Chilly Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 Oh William. Whitner has done a pretty decent job out of the gate. He should be commended on that. As to your argument, I think we can look @ the Raiders and see that drafting OL high doesn't guarantee tons of wins, either. I'm just hoping Marv and company will concern themselves w/ drafting the best PLAYERS for this team, regardless of position. We got a starting DT out of this draft, just not where people wanted to: we got him in the 5th round. As for the OL, I posted yesterday about how I feel they're much better in run blocking but still need work (interior especially) in pass protection. They're a work in progress, but it's pretty decent progress so far. It's still too early to tell for sure, so we'll see what happens down the line. So far though, I like the defensive players we were able to acquire in this draft. 789385[/snapback] Thanks Rich, I wasn't the one that had to post a response to his crap this time.
Lori Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 The draft day thread. 789481[/snapback] Classic. "Worst pick in the history of the Bills." "What a complete, freakin waste. I am pissed!!!!!!!!!!!!!" "Fire Marv right now." "Two words: Utter. Incompetence." "!@#$ you Marv- you suck! " And that's just in the first two pages. What kind of BBQ sauce do y'all like with your crow? I'll make sure to have some for you at the tailgate Sunday...
The Senator Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 The draft day thread. 789481[/snapback] Just got thru it - great reading. Always interesting to see who was prescient, who was circumspect, and who was a completely ridiculous 'tard. (And also a great relief not to find my name anywhere in that particular thread! )
Bill from NYC Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 The point is that the original argument of "could have had Whitner AND traded down," is just a guess. Nobody knows. That point stands with or without rookie of the month. 789470[/snapback] Yeah, and your stance is short sighted. He was rookie of the month. This is great, but are you able to even see the possibility that draft picks take years to evaluate? Can you fathom the premise that drafting Whitner at #8 was not the only single way to improve the Buffalo Bills Football Team? Does history tell you that we are drafting "skill players" and losing football games? Call me a broken record as you will, but I suggest that you take a look at the big picture, if for no other reason, for the sake of discussion. I mean....we are here, right?
Kelly the Dog Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 Yeah, and your stance is short sighted. He was rookie of the month. This is great, but are you able to even see the possibility that draft picks take years to evaluate? Can you fathom the premise that drafting Whitner at #8 was not the only single way to improve the Buffalo Bills Football Team? Does history tell you that we are drafting "skill players" and losing football games? Call me a broken record as you will, but I suggest that you take a look at the big picture, if for no other reason, for the sake of discussion. I mean....we are here, right? 789598[/snapback] I can only assume you wanted Davin Joseph or Nick Mangold @ #8, who would be on the pine.
Dan Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 I can only assume you wanted Davin Joseph or Nick Mangold @ #8, who would be on the pine. 789602[/snapback] As much as like Whitner and think it was a far better pick than anyone imagined, Mangold wouldn't have been a bad pick either, IMO. I agree he may not be contributing much this year, but a good center for the future would be nice. Stiill, no sense crying over spilt milk. What's done was done and now all we should do is move forward and be thankful for what we have. And what we have is the NFL Rookie of the Month. I'd say that's pretty darn good!
Acantha Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 Yeah, and your stance is short sighted. He was rookie of the month. This is great, but are you able to even see the possibility that draft picks take years to evaluate? Can you fathom the premise that drafting Whitner at #8 was not the only single way to improve the Buffalo Bills Football Team? Does history tell you that we are drafting "skill players" and losing football games? Call me a broken record as you will, but I suggest that you take a look at the big picture, if for no other reason, for the sake of discussion. I mean....we are here, right? 789598[/snapback] And I have, though it would be easier to assume that I have the same blinders on about the situation that you do. Just because I think Whitner was a good pick doesn't mean that I don't think we could have had an equally good draft by trading down and going a different direction. The one big difference is that not only am I actually willing to give Whitner the years he might need to fully develope, but I am also able to fathom that just because we have drafted DB's in the past who have gone elsewhere doesn't mean that this is a bad pick. Can you fathom that? Perhaps it doesn't help your case that instead of just saying that he is doing very good so far...and leaving it at that...you decide to use this thread once again to further your crusade against the draft.
MRW Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 Classic. "Worst pick in the history of the Bills." "What a complete, freakin waste. I am pissed!!!!!!!!!!!!!" "Fire Marv right now." "Two words: Utter. Incompetence." "!@#$ you Marv- you suck! " And that's just in the first two pages. What kind of BBQ sauce do y'all like with your crow? I'll make sure to have some for you at the tailgate Sunday... 789588[/snapback] Kudos to MDH, whose posts against the pick remain quite reasonable all these months later, even if I don't necessarily agree with him. There are others too but his stood out...
Bill from NYC Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 And I have, though it would be easier to assume that I have the same blinders on about the situation that you do. Just because I think Whitner was a good pick doesn't mean that I don't think we could have had an equally good draft by trading down and going a different direction. The one big difference is that not only am I actually willing to give Whitner the years he might need to fully develope, but I am also able to fathom that just because we have drafted DB's in the past who have gone elsewhere doesn't mean that this is a bad pick. Can you fathom that? Perhaps it doesn't help your case that instead of just saying that he is doing very good so far...and leaving it at that...you decide to use this thread once again to further your crusade against the draft. 789612[/snapback] Well, I did say this: >>>Way to go Donte! Ya had me a little scared with the holdout.<<< I don't know what it is that you would have me do in terms of evaluating Whittner. We needed a safety. We got a safety, and a seemingly good one. This is a good thing. Then, we gave away a pick and selected more and more defensive backs. You might like this. I don't. I don't understand your anger with me. I think that teams win and lose football games primarily up front. You otoh probably think that little speedsters are the way to go. All it does is tell me that you are ignoring the won/loss record of the Bills, and turning you back on the methods that the most successful teams use in terms of drafting football players. It doesn't make me angry. I simply disagree.
Acantha Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 Well, I did say this: >>>Way to go Donte! Ya had me a little scared with the holdout.<<< I don't know what it is that you would have me do in terms of evaluating Whittner. We needed a safety. We got a safety, and a seemingly good one. This is a good thing. Then, we gave away a pick and selected more and more defensive backs. You might like this. I don't. I don't understand your anger with me. I think that teams win and lose football games primarily up front. You otoh probably think that little speedsters are the way to go. All it does is tell me that you are ignoring the won/loss record of the Bills, and turning you back on the methods that the most successful teams use in terms of drafting football players. It doesn't make me angry. I simply disagree. 789625[/snapback] For starters, my only "anger", if I had any, might come from the belittling nature of your posts. Second, believe it or not, I actually think the way you build a team is from the lines, much like yourself. And I said, the big difference is that I am willing to see how Marv's plan works out. You can bring up the history of the organization all you want, but the fact is that this isn't the same organization, so historical data on how they handle drafts and re-signing vets doesn't stand up. And once again, disagree all you want, but the crusade you seem to have set forth to bring up your disagreement over and over in as many different threads as you can is more than tiresome. Yes, we are here to discuss, so discuss. But condescendingly bringing up the point that you would have rather had line drafted instead of the "speedy guys" has nothing to do with how Whitner is playing now. And BTW, we gave up a pick for a fat guy. Doesn't that register on your master plan? Oh yeah....
R. Rich Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 Mass hysteria, if I recall correctly. Some of the rants provided great amusement to those of us at the JK Club party that day... 789551[/snapback] So that's what you guys do, huh? Laugh @ us? How dare you!
Orton's Arm Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 at least the NFL Executive of the Year......I am sure the Media guys will beso ashamed of having criticized him and his age, they will never nominate him for that title. 789346[/snapback] Precisely how many people in the media do you think have a sense of shame?
Pete Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 The draft day thread. 789481[/snapback] Great job Donte! I will gladly eat crow on this one! I came around later that draft day and praised the pick but thought we could of traded down. I was releived to hear the Ravens were gonna draft him. Check out me letting Brav in Seattles that Kyle Williams would be a great Bill. I love this draft in hindsight!
Pyrite Gal Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 Yeah, and your stance is short sighted. He was rookie of the month. This is great, but are you able to even see the possibility that draft picks take years to evaluate? Can you fathom the premise that drafting Whitner at #8 was not the only single way to improve the Buffalo Bills Football Team? Does history tell you that we are drafting "skill players" and losing football games? Call me a broken record as you will, but I suggest that you take a look at the big picture, if for no other reason, for the sake of discussion. I mean....we are here, right? 789598[/snapback] I think you are certainly correct that one can only really assess a draft with any sense of reality three years down the line. The reality is that a player may present as Moulds did with all signs his first two years making him worthy of people feeling he may well be a bust, but then he broke out and became a legit multi-time Pro Bowler. It can go the other way too due to the league catching on to some weakness or an injury that a player looks great initially and ends up sucking. Hower, I think that this rookie of the month (particularly for the 1st month) is completely relevant to those who wailed, whined or laughed at the pick claiming that this was proof Marv was senile. What this honor demonstrates is that those who declared Whitner as not a first round talent or even a likely bust have already been proven to be flat out wrong. He may turn out not to have a career consistent with being the rookie of the month, but no matter in terms of demonstrating that folks that Marv made a foolish choice Whitner's start as the best of the draftees indicates they are the ones who may well be senile and that compared to Marv and the Bills as talent evaluators they are out to lunch. Regarding your interst in buidling an OL from the draft, there is logic to this in a perfect world, but in answer to your question "here" is simply an imperfect world. Your strategy us a fine theory, but simply make little sense for the Bills who after 5 years of no playoffs under YD and Marv and Ralph's age need to win as many games as they can right now. If that is your goal (do you disagree that due to our recent record and the age of the Golden Boys this is not a primary goal for the Bills in the here and now?) then looking at our needs (certainly after the cuts of Milloy and Adams and probably even before) an OL focused draft for the Bills makes little sense in 2006. We actually now have after this weekend a best case in terms of an OL oriented draft as NYJ took D'Brick early and also got Mangold late in the 1st round. To even come close to replicating this, the Bills would have had to both trade up and give away resources to get D'Brick and still pull off something like the trade up they did to get Mccargo. Even if they did this, they still would have the holes to fill at SS and DT and now have even less resources to draft other players as they would have needed to trade away picks to trade up to get D'Brick. Alot of this is woulda/coulda/shoulda illusion as one different pick or a trade up would alter the entire draft. However, given that there was only 1 othe OL player taken in the 1st and scant dew others taken on the 1st day, the choices the Bills would have had to make are pretty limited and clear. Its hard to see how this team is not vying for the #1 [ick next year if they had followed your theory and traded up for both D'Brick and Mangold and what the world would look like watching this team play either with Coy Wire as their SS and desperately needing 5th rounder Williams to play (unless we had to trade that pick away to step up for D'Brick). I simply do not see your strategy working at all for Ralph and Marv and this team even if it is a good theory.
Orton's Arm Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 The draft day thread. 789481[/snapback] Good read. I'll admit I was one of the ones who had issues with the Whitner pick: As for what I would have done--if I thought Leinart or Cutler would be a significant upgrade over Nall, I'd have taken a QB. If not, I'd have traded down; using a pick in the middle or lower part of the first round to take Mangold. If two of the top three QBs fall to #8, you either pick one of them, or you trade down. One or the other. I have mixed feelings about this post. On the one hand, Mangold played well against the Bills, and Cutler's shown real promise over in Denver. On the other, I probably should have been a little less, um, firm in my insistence that Marv's strategy was flawed.
eball Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 Just got thru it - great reading. Always interesting to see who was prescient, who was circumspect, and who was a completely ridiculous 'tard. (And also a great relief not to find my name anywhere in that particular thread! ) 789596[/snapback] You can say THAT again. Hilarious stuff. I hope a handful of Bills' fans have been able to recover from the injuries sustained when their collective knees slammed into their faces.
Nanker Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 Classic. "Worst pick in the history of the Bills." "What a complete, freakin waste. I am pissed!!!!!!!!!!!!!" "Fire Marv right now." "Two words: Utter. Incompetence." "!@#$ you Marv- you suck! " And that's just in the first two pages. What kind of BBQ sauce do y'all like with your crow? I'll make sure to have some for you at the tailgate Sunday... 789588[/snapback] And what about: "Rather have cancer than Whitner with the #8 pick!" "I just spent a year in Iraq waiting to get back to the Bills and they draft a schmuck." Such wisdom.
scribo Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 And what about: "Rather have cancer than Whitner with the #8 pick!" "I just spent a year in Iraq waiting to get back to the Bills and they draft a schmuck." Such wisdom. 789820[/snapback] Not to mention: "Y'know what...if this is the way it's going to go, move the team. It's not worth it to get kicked in the crotch by a team that's only technically in the NFL. Don't buy tickets for 2006. Let the senile old man hemmorhage money."
Recommended Posts