What is your draft doomsday scenario?

[HappyDays]

7 minutes ago, FireChans said:

It can't be, because we don't know his draft process.

 

I guess what matters is do you believe that Elam was truly sticking out as the best player left on their board when they traded up for him, or did he reach because he needed a CB?

 

I genuinely believe him when he said Elam was sticking out with a 1st round grade. I'm sure the need helped influence his decision to trade up. The problem was they completely misevaluated the player. I think they got bamboozled by that damn notebook and though he fit their DNA and could be coached up. Hopefully they learned their lesson and will take a cleaner scheme and talent fit this time around.

[Einstein's Dog]

2 hours ago, FireChans said:

Man, I just really don't agree with any of this.

 

The history of the NFL is that things can change....fast.

 

When you are penciling in your first round pick to fill in a pre-planned "hole," you are not only limiting flexibility at the pick, but future roster flexibility.

 

Not only can you fail to fill a hole because it's an imperfect science (see Elam, Kaiir), but pigeon-holing yourself for the future is just not a good idea imo.

 

You say BPA is subjective, (and it is) but its also the best science they have. Brandon Beane will have a board, and the players him and the scouts have evaluated will be ranked top to bottom. That is THEIR process and if they go outside it because they need a CB, that is not winning strategy.

I don't want it to pigeonhole the process too much, but I'm sure they narrow it down to some specific goals.  And yes, CB is one of this years goals.  And I agree that the one year with the Elam pick was a bit too much for me.

 

When most people say BPA, they really mean Best Player Available at a premium `position of need.  For instance they don't mean a great punter.  And most don't expect the Bills to pick a QB early.  So BPA is so rife with subjectivity (ie what is premium, where and how much do you factor in need) that I do not consider it a science.

[nosejob]

15 minutes ago, BigAl2526 said:

Donald was a 3 tech.  My issue is not that Nolen can't play and be a good or even great defensive tackle.  It is that Buffalo's primary need at defensive tackle is for a 1 tech to potentially replace 34 year old Daquan Jones.  If you line up with two sub 300 lb defensive tackles, some teams (Baltimore?) are going to run the ball up your gut all day long and you won't be able to stop them.  If Buffalo were to draft Nolen, they would be needing to look hard for a starting caliber 1 tech later in the draft.  They could do that.  There are a few more in the draft (Tyliek Williams, Alfred Collins, maybe Jamaree Caldwell).  There are some other 1 tech's they could draft, but they are probably going to need some amount of development before you'd want to trust them with starter responsibility.  The point is, the longer you wait, the more pressure you face to find somebody you can reasonably expect to fulfill the need.  Yes, you want to draft the best player available, but if that player does not also meet a significant need, your draft results are less than ideal.  I would rank the Bills draft need this way: 1. cornerback 2. 1 tech DT 3. WR (one that can line up outside and stretch defenses), 4. safety.  A rotational 3 tech DT, RB (insurance against a James Cook holdout), interior offensive line (to improve depth, a third string TE, are all minor needs.  If you fill them on day three of the draft, great, but you can survive without them. 

I wish we could get over the 3T  1T crap, it's 2025. All we've heard for 8 yrs. is how we wanna rush fo. Well with 5 Oline men, a TE and a back, good luck with that. It's simple math. Unless you got Moses at NT and the disciples on the line, the front 4 ain't happening, especially if you draft poorly and sign low end FAs.

That being said, I'll take the most disruptive DTs and Edges I can find. Guys that can play up and down the line. Give me 4 Chris Joneses and we'll start from there.

 

First step is Nolen. ( could be another Chris Jones) and go from there. 

[FireChans]

32 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

I agree with most of what you say, and you can't ignore need.  It hopefully wouldn't pigeonhole you into a decision where you pass over a great, elite player in a premium position to get one that fits your needs better at a different position - ie the example below.

 

Interesting to me though, that you mention the Elam pick - I was hoping/thinking one of the WR options would be the pick - C Watkins or G Pickens.

But that's the thing, and @HappyDays's example illustrates it.

 

We didn't NEED a Kyler Gordon slot DB in 2022. We had Taron Johnson playing at a high level.

 

Now, 3 years later, TJ is coming off the worst year of his career, and is IMO a cut candidate next offseason. Gordon may be the one of the best slot CBs in the league. Elam is off the team.

 

You can obviously play this game with anybody and any year. And who knows how closely Gordon and Elam were ranked to each other. But self-handicapping because of need just makes the already long odds of the draft process even longer.

 

I am on record that I think Walter Nolen is one of the best IDL players projected to be around our pick. I prefer him to the other guys who play 1t and fit more of what we need on defense. I don't care about fit. If Beane prefers Nolen as a player to a Harmon, even slightly, but picks Harmon because he likes the fit better, I wholeheartedly disagree with that strategy. Point blank, period.

[GunnerBill]

11 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I genuinely believe him when he said Elam was sticking out with a 1st round grade. I'm sure the need helped influence his decision to trade up. The problem was they completely misevaluated the player. I think they got bamboozled by that damn notebook and though he fit their DNA and could be coached up. Hopefully they learned their lesson and will take a cleaner scheme and talent fit this time around.

 

It's almost always a mix of the two. They definitely misevaluated him. 100%. But often when you need X position you end up comvincing yourself that the guys who might be options at the spot are better than they are. So they misevaluated him in the first place and then he ends up with another grade boost because he played a spot they had a huge hole. 

 

Beane's line was he was the last first round grade. I'm sure that is true. How he got thar grade is the interesting bit.

[FireChans]

11 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

I don't want it to pigeonhole the process too much, but I'm sure they narrow it down to some specific goals.  And yes, CB is one of this years goals.  And I agree that the one year with the Elam pick was a bit too much for me.

 

When most people say BPA, they really mean Best Player Available at a premium `position of need.  For instance they don't mean a great punter.  And most don't expect the Bills to pick a QB early.  So BPA is so rife with subjectivity (ie what is premium, where and how much do you factor in need) that I do not consider it a science.

Here some things I can guarantee.

 

No QBs after Cam Ward will have a first round grade on the Bills draft board. Cam may not either.

 

No punter will have a first round grade on the Bills draft board.

 

I agree that it's not THAT simple to just say "BPA" because I would lean towards premium positions with my picks too. But if it gets to the Bills pick and Starks is there as their last first round grade sticking out like a sore thumb, well, I wouldn't hate it then.

[nosejob]

17 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

It's almost always a mix of the two. They definitely misevaluated him. 100%. But often when you need X position you end up comvincing yourself that the guys who might be options at the spot are better than they are. So they misevaluated him in the first place and then he ends up with another grade boost because he played a spot they had a huge hole. 

 

Beane's line was he was the last first round grade. I'm sure that is true. How he got thar grade is the interesting bit.

See Beane always drafts for need. Always. This year we'll see what they think is most important and that should be a final grade on this GM. I like Beane, but after x amounts of WTF?.....

9 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Here some things I can guarantee.

 

No QBs after Cam Ward will have a first round grade on the Bills draft board. Cam may not either.

 

No punter will have a first round grade on the Bills draft board.

 

I agree that it's not THAT simple to just say "BPA" because I would lean towards premium positions with my picks too. But if it gets to the Bills pick and Starks is there as their last first round grade sticking out like a sore thumb, well, I wouldn't hate it then.

Starks or Emmanwori I would be fine with as they can play Safety, Nickel or Dime and not have 100% work load....according to Bills past MO

Edited April 17 by nosejob

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, nosejob said:

See Beane always drafts for need. Always. This year we'll see what they think is most important and that should be a final grade on this GM. I lie Beane, but after x amounts of WTF?.....

 

I agree his first round picks always feel need driven. But the bigger issue remains evaluation IMO.

 

Edited April 17 by GunnerBill

[Warriorspikes51]

If we don't add legit size & power to the IDL   we may as well forfeit the season 

we've managed to build a fantastic OL 
 

time to get the DL locked down 

Edited April 17 by Warriorspikes51

[FireChans]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I agree his first round picks always feel need driven. But the bigger issue remains evaluation IMO.

 

I think this is all very hard to argue.

 

We simply don't know where most NFL teams had him. Maybe they all missed?

 

The consensus big board had Elam at 29 behind Booth and McDuffie but ahead of Gordon.

 

I don't expect Beane to be perfect every year and out-evaluate the rest of the NFL. I don't think that's fair.

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, FireChans said:

I think this is all very hard to argue.

 

We simply don't know where most NFL teams had him. Maybe they all missed?

 

The consensus big board had Elam at 29 behind Booth and McDuffie but ahead of Gordon.

 

I don't expect Beane to be perfect every year and out-evaluate the rest of the NFL. I don't think that's fair.

 

We know the Chiefs had him as their next guy after McDuffie. The GM admitted thst to the Athletic.

[nosejob]

Just now, FireChans said:

I think this is all very hard to argue.

 

We simply don't know where most NFL teams had him. Maybe they all missed?

 

The consensus big board had Elam at 29 behind Booth and McDuffie but ahead of Gordon.

 

I don't expect Beane to be perfect every year and out-evaluate the rest of the NFL. I don't think that's fair.

But the trade up was a big tell...especially if it seems like an OMG knee jerk reaction.

[SoCal Deek]

40 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

I don't want it to pigeonhole the process too much, but I'm sure they narrow it down to some specific goals.  And yes, CB is one of this years goals.  And I agree that the one year with the Elam pick was a bit too much for me.

 

When most people say BPA, they really mean Best Player Available at a premium `position of need.  For instance they don't mean a great punter.  And most don't expect the Bills to pick a QB early.  So BPA is so rife with subjectivity (ie what is premium, where and how much do you factor in need) that I do not consider it a science.

I disagree. BPA means just what it says. No matter what the position. Period. 

[Solomon Grundy]

1 hour ago, BigAl2526 said:

Donald was a 3 tech.  My issue is not that Nolen can't play and be a good or even great defensive tackle.  It is that Buffalo's primary need at defensive tackle is for a 1 tech to potentially replace 34 year old Daquan Jones.  If you line up with two sub 300 lb defensive tackles, some teams (Baltimore?) are going to run the ball up your gut all day long and you won't be able to stop them.  If Buffalo were to draft Nolen, they would be needing to look hard for a starting caliber 1 tech later in the draft.  They could do that.  There are a few more in the draft (Tyliek Williams, Alfred Collins, maybe Jamaree Caldwell).  There are some other 1 tech's they could draft, but they are probably going to need some amount of development before you'd want to trust them with starter responsibility.  The point is, the longer you wait, the more pressure you face to find somebody you can reasonably expect to fulfill the need.  Yes, you want to draft the best player available, but if that player does not also meet a significant need, your draft results are less than ideal.  I would rank the Bills draft need this way: 1. cornerback 2. 1 tech DT 3. WR (one that can line up outside and stretch defenses), 4. safety, 5. edge rusher  (preferably one with some bend and explosiveness).  A rotational 3 tech DT, RB (insurance against a James Cook holdout), interior offensive line (to improve depth, a third string TE, are all minor needs.  If you fill them on day three of the draft, great, but you can survive without them. 

Yeah, but teams didn't run rough shot over the Rams

[Einstein's Dog]

30 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Here some things I can guarantee.

 

No QBs after Cam Ward will have a first round grade on the Bills draft board. Cam may not either.

 

No punter will have a first round grade on the Bills draft board.

 

I agree that it's not THAT simple to just say "BPA" because I would lean towards premium positions with my picks too. But if it gets to the Bills pick and Starks is there as their last first round grade sticking out like a sore thumb, well, I wouldn't hate it then.

So what you're saying to me is that the draft board is already factoring in position value.  That is a subjective value, as is need.  It is what allows Beane to say Elam was the highest person on his board while C Watkins and G Pickens were still there.

 

One thing that hasn't been discussed is taking goals of the draft as a whole.  For instance, it very well could be a huge goal of the FO is to come out with a good DLman and CB.  They may have to consider the combination of the two with the picks available.  For instance, in the mock 2.0 where Grant was taken, the board thought there wasn't even a CB worthy of consideration.  The first mock looked a lot better in satisfying that goal.  It certainly could be a factor in downgrading an early DLman pick thinking the pickings will be slim for CB at the next pick and may require a move up to get a guy you like.

[Mikie2times]

55 minutes ago, nosejob said:

I wish we could get over the 3T  1T crap, it's 2025. All we've heard for 8 yrs. is how we wanna rush fo. Well with 5 Oline men, a TE and a back, good luck with that. It's simple math. Unless you got Moses at NT and the disciples on the line, the front 4 ain't happening, especially if you draft poorly and sign low end FAs.

That being said, I'll take the most disruptive DTs and Edges I can find. Guys that can play up and down the line. Give me 4 Chris Joneses and we'll start from there.

 

First step is Nolen. ( could be another Chris Jones) and go from there. 

Disagree with the 3T / 1T. For our system, it can make all the difference in the world. If you can get a good 1 tech Bernard will become a Pro Bowl LB. We want that guy for the playoffs so teams can't run on us. Regular season it isn't as critical because we always play with a lead. But against good teams stopping the run matters. 

[FireChans]

3 minutes ago, Mikie2times said:

Disagree with the 3T / 1T. For our system, it can make all the difference in the world. If you can get a good 1 tech Bernard will become a Pro Bowl LB. We want that guy for the playoffs so teams can't run on us. Regular season it isn't as critical because we always play with a lead. But against good teams stopping the run matters. 

We stopped the run just fine last year, fwiw.

8 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

So what you're saying to me is that the draft board is already factoring in position value.  That is a subjective value, as is need.  It is what allows Beane to say Elam was the highest person on his board while C Watkins and G Pickens were still there.

 

One thing that hasn't been discussed is taking goals of the draft as a whole.  For instance, it very well could be a huge goal of the FO is to come out with a good DLman and CB.  They may have to consider the combination of the two with the picks available.  For instance, in the mock 2.0 where Grant was taken, the board thought there wasn't even a CB worthy of consideration.  The first mock looked a lot better in satisfying that goal.  It certainly could be a factor in downgrading an early DLman pick thinking the pickings will be slim for CB at the next pick and may require a move up to get a guy you like.

What I'm telling you is that no punter is gonna get a first round grade lol.

 

You are kind of trying to turn this into a gotcha. Beane doesn't know if Watkins or Pickens are there or not when he makes the board. That's the point of the board.

36 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

We know the Chiefs had him as their next guy after McDuffie. The GM admitted thst to the Athletic.

And that's the rub. Maybe every GM in the NFL was wrong on Elam. That's why you let the board come to you and don't chase needs, IMO.

[GunnerBill]

13 minutes ago, FireChans said:

 

And that's the rub. Maybe every GM in the NFL was wrong on Elam. That's why you let the board come to you and don't chase needs, IMO.

 

But he did that last year and still blew the evaluation. That's my point. I think questionable talent evaluation is the bigger issue than strategy.

[Mikie2times]

2 minutes ago, FireChans said:

We stopped the run just fine last year, fwiw.

What I'm telling you is that no punter is gonna get a first round grade lol.

 

We have not been a fundamentally sound run defense in years. We depend on leads and gambling with run blitzes to prevent teams from running. Which works against the scrubs we play in the regular season but that's where it ends.

 

We are 13-14 when we allow 130 yards+ since 2020 in the regular season.  We allowed 447 yards rushing to Baltimore in two games last year

 

These are the outputs we have allowed in the playoffs:

 

2020: 163, 150, 114 (L)

2021: 89, 182 (L)

2022: 42, 172 (L)

2023: 106, 146 (L)

2024: 79, 176, 135 (L)

 

So do the math. 13-14 in the regular season when we allow 130+. We have allowed 130+ in 7 of 12 playoff games. In 4 out of 5 of our playoff losses. 

 

[Einstein's Dog]

13 minutes ago, FireChans said:

 

You are kind of trying to turn this into a gotcha. Beane doesn't know if Watkins or Pickens are there or not when he makes the board. That's the point of the board.

And that's the rub. Maybe every GM in the NFL was wrong on Elam. That's why you let the board come to you and don't chase needs, IMO.

This isn't meant to be some form of gotcha. 

 

Beane obviously had the choice of Watkins or Pickens when he chose Elam.  People can say Beane's board had Elam higher but I think the need factor was baked into the board then (and I was agreeing with you on not liking that move).