BoondckCL Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 First off Ngata is not that good. He has the size and POTENTIAL to be good in the NFL. A lot of people confuse potential and talent mainly because all of these "draft experts" are to afraid to commit to any particular player ever since Mel Kiper said he preferred Ryan Leaf over Peyton Manning. DO NOT CONFUSE THE TWO! Into discussing Ngata's play. He didn't even play every down in college. In the bowl games this year he was pushed all over the field by a second round caliber player. How can you use your number 8 over all oick on a guy who doesn't even play every down in college. His pass rush is terrible, he had less than five sacks or something to that effect in his whole career at Oregon. In the cover 2, you do have to rely on your d-line to apply pressure so therefore Ngata would not fit into our system. We would have to pull him out on second and longs and third downs, so he would only be playing one down sometimes. Now think about it YOU WOULDN'T USE YOUR FIRST ROUND PICK ON A 3RD DOWN RUNNING BACK, WOULD YOU? He has the size but all in all as you can see in my mock that i think Bunkley and trading down are the better choices. Bunkley is not just a workout warrior as some have said. One of the Bills' largest problems last year was stopping the run, and i think getting a guy who broke his school record for tackles for losses is our kind of guy.
Dibs Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 I'm so confused. You say NO WAY. Bills wont draft Ngata. http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showtopic=45317&st=0 This guy says it's a done deal regardless of who else is available. Who do I believe? Ooooh, who do I believe?
cantankerous Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 Awww what do you know anyway? I bet we trade down though...but if we pick Ngata...I wanna see you EAT your words. Besides, like you know anymore than anyone else about the Bills drafting whoever. Some people think they know it all...
Pyrite Gal Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 Awww what do you know anyway? I bet we trade down though...but if we pick Ngata...I wanna see you EAT your words. Besides, like you know anymore than anyone else about the Bills drafting whoever. Some people think they know it all... 665871[/snapback] I agree we probably trade down if we can because we need the help that an extra first day pick or two can give us in order to get more Ws. I see two potential problems with Ngata both of which we may reasonably chose to feel they can be dealt with by talking to and measuring the man. We are quite familiar with DTs who take plays off, because this was a real rap on Adams. However, TD read him correctly when he negotiated with him that Adams was a changed man. Rather than take half the game off as he did earlier, he reduced that to only taking a 1/3 or a quarter of the game off as a Bill. Since he had an outrageously fast first step for a DT, the opposing OC and blockers assigned to him could not take any plays off because they did not know whether Sam would be vacationing that play or simply enbarass them by blowing into the backfield or sacking the QB. Ngata sounds like the same type of player in that he has a rep for an incredibly quick first step and a massive body. If the braintrust judges that he is willing to make good on a commitment to change upon entering the adult world as Adams was stimulated to do by feeling age catch up with him, he may well be a great choice. The other rap on him are his having a series of nagging injuries in college. The ori game and the college game are really different things in terms of the pros having the best equipment and professionals working constantly and consistently on strength and conditioning. If the Bills are also concerned about this issue, but make the judgement that they can be addressed with better and consistent strength, conditioning and diet and they judge that Ngata can make the change in his habits with the large changes in his life of becoming a well paid pro and also his reaction to his Mom's recent death he will be a very good choice. However, if from their discussion with him and the doctors look see, they have signfiicant doubts, then they should work hard to trade down and hiope they get Bunkley. At any ratem this is a case where the fan opinion of Ngata seems pretty incomplete for drawing any rational conclusions unless they have examined him medically to ascertain as best as possible the cause of his nicks and unless they have looked the man in the eyes when they asked him questions about what it means to him to become a pro.
syhuang Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 I'm so confused. You say NO WAY. Bills wont draft Ngata. http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showtopic=45317&st=0 This guy says it's a done deal regardless of who else is available. Who do I believe? Ooooh, who do I believe? 665859[/snapback] One said Bills would definitely draft Ngata. The other said Bills definitely wouldn't draft Ngata. The only possible explanation for both statements is that Bills will boycott the draft. Ralph will use it to keep Bills in Buffalo and to express his feedlings on the new CBA.
frogger Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 if we draft Ngata, I'll be fine with taking him out on 2nd and longs. Because Hey! it's 2nd and long, how often did we hear that last year. And if Ngata is part of the reason that it is 2nd and long, then hey! it's 2nd and long, good draft pick. I feel Bunkley will struggle in the NFL, far more than Ngata. while I am not completely sold on Ngata, I think he'll be a better pro. I'd rather trade down and get more first day picks and still draft Wroten, Ideal situation-get the vikings to trade both 2nds and their first to move up to draft Cutler, and with their pick get Wroten, who might be the best 3 tech in the draft. and then we'd have 3 2nd rounder....how sweet would that be.
Dibs Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 .....Ideal situation-get the vikings to trade both 2nds and their first to move up to draft Cutler, and with their pick get Wroten, who might be the best 3 tech in the draft. and then we'd have 3 2nd rounder....how sweet would that be. 665895[/snapback] Unfortunately according to the 'trade value chart' that deal would be very unlikely to happen. 8 = 1400 17 = 950 48 = 420 51 = 390 As you can see 2 seconds isn't going to happen. their 115(4th) = 64 our #8 for their 17,51 & 115.....not nearly as nice
Coach Tuesday Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 Good point about Ngata not playing every down. That is huge IMO - Bunkley is an every-down player, making him more valuable IMO.
obie_wan Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 . Now think about it YOU WOULDN'T USE YOUR FIRST ROUND PICK ON A 3RD DOWN RUNNING BACK, WOULD YOU? 665834[/snapback] The Bills took Ronnie Harmon in the 1st round a while back who was teh proto-typical 3rd down back. Good thing they wised up and drafted Thurman (in the 2nd round though)
BuckeyeBill Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 First off Ngata is not that good. 665834[/snapback] We will see very soon won't we.
R. Rich Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 Unfortunately according to the 'trade value chart' that deal would be very unlikely to happen. 8 = 1400 17 = 950 48 = 420 51 = 390 As you can see 2 seconds isn't going to happen. their 115(4th) = 64 our #8 for their 17,51 & 115.....not nearly as nice 665900[/snapback] Agreed, unless we throw in a pick, there's no way the Vikes would give up 3 high picks for one pick, even if it is 8th overall. They need more than one player.
Beerball Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 One said Bills would definitely draft Ngata. The other said Bills definitely wouldn't draft Ngata. The only possible explanation for both statements is that Bills will boycott the draft. Ralph will use it to keep Bills in Buffalo and to express his feedlings on the new CBA. 665884[/snapback] If a trade can't be worked out, the Bills will use the Vikes strategy of a couple years ago. They'll simply let the pick slip by. Really we have a wonderful excuse with an octogenarian calling the shots. Ralph will come on TV later in the day and state that we just didn't have enough time to make the pick...
stuckincincy Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 If a trade can't be worked out, the Bills will use the Vikes strategy of a couple years ago. They'll simply let the pick slip by. Really we have a wonderful excuse with an octogenarian calling the shots. Ralph will come on TV later in the day and state that we just didn't have enough time to make the pick... 665969[/snapback] Didn't Tice & Co. do that 2 years in a row? IIRC, that was how JAX got Leftwich. No?
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 We will see very soon won't we. 665935[/snapback] And Williams is still much better than McKinnie.
Bill from NYC Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 Agreed, unless we throw in a pick, there's no way the Vikes would give up 3 high picks for one pick, even if it is 8th overall. They need more than one player. 665944[/snapback] Do you think that they would swap 1sts and give up their 1st in 07? We got a 2nd in 01 for moving from 14 to 21. I would want far more than a 2nd to move down 9 spots from #8. If we trade this pick, we have simply got to fleece somebody. If not, I would rather stay put. Jmo.
Beerball Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 Didn't Tice & Co. do that 2 years in a row? IIRC, that was how JAX got Leftwich. No? 665975[/snapback] oopsy linky
R. Rich Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 Do you think that they would swap 1sts and give up their 1st in 07? We got a 2nd in 01 for moving from 14 to 21. I would want far more than a 2nd to move down 9 spots from #8. If we trade this pick, we have simply got to fleece somebody. If not, I would rather stay put. Jmo. 665982[/snapback] I don't think trade values are a constant, William. Some years, you have good depth in the draft and it may be tougher to get good trade value for moving up/down. Some years, you get a crappy draft, so teams are forced to reach for a player if they want to move up and pay dearly for it. This year, I think this is a very deep draft in a number of positions (weak @ WR, top heavy @ QB, RB, but pretty solid everywhere else), so I could see the Bills getting multiple picks in this draft for moving down as opposed to getting a future pick.
stinky finger Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 Didn't Tice & Co. do that 2 years in a row? IIRC, that was how JAX got Leftwich. No? 665975[/snapback] Leftwich?!?!?! I thought that was Gary Coleman.
R. Rich Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 oopsy linky 665984[/snapback] And to think, they could've had Ryan Sims instead of that bust Kevin Williams.
Bill from NYC Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 I don't think trade values are a constant, William. Some years, you have good depth in the draft and it may be tougher to get good trade value for moving up/down. Some years, you get a crappy draft, so teams are forced to reach for a player if they want to move up and pay dearly for it. This year, I think this is a very deep draft in a number of positions (weak @ WR, top heavy @ QB, RB, but pretty solid everywhere else), so I could see the Bills getting multiple picks in this draft for moving down as opposed to getting a future pick. 665996[/snapback] And while I DO clearly see your point, here are my hopes/thoughts/dreams.... 1) We fortify both lines and the kids see actual playing time. There would be NO reason to make a good RG (Setterstrom? ) sit behind CV for a full year. Ditto to Joseph or the Deuce at LG. 2) Our record will probably not be so good in 06, thus giving us a early picks, AND cap space (cuts of Moulds, MW, etc.). 3) Couple 1 & 2 with some timely UFAs, and we have a serious contender in 07. I will not stop dreaming my friend.
Recommended Posts