Peter King update on Whitner pick

[Ramius]

Exactly, quality over quantity.  I'd rather the Bills have 5 or 6 guys they really want than 7 or 8 guys they think might be OK. 

 

779605[/snapback]

 

But you dont get it! we could have drafted more mediocre O-linemen with those extra picks!

[ajzepp]

But you dont get it! we could have drafted more mediocre O-linemen with those extra picks!

779629[/snapback]

Or better yet, we could have used a pick to trade for Pucillo!

[Taro T]

King's criticism is still valid.  If he is right about no one taking him, then he is right the Bills' should have traded down.  That is what he said all along.  I don't think he ever called Whitner a bad player.

779542[/snapback]

We will never know whether he is right or not about that. (My gut feel is that he is wrong, but that is just as speculative as claiming that he IS right.) But either way, since the Bills were certain that they wanted Whitner and were reasonably sure that other teams had at least an interest in him, I don't see a reason for them to trade all the way down to 15 to get one extra pick. If they could have dropped to 9th or 10th, it may be a different story, but a lot can happen (trades, somebody having their 1st choice grabbed so they settle for 2nd / 3rd choice, etc.) in those 6 picks between when the Bills did draft vs #15.

[HudsonValleyBillsFan]

Peter King is just trying to save face.

The bottom line is that we have the guy marv wanted and he

is performing well. King can think whatever he wants.

Marv is our GM and he felt that picking Whitner

at 8 was the right thing to do. For crying out loud, the media has criticized every

single move Levy has made since he took the job.

So far, things have gone pretty well.

I'll take tangible results over a has-been SI writer's opinions.

 

Just and nod at the media idiots

 

 

 

Sorry if it has been posted.

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=cnns...cnnsi&type=lgns

I GOT A LOT OF BILLS MAIL THIS WEEK. From Jay of Buffalo: "Welcome aboard the Bills bandwagon. Happy to have you. The biggest story from Buffalo is Marv Levy. Here is a guy that got hammered on draft day for picking players too high. Well, they started five rookies on a defense that was ranked in the bottom five last year and have been very good so far. Can you give Marv some credit for knowing football?''

 

Absolutely. Levy deserves it. My only problem with not trading down to get Donte Whitner on draft day is that the Bills could have dealt down and picked up an extra second-round pick (or third) and still almost certainly have gotten the guy. I remember calling around after the draft, and no one between picks Nos. 8 and 15 was going to take him. And Buffalo had an opportunity to move to 15. But that's over. I think the Bills, obviously, picked the right people on draft day. Talking to the departed Troy Vincent last week, he loves Whitner and thinks he's going to be good for a long time.

 

======================================

 

Didn't Witner say something about Ravens were very interested in drafting him? Did King really call Lions?

779534[/snapback]

[PromoTheRobot]

King's criticism is still valid.  If he is right about no one taking him, then he is right the Bills' should have traded down.  That is what he said all along.  I don't think he ever called Whitner a bad player.

779542[/snapback]

On what block of granite was it chiseled in that no other team was going to draft Whittner?

 

PTR

[dave mcbride]

We will never know whether he is right or not about that.  (My gut feel is that he is wrong, but that is just as speculative as claiming that he IS right.)  But either way, since the Bills were certain that they wanted Whitner and were reasonably sure that other teams had at least an interest in him, I don't see a reason for them to trade all the way down to 15 to get one extra pick.  If they could have dropped to 9th or 10th, it may be a different story, but a lot can happen (trades, somebody having their 1st choice grabbed so they settle for 2nd / 3rd choice, etc.) in those 6 picks between when the Bills did draft vs #15.

779651[/snapback]

yes, like the dolphins trading up to pass the bills.

[syhuang]

peter king should know better than to think that teams are going to tell him the truth about who they would have taken. It makes them look bad, and it makes their draft pick look like a consolation prize. Nobody tells the truth on draft day.

779567[/snapback]

 

Exactly. Even if some teams really wanted to draft Whitner, why would they tell reporters the truth?

 

"No, Ernie Sims wasn't our first choice. We wanted Michael Huff or Donte Whitner all along"

 

"We had no choice but draft Ngata after Whitner was gone"

 

 

There's no reason to tell reporters what teams really want. Why do teams want to tell King the truth to risk causing bad feelings to their draft picks? These reporters can make stories out of nothing, let alone information like this.

[Tortured Soul]

On what block of granite was it chiseled in that no other team was going to draft Whittner?

 

PTR

779663[/snapback]

King is a reporter. He did his reporting, and based on what he found out, he reached his conclusion. King, like every other human (save maybe the Pope, according to BBC), is fallible and doesn't have the luxury of answers written in granite. If you don't think he is a good reporter, then you don't need to read him.

[Bill from NYC]

But you dont get it! we could have drafted more mediocre O-linemen with those extra picks!

779629[/snapback]

 

No need for that. The mediocre O-Linemen we already have are the stars of this group.

 

C'mon R-man, are you seriously ready (after 2 games) to deem every blocker selected after Whittner a mediocre player?

Not that you should care, but I consider your posts to be well thought, well informed, and rational. This is a stretch to say the least.

 

I didn't like this draft, but my view is certainly subject to change. Whittner looks good, and we might just have a steal in #95. This is not to overlook the players in between, but again, it is early.

 

I think that we both know that to get to the next level, the Bills will have to devote huge resources to the OL. The Vikes did, and they are looking pretty good (so far).

If this organization decides to do so at some point, I have a feeling that we will have a beer together at a home playoff game.

[ans4e64]

So true. Plus, he makes it sound like anyone can just pick up the phone on draft day and find out what the other teams are doing. I mean, why didn't MARV call everyone to see the status of Whitner? I mean, it's so easy. King did it. Clearly, anyone can do it.

 

King peaked with his cameo in "The Longest Yard" and should have retired shortly thereafter.

779593[/snapback]

 

 

Exactly.... why didnt marv think of that? jeez... he could have just called those teams and asked, what a boso

[Pyrite Gal]

King is a reporter.  He did his reporting, and based on what he found out, he reached his conclusion.  King, like every other human (save maybe the Pope, according to BBC), is fallible and doesn't have the luxury of answers written in granite.  If you don't think he is a good reporter, then you don't need to read him.

779680[/snapback]

 

If by what "King said is valid" you mesn that what he said is "theoretically possible" then I agree. However, i simply do not think that one can give him much more credit than that if by valid you mean something stronger than that

 

Even King's reporting that he detected no interest in Whitner from the teams which did not get him adds little true validity to the theoretical possibility the Bills could have traded down and got him:

 

1. If one thing is different in a draft a whole bunch of things will be different. Not only is it clear that Miami had an interest in a safety because they took one, as Whitner dropped down the board toward a new Bills traded down draft spot, other teams come into play besides the Fins that might trade up past the Bills. His reporting merely introduces more variables into the equation if from he concludes the Bills should trade down and thus his theory remains a possible but not really valid theory.

 

2. The draft is all about lying and fooling your competitors about your interests and approaches. We have all heard Butler and others spin after the draft saying exactly who they got was who they wanted. it seems far-fetched that he would get anyone in picks 9-15 to say the guy they really wanted was Whitner but darn the Bills got him.

 

Saying he talked to folks before the draft does not give him greater validity as teams seem to have even more reason to lie so I do not think that adds to his validity either.

 

3. King should report if he is a reporter. Who (if anyone) offered the Bills a 2nd or a deal that Marv though was worth risking losing Whitner to take. If such a deal had happened but the unexpecte occured and someone leaped ahead of the Bills and took Whitner , how does King think the Bills should have gone about rebuilding? Draft the injured Allen instead? Draft Bullocks in a later round. King only does a superficial examination of the implications of doing without Whitner but decides to have a problem anyway.

 

I agree that King is only human and no one should expect perfection (King is in no danger of being perfect). However, in addition to being human he also is a superficial and poor reporter as well.

[IDBillzFan]

I think that we both know that to get to the next level, the Bills will have to devote huge resources to the OL.

779721[/snapback]

I think Marv knows that, but I recall reading comments from him to the effect that "you have to build your defense first" for whatever reason. My thinking is he's addressing the D this year and will do likewise with the offense next year.

 

Not being a draftnik, I have no idea what kind of OL pickings will be available next year in the draft.

[OnTheRocks]

I remember calling around after the draft, and no one between picks Nos. 8 and 15 was going to take him.

779534[/snapback]

 

and when the Bills called around and asked if anyone else was going to take him everyone said the same thing. What a jackass.

who reads his drivel anyway?

[Bill from NYC]

I think Marv knows that, but I recall reading comments from him to the effect that "you have to build your defense first" for whatever reason. My thinking is he's addressing the D this year and will do likewise with the offense next year.

 

Not being a draftnik, I have no idea what kind of OL pickings will be available next year in the draft.

779728[/snapback]

 

Marv has stated in the past that "you can't have too many cornerbacks."

 

LA, what scares me is that Clements will walk, and Marv will take yet another 1st round DB.

Before you write this off....T. Smith, Burress, and Winfield are first round corners who walked after their contract expired.

 

Check out the resources that the Bills have devoted to the secondary, and how few they have devoted to blocking.

[Alaska Darin]

No need for that. The mediocre O-Linemen we already have are the stars of this group.   

 

C'mon R-man, are you seriously ready (after 2 games) to deem every blocker selected after Whittner a mediocre player?

Not that you should care, but I consider your posts to be well thought, well informed, and rational. This is a stretch to say the least.

 

I didn't like this draft, but my view is certainly subject to change. Whittner looks good, and we might just have a steal in #95. This is not to overlook the players in between, but again, it is early.

 

I think that we both know that to get to the next level, the Bills will have to devote huge resources to the OL. The Vikes did, and they are looking pretty good (so far).

If this organization decides to do so at some point, I have a feeling that we will have a beer together at a home playoff game. 

779721[/snapback]

Which one of the OLineman drafted after Whitner should we have taken?

[Alaska Darin]

Marv has stated in the past that "you can't have too many cornerbacks."

 

LA, what scares me is that Clements will walk, and Marv will take yet another 1st round DB.

Before you write this off....T. Smith, Burress, and Winfield are first round corners who walked after their contract expired.

 

Check out the resources that the Bills have devoted to the secondary, and how few they have devoted to blocking. 

779738[/snapback]

Again, I point back to the fact that far more DBs are taken in the first round than OLinemen. It's not just the BILLS who do it. Reality says you don't need to spend early choices on OLine.

[AJ1]

Again, I point back to the fact that far more DBs are taken in the first round than OLinemen.  It's not just the BILLS who do it.  Reality says you don't need to spend early choices on OLine.

779754[/snapback]

 

Pretty tough to figure. If you have a slow, crappy Dline you might give up 4.5 ypc. If you have a slow, crappy defensive backfield you might give up 5 or 6 passing TD's a game. Now what should I take at draft time? Let me see....

[Ramius]

No need for that. The mediocre O-Linemen we already have are the stars of this group.   

 

C'mon R-man, are you seriously ready (after 2 games) to deem every blocker selected after Whittner a mediocre player?

Not that you should care, but I consider your posts to be well thought, well informed, and rational. This is a stretch to say the least.

 

I didn't like this draft, but my view is certainly subject to change. Whittner looks good, and we might just have a steal in #95. This is not to overlook the players in between, but again, it is early.

 

I think that we both know that to get to the next level, the Bills will have to devote huge resources to the OL. The Vikes did, and they are looking pretty good (so far).

If this organization decides to do so at some point, I have a feeling that we will have a beer together at a home playoff game. 

779721[/snapback]

 

yah that was a bit of a dig.

 

I totally agree that we need to devote more resources to the OL. As you said, it appears that the vikings are doing well for themselves by signing hutch, and on the flip side seattle's rushing attack has apparently suffered. (but...i have no doubt that the seahawks were set ot match any offer hutch got, and the vikings pulled a fast one with the poison pill)

 

My dig was regarding the draft, in that since we were targeting whitner, i think staying put and making sure we got whitner was a better strategy than dropping down for an extra pick and hoping that a) whitner was still there, and b) hoping that whoever we took with our acquired pick pans out. I know your thoughts differ, but if we all agreed this place would be boring.

 

 

Regarding CB's, i know that Marv has a history of taking them early on, in the 90's. (i do not count this draft, because we needed the help on defense). I still hope we re-sign Clements, thus eliminating the need to take a corner early. Hopefully Clements will not ask for the 50 mil he think's he's worth. But regarding Marv's drafting CB's early, heres some thoughts i have...

 

1. in the 90's, DB was our biggest problem area on defense, sohe was constantly attempting to upgrade it.

 

2. A 1st round CB can step in and play at a reasonably high level from day 1. They are also relatively cheap when it comes to CB contract value. Top flight CB's demand a ton of $$$, so it would make more monetary sense to draft a decent one early and not pay him as much and have the money spent elsewhere, than to pay a top flight CB 50 mil and have rooks at other positions.

 

I guess it may come down to would you rather have a 40-50 mil CB and a rookie OLman, or a 30 mil OL man and a rookie CB?

 

I also agree with the theory that it never hurts to take an OL in day 1 of every draft, and to draft a QB in round 6 or 7 every draft.

[Bill from NYC]

Which one of the OLineman drafted after Whitner should we have taken?

779745[/snapback]

 

Darin, that would appear to be a direct question, but it is vague.

Are you ready to declare Joseph a bust, or even a worse player than Whittner after 2 games? Would we have still given away a pick for McCargo?

 

We will obviously not know for a few years whether or not this was a good draft (unless of course you wiish to do so now), but I would have went with the extra picks (in lieu of surrendering them) and taken Joseph.

 

How about you? Were you all over selecting Whittner in round 1 before the draft?

[stuckincincy]

Which one of the OLineman drafted after Whitner should we have taken?

779745[/snapback]

 

LSU's Andrew Whitworth.