Spiderweb Posted April 30, 2006 Author Posted April 30, 2006 As disappointed and doubtful as I am about our real draft, the one you suggest would have been worse. Ngata is interesting based on his resume, but even with his resume he would have to present as a person who is only gonna take 1/3 to 1/4 of plays off rather than the half of plays on vacation. If he only took 1/4 or less of plays off I think he would be fine as opposing OCs and Gs would not know whether he was going to play hard or not (this is why Sam Adams was great even though he took plays off). In addition to us fans really having no clue about what kind of man he is, we have not had our docs look at him to make a judgment whether he has a recurring injury issue or body. I could easily see how Marv might be impressed with him or how with professional weight and condidtioning traininf he could be a good choice but without this info I can easily see how he could be passed upon. Justice simply has character issues which caused him to plummet and the whines from fans if he had been picked in the 2nd would have been justified (particularly with us on record avoiding character issues. Out draft is questionable but yours looks worse. 676767[/snapback] It's sad to make one 1st round "reach", with so much at stake, but Marv has managed to make two reaches in round 1. While I still would have taken Ngata (or even Bunkley), trading down would have been better, had there been a mid 1st willing to trade. A year or two from now, we may sit back and regale in our happiness over this years draft, but I strongly doubt it. Marv stated in a PC shortly after his hire that the game is won and lost in the trenches. That seems so long ago now. I like both DB's we picked up so far, but we needed the big guys more.,....
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 We did sign a center and a guard who both started last year. Our bigest problem last year was in the middle, which we did address. Whether it's sucessful or not, who knows, but you wouldn't know any better by drafting a rookie either. Gandy played decent, so I'm ok with either taking a 4th round OT and grooming him for next year, or pick up a free agent OT next year if Gandy does struggle. I am disappointed we are letting the OL fester for another year (unless we get lucky with the FA's we signed) but you can't fix everything all at once. 676763[/snapback]
Kelly the Dog Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 Possibly, but you gotta admitt, this was one of the oddest Day 1 drafts for the Bills in some time....I have no real problem witht he players (I would bet few here have ever seen them even play), it just seemed odd that we had to make a swap, and give up a draft pick to get them...I would have really liked to see an OL drafted in the first three rounds....oh well, here is crossing my fingers that Sunday makes things look better...wondering if maybe Nate Clements is on his way out... GO Sabres! 676894[/snapback] Yeah, but seriously, can you trust us? Does anyone here legitmately believe that they can draft players they have never seen live, have seen a couple games on TV of, rate high because guys on the Internet that aren't good enough to be hired by NFL teams for their expertise say should be highly rated? Hell, the players that really ARE rated high tank more often than not.
MDH Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 Yeah, but seriously, can you trust us? Does anyone here legitmately believe that they can draft players they have never seen live, have seen a couple games on TV of, rate high because guys on the Internet that aren't good enough to be hired by NFL teams for their expertise say should be highly rated? Hell, the players that really ARE rated high tank more often than not. 676921[/snapback] While you are absolutely correct this is also the same line that people have used the last 5 years to defend bad drafts. While TD certainly knows more about football than any of us it didn't prevent those people who bashed the drafts in years past from being correct. Just knowing more than the fans who are criticizing doesn’t mean the draft is a good one. As someone on ESPN said early, "the great thing about the draft is that everybody has an opinion and NOBODY is wrong, at least on draft day."
Kelly the Dog Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 While you are absolutely correct this is also the same line that people have used the last 5 years to defend bad drafts. While TD certainly knows more about football than any of us it didn't prevent those people who bashed the drafts in years past from being correct. Just knowing more than the fans who are criticizing doesn’t mean the draft is a good one. As someone on ESPN said early, "the great thing about the draft is that everybody has an opinion and NOBODY is wrong, at least on draft day." 676959[/snapback] True. Again this is a semantic argument. IMO, everyone should make a point of saying this is what I think, not this is what I know. Maybe that is asking too much. Ultimately, it doesn't matter, this is a message board. Everyone is free to express their opinions. Bu that is what they are. To me, there is a big difference between saying "this is a terrible draft" and "I think we'll look back on this as a terrible draft"
Fan in San Diego Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 True. Again this is a semantic argument. IMO, everyone should make a point of saying this is what I think, not this is what I know. Maybe that is asking too much. Ultimately, it doesn't matter, this is a message board. Everyone is free to express their opinions. Bu that is what they are. To me, there is a big difference between saying "this is a terrible draft" and "I think we'll look back on this as a terrible draft" 677017[/snapback] And the difference is what between us saying this is a terrible draft and we will look back say this was a terrible draft is what ?
Kelly the Dog Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 And the difference is what between us saying this is a terrible draft and we will look back say this was a terrible draft is what ? 677019[/snapback] One is you're an arrogant know it all, the other is you're a fan, willing to be right or wrong.
Fan in San Diego Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 One is you're an arrogant know it all, the other is you're a fan, willing to be right or wrong. 677021[/snapback] And you are which ? Witch ?
mead107 Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 so many experts, not enough jobs in the nfl for all of you smart people . how do we know its wrong or how do we know it is right ???? do you know more than the people that are in this 24-7 ???? you all know marv is wrong ???? lets play the season and see what happens . it is only a !@#$ing game .
Ghost of BiB Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 so many experts, not enough jobs in the nfl for all of you smart people . how do we know its wrong or how do we know it is right ???? do you know more than the people that are in this 24-7 ???? you all know marv is wrong ???? lets play the season and see what happens . it is only a !@#$ing game . 677037[/snapback] Don't encourage them.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 i was reading these posts while watching an old seinfeld episode, one in which jerry/elaine/george/and another chick use call waiting to discuss george having sex with the chick on the first date, "in the kitchen because it's the most social room in the house." my point is after reading what some hardcore fans (and you folks are, as am I) say about the draft, it's like one big seinfeld episode... 'I'm not saying they're bad picks, they're bad picks in the places the picks were picked, and I think we should have picked the pick I thought we should pick wher the pick should have been picked.' Initial disappointment that we didn't pick some monster for the d-line that we all could feel good about (at least until the next GM comes along in 3 years and we complain about how the guy had no heart for the game) in the first round has given way to the realization that "In Marv I trust", at ;east until he proves he can't get it done. Playmakers, team leaders, speed. let's go with that. F the mock drafts. t ps--Kramer just busted in to tell jerry and elaine that he needs the condoms back that he gave to george because they're defective. what a show, and a lot of people didn't understand it when it started either (yes, there was a deeper message here..)
Tolstoy Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 i was reading these posts while watching an old seinfeld episode, one in which jerry/elaine/george/and another chick use call waiting to discuss george having sex with the chick on the first date, "in the kitchen because it's the most social room in the house." my point is after reading what some hardcore fans (and you folks are, as am I) say about the draft, it's like one big seinfeld episode... 'I'm not saying they're bad picks, they're bad picks in the places the picks were picked, and I think we should have picked the pick I thought we should pick wher the pick should have been picked.' Initial disappointment that we didn't pick some monster for the d-line that we all could feel good about (at least until the next GM comes along in 3 years and we complain about how the guy had no heart for the game) in the first round has given way to the realization that "In Marv I trust", at ;east until he proves he can't get it done. Playmakers, team leaders, speed. let's go with that. F the mock drafts. t ps--Kramer just busted in to tell jerry and elaine that he needs the condoms back that he gave to george because they're defective. what a show, and a lot of people didn't understand it when it started either (yes, there was a deeper message here..) 677062[/snapback] This is correct. To all those of you who are complaining about the Bill's draft, please try to follow this: You are complaining that the Bills drafted badly today, not because the players they drafted won't turn out well (afterall, as you admit, no one knows how these players will turn out), but because the players did not represent "good value." In other words, the Bills could have had the same players by trading down. Now I want you all to ask yourself one simple question: What is the objective "value" standard that you are using to judge the worth of the players that we drafted? Is it Kiper's mock draft? Kirwan's? Brandt's? Scouting Inc's? Some other organization that sells its rankings to the media? On what grounds can you claim that these sources have a notion of a given player's value that is objectively better than the collective opinion of the football men in the Bills organization? More to the point, on what grounds can you claim that any other NFL team uses these same sources to derive their notion of a given player's value? Other teams rely on their own scouts for player rankings. If the Bills think a player is awfully good, don't you think it is possible that other teams feel the same way? Of course, with all the secrecy going on, the Bills don't know how other teams have players ranked. So from the Bills' perspective, it is entirely likely that other teams have also seen the same tape and combine workouts, and have arrived at the same opinion. In other words, isn't it entirely possible that one or more teams other than the Bills had their eyes on the same players that we drafted? PUT SIMPLY, WHY DO YOU ASSUME THAT EVERY OTHER NFL TEAM IS FOLLOWING KIPER'S MOCK DRAFT?
mboconnor Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 The one thing I like about all this is that finally someone thought to draft guys who had played a few games in cold weather. The biggest problem I saw with JP last year was that he looked like had never seen snow before and played accordingly. Jim Kelly, Andre Reed, Thurman Thomas, and Bruce Smith were so great in Buffalo because they thrived on the home field advantage. Levy and Modrak (the person who is most responsible for all this and the talent evals during the TD era) seem to have looked at Kiper and the gang's record for talent evaluation and came away unimpressed. They have been telling anyone who was willing to listen that they want "football players" and smart ones at that. If one looks at what the Patriots have been doing the last few years, one might see a parallel. All that said, I think that trading down the 8th pick would have been safer than Levy and Modrak thought. I'm giving Marv a pass on the first year as far as tactics go. I think he'll improve. In the end, what did it cost the Bills? They lost a 3rd round pick (too bad, but recoverable) and a lot of Ralph's money by making two guys into higher picks than they would have been. Tell you what, let's see what new regime can do with the parts they have. It's a tough schedule next year, so I don't see them in the playoffs anyway. I'll be happy with a 1988 type season where they are entertaining and show a lot of progress toward the eventual goal (4 more trips!).
mead107 Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 Don't encourage them. 677038[/snapback] i can not wait for the season to start . i just want to have a lot of fun at the games .
Ray Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 Doe anyone remember an undrafted freee agent we took in Pat Williams? He was pretty good.
Kelly the Dog Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 And you are which ? Witch ? 677025[/snapback] It's very simple. Either you know the Bills had a terrible/great draft or you think they did. Pesonally, I think they had a decent draft. I don't know. Perhaps you do. I thought at first that Whitner was a reach but the more I read the more I see a lot of people were high on this guy and he seems like he's a terrific player in a need area. Would I have taken him at 8, probably not. But I wanted to trade down 3-5 slots and take Bunkley but if there are no trade down partners you simply can't do it. I wanted McCargo a lot. He may be a total bust but that was a guy I liked beforehand. He may be a total bust, too, but clearly the Bills scouts and brass loved these two guys, otherwise they wouldn't have done what they did. The corner in #3 was rated by everyone higher. If you want you torate the draft by pre-draft rating byguys not employed by NFL teams, that was an absolute steal. Personally, I don't know.
Ghost of BiB Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 It's very simple. Either you know the Bills had a terrible/great draft or you think they did. Pesonally, I think they had a decent draft. I don't know. Perhaps you do. I thought at first that Whitner was a reach but the more I read the more I see a lot of people were high on this guy and he seems like he's a terrific player in a need area. Would I have taken him at 8, probably not. But I wanted to trade down 3-5 slots and take Bunkley but if there are no trade down partners you simply can't do it. I wanted McCargo a lot. He may be a total bust but that was a guy I liked beforehand. He may be a total bust, too, but clearly the Bills scouts and brass loved these two guys, otherwise they wouldn't have done what they did. The corner in #3 was rated by everyone higher. If you want you torate the draft by pre-draft rating byguys not employed by NFL teams, that was an absolute steal. Personally, I don't know. 677099[/snapback] You're talking to someone who has been incapable of listening since about 3 PM.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 great point(s). compelling, especially, when you consider someone like HN, a guy well liked by many, but considered to be the wrong type of playerfor our defensive scheme. i think we all spent time last season attempting to pepper spray the images of some of our offensive plays out of our eyes, knowing on some fundamental level that Mularkey et all surely must have spent the prior week game planning by trying to hammer square pegs into round holes. you just have to figure that Marv (and note to sportswriters everywhere: everyone who cares about the bills have a pretty good idea of his age, no need to keep calling him "80 year old...") and the rest of the braintrust read all the reports, looked at schemes, looked at personalities, etc and made the best choices for their team. if he fails, he fails. i'll cross that bridge when i get there, i've got a lot olf experience in that. word to your mother(s).
jlk.billsfan Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 The Tampa 2 needs a solid safety and all we had was Coy Wire and a mediocre FA so I have no problem with going for Whitner. We certainly needed a DT and if we missed on McCargo, there was a huge drop in quality to the next guy. I know a lot of people think he would have been there for us in the second but that is pure speculation. The guy is a player, every bit as good as Bunkley and Ngata with probably more upside than either of them. I think there was a good chance he would have been gone. I am disappointed we are letting the OL fester for another year (unless we get lucky with the FA's we signed) but you can't fix everything all at once. We absolutely needed a DT and a SS and we got two very good prospects. As for the CB in the third, I guess they don't think much of King or Greer for that matter. I really don't get that pick but the first two were solid enough. 676763[/snapback] Not that don't they don't think much of King/Greer,it just makes Nate more expendable
MikeSpeed Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 I'm confused. (Which is easy for me) Wasn't one of our biggest weaknesses the OL? Yes the DL was weak also, but no OL in the first 3 rounds? Come on even the most optimistic of you have to at least question that. Here's hoping day 2 brings WM some help. If not, then here's hoping our new D can pitch a lot of shutouts.
Recommended Posts