To Those Who Are Happy About The McKelvin Pick

[drnykterstein]

Considering that Clements was the best corner I've ever seen in a Bills uni (with nary a close second) that might be a little high on the expectations side.

 

You didn't like Winfield? I'd take him over Nate, given a choice.

[Flbillsfan#1]

Considering that Clements was the best corner I've ever seen in a Bills uni (with nary a close second) that might be a little high on the expectations side.

 

[/quote) You are obviously too young to remember Butch Byrd, I was just a kid, but still remember him as the Bills best CB ever (so far).

[Simon]

You didn't like Winfield? I'd take him over Nate, given a choice.

Oh, I liked him all right.

But they're not even in the same class, imo.

[DrDawkinstein]

You didn't like Winfield? I'd take him over Nate, given a choice.

 

as a cover/shutdown CB, ill take Clements

 

Winfield was great when we had horrible LBs like Eddie Robinson, cause he would come up and support the run. But once we signed Spikes and Posey (yes Posey) that role was no longer needed.

 

dont get me wrong, nate was great against the run. but we didnt need him to play 4th LB. i remember a lot of times that Winfield had to come up big on a deep ball and ended up with his face buried in the WR's chest, never looking back for the ball.

 

 

theyre both good CBs though, the problem was the Bills knew neither were actually worth what they were going to command in the CB Free Agent market.

[DrDawkinstein]

Bill, what wouldve been more infuriating: letting Clements walk and having to draft another CB 2 years later, or tying up $100million in a CB who had an ok year last year?

[drnykterstein]

Hmm.. that's interesting. I always considered Nate and Antoine about equal. Didn't realize others thought different.

[RI Bills Fan]

Considering that Clements was the best corner I've ever seen in a Bills uni (with nary a close second) that might be a little high on the expectations side. I mean, I don't think anybody had expectations for Schobel to be the next Bruce Smith AT LEAST.

 

The best corner I ever saw play for the Bills was Robert James, Clements couldn't carry his jock.

[OCinBuffalo]

You didn't like Winfield? I'd take him over Nate, given a choice.

I'll second that. It's like people forgot that Nate Clements lost us a game a couple of times and gave 10 yard cushions on 7 yard slant plays all day. Winfield was a much, much better player at corner, and we should have kept him. Clements needed to go, IMO, not because he wasn't good, but because he was never anywhere near great.

 

McKelvin has a chance to be great, especially when you consider things like going up against Calvin Johson, one of the best WR prospects in years, and allowing a whopping 2 catches for 9 yards. I would always rather take a guy who has a chance to be great, than a guy who might be safer historically at his position, but will only ever approach good. Of course, that all depends on where the rest of the team stands.

 

If our O line didn't give up the least # of sacks last year, I might be inclined to see things differently.

 

But they did give up the least # of sacks last year, and, more importantly, they had a chance to play a full season together. Continuity at O line, not this endless merry-go-round we have had, is going to pay off huge for us, finally. It's for that reason alone that we shouldn't be looking to change things, unless for example, Fowler just completely folds.

 

We'll see, but I am looking forward to seeing McKelvin play in camp and pre-season.

[Dan]

Bill, what wouldve been more infuriating: letting Clements walk and having to draft another CB 2 years later, or tying up $100million in a CB who had an ok year last year?

This is a good question. And for me, I think it's its a no brainer. Let Clements walk and spend that money on the line. We absolutely needed help on the line and no way you spend that much on a CB and hope you can draft OL.

[DrDawkinstein]

Hmm.. that's interesting. I always considered Nate and Antoine about equal. Didn't realize others thought different.

 

 

i consider them ABOUT equal... just equal in different ways.

 

 

wait, what?

[DrDawkinstein]

This is a good question. And for me, I think it's its a no brainer. Let Clements walk and spend that money on the line. We absolutely needed help on the line and no way you spend that much on a CB and hope you can draft OL.

 

 

OOOH, very very good point.

 

so we can think of it this way:

 

we let Clements walk, and in turn brought in 3 OLineman (2 starters). and then just had to draft 1 CB. instead of losing all that cap space and having to draft multiple lineman who may or may not work out.

 

whoa, i think we just figured something out. great thread!

[BillnutinHouston]

Go ahead and damper expectations if you want, but I'm ultimately looking for a Super Bowl from this team. I NEED low first round picks to not just be competent and hold theitr own, but excel. Change games.

 

With the #11 pick I want the same as I wanted from Whitner at #8 (with different measureables of course because he's a CB). I want McKelvin to start, break up at least 12 passes this year, and elevate the defense overall to at least #20. And I want the Bills to steal one game from New England due in some measure to shut-down corner play.

[stuckincincy]

My opinion of the pick is well known but believe it or not, I am willing to listen to some degree of reason. I do wonder just how good this kid has to play to satisfy those of you who wanted yet another first round defensive back, and think that Jauron is something less than a loser/jackass for drafting one.

 

At the #11 slot, do we have right to reasonably expect this kid to be a solid player? Should he be more of an impact player than Whitner? Should we expect him to develop into the equal of Clements? Should we expect the next Mel Blount?

 

I have never seen this small college kid play football. I have zero idea how good he is. Do you guys think that he will be as good as Winfield? Burress? Deoin Sanders? I pay no attention to defensive backs in terms of players that I think the Bills need to win. The reason for this is that I have watched 1st round dbs come and go, as the Bills continue to lose.

 

Is there something special about McKelvin that should/would make me think that this time will be different?

 

He's a 1st round pick.

I expect him to get a bit of early playing time, and more as the season wears on.

 

FWIW, See CIN with back-to-back CB 1st round picks. In their case, Jonathan Joseph in '06 got more and more time supplanting the aging Tory James, and the injured Delthea O'Neal.

 

Joseph broke his foot off-season in '07, and gained a starting spot mid-year as he recovered and as O'Neal was out with injury. '07 1st rounder Leon Hall played sparingly early on - and like Joseph in his early games, got spanked.

 

Hall learned, and ended up on some all-rookie teams.

 

 

1st rounders don't ride the pine. I think we will see McK extensively come mid-season. I expect he will perform well.

[Dan]

OOOH, very very good point.

 

so we can think of it this way:

 

we let Clements walk, and in turn brought in 3 OLineman (2 starters). and then just had to draft 1 CB. instead of losing all that cap space and having to draft multiple lineman who may or may not work out.

 

whoa, i think we just figured something out. great thread!

That's how I see it. We let one player walk. He didn't want to be here anyway. And in return got 3 guys that solidified our line. I don't care how you slice it that's a good trade.

 

I do agree with Bill though. The line is by no means set. We need to upgrade at least one position and get some depth. But, the Oline is far from the most pathetic unit on the team. And that's basically the result of letting Clements walk. Hopefully, the line is held together this year, continiues to improve, and we can start getting some depth guys in next year.

[OCinBuffalo]

OOOH, very very good point.

 

so we can think of it this way:

 

we let Clements walk, and in turn brought in 3 OLineman (2 starters). and then just had to draft 1 CB. instead of losing all that cap space and having to draft multiple lineman who may or may not work out.

 

whoa, i think we just figured something out. great thread!

Right, and like i said, our O line, playing together for the first time, did a great job. I will take giving up the least # of sacks over (actually it's more like 70 million) Nate Clements every day. And I would much rather have to draft replacement corners every other year, than constantly keep breaking up the continuity of the O line. O line is unlike every other position in terms of real team work, and you have to have guys who know each other well.

 

The real comparison people need to make with the SB teams is this: how long has their O line been together?

[Lori]

excuse me if im out of line, but i think most of your frustration and protesting (and general bellyaching ) over this pick has more to do with the past regimes' handling of players at McKelvin's position. and less to do with McKelvin himself.

 

that should not be used as a detractor in the case of McKelvin. its not his fault that Butler and Donahoe and Marv let a handful of CBs go while they were all in power.

Solid. Saved me some typing.

 

That's the same point BADOL has been trying to make: if the front office didn't treat so many of their top draft picks as disposable products, they wouldn't have to keep filling the holes they create by doing so. Yeah, I was one of those who balked at Clements's $80-million pricetag -- heck, I said the same when the Colts offered Jeff Burris $20 million -- but at some point, they have to decide whether they want to be a playoff contender or a farm system.

[bills_fan]

I actually don't have much of a problem picking a CB in the first round every 3-4 years. That way we do not tie up as much FA money in the position.

 

In this draft, we really didn't have much of a choice, all the DL I wanted were gone by 11. If we could not deal down (and I assume we could not), then it would have been too early to pick Groves or Balmer.

 

Albert would have been a decent pick, but that assumes that Butler (who I am very high on BTW), could transition to C quickly and move Fowler to the bench. I'm not sure about that.

 

This may have been a pick of default. Take the CB this year because there is noone else to take for the lines. This also further infuriates me with respect to Ngata, but thats a different issue.

[Flbillsfan#1]

Solid. Saved me some typing.

 

That's the same point BADOL has been trying to make: if the front office didn't treat so many of their top draft picks as disposable products, they wouldn't have to keep filling the holes they create by doing so. Yeah, I was one of those who balked at Clements's $80-million pricetag -- heck, I said the same when the Colts offered Jeff Burris $20 million -- but at some point, they have to decide whether they want to be a playoff contender or a farm system.

I think it is crazy to pay the kind of $$ SF paid Clements. I think the Front Office needs to anticipate that better & bring in the replacement earlier TRADING the player in question, & getting something in return.

[bills_fan]

Solid. Saved me some typing.

 

That's the same point BADOL has been trying to make: if the front office didn't treat so many of their top draft picks as disposable products, they wouldn't have to keep filling the holes they create by doing so. Yeah, I was one of those who balked at Clements's $80-million pricetag -- heck, I said the same when the Colts offered Jeff Burris $20 million -- but at some point, they have to decide whether they want to be a playoff contender or a farm system.

 

 

I actually disagree with you on this point. Spend the big money on the OL, Front 7 on D and offensive skill positions, in that order. Save the secondary for draft picks.

[DrDawkinstein]

Right, and like i said, our O line, playing together for the first time, did a great job. I will take giving up the least # of sacks over (actually it's more like 70 million) Nate Clements every day. And I would much rather have to draft replacement corners every other year, than constantly keep breaking up the continuity of the O line. O line is unlike every other position in terms of real team work, and you have to have guys who know each other well.

 

The real comparison people need to make with the SB teams is this: how long has their O line been together?

 

 

another great point. ill take some consistency for once over always trying to "improve through change"

 

OLine is 5 positions in 1. The OLine needs to be a unit, not a bunch of ever-changing guys.

 

They worked quite well together last year considering that they were not only learning to play with each other, but some of them were just learning how to play their positions.

 

i wont say that we couldnt stand to use more talent at Center, but i think giving these guys another year together will be the equivalent of the small increase we'd see by bringing in someone new.