Draft Philosophy

[BillsVet]

Article

 

Interesting read from about one of the best front offices in the league. GB's success on draft day is up there with any team in the league and they've made a habit of acquiring talent from top to bottom. Not surprisingly, they've been successful with picks like Corey Williams, Greg Jennings, Daryn Colledge, et al. Thompson also parlayed the franchised DT Corey Williams into a second rounder, or a player he was set to lose for a high pick. Good front offices make moves like this to further their team.

 

The draft is about the future, not the present. Buffalo's made a habit of drafting for need far too often the last two years because they remain in need of players at so many positions. This year probably will be no different, in that Buffalo must take a WR in the first two rounds, regardless of who's available when they pick.

[dave mcbride]

Article

 

Interesting read from about one of the best front offices in the league. GB's success on draft day is up there with any team in the league and they've made a habit of acquiring talent from top to bottom. Not surprisingly, they've been successful with picks like Corey Williams, Greg Jennings, Daryn Colledge, et al. Thompson also parlayed the franchised DT Corey Williams into a second rounder, or a player he was set to lose for a high pick. Good front offices make moves like this to further their team.

 

The draft is about the future, not the present. Buffalo's made a habit of drafting for need far too often the last two years because they remain in need of players at so many positions. This year probably will be no different, in that Buffalo must take a WR in the first two rounds, regardless of who's available when they pick.

The Bills draft trust may actually believe in this strategy as well, but don't forget that Ralph has -- and always has had -- a big say in who we draft. And unfortunately, he's not thinking about the future. Expect a WR.

[Dwight Drane]

The draft is about the future when you have no present.

 

Buffalo has a present this year.

[Arkady Renko]

I am sorry, but GMs are exaggerating when they say the best player available no matter what the position. If so, there would be ridiculous drafts with like 3 QBs, 2 Kickers and 2 Centers.

[Lurker]

Buffalo's made a habit of drafting for need far too often the last two years because they remain in need of players at so many positions. This year probably will be no different, in that Buffalo must take a WR in the first two rounds, regardless of who's available when they pick.

I agree. Lynch, Poz, Edwards, Whitner, McCargo, Simpson, Butler, Ellison and Williams were just wasted picks.

[Brandon]

I am sorry, but GMs are exaggerating when they say the best player available no matter what the position. If so, there would be drafts with like 3 QBs, 2 Kickers and 2 Centers.

 

Yep. Its never quite as simple as going purely BPA. There are always additional factors to consider.

 

I'd also point out that NO GM will go on record and openly say that he didn't take the BPA. Not a single one, unless he's stupid, anyway. The fans will have his head on display on a pike in front of the stadium if he admits going with need over BPA.

[BillsVet]

The Bills draft trust may actually believe in this strategy as well, but don't forget that Ralph has -- and always has had -- a big say in who we draft. And unfortunately, he's not thinking about the future. Expect a WR.

 

Agree wholeheartedly. Ralph is from the old school, and meddling is part of his makeup. He cannot simply stand by and trust people to do what is right, despite the fact he is a businessman and not a NFL personnel type.

 

I agree. Lynch, Poz, Edwards, Whitner, McCargo, Simpson, Butler, Ellison and Williams were just wasted picks.

 

Don't go to such extremes. Lynch, Poz, Whitner, and McCargo all were drafted because a giant need existed at their respective positions.

 

I'll refrain from doing revisionist history and suggesting an alternative pick. Rather, I'd point out that when a team consistently drafts for need, there is a problem with those drafting, not the players being drafted. All the aforementioned players were selected when a major need was evident, and this year is no different.

[DrDawkinstein]

you do understand that this is year 3 of a complete rebuild from the Donahoe era? right?

 

for the past 2 drafts EVERY position was a need. and now we're finally starting to be able to focus that down. and next draft will be even better and more precise.

 

we have a plan, but we're just 2 years into it. we'll improve this year, and then the next.

[Dibs]

.....Don't go to such extremes. Lynch, Poz, Whitner, and McCargo all were drafted because a giant need existed at their respective positions.

 

I'll refrain from doing revisionist history and suggesting an alternative pick. Rather, I'd point out that when a team consistently drafts for need, there is a problem with those drafting, not the players being drafted. All the aforementioned players were selected when a major need was evident, and this year is no different.

I think the whole 'drafting the best available talent' concept is a little deceptive in that it is probably only relevant rarely. Most of the time it seems to me that 'the best available player' is only marginally rated higher than a slew of other players. In those cases it would be ridiculous to draft the(for example) OT when you have a probowl LT & set at RT when you could take a player of similar caliber in an area of need. A smart selector will acknowledge the concept that even though he has player A rated a little above players B, C, D-K, it is not an exact science & player K may well end up being the best of the bunch.

 

It is only when a player is significantly rated higher than the rest available that the 'drafting the best available talent' concept can really be considered. In those cases.....which are generally rare.....it would IMO be wise to either take the player(regardless of need), or orchestrate a trade down(which should not be too hard in that situation).

[Dan]

you do understand that this is year 3 of a complete rebuild from the Donahoe era? right?

 

for the past 2 drafts EVERY position was a need. and now we're finally starting to be able to focus that down. and next draft will be even better and more precise.

 

we have a plan, but we're just 2 years into it. we'll improve this year, and then the next.

That's how I see it. The FO has spent the last 2 years pretty much completely rebuilding this team. Every position was one of need. What I'm hopeful for is that this will be the final year of that. If a solid WR, DT, TE emerges this year; then the team is finally at a point where every position is, at least, adequate. Then next year, we can start thinking about BPA and such.

 

So, I'd say we're 1 more good draft away from that point. It's called patience. Going into year 3 of this FO and coaching staff, I'd say they're right about where they want to be.

[BillsVet]

you do understand that this is year 3 of a complete rebuild from the Donahoe era? right?

 

for the past 2 drafts EVERY position was a need. and now we're finally starting to be able to focus that down. and next draft will be even better and more precise.

 

we have a plan, but we're just 2 years into it. we'll improve this year, and then the next.

 

 

The operative question is, how many years does it take to rebuild a football team? Especially with so many starters from one era to another. This isn't the Atlanta Falcons thing where Dimitroff needs probably 3 years. You realize Levy/Jauron inherited:

 

Clements, Schobel, Evans, Peters, Kelsay, McGee, McGahee, Crowell, Parrish, Losman, Greer, and a fine special teams staff including Lindell and Moorman. Tell me why it takes three whole seasons to rebuild a team with players like that on your roster?

 

Yeah, it's year three of a rebuild. Only it's not as comprehensive as some want to think it is, because that wouldn't provide the excuse if the team isn't good in 08.

 

I highlighted GB's model because they've acquired so much talent the last few years. I think it's safe to say their front office is darn good. Buffalo's front office has one proven executive in talent evaluation, and that's Modrak. He's the closest thing to a GM Buffalo has.

[Dibs]

......You realize Levy/Jauron inherited:

 

Clements, Schobel, Evans, Peters, Kelsay, McGee, McGahee, Crowell, Parrish, Losman, Greer, and a fine special teams staff including Lindell and Moorman. Tell me why it takes three whole seasons to rebuild a team with players like that on your roster?

Firstly one cannot count Losman in that list since he is not a solid-good player. McGahee is another player who cannot really count since it seemed apparent that he was not wanting to stay and would have moved on regardless.

That list then comes to 9 players.....counting attrition(Clements loss).....it means we needed to stock 15 starters(not counting Parrish as a starter). How many additional starter players per offseason seem reasonable to add? A good year for any team would be 2 per draft & two successful FA acquisitions......or 4 per offseason.

 

In 2 drafts & 3 offseasons the rebuild has added SS, FS, OLB, MLB, DT, DT, OG, OG, OT, QB(?), RB. If we get another quality starter or two from this upcoming draft that will make 4 per offseason.....that would make 3 good offseasons in a row(assuming the young players continue to improve & Stround & Mitchell pan out).

[Dan]

The operative question is, how many years does it take to rebuild a football team? Especially with so many starters from one era to another. This isn't the Atlanta Falcons thing where Dimitroff needs probably 3 years. You realize Levy/Jauron inherited:

 

Clements, Schobel, Evans, Peters, Kelsay, McGee, McGahee, Crowell, Parrish, Losman, Greer, and a fine special teams staff including Lindell and Moorman. Tell me why it takes three whole seasons to rebuild a team with players like that on your roster?

 

Yeah, it's year three of a rebuild. Only it's not as comprehensive as some want to think it is, because that wouldn't provide the excuse if the team isn't good in 08.

 

I highlighted GB's model because they've acquired so much talent the last few years. I think it's safe to say their front office is darn good. Buffalo's front office has one proven executive in talent evaluation, and that's Modrak. He's the closest thing to a GM Buffalo has.

You do realize that last year was the first time in 3 years the Packers made the playoffs. It was the 3rd season for HC Mike McCarthy. Their GM took over in 2005. So, by all accounts, they restructured with a new FO, HC and it took 3 years to get back into the playoffs... AND they had one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game during that span.

 

So, yes, the Pack have done quite well to get to where they are. But, the Bills have done fairly well the last 2 years as well and appear to be on track for a playoff push this year. Only time will tell. But, at this point in time, I'd say we're on a better track than we were 2-3 years into the TD era. And if we make the playoffs in year 3 of this FO and Jauron's tenure, then I'd say they were right on track. If not, then I'll assess what's wrong and we'll see from there.

[ndirish1978]

The operative question is, how many years does it take to rebuild a football team? Especially with so many starters from one era to another. This isn't the Atlanta Falcons thing where Dimitroff needs probably 3 years. You realize Levy/Jauron inherited:

 

Clements, Schobel, Evans, Peters, Kelsay, McGee, McGahee, Crowell, Parrish, Losman, Greer, and a fine special teams staff including Lindell and Moorman. Tell me why it takes three whole seasons to rebuild a team with players like that on your roster?

 

Yeah, it's year three of a rebuild. Only it's not as comprehensive as some want to think it is, because that wouldn't provide the excuse if the team isn't good in 08.

 

I highlighted GB's model because they've acquired so much talent the last few years. I think it's safe to say their front office is darn good. Buffalo's front office has one proven executive in talent evaluation, and that's Modrak. He's the closest thing to a GM Buffalo has.

 

 

Please remove McGahee and Losman from any posts talking about great talent. Also, Greer was deep on the bench and no one knew what we had in him

[ExpertOpinion]

I agree. Lynch, Poz, Edwards, Whitner, McCargo, Simpson, Butler, Ellison and Williams were just wasted picks.

McCargo and Whitner were both draft too high.

[Trader]

Yep. Its never quite as simple as going purely BPA. There are always additional factors to consider.

 

I'd also point out that NO GM will go on record and openly say that he didn't take the BPA. Not a single one, unless he's stupid, anyway. The fans will have his head on display on a pike in front of the stadium if he admits going with need over BPA.

[/quote

 

You have to go BPA within reason. Remember that player ranking and weighting is never an exact science. Also some positions are easier to draft and some positions go off the board faster than others ( DL). You have to think a year or two ahead as well.

 

My thinking is that it's BPA within 3-4 picks assuming there is not a huge drop off. Use the option to trade out of your pick

if you can.

 

The draft is the most important part of the overall strategy to optomize player assets and leverage your cap dollars to achieve an overall result. You are not operating in a vacume, every team is doing the same thing at the end of process you want to have 53 guys who are better than every other teams 53 guys.

[Flbillsfan#1]

McCargo and Whitner were both draft too high.

If the Bills didn't take Whittner, Miami would have grabbed him right behind the Bills. Instead they took Jason Allen to play safety who SUCKS. Whittner has also outplayed the safety drafted before him by Oakland. McCargo shows signs of being a solid player who the Bills would not have gotten if they didn't move up to get him.

[Draft Maniac]

McCargo and Whitner were both draft too high.

 

Does it matter? If he can play I can give 2 ***** on when he was drafted.

[Flbillsfan#1]

Please remove McGahee and Losman from any posts talking about great talent. Also, Greer was deep on the bench and no one knew what we had in him

I did not see the words "great talent" anywhere in that post. The Bills did get your boy Edwards for McGahee however, & another 3rd in this years draft. In spite of what you HATERS think Losman still has value to the Bills.

[obie_wan]

That's how I see it. The FO has spent the last 2 years pretty much completely rebuilding this team. Every position was one of need. What I'm hopeful for is that this will be the final year of that. If a solid WR, DT, TE emerges this year; then the team is finally at a point where every position is, at least, adequate. Then next year, we can start thinking about BPA and such.

 

So, I'd say we're 1 more good draft away from that point. It's called patience. Going into year 3 of this FO and coaching staff, I'd say they're right about where they want to be.

 

and a big reason why the team had so many holes to fill immediately is that the front office voluntarily created many of those holes by trading or cutting veteran players.

 

Specifically the Bills forced themselves to take a RB and LB at the top of the last draft becasue they cut loose starters for less than full value BEFORE the draft.

 

The year before they did the same thing with the defenseive backfield and forced themselves to turn down trade offers because they were forced to take Whitner since they had no options.

 

Look for them to be in the same boat this year at WR and QB if they trade Losman for a box of rocks as most posters want.