TDRupp Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 Well...I don't know about Ronnie Lott... I'll give the Kid a break and say Ed Reed... I think there is a MASSIVE diiference in the Picks of Whitner and Parrish...Whitner is a Safety that fits the Cover-2, but I'm pretty sure with his whole package he could fit in on most Teams at Free or Strong...I think comparing Whitner to a "Luxury Pick" is a bit of a reach as well...This was a HUGE Need on this Roster, unless in fact you are a Coy Wire Fan... But I do agree that Whitner better be REAL good...There is no question the Bills fell in love with the Kid...It should be interesting to compare Whitner's progress to Huff's in a few Years as well... 679759[/snapback] Excellent post. Barring injury this guy will be a very good solid SS for many years and I belive has a great chance on being a top 5 in the NFL SS. That is good value at 5, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 Better than Whitner would have been: Moving down in the first and picking up an extra 2nd or a 3rd and have a slight chance at nabbing Whitner with a later pick. If he's gone, grab Tamba Hali or Greenway, or Lawson all three of which could step in and help this team right away. In doing so you acquire an extra pick AND you save a ton of money. The way TD turned the 13 overall pick into Nate Clements and Travis Henry is a perfect illustration of this concept. 679892[/snapback] In this scenario if you do not get Whitner after you trade down you may get Hall, Greenway or Lawson, but you are still left with Bown/Wire as your startig SS. It appears that even under the best scenario you end up with Allen (the 3rd safety taken) who is rehabbing after a major injury. The basic deciain to stretch for Whitmer was made when the two safeties the Bills assessed as comfortably being able to start immediately dropped to one when OAK at 7 took Huff. One could suggest: 1. We should have risked losing Whitmer by trading down, If you argue this then how far down would you trade and what do you think we get in return for the risk and what do you think we could have gotten for this return. 2. We should have pursued some other strategy of team building that did not place such a premium on the draft producing immediate replacements for Milloy and Adams. If you argue this then what is that other strategy. 3. Something else. What is something else. Without some detail on these issues complaints are little more than mere whining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 In this scenario if you do not get Whitner after you trade down you may get Hall, Greenway or Lawson, but you are still left with Bown/Wire as your startig SS.. 680489[/snapback] So if the only way the Bills could find a player to compete for the starting spot is to use the 8th pick? Ko Simpson has the size to play SS and the Bills got him in the 4th. I'd say if they really wanted they could have slotted him into the competition for the starting SS spot and he likely would have won. Honestly I'd rather have Brown as the Bills starting SS than Anderson as a starting DT or Kelsey/Denney as the starting DE. I'd rather have Brown as the starting SS than Benny as a starting OG. Then again I’m not a big believer in the idea that your starting SS has to be a superstar. I put much more emphasis on DE and DT. Just look at the value the Bills got in the 3rd and 4th rounds. Youboty and Simpson. Most people are saying that these are "steals". With that type of value available in those rounds I wouldn't have minded the Bills moving down two times in the first round into the 20s and picking up 3 or so more picks in these rounds, but that's just me. After the “Big 8” there was a drop-off in talent on most boards with 10-15 players all bunched together in terms of grades. I wouldn’t have cared if Whitner wasn’t available if the Bills moved down to 14. If he wasn't they could have tried to move down again and picked up another 3rd in the process. This draft was DEEP and the Bills didn’t take advantage of that fact. All that being said, I think Whitner will be a very good SS, I’m just not sure he’s better than whoever we could have gotten at the 14th spot and the 3rd rounder we could have picked up combined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Ko Simpson has the size to play SS and the Bills got him in the 4th. I'd say if they really wanted they could have slotted him into the competition for the starting SS spot and he likely would have won. 680528[/snapback] I may be wrong, but all the writeups I've seen on Simpson list him as a FS only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 I may be wrong, but all the writeups I've seen on Simpson list him as a FS only. 680532[/snapback] Simpson is too skinny to play SS. He is a pure ball hawking FS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Simpson is too skinny to play SS. He is a pure ball hawking FS 680533[/snapback] He has enough of a frame to add a little bulk and given the way he tackles I don't think it's a stretch that he could be moved over. That being said it was just an example of how the Bills didn't have to use the 8th pick to find a guy that could compete for a starting position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 How good will Whitner have to be to justify the #8 pick? 1: If he is better than Huff....pick justified(obviously) 2: If he is a pro-bowler....pick justified. (what % of top 10 picks become pro-bowlers?) 3: If he starts instantly & has a solid career....pick justified. (what % are busts?) Even if we picked him at #11, #13, #15 or #17, justifications 2 & 3 would still apply. The reality is.... half of the first round(give or take) are busts. The reality also is.... half of the top 10 picks selected(give or take) are busts. Who cares where he is taken... If he isn't a bust, Pick Justified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdellapelle Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 winfield at safety, enough said! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 I don't remember the round John Lynch was drafted in, But if it wasn't in the top ten he deserved to be. I will be more than happy if Whitner is anywhere near as good as Lynch - who my very well make the HOF. 679941[/snapback] Lynch was a 3rd rounder. And, yes, he was an excellent safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 So it's a bad pick unless he's the next Ronnie Lott? #8 is very, very high for a pure safety. Now I credit Marv and Dick for "thinking outside the box" and all that, but a top 10 pick is where teams are trying to pick up superstars and guys they can build a franchise around. When they went "outside the box" though it immediately put a bigger spotlight on that pick. It's not really that difficult to comprehend; before Tagliabue even got to the podium, Boomer's jaw was hitting the floor. If you don't think there is any extra pressure on this pick, you're kidding yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 All that being said, I think Whitner will be a very good SS, I’m just not sure he’s better than whoever we could have gotten at the 14th spot and the 3rd rounder we could have picked up combined. 680528[/snapback] Hopefully, he's vastly better than Manning and Harper. 3 years from now, we should come back and see if we would still want Whitner and McCargoShip over Bunkley/Ngata and Manning/Harper and say another pick (or two), ... picking a random name ... nice a T, Toledo. I hope the answer is "Hell yeah." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 #2, my friend. The Patriots will contend for the Super Bowl next year. In doing so, they attacked immediate needs they had at the WR and RB position. They were justified in doing so. The Steelers will contend for the Super Bowl next year. In doing so, they attacked immediate needs they had at the WR position. They were justified in doing so. Your beloved Bills will NOT compete for the Super Bowl and have numerous holes on the roster. There are major depth concerns at virtually every position. Despite this, they went into the early rounds of the draft targeting specific positions. IMO, they were not justified in doing so. New Orleans had major holes at LB and OT. Yet the top two candidates on their draft board were a defensive and and a running back. Why? Because it offers maximum value. Picking at 8 when the quality of playes available was comparable to the 15 slot, staying put was stupid. 2. We should have pursued some other strategy of team building that did not place such a premium on the draft producing immediate replacements for Milloy and Adams. 680489[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 THANK YOU!!!! Finally, someone who understands the concept of value. After the “Big 8” there was a drop-off in talent on most boards with 10-15 players all bunched together in terms of grades. I wouldn’t have cared if Whitner wasn’t available if the Bills moved down to 14. If he wasn't they could have tried to move down again and picked up another 3rd in the process. This draft was DEEP and the Bills didn’t take advantage of that fact. 680528[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 #2, my friend. The Patriots will contend for the Super Bowl next year. In doing so, they attacked immediate needs they had at the WR and RB position. They were justified in doing so. The Steelers will contend for the Super Bowl next year. In doing so, they attacked immediate needs they had at the WR position. They were justified in doing so. Your beloved Bills will NOT compete for the Super Bowl and have numerous holes on the roster. There are major depth concerns at virtually every position. Despite this, they went into the early rounds of the draft targeting specific positions. IMO, they were not justified in doing so. New Orleans had major holes at LB and OT. Yet the top two candidates on their draft board were a defensive and and a running back. Why? Because it offers maximum value. Picking at 8 when the quality of playes available was comparable to the 15 slot, staying put was stupid. 680786[/snapback] Um...which player was the obvious value choice again? It sounds like Marv & Co. believe that the BPA was Whitner. Are you suggesting they should have followed ESPNs big board rather than their own? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Time will tell, I suppose. To me, after the top 6 picks, 7-17 were fairly comparable in value... comparable enough such that an extra second or third could make up for the difference and then some. Um...which player was the obvious value choice again? It sounds like Marv & Co. believe that the BPA was Whitner. Are you suggesting they should have followed ESPNs big board rather than their own? 680799[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Time will tell, I suppose. To me, after the top 6 picks, 7-17 were fairly comparable in value... comparable enough such that an extra second or third could make up for the difference and then some. 680800[/snapback] That is the frustrating thing...time. By the time we know one way or the other...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Time will tell, I suppose. To me, after the top 6 picks, 7-17 were fairly comparable in value... comparable enough such that an extra second or third could make up for the difference and then some. 680800[/snapback] But Dawgg - you're thinking Buffalo-centric here. If picks 7-17 were of relatively equal value, why would any team give up a 2nd or 3rd round pick in order to move up to #8? If you were a fan of one of those teams, would you have been happy if your team gave up a first-round pick to go to #8? The truth of the matter is that with both Leinart and Cutler on the board, any team that liked Leinart a lot had to decide if Leinart was really a surer bet than Cutler + a first day pick. Ditto with both Ngata and Bunkley on the Board. So, with few, if any, trade partners available, the Bills went with the top pick on their board.... at least we didn't make a truly bad reach by picking Winston Justice. JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 #2, my friend. The Patriots will contend for the Super Bowl next year. In doing so, they attacked immediate needs they had at the WR and RB position. They were justified in doing so. The Steelers will contend for the Super Bowl next year. In doing so, they attacked immediate needs they had at the WR position. They were justified in doing so. Your beloved Bills will NOT compete for the Super Bowl and have numerous holes on the roster. There are major depth concerns at virtually every position. Despite this, they went into the early rounds of the draft targeting specific positions. IMO, they were not justified in doing so. New Orleans had major holes at LB and OT. Yet the top two candidates on their draft board were a defensive and and a running back. Why? Because it offers maximum value. Picking at 8 when the quality of playes available was comparable to the 15 slot, staying put was stupid. 680786[/snapback] But if the Bills couldn't find a team interested in giving up a first day pick to move up, what do we do then? The players who went after us were: LB Ernie Sims QB Matt Leinart QB Jay Cutler DT Haloti Ngata DE Kamerion Wimbley DT Broderick Bunkley CB Tye Hill CB Jason Allen LB Chad Greenway Are any of those players any clearly better than Whitner? (Other than Leinart? ;-) Are any of those players more clearly an upgrade than Whitner over Bowen or McCargo of Anderson? I find it hard to see how.... JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 But if the Bills couldn't find a team interested in giving up a first day pick to move up, what do we do then? The players who went after us were:LB Ernie Sims QB Matt Leinart QB Jay Cutler DT Haloti Ngata DE Kamerion Wimbley DT Broderick Bunkley CB Tye Hill CB Jason Allen LB Chad Greenway Are any of those players any clearly better than Whitner? (Other than Leinart? ;-) Are any of those players more clearly an upgrade than Whitner over Bowen or McCargo of Anderson? I find it hard to see how.... JDG 680836[/snapback] Ignoring the two QBs (they were the bait and leverage at the #8 spot that Marv failed to use), any one of these guys would've been a good pick and contributor if not starting on the Bills ratty defense. Your asking the wrong question by the way. The question is not if 1 of these guys is better than Whitner. The question is whether Whitner is a smarter strategy than 1 of these guys plus probably 2 more picks (at least a 3rd rounder and maybe a 2nd), plus the pick traded away to come back in the first round and reach for McCargo (that's conservatively 4 bodies) might better serve a rebuilding team with expansion team sized holes across the roster? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 The Patriots will contend for the Super Bowl next year. In doing so, they attacked immediate needs they had at the WR and RB position. They were justified in doing so. The Steelers will contend for the Super Bowl next year. In doing so, they attacked immediate needs they had at the WR position. They were justified in doing so. 680786[/snapback] May I please direct you to Marv Levy's press conference following the Whitner pick. In case you don't go there, I'll ask the following, "Who was the Steelers' best player last year?" "Which player on Steelers' defense did the OCs have to account for on all downs?" "Who was the best player on Pats' D when they won the Superbowls?" Since we're walking down memory lane, who was the last safety who ran a sub 4.4 - 40? Was it Rod Woodson? Would he be worth a top 10 pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts