JStranger76 Posted March 21, 2008 Posted March 21, 2008 Right on Ozymandius. As of right now I'd say we can hang with em' but not dominate yet. Another DE for the defense and a center for the offense if you ask me. Unfortunately, I don't see that center in this draft class.......
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 21, 2008 Posted March 21, 2008 Who says if we draft Harvey we're going to keep Kelsay, or even Denney? If Harvey is drafted by us and is the real deal, I'm sure Kelsay is gonna go bye-bye. Honestly regardless of whether or not we draft harvey, we should be drafting defensive ends either this year or next. I really think Kelsay and Denney are gone after this season. Regardless of contracts. They will be moved. They're not natural fits for this defense. Neither are really starters. Our defensive line is far from a finished project. It needed a complete overhaul, the way the oline got last year. It's nowhere near finished. The Rev.Mattb74 ESQ. Posted Today, 02:14 PM I agree, especially this is year 3 of the rebuilding process. Although I full expect the team to make a run at the wildcard they are not ready for the SB. I would rather have a stud DE then a complimentory WR. That being said if the Bills have a DE and WR rated close together you have to take care of the bigger need which is WR. Always grab BPA. AFreakinMEN!! That being said none of these wr's should be rated close to derrick harvey, or in the improbably scenairo he slips Vernon Gholston. The Bills can just as easily get a mediocre complimentary wr in rds 2-4, rather then overdrafting one in the 1st.
Brandon Posted March 21, 2008 Posted March 21, 2008 Sooooo, we should remain mediocre at the position? It seems that many are content doing just that at WR, CB, or TE, so why not? Sarcasm aside, I do not advocate ignoring the position. In fact, I think they could very well draft yet another 2nd round DE this year. But for financial reasons, I have a very hard time believing that they'll add one in the first. Lets also not forget that they've already invested a 3rd and a 5th in this defensive line by trading for Stroud this offseason.
Alaska Darin Posted March 21, 2008 Posted March 21, 2008 From what I've read thus far, this draft looks suspiciously like the year the Steelers picked Santonio Holmes. There just aren't many wideouts that are deserving of being picked in the first but there are plenty of guys at both TE and WR from round 2 on. I don't know much about this particular DE but if there's a big nasty guy available at 11, I'd certainly rather pick him than reach for a WR who's not going to be much better than a guy drafted 2 rounds later.
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 21, 2008 Posted March 21, 2008 From what I've read thus far, this draft looks suspiciously like the year the Steelers picked Santonio Holmes. There just aren't many wideouts that are deserving of being picked in the first but there are plenty of guys at both TE and WR from round 2 on. I don't know much about this particular DE but if there's a big nasty guy available at 11, I'd certainly rather pick him than reach for a WR who's not going to be much better than a guy drafted 2 rounds later. There's a few de's who are Maybe last 1st- mostly 2nd rd players. Like Phillip Merling, Quentin Groves, Calais Campbell, Jason Jones. There's some project type players, and a few guys who are tweeners. Most of these people, are based more off potential then on field production. If the choice is a Derrick Harvey, or Sweed/Kelly and then a 2nd rd de. It would be a much better strategy to go harvey, and 2nd rd wr, where you're bound to get a similar wr in the 2nd. I think it's actually pretty deep year for project ends, but light on true studs.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 21, 2008 Posted March 21, 2008 From what I've read thus far, this draft looks suspiciously like the year the Steelers picked Santonio Holmes. There just aren't many wideouts that are deserving of being picked in the first but there are plenty of guys at both TE and WR from round 2 on. I don't know much about this particular DE but if there's a big nasty guy available at 11, I'd certainly rather pick him than reach for a WR who's not going to be much better than a guy drafted 2 rounds later. If we could do a Harvey, Fred Davis (or Martellus Bennett) and then Jordy Nelson trio I would be willing to forego the CB for now. A serious pass rush makes decent CBs good, and good CBs great, but not as much vice versa.
marauderswr80 Posted March 21, 2008 Posted March 21, 2008 I dont mind the pick...........however lets have some fun with a pitiful offense for another season.
Trader Posted March 21, 2008 Posted March 21, 2008 I would like him at #11 a lot. I don't consider the rebuilding of the lines to be complete at all. It's only complete when we dominate along the lines. He would be my pick at 11. 60-40 he is gone by then.
Fewell733 Posted March 21, 2008 Posted March 21, 2008 I really like Harvey and would be happy if we draft him, but I'd only do it if we think there will actually be a WR in the 2nd that's going to be able to cut it as a starter. We seem to be overlooking the reality that our offense was epicly bad last year at scoring points despite a line that actually succeeded in protecting the quarterback. The defense has already garnered 3 major offseason additions in Mitchell, Stroud, and Johnson which will all either start or be a major part of the defense + is getting Poz, Ko, and Denney back healthy. The offense has only added a few reserve tight ends and an unexceptional fullback. I think people are way underrating this WR crop - there isn't the sure fire top-10 type guy, but there are about 5 mid to late 1st rounders and likely if we wait till the 2nd it'll be the 7th WR off the board at that point. Is that what we want? If Harvey is as good as the scouts are hinting there will be opportunities to trade down - which is what we should do. Don't buy too much in to the "reach" baloney. It's almost always baloney.
Astrobot Posted March 21, 2008 Posted March 21, 2008 Right on Ozymandius. As of right now I'd say we can hang with em' but not dominate yet. Another DE for the defense and a center for the offense if you ask me. Unfortunately, I don't see that center in this draft class....... Cody Wallace and Fernando Velasco are OC's in that hard-hit, push-the-pile mode. No Hull, though.
Rock'em Sock'em Posted March 21, 2008 Posted March 21, 2008 Jake Long (top 5 pick this year) versus Derrick Harvey
Pete Posted March 21, 2008 Posted March 21, 2008 Denney doesn't turn 31 for a few more months and is only three months older than Aaron Schobel. Not that I think he's going anywhere, mind you. He's not particularly expensive to keep around and plays a solid overall game. He's under contract through 2009. not to mention Denney can line up inside. Denney is going nowhere
Dr. Fong Posted March 22, 2008 Posted March 22, 2008 Jake Long (top 5 pick this year) versus Derrick Harvey What's your point? Ever seen footage of Bruce Smith vs. Tony Boselli?
Tim Anderson's Lunch Pail Posted March 22, 2008 Posted March 22, 2008 Who says if we draft Harvey we're going to keep Kelsay, or even Denney? If Harvey is drafted by us and is the real deal, I'm sure Kelsay is gonna go bye-bye. Kelsay isn't going anywhere. He signed a long-term extension with a sizeable bonus last offseason and he's one of the defensive captains. That's just silly talk.
In space no one can hear Posted March 22, 2008 Posted March 22, 2008 What's your point?Ever seen footage of Bruce Smith vs. Tony Boselli? Touche.
Tipster19 Posted March 22, 2008 Author Posted March 22, 2008 Jake Long (top 5 pick this year) versus Derrick Harvey What's your point? I thought the same thing. Showing the highlights from one game doesn't mean anything. If that were the case than we should be drafting WR Jordy Nelson in the first rd because of the way he turned CB Aqib Talib inside out in that Kansas/Kansas State game. Man, I sure do like that Nelson though!
Tcali Posted March 22, 2008 Posted March 22, 2008 I don't think that is true. They always listed Bruce at like 275lbs, but he later admitted he really played at like 230lbs often. So did Charles Haley. 230? dont be silly. Bruces weight MAY have dipped down to about 263 at times.Ive seen the guy before in person--he hasnt weighed 230 since the 8th grade.
Mickey Posted March 22, 2008 Posted March 22, 2008 If this guy is the real deal and he is there at 11, you take him and don't look back. Top DE's are tough to find, there are lots of good WR's in every draft. The fact that we have some overpaid, underperforming guys on the roster at that position is all the more reason to get a guy like this to fix that problem. A DE that demands double teams and has to be targeted by the offense on every play is a huge advantage for a defense. With Poz, Mitchell, McCargo and Stroud roaming the field, imagine what a night mare it would be for the other side if we added a playmaking DE like this fella. Of course, "if" he is the real deal is a big "if".
BADOLBILZ Posted March 22, 2008 Posted March 22, 2008 I don't think that is true. They always listed Bruce at like 275lbs, but he later admitted he really played at like 230lbs often. So did Charles Haley. Bruce Smith hasn't been 230 lbs. since the 7th grade. He was well north of 300 when he came to Buffalo from VT and played at around 265 once he became a workout fanatic.
Recommended Posts