about Kings artical on TBD front page

[apuszczalowski]

I think Carrucci summed it up the best and I respect his writing and his opinions. These rankings and mock drafts the so called "Experts" make mean absolutely nothing, they are only speculation as to how a player will perform and who they think is interested in them. These "Reporters" are covering all 32 teams, I wouldn't take their opinions as fact cause they are covering a wide area and don't have the time to focus on all teams individually. They are just like you and I but because they are in the media, we think their opinions are truth (and they get payed for doing it)

 

The Bills had the player they wanted and thought would be the best fit for their system. They did not want to take their chance and trade down where they may or may not have been able to take whitner and may have had to settle for someone alot lower on their list. Atleast they got one of the guys they wanted that was at the top of their chart.

 

If these "Experts" gradings and mocks were accurate, why did no one have bush going #2, or Young being the first QB drafted? I thought Leinart was the highest rated QB in the draft?

[Scraps]

He clearly implies Whitner would be there at 15.

687892[/snapback]

 

Well duh! Yes he thought Whitner would be there at 15, otherwise he would not have a problem with Levy passing on the deal. He does not guarantee as fact that Whitner would be there at 15. Thats why he said

 

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 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?

 

Oh, back to the what ifs, are we?

 

What's with Cleveland and Ngata?

 

When he said

 

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.

 

By saying the Ravens were the only team interested in Whitner before the middle of the round, didn't he address the Rams and Lions?

 

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.

 

What do you want? A 500 page thesis? He is a sports columnist replying to an email. Get some perspective. Its absurd to expect him to address every teams needs and every possible scenario you dream up in an on line column. He didn't ignore the other teams between 8-15. He said the only team interested in Whitner before the middle of the round was the Ravens. Did he really have to say that the Rams were not interested in Whitner, the Browns were not interested in Whitner, the Eagles were not interested in Whitner ...? Are you this anal when it comes to a column you agree with?

 

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.

 

Yeah, that is what we are quibbling over. The degree of risk. I believe Whitner would have been there at 15. King believes Whitner would have been there at 15. And when King said

 

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.

 

I think he acknowledged risk. Why else would he use the word "chance"?

 

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

 

So now your saying I was fixated on Bunkley?

[Scraps]

I think Carrucci summed it up the best and I respect his writing and his opinions. These rankings and mock drafts the so called "Experts" make mean absolutely nothing, they are only speculation as to how a player will perform and who they think is interested in them. These "Reporters" are covering all 32 teams, I wouldn't take their opinions as fact cause they are covering a wide area and don't have the time to focus on all teams individually. They are just like you and I but because they are in the media, we think their opinions are truth (and they get payed for doing it)

 

The Bills had the player they wanted and thought would be the best fit for their system. They did not want to take their chance and trade down where they may or may not have been able to take whitner and may have had to settle for someone alot lower on their list. Atleast they got one of the guys they wanted that was at the top of their chart.

 

If these "Experts" gradings and mocks were accurate, why did no one have bush going #2, or Young being the first QB drafted? I thought Leinart was the highest rated QB in the draft?

688244[/snapback]

 

I just did a google search on mock drafts to look at some of them. Granted I only looked at 6 of them, but in 4 of them, Vince Young was gone before Lienart and they were 50/50 regarding Mario Williams and Reggie Bush.

 

Whitner was projected somewhere between 18 and 31.

[mary owen]

I think Carrucci summed it up the best and I respect his writing and his opinions. These rankings and mock drafts the so called "Experts" make mean absolutely nothing, they are only speculation as to how a player will perform and who they think is interested in them. These "Reporters" are covering all 32 teams, I wouldn't take their opinions as fact cause they are covering a wide area and don't have the time to focus on all teams individually. They are just like you and I but because they are in the media, we think their opinions are truth (and they get payed for doing it)

 

The Bills had the player they wanted and thought would be the best fit for their system. They did not want to take their chance and trade down where they may or may not have been able to take whitner and may have had to settle for someone alot lower on their list. Atleast they got one of the guys they wanted that was at the top of their chart.

 

If these "Experts" gradings and mocks were accurate, why did no one have bush going #2, or Young being the first QB drafted? I thought Leinart was the highest rated QB in the draft?

688244[/snapback]

 

you don't hear much about this guy's mock, but man he was almost dead on in the 1st half of the draft. I guess he had inside info that was better than Kings.

effing crapshoot man, that's all it is!!!!

 

hell, my mock was better than King's, maybe that's why I am not critical of any of the team's decisions.

 

 

 

http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFLDr.../mock042806.htm

[syhuang]

I just did a google search on mock drafts to look at some of them.  Granted I only looked at 6 of them, but in 4 of them, Vince Young was gone before Lienart and they were 50/50 regarding  Mario Williams and Reggie Bush. 

 

Whitner was projected somewhere between 18 and 31.

688260[/snapback]

 

interesting, most of the mock drafts I saw had Bush went to #1 overall.

 

Aslo , it seems like you miss the mock drafts which had Whiter at #8.

[Scraps]

interesting, most of the mock drafts I saw had Bush went to #1 overall.

 

Aslo , it seems like you miss the mock drafts which had Whiter at #8.

688317[/snapback]

 

There are a ton of mock drafts out there. Obviously I did not see the one with Whitner going at 8 until the link was posted here. Even in that draft the author states that the Bills are in no mans land and are the most logical team to trade up or down.

[syhuang]

There are a ton of mock drafts out there.  Obviously I did not see the one with Whitner going at 8 until the link was posted here.  Even in that draft the author states that the Bills are in no mans land and are the most logical team to trade up or down.

688330[/snapback]

 

There're more than one mock draft having Whitner at #8, do more "googling" and you'll find more.

[Scraps]

There're more than one mock draft having Whitner at #8, do more "googling" and you'll find more.

688335[/snapback]

 

Why don't you simply provide me the links?

[syhuang]

Why don't you simply provide me the links?

688343[/snapback]

 

Do you save all the links to the mock drafts you ever saw? Is it so hard to learn how to use google?

 

Also, what's the point to use mock drafts to justify the picks? is any of the mock drafts written by real pro-football scouts? Do they really have access to the draft boards of all teams?

[Dan III]

Why don't you simply provide me the links?

688343[/snapback]

here is one... http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/9403416

[OGTEleven]

Well duh!  Yes he thought Whitner would be there at 15, otherwise he would not have a problem with Levy passing on the deal.  He does not guarantee as fact that Whitner would be there at 15.  Thats why he said

 

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.

 

Obviously the Bills assessed the risk % as a higher one than King did. The Bills have a large staff that does this for a living. King is one person who mostly writes for a living and does some (clearly shoddy) research to back up his work.

 

Oh, back to the what ifs, are we? 

 

All the what ifs are related to the risk, which is consistent.

 

What's with Cleveland and Ngata? 

 

Some information had Cleveland taking Ngata. If they did, Baltimore wouldn't have, right?

 

When he said

 

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.

 

By saying the Ravens were the only team interested in Whitner before the middle of the round, didn't he address the Rams and Lions? 

 

Not the Rams. He discounted them because they eventually traded their pick to Denver. If the Bills had traded their pick to Denver St. Louis could have taken Ngata, Whitner or traded with miami (or possibly the Bills). I feel King made the risk(s) out to be linear, but they were more complex than that.

 

What do you want?  A 500 page thesis?  He is a sports columnist replying to an email.  Get some perspective.  Its absurd to expect him to address every teams needs and every possible scenario you dream up in an on line column.  He didn't ignore the other teams between 8-15.  He said the only team interested in Whitner before the middle of the round was the Ravens.  Did he really have to say that the Rams were not interested in Whitner, the Browns were not interested in Whitner, the Eagles were not interested in Whitner ...?  Are you this anal when it comes to a column you agree with?

 

He doesn't have to detail all of his analysis, but he ought to take more factors into account. Maybe it's just more fun (or easier) to come to a conclusion and then find facts to back you up.

 

Yeah, that is what we are quibbling over.  The degree of risk.  I believe Whitner would have been there at 15.  King believes Whitner would have been there at 15.  And when King said

 

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 acknowledged the risk, but downplayed it.

 

 

So now your saying I was fixated on Bunkley?    

 

No. you were fixated on accusing me of comparing players for about 10 posts. I never intended to compare players.

[Scraps]

Do you save all the links to the mock drafts you ever saw? Is it so hard to learn how to use google?

688350[/snapback]

 

I know how to use google just fine. I used it to come across a number of mock drafts that had flat out refuted your claim that

 

If these "Experts" gradings and mocks were accurate, why did no one have bush going #2, or Young being the first QB drafted? I thought Leinart was the highest rated QB in the draft?

 

I just thought since you saw several mocks with Whitner going at 8, you might have some rememberance on where you saw them, or what group they were associated with. It makes it easier to pick out the right ones instead of going through every mock on a google search.

[syhuang]

I know how to use google just fine.  I used it to come across a number of mock drafts that had flat out refuted your claim that

 

I claimed there're more than one mock draft have Whitner at #8, how many links of mock drafts were listed in this thread to confirm it?

 

refute? How many mock drafts did you go through? Six (see your previous post). Just SIX!!

 

And you think you know how to google.

 

What's the pont to use few mock drafts to make any conclusion? and what the hell do you use mock draft to justify real draft picks? Is any of them based on the real draft boards?

[Scraps]

Obviously the Bills assessed the risk % as a higher one than King did.  The Bills have a large staff that does this for a living.  King is one person who mostly writes for a living and does some (clearly shoddy) research to back up his work. 

All the what ifs are related to the risk, which is consistent. 

Some information had Cleveland taking Ngata.  If they did, Baltimore wouldn't have, right?

Not the Rams.  He discounted them because they eventually traded their pick to Denver.  If the Bills had traded their pick to Denver St. Louis could have taken Ngata, Whitner or traded with miami (or possibly the Bills). I feel King made the risk(s) out to be linear, but they were more complex than that.

He doesn't have to detail all of his analysis, but he ought to take more factors into account.  Maybe it's just more fun (or easier) to come to a conclusion and then find facts to back you up.

He acknowledged the risk, but downplayed it.

688368[/snapback]

 

Thank You. Thank you for finally admitting that King acknowedged risk.

 

As for the rest of your post, I think you are over hyping the risks and are obviously going to keep coming up with what if scenarios until Whitner was the only choice.

 

No. you were fixated on accusing me of comparing players for about 10 posts. I never intended to compare players.

 

I don't care what you intended to do. You asked some "what if" questions, which I briefly entertained. I pretty much gave up after you came up with what if the Dolphins trade up to take Whitner, Bunkley is gone, the Bills draft someone with a broken hip and are punished by Whitner for the next decade. I was half expecting you to have us drafting Ted William's frozen head. Don't blame me if you take the conversation down that path.

[Scraps]

I claimed there're more than one mock draft have Whitner at #8, how many links of mock drafts were listed in this thread to confirm it?

 

refute? How many mock drafts did you go through? Six (see your previous post).  Just SIX!!

 

And you think you know how to google. 

688377[/snapback]

 

So its incumbent upon me to prove your point?

 

What's the pont to use few mock drafts to make any conclusion?

 

To get a consensus on where one might expect particular athletes to be taken? As a point of general conversation?

[syhuang]

So its incumbent upon me to prove your point?

 

Did you prove any of your points?

 

My point has been proved by others. And your claim is wrong.

 

To get a consensus on where one might expect particular athletes to be taken?  As a point of general conversation?

688403[/snapback]

 

Consensus doesn't mean correctness. None of the mock drafts was done by real football scouts or based on real draft boards. In other words, it's just unprofessional opinions.

 

Do you think NFL draft is a beauty contest or America Idiol where consensus is important?

[Scraps]

Did you prove any of your points?

 

My point has been proved by others. And your claim is wrong.

688420[/snapback]

 

I appreciate their efforts. At least they can back up their beliefs. All you seem to do is espouse vacuous drivel.

 

Consensus doesn't mean correctness. None of the mock drafts was done by real football scouts or based on real draft boards. In other words, it's just unprofessional opinions.

 

We should do away with unprofessional opinions. Then there would be no purpose for this board.

[Dawgg]

I want to take you back to 2001. The Bills were coming off an 8-8 year and had new coaches and new management. The management purged the entire roster leaving plenty of holes on both sides of the ball. But one of the most glaring needs on that roster was a left tackle. The Bills' offensive line was arguably the worst unit in football. Bills QBs simply couldn't sit in the pocket for maybe 2 seconds. The consensus top OT on the board was a guy by the name of Kenyatta Walker.

 

When it came time to make their selection at 14, Kenyatta Walker was sitting there, ripe for the taking. Fans of TBD were going nuts, screaming his name and imagining the day they would don his jersey.

 

To their dismay, the Bills did not take him.

 

Realizing this team had too many holes to fill, the Bills traded down 7 spots from 14 to 21 with the Bucs in and aquired their 2nd rounder (51st overall). The Bills had targeted Clements all along. He was the #1 corner in the draft and they gambled that he would be there, knowing full well that he very well might not be.

 

In fact, mocks had Clements going earlier, as high as 17.

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/...ockdraft_april/

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/s/pfw/2001mockdraft2.html

 

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/archive/2001/mock.html

 

Did the Bills have their panties up in a wad?

Were they shuddering at the thought of losing out on the player they had rated so highly?

Why not just PLAY IT SAFE and take Nate Clements at 14? Afterall, if he's good it won't matter where he was picked.

 

Right????

 

WRONG.

 

That risk paid off bigtime and allowed the Bills to draft Travis Henry. Say what you want about Travis, but while he was in a Bills uniform, he was a beast. Not to mention trading him yielded a 3rd round pick which allowed the team in turn to trade up to draft John McCargo.

 

When you are a playoff caliber team, you play it safe and target very specific players who will help you win a championship.

 

When you are a small market team coming off a 5-11 season, you simply MUST maximize the value out of your draft picks and be versatile.

 

 

 

 

Obviously the Bills assessed the risk % as a higher one than King did.  The Bills have a large staff that does this for a living.  King is one person who mostly writes for a living and does some (clearly shoddy) research to back up his work. 

All the what ifs are related to the risk, which is consistent. 

Some information had Cleveland taking Ngata.  If they did, Baltimore wouldn't have, right?

Not the Rams.  He discounted them because they eventually traded their pick to Denver.  If the Bills had traded their pick to Denver St. Louis could have taken Ngata, Whitner or traded with miami (or possibly the Bills). I feel King made the risk(s) out to be linear, but they were more complex than that.

He doesn't have to detail all of his analysis, but he ought to take more factors into account.  Maybe it's just more fun (or easier) to come to a conclusion and then find facts to back you up.

He acknowledged the risk, but downplayed it.

No.  you were fixated on accusing me of comparing players for about 10 posts.  I never intended to compare players.

688368[/snapback]

[syhuang]

I appreciate their efforts.  At least they can back up their beliefs.  All you seem to do is espouse vacuous drivel.

It's better than what you did. My claim has been proved, but yours don't.

 

We should do away with unprofessional opinions.  Then there would be no purpose for this board.

688425[/snapback]

No problem, I didn't take any of your posts seriously and just treat them as jokes.

 

And you don't have anything to say about using mock drafts to compare NFL draft to America Idiol? See, an instance example to show your point is a joke.

[Scraps]

It's better than what you did. My claim has been proved, but yours don't. 

688440[/snapback]

 

Nice use of the English language.

 

Must I provide a bunch of links showing Williams projected higher than Bush and Young projected higher than Lienart?