Matt in KC Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 We all know we need LB, RB, CB... (or at least most posters here do, though some claim CB is not a clear need). But this is "only" three positions, and we now have four first day picks in the draft. What is the other position you think we will or should take on day one, and what are the positions filled with our four second-day picks? My positions and reasons are below, in the order I think they are important and likely to be selected. Another Linebacker - I think this is our remaining first day pick. We lost both Spikes and Fletcher, and Stamer and Crowell are returning from injury. Haggan has looked (just) okay in pre-season, but is really more a special teams player than a LB we want in the game. I realise we took care of one of our vacancies (really we did) by making Wire a LB, but I think we're still very thin at this position even if we do get Patrick Willis in the first round. Does DiGiorgio make the team? (Does the practice squad count as "making the team?") 2007 is the last year under contract for Stamer and Haggan and I think it's very doubtful both will return next year. Back-up/future Guard and/or Center - Preston is also our backup Center? In preseason the last couple years, Esposito snapped the ball with the second team in front of Preston. Esposito who? Exactly.... We lost both Gandy and Reyes this offseason. This is the last year under contract for Whittle and next year is the last for Preston, Fowler and Merz (time flies, doesn't it?). It is time to start grooming someone else and keep the "pipeline" full. Signing Dockery did not help our depth at guard, just our starting lineup. Defensive End - Yes, I like Hargrove as a personality, but haven't really seen anything to make me think he can compete at this level. Given that Schobel, Kelsay and Denney would all line up on passing downs the last couple years, I'm not thrilled with our depth here. I think we keep 9 D-Linemen on the roster, but contray to popular thought, 5 of them are DE's (one is our the player we draft). I suspect DE will get the extra player because Denney or Hargove could line up as a DT in the rotation. I don't think any of our DTs could play on the end if needed. Backup RB / FB - I am glad Shelton is gone; he plugged more wholes in front of McGahee the last two years than he opened. If we are going to use a fullback at all this year, it would be nice to draft someone with an "up-side" instead of using a vet like Ricard. I like Thomas and Williams, but they can't be expected to help us next year and beyond. Cieslak did fill in at FB last year because he was the best of a few very bad choices. (Also, this is Cieslak's last year under contract.) I haven't seen Jackson play, but don't put any weight in NFLE stats. (Wasn't Ken Simonton? the same kind of NFLE wonder?) I'd be thrilled if we do have a diamond in the rough, but assume Levy's comments about him are mainly to help us seem less desperate for contract negotiations with others. Backup Safety - Bowen gone; Leonard is backing up both spots and Wire is now a LB. We are one bad play from having Simpson and Leonard being our safeties covering the deep part of the field (with a rookie MLB?) and no one backing them up, except Wire, who I'm sure will continue to be a team player and drop 15 pounds before the next game. And yes, for anyone who is superstitious, I was knocking on my wood desk with my left hand as I typed with my right hand. Tight End - This is Cieslak and Nufeld's last year under contract and we still haven't seen Everett ("paging Kevin Everett... please report to the playing field as soon as possible...."). I'm happy with Royal for one of our TE positions, but remain depressed about our other players. If we don't take one this year, this position could be a first-day selection next year. Wide Reciever - I don't think we're likely to take one this year, but think we need to keep the pressure of competition on our current players. George Wilson, Chris Denney and a couple ("camp fodder") FA's could provide this pressure. I want to see even more of Roscoe this year. If JP has a little more time, I think he could get enough separation to kill opposing secondaries. Quarterback - Holcolm is gone, which is fine with me. I think he's a fine backup QB, but I take this as a sign that we're continuing to shift the playbook to JP's strengths and would rather not pay his salary or remember questioning if JP would start. I think Nall will be our backup this year, and there is little reason to use a draft pick on a 3rd QB unless we want to take on a project and think the pick is a better gamble than the other players left in the 7th round.
apuszczalowski Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 We lost both Gandy and Reyes this offseason. This is the last year under contract for Whittle and next year is the last for Preston, Fowler and Merz (time flies, doesn't it?). It is time to start grooming someone else and keep the "pipeline" full. Signing Dockery did not help our depth at guard, just our starting lineup. You say they lost Gandy and Reyes, but only gained Dockery for Depth? Dockery Replaces Gandy, and Reyes by the end of the year wasn't even considered Depth as he didn't even see the field anymore They brought in Walker and Whittle. Walker becomes a starter therefore making Pennington or Preston a backup to their position they started at the end of last season. So they gained depth there, along with Whittle who *could*, but not likely, end up as a starter, but will probably just be depth. For this year, the team is set on the o-line. Let the current guys fight for spots, see what the Bills have, and then fix anything that didn't work next season.
The Big Cat Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 You say they lost Gandy and Reyes, but only gained Dockery for Depth? Dockery Replaces Gandy, and Reyes by the end of the year wasn't even considered Depth as he didn't even see the field anymore They brought in Walker and Whittle. Walker becomes a starter therefore making Pennington or Preston a backup to their position they started at the end of last season. So they gained depth there, along with Whittle who *could*, but not likely, end up as a starter, but will probably just be depth. For this year, the team is set on the o-line. Let the current guys fight for spots, see what the Bills have, and then fix anything that didn't work next season. I disagree, I bet they bring in a G or C during the draft, may be both.
Matt in KC Posted April 9, 2007 Author Posted April 9, 2007 You say they lost Gandy and Reyes, but only gained Dockery for Depth? Dockery Replaces Gandy, and Reyes by the end of the year wasn't even considered Depth as he didn't even see the field anymore They brought in Walker and Whittle. Walker becomes a starter therefore making Pennington or Preston a backup to their position they started at the end of last season. So they gained depth there, along with Whittle who *could*, but not likely, end up as a starter, but will probably just be depth. For this year, the team is set on the o-line. Let the current guys fight for spots, see what the Bills have, and then fix anything that didn't work next season. The definition of depth for the O-Line is a player on the roster who does not play unless someone gets hurt, like Reyes. This is Whittle's only year under contract, and yes, Walker and Dockery will likely start this year. You are right that Pennington will again likely become depth at OT with some valuable playing experience, but that doesn't help us at guard or center. If Walker does move to guard, then yes, that frees up Preston, though I'm weary of having him back up all of the interior line positions, especially since he looked like the weak link on the line last year, and doesn't seem to be improving any more. I'd love to see him step up and conclusively earn the RG job (then get extended another couple years), but don't expect this to happpen.
Pyrite Gal Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 There can be some significant need changes based on decisions which cannot be seen by us outsiders regarding what we attempt to do with the offensive scheme. Clearly the Bills ran a restricted offense from the future planned version if only just because they simplified it and took few chances as they assessed and trained JP (there was clear utility in this approach as they at least stayed close with eventual SB champs Colts though they clearly were outgunned by Manning and if this game was a shootout we would have not even stayed close). However. they did some other oddly ineffective things like never ever really getting their act together at FB though clearly Shelton was struggling. It is not inconceivable that the plan all along has been to switch to a system which goes with a single RB and 3 WRs as the base O and the sudden "opportunity" of virtually completely redoing our RB approach with WM gone means our needs at RB would be very different. Cieslak (and oerhaps even Neufeld) may fit in as a mostly TEs who are capable of being an FB in goalline or short yardage situations but in essence it eliminates the need for an FB in this draft. This move would also correspond with finally unleashing the speed of having an Evans/PP/Parrish WR set rather than the odd use of a 2 WR system with PP miscast in a possession WR role. I also agree with idea that we are going to do some serious shopping for another safety and would not be surprised to see this as a higher priority for the Bills than searching for a Meacham or some other possession receiver and probably is viewed as a larger priority than finding another CB. At CB, the Bills decided before last season that NC was not worth it to the Bills to resign at what the market would give him even after his very bad 2005 and in fact he was not worth what the likely average salary of the top 5 CBs so that it was no loss to promise him not to franchise him again. I see a second day CB if we see a good one, but judge this to only be a high priority for those who were dazzled by Clements and think we must find a comparable talent to replace him. the fact is that a comparable talent is simply wasted in a Cover 2 and we cannot afford the cap hit needed to sign such a talent.
Pete Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 I say we draft a WR first day and we will spend a pick on a FB and/or TE. We will also select a S
KOKBILLS Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 Wide Reciever - I don't think we're likely to take one this year, but think we need to keep the pressure of competition on our current players. George Wilson, Chris Denney and a couple ("camp fodder") FA's could provide this pressure. I want to see even more of Roscoe this year. If JP has a little more time, I think he could get enough separation to kill opposing secondaries. I have no scientific evidence to point to, nor do I know anyone on the inside, etc...But I do have a gut feeling that the Bills will consider taking a WR at #12, and that WR is Robert Meachem... Like I said it's just a gut feeling...Cause My gut is also telling Me the #1 Player the Bills want, LB Patrick Willis will be gone by #12...
Pete Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 I have no scientific evidence to point to, nor do I know anyone on the inside, etc...But I do have a gut feeling that the Bills will consider taking a WR at #12, and that WR is Robert Meachem... Like I said it's just a gut feeling...Cause My gut is also telling Me the #1 Player the Bills want, LB Patrick Willis will be gone by #12... It seems like Meachem is shooting up draft boards. Have you seen him play? I am not that familiar with him- why is his draft stock rising? Did he have a great combine? Or did he produce on the field? Upside? I would LOVE to see the Bills get another WR to help out Lee and JP!
Matt in KC Posted April 9, 2007 Author Posted April 9, 2007 It is not inconceivable that the plan all along has been to switch to a system which goes with a single RB and 3 WRs as the base O and the sudden "opportunity" of virtually completely redoing our RB approach with WM gone means our needs at RB would be very different. Cieslak (and oerhaps even Neufeld) may fit in as a mostly TEs who are capable of being an FB in goalline or short yardage situations but in essence it eliminates the need for an FB in this draft. This move would also correspond with finally unleashing the speed of having an Evans/PP/Parrish WR set rather... Boy, I sure hope so. With our WR speed and JP's arm it really could be exciting. ...but we'll never find out if we can't provide pass protection. ...than the odd use of a 2 WR system with PP miscast in a possession WR role. Reed seems to be doing a good job as our possession reciever, consistently coming back to JP when he feels pressure. I liked everything but Price's lack of blocking last year...until I looked at his stats. Price's YpC is bad-possession-reciever-like and I suspect this is his last year on the team in a stopgap role. (Reed 12.1, Price 8.2) Actually, Clumpy's page says Price signed through 2009, so who knows. I could have sworn he signed a two year deal. Why do you call Price our possession reciever and not Reed? I also agree with idea that we are going to do some serious shopping for another safety and would not be surprised to see this as a higher priority for the Bills than searching for a Meacham or some other possession receiver and probably is viewed as a larger priority than finding another CB. At CB, the Bills decided before last season that NC was not worth it to the Bills to resign at what the market would give him even after his very bad 2005 and in fact he was not worth what the likely average salary of the top 5 CBs so that it was no loss to promise him not to franchise him again. I see a second day CB if we see a good one, but judge this to only be a high priority for those who were dazzled by Clements and think we must find a comparable talent to replace him. the fact is that a comparable talent is simply wasted in a Cover 2 and we cannot afford the cap hit needed to sign such a talent. I still think a first day pick is going to be a CB, but not because I think Yobouty can't play. We often have three CBs on the field at once, they take awhile to develop, and good ones are not available for cheap. You have to draft them. I suspect we keep the pipeline full with a 3rd round CB, or a 4th rounder if we see someone else we can't pass up in the 3rd. Given how well Clements played in the second half of 2006, we need a lot of things to go right on defense for us to not feel a significant drop-off this year. That's not to say we've made any bad choices, just that we lost a good player.
apuszczalowski Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 The definition of depth for the O-Line is a player on the roster who does not play unless someone gets hurt, like Reyes. This is Whittle's only year under contract, and yes, Walker and Dockery will likely start this year. You are right that Pennington will again likely become depth at OT with some valuable playing experience, but that doesn't help us at guard or center. If Walker does move to guard, then yes, that frees up Preston, though I'm weary of having him back up all of the interior line positions, especially since he looked like the weak link on the line last year, and doesn't seem to be improving any more. I'd love to see him step up and conclusively earn the RG job (then get extended another couple years), but don't expect this to happpen. But thats not what I'm getting at. Depth to me is players that don't start/play much in a game, only get in when theres an injury, and occasionally to rest a starter. They lost Vilareal (someone who was off the active roster by the seasons end), Gandy (a starting Guard), and Reyes (a starter to begin the season, then a healthy scratch for the second half therefore not really depth in my opinion cause he was virtually gone and wasn't going to see the field unless it was a serious emergency) They brought in Whittle (depth move that can play any position on the line), Dockery (to replace Gandy), and Walker (an upgrade over the current RT/RG) Whittle is depth, we all know that (since CV was lost most of the season, he is pretty much his replacement) Dockery is Gandy's replacement (meaning that Losing Gandy is basically a wash because they gained Dockery) Walker is an upgrade over either right side positions which forces the starter from whatever position he takes to become a backup (depth). Since they lost 3 linemen, and gained 3, they really don't need more depth becasue they will have the same amount of players at those positions as last year. If someone is brought in, someone is getting cut (the roster is not infinite, theres a cap to max amount of players allowed per team). That leaves Buffalo with a starting line of Peters - Dockery - Fowler - Walker/Preston - Walker/Pennington. As for depth, that leaves them with Whittle (can play any spot), Preston/Pennington (whomever doesn't start), Merz, and a couple others that will probably be on the practice squad. I don't see the Bills keeping more o-linemen then they did last year, so if they draft someone, that player would have to make the team, cutting someone from last year, or be on the practice squad (basically wasting a pick from this year for someone to keep the bench warm). The are pleased with Fowler (unlike some fans), so I doubt he's done in Buffalo after this year and will probably be re-signed next season. Whittle may be on a one year contract, but if they like him he will get re-signed, or will leave at the end of the year and another vet will be brought in for depth. I just can't see with the Bills other pressing needs (RB, LB and to a lesser extent, CB) that they are going to go and bring in more o-linemen until the see what they have and what they need first. Next offseason will be when they look for some more depth because it will have given them the time to see what they currently have and what needs improvement (i.e. if Preston stays around, if Merz is NFL caliber, if Dockery or Walker were worth the money spent, if peters is the real deal, etc.) This isn't a SB year for the Bills so its not like they have one position to fix, they will have to use the resources wisely and spread it around to not weaken one position to make another stronger. Do they really need a Pro Bowl Caliber line if the Running game is led by a scrub? Are you going to build a top 2 Secondary only to let the LB's get run over because they are all 3rd tier? I am going to say the Bills with their 7 picks will take 1 - RB 2 - LB's 1 - TE or WR 1 - CB 1 - QB (late, probably on the 2nd day to fill the #3 spot as a project) 1 - a FB may also be taken, or another secondary player If a D-linemen or a o-linemen are taken, it won't be on the first day, and they will probably end up on the practice squad
tennesseeboy Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 Probably we'll do some duplication is my guess. Even if we draft Willis, we could use another linebacker in the mix. If there is a strong RB from the crop of five or six after Peterson, I could see us drafting a second one. On the other hand, we might find an outstanding player of any of ten or twelve positions worth taking a chance on. Wide receiver might be interesting in the third round for us.
JStranger76 Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 If a DE like Anthony Spencer was there in the 2nd I would sure consider a guy like that, you can never have to many pass rushers. Throw in DT and WR as well if it's a "I can't believe this guy was available" type situation.
Matt in KC Posted April 9, 2007 Author Posted April 9, 2007 I have no scientific evidence to point to, nor do I know anyone on the inside, etc...But I do have a gut feeling that the Bills will consider taking a WR at #12, and that WR is Robert Meachem... Like I said it's just a gut feeling...Cause My gut is also telling Me the #1 Player the Bills want, LB Patrick Willis will be gone by #12... I would love to see another receiver on the roster, but I think Price's contract, plus Marv's comments about "being happy with who we have" mean this position probably waits until next year. If Willis is gone, I suspect we take Lynch with our 1st round pick. I don't think it's easy to trade down so we might grab someone unexpected, but WR would definitely be a "shocker."
apuszczalowski Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 If a DE like Anthony Spencer was there in the 2nd I would sure consider a guy like that, you can never have to many pass rushers. Throw in DT and WR as well if it's a "I can't believe this guy was available" type situation. The problem is, Buffalo already has 4 DE's signed on the roster, bringing in another wil force them to cut one (who would you cut for an unproven rookie?), or have a #2 pick sit on the practice squad until a spot becomes avaialable
JStranger76 Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 In agreement with Matt In DC I gotta say ( NOT WHO I PREFER ) but who I think we'll select with our 1st will be CB Leon Hall. I won't be mad or thrilled, but he seems to be a very SAFE pick for our D. He doesn't have elite speed (40yds) but his cone and shuttle drills were #1 by a good margin. He does fit our D style very well (from what we can gather by our untrained eyes ) so I'm guessing he will be the actual pick, not the Stadium Wall favorate. I'm personally a BillInNYC type (whacked out lineman screamer) but CB does make sense. Hopefully the 2nd pick will be best remaining LB and Manuel Rameirez (G, Texas Tech) as our 1st third rounder followed by the best RB left with our other 3rd rounder. I think we'll have to wait till next year to find a franchise RB.
JStranger76 Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 Cut Hargrove as long as he leaves whatever stimulants he is on for the new guy to take before kickoff!!!
KOKBILLS Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 It seems like Meachem is shooting up draft boards. Have you seen him play? I am not that familiar with him- why is his draft stock rising? Did he have a great combine? Or did he produce on the field? Upside? I would LOVE to see the Bills get another WR to help out Lee and JP! I saw Meachem a bit last Year...A few Games...And He looked pretty darn good...He was 3rd Team All American and 1st Team All-SEC...But appearently it was at the Combine where He really impressed...On The NFL Network the other day, I think it was "The Path To The Draft" Show, they commented that Meachem looked outstanding in the drills, caught everything thrown His way with His Hands (never let a Pass get to His body), and of coarse He is 6-2 and ran a solid 4.39 at Indy... The knock on Meachem is that He's not overly physical for His size and that He prefers the Outside, staying out of the Middle of the Field...But if you watch the Tape on the Kid He breaks DB Tackles with consistancy and is certainly a threat in The Deep Game...The other thing I noticed on the Highlight Tape I saw was that He caught a few TD's in the Back of the Endzone this past Year showing good concentration and eye/hand/feet coordination...From what I've seen of the Kid, and admittedly it's not a heck of a lot, he certainly looks like He would be a nice compliment to Lee Evans...Meachem seems to fit as far as what one would imagine the Bills would like on the other side...
Pyrite Gal Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 In agreement with Matt In DC I gotta say ( NOT WHO I PREFER ) but who I think we'll select with our 1st will be CB Leon Hall. I won't be mad or thrilled, but he seems to be a very SAFE pick for our D. He doesn't have elite speed (40yds) but his cone and shuttle drills were #1 by a good margin. He does fit our D style very well (from what we can gather by our untrained eyes ) so I'm guessing he will be the actual pick, not the Stadium Wall favorate. I'm personally a BillInNYC type (whacked out lineman screamer) but CB does make sense. Hopefully the 2nd pick will be best remaining LB and Manuel Rameirez (G, Texas Tech) as our 1st third rounder followed by the best RB left with our other 3rd rounder. I think we'll have to wait till next year to find a franchise RB. Given the need for both starters and depth at LB and RB (as many as three acquisitions we do not have right now can easily be RBs who make this team and we lost the two players who started at LB last year) it would seem hard to imagine us picking a CB who could also easily be in on the bench all season. Youbouty was judged to be a 1st round physical talent who needed a year of training before he could be a potential 1st round pick and thus dropped to the third round where we picked him. If the same pundits who made this assessment are correct that Hall is a potential starter if chosen we are pretty much going to a coin flip as to whether a year if working under the Bills' coaches is equal to getting the four years which makes Hall a likely starter. Given our resigning of Kiwaukee Thomas who said he wanted to start this year and whom Jauron obviously likes, it seems unlikely we would create a logjam at CB where we definitely need a starter when we need a starter and also backups at RB and LB.
Pete Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 Could we trade down, get another pick, and still get Meacham?
JStranger76 Posted April 9, 2007 Posted April 9, 2007 Hall wouldn't be on the bench all year Pyrite, unless he missed a lot of time like Youboty. Thomas might want to start but come on, he was signed as depth at best. I don't see a logjam situation at all, just an oppurtunity to add a legit starting CB. If things turn out well, we could be looking at a Hall and Youboty combo with McGee playing nickle where he belongs........
Recommended Posts