BillsVet Posted March 13, 2008 Posted March 13, 2008 I posted this previously, and think it's a worthwhile point. No one knows for sure if Bryant Johnson will sign with Buffalo. Recent signs indicate he's trying to shop his services, but there've been no takers as of now. It could very well end up that he realizes he's not wanted as much as he thinks he is and signs elsewhere. If, and this is a big if, the Bills do not sign a decent receiver to complement Lee Evans, I believe it becomes necessary to draft one in the first, and certainly no later than the second round. The draft is deep at WR this year, with Malcolm Kelly, Limas Sweed, Devin Thomas, Mario Manningham, et al among others as good options, particularly the first three in that their size makes them more RZ worthy. OTOH, the team owner has mentioned that while they need bigger receivers, rookies take time to develop. He's right, and most WR's in their rookie campaign aren't prolific. However, the offense needs options, and right now outside of Lynch and Lee Evans, there aren't too many. If nothing changes at WR before the draft, I see them going offense again in round 1 with a wideout.
richNjoisy Posted March 13, 2008 Posted March 13, 2008 I posted this previously, and think it's a worthwhile point. No one knows for sure if Bryant Johnson will sign with Buffalo. Recent signs indicate he's trying to shop his services, but there've been no takers as of now. It could very well end up that he realizes he's not wanted as much as he thinks he is and signs elsewhere. If, and this is a big if, the Bills do not sign a decent receiver to complement Lee Evans, I believe it becomes necessary to draft one in the first, and certainly no later than the second round. The draft is deep at WR this year, with Malcolm Kelly, Limas Sweed, Devin Thomas, Mario Manningham, et al among others as good options, particularly the first three in that their size makes them more RZ worthy. OTOH, the team owner has mentioned that while they need bigger receivers, rookies take time to develop. He's right, and most WR's in their rookie campaign aren't prolific. However, the offense needs options, and right now outside of Lynch and Lee Evans, there aren't too many. If nothing changes at WR before the draft, I see them going offense again in round 1 with a wideout. The age-old problem with a trade is finding the right partner. Ideally, the Bills would like to trade down only 3-6 slots to assure themselves of one of the top 1-3 WR's. A trade down from pick 11 to, say pick 16 is worth about a 3rd. To pick 18 is a 3rd and 4th. If someone dangles a decent player too at a desired position (CB or WR), then the pick charge can be lowered. Of course, there would then be the issue of cap hit(s) etc for each team. I, too, would like the see the Bills trade down since the top WR's are rated to go starting around pick 15. Top CB's, on the other hand, should start going around picks 6-8. At pick 11, we are probably looking at, at best, the 3rd best CB. I see no reason to trade up this year in round 1 unless the top CB is knocking their socks off. Will Malcolm Kelly ever run a 40? Without one, I can't see the Bills risking drafting him at pick 11. -RnJ
DreamOnDan Posted March 13, 2008 Posted March 13, 2008 I am sure that the Bills need to add 2 wr. If lee, the fa addition, or the rookie gets hurt.... We are right back where we started. My guess is Bryant wants a 5 year deal and the Bills want a 3 year deal. I see whatever free agent wr we add as a stop gap for the rookie we draft. I'm almost sure that the Bills will draft a wr within the first 3 rds even if we sign a fa.
Trader Posted March 14, 2008 Posted March 14, 2008 I posted this previously, and think it's a worthwhile point. No one knows for sure if Bryant Johnson will sign with Buffalo. Recent signs indicate he's trying to shop his services, but there've been no takers as of now. It could very well end up that he realizes he's not wanted as much as he thinks he is and signs elsewhere. If, and this is a big if, the Bills do not sign a decent receiver to complement Lee Evans, I believe it becomes necessary to draft one in the first, and certainly no later than the second round. The draft is deep at WR this year, with Malcolm Kelly, Limas Sweed, Devin Thomas, Mario Manningham, et al among others as good options, particularly the first three in that their size makes them more RZ worthy. OTOH, the team owner has mentioned that while they need bigger receivers, rookies take time to develop. He's right, and most WR's in their rookie campaign aren't prolific. However, the offense needs options, and right now outside of Lynch and Lee Evans, there aren't too many. If nothing changes at WR before the draft, I see them going offense again in round 1 with a wideout.
BillsVet Posted March 14, 2008 Author Posted March 14, 2008 I think it's a good no-signing for Buffalo with Bryant Johnson. He overestimated his worth on the free agent market, and ultimately took a one year deal to prove his skills on a team without a #1 QB. He was out for a payday no one was willing to give him. At the same time, it leaves the Bills with a tremendous hole at WR, though I don't think Bills management sees a huge problem. Jauron is a defense first coach, and their three acquisitions on FA are on that side of the ball. Once again, it'll be win with defense, and hope the offense can score just enough. It's what DJ coached teams are notorious for, though opponents will easily take away Evans and Lynch much like they did last year. Edwards has been anointed as the starter, but the weapons will be few and far between. If the Bills don't grab a WR in the first round, or try to go with what they've got, it's going to be a long season offensively. Sweed, Kelly, and Devin Thomas represent the best options, though none are top half of the first round talents at WR.
BillsVet Posted March 15, 2008 Author Posted March 15, 2008 WR in the first round = pipe dream. Love the avatar. Not in agreement concerning the first round pick. Drafting a first round CB seems the alternative. The other "needs" aren't on par with WR. A CB would not make this team much better, and in all probability would become a nickel and be worked into the lineup a la Darelle Revis for NYJ in 07. The TE class is weak, headlined by a bulked up WR in Dustin Keller and a slow John Carlson. LB should not be a priority, and unless Dorsey or Ellis fall, neither should DT. Outside of a talented DE dropping down, the WR position cannot be ignored. Opponents had too easy a time shutting down Lee Evans, and outside of games against also-rans Cincinnati and Miami, the Bills offense sputtered mightily, particularly in the passing game with Evans recording 100+ yard recieiving games against only the Bungles and Dolfelons. Yes, that first rounder would be relied heavily from the beginning. At this point, there's little option.
boomerjamhead Posted March 15, 2008 Posted March 15, 2008 Love the avatar. Not in agreement concerning the first round pick. Drafting a first round CB seems the alternative. The other "needs" aren't on par with WR. A CB would not make this team much better, and in all probability would become a nickel and be worked into the lineup a la Darelle Revis for NYJ in 07. The TE class is weak, headlined by a bulked up WR in Dustin Keller and a slow John Carlson. LB should not be a priority, and unless Dorsey or Ellis fall, neither should DT. Outside of a talented DE dropping down, the WR position cannot be ignored. Opponents had too easy a time shutting down Lee Evans, and outside of games against also-rans Cincinnati and Miami, the Bills offense sputtered mightily, particularly in the passing game with Evans recording 100+ yard recieiving games against only the Bungles and Dolfelons. Yes, that first rounder would be relied heavily from the beginning. At this point, there's little option. All I'm saying is that one of the guys with a first round grade is sure to fall to the Bills in the second round. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised to see them trade back into the first to grab a receiver they really like, I just don't think they are going to go WR at 11. I think they will grab the best defensive playmaker on their board at 11, and grab a WR later. The defense is closer than the offense is and I think that by strengthening the D the offense will have shorter fields, hopefully more possessions (takeaways by D), and a lower opposing point total to deal with.
BillsVet Posted March 15, 2008 Author Posted March 15, 2008 All I'm saying is that one of the guys with a first round grade is sure to fall to the Bills in the second round. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised to see them trade back into the first to grab a receiver they really like, I just don't think they are going to go WR at 11. I think they will grab the best defensive playmaker on their board at 11, and grab a WR later. The defense is closer than the offense is and I think that by strengthening the D the offense will have shorter fields, hopefully more possessions (takeaways by D), and a lower opposing point total to deal with. In theory, WR is deep this year with Sweed, Kelly, Manningham, Hardy, Doucet, D. Thomas, and Desean Jackson probably going before the first day is over. There will be plenty of options at 11, but we need to recall this is an offense ranked near the bottom of every statistical category in 07. Going defense in round 1 gives me the impression they're not serious about doing what Schonert is talking about. Granted, a first round receiver may not make 80 catches, but there aren't a host of receivers with size either. If the Bills go CB in round 1 (and I can't see LB or DL at this point) it makes me wonder about Schonert has for options with Edwards. At least a rookie with size like Kelly, Sweed, or Thomas gives them another option. Reed and Parrish are simply not enough to allow an offense to succeed in the passing game.
boomerjamhead Posted March 15, 2008 Posted March 15, 2008 In theory, WR is deep this year with Sweed, Kelly, Manningham, Hardy, Doucet, D. Thomas, and Desean Jackson probably going before the first day is over. There will be plenty of options at 11, but we need to recall this is an offense ranked near the bottom of every statistical category in 07. Going defense in round 1 gives me the impression they're not serious about doing what Schonert is talking about. Granted, a first round receiver may not make 80 catches, but there aren't a host of receivers with size either. If the Bills go CB in round 1 (and I can't see LB or DL at this point) it makes me wonder about Schonert has for options with Edwards. At least a rookie with size like Kelly, Sweed, or Thomas gives them another option. Reed and Parrish are simply not enough to allow an offense to succeed in the passing game. I get everything you are saying, I really do... I'm not saying that they are going to ignore the need for a WR on day 1 and grab the next Marques Colston on day two. I just don't see them going WR at 11. With regards to Schonert - is there a true FB on the roster yet? Or is there and I missed something? Don't get me wrong because I'm stoked about Schonert, I just think it's premature to worry about where the offense is now, and where it is going under Schonert's leadership. I think day one is going to be Rivers and Doucet (trade up).
UticaBill Posted March 15, 2008 Posted March 15, 2008 I could live with Rivers, but then are we going 3-4? I really would rather have a starter then a backup....
BuffOrange Posted March 15, 2008 Posted March 15, 2008 All I'm saying is that one of the guys with a first round grade is sure to fall to the Bills in the second round. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised to see them trade back into the first to grab a receiver they really like, I just don't think they are going to go WR at 11. I think they will grab the best defensive playmaker on their board at 11, and grab a WR later. The defense is closer than the offense is and I think that by strengthening the D the offense will have shorter fields, hopefully more possessions (takeaways by D), and a lower opposing point total to deal with. CB is one of the deeper positions this year, no?
DreamOnDan Posted March 15, 2008 Posted March 15, 2008 Not only would I be happy with a wr in the first, I prefer to draft one in the first 2 rds. We are not only missing a solid #2 we need a player for depth. We are one injury away from not having a #1 or #2 all over again. Draft the big guy #1 whoever it is they like. And then if one falls to us in the second rd draft him too. I'd be happy with a Kelly and any other one of the top 8 wr. But the bottom half of the top 8 look like candidates for a #1 wr or slot. Let Roscoe return kickoffs, bump him to #4 and that would make our offense explosive. Add a TE and WOW!
Pirate Angel Posted March 15, 2008 Posted March 15, 2008 Its hard to say with the DT CB and DE projected to go in the top 10 picks of the Draft its Hard to Believe the some team like Miami, KC, or Baltimore wont take a Chance on a QB which would allow one of the top rated guys to fall, It would be hard to pass on CB's -Leodis McKelvin or Rodgers-Cramartie , DT- Sedric Ellis , or a DE like Vernon Gholston at # 11
Pirate Angel Posted March 15, 2008 Posted March 15, 2008 Not only would I be happy with a wr in the first, I prefer to draft one in the first 2 rds. We are not only missing a solid #2 we need a player for depth. We are one injury away from not having a #1 or #2 all over again. Draft the big guy #1 whoever it is they like. And then if one falls to us in the second rd draft him too. I'd be happy with a Kelly and any other one of the top 8 wr. But the bottom half of the top 8 look like candidates for a #1 wr or slot. Let Roscoe return kickoffs, bump him to #4 and that would make our offense explosive. Add a TE and WOW! Every offense in the NFL is in danger of this at every position
DreamOnDan Posted March 15, 2008 Posted March 15, 2008 Every offense in the NFL is in danger of this at every position That is Very true, But doesn't even come close to changing my opinion... Every team also chooses what positions are important enough to be deep at. I hope that this all of a sudden becomes one of them. Currently we have not too many wr especially since Lee isn't even extended yet.
BillsVet Posted March 15, 2008 Author Posted March 15, 2008 I get everything you are saying, I really do... I'm not saying that they are going to ignore the need for a WR on day 1 and grab the next Marques Colston on day two. I just don't see them going WR at 11. With regards to Schonert - is there a true FB on the roster yet? Or is there and I missed something? Don't get me wrong because I'm stoked about Schonert, I just think it's premature to worry about where the offense is now, and where it is going under Schonert's leadership. I think day one is going to be Rivers and Doucet (trade up). I think they'll find or even have a FB, but that's not the point here. As for LB, I can't seen them getting younger at the position. They've already allocated a 2nd rounder in 07 (Posluszny) and a good FA signing this year (Mitchell) so I cannot see Rivers. Unless they've got a CB they really like, and I think my head would explode if they use another high resource on a DB, it's readily apparent they've got little choice. IMO, the biggest areas of need (in order) are the following: WR TE CB C OL Depth S Granted, it's my amateur opinion, but the weapons on offense are few and far between. They can have a run first offense, but without more receiving threats, you'll see plenty of 8 and 9 guys in the box. Diversifying the offense should be priority number one in the first two rounds, unless something drops to them.
Recommended Posts