any hurry. I do expect barksdale to return to StL.

I'm holding out hope that between now and the season starting that Whaley figures out how to acquire some better talent at RT, & OG then what he has on the roster. Almost anyone mentioned will be an upgrade, and better then Urbik, Williams.

 

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/sports/football/nfl/bills/2015/01/08/bills-offensive-line-grades/21467023/

 

 

EDIT: I'll still hold out hope. Although it doesn't look good after reading this.

 

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/bills-news-notes/2015/3/26/8296063/doug-whaley-rex-ryan-buffalo-bills-offensive-line-2015

Edited March 26, 2015 by FeartheLosing

[thebandit27]

I don't know anyone who claimed they didn't try. Aggressive is relative. Was Bulaga on the jet back and forth or was that Clay?

Not sure that's a salient point ChanFuego.

 

If the reports are to be believed that Buffalo offered Bulaga more than Green Bay, then clearly he was intent on staying there. Given that's the case, they can't MAKE the guy visit. It's likely that they told the agent what their offer was, and made it known they'd pay more. Not their fault that the guy wanted to stay.

 

Now, that doesn't mean they don't still need to address the OL.

[FireChan]

Not sure that's a salient point ChanFuego.

 

If the reports are to be believed that Buffalo offered Bulaga more than Green Bay, then clearly he was intent on staying there. Given that's the case, they can't MAKE the guy visit. It's likely that they told the agent what their offer was, and made it known they'd pay more. Not their fault that the guy wanted to stay.

 

Now, that doesn't mean they don't still need to address the OL.

Who knows how much more they offered? All we know is "more." It could've been $100k more per year. Granted, it could've been $5 million more, but at this point, is it really not fair game to question the FO a little bit? I mean, the GM himself is saying that the O-line hunt was a "failure" or a "loss" and we're still getting the "they tried though!" responses. Give me Whaley's salary and I'll try really hard too.

 

If I ranked the positions of need where I thought their importance was, it would go:

 

Interior O-line

Exterior O-line

TE

WR/FB I guess? Were these really needs?

 

And yet, here we are. The two places I considered were the most necessary, are still empty. But, at least they tried.

Edited March 26, 2015 by FireChan

[BillsCelticsAngelsBama]

Guys that didn't want to come here... didn't come here. But it's the GM's fault ? There are actually some players that don't want to play in Buffalo, as hard as that is to believe. The GM has done a great job getting playmakers and now if OL, LB and S can be strengthened this is a power team, no I didn't forget QB. Don't get some of you who are unhappy with the talent level we have under Whaleys watch.

[Dibs]

Unless I've missed a comment or two in this thread, it seems that nobody has picked up on this statement:

 

“We’re tapped out,” Whaley said. “We’re at the point now where we’ve got to save” cap space “for the draft choices and for injury replacements next year. So anything we do from now on will basically be minimum” salaried “guys.

 

Maybe if Evans gets cut by the Saints he will change his tune on that, but as quoted, we are now pretty much set in our team roster(aside from rookies/journeymen).

[White Linen]

I was just funning around. I agree 100%. But there's a lot of time between now and September.

 

Again, there are guys that surprise every year. We have a new coaching staff. Rex calls them all-stars. I am hopeful that at least one of our O-linemen drafted last year will step up.

 

Plus, there's still the rest of free agency and the draft.

 

Oh ok. I just think it's legit to talk about where we are in the here and now - but also agree that there's plenty of time to address the OL and certainly no time to panic.