Bill from NYC Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 It seems obvious that a bad team that tries to build from the outside in is going to have some issues, especially, if their interior is filled with the soft and creamy Oreo cookie filling. On offense, if the QB has no time to throw or is getting injured, it doesn't matter if Holt and Bruce are on the outside. On defense, it doesn't matter if you got Deion and Deion Jr. if other teams can gash you up the gut for 8 yards a carry. The good news is that the Bills have actually woken up in the last year and spent some attention and money on their lines. I don't think their work is complete, myself. But, at least it is a step in the right direction and better than playing ostrich and using draft day as a publicity stunt. Absolutely right! The odd thing is that first round DBs are just as unlikely to rile up marginal fans as OL. QBs, RBs and WRs sell the tickets imo. Looking at it from that perspective, one would think they would draft a wr in round 1, but after day 1 of 06, I will not be surprised by anything.
Arkady Renko Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 Um... how often have such times drafted so highly in the first round. Bad teams normally draft higher. It would be better if you talked about first round picks generally.
Coach Tuesday Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 I haven't seen Clady play but if he is good, that is an idea that is hard to find fault with. From what I understand he grades out slightly better than Levi Brown did last year. Extremely athletic and strong, but a bit raw - his technique needs work. If he had gone to a major school, he'd probably be considered a top-five lock (he still may go top-five).
stuckincincy Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 Following the current draft predictions, that's how it will play out. The wild card will be someone moving up for another position and kicking the Chiefs or Bengals behind us. Considering the Chiefs OL needs, this might not be out of the question. With our offseason moves, teams with bad front offices won't see us as much threat to go DT at 11. Our best scenario may just include another team's error on letting someone with a different need move up. I could see CIN trading down, simply because their skinflint owner wouldn't want to pay top 10 $$$.
apuszczalowski Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 Now, of those teams, how many have had good WR's and CB's already when they drafted what they did? That usually helps since every year teams have different needs that they have to try and fill
1billsfan Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 The Giants won the Superbowl with Plaxico Burress who's a former first rounder. The Colts won the year before with Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne, two former first round WRs. The Patriots almost went 19-0 with two former first round WR picks with Randy Moss and Donte Stallworth. This splitting of hairs on when guys are picked and that successful teams only draft DL with high picks is ridiculous. The Bills are in desperate need of another very good WR to have any shot at success going forward. Period, end of story.
Arkady Renko Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 The Giants won the Superbowl with Plaxico Burress who's a former first rounder.The Colts won the year before with Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne, two former first round WRs. The Patriots almost went 19-0 with two former first round WR picks with Randy Moss and Donte Stallworth. This splitting of hairs on when guys are picked and that successful teams only draft DL with high picks is ridiculous. The Bills are in desperate need of another very good WR to have any shot at success going forward. Period, end of story. Isn't Toomer a former first rounder of the Giants as we well?
Arkady Renko Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 I am all about bringing in impact players on defense as much as the next guy, but I am trying to understand where there is room for LBs and DL to start given the current roster.
Brandon Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 Isn't Toomer a former first rounder of the Giants as we well? Almost. He went 34th overall back in 1996.
Dawgg Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 The Giants won the Superbowl with Plaxico Burress who's a former first rounder.The Colts won the year before with Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne, two former first round WRs. The Patriots almost went 19-0 with two former first round WR picks with Randy Moss and Donte Stallworth. This splitting of hairs on when guys are picked and that successful teams only draft DL with high picks is ridiculous. The Bills are in desperate need of another very good WR to have any shot at success going forward. Period, end of story. The Giants and Pats acquired their WRs through free agency. The Colts took Harrison and Wayne outside of the top 15, with Wayne being at the end of the first round. In the top 15, I think it's best to take the best defensive playmaker or OL/DL available.
Ramius Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 AKC, can i ask you why you convienently left the Jags out of your study? In 2001-2, they took 2 DTs in round 1. (1 of them is now with the Bills) But since then, they have taken QB-WR-WR-TE-FS. Obviously they have spent 4 picks in the past 4 years on pass catchers and DBs, yet they continually are in the playoff hunt or making playoff appearances. While i agree with your overall premise that the bills need ot spend more early round draft resources on both lines, it is foolish at best to reduce the argument down to "drafting WRs/DBs in round 1 makes your team lose and drafting OL/DL in round 1 makes your team win"
Dawgg Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 In 2001-2, they took 2 DTs in round 1. (1 of them is now with the Bills) But since then, they have taken QB-WR-WR-TE-FS. Obviously they have spent 4 picks in the past 4 years on pass catchers and DBs, yet they continually are in the playoff hunt or making playoff appearances. ... and the Jags sure wish they had some of those picks back. I think they realized, after watching the Matt Jones and Reggie Williams, that picking a receiver with a first round pick is a risky proposition at best... which is why you see them addressing the position in free agency. I don't agree that the same applies for DBs... DBs, particularly corners, have skyrocketed in price and drafting them has become essential. But I do think teams that consistently spend high draft picks at WR generally aren't as consistent as those who spend them on both lines and/or the defense.
Ramius Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 ... and the Jags sure wish they had some of those picks back. I think they realized, after watching the Matt Jones and Reggie Williams, that picking a receiver with a first round pick is a risky proposition at best... which is why you see them addressing the position in free agency. I don't agree that the same applies for DBs... DBs, particularly corners, have skyrocketed in price and drafting them has become essential. But I do think teams that consistently spend high draft picks at WR generally aren't as consistent as those who spend them on both lines and/or the defense. With respect to DBs, the draft represents the best value you can get for a CB. As you said above, the price for good CBs are skyrocketing. So you can either pay $60-70 million over 6 years for one, or draft one mid first round and spend 10-15 million on one.
YOOOOOO Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 So when the Pats go CB this year....can we throw away this worthless post?
Bill from NYC Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 So when the Pats go CB this year....can we throw away this worthless post? No, because they would be drafting a db as a finishing touch to a very strong foundation, instead of building a team via first round defensive backs, which is stupid.
Sisyphean Bills Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 No, because they would be drafting a db as a finishing touch to a very strong foundation, instead of building a team via first round defensive backs, which is stupid. Yep. The Patriots added all those WRs last. They already had a good line, a great QB, a stout defense. And another thing: the Patriots aren't afraid of adding depth and improving the competition. They went out and got a handful of WRs when most teams would've signed one and hoped for the best.
dave mcbride Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 This doesn't look like the year for us to fill our DT rotation in the first since the air is so thin at the top of the DT class. It's too bad, because we look to have the first 4 pieces. One more premium talent there would give us a quality and competitive rotation IMO, with the flexibility to play Johnson in the "Tuck" role. But it may have to wait- I should float a trial question past someone like the FootballOutsiders to see if they'd spend the time to analyze the overall cap numbers at the O and D level. I'd be very interested in seeing how the numbers come out- and no doubt there are some exceptions to the overall trend- Indy at first glance would appear to skew the $ ratio while the Steelers skew the DTs rotation numbers- but overall the consistent teams, and especially the teams consistent on D, have put a much higher poriority on premium DLine talent than the Lions/Bills/Jets of the NFL. To be fair to the Jets, they have spent a number of elite picks on D-line the past dozen years (Shaun Ellis, Dewayne Robertson, John Abraham, Bryan Thomas) and on the front seven more generally (Farrior, Vilma). In 1997, they drafted Farrior #8 overall and Terry Rick (a DT) #31 overall. Their first pick (second round) in the 1998 draft was a DE, and their first two picks (a second and a third) were O-line. In 2000 (I note for readers that your cutoff is conveniently 2001), they drafted two defensive linemen in the top 15, both of whom are still productive NFL players (Ellis and Abraham). In both 2002 and 2003, they spent first round picks on the D-line (#4 overall and #22 overall), and in 2004, they spent the #12 pick on a linebacker (Vilma). In 2005, they didn't draft until the second round, but nabbed a DT with their third round pick. In 2006, they devoted their top two picks to the o-line, which most here view as valuable. So they're a bad example for your argument when you look at them in their entirety instead of cherrypicking a couple of years.
Arkady Renko Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 Where will these first round linebackers and DLs play? They aren't starting most likely. A first round pick this high shouldn't take long to start.
robertpaul49 Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 I think that the point is that a team shouldn't draft a wide receiver very high in the first round because good and or serviceable wide receivers are not as rare as quality defensive linemen. Plus, the likelyhood of being a bust is too high. There are certain positions that should be drafted in different areas of the first round. Top ten should be defensive linemen and quarterbacks. The bottom ten should be wide receivers, tight ends, and corner backs. Certainly, there are exceptions; however, this seems to be true over time. Personally, I think it would be a big mistake for the Bills to reach for a wide receiver because they need one. They should either trade down, or they should select the best player available. I think it would be better to get a cornerback who is worthy of this spot then pick a player who isn't. The most important aspect is that the Bills do not draft a bust. Not to mention, how many people on this board really believe that the Bills are one player away?
1billsfan Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 The Giants and Pats acquired their WRs through free agency. The Colts took Harrison and Wayne outside of the top 15, with Wayne being at the end of the first round. In the top 15, I think it's best to take the best defensive playmaker or OL/DL available. Sorry, but you're making no sense at all. It makes absolutely no difference that those players were acquired through free agency, they were former first round WRs. What's your argument regarding the Colts first round WRs? Your reasoning is very convoluted as to why the Bills should go OL/DL in the first and not take a WR which is the obvious, most intelligent and only choice. Am I the only one who thinks this thread is very bizarre?
Recommended Posts