John from Riverside Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 It's hard to argue with most of these assessments. I would point out that McKinnie hasn't really had three years since his first was a bust. There is probably more reason to think he has not yet peaked as compared to Williams and Jones who likely are playing as good as they are ever going to. Another thing to consider when it comes to big Mike, I would think that drafting him as high as we did, it was thought that he would ultimately be playing LT, not RT. Certainly, the many debates we had on the board with regard to who we should take that year often revolved around that issue. My recollection is that most took it as a given that he was eventually going to be moved to LT. Either he hasn't played well enough for that to happen or it was never really the plan to begin with. If that is the case, we either drafted him too high for a guy slated to play RT or we drafted him too high given his inability to improve enough to play LT as was planned. At the time, I was not very high on him because he hadn't played on the left side. Those who disagreed pointed out that he only played on the right in college because their QB was a lefty. I believed then and believe now that the skill sets needed at LT and RT are not the same and not easily interchangeable. "Poppycock", I was told. Given this issue, I might not rate him as favorably as others. Don't get me wrong on big Mike, I like him and have plenty of hope that he is going to play even better. Though not entirely behind his selection, I have often defended him here. I think they are spot-on when it comes to Freeney. In retrospect, he probably should have been the top pick in that draft or at least in the top 3 or 4. He is a rare talent, a solid individual and a real playmaker. At this level, there are not many guys so good that they force teams to change what they are doing. Freeney is that good in my opinion. He is on a pretty weak defense and yet still manages to stand out. Imagine how destructive he would be on a more balanced team. He reminds me a little of Bruce and LT. No offensive game plan can ignore him, they have to give him special attention. I think some of teams who passed him up wish they hadn't. 377289[/snapback] I dont understand why anyone would think we have seen the limit of Mike Williams potential...... - He was pretty good his first year - He shows up his second year distraught and out of shape I am waiting to see what he does THIS year......
Mickey Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 I dont understand why anyone would think we have seen the limit of Mike Williams potential...... - He was pretty good his first year - He shows up his second year distraught and out of shape I am waiting to see what he does THIS year...... 377589[/snapback] You are missing a whole year bud. This will be his fourth year. I did not say that we have seen his limits, I just pointed out that there is more reason to suspect that McKinne has additional room for improvement than big Mike. McKinne has really only played 2 years, Mike has played three. By the way, the year he showed up out of shape, skipped all the OTA's and was a basket case to boot was his third year, not his second. Yikes.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 You are missing a whole year bud. This will be his fourth year. I did not say that we have seen his limits, I just pointed out that there is more reason to suspect that McKinne has additional room for improvement than big Mike. McKinne has really only played 2 years, Mike has played three. By the way, the year he showed up out of shape, skipped all the OTA's and was a basket case to boot was his third year, not his second. Yikes. I can't speak about McKinnie's O-line coach, but if you consider that McKinnie has "really only played 2 years," I'd submit that with Big Mike's coaching prior to last year, he's "really only played 1 year." And I think his potential is still largely untapped, or at least WAS.
Mickey Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 I can't speak about McKinnie's O-line coach, but if you consider that McKinnie has "really only played 2 years," I'd submit that with Big Mike's coaching prior to last year, he's "really only played 1 year." And I think his potential is still largely untapped, or at least WAS. 377641[/snapback] Maybe so but was he really so very bad on his own that an entire year in the NFL with a less than standout OL coach was entirely worthless in terms of experience? I think its fair to say that neither of those two guys have maxed out their ability yet. I am giving McKinne an edge on the "still untapped talent" issue because he basically missed an entire year and a whole year's worth of experience in the league, even with a sub-par coach, is, imho, worth more than sitting home watching the year go by.
IDBillzFan Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 I do it because I am very into the NFL draft. Aside from the season, it's the best thing out there. 377461[/snapback] I understand why draftniks like you do it. I should have been more specific. How does someone get a paying job to rate and evaluate them in print or online? I guess we just need a football fix any way we can get it.
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 Maybe so but was he really so very bad on his own that an entire year in the NFL with a less than standout OL coach was entirely worthless in terms of experience? I think its fair to say that neither of those two guys have maxed out their ability yet. I am giving McKinne an edge on the "still untapped talent" issue because he basically missed an entire year and a whole year's worth of experience in the league, even with a sub-par coach, is, imho, worth more than sitting home watching the year go by. 377670[/snapback] The big difference between McKinniw and MW is that based on the way MW responded to the threats (JMac threatened he would be moved to guard) and encouragement (he got a gameball for his plsy mid last season) of the Bills MW improved bigtime from his meltdown last preseason and is reported to have reported to this years OTA at a lighter weight than last season and reports of him being a workput warrior this year on his own. McKinnie on the other hand has a rep as a malingerer and showing a bad attitude after his holdout as a rookie. He finally began to show on the field some better play at the end of last year, but this is the only good sign I have heard unless you know something I don't. MW mat nit ever meet the goals originally thought for him but there is objective evidence he is going to try and has reversed his worse time. There is some hope for McKinnie also but not objective evidence to make this assumption anything but a hope.
NYGPopgun10 Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 14. New York Giants TE Jeremy Shockey | Miami (Fla.) Great athlete who makes a lot of plays, but has dropped a lot of clutch passes. Has limitations as a blocker. Evaluation: Red chip-plus. They nailed Shockey.
MDH Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 14. New York GiantsTE Jeremy Shockey | Miami (Fla.) Great athlete who makes a lot of plays, but has dropped a lot of clutch passes. Has limitations as a blocker. Evaluation: Red chip-plus. They nailed Shockey. 377786[/snapback] Yeah, though I'm not sure they nailed his evaluation rating. A guy that can't block, drops lots of passes and can't stay healthy isn't a "red chip plus" in my book.
The Jokeman Posted July 9, 2005 Posted July 9, 2005 That makes more sense. It's funny how Jones has actually become a pretty damn good LT, because people were blasting the Bengals for taking him so high in the draft, saying they wasted another high first rounder. Shows what the 'experts' know. 377347[/snapback] The criticism was that the Bengals should of traded down to acquire more picks as Jones wasn't regarded as a top 10 selection was all. In terms of my thoughts, I admit that I was wrong on this draft. I really thought a guy like Wendell Bryant be a perfect fit for our defense as thought we'd be a one gap defense and the pass rusher from the DT position we needed next to Phat Pat. At the same time I remember the consensus before the draft was for us to take Ryan Simms who's turned out to be less than spectacular. Though in retrospect as have said many a times, the best pick we could of made was John Henderson. Yet at the time of the draft I was concerned with his health status. Although Freeney has definately shown to be a very good NFL pass rusher, had we taken him the question would be how would we get he and Aaron Schobel on the field at the same time.
Nanker Posted July 9, 2005 Posted July 9, 2005 This also strikes me as a pretty accurate assessment of the players chosen. I do have some differences though with your interpretation of the assessment or of initial assessment of MW. First, I would choose your option that MW has simply not player well enough to shift him to LT. However, I think it is still too early to declare the possibility of moving him to be over. While I agress that playing the right side and playing the left side are not interchangeable it certainly can and has been done. Two issues are that the left side involves more responsibility as you are guarding the QB blindside, but there I have confidence in MW doing this because he did this well in college for a lefthander as folks point out. The second issue is the question as he will need to switch his technique as opposing rusher will now be coming over his other shoulder and if habitually he is used to applying his steength and reading and making movesfor people coming the other way this can make a marginal difference which can be significant. Assessing whether he can make that shift needs to take into acoount his performance as a player: Year 1: Good start and good protection as he immediately earned a starting role and the OL was productive as his RBs and his QB all had productive years behind his and other blockers work. i do not remember him getting beaten a lot (as often happens with rookies and even players like Schobel who is at best is very solid can beat a better player from time to time as he did with the top-notch Ogden last year). I think that he did well enough as he had things to learn about what it is like to simply play above college level and having Vinky be his position coach and having Sullivan as the RG gave him tachers who could teach him the basics though neither could teach him the fine points. Second Year- MW began to hit the wall in teaching as the not ready for primetime Ruel took over for Vinky and his one year of experience as an OL position coach with the Lions allowed him to offer little in advanced teaching to MW. Even worse, though MW would have really profited from having at least an equal to work with at RG, he was working with Pacillo as his partner who needed an experienced vet at RT next to him even more than MW could have used having a more experienced player at RG It actually speaks highly of TH's work that the team produced as much as it did in terms of running yardage and it was not surprising at all that too often the less than mobile Bledsoe got sacked with MW and Pacillo standing over his prone form with obvious "I though you had him" body language regarding the sacker who was now dancing with joy. Third year- MW really melted down as he reacted unprofessionally to the death of his Grammy who raised him (understandable but not condoneable as a fan). However, the great sign was that we saw MW show every sign of tremendous improvement now that he had an adult working with him (JMac) and an experienced player (Villarial) next to him. He dealt with the tough love which JMac publicly demonstrated (the threat to move him to guard which seemed to be taken seriously by MW who got buay cutting weight an learning the game and ICE who falsely claimed that G was the obvious place for MW because of his size though MW had shown no signs in his two years of a lack of agility that saw him victimized by outside or edge rushers due to his size) by training so hard to cut weight he hurt his foot. The bottomline is that MW had the year in his 3rd year he should have had in his second if GW had been striong enough to hire and then replace his OL coach with a competent person. This year will be an interesting one for MW. I think if things had gone according to plan and MW had produced like last year in his lost year of 2003, then the Bills comfortably could have flipped him to LT this year to take over for JJ who got far more than the Bills should have paid for him from SF. Instead, not only did MW lose a year of development, but actually took a step backward because of the unexpected meltdown and the uncertainty created by him needing to flip sides. It will be a jump but it could well happen that 2005 will see MW become the player we wanted him to be and gain reknown for pancaking a few opponents. If so he can comfortably be experimented with and challenged to flip sides next year and we will need to make the cheaper easier buy or move of finding an RT. Overall, there is hope and though the TD plan did not work perfectly in terms of making the segue from JJ to MW, I think based on this assessment he deserves kudos for making the right choice between MW and McKinnie and also of Levi Jones who are ranked by these outside observers as lesser talents than MW. McKinnie did lose a half or full season of development compared to MW, but this loss was his own doing due to his holdout and it seems to be unreasonable to predict greatness for him while he has some clear attitude negatives while MW has demonstrated a positive attitude now with reports he has trimmed down and worked out this off-season. TD might be reasonably questioned for not trading down because even if they are virtually guranteed blue chip talents (Peyton Manning who has never brought his team to an SB an an example of a great player who simply has never achieved the ultimate goal with is team and now commands so much money and cap room I will not be surprised if Indy never does achieve its goal of winning with him despite his great play) there is a clear question whether it is beneficial to have a draft pick so high he is slotted to get a team-breaking salary. the cap hit of $9+ million MW had (or even the "cheaper" $7.8 he now will get is far more money than his play deserves. However, the Bills had so undermanned the OL in the Butler era the pick of MW does make sense. Overall kudos to TD (mostly for getting smarter and replacing the GW/Sheppard/Killdrive/Vinky/Ruel mistake with MM/TC/JMac combo). At any rate, sorry for the lack of cliffnotes but I am happy to use this opportunity to think outloud. 377367[/snapback] Said-Same Cliffnotes: 1st Year: Fuschia - highly prized and highly priced potted plant 2nd Year: Flaming Pink - shocked to learn he has to work for all that money 3rd Year: Mauve - Oh my! JMac kicks some ass and the fat boy responds 4th Year: Bills Logo Red and entrenched at RT for a TON of money Some of us are still hoping he'll transform into Bills Logo Blue.
BillsFan Trapped in Pats Land Posted July 9, 2005 Posted July 9, 2005 That evaluation of Shockey is laughable. Nice player, but his production has dropped of every year in the league. His red zone efficiency went up this year but I would still take Gonzalez, Heap, and maybe Gates over him.
ganesh Posted July 9, 2005 Posted July 9, 2005 That evaluation of Shockey is laughable. Nice player, but his production has dropped of every year in the league. His red zone efficiency went up this year but I would still take Gonzalez, Heap, and maybe Gates over him. 377933[/snapback] and even crumpler.... shockey is a baby that needs spoon feeding. I think he has been just over-hyped by the espn/abc guys
BillsFan Trapped in Pats Land Posted July 9, 2005 Posted July 9, 2005 and even crumpler.... shockey is a baby that needs spoon feeding. I think he has been just over-hyped by the espn/abc guys 377937[/snapback] Forgot about Crumpler. I would definately take him over Shockey. Shockey's image is helped that he plays in NY, with a Manning, and went to Miami. But much like Ray Lewis his production doesn't match his hype.
R. Rich Posted July 9, 2005 Posted July 9, 2005 I understand why draftniks like you do it. I should have been more specific. How does someone get a paying job to rate and evaluate them in print or online? I guess we just need a football fix any way we can get it. 377726[/snapback] I guess they have to have someone w/ some insight. It's the same way that you have 'experts' on fantasy sports that go on TV and radio shows and give their 'expert' advice.
Mickey Posted July 9, 2005 Posted July 9, 2005 The big difference between McKinniw and MW is that based on the way MW responded to the threats (JMac threatened he would be moved to guard) and encouragement (he got a gameball for his plsy mid last season) of the Bills MW improved bigtime from his meltdown last preseason and is reported to have reported to this years OTA at a lighter weight than last season and reports of him being a workput warrior this year on his own. McKinnie on the other hand has a rep as a malingerer and showing a bad attitude after his holdout as a rookie. He finally began to show on the field some better play at the end of last year, but this is the only good sign I have heard unless you know something I don't. MW mat nit ever meet the goals originally thought for him but there is objective evidence he is going to try and has reversed his worse time. There is some hope for McKinnie also but not objective evidence to make this assumption anything but a hope. 377742[/snapback] I'm not so sure that Mike had such a great year last year or that McKinne had such a lousy one. Keeping in mind the patsie laced schedule we had, our offense ranked 26th overall and theirs ranked 2nd. We did better on the ground bin the aggregate but only by a whopping total of 51 yards over 16 games. The Vikings actually averaged 4.7 yards per carry as opposed to our 3.9 yards. Both teams gave up 1 sack per every 12 attempts. This is a team game so stats like these aren't the best at measuring performance but in terms of objective evidence, it is more than zero and more than I have seen offered that Mike had a great year or that McKinne had a lousy year. For perspective, lets see what our counterparts at a Vikings site are saying: "...maybe McKinney isn't at the same level as McDaniel, but he's close and he's still improving." "If I had to grade them I'd say: T-Mike Rosenthal B- T-Bryant McKinnie B+ (with A+ potential)..." "...but who do we have that is reliable? Mckinney is the only one..." "McKinney did not start out last year very well but by the end of the year was kicking some serious butt. He was also playing hurt last year! From what I am hearing around here this spring he is looking better than he ever has." [sound familiar?] On top of this you also have to consider that Mike is playing RT, a position not nearly as critical or difficult to play as is LT where BM plays. I wouldn't trade Mike for BM given his attitude and headaches but on the field where it matters, I'm not convinced there is much of a difference. Do you have some objective evidence that BM is far more maxed out on his potential than is big Mike? Or that Mike had a much better year than BM did?
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted July 9, 2005 Posted July 9, 2005 I'm not so sure that Mike had such a great year last year or that McKinne had such a lousy one. Keeping in mind the patsie laced schedule we had, our offense ranked 26th overall and theirs ranked 2nd. We did better on the ground bin the aggregate but only by a whopping total of 51 yards over 16 games. The Vikings actually averaged 4.7 yards per carry as opposed to our 3.9 yards. Both teams gave up 1 sack per every 12 attempts. This is a team game so stats like these aren't the best at measuring performance but in terms of objective evidence, it is more than zero and more than I have seen offered that Mike had a great year or that McKinne had a lousy year. For perspective, lets see what our counterparts at a Vikings site are saying: "...maybe McKinney isn't at the same level as McDaniel, but he's close and he's still improving." "If I had to grade them I'd say: T-Mike Rosenthal B- T-Bryant McKinnie B+ (with A+ potential)..." "...but who do we have that is reliable? Mckinney is the only one..." "McKinney did not start out last year very well but by the end of the year was kicking some serious butt. He was also playing hurt last year! From what I am hearing around here this spring he is looking better than he ever has." [sound familiar?] On top of this you also have to consider that Mike is playing RT, a position not nearly as critical or difficult to play as is LT where BM plays. I wouldn't trade Mike for BM given his attitude and headaches but on the field where it matters, I'm not convinced there is much of a difference. Do you have some objective evidence that BM is far more maxed out on his potential than is big Mike? Or that Mike had a much better year than BM did? 377967[/snapback] Thanks for taking the time to provide some interesting quotes from folks who care deeply about and are on top of the Vikes situation. Though my guess is that the Vikes fans are as biased about their team as we are about the Bills (so everything is to be taken with a grain to a boulder of salt) it is really helpful to get some other views of performance rather than the usual fact-free opinions we spout on TSW. My sense is that McKinnie and JMac are on essentially the same career track. Well regarded in college followed by a pro career which did not equal their college careers and both giving some hope of having turned around their pro production. Overall, my sense is that the McKinnie meltdown was longer term than the MW meltdown (his first year loss, his second year a disappointment, and his 3rd year a bad start with improved performance as he went on while MW had a promising 1st year, a disappointing 2nd year, and got off to a horrendous start last year with folks agreeing at least that he improved a lot from OTA to the end of he regular season even if they disagree about their assessment of his level of regular season improvement). Further as far as a static assessment of where MW is right now, he red-chip + judgment of this rating strikes me as pretty reasonable. He is not a blue-chip performer today, but he can be. He has had real problems and deficits in his play over the years, but they have never been a consistent inability to deal with outside or edge rushers or other items linked to his massive size limiting his agility, instead they have been mental issues linked with his inabiility to co-ordinate well with RG Pacillo leadin him to have issues with stunts in his 2nd year. I'd be a lot more worried about whether he has some fundamental inherent problem but: 1. His three years of play have seen an RB pick up impressive rushing numbers with him at RT as TH and WM have gained over a 1000 yards behind his OL and at a good rate per game. If MW was ineffective individually opposing Ds would recognize this and shift toward the left side and our running attack would also show that bias. I saw no signs of that. 2. His three years also have seen pass game productivity which seems more closely linked to overal O performance rather than some specific issue related to him. His first year saw good O pass performance with him at RT which became less consistent as the season wore on but Killdrives inability to vary the scheme and BB providing a roadmap for undressing Bledsoe seems to be far more likely factors than anything linked to poor performance by MW. The pass pro melted down his second year, but the MW issues (and there were issues) seemed to be defined by poor co-ordination between him and Pacillo (their body language over a sacked Bledsoe too often appeared to say "I thought you had him") and mental adjustment issues rather than him physically being beaten by outside often or some other sign of agility issues. The pass pro he was part of last year was only productive statistically at the #26 level cited but the number of sacks dropped tremendously (again mostly due to better and more diverse successful play calling in my view) and like it or not MW was part of this. 3. In terms of third party validation, it is always tricky because it is subjective rather than objective, However, him being rewarded a gameball for his play midseason (though I suspect it was recignition as much for his diligence in getting back into playing shape after his OTA meltdown which actually is good news if that is the reason for the award) and observers and pundits seem uniformly impressed with his play and him pancaking an opponent was noted a few timez. I think it is impossible to argue that his play did not improve a lot from his meltdown in OTA and it seems logially explainable that his performance is much improved under JMac rather than Ruel and with Villarial rather than Pacillo next to him. I think his improvement is real and may well be a harbinger of his play improving enough that he can comfortably switch sides to LT next year. I agree with you that LT and RT are different positions and that LT is more difficult because: 1. You have QB blindside responsiblity. 2. One has to play in space along more because the TE is not covering your outside. I think point one is where MWs previous experience comes in as he has done the blindside before. Point 2 is the question and the issue where agility questions come in. However. the default to me is that he has not shown signs of having edge rusher issues (everyone gets beat once in awhile aroun the edge as Jonathan Ogden showed with Schobel last year so it is only an issue for me if there is a consistent problem) when our TE releases for a pass and he is left alone on the right side or when we suffered huge TE issues last year with injuries to Campbell and Euhus and isolating MW was not a difficult thing for a D to do. If (and this remains an IF) MW can make it through this year learning from JMac's experience and being able to focus on improving his play with Villarial's evaluation and help rather than worrying about how to carry Pacillo and getting limited help from Sullivan, I think he should be able to make the switch. The other issue which will help MW when he makes the shift (as I think he will do next year at the latest) is tha JP is a huge upgrade in mobility over Bledsoe. In fact, I am pretty confident that MW as a 4th or 5th year pro will have enough experience when he does get beat in space by a Jason Taylor to know when he has been taken and simply take the penalty by tackling the speed rushing LDE or at least yelling oh sh*t LOOKOUT to a JP who can run for his life rather than have Bledsoe take a big hit from his blindside while patting the ball. Making the flip to LT will be a challenge but I think if MW has another year of progress like last year, the flip will be easily doable.
KD in CA Posted July 9, 2005 Posted July 9, 2005 Editor's note:Blue chip indicates an elite talent – a difference maker who consistently makes big plays. Red chip indicates an impact player with starter-type production who can improve in at least one area. Purple indicates a solid starter you can win with and who usually gets the job done. Orange indicates backup production. Green indicates a player with upside but who can be a liability to put on the field. A plus or minus indicates that a player is on the verge of fitting into another category. Blue Fire's not gonna be happy when he sees this. How is someone supposed to remember all this information without looking it up each time???
Recommended Posts