Positional Needs in the 2009 Draft

[lets_go_bills]

I'd go

 

1. TE

2. C

3. OLB

 

It'll be interesting to see how the class of 2009 pans out, but at this point, if C Alex Mack of Cal is half as good some are saying, he's worthy of a first round selection. I know center's aren't normally first rounders, but he'll be a starter from Day 1.

 

TE Brandon Pettigrew has some character concerns, but is a physical player with very good hands. Buffalo needs size at the TE position and Pettigrew provides that.

 

I think we're overestimating the LB position, especially given how LB's can be replaced in the C2 defense. I think the Bills rely less on FA as the team is built. That's not to say I think Ellison is the answer, but plenty of players have stepped into the position and performed well. IMO, LB's out of college are more apt to be available than TE or C.

 

The Jets drafted a C in the first round, in Nick Mangold only a couple years ago.

[Pyrite Gal]

I think a key for you to meet an October deadline is to wait as long as you can to see what type of offense the Turk decides to run

 

It looks to me like he is sorely tempted to actually want to have the spread offense with 3 WRs be our base and as this would get Parrish on the field more this is a logical thing to do. In addition, I think Lynch is actually a more productive rusher from the 1 back spread than in a smash mouth FB lead running game.

 

You can get the extra WR through a method of dropping the FB or even through not making use of the TE as receiver. However, this would be quite different than what the Bills have historically done and the team seems to have hard time committing to either approach.

 

They are flirting with it as we really have one functional TE on the roster and no functional FBs as passing or short yardage threats.

 

I would watch how the team settles into a particular O style over the next month. My sense is that Royal is actually a good enough receiver that the team is going to be forced to use the TE as a pass option and this will heighten the need to get some depth at this position as really Schouman has not been a consistent enough producer to replace Royal as a starter if we need a back-up.

[Chilly]

While it's hard to really rank them at the moment, I'd put our top 5 needs at (not necessarily in order):

 

OLB

S

TE

OC

OG

[BEAST MODE BABY!]

I'd go

 

1. TE

2. C

3. OLB

 

It'll be interesting to see how the class of 2009 pans out, but at this point, if C Alex Mack of Cal is half as good some are saying, he's worthy of a first round selection. I know center's aren't normally first rounders, but he'll be a starter from Day 1.

 

TE Brandon Pettigrew has some character concerns, but is a physical player with very good hands. Buffalo needs size at the TE position and Pettigrew provides that.

 

I think we're overestimating the LB position, especially given how LB's can be replaced in the C2 defense. I think the Bills rely less on FA as the team is built. That's not to say I think Ellison is the answer, but plenty of players have stepped into the position and performed well. IMO, LB's out of college are more apt to be available than TE or C.

 

I concur. Alex Mack is supposed to be one of the better center prospects in awhile. So depending on how things pan out, I think it will be C, TE and a Crowell replacement...not sure of the order because it depends on who's available and free agency.

 

I certainly don't think we take a WR in or before round 3.

[WellDressed]

Right now I`d say rd 1 a De . With Schobel and Denney getting alittle long in the tooth,this is my pick. Rd 2 a Te with a little more speed. Who are the top D- ends this year? Anything after the first 2 rounds I`d have to wait on as the season goes by.

 

I'll pick you up from summer school after you learn how to properly use the english language when writing.

[BillsVet]

I concur. Alex Mack is supposed to be one of the better center prospects in awhile. So depending on how things pan out, I think it will be C, TE and a Crowell replacement...not sure of the order because it depends on who's available and free agency.

 

I certainly don't think we take a WR in or before round 3.

 

Chris Spencer of Seattle, Jeff Faine originally from New Orleans, and Damien Woody first of New England* all have gone in the first in recent years.

 

It's a small sample size, but those three are pretty good, though Woody is the RT with NYJ now.

 

I'd like to see a center with mobility and the ability to handle bigger DT's. Running up the middle has been an issue, and even though Fowler isn't the only reason, he's a liability in run blocking. Mack is most likely the top talent at the position next April. It's a long way off, but C may be the team's weakness, and that's not a bad thing.

[Astrobot]

Wow! I really appreciate all of your input. I made an Excel spreadsheet of all of your opinions, ranking a 1st Round position 7 points, 2nd Round 6 points, etc., all the way down to 7th Round suggestions getting 1 point. For example If 8 of you wanted OLB in the 1st Round (7 points), that got 56. In fact, 8 of you mentioned OLB as 1st Rounder.

 

This is when it pays to have your very own Draft Droid.

 

The Results Are:

 

Round 1: OLB-56 pts., TE-28 pts., OC-14 pts., DE-14 pts.

 

Round 2: TE-42 pts., OC-24 pts., OLB-18 pts., DE-6 pts.

 

Round 3: OLB-20 pts., TE-20 pts., OC-15 pts., OL-10 pts.

 

Round 4: OC-20 pts., DE--8 pts., WR-8 pts., OLB-4 pts.

 

Round 5: OL-12 pts., QB-3 pts., OC-3 pts., DE-3 pts., TE-3 pts.

 

Round 6: OL-6 pts., QB-4 pts., DE-2 pts., OC-2 pts.

 

Round 7: WR-2 pts., TE-1 pt., OLB-1 pt., DE-1 pt., OL-1 pt.

 

 

Most often mentioned: OLB (99 pts.), TE (94). These would be our Top Priority Needs.

OC (70 pts.) is a Priority Need.

DE (39 pts. ) is a Need.

OL (19), QB (12), and WR(10) round out our Needs.

 

Your subjective opinions were also great.

 

It's a great point that the Bills might replace OLB, say, via FA and not the draft.

Another great point was that a great OC like Mack might supercede the OLB availability in RD#1 and be better value.

 

Our first draft is in October, but I wanted to dipstick the Wall (That doesn't sound dirty). I believe that the consensus of our group did very well picking our needs last year, and certainly beats one "expert" dictating our team's Positional Needs.

Thanks!

Astro

Bills Correspondent

www.DraftTek.com

[Orton's Arm]

If we re-sign Crowell, we can get away with ignoring the LB position entirely. As for McCargo, he played well for large portions of this year. I don't see a need to take away his roster spot if you're going to give it to some 4th round pick who's going to have a so-so career.

 

An elite DE would be a huge addition for this defense, but DE isn't really a need position.

 

At WR, I'd be comfortable with Evans and Parrish as the speed guys, and Hardy and Johnson as the big, physical guys. Josh Reed provides depth.

 

That said, I could envision the following draft:

 

1. Mack, C

2. TE

3. OG

4. QB

5. FB

6. S

7. OL

 

That 3rd round OG could provide depth at the three interior positions. He might eventually be able to beat out one of our OGs for a starting position.

 

To be honest, I'm not sure what the team should do with that 3rd round pick. If you use it on a DE, you have to ask yourself how much better you think that 3rd round pick is going to be than any of the four DEs in our rotation. Ditto with DT and the four guys there (unless you've given up on McCargo). If we re-sign Crowell, then using the 3rd on a LB would just give you more depth. This team clearly has no business using a 3rd on a CB, Greer or no Greer. We're pretty much set at the starting safety positions.

 

On offense, it's going to be hard for a 3rd round pick to break into the starting lineup. I'm already filling the C and TE positions with my first two picks. So that leaves QB (Edwards), WR (Evans, Hardy, Parrish, and Johnson), LT (Peters) LG (Dockery), OC (1st rounder), RG (Butler) and RT (Walker). I don't see a huge chance of a 3rd round pick providing a large upgrade over any of those guys.

 

Given this situation, the Bills should pay less attention to need than usual when their third round pick comes up. Instead, they should look for a guy who might have a significantly better career than you'd normally expect from a third round pick.

[ndirish1978]

First, are you suppose to take free agency into account? If so, I think we need to replace Crowell through FA next offseason, as I foresee us looking to enter next season as a serious contnedor, meaning no longer looking for rookies to start immediately. And OLB will be key position to upgrade.

 

After that, we need to build solid depth on in the interior of our offensive line. So a top-tier center would be great or even a monster guard.

 

We'll have extended Evans by then, so too much dough will be tied up in our WRs to draft another one high. Plus, Hardy will be coming into his own by year's end, hopefully.

 

I really like Derek Fine, and the coaches really like the other Derek, so I don't think they'll take a tight end in the first, even if there is a TE worth a 1st round pick.

 

Another DT will be needed, especially if the reports of shopping McCargo are true, and I think they are.

 

We just spend a t 3rd on Ellis, and I think he is going to becoming a good player, so this has to be a position addressed late if at all.

 

We need depth at safety, but I think we have our starting duo in place for the forseeeable future.

 

I'd go with:

 

1. OLB

2. C/G

3. C/G

4. DT

5. TE

6. S

7. OLB

 

 

I agree with you to a point. LB is one position where guys have traditionally come in and been able to play very well as rookies. That said, Derek Fine is an H-Back, so I do see a need there, though Royal seems to be acquitting himself nicely in the passing game. We could use help on the inside of the line © as well as greater depth there. I do agree with what another posted pointed out- that our DEs, while a decent enough unit, are starting to get a little long in the tooth. Let's not forget that next year is a GREAT draft for LBs, so I see us going there in Rd 1 with Crowell gone.

 

Round 1: LB

Round 2: TE

Round 3: OL

Round 4: DE

Round 5: DT

Round 6: QB

Round 7: S

[BEAST MODE BABY!]

THings can change, but I think DE becomes our #1 need in 2010. 2009 not so much.

[d_wag]

I'd go

 

1. TE

2. C

3. OLB

 

It'll be interesting to see how the class of 2009 pans out, but at this point, if C Alex Mack of Cal is half as good some are saying, he's worthy of a first round selection. I know center's aren't normally first rounders, but he'll be a starter from Day 1.

 

TE Brandon Pettigrew has some character concerns, but is a physical player with very good hands. Buffalo needs size at the TE position and Pettigrew provides that.

 

I think we're overestimating the LB position, especially given how LB's can be replaced in the C2 defense. I think the Bills rely less on FA as the team is built. That's not to say I think Ellison is the answer, but plenty of players have stepped into the position and performed well. IMO, LB's out of college are more apt to be available than TE or C.

 

good points.....as well with regards to the OLB position, the #3 backer often doesn't see the field a tremendous amount to begin with (ex. ellison was likely in for less then 50% of the game vs. seattle) and that lowers the impact they have on the game.......with the increased use of nickel and dime in NFL defenses the #3 LB has become less important

 

an elite TE has a greater impact on the game then an elite #3 LB

[Tcali]

I'd go:

 

#1. OLB

#2. DE

#3. TE

#4. C

#5. DT

#6. QB

#7. G

 

I'd pretty much agree with your list--and the order you have ...although I may switch #s 1 &2...Top DEs are harder to find with a 2 pick.