Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

According to Beane we STILL draft him, and I'd be all for it. Beane has repeatedly stated that drafting for need is a BIG mistake. He said you should ALWAYS go BPA. I want him to stick with his plan. I believe in his plan and his philosophies. If it's Metcalf then Metcalf it is.

Posted

if he is the top guy on the board you draft him....   Just like any other position. You don't pass on the best player at the top of the draft board, that's how you turn into the Buffalo Bills and Cleveland Browns for all those years.

Posted

I don’t think the WR signings preclude Buffalo from taking a WR. I actually think it’s a better situation to draft a WR now than prior to the FA signings. Now he can come in and ease into the lineup. Take a year or two to fully gain the number one receiver role (unless he blows you away). 

Posted

Simple, you take him.  However, the concerns about his agility numbers and their impact on his ability to separate at the next level make me doubt he should be taken over defensive studs like Williams, Allen, Oliver, etc. 

Posted

IF....he is BPA, take him. I highly doubt he is, and pray he's not, but if he is I trust McBeane. I'd really prefer a penetrating DT or Edge at 9 overall. Think there will be one at 9 that grades out higher than Metcalf

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
1 minute ago, eball said:

I think it's a moot point.  He won't be BPA at 9.

 

I tend to agree, he scares me a bit. But, like Josh, if we were to take him he’s our guy and I’ll hope for the best. But I’d be skeptical.....

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted

All that matters is how the Bills board is set up. We won’t know if he’s “their” BPA when pick 9 comes up, if he’s still available. If they pass on him, it means he wasn’t and they had another player rated higher . It doesn’t mean they felt they didn’t need another WR.  Imo 

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted

I don't think he'll be IMO the BPA at #9, but I do have him like #6 or 7 on my big board so he could be.

 

These FA signings should have zero impact on our willingness to draft him. If they're as high on him as I am, he could be the best WR on this roster from Day 1 with a far higher ceiling than any of these guys.

Posted

Well, for that to be the case the argument would have to be that Metcalf is at least the 9th best player in the draft... That seems like a stretch to me.

 

Bosa 

Williams

Allen

Oliver 

Hockenson

J. Williams

Burns

Sweat

Taylor

 

They are all guys I think are overall better than him...

 

Another thing on this note is that drafting BPA over need does not eliminate the reality of positional worth- that becomes a factor of the overall player ranking.

 

So if you had a ranking system wherein a perfect 10 is Hall of Fame, and you have a tackle who is a 9.0, I think the argument can be made that he is still the "best player available" over a 9.5 receiver simply because the value of a tackle over that of a receiver can bridge that .5 gap.

Posted
10 minutes ago, Billsfansinceday1 said:

It is spoken and so it shall be.

i like this.  i'm going to make my wife say this to me on the regular.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

All that matters is how the Bills board is set up. We won’t know if he’s “their” BPA when pick 9 comes up, if he’s still available. If they pass on him, it means he wasn’t and they had another player rated higher . It doesn’t mean they felt they didn’t need another WR.  Imo 

 

Harry in the 2nd, baby!

Posted

BPA doesn't mean you actually take the BPA. BPA just means you don't reach for a WR or a OT because that is your greatest need. If you don't want a WR you can look at the second highest guy on the board and if his grade is very close and maybe fills a spot you take that guy. 

  • Like (+1) 2
×
×
  • Create New...