McKinnie about to sign long term extension

[Bill from NYC]

This means that L. Jones, Anderson, and McKinnie are all off the 07 free agency market, all within a month or so.

 

THIS is why these guys (OTs) have to be drafted as a general rule. Teams simply will not give them up.

[R. Rich]

Forgetting comparisons to Mike Williams, is McKinnie WORTH that much coin?

765671[/snapback]

 

He's a young guy who is just coming into his own and realizing all the potential he has. Plus, he gets his All Pro center back healthy and adds another All Pro @ guard next to him. Given that, I fully expect McKinnie to have a Pro Bowl season for the Vikes.

[Lurker]

The past is the past...or should we continue to dwell on Perry Tuttle some more, too?

[JStranger76]

Listen, don't even get us started on Perry Tuttle. Well Bill, we gotta hope that Peters developes into an outstanding LT because I think Joe Thomas of Wisconcin is the premeir tackle of this draft and he is more of a RT prospect. I'm leaning more towards an impact pass rusher anyways and then a guard or RT(if Peters is moved) with the next pick. It's to early to know who will be free agents at these positions because the new $ from the cap going up is allowing teams to sign guys to extensions already. We need to work on some guys right now too(Fletcher and Clements).

[Albany,n.y.]

The past is the past...or should we continue to dwell on Perry Tuttle some more, too?

765804[/snapback]

Going back in the time machine:

Why would Knox trade up for Perry Tuttle, dumb move. Should have drafted Mike Quick. Matt Kofler in the 2nd round? Give me a break! 3rd round-That Eugene Marv guy has some potential, but the Metzelaars guy Seattle picked in our spot looks like a player. The rest of our draft looks pretty bad, at least Knox got us a kicker to replace Mike-Mayer. That Anderson guy should be entrenched as our kicker for the next decade or two

[Fezmid]

I could care less about character if it doesn't affect the player from performing on the field. Yeah, Bruce Smith, Thurman and Kelly were outstanding citizens.

765667[/snapback]

They were nowhere near as bad as BM has been off the field.

 

Apparantly character isn't that important to fans anymore.

 

I didn't watch the VIkes very much last year, but before last year the guy sucked on the field as well.

 

CW

[Pyrite Gal]

He's a young guy who is just coming into his own and realizing all the potential he has.  Plus, he gets his All Pro center back healthy and adds another All Pro @ guard next to him.  Given that, I fully expect McKinnie to have a Pro Bowl season for the Vikes.

765776[/snapback]

 

 

I thimk one of the other things which apparently helped BM's productivity was the switch away from Culpepper and to Johnson. Culpepper is notorious (he is highly regarded if it works but notorious since it has not worked lately) for hanging onto the ball and scrambling around.

 

From my understanding, BM had difficulty holding blocks for a long time or dealing with the more athletic DEs when your QB was jumping around a lot. Not only did losing Culpepper help his weaknesses/strenghts out a lot, but Brad Johnson with his many years of experience made plays with his head and sense of the rush rather than with his feet.

 

If the WR was not open or he sensed the BM or someone else was getting beat, he checked down and dumped it off before a sack occured,

[Orton's Arm]

Are you seriously complaining about the Bills not overpaying for an injury prone Jennings?  Donahoe made a lot of mistakes, not re-signing Jennings wasn't one of them.  Tell me, how many games has Jennings played for the 49ers thus far?

765717[/snapback]

I guess the Jennings situation bothers me because he was TD's best draft pick on the OL. As Bill from NYC said, if you want top-flight OL, you're probably going to have to draft them.

 

I admit that if Jennings continues to spend time on injured reserve, TD's decision will look like a good one. But if he comes back strong, and stays on the field for the next few years, he'll be a real boost to San Francisco.

[JStranger76]

They just didn't get caught as much Fez. Hey, character is important to me, but I'm a realist too. There are some bad apples out there, and sometimes they don't spoil the whole bunch. Every team has at least a few, and sometimes they are playing critical positions. It sucks but that's how it is now.

[JimBob2232]

Donahoe was VERY good at the things he was good at. By this I mean, he excelled in these areas:

 

1) Obtaining fair value (or exceeding fair value) in trades.

2) Bringing back hope and optimism to Buffalo

3) Managing the salary cap

 

 

However, the things TD was bat at, he was VERY bad at. For example

 

1) Failure to admit his faults. (i.e. OLine)

2) Draft day always provided excitement, but results were questionable.

3) Handling of the media/press/fans

4) Unwililngness to resign veteran players

 

 

I cant fault TD for the Bledsoe trade. I cant fault TD for Mike Williams. I cant fault TD (too much) for the Losman trade. The problem I have with TD is that the results werent there. I applauded almost every move at the time it was made. If I was GM and those options were presented to me, I likely would have made the same decision. I cant fault another man for choices I would have made.

 

That said, I am happy the team is in Marv's hands. Hopefully results will follow.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

I guess the Jennings situation bothers me because he was TD's best draft pick on the OL.  As Bill from NYC said, if you want top-flight OL, you're probably going to have to draft them. 

 

I admit that if Jennings continues to spend time on injured reserve, TD's decision will look like a good one.  But if he comes back strong, and stays on the field for the next few years, he'll be a real boost to San Francisco.

Jennings will annually miss several games due to injury. He's also an above average LT and got paid like a top-flight one. Again this goes back to TD's mistake in drafting Mike Williams. Since Williams was a college RT who they wanted to ease-into the LT spot, they had to move Jennings from his best position of RT (he would have been a perennial Pro Bowler there had he stayed) to LT. Had TD just drafted McKinnie, or better yet Jones, he would have had 2 great (McKinnie still has to get their IMHO) OT's STILL.

[Kelly the Dog]

If McKinnie was a FA and visited Buffalo and asked for a $48 mil contract, I am not sure I would sign him. We do need a LT, he is getting quite good, but it still really is about value and what a player is worth. This year is key for him, IMO. If he makes the strides he made from 2004 to 2005, perhaps then he is worth it. When I watch him, I still see him get beat, and loaf on run plays, and have trouble moving at times.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

I'd sign him for $48!

[Kelly the Dog]

I'd sign him for $48!

765894[/snapback]

I meant 48 thousand.

[Orton's Arm]

Jennings will annually miss several games due to injury.  He's also an above average LT and got paid like a top-flight one. 

The points you made are good. I agree the money he's getting is ridiculous. My hope would have been to extend him in year 2 or 3 for a much more reasonable figure than what he's getting paid right now.

[Pyrite Gal]

This means that L. Jones, Anderson, and McKinnie are all off the 07 free agency market, all within a month or so. 

 

THIS is why these guys (OTs) have to be drafted as a general rule. Teams simply will not give them up.

765760[/snapback]

 

 

As far as this ssituation I think TD and his crew can reasonably be faulted for making bad evaluations on the two candidates they selected on the first day of drafts for the T spot (Jonas and MW). In adition, the large number of second day choices they made of potential candidates for all OL positions including LT (Sullivan, Pucillo, Sobieski, McFarland, Geisinger, Preston) also includes a number of bad choices who simply did not work out.

 

If the theory here is that TD shoul be faulted because he did not devote draft resources to the OL, I do not think this fits the facts.

 

1. TD chose at least one (and sometimes 2 OL players each draft he ran.

2. TD devoted significant draft resources to these picks having spent a #4 o MW and another first day choice on Jennings.

3. with the exception of the 04 draft where spending a #2 on Parrish and a #3 on Everett (though particularly given the injuries both suffered its way too early to pass judgment credibly on this draft) , every other first day pick was arguably the best player available (Evans, WM) or a need pick (Losman, Kelsay, even the horrendous Coy Wire started at SS his rookie year). For those who think there is some theoretical problem here of too little OL focus in the draft, who would you have picked instead of Pro Bowl or possible Pro Bowl talents like Clements or Evans, valuable good players like Schobel or Crowell, or need picks like Denny and even the horrible Wire to go for some OL player. This theory gets hard to justify in reality beyond 20/20 hindsight and even with that advantage it ain't a slam dunk.

4. In fact, even with hindsight, the best cases are that they should have picked Levi Jones rather than MW. Yet, this shows the problem that there is not a theoretical miscue by TD as he spent a #4 on OL. The problem was they made a bad assessment.

 

This is clearly worth noting, but is the height of needing to fire his butt and move on rather than consistent claims not borne out by the facts that he needed more OL focus in the draft.

 

The general rule is actually, your GM and his team need to be good at picking OL players (well duhh).

 

TD hired GW who hired his buddy Vinky and the inexperienced Ruel when it was obvious his buddy was not up to the teaching or assessment job. In fact, TD seems to have done well by finally acquiring JMac to deal with the mess on the OL left by Butler and worsened with their miscues on the OL in the 01 draft.

 

There problem was not that they ignored OL but that they made bad picks. JMac has dealt with this bad situation by attempting to get the availble cut rate players since as you point out the good ones are locked up.

 

He misfired badly on Bennie Anderson, but did quite well getting adequate LT play in most outside observations on the cheap from Gandy and did extrordinarily well getting Peters who most feel he merited an extension (I actually argued he had another year to assess Peters as he was an RFA and if he played well he could lock him up next year when the Bills still held the cards on this EFA, however, the Bills and JMac took your advice and signed him long-term. The Anderson miss is not a good thing, but given reality do you expect every attempt to reverse pass poor OL draft assessments to work? He has done as well as he could given reality with what he inherited and what he has IMHO.

 

I guess the bottomline is what do you and other OL draft fanatics suggest we should have done instead.

 

1. We should have given huge extensions to MW and JJ to meet your theory of good teams hang on to their OL players?

 

I think not, both would have been bad moves.

 

2. TD should have passed on getting good and arguably best available players like NC, WM and Evans and instead should have gotten some OL player you fail to name even in hindsight?

 

I think these players are as good or probably better than the OL players really available to us even in hindsight.

 

3. TD should have passed on filling needs at SS, DE, and DT when he made those first round choices and instead gone for OL and we would have been fine with Jenkins at SS, Chidi Ahanatou at DE, and Ron Edwards at DT?

 

Most of these need picks sucked but there was a need because the likely alternative that your OL draft strategy would have given us was even worse. If you like most of us found Wire unacceptable imagine what it would have been with worse than even Wire at SS.

 

4. Do you want to argue that the Bills should have gonr to an OL draft focus right here right now to reverse their previous errors?

 

I don't think so with this draft. The only OL players taken in the first round were D'Brick, Joseph and Mangold. They would have needed to give up even more resources to trade up for D'Brick and aleady we had gaps at SS and DT to fill. You really would need to propose some alternative fantasy strategy to make this work and I do not see what this is. Even if one buys into your strategy of OL first, this is diffrent than an OL first through draft strategy. I'm no sure that any of the winning teams you base the OL through draft strategy on do it by yes building the OL first, but do this by not only ignoring other needs like DT or SS but in fact increasing this need or lessening our draft and other resources by trading stuff to move up.

 

You need a partner to trade down so already going after Mangold or Josepph is theoretical. However, i do not think that either of these two first round picks are being hailed as the long-term answer to TB or Jet woes.

 

In essence in reality, your draft OL proposal just does not seem to make sense in reality though it is a reasonable theory.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

I meant 48 thousand. 

Well, now you're being ridiculous.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

The points you made are good.  I agree the money he's getting is ridiculous.  My hope would have been to extend him in year 2 or 3 for a much more reasonable figure than what he's getting paid right now.

I don't doubt that TD tried to extend him, but I seriously DO doubt that he offered him anything close to what he got from SF.

 

Frankly I was surprised to see Jason Peters sign for so little (somewhere between $3-4M a year).

[Dawgg]

He did try and extend him. He offered contracts to Pat Williams, Schobel, and Jennings and made it clear we had the cap space to sign just one. Schobel bit and signed so the rest played the year out.

 

I don't doubt that TD tried to extend him, but I seriously DO doubt that he offered him anything close to what he got from SF.

 

Frankly I was surprised to see Jason Peters sign for so little (somewhere between $3-4M a year).

765916[/snapback]

[Orton's Arm]

If the theory here is that TD shoul be faulted because he did not devote draft resources to the OL, I do not think this fits the facts. 

I know Bill from NYC is the person at whom this pile of text was being thrown, but I want to respond to this particular point. Let's start with the facts:

 

1. TD was handed a roster that was almost expansion-like in terms of offensive linemen. Ruben Brown gave the Bills a few years in the TD era, but beyond him there wasn't much of anything.

 

2. There were, however, some valuable skill position players. Eric Moulds is the most obvious, but there was good, young talent at running back as well.

 

3. Over the course of his five year tenure, TD used no less than eight picks in the first two rounds on offensive skill position players. In contrast, he used just one such pick on the offensive line.

 

You seem to blame this disparity on two factors: the best player available theory, and the idea that TD took players at positions of need.

 

The best player available theory is one that I just don't buy. TD had shown himself more than able to trade up or down in the draft to achieve a specific purpose--getting a second round pick plus Nate Clements, getting Losman, etc. Unfortunately, none of his trades involved taking an offensive lineman. Had TD felt as strongly about an offensive linemen as he felt about, say, Coy Wire, he would have made an appropriate trade to acquire the lineman.

 

Your second point was that TD's picks addressed positions of need. While that was sometimes true, he used two high draft picks on running backs despite Antowain Smith, an additional two on slot receivers, and yet another on a speed receiver. I admit the speed receiver pick (Lee Evans) was a need, but all that other stuff should have been done differently.

 

The bottom line is that TD didn't make the offensive line a priority.

1. He invested 1/8th the number of high round draft picks on the line as he did on offensive skill position players.

2. When he did find a good lineman, he let him hit free agency (Jennings) or else released him outright (Tucker).

3. The free agents he signed were typically older players who would soon need to be replaced (Villarrial), or else were worthless rejects like Bennie Anderson.

 

These three factors combined to hamstring the offensive line on a number of levels. The talent wasn't there, the heart wasn't there, and the continuity wasn't there. Maybe you'll say that it's easy to point out someone's mistakes with 20/20 hindsight. I say that his mistakes should have been obvious at the time, and they were obvious to many fans such as Bill from NYC. I'm quite sure Bill made it clear he thought TD should have been investing more heavily in a good offensive line; and that he warned TD's strategy was likely to result in a bad line. I know I was saying those things. Well, guess what? We were right. The line stank, especially in 2005.