about Kings artical on TBD front page

[Scraps]

1. No.  It does not have to be viewed as a value judgement.

 

I did not offer an opinion as to whether the Bills should have traded down or not.  I never intended to discuss a trade at all.  How many times should I write this before you understand?

 

2. King suggested this and did not back it up with a logical set of facts.  He used facts which supported his point and ignored facts which contrasted his point.

 

3. I did not pass judgement on a possible trade or lack thereof.  I passed judgement on King's passing off speculation as fact. 

687768[/snapback]

 

But he does not talk about fact. Nor does he pass his speculation off as fact. When he says things like

 

In this case, my feeling is you have to know the draft and you have to know the teams around you. If you have a strong feeling a team below you is going to take the player you love, then obviously you can't make that trade. If Levy and coach Dick Jauron had solid evidence Whitner might go to Arizona at No. 10 or Baltimore at No. 12, then obviously the Bills had to sit where they were and just take the guy.

 

and

 

One final thing, Davey: If you have an opportunity to get Whitner alone, or you have an opportunity to trade down and get Whitner at a lower salary, plus get a potentially very good player in the second round, then I think the latter is the draft-day chance you've got to take.

 

he is not talking about fact. He is talking about "feelings" and "chance" and his opinion.

[colin]

OGT you are making good sense, stop it!

 

i think the point that everyone should note is that ngata, bunk and whitner would have been gone by 15. those were the 3 players the bills really wanted in the top 15 (aside from the guys who had been picked allready).

 

the bills might have gotten some decent picks for moving down, but they REALLY wanted a stud safety and dt, a trade down to 15 would have removed at least one of those from their selection.

 

they saw that chicago was willing to trade and the guy they wanted was there so the jumped up and took mccargo, solving both the needs they wanted.

 

if mccargo ends up as good as ngata or bunk, and if whitner is the rock he was in college (and the rock that every damn osu db has been in the nfl so far) then we are talking about this being a superb draft.

 

looking back i think marv and co did the right thing

[Ozymandius]

If Denver didn't offer a 2nd and 4th, then Marv would have denied it in his interview with King...

 

We are accepting at face value that Denver would've given a 1st, 2nd and a 4th to move into the 8th position.  I don't believe it.  I do not believe Denver coveted Cutler enough to give up a 1st, 2nd and 4th.

 

I believe that had Denver offered a 1st, 2nd and 4th for the Bills pick, Marv would've taken it. 

 

I also don't know why anybody would tell the truth to Peter King.  Nobody in the league seemed to know the Bills were going after Whitner.  I was so upset at the time I was yelling at everybody.  But hearing what Marv said, I'm okay with it. 

 

Once more, I do not believe that Denver offered a 2nd and a 4th.  Maybe a 3rd and a 4th.  They gave St. Louis a 3rd to move up 4 slots.

687743[/snapback]

[OGTEleven]

But he does not talk about fact.  Nor does he pass his speculation off as fact.  When he says things like

and

he is not talking about fact.  He is talking about "feelings" and "chance" and his opinion.

687782[/snapback]

You left this out:

 

But my information from two teams drafting in that area was that the only team extremely interested in Whitner before the middle of the round was the Ravens. And the intelligence around the league said Baltimore would certainly take nose tackle Haloti Ngata if he were there

 

He certainly infers that no other lower team would trade up or at least ignores the possibility. He deems his information as of higher value than Marv's and Jauron's.

 

You said yourself:

 

King suggests that the Bills should have traded down because they could had a high probability of getting the same player, plus a couple of more picks. That is they would have gotten value.

 

How do you start with "high proabability" and get to "feelings and chance" in the very next post?

[Ozymandius]

i think the point that everyone should note is that ngata, bunk and whitner would have been gone by 15.  those were the 3 players the bills really wanted in the top 15 (aside from the guys who had been picked allready).

687790[/snapback]

We don't really know that at all, though, for the same reason that we didn't know Whitner was going to be the pick. I actually think the Bills probably had McCargo as the top DT on their board.

 

There would still have been good players available at 15. I would have been very pleased with Davin Joseph at that pick, for example.

[Dawgg]

I disagree.

 

Whitner was the one and only player to take in this draft.

 

There would still have been good players available at 15.  I would have been very pleased with Davin Joseph at that pick, for example.

687801[/snapback]

[mary owen]

I love the way the critics add value to players (and multiple picks) over the value a GM, team scouts, HC, and Assistant GM place on individual prospects.

 

That's what this all comes down to. It's absurd to think that other outside sources/contacts/casual aquaintances of journalists (even the almighty King) know what's best for a team.

[Scraps]

You left this out:

He certainly infers that no other lower team would trade up or at least ignores the possibility.  He deems his information as of higher value than Marv's and Jauron's.

 

You said yourself:

How do you start with "high proabability" and get to "feelings and chance" in the very next post?

687799[/snapback]

 

I read what he wrote. He used the words "feeling" and "chance" I used his exact words to rebut your attempt to shove the word "fact" into his mouth.

[Scraps]

I disagree.

 

Whitner was the one and only player to take in this draft.

687802[/snapback]

 

I'm surprised we didn't trade up to get him.

[syhuang]

I disagree.

 

Whitner was the one and only player to take in this draft.

687802[/snapback]

 

[OGTEleven]

I read what he wrote.  He used the words "feeling" and "chance"  I used his exact words to rebut your attempt to shove the word "fact" into his mouth.

687829[/snapback]

One final thing, Davey: If you have an opportunity to get Whitner alone, or you have an opportunity to trade down and get Whitner at a lower salary, plus get a potentially very good player in the second round, then I think the latter is the draft-day chance you've got to take.

 

He clearly implies Whitner would be there at 15.

 

If Levy and coach Dick Jauron had solid evidence Whitner might go to Arizona at No. 10 or Baltimore at No. 12, then obviously the Bills had to sit where they were and just take the guy.

 

He clearly ignores St. Louis, Detroit and Cleveland (Ngata). If the Bills had strong evidence that St. Louis would have taken Whitner should they have ignored it because it wasn't Baltimore or Arizona?

 

But my information from two teams drafting in that area was that the only team extremely interested in Whitner before the middle of the round was the Ravens. And the intelligence around the league said Baltimore would certainly take nose tackle Haloti Ngata if he were there.

 

He clearly ignores that there were 6 teams "drafting in the area" (9,10,11,12,13,14) and replies on the intelligence of two teams to cover all 6's intentions. Is it possible/likely that team A had team B fooled? His work is shoddy. He also ignores the trade up possibility entirely. If you choose to accept these low standards that's fine. I choose not to do so.

 

He did not stand up and shout "I can prove Whitner would be there at 15" but he did everything else. His implication was very clear. His facts backing it up were sparse.

 

When you said:

 

  It is not that I choose not to see your point. I acknowledge your point. Many other people, including Dawgg I believe, have acknowledged that someone could have then moved up ahead of 15 and taken Whitner. Obviously you assume risk in trading down, but if you want to maximize the value you get out of the draft, you have to assume some measure of risk. I'm not convinced the risk was terribly high.....

 

I thought you basically agreed with me but assumed a lower risk than I assumed. Fair enough. Now you seem to be saying that King properly acknowledged the risk which is not so.

 

I guess I should be happy that I got you out of Bunckleyville in only 34 posts.

[obie_wan]

Again, for the 100th time, you are fixated on Whitner.  It's Whitner or bust.

 

If the only option in this draft is to come out with Donte Whitner, then yes, you stay at 8 and pick him.  However, if there are other players of his caliber later in the draft (and yes, there were whether you believe it or not), then it makes prudent sense to trade down and acquire quality picks.  2 starters are better than 1 -- especially for a team coming off a 5-11 season with holes at every position except punter.

687686[/snapback]

 

So which of these mysterious "other players" of equal value and need to the Bills should they have taken at #15?

[ganesh]

These guys make you laugh....Didn't the Ravens HC talk in a post-draft

radio show about how they would have picked Whitner if he was available at 13.

Peter conviniently decided to ignore that piece of information.

 

As one of the guys in the local talk show (in Pitt) said, if you like a player and

really enamoured by him, go get him at what ever pick you think it is safe...

There is no such thing as a reach.....that will be told only 4-5 years from the

draft day.

[Ozymandius]

These guys make you laugh....Didn't the Ravens HC talk in a post-draft

radio show about how they would have picked Whitner if he was available at 13.

Peter conviniently decided to ignore that piece of information.

688014[/snapback]

Yes, King must've conveniently decided to ignore that. Hmmm, that or IT NEVER HAPPENED (or King never heard about it, but most likely, it just never happened). No coach or GM is going to publicly state that he didn't draft his first choice.

[Dawgg]

It's truly amazing how brainwashed some people are to the point where they concoct radio shows to justify what happened.

 

Yes, King must've conveniently decided to ignore that.  Hmmm, that or IT NEVER HAPPENED (or King never heard about it, but most likely, it just never happened).  No coach or GM is going to publicly state that he didn't draft his first choice.

688039[/snapback]

[Dawgg]

I have answered this numerous times.

 

Ozymandius suggests David Joseph - not a bad choice.

 

If defense was Marv's preference, perhaps (in no particular order):

 

Chad Greenway:

 

Posey can (and should) be replaced. Fletcher is not getting any younger and his contract is running out. Spikes, no matter what his PR campaign wants you to believe, is coming off an injury in which most athletes are never the same again.

 

Tye Hill:

 

Would step right in as the starter opposite Nate Clements -- has the talent to become a #1 corner and could step right in if Clements leaves. Moves McGee to the nickel spot and gives the team a formidable 3-some at cornerback.

 

This, of course assumes the extremely unbearable tragic scenario in which Whitner is taken before pick 15, which in and of itself may very well NOT have happened.

 

So which of these mysterious "other players" of equal value and need to the Bills should they have taken at #15?

687917[/snapback]

[mary owen]

for those of you frightened by what guys like Peter King, Dr. Z, Chris MortenHoe, and Mel kiper say about the Bills draft, Carucci offers some calming words:

 

Worried Fan:

I need someone to make sense of the Bills' draft. I was told they took a player that wasn't even the best at that position and then traded up to get a guy that could have been there for a while. Please try to explain what the plan of attack for the Bills could be. I am scared.

--Corey M.

 

Vic:

Don't be frightened, Corey. Like Jeff, the Raider fan, you need to chill out and look at the situation from a different perspective.

 

I know you didn't mention this, but based on what I've heard and read, I think many Bills fans, like Raider fans, are bothered that their team didn't select one of the two remaining top two quarterbacks -- Leinart or Cutler.

 

No, the safety the Bills selected with the eighth overall pick, Donte Whitner, wasn't universally rated the best at his position. That would have been Huff, whom the Raiders grabbed at No. 7. The Bills wanted Huff and, until Oakland's selection, thought they could land him. And, yes, the Bills did trade for a second first-round pick, which they used on defensive tackle John McCargo, widely viewed as a player who might have been available at a later spot.

 

But all of the ratings you hear about in the media, including those referenced on this very site, are highly subjective and not always accurate based on how players actually perform in the league. Even people who formally made a living drafting players for NFL teams are offering an opinion. Teams can only trust how they rate players, and often their ratings disagree with those that so many of us like to cite when second-guessing (or flat-out ripping) the actual picks.

 

The bottom line with the Bills' decision-makers is that they concluded they had a better chance of using this draft to more quickly improve the NFL's 29th-ranked defense last year than upgrading their quarterback situation, which is anything but settled. If Whitner and McCargo are able to make such a contribution, what difference does their draft status make? If the Bills end up with five defensive starters from this draft who all make decent-to-substantial contributions, are their pre-draft ratings really going to matter?

 

 

Lighten up, Francises

[mary owen]

I have answered this numerous times.

 

Ozymandius suggests David Joseph - not a bad choice.

 

If defense was Marv's preference, perhaps (in no particular order):

 

Chad Greenway:

 

Posey can (and should) be replaced.  Fletcher is not getting any younger and his contract is running out. Spikes, no matter what his PR campaign wants you to believe, is coming off an injury in which most athletes are never the same again. 

 

Tye Hill:

 

Would step right in as the starter opposite Nate Clements -- has the talent to become a #1 corner and could step right in if Clements leaves.  Moves McGee to the nickel spot and gives the team a formidable 3-some at cornerback.

 

This, of course assumes the extremely unbearable tragic scenario in which Whitner is taken before pick 15, which in and of itself may very well NOT have happened.

688076[/snapback]

 

 

so, I guess you guys scouted these players? ok....

[Dawgg]

LOL...

 

This is far from rocket science, my friend.

 

so, I guess you guys scouted these players? ok....

688079[/snapback]

[Rico]

The Bills wanted Huff and, until Oakland's selection, thought they could land him.

Just as I suspected... thanks for clearing that up, Vic Carucci!