Is Cyrus Kouandjio Still a Bust?

[Kirby Jackson]

I just believe it comes down to good talent evaluation. There is no way I'd have taken Greg Robinson 2nd overall, hell I didn't have him as a top 10 player on my board that year.

 

I think tackle is an example of a position where I want refined technique over raw potential. I think teams get it wrong at that position more than others because they are wowed by the measurables.

I am OK with the correct left tackle but I would still be scared in the top 10. I excluded the most recent draft because we don't know what will become of these guys. In the 4 prior drafts (2012-2015) there were 12 OL picked in the top 11 picks: Matt Kalil, Eric Fisher, Luke Joekel, Lane Johnson, Jonathan Cooper, Chance Warmack, DJ Fluker, Greg Robinson, Jake Matthews, Taylor Lewan, Brandon Scherff and Ereck Flowers.

 

Johnson is a nice player but always in trouble. Scherff may be the best of the bunch but I would have taken Leonard Williams there. I do not think that any of these guys has elevated his franchise.

Edited August 22, 2016 by Kirby Jackson

[GunnerBill]

 

Remember Jason Peters?

He was a UDFA wasn't he? I'm fine taking a chance on raw potential there. I mean when you are picking high up I think you take technique, polished guys. Having said that Jake Matthews has only been average so far and I had him as a top 5 player that same draft as Robinson.

 

My point still stands. If I am picking top 10 and the BPA is a guy I think can be a franchise LT I pick him.

Johnson I was high on, Matthews I was high on and Lewan I liked (but thought he went too high). There is no argument for a guard like Cooper or Warmack that high IMO.

[Nervous Guy]

He was a UDFA wasn't he? I'm fine taking a chance on raw potential there. I mean when you are picking high up I think you take technique, polished guys. Having said that Jake Matthews has only been average so far and I had him as a top 5 player that same draft as Robinson.

 

My point still stands. If I am picking top 10 and the BPA is a guy I think can be a franchise LT I pick him.

Johnson I was high on, Matthews I was high on and Lewan I liked (but thought he went too high). There is no argument for a guard like Cooper or Warmack that high IMO.

yeah UDFA Tight end....he replaced the 2002 fourth overall pick Mike Williams who was considered one of the two top LTs...the other being McKinnie...we really whiffed on that one.

[GunnerBill]

yeah UDFA Tight end....he replaced the 2002 fourth overall pick Mike Williams who was considered one of the two top LTs...the other being McKinnie...we really whiffed on that one.

Mike Williams was before I starter paying any attention to draft classes but he strikes me as exactly what I am talking about. A guy loved for his measurables. If I am taking my potential franchise LT early I want the guy who is polished. In a lot of other positions I want the high ceiling physical freak. Not at left tackle. I want to see that a guy can play not just out strength college pash rushers.

[BADOLBILZ]

 

You know, for every bit of legitimate football knowledge and analysis you impart, you really lessen yourself when you feel the need to "rag" on a guy who did nothing other than tear up his knee.

 

Just a thought.

 

Utter nonsense.

 

He injured his knee LONG before he was drafted.

 

I have zero against the guys effort or preparation it's not his fault he was taken in the second round.

[GunnerBill]

 

Utter nonsense.

 

He injured his knee LONG before he was drafted.

 

I have zero against the guys effort or preparation it's not his fault he was taken in the second round.

I think he was on about Ragland... but I read it as Kujo at first.

[BADOLBILZ]

 

Well, they did need a tackle.

 

My problem with the Kouandjio pick isn't the position, it's the player; player quality should govern in most cases.

 

Also, I don't necessarily think it's safe to say that guys like Shaq and Ragland wouldn't and won't eventually be better than the guys out there simply because they were able to execute the game plan for a quarter.

 

I do see your larger point--that there are certain pieces that are more replaceable than others. That doesn't, however, mean that there's diminishing returns on all non-QB positions.

 

I have no issue with the position either...........I have issue with drafting for need when needs change significantly from year to year.

 

Will Shaq and RR be better than a guy like Manny Lawson who....to be kind......probably couldn't start for another team in the league?

 

If not then they will be outright busts.

 

I've never predicted that. I don't even want to think about that. When you aim low to start you hope to at least hit the target.

 

The question for me is will these guys be the kind of impactful players that can transition from one scheme to the next if necessary and still be impactful.

 

I don't think Shaq is the kind of guy that can be a 10 sack guy in a one gap 4-3 attack. I don't think Ragnuts would cut it as an every down 4-3 MLB.

 

I could be wrong.......but that's what I see. Limited players who were drafted as much because they seemed closer to ready than other rookies might be as because of the potential impact they can have.

[JohnC]

I don't disagree with following your board but it would be rare (if ever) that I would have a guard, center, RT, ILB or run stuffing DT in with a 1st round grade. I would listen to the argument for a franchise LT but not in the top 10. You cannot use a pick that early for someone that is dependent on those around them for success. Again, JMO but as an example do you think in hindsight the Rams would have rather drafted Bortles, Watkins or Mack than Greg Robinson? The Falcons took Jake Matthews over Mike Evans, Anthony Barr, Odell Beckham and Aaron Donald. Bortles, Watkins, Mack, Evans, Barr, Beckham and Donald are in positions to control the outcome of a play. They can either rush the passer or put points on the board. I throw CB into that mix as well. Give me those guys all day long in the 1st and I will take my chances. The Cowboys start 3 really good 1st round OL and another guy that would have went in the 1st if not for that crazy situation and they won 4 games. The Broncos won the Super Bowl with elite pass rushers, corners, and receivers.

I did state that the issue of securing a qb is a priority issue for all teams and is in a special category by nature of the position.

 

Where I disagree with you is that you shouldn't look at a particular draft year and then draw conclusions. With the Ozzie Newsome approach of taking the best player carried over a number of years you build up to a critical mass of players that collectively give you a strong roster and allows you more flexibility when deciding to add or subtract from your roster.

 

You brought up Mack to illustrate your point regarding the importance of certain positions. The take I have on Mack is that he illustrates my position on drafting for talent over positions because he was ranked on many boards near the top of the draft. From a talent standpoint he deserved to be a top 1-3 pick.

 

In general, teams that are better at ranking talent regardless of positional needs have more sustained success over teams that give added weight to positions when evaluating and drafting players. It also has to be noted that certain teams don't rank positions in the same way as others do. As an example the Patriots don't expend much resources in securing receivers and running backs while other teams place more weight on those positions.

[Kirby Jackson]

I did state that the issue of securing a qb is a priority issue for all teams and is in a special category by nature of the position.

 

Where I disagree with you is that you shouldn't look at a particular draft year and then draw conclusions. With the Ozzie Newsome approach of taking the best player carried over a number of years you build up to a critical mass of players that collectively give you a strong roster and allows you more flexibility when deciding to add or subtract from your roster.

 

You brought up Mack to illustrate your point regarding the importance of certain positions. The take I have on Mack is that he illustrates my position on drafting for talent over positions because he was ranked on many boards near the top of the draft. From a talent standpoint he deserved to be a top 1-3 pick.

 

In general, teams that are better at ranking talent regardless of positional needs have more sustained success over teams that give added weight to positions when evaluating and drafting players. It also has to be noted that certain teams don't rank positions in the same way as others do. As an example the Patriots don't expend much resources in securing receivers and running backs while other teams place more weight on those positions.

I just look at the OL (listed earlier) and it further illustrates my point. None of them transformed their teams, they just can't by the nature of the job. QB goes without saying but WR, CB and pass rushers can change the face of your team. They can do things on their own.

 

Watkins is a great example. The Bills receivers outside of Watkins are not good. The entire offense is different with him on the field. He keeps safeties from the LOS and commands an extra body. That opens things up underneath, for the other receivers and for the running game. He effects the entire game just by being out there. I think that Tyron Smith is the best OL in football. If you are the defense you can slide your best pass rusher away from him. You can make him play one on one with Lorenzo Alexander for the whole game. He may do great against Alexander but he isn't stopping the pass rush. He can only do his assignment.

[GunnerBill]

I don't think Shaq is the kind of guy that can be a 10 sack guy in a one gap 4-3 attack. I don't think Ragnuts would cut it as an every down 4-3 MLB.

 

I could be wrong.......but that's what I see. Limited players who were drafted as much because they seemed closer to ready than other rookies might be as because of the potential impact they can have.

I think you are wrong on Shaq. Not so much on Ragland. I think Lawson is gonna be one hell of a player for a long time whichever scheme you want to put him in.

 

I just find it hard to criticise that pick. Jack apart he was sticking out as by far the best player on my board at #19. I was amazed he made it out of the top 10 and I suspect he only did because of the shoulder. I just do not believe it was a pick for need. It was simply picking the most talented football player still on the board.

Edited August 23, 2016 by GunnerBill

[3rdand12]

nice progress by Kujo. hope he can continue trending up. he aint there yet , but getting better makes has me pleased for him

[The Frankish Reich]

These things -- bust or not bust -- are easier in baseball, where we can simply look to something like "expected Wins Above Replacement by draft position" and then see whether a specific draft pick produced anywhere near expectations. Football is tougher from an analytic standpoint, but with a guy like Koundjio, can anyone disagree with the following?

 

Year 1: 0 WAR

Year 2: 0 WAR

Year 3 0 WAR

 

Year 4, best case scenario: backup who gets forced into action for a few games based on an injury, performs like a marginally competent NFL backup. Continuing the baseball analogy, an average starter over 150 games is good for about 2 WAR. An average backup may be 1 WAR. So maybe he produces at a level equivalent to a 0.5 WAR baseball player.

 

0.5 WAR over the course of a 4 year contract? In baseball, nobody would hesitate to call that a bust.

[Kirby Jackson]

These things -- bust or not bust -- are easier in baseball, where we can simply look to something like "expected Wins Above Replacement by draft position" and then see whether a specific draft pick produced anywhere near expectations. Football is tougher from an analytic standpoint, but with a guy like Koundjio, can anyone disagree with the following?

 

Year 1: 0 WAR

Year 2: 0 WAR

Year 3 0 WAR

 

Year 4, best case scenario: backup who gets forced into action for a few games based on an injury, performs like a marginally competent NFL backup. Continuing the baseball analogy, an average starter over 150 games is good for about 2 WAR. An average backup may be 1 WAR. So maybe he produces at a level equivalent to a 0.5 WAR baseball player.

 

0.5 WAR over the course of a 4 year contract? In baseball, nobody would hesitate to call that a bust.

No offense but you can't really apply WAR to football. It really only works in baseball and basketball. Position value is to wide which is why WAR isn't used in football.

 

What's Tyron Smith's WAR? They won 4 games and he is maybe the best OT in football. By the same token Tony Romo's WAR would be like 6 (or with your normalizing 24). If you want to apply analytics (while not perfect) PFF is more effective. It is a better indicator by position. Even still great OT play vs decent OT play (which it looks like CK may now be able to give) will have an extremely low impact on the outcome of games. It's probably the difference in a handful of plays all year.

[The Frankish Reich]

No offense but you can't really apply WAR to football. It really only works in baseball and basketball. Position value is to wide which is why WAR isn't used in football.

 

What's Tyron Smith's WAR? They won 4 games and he is maybe the best OT in football. By the same token Tony Romo's WAR would be like 6 (or with your normalizing 24). If you want to apply analytics (while not perfect) PFF is more effective. It is a better indicator by position. Even still great OT play vs decent OT play (which it looks like CK may now be able to give) will have an extremely low impact on the outcome of games. It's probably the difference in a handful of plays all year.

Correct. I was just analogizing to baseball because in Koudjio's case there's no way anyone can argue that he's produced anything other than zero value over the first 3 years. Therefore, unless he suddenly emerges as a quality starter in Year 4, there's no way he can be considered anything other than a bust to the Bills. As I've said before, that doesn't mean he can't redeem himself later on. But Years 5 an beyond are not under team control, so that's irrelevant to the analysis here.

[eball]

 

Utter nonsense.

 

He injured his knee LONG before he was drafted.

 

I have zero against the guys effort or preparation it's not his fault he was taken in the second round.

Ragland. Or as you call him, Ragnuts.

[Kirby Jackson]

Correct. I was just analogizing to baseball because in Koudjio's case there's no way anyone can argue that he's produced anything other than zero value over the first 3 years. Therefore, unless he suddenly emerges as a quality starter in Year 4, there's no way he can be considered anything other than a bust to the Bills. As I've said before, that doesn't mean he can't redeem himself later on. But Years 5 an beyond are not under team control, so that's irrelevant to the analysis here.

This is year 3 (not 4).

 

He came in as a raw player that was the youngest player in the draft (at least I think). He has certainly not done anything to date but all signs look like he will be a solid swing guy. His high ceiling has left room for improvement and he has finally improved. I'm not fitting him for a gold jacket but from a guy that didn't belong in the league to a solid player is a win. I would certainly say that he's been a bust to date but that can change because of his talent. Many busts don't have the ability to change their fortunes.

Edited August 23, 2016 by Kirby Jackson

[BADOLBILZ]

Ragland. Or as you call him, Ragnuts.

 

 

My opinion of Ragnuts potential has nothing to do with the knee injury......I assume he will return completely healthy.

[The Frankish Reich]

This is year 3 (not 4).

 

He came in as a raw player that was the youngest player in the draft (at least I think). He has certainly not done anything to date but all signs look like he will be a solid swing guy. His high ceiling has left room for improvement and he has finally improved. I'm not fitting him for a gold jacket but from a guy that didn't belong in the league to a solid player is a win. I would certainly say that he's been a bust to date but that can change because of his talent. Many busts don't have the ability to change their fortunes.

Thanks - for some reason I had in my mind that he came in the EJ draft. This does make a difference - if he emerges as a competent backup lineman this year, and maybe a bit better next year, he could still prove to be a reasonably valuable draft pick. But as far as performance vs. the Giants, we are getting pretty excited about a guy who didn't play well, but didn't look completely lost out there like he did previously ...

[Saxum]

Simple to look up:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/cyrus-kouandjio/

 

At least he has been making an effort during off season at LeCharles Bentley Offensive Line Performance Training Center.

[Kirby Jackson]

Thanks - for some reason I had in my mind that he came in the EJ draft. This does make a difference - if he emerges as a competent backup lineman this year, and maybe a bit better next year, he could still prove to be a reasonably valuable draft pick. But as far as performance vs. the Giants, we are getting pretty excited about a guy who didn't play well, but didn't look completely lost out there like he did previously ...

Oh I know, he has looked competent though for most of this offseason. They are calling him the most improved player. I honestly thought that he had no prayer of a roster spot. He has gone from that bad to a roster lock IMO.

 

If he does indeed end up serviceable he can go from a Torrell Troup quality draft pick to a Duke Williams quality pick (I know that CK went earlier). He can be a guy that sticks on the roster and isn't a total liability. That's not ideal for your 2nd rounder but you can do worse, until this offseason I'm not sure that I thought you could.