Tipster19 Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 Especially after spending all this money on FA O-Linemen. As long as one believes that McGahee is on the trading block, then how in the world could you let him go and not replace him with an upgrade? Now I'm even more convinced that we will at least draft Lynch or even possibly Peterson. Matter of fact, I believe that it's Peterson even more so. Marv can't let McGahee go and then chance another team to trade up and select Lynch after Peterson has been drafted. The compensation for McGahee, the possible trade and compensation for Spikes and pick(s) from next year's draft provides many different ways on how to move up in this year's draft. Before anyone wants to cast any doubt on this scenario, keep in mind how Marv has been marching to his own beat since he came back as GM. Marv's navigation of the personnel as GM is second to nobody and that includes Donahoe.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 Especially after spending all this money on FA O-Linemen. As long as one believes that MaGahee is on the trading block, then how in the world could you let him go and not replace him with an upgrade? Now I'm even more convinced that we will at least draft Lynch or even possibly Peterson. Matter of fact, I believe that it's Peterson even more so. Marv can't let MaGahee go and then chance another team to trade up and select Lynch after Peterson has been drafted. The compensation for MaGahee, the possible trade and compensation for Spikes and pick(s) from next year's draft provides many different ways on how to move up in this year's draft. Before anyone wants to cast any doubt on this scenario, keep in mind how Marv has been marching to his own beat since he came back as GM. Marv's navigation of the personnel as GM is second to nobody and that includes Donahoe. When you have a glaring need for a DT, a LB and a CB, have the #12 pick, and just lost your best defensive player, there is simply no justification to take a RB #1.
bud8andbills Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 When you have a glaring need for a DT, a LB and a CB, have the #12 pick, and just lost your best defensive player, there is simply no justification to take a RB #1. Motivation people, motivation.
JimBob2232 Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 When you have a glaring need for a DT, a LB and a CB, have the #12 pick, and just lost your best defensive player, there is simply no justification to take a RB #1. There is if you are building for the 2008 season instead of the 2007 one....
Kelly the Dog Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 There is if you are building for the 2008 season instead of the 2007 one.... If you're building for 2008, which I don't think for a second we are, it's much easier to find a good RB that can step right in and play than it is a DT, LB or CB. There is also not a clear cut choice for an RB at 12.
3 left feet Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 If you're building for 2008, which I don't think for a second we are, it's much easier to find a good RB that can step right in and play than it is a DT, LB or CB. There is also not a clear cut choice for an RB at 12. you think it would be easier for lynch to acclimate to the pro game then say amobi okoye or patrick willis? cb i think is comperable given the difference is wr and te speed, but i think that LB and DT are more plug-n-play than RB. BTW, next years RB draft class w/my boy stevie slaton and mcfadden is going to be electrifying.
Tipster19 Posted March 4, 2007 Author Posted March 4, 2007 Now I think why Marv was frothing to come back to Buffalo for the GM job. He loves Buffalo, the franchise and the atmosphere. He saw a short turnaround here in this situation when everyone else considered us a laughingstock. He came in and purged the malcontents, second tier players and the miscast personnel. I think that this is part of the reasoning on Spikes, that and his serious injury. He then proceeded to implement the scheme, coach(s) and players for this team's foundation immediately. He took a controversial selection with Whitner and then traded up for McCargo. While McCargo is still an unknown dimension, Marv moved in the right direction by addressing important defensive needs. Year two what did he do? He jumped right in on the first day of free agency and instantly fortified our O-Line. We weren't going to be able to pay Clements and still be able to afford to move forward. Sometimes it's better to give so you can get. I think that's part of the reason why we went so heavily on the secondary in last year's draft. Look what Marv has done in the last 24 hours for our O-Line. He knows what it will do for our offense's foundation. He hasn't forgotten what Hull, Ritcher and Woolford provided for our play-off runs. I can't imagine that if Willis is traded that Marv would try and replace him with a bargain basement replacement. It doesn't make sense. Last but not least, I truly believe that Marv loves this organization and his only gratification is to restore this franchise with pride, dignity and character and why wouldn't he, he exemplifies these virtues.
CarolinaBill99 Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 I don't think Willis is going anywhere. He is on a contract year and needs to prove himself for the big contract from any team. I think we will draft a RB in the third round or so and develop him around Willis this year.
Dan Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 There is if you are building for the 2008 season instead of the 2007 one.... If you're playing for 2008, you don't spend roughly $75 mill on veteran linemen. You draft guys and let them develop for a year.
BuffaloBilliever Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 I'd give you credit, if you spelled McGahee right.
3 left feet Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 If you're playing for 2008, you don't spend roughly $75 mill on veteran linemen. You draft guys and let them develop for a year. youre not gonna spend 75 million on two non-veteran linemen and its not like these guys are 30, theyre in their 20's. i dont think the bills are drafrting for only this year or only 2008, the front office is trying to build longevity, not a flash in the pan.
Dan Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 youre not gonna spend 75 million on two non-veteran linemen and its not like these guys are 30, theyre in their 20's. i dont think the bills are drafrting for only this year or only 2008, the front office is trying to build longevity, not a flash in the pan. exactly
Tipster19 Posted March 4, 2007 Author Posted March 4, 2007 Oops! Sorry dude, I can't believe that I've been doing that. Hey, at least I got McCargo right.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 I say keep Willis unless someone offers you a 2nd rounder before the draft. If not, still draft his replacement, but keep him and wait for a team to lose a RB in TC/pre-season, which happens every year. Then if he's still on the roster before the season starts, work the rookie in slowly over the year.
Brandon Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 When you have a glaring need for a DT, a LB and a CB, have the #12 pick, and just lost your best defensive player, there is simply no justification to take a RB #1. I dunno. If the Bills trade Willis McGahee, our only RBs would be Shaud Williams and Fred Jackson. I'd say that's a pretty glaring hole as well.
Nanker Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 Let's just sign Sammy Morris. Ralph's got the money.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 I dunno. If the Bills trade Willis McGahee, our only RBs would be Shaud Williams and Fred Jackson. I'd say that's a pretty glaring hole as well. I was talking about not trading Willis. Surely, you would need to replace him, but then you would have four glaring holes and not three.
Tipster19 Posted March 4, 2007 Author Posted March 4, 2007 Keep in mind that there is still alot of time in free agency, roster cut downs, trade deadlines and the draft to still address some of our current needs. I'm expecting the DT, LB, and CB to be greatly minimized by the time the draft rolls around. Two out of these three positions may even all together resolved by draft time. I've asked in another thread about RFAs and if there is someone that can help us but didn't get a response. I believe that this is an avenue that will bear results for us.
Ozymandius Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 Especially after spending all this money on FA O-Linemen. As long as one believes that McGahee is on the trading block, then how in the world could you let him go and not replace him with an upgrade? Now I'm even more convinced that we will at least draft Lynch or even possibly Peterson. Matter of fact, I believe that it's Peterson even more so. Marv can't let McGahee go and then chance another team to trade up and select Lynch after Peterson has been drafted. The compensation for McGahee, the possible trade and compensation for Spikes and pick(s) from next year's draft provides many different ways on how to move up in this year's draft. Before anyone wants to cast any doubt on this scenario, keep in mind how Marv has been marching to his own beat since he came back as GM. Marv's navigation of the personnel as GM is second to nobody and that includes Donahoe. ????? Why would we want to trade up to get an injury prone RB? Why draft a RB in the first round when you have a defense that's been ravaged? If McGahee goes for a 3rd-rounder, why would you need to trade up into the top 5 overall picks for an upgrade? It's just terrible logic all around.
Fan in San Diego Posted March 4, 2007 Posted March 4, 2007 Now I think why Marv was frothing to come back to Buffalo for the GM job. He loves Buffalo, the franchise and the atmosphere. He saw a short turnaround here in this situation when everyone else considered us a laughingstock. He came in and purged the malcontents, second tier players and the miscast personnel. I think that this is part of the reasoning on Spikes, that and his serious injury. He then proceeded to implement the scheme, coach(s) and players for this team's foundation immediately. He took a controversial selection with Whitner and then traded up for McCargo. While McCargo is still an unknown dimension, Marv moved in the right direction by addressing important defensive needs. Year two what did he do? He jumped right in on the first day of free agency and instantly fortified our O-Line. We weren't going to be able to pay Clements and still be able to afford to move forward. Sometimes it's better to give so you can get. I think that's part of the reason why we went so heavily on the secondary in last year's draft. Look what Marv has done in the last 24 hours for our O-Line. He knows what it will do for our offense's foundation. He hasn't forgotten what Hull, Ritcher and Woolford provided for our play-off runs. I can't imagine that if Willis is traded that Marv would try and replace him with a bargain basement replacement. It doesn't make sense. Last but not least, I truly believe that Marv loves this organization and his only gratification is to restore this franchise with pride, dignity and character and why wouldn't he, he exemplifies these virtues. Amen Brother !
Recommended Posts