Chilly Posted January 3, 2007 Posted January 3, 2007 Your first point assumes that nobody else could have been able to play the position. Safeties are not that hard to get as a general rule. Not at that point. Free Agency started March 3rd, and most of the good players were snatched up. We had already signed Fowler to play center, but had no one to fill in safety. They went for a need, and felt he as their guy. As for the extra 2nd, I actually heard Marv say on Sirius Radio that one team offered more than a 2nd (along with a swap of 1sts).Sounds like that would have put us in the bottom of the 1st round, at least according to the NFL Draft Value Chart. Its possible that Marv really did want Mangold but wasn't willing to take the risk to drop down that far and lose out on him. In any event, this is over, and Whitner looks like he will be a good player. Worthy of a #8? It is obviously too early to tell. I just hope that in 07, Marv places less emphasis on the secondary. How about you? Well, yeah, since we have starters there. I hope Marv drafts the best player available at a needed position (and there are plenty of them). Last year he obviously felt that was Whitner, and safety was a need position. Pigeon-holing yourself into taking only offensive linemen is a bad way to do things. I'd like to see a bunch of different positions addressed in the offseason, including: 1.) Inside O Lineman 2.) Defensive Line 3.) Linebacker 4.) Tight End 5.) Cornerback (if Nate leaves, we've got huge issues at CB.) 6.) Wide Receiver 7.) Fullback 8.) Backup QB (if Nall isn't the guy) If this means that, yes, a CB is the best guy available at our pick, Marv should take him. Likewise, if a lineman is the best guy available, he should be taken.
SACTOBILLSFAN Posted January 3, 2007 Posted January 3, 2007 Miami - Pat Willis, LB, Ole Miss Saban coached in the SEC and knows just how good Willis is. I think this is great logic for the dolphins to follow this april
Formerly Allan in MD Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Don't worry. The experts on this board will have it all figured out. Remember the ones who went "ape" when we picked Williams, the OL savior, and were nuts about guys like Bunkley because they read somewhere that he was good? It will be a thrill a moment. as we get nearer to the draft. reading the sanctimoneous posts.
Whitner20 Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Don't worry. The experts on this board will have it all figured out. Remember the ones who went "ape" when we picked Williams, the OL savior, and were nuts about guys like Bunkley because they read somewhere that he was good? It will be a thrill a moment. as we get nearer to the draft. reading the sanctimoneous posts. Everyone has ideas and theories and thats what i love. Thats the whole point behind a message board and thats why i joined this board, and if you're opposed to different views and ideas, then why even waste your time here? I mean, i really hope we select Jarrett with our #1, who know how well it would work out but it's fun to talk about and bounce around ideas.
Pyrite Gal Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Your first point assumes that nobody else could have been able to play the position. Safeties are not that hard to get as a general rule. As for the extra 2nd, I actually heard Marv say on Sirius Radio that one team offered more than a 2nd (along with a swap of 1sts). In any event, this is over, and Whitner looks like he will be a good player. Worthy of a #8? It is obviously too early to tell. I just hope that in 07, Marv places less emphasis on the secondary. How about you? Assumption is prettty much anybody has for these woulda/coulda/shoulda arguments made mostly based on the benefit of 2-/2- hindsight. I certainly have been guilty of making some of these w/c/sh argruments myself raising the point about alternative draft moves and folks such as SDS himself were quick to point out that all it takes is one draft move to change at some point early in the draft and everything else changes as well to make these arguments actually fairly meaningless. I agree with this general perspective but still feel these type of alternative draft posts are worthwhile under certain constraints that most of these posts don't meet. Specifically: 1. They tend to be most worthwhile when advocating that the Bills should have taken a player available when they chose who plays the same position as the player they chose. When an alternative actually suggest picking a different position it essentially makes all pick suggestions for taking another position later in the draft worthless as the first change would trigger different actions and different strategies than those that actually occured. 2. If the alternative involves a trade being made it is essentially a worthless alternative as it takes two teams to make a deal and when one proposes an alternative based on any trade (even one that happened in real life) it is quite doubtful that it would have happened in real life given we are assuming different actions. 3. If the alternative involves more than one round it is probably a pretty worthless w/c/sh as so many things would have been altered by the first different move. Theories which involve a gap being filled by picking a player in a later round who was available in real life are fairly worthless as the intial change offered in their alternate reality means that the player may well have not been available later. 4. Reality makes a big difference in terms of performance in unpredictable ways. If the Bills had drafted recently murdered CB Williams he would almost certainly be alive today. If the Broncos had drafted McCargo maybe he wouldn't have gotten hurt. I advocated the Bills take Ngata with their pick last draft and in theory his performance with the Ravens means perhaps this would have been a higher impact pick. However, the Ravens play a 3-4 and Ngata actually plays him at DE. Maybe he would have sucked playing DT in the Bills Cover 3 so it is even difficult to make assertions based on assumptions about how he would have been as a Bill. 5. In order to avoid the perception that ones arguments are merely based on 20/20 hindsight (which quite frankly most posts on TSW that site him are) then one should be able to produce the posts from the archive that argue this point. If not, and this is not acknowledged then so what for this "insight." It is a worthwhile note that Mangold has played well and certainly it is rational to propose that the Bills might have had a strategy involved in working to run the ball as their first priority rather than stop the run as their first priority and drafting defensively and moving up into the first round to assure a get of McCargo. However this argument is simply better made by debating which strategy (O first or D first rather than worrying about what assumptions one should make to support some fictitious theory that they should have picked this guy. If one must link actual player performances into this argument then it actually is a much cleaner argument rather than hatching trading theories to simply say that the Bills should have not traded up into the 1st round to get McCargo as they should have waited until the second day to get their DT because Williams would be available and he could start at DT for the Bills, This is obvious and as far as I know no one was predicting that Williams could start immediately but this clearly this is by far the best specific player argument that picking McCargo and trading up to get him at DT was not a necessary move. I think folks tend avoid this rather obvious argument which I think is far superior to the various arguments people make that McCatgo was a bad pick specifically because no one was making this argument which turned out to be true beforehand. If they did then I bow to them and say we truly not worthy of their brilliance. On the other hand if folks simply try to prove this point by attacking McCargo as a bad player, really the right response to this is so what? As it stands, folks also try to use the overreach for McCargo argument to claim Marv does not know what he is doing. Granted he made a moved up for a player who did not produce or work out, but when one makes this argument they also need to acknowledge he found a guy capable of credibly startig immediately on the second day of the draft so IMHO as far as assessing the Marv performance re:Mccargo, its not a good one as he traded value away to move up for since he got a starting DT from this draft kudos to him for this and making the poor performance by McCargo (so far) a wash as far as real world assessment is concerned.
willis da illest Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Thats the worst mock draft I've seen in a minute. Antoine Cason top 5 pick? I don't even know if he's a top 5 corner. You got Hughes, Ross, Hall, Wilson out there and he gott em takin Cason? Cason's good don't get me wrong, but he's to small now and I don't even think he declared for the draft yet.
marauderswr80 Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Ive seen about 15 sites that have mock drafts and many of them having us take either JeMarcus Russell, Drew Stanton, Troy Smith or Brian Brohm. Another having us take Dwayne Jarrett, and another having us take that guard from Texas. Those mocks told me those people have not watched a Bills game all year long. Losman has made so mcuh progress Buffalo WONT draft a QB this year! They wont! Maybe sign an unrestricted FA maybe, but not in the draft they wont. Only pick I liked was the Dwayne Jarrett pick, but after last night and watching LSU destroy the HIGHLY overrated Notre Dame team, im fully confident the WR from LSU Dwayne Bowe would be around in the 2nd round, he would fit nicely with Lee Evans. Bowe is a big WR too.....
MadBuffaloDisease Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 That JaMarcus Russell kid was impressive.
marauderswr80 Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 That JaMarcus Russell kid was impressive. Oh no kidding!!!!! His accuracy was very impressive, I cant argue that fact! But we dont need a QB. I heard lastnight that JeMarcus Russell gets very P-O'd when people compare him to Culpepper. Russell is 6'6 260 pounds, hes a beast. Good QB though, I think he will do ok at the next level if he gets with the right team and into the right offense. If we needed a QB, id be on the JeMarcus Russell bandwagon! Is Brady Quinn overrated or what?
Phlegm Alley Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 That JaMarcus Russell kid was impressive. Ever since I saw this kid play against Miss. St back in September, I was saying that he has the tools to be the best QB from this class if he came out this year. He completed 68% of his passes. Threw 26 TD passes and 8 INT (6 of which came in 2 games) and he seems to have "it" while not being too flashy. He just has a very calm demeanor about himself. Brady Quinn, OTOH, was awful, forcing the ball to Smardzjda with multiple defenders around him. Dwayne Bowe is a reciever I like a lot. He had 1 drop yesterday on a slant route that could have been intercepted after it bounced off of his hands, but otherwise, I was impresses with him.
marauderswr80 Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Ever since I saw this kid play against Miss. St back in September, I was saying that he has the tools to be the best QB from this class if he came out this year. He completed 68% of his passes. Threw 26 TD passes and 8 INT (6 of which came in 2 games) and he seems to have "it" while not being too flashy. He just has a very calm demeanor about himself. Brady Quinn, OTOH, was awful, forcing the ball to Smardzjda with multiple defenders around him. Dwayne Bowe is a reciever I like a lot. He had 1 drop yesterday on a slant route that could have been intercepted after it bounced off of his hands, but otherwise, I was impresses with him. I like Bowe over Jarrett in the draft, I also think Bowe can be had in the 2nd round! Unless you think Bowe is a late first rounder which he very well could be! I agree about your comments about Russell, that kid is very good!
Phlegm Alley Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 I like Bowe over Jarrett in the draft, I also think Bowe can be had in the 2nd round! Unless you think Bowe is a late first rounder which he very well could be! I agree about your comments about Russell, that kid is very good! I am going to use a word here that many on TBD will love...value. I think getting Bowe in a later round as opposed to drafting a taunting cocky WR from USC in the 1st round represents better value, IMHO, because with our 1st round pick, we can use it on a player that may help us sure up our Run D. I was a big fan of Jarret before he pointed his finger at a UM defender in the ROse Bowl. On the sidelines after he caught TDs he was celebrating by having his teammates "pat" him down.
BUFFALOTONE Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Your first point assumes that nobody else could have been able to play the position. Safeties are not that hard to get as a general rule. As for the extra 2nd, I actually heard Marv say on Sirius Radio that one team offered more than a 2nd (along with a swap of 1sts). In any event, this is over, and Whitner looks like he will be a good player. Worthy of a #8? It is obviously too early to tell. I just hope that in 07, Marv places less emphasis on the secondary. How about you? That all depends in NC stays or goes. I cant think that they would go into the offseason with an untested Youboty playing corner. I would say that they would address the CB position early or get a vet in FA. My belief is that we will go OG or LB in round 1.
Fan in San Diego Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 No way does Buffalo pick a QB, any top prospects will be going to Oakland and Miami first !
ganesh Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 No way does Buffalo pick a QB, any top prospects will be going to Oakland and Miami first ! I don't think Miami is going to spend a 1st round pick on a QB. They already have Culpeper and Harrington. Miami needs to draft for the OL, their biggest weakness like ours. Other QB needy teams are Detroit, Houston, Green Bay (if Favre retires, not sold on Rogers), Minnesota, Cleveland.
apuszczalowski Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 I don't think Miami is going to spend a 1st round pick on a QB. They already have Culpeper and Harrington. Miami needs to draft for the OL, their biggest weakness like ours. Other QB needy teams are Detroit, Houston, Green Bay (if Favre retires, not sold on Rogers), Minnesota, Cleveland. Detroit - yes, but it is career suicide for who ever ends up there Houston - not really, I still think they believe Carr is good, and he is, they just need to continue to build up that team at other positions, like RB and o-line Green Bay - yes, if Favre retires and they aren't sold on Rogers. This could be why they want Favres answer soon Minnesota - Doubtful, they drafted that QB late last year and tried him out the last couple games and from what I have heard, they are high on him Cleveland - Maybe, Quinn is being said to actually prefer going here so it could happen. Depends if they are ready to give up on Frye yet. I think you need to add on Oakland, mostly because they need EVERYTHING, and are a mess at QB right now Tampa might be looking at one if Simms can't come back and play at 100% (depends on how much losing your spleen in a game can effect a player, mentally and physically) KC might look at one later to start grooming a replacement for Green Also what about Chicago? can they really be all that impressed with Rex? All of this also depends on who's available in FA
marauderswr80 Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 I am going to use a word here that many on TBD will love...value. I think getting Bowe in a later round as opposed to drafting a taunting cocky WR from USC in the 1st round represents better value, IMHO, because with our 1st round pick, we can use it on a player that may help us sure up our Run D. I was a big fan of Jarret before he pointed his finger at a UM defender in the ROse Bowl. On the sidelines after he caught TDs he was celebrating by having his teammates "pat" him down. What about when he caught that first down later in the game and he handed the ball to the DB. The pointing the finger deserved a flag also, just as much as handing the ball to the DB.....he should have been called for personal fouls both plays. Great talent, but very ignorant. Bowe on the other hand has just as much talent and has a better character attitude. But in someways, I think any WR that teams with Evans will learn just to drop the ball and go to the sidelines.... I cant stand when players celebrate a first down....its so dumb!
Realadeeczech Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 JP Losman will not be the Bills starting QB after next year!!
ganesh Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 I think you need to add on Oakland, mostly because they need EVERYTHING, and are a mess at QB right now Tampa might be looking at one if Simms can't come back and play at 100% (depends on how much losing your spleen in a game can effect a player, mentally and physically) KC might look at one later to start grooming a replacement for Green Also what about Chicago? can they really be all that impressed with Rex? All of this also depends on who's available in FA I did not add Oakland because the original poster already mentioned them. Tampa just re-signed Simms and they might go after Plummer as he is more familiar with the West Coast offense. KC has Huard backing up Green and he played pretty well. I don't think they are going to spend their 1st rounder on a QB. Chicago is a interesting question. While Grossman doesn't seem to be the answer this team is built to win NOW. They will have to get a veteran QB (like McNair to Baltimore) and hope to win the big one in the next season or two. I don't think they will invest in a 1st round QB.
apuszczalowski Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 I did not add Oakland because the original poster already mentioned them. Tampa just re-signed Simms and they might go after Plummer as he is more familiar with the West Coast offense. KC has Huard backing up Green and he played pretty well. I don't think they are going to spend their 1st rounder on a QB. Chicago is a interesting question. While Grossman doesn't seem to be the answer this team is built to win NOW. They will have to get a veteran QB (like McNair to Baltimore) and hope to win the big one in the next season or two. I don't think they will invest in a 1st round QB. I was just throwing some more possibilities out there (that are more likely then Buffalo drafting a QB) The only one I disagree with would be Chicago, I could see them bringing in a Vet to start next year, but also maybe bringing in a young kid to learn the system for the future, if any of the top QB's fall to them, they may take one just because it would be a steal
Recommended Posts