30dive Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 It is pretty clear that the Bills had identified the position/s they wanted. And when Huff went to the Raiders, the next best saftey on most charts was Whitner. So they took him. This left the other position they had identified for there next pick, DT. The pressure increased as Ngata and Bunkley "certainly" the Bills top ranked DT/s gone or projected to go; thus leaving McCargo as the next highest ranked DT. Accoring to many charts they got the second ranked Safety in the draft and the third ranked DT. Overall I'll give the gentlemen at One Bills Drive a C+, primarily because I really do believe we could have picked up Ngata or Bunkley and then picked up a "quality" DB (certainly not of Whitners value) in the second. Hey another GM might have gambled, ML seemingly won't be known for his poker skills......I think I'll take that. As always time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 (edited) I liked their picks. I'm guessing they get 2 starters in Whitner and McCargo, which is not bad (wr's and rb's excepted - the high picks there are generally locks to get a bunch of playing time.). As for Youboty - stocking up on DB's is on every club's mind these days. Picks from round 4 and down are always a bit iffy, but luck happens! I sure would have liked them to select some OL's higher up - but I'm hoping that some decent playcalling on offense will help out. I do like their FA acquisitions - bench building - although TE Royal for more money over Shoebel struck me as odd. In my view, it's an improvement over the previous years - no pie-in-the-sky stuff, and on that basis I give 'em an A. OK - edit - "B". Edited May 1, 2006 by stuckincincy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
30dive Posted May 1, 2006 Author Share Posted May 1, 2006 An "A".....hmmmmmm I tend to agree with everthing you said, save the grade, IMHO a grade of A means there was no one else we could have picked up that was better than who we got. My C+ certainly might be a wee bit low, but this draft is certainly somewhere between your grade and mine. With that said, I think that is a very good result. Hey and if the guys at ESPN hate our draft, that can only be a good thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marv's Neighbor Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 Exactly! Time will tell and hopefully we'll be OK. The Draft is such a crap shoot anyway. There is so much scouting information that everybody considers themselves the next 'genius' and when picks don't go their way they start with the sh*t hemorhage stuff. Would I like to seen us go in another direction? Possibly! Will it make a difference? That's where you have to try to balance your needs against the "take a stab" draft. It's too late for the woulda shoulda coulda crapola so get a grip! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 An "A".....hmmmmmm I tend to agree with everthing you said, save the grade, IMHO a grade of A means there was no one else we could have picked up that was better than who we got. My C+ certainly might be a wee bit low, but this draft is certainly somewhere between your grade and mine. With that said, I think that is a very good result. Hey and if the guys at ESPN hate our draft, that can only be a good thing! 679385[/snapback] OK - I changed it to a "B". They had a bunch of holes to fill, for sure. I'd guess that they figured - correctly, that patching up the D had the better chance of returns next season. Attendance and wins do matter, of course. If I may, I'll contrast their draft to Cincy's. Their glaring need is at DT - Adams will help, but they were something like 28th against the run. What they did was to draft some insurance - only one of their OL is signed past '06; DE Smith's contract runs out in '06, too. DB Tory James is slowing up with age, and either his or Delthea O'Neal's contract runs out after this season. The wisdom of their passing on early DT's remains to be seen. Their TE spot is pretty poor. Questions at SS. So I would expect that consensus would give them a "C" or less, but to them internally, I'd give it a solid "B". I think given their situation, the Bills did a nice job. It is fun to kick around these post-draft ratings, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts