Whitner in rare company

[Scraps]

http://www.nfl.com/stats/playersort/NFL/DB...ES/2006/regular

 

Whitner was 5th in the league among all defensive backs in total tackles (104). He was a rookie. Huff had 78 and Vincent never once had that many in his 16 year career. Roy Williams has never topped 100 tackles in his 5 years in the league. Making the Pro Bowl means very little, Romo and Rivers are made it while Tom Brady did not. The NFL's pro bowl cares very little about who's truly the best at that position. Get off Whitners back, the guy had a great year considering he was a rookie. I certainly don't remember Whitner getting beaten by tight ends or him looking foolish missing tackles much this season. I see no reason why he won't get better and get to the probowl in the next year or two.

 

Is being 5th in total tackles for a DB really something to crow about? When a DB is making so many tackles, isn't that usually because the team has a weak run defense? Doesn't that really show that the defensive line is being handled by the opponents offensive line one on one and guards are able to to block the LBs so the DBs have to make the tackle? Of the top 10 DBs on the list you linked, only one played for a barely above average team in run defense. Most were pretty close to the Bills as a bad run D team.

[Mikie2times]

One can certainly argue they could have done better, but if you are reasonably gonna argue this then the complaint calls upon the complainer to lay out not the stats of how this draft compared to other drafts (those were simply other years with other draft classes) but instead at least give some idea of how the holes left by pursuit of a different draft strategy would be filled (for example, do you not trade up for McCargo because you can show you would get him later or that you knew Williams could be had in the 5th and you knew he was gonna beat McCargo out anyway. or you pass on Whitner at #8 because you lay out a case that makes it clear DET was not gonna take him at #9 and that the Fins would not jump ahead you if you traded down).

 

The bottomline is that your post seems to ask folks to put more value in picking a safety departing from the norm in past drafts (I agree it does but who cares given the need for an SS we created and Whitner being more productive than the other SS candidates taken on the first day) than in the stats which show this draft class contributing significantly (as shown by the large number of starters from this draft and the large number of starts they made) to a team that got significantly better.

 

We certainly woulda/coulda/shoulda done better, but I will take reality over a fantasy league view of the 2006 draft based on statisticial performance in different drafts with different classes of players at different times

This was my draft strategy.

 

http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showt...10&hl=ngata

[IDBillzFan]

Is being 5th in total tackles for a DB really something to crow about?

It sure beats the holy hell out of him being 5th in MISSED tackles.

 

Did this guy not show you folks enough to know that this position is virtually locked down for the long haul? What the hell did you all expect from this guy in his first year? Is he supposed to start schitting purple twinkies and walking on water? Will that make you happy?

 

Probably not.

 

Jesus.

[Mikie2times]

It sure beats the holy hell out of him being 5th in MISSED tackles.

 

Did this guy not show you folks enough to know that this position is virtually locked down for the long haul? What the hell did you all expect from this guy in his first year? Is he supposed to start schitting purple twinkies and walking on water? Will that make you happy?

 

Probably not.

 

Jesus.

This is a freaking message board. With the draft approaching this is relevant. Do you think it’s at all possible given the power of foresight we should have drafted Ngata? If even a part of you thinks that then it’s relevant that our GM did something almost no team does to bypass selecting him.

[Scraps]

It sure beats the holy hell out of him being 5th in MISSED tackles.

 

Did this guy not show you folks enough to know that this position is virtually locked down for the long haul? What the hell did you all expect from this guy in his first year? Is he supposed to start schitting purple twinkies and walking on water? Will that make you happy?

 

Probably not.

 

Jesus.

 

Did I say something negative about Whitner in my post?

 

Lighten up Francis.

[Dan]

I see 2 principal problems with the argument that either (1) Witner was a bad pick at #8 because he's a safety and safeties shouldn't be selected that high or (2) Marv should have selected Ngata or some other player more appropriate at the #8 spot.

 

Problem 1: If you have a player rated as your #1 choice, what difference does it make if you select him at #8 or #28? It seems like a reasonable strategy that you have the players rated that you want for your team and you select them if they're on the board. All this talk of trading down and the like is just that... talk. There's no guarantee that someone else won't pick your guy, so why not pick him as soon as you can.

 

It seems to me the whole point of the draft is to select players that you think will help your team, if those players are available you should select them, regardless of projections and conventional draft "wisdom". Clearly, Marv et al, had Whitner rated high, hence they made the selection.

 

Problem 2: Is it not conceivable that Marv et al. did not see DL or OL as our primary need in the draft? Just because we as fans or ESPN draft experts saw it that way, perhaps Marv et al. saw the free agents aquisitions along with our later round selections (which they would have known they were targeting) and thought that would be sufficient to solidify the lines.

 

Regardless of how things may have turned out or what we fans think, Marv et at. may see things differently and if that's the case then why select Ngata at #8 if you think Triplet and Mcargo will be sufficicent?

 

I guess my point is that Marv et al. seem to have gotten the player they wanted at #8 and there's no guarantee he would have been around had they traded down. If in a few years, Whitner is a complete bust and we're still not in the playoffs, then we can say they made a mistake. However, at this point in time, I think we can only conclude that Marv seems to have a plan for rebuilding this team and Whitner was a part of that plan. And, for myself, after 1 year I'd say the plan is on track. Let's just hope we continue to see progression in the coming year.

 

With all that being said, I must say, I would have preferred nothing but linemen selected last year, and I'll go so far again. I hope we pick nothing but linemen i nthe draft. Until we fix the lines, I fear we'll be stuck in mediocrity. But, that's just my opinion, and I'm not employeed in an NFL front office for a reason (mostly because I haven't applied).

[Pyrite Gal]

If even a part of you thinks that then it’s relevant that our GM did something almost no team does to bypass selecting him.

 

I think it is relevant that our GM did something almost no team did in previous drafts. It shows our GM was on the ball in this draft as the post above which shows how safeties across the board got picked a half a round or more higher than in previous drafts and you saw Marv after this trend began and correctly seeing that teams which picked after us were also in the hunt for safeties h picked well for dealing with this trend.

 

If Marv had followed your seeming advice the Bills would have been making picks which fit past trends but were out of step with trends in this draft. He chose current reality over past stats and I think it is intelligent to deal in reality virtually everytime.

 

Sometimes its good to be against the tide, but we had such a clear need for SS help that if he sent us off on some quest to follow historic patterns we simply would have ended up with one of the SS players who performed worse than Whitner did this season as our SS and this D and likely this team would have had another 5-11 season.

 

I know i was all for picking Ngata before the draft began, but in retrospect Marv appears correct to have gons SS and Whitner in particular rather than Huff for his choice.

[Mikie2times]

I know i was all for picking Ngata before the draft began, but in retrospect Marv appears correct to have gons SS and Whitner in particular rather than Huff for his choice.

According to whom? No offense but you speak as if it's true. The evidence isn't exactly overwhelming when you consider Ngata looks like a franchise DT. If you try and argue a SS is more valuable then a DT of equal skill level you'll lose every time. I'm not interested in hearing the Cover 2 card either. If Whitner becomes half the player Bob Sanders is we should be thrilled. Even with that freak of nature the Colts still can't stop anybody on the ground, and it damn near cost them the Super Bowl once again.

[Dibs]

.....Problem 2: Is it not conceivable that Marv et al. did not see DL or OL as our primary need in the draft? Just because we as fans or ESPN draft experts saw it that way, perhaps Marv et al. saw the free agents aquisitions along with our later round selections (which they would have known they were targeting) and thought that would be sufficient to solidify the lines.....

Also.....

.....apart from the whole scheme situation, has anybody put forward the concept that there was something about N'Gata that Marv & Co. didn't like? Something in him that made them a little cautious in selecting him.....maybe motivation/weight/etc? There were many posters here pre-draft last year who had strong reservations about N'Gata.

It looks like any reservations they may have had were unfounded & N"Gata is going to be a good player....but.....where is the crime in them not selecting him with the #8 pick if they were not as confident in him as they were with Whitner?

 

Selecting N'Gata makes hindsight looks great but IIRC there were heaps of posters here who would have been ecstatic had we selected Bunkley(who may still pan out). At this point I think everyone is happier with Whitner over Bunkley. It seems to me that the Whitner pick could ONLY be deemed a good one by some here if he ends up being a better player than every single player beneath him within the 1st round.

 

N'Gata panning out & the Whitner pick being good are not mutually exclusive to each other. So we didn't pick N'Gata.....big deal.

Edited January 29, 2007 by Dibs

[Pyrite Gal]

According to whom? No offense but you speak as if it's true. The evidence isn't exactly overwhelming when you consider Ngata looks like a franchise DT. If you try and argue a SS is more valuable then a DT of equal skill level you'll lose every time. I'm not interested in hearing the Cover 2 card either. If Whitner becomes half the player Bob Sanders is we should be thrilled. Even with that freak of nature the Colts still can't stop anybody on the ground, and it damn near cost them the Super Bowl once again.

 

I think the difference between our perspectives is that while you ask whether an SS is more valuable than a DT of equal skill its not true that I would lose every time. The one time I would not lose is when lets say that the two starting DTs I have on my team are Jamal Williams and Casey Hampton, (or the equivalent skill levels as the particular players are chosen to show a skill level not the specific players) and my SS is none other than Coy Wire.

 

If I had a choice in this draft between picking a stud DT with great prospects who after he sits on the bench generally and rotates a bit with my two Pro Bowl starters and breaks into the starting line-up in his third year and is a franchise DT for years and between a OK but not great SS who likely will beat out Wire even though I suspect I will be drafting an SS again in two years, I take the lesser playing SS particularly if I think that I can make the SB this year.

 

While those who are choosing players in their fantasy league are doing the right thing by simply taking the best player at a particular position, I on the other hand am building a team which I think can win (and in this extreme case where I want to win now, or in a case where your GM and owner are going to leave this planet at some time which is probably sooner rather than later so winning now is very important) I have no problem picking a player of lower skill level if I think he is the piece I need to build my team.

 

In the Bills case, they had pressing needs for both DTs and SSs in 2006, but it is clear now that the Bills made a decision going into this draft that if they took Ngata they were going to end up with a safety they considered second tier that they did not want.

 

On the other hand if they chose a safety with the #8 they might have to trade up to guarantee they got the first tier (in their view DT McCargo that they wanted he was no Ngata or even a Bunkley but depending on how this draft went they felt if they got Whitner they could trade up and fill both needs in the draft, whereas if they passed on Whitner for Ngata they were gonna end up with a SS they were worried about starting.

 

I read your posts (I may be reading them incorrectly so forgive me if I am wrong) as being very concerned about which position is worth a certain level pick in the draft and also seeming to feel that evidence of past activity somehow proves what you should do in the present.

 

I think these two points are of interest, but in the end are interesting trivia compared o the overarching need to build a winner and because of our long playoff drought, the Golden Boys age, and the "what have you done for me lately"drive which permeates our culture, I am willing to pick a player at a different level than his position historically calls for to build a team I think can win and win as soon as possible.

 

So yes, i would pick a lesser performing player under some circumstances and those circumstances were present in the 2006 draft where the Bills likely judged they could get both the SS they wanted and a DT they wanted if they chose the SS first, The die was really cast for it to go down the way it did when Oak chose Huff and for the Bills there was no other option than to pick the SS they wanted at #8 because if they did not he might be gone as soon as the #9 pick to DET if they had traded down.

 

Again, the key to understanding this is if the Bills had chosen Ngata, what do you think they would have done at SS, If they were lucky they probably end up with Bullocks who went to DET in the 2nd round where he credited with 30 less tackles and had no INTs.

 

We probably are worse with Ngata playing out of position from where he has excelled for the Ravens and rnfup eith a lesser talent at SS when we end up with two rookies playing safety. If only for the reason that it turned out we needed every iota of talent we could muster at safety with two rookies starting, I'm glad the Bills made decisions which gave them the best performing safety in the draft.

[Scraps]

I see 2 principal problems with the argument that either (1) Witner was a bad pick at #8 because he's a safety and safeties shouldn't be selected that high or (2) Marv should have selected Ngata or some other player more appropriate at the #8 spot.

 

Problem 1: If you have a player rated as your #1 choice, what difference does it make if you select him at #8 or #28? It seems like a reasonable strategy that you have the players rated that you want for your team and you select them if they're on the board. All this talk of trading down and the like is just that... talk. There's no guarantee that someone else won't pick your guy, so why not pick him as soon as you can.

 

Because this team had so many holes in so many places it only made sense to maximize the number of picks you could get, and thus plug as many holes as you could.

 

Problem 2: Is it not conceivable that Marv et al. did not see DL or OL as our primary need in the draft? Just because we as fans or ESPN draft experts saw it that way, perhaps Marv et al. saw the free agents aquisitions along with our later round selections (which they would have known they were targeting) and thought that would be sufficient to solidify the lines.

 

If Marv didn't see DL as a primary need, why did he trade up to get Mcargo?

[Scraps]

I think the difference between our perspectives is that while you ask whether an SS is more valuable than a DT of equal skill its not true that I would lose every time. The one time I would not lose is when lets say that the two starting DTs I have on my team are Jamal Williams and Casey Hampton, (or the equivalent skill levels as the particular players are chosen to show a skill level not the specific players) and my SS is none other than Coy Wire.

 

If I had a choice in this draft between picking a stud DT with great prospects who after he sits on the bench generally and rotates a bit with my two Pro Bowl starters and breaks into the starting line-up in his third year and is a franchise DT for years and between a OK but not great SS who likely will beat out Wire even though I suspect I will be drafting an SS again in two years, I take the lesser playing SS particularly if I think that I can make the SB this year.

 

While those who are choosing players in their fantasy league are doing the right thing by simply taking the best player at a particular position, I on the other hand am building a team which I think can win (and in this extreme case where I want to win now, or in a case where your GM and owner are going to leave this planet at some time which is probably sooner rather than later so winning now is very important) I have no problem picking a player of lower skill level if I think he is the piece I need to build my team.

 

In the Bills case, they had pressing needs for both DTs and SSs in 2006, but it is clear now that the Bills made a decision going into this draft that if they took Ngata they were going to end up with a safety they considered second tier that they did not want.

 

On the other hand if they chose a safety with the #8 they might have to trade up to guarantee they got the first tier (in their view DT McCargo that they wanted he was no Ngata or even a Bunkley but depending on how this draft went they felt if they got Whitner they could trade up and fill both needs in the draft, whereas if they passed on Whitner for Ngata they were gonna end up with a SS they were worried about starting.

 

I read your posts (I may be reading them incorrectly so forgive me if I am wrong) as being very concerned about which position is worth a certain level pick in the draft and also seeming to feel that evidence of past activity somehow proves what you should do in the present.

 

I think these two points are of interest, but in the end are interesting trivia compared o the overarching need to build a winner and because of our long playoff drought, the Golden Boys age, and the "what have you done for me lately"drive which permeates our culture, I am willing to pick a player at a different level than his position historically calls for to build a team I think can win and win as soon as possible.

 

So yes, i would pick a lesser performing player under some circumstances and those circumstances were present in the 2006 draft where the Bills likely judged they could get both the SS they wanted and a DT they wanted if they chose the SS first, The die was really cast for it to go down the way it did when Oak chose Huff and for the Bills there was no other option than to pick the SS they wanted at #8 because if they did not he might be gone as soon as the #9 pick to DET if they had traded down.

 

Again, the key to understanding this is if the Bills had chosen Ngata, what do you think they would have done at SS, If they were lucky they probably end up with Bullocks who went to DET in the 2nd round where he credited with 30 less tackles and had no INTs.

 

We probably are worse with Ngata playing out of position from where he has excelled for the Ravens and rnfup eith a lesser talent at SS when we end up with two rookies playing safety. If only for the reason that it turned out we needed every iota of talent we could muster at safety with two rookies starting, I'm glad the Bills made decisions which gave them the best performing safety in the draft.

 

If the Bills had chosen Ngata, maybe our rush defense wouldn't have sucked as bad, hence our DBs wouldn't have been forced to make so many tackles.

 

Unless I had a really solid line, which the Bills did not have, I'd take the DT over the SS any day of the week. Strength in the middle and domination of the lines on both sides of the ball will win you more games than a decent secondary will.

[Scraps]

Also.....

.....apart from the whole scheme situation, has anybody put forward the concept that there was something about N'Gata that Marv & Co. didn't like? Something in him that made them a little cautious in selecting him.....maybe motivation/weight/etc? There were many posters here pre-draft last year who had strong reservations about N'Gata.

It looks like any reservations they may have had were unfounded & N"Gata is going to be a good player....but.....where is the crime in them not selecting him with the #8 pick if they were not as confident in him as they were with Whitner?

 

Selecting N'Gata makes hindsight looks great but IIRC there were heaps of posters here who would have been ecstatic had we selected Bunkley(who may still pan out). At this point I think everyone is happier with Whitner over Bunkley. It seems to me that the Whitner pick could ONLY be deemed a good one by some here if he ends up being a better player than every single player beneath him within the 1st round.

 

N'Gata panning out & the Whitner pick being good are not mutually exclusive to each other. So we didn't pick N'Gata.....big deal.

 

I guess it depends on whether if you prefer to build your team from the outside in or the inside out. A DT is far more likely to have an impact on both the rush and pass defense than a SS ever will.

[Dibs]

I guess it depends on whether if you prefer to build your team from the outside in or the inside out. A DT is far more likely to have an impact on both the rush and pass defense than a SS ever will.

For the most of it, I agree wholeheartedly....however. My point basically was....what if there was something Marv & Co. didn't like about N'Gata(& Bunkley). OK....it seems in hindsight that having reservations about N'Gata were not warranted(as appears so far)....but it was totally reasonable to not draft him based upon their pre-draft assessments(that & he doesn't have the quicks for the D....but that's besides the point perhaps).

Just because we might have drafted a better player(N'Gata).....that does not mean that the player we drafted was a bad pick.

 

In 2002 was the Cowboys pick at #8(SS Roy Williams) not a good choice because they could have gotten DE Dwight Freeney?

 

In 2001 was the Panthers pick at #11(MLB Dan Morgan) not a good choice because they could have gotten G Steve Hutchinson?

 

The list is endless.

In the end....we did not draft N'Gata(for probably multiple reasons). Maybe it's a pity we didn't......and a damned good job we didn't draft Bunkley. I don't see how it's such a terrible thing that we didn't. N'Gata might not excel in the D. He may well have become a lazy fat slob(as mentioned by many pre-draft). McCargo might come on gangbusters next season.....or the one after.

 

In case nobody remembers, McCargo was a first round pick. As far as I see it, we used a great deal of draft resources on the DT position(& it needed it.....& then some).

I still can't understand why all the whinging.

We got a good player who performed as one of the....what?......top 6 1st round rookies?......top 8?

People are strange.

[Coach Tuesday]

The concern was that Ngata took plays off in college, and would not be on the field on 3rd downs. Both of those issues failed to manifest themselves last year, and in HINDSIGHT it is 100% obvious he would have been a better pick for the Bills. There is also the fact that they could have obtained another second round pick (at least) by trading down and still selected Whitner. TAKE THAT, YOU BLOATED, ROTTING HORSE CARCASS!

 

Let me ask this: other than Ngata, is there anyone else the Bills should've taken over Whitner in hindsight????? I'm thinking NO. Okay fine, so Marv took the second best player with that pick instead of the first best player. Get over it. Saban took a safety that may never even play...

[1billsfan]

If the Bills had chosen Ngata, maybe our rush defense wouldn't have sucked as bad, hence our DBs wouldn't have been forced to make so many tackles.

 

Unless I had a really solid line, which the Bills did not have, I'd take the DT over the SS any day of the week. Strength in the middle and domination of the lines on both sides of the ball will win you more games than a decent secondary will.

 

Maybe the reason they didn't choose Ngata was they heard that he was fat and lazy. Kind of like Sam Adams who they jetisoned off the team. You could be a monday morning quarterback looking at every single round of every previous draft and find a player the Bills should have taken instead. It's a ridiculous exercise.

[Scraps]

For the most of it, I agree wholeheartedly....however. My point basically was....what if there was something Marv & Co. didn't like about N'Gata(& Bunkley). OK....it seems in hindsight that having reservations about N'Gata were not warranted(as appears so far)....but it was totally reasonable to not draft him based upon their pre-draft assessments(that & he doesn't have the quicks for the D....but that's besides the point perhaps).

Just because we might have drafted a better player(N'Gata).....that does not mean that the player we drafted was a bad pick.

 

It means we could have gotten better talent and done more to upgrade the team. Isn't that how you build a winning team?

 

In 2002 was the Cowboys pick at #8(SS Roy Williams) not a good choice because they could have gotten DE Dwight Freeney?

 

In 2001 was the Panthers pick at #11(MLB Dan Morgan) not a good choice because they could have gotten G Steve Hutchinson?

And we could have had Freeney in 2002 but took Mike Williams. There were people on this board lobbying to pick Freeney at that time. They were obviously right. Would you argue with them as endlessly as you do with people who are not enthralled with the Whitner pick?

 

And what did the Cowboys and Panthers do since that time? I know the Seahawks went to a Super Bowl and the Colts are going to one this year.

 

In the end....we did not draft N'Gata(for probably multiple reasons). Maybe it's a pity we didn't......and a damned good job we didn't draft Bunkley. I don't see how it's such a terrible thing that we didn't. N'Gata might not excel in the D. He may well have become a lazy fat slob(as mentioned by many pre-draft). McCargo might come on gangbusters next season.....or the one after.

 

Maybe you come across a Marv apologist. If there were a player to be concerned about, it was McCargo based on his injury history.

 

I thought it was pretty obvious that our run defense was going to be bad this year. A run stuffing DT could have been the best way of addressing that deficiency. I'm sorry but McCargo and all the rest of our DTs just seem to light to me.

[Dawgg]

There is no question about it --- this was a botched draft by Marv and Co.

 

While everyone here can gush all they want about Whitner, drafting him at #8 was far too high, ESPECIALLY if the Denver offer was on the table. Whitner will turn out to be a solid player in this league but with the number of needs this team had going into the draft, they really messed up a chance to improve the team by acquiring more picks in a very deep draft. Instead of accumulating picks, the Bills surrendered them, moving back into the first round and giving up a 3rd to take the vastly overrated McCargo.

 

It bothers me that so many people talk about how great our draft was, and use Whitner in the argument. You can argue for a lot of players making this a good draft, but Whitner is not one of them (at least for now).

 

Since 1990 170 players have been selected in the top ten picks of the NFL draft. Of the 170 players 7 played either safety position in college. That’s 4.1% of all the top ten picks in the last 17 years. The list includes Mark Carrier, Troy Vincent, Roy Williams, Eric Turner, Sean Taylor, and this years additions in Michael Huff and Whitner. The first four guys on the list have played in a combined 13 pro bowls, and not a single one of them had less then two pro bowl appearances. Taylor looks like he should certainly add to that list if he keeps his head on straight.

 

The point is not that Daunte Whitner can’t become one of these guys. It’s that drafting a safety this early is VERY rare, and in the cases teams did it they found pro bowl caliber players for at least a few seasons. It seems like the barometer for Whitner is if he’s a good player he was a good pick. If I drafted a good kicker in round 1 would it be a good pick if that kicker wasn’t great? Whitner is not a good pick until he shows he can play at a pro bowl level. I’ll give him time to do that, but just by making this decision Marv got himself in an uphill battle.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

It means we could have gotten better talent and done more to upgrade the team. Isn't that how you build a winning team?

Using that logic it makes just as much sense to say we should have taken Marques Colston at #8, and he was selected 4 picks before the draft ended.

 

Second guessing a pick based on the fact that in hindsight a whole season later you think someone else would have been a better pick is pointless. We got a guy who looks like he'll be a good player at an important position in our defense and at a spot that was a position of need for us. I'll watch him develop, and judge him after 3-4 years in the league, just as I would any other 1st round pick.

[Ramius]

According to whom? No offense but you speak as if it's true. The evidence isn't exactly overwhelming when you consider Ngata looks like a franchise DT. If you try and argue a SS is more valuable then a DT of equal skill level you'll lose every time. I'm not interested in hearing the Cover 2 card either. If Whitner becomes half the player Bob Sanders is we should be thrilled. Even with that freak of nature the Colts still can't stop anybody on the ground, and it damn near cost them the Super Bowl once again.

 

Ever consider Ngata MIGHT look a little bit better because he's playing with ray lewis, adalius thomas, ed reed, and an all-star defense? Methinks ngata would look quite a bit worse if he was on a team with few stars or a bad defense.