ajzepp Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 ONE aspect? lol. How is this being blown out of proportion? It iswhat it is. One starter after round two. 284885[/snapback] If you can't figure it out by reading the rest of the replies, then I can't help you bro lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Not when you're talking about a GM... His job is to bring the talent to the team. He has done his job. Unfortunately he's a bit too old to throw, catch, run, etc, etc.... 284865[/snapback] So, he has brought talent to the team, and yet in the 4 years he's been here, the team hasn't had enough players who can throw, catch, run, etc, etc enough to make one playoff appearance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San-O Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 Another misleading thread. One could argue that plenty of post 2nd rounders would be starting for the Bills if Donahoe didn't sign strong FA talent. Crowell would be starting instead of Spikes, Wire instead of Milloy, Haggin instead of Fletcher, Stamer instead of Posey, Edwards instead of Adams. Point is, they don't have to start these guys because Donahoe has done an excellent job in aquiring talent in the draft and FA. And again, we're completely ignoring special teams here, which is a mistake, considering Donahoe has built the best ST unit in the league, largely through the draft. You'll find several post 2nd rounders starting on special teams. By the way, Jennings and McGee both started for the Bills last season, and both were taken after the 2nd round. 284877[/snapback] Good spin, I think? So, we sign free-agents to start because we don't want to draft them? I am not including special teams. They are SPECIAL. This is not a Super Bowl team like NE loaded with talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like A Mofo Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 This is not a Super Bowl team like NE loaded with talent. 284894[/snapback] Who is saying that? You make it seem so many here believe that...now you are in the spin cycle!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San-O Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 Who is saying that? You make it seem so many here believe that...now you are in the spin cycle!! 284896[/snapback] Read the thread. The poster I was responding to is saying we would have more guys starting after round two if we weren't so good and didn't have as good FA signings. Brilliant! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crows57 Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Does anyone else find this startling? No. If you want to present evidence that this is in the bottom tier of average or better teams I can be persuaded to be startled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like A Mofo Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Read the thread. The poster I was responding to is saying we would have more guys starting after round two if we weren't so good and didn't have as good FA signings. Brilliant! 284900[/snapback] I read it. Continue on your your LAMP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Good spin, I think? So, we sign free-agents to start because we don't want to draft them? I am not including special teams. They are SPECIAL. This is not a Super Bowl team like NE loaded with talent. 284894[/snapback] When you replace 51 of 53 players, you can only replace apprx. 28 players through the draft after 4 years. So you have to sign FAs. But I think you knew that. Now Donahoe can either sign crappy FAs, who can be beaten out by 3rd and 4th round draft choices, or he can sign the best players available. Good thing he signed the best players available, or you'd really have a problem with him. And I don't want to sound harsh, but if you don't include special teams after watching the Bills last season, you don't know football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 We went 9-7 last year.......9-3 after the team began to gel and Willis became the starter. If you can't see that the team (yes, the team that TD put together) is on the upswing, then I don't know what to tell you. TD has done a great job finding talent for this team.....whether via the draft, FA, trades, UDFAs, etc. We are at or near the top of the league in 2/3 areas, and our offense has a new stud RB, new stud WR, and potentially a new stud QB. Open your eyes, people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan Trapped in Pats Land Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Yeah, I saw it. Now go dig me up the names of all the other GMs who have drafted tons of talent from rounds 3-7... I'll be waiting here. 284846[/snapback] Pioli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffaloboyinATL Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 From another thread praising TD, I figured equal time is fair. Of the currect depth chart I went through and determined of the players who would start, only 8 have been drafted by TD since coming here, and only 1 after the second round. Notice only 1 O-lineman: ============================================ J.P. Losman 1 Willis McGahee 1 Lee Evans 1 Mike Williams 1 Aaron Schobel 2 Chris Kelsay 2 Ron Edwards (Probably not a starter) 3 Terrence McGee 4 Nate Clements 1 ============================================ You TD supporters can try and spin this any way you like, however I believe this shows clearly TD has been unable to draft much quality after round 2. And this is not a Super Bowl team. 284815[/snapback] I would be concerned if he was drafting first and second rounders who did not start or make an impact in their first couple of seasons, as is the case with some other teams. At least we are making good use of our first couple of picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Pioli 284931[/snapback] Here are the Pat's late round notables from the past four drafts: 2001: Kenyatta Jones (3rd) 2002: David Givens (#244) 2003: Asante Samuel (#120) Dan Koppen (#164) 2004: ?? None that I can see WHOOOOPIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 I also did not find this startling because I think the draft is an important part of building a team, but unlike many posters I do not think is the most important part of building a team. The important thing I think is for a GM to be good at striking a balance and having a good mix which uses the tools of FA, UDFAs, trades and of course the draft to build a winning unit. The current Pats team defines success having won 3 of the last 4 SBs and I am very much influenced by BB building the 1st team acquiring 15 or so players after the June 1st cap cuts and building a winner with that strong core of players chosen in the BB mold. The draft was obviously an important part of this team but the handful of draftees acquired that year (most of whom we in development guys were not the key to building a winner. It supports your focus on the later part of the draft that hactual draft key was the unplanned reliance on 6th round pick Tom Brady. But still as best as I can tell ther are a few BB draftees who play prominent roles, but the real leadership that defines the team is provided by FAs such as Harrison. As far as your factoids, the interesting thing here is not only why TD has been so poor at finding starters in the end of the draft, but also that it contrasts with him finding a bunch of starters in the first two rounds. He has traded up so his 4 years brought additonal picks, but the baseline is 4 years means 8 picks from the first two rounds and he has 8 starters. Why do you feel that TD has been so successful in the 1st 2 rounds when he has been unsuccessful in the later rounds. The ego explanation does no go to far in explaining this phenomena in that most of these 8 are players who should start like WM and Evans and even Kelsay and Denney are contributors to one of the top statistical Ds in the league. Rather than simply pooh-poohing the theory that he has found better players though other mechanism which has forced his draftees to the bench this is actually true in regards to LBs. I doubt any draftees are going to move Spikes and Fletcher out of the starting line-up. Posey is the weakest link ofthree, but the D unit has generally performed well so indicting him for ego does not seem like a good explanation. As far as Crowell and Haggan, they were drafted for ST and depth and that os what they provide as I find it hard to complain about ST performance. In terms of spin, I think these are the issues and these are the explanations: 1. His first three years did not see a winning record and sucked, but ht bears the lead responsibility for this by hiring an HC who was not ready for prmetime, but I think he was hiring a guy he knew he could beat ifthe Ciwher situation happened to him again. 2. Last year, he made what appears to be a at least good if not very good hire in MM. Through striking a good balance and good leadership he deserves praise for being GM of a team with a winning record, but because of adjustment struggles with a new coach and the new crew panicking bit in the last game they missed the playoffs. Its hard for me to see anyone being logically anything other than hopefulafter last year's improvement in W/L and it being very early (pre-draft) in off-season acquisition and striking the all important balance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jahnyc Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 SoCal raises a legitimate question, particularly given our failure to make the playoffs over the last number of years. I am not suggesting that we fire TD, but in light of the foregoing, it is fair to review his performance, where we are and why. The reality is if we were getting better performance from our late round picks the team would be a better team and more balanced in terms of overall player economics. TD has done well with first and second round picks and some free agent acquisitions, but the missing piece of the puzzle is success with the late round picks and cheap free agent acquisitions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 After 5 minutes of exhausting research, I found the following: The Philadelphia Eagles had ONE starter in the Super Bowl drafted since 2001 after round 2 (Westbrook). The New England Patriots had TWO (Koppen, A. Samuel). Nice thread, Chicken Little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobblehead Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Here is a linky showing the 3rd round and beyond tally of arguably the best drafted team in history, the 1969-74 Steelers. The total of eventual starters the Steelers drafted in round 3 and beyond in that period equals 12. Even so, to answer your question, I would have to say no, I'm not startled. Rounds 3 through 7 is such uncharted territory, I would feel foolish to even try to make an argument about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San-O Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 After 5 minutes of exhausting research, I found the following: The Philadelphia Eagles had ONE starter in the Super Bowl drafted since 2001 after round 2 (Westbrook). The New England Patriots had TWO (Koppen, A. Samuel). Nice thread, Chicken Little. 284967[/snapback] Wrong again: Please NFL link depth chart for offense. Seven starters on OFFENSE drafted by New England, three after found two. This is just on offense. Didn't bother to check defense. http://www.nfl.com/teams/depthcharts/NE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 I bet cleveland would like some of the Bills 1st rounders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 SoCal raises a legitimate question, particularly given our failure to make the playoffs over the last number of years. I am not suggesting that we fire TD, but in light of the foregoing, it is fair to review his performance, where we are and why. The reality is if we were getting better performance from our late round picks the team would be a better team and more balanced in terms of overall player economics. TD has done well with first and second round picks and some free agent acquisitions, but the missing piece of the puzzle is success with the late round picks and cheap free agent acquisitions. 284951[/snapback] SoCal only raises a legimate question if you believe the premise that a team that replaces 51 of 53 players in a 4 year time frame should be perrenial playoff contenders. Sorry, I don't buy that premise. Now you could argue that TD should have overpaid for aging, mediocre players like Holecek, Jones, and Wiley, but I wouldn't, doing that would have prolonged the inevitable. And you could argue that he should have gamed the salary cap to gain another 8-8 season out of Butler's old group of players, but that would have risked the aquisition of Spikes, Fletcher, and Milloy. Teams don't miracleously go from 4-12 to the playoffs in one season without years of losing seasons and high draft picks behind them. The Chargers are perfect example of this, as are the Rams, Ravens, and even the Patriots to some extent. To his credit, Donahoe's massive player turnover did not result in the Bills turning into the Cards, or the Bengals, or even the Chargers. Despite only one season of picking in the top 10, the Bills have had 2 losing seasons, a .500 season and a winning season. That's actually pretty good if you're not deluding yourself into thinking the team was going to going to compete in the playoffs every season while they were in the middle of a massive turnover of players. Donahoe has made mistakes, but player aquisition isn't one of them. He's built the #1 defensive unit and the #1 special teams unit from scratch in 4 years, thanks to his player aquisition skills. Maybe if we stop bitching that TD built an excellent group of LBs through FA instead of the draft, we can talk about the real mistakes Donahoe has made over the last 4 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San-O Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 Does anyone else find this startling? No. If you want to present evidence that this is in the bottom tier of average or better teams I can be persuaded to be startled. 284905[/snapback] http://www.nfl.com/teams/depthcharts/NE Seven of New Englands offensive starters were drafted by them, three after round 2. ================================================ http://www.patriots.com/team/index.cfm?ac=playerbio&bio=571 http://www.patriots.com/team/index.cfm?ac=playerbio&bio=566 http://www.patriots.com/team/index.cfm?ac=...erbio&bio=12370 Eight of New Englands defensive starters were drafted by them, don 't have rounds. That's 15 drafted starters, we have 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts