truth on hold Posted October 17, 2008 Author Posted October 17, 2008 John Pitts, Al Cowlings,Walt Patulski, Reuben Gant, Tom Ruud etc... the list keep going and going. Phil Dokes!
Orton's Arm Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 I have no problem with Donahoe's drafts, just his selection of coaches. TD drafted all of these players, who I consider to be very good NFL players: Clements, Schobel, Henry, Jennings, Denney, Reed, Bannan, McGahee, Kelsay (a favorite whipping boy, but who I think is a solid player), McGee, Crowell, Aiken (ST stud), Hagan (ST stud), Parrish, Preston, Evans, and Eric King (who I think is getting good PT in Tenn). He busted on Mike Williams, but Williams was the smart choice and the 2002 draft at the top was terrible. I'm not sure you're going to see many drafts better than TD's first one here. There are two elements to having a successful draft: the tactical and the strategic. The tactical element boils down to finding players who play well at their positions. The strategic element is about using the draft to help you put together a solid and complete football team. The 2001 draft was much stronger tactically than it was strategically. 1. Nate Clements Tactical: a very good football player. Strategic: The decision to draft Nate Clements was also a decision to allow Antoine Winfield to go first contract and out. And given TD's decision to not pay Winfield market value, he had to know that when the time came, he'd also likely allow Clements to go first contract and out. Using a first round pick on a guy you expect (or should expect) to go first contract and out is a poor strategic choice. 2a. Aaron Schobel Tactical: a good pick Strategic: a good pick 2b. Travis Henry Tactical: a reasonably good football player Strategic: there were several excellent strategic reasons why TD should not have taken a RB with this pick. 1) The Bills already had Antowain Smith, but were in desperate need of an infusion of talent on the offensive line. Did Henry really provide that much of an upgrade over Antowain Smith? 2) Running backs' careers can often be short. TD should know this: when he was in Pittsburgh, Barry Foster's star shone brightly for a few years before he got replaced by Bam Morris. Morris was the Steelers' starter for a few years--and a good one too--until he was replaced by Bettis. Why draft a player who's likely to have a short career, such as Henry, when you're in the first year of a rebuilding program? 3a. Ron Edwards. Bust. 3b. Jonas Jennings. Jennings went first contract and out, which means something clearly went wrong somewhere. One could argue it was a tactical error, in that TD chose a player who was too injury prone. Or it may have been a strategic error. 4 - 7 Brandon Spoon looked like he had the potential to become a solid player, had he not gotten injured. Other than him, there was nothing noteworthy about this portion of the draft. They say you can't truly judge a draft until five years later. Five years after that draft who did we have left? We had Aaron Schobel, and that last year we squeezed out of Clements by franchising him. Using the five year standard, the 2001 draft was fairly underwhelming.
Dark Fan Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 The Bills aren't that bad overall with their own 1st round picks over the past years. It is when we try to use somebody else's first rounder that we get in trouble. Agreed. Losman and McCargo were both trade-ups into the 1st round. Lets put the kabash on that strategy in the future. I'd be interested to see a list of "2nd pick" first rounders around the league and how they have fared. Brady Quinn comes to mind as a recent example, jury still out on that one although he hasnt played his way onto the field.
Pyrite Gal Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 I think this thread mostly speaks to the sense that the conventional wisdom simply over- values the draft (and the 1st round in particular as THE key to building a great team. Yes, the draft is important, but no it is not THE important thing. The CW is that a 1st round choice should be a starter his first year, but the CW as in many cases is simply wrong. I looked at one year in depth (I think it was the 06 draft or it was some year generally perceived to be a pretty strong class around then) and it was about 50% of 1st round choices being #1 on their team's depth chart at their position a year later. Polian may be right that eventually folks turn out to be like Eric Moulds (a bust after his first two years who then becomes a Pro Bowl quality player), but I agree with the post above which says his study after ten years of play showed most players picked when looking back at their careers turned out to be disappointments. Expectations are so high for 1st rounders that it is no wonder they disappoint because in the end the draft really is a crapshoot in terms of results. Good players have to come from somewhere and it is simply true good players generally get drafted. However, the facts simply are that all of the talk of stone cold certainty is just talk whether one studies at Mel Kiper levels or you are simply a fan on TSW.
BillsfaninFl Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 The last 5 drafts.....2004 Lee Evans(13) 2005 -none- 2006 Donte Whitner(8) 2006 John McCargo(26) 2007 Marshawn Lynch(12) 2008 Leotis McKelvin(11) Last 5 drafts don't look too bad to me. Let's look at this from another angle. GMs and Coaches do not make these decisions based upon just their observations. They are a little busy doing other things, too. The scouts spend a lot of time doing the evaluating, then try to influence the decisionmakers. But the reason why so many high picks do not make it in the NFL, is that the evaluators are unable to see these guys in an NFL situation. When a wrong guy is picked, there are many factors that may be involved. For example, McCargo played on a superior defensive line in college... and better players make their team members look better. That's just one reason of many why drafting players is a "best guess" process.
2003Contenders Posted October 17, 2008 Posted October 17, 2008 There are two elements to having a successful draft: the tactical and the strategic. The tactical element boils down to finding players who play well at their positions. The strategic element is about using the draft to help you put together a solid and complete football team. The 2001 draft was much stronger tactically than it was strategically. 1. Nate Clements Tactical: a very good football player. Strategic: The decision to draft Nate Clements was also a decision to allow Antoine Winfield to go first contract and out. And given TD's decision to not pay Winfield market value, he had to know that when the time came, he'd also likely allow Clements to go first contract and out. Using a first round pick on a guy you expect (or should expect) to go first contract and out is a poor strategic choice. 2a. Aaron Schobel Tactical: a good pick Strategic: a good pick 2b. Travis Henry Tactical: a reasonably good football player Strategic: there were several excellent strategic reasons why TD should not have taken a RB with this pick. 1) The Bills already had Antowain Smith, but were in desperate need of an infusion of talent on the offensive line. Did Henry really provide that much of an upgrade over Antowain Smith? 2) Running backs' careers can often be short. TD should know this: when he was in Pittsburgh, Barry Foster's star shone brightly for a few years before he got replaced by Bam Morris. Morris was the Steelers' starter for a few years--and a good one too--until he was replaced by Bettis. Why draft a player who's likely to have a short career, such as Henry, when you're in the first year of a rebuilding program? 3a. Ron Edwards. Bust. 3b. Jonas Jennings. Jennings went first contract and out, which means something clearly went wrong somewhere. One could argue it was a tactical error, in that TD chose a player who was too injury prone. Or it may have been a strategic error. 4 - 7 Brandon Spoon looked like he had the potential to become a solid player, had he not gotten injured. Other than him, there was nothing noteworthy about this portion of the draft. They say you can't truly judge a draft until five years later. Five years after that draft who did we have left? We had Aaron Schobel, and that last year we squeezed out of Clements by franchising him. Using the five year standard, the 2001 draft was fairly underwhelming. Oh, come on. That is purely revisionist and a parsing of situations so as to demonize TD. Look, Donahoe made a number of mistakes during his tenure with the Bills, but the 2001 draft was a good one. If you want to blame him for letting Clements and Jennings get away, then so be it. However, both of those guys signed such ridiculous contracts (as did Winfield at the time) that is is unfair to equate their having left the team with whether or not their draft selections were proper. Never mind also that TD deserves credit for handling the trading down aspect of the draft the way he did. Remember, he moved down to draft Clements, when many (myself admittedly at the time included) thought he should have drafted the OT (Kenyatta Walker?) that wound up with the Bucs -- and turned out to be a bust. That move was for an additional 2nd rounder, which TD later traded down again to garner an additional 4th. Thus, the trades netted us the following players: Clements, Henry and Brandon Spoon -- rather than just the OT that proved to be a bust anyway. I wouldn't go so far as to call Edwards a bust either.
Pyrite Gal Posted October 18, 2008 Posted October 18, 2008 Oh, come on. That is purely revisionist and a parsing of situations so as to demonize TD. Look, Donahoe made a number of mistakes during his tenure with the Bills, but the 2001 draft was a good one. If you want to blame him for letting Clements and Jennings get away, then so be it. However, both of those guys signed such ridiculous contracts (as did Winfield at the time) that is is unfair to equate their having left the team with whether or not their draft selections were proper. Never mind also that TD deserves credit for handling the trading down aspect of the draft the way he did. Remember, he moved down to draft Clements, when many (myself admittedly at the time included) thought he should have drafted the OT (Kenyatta Walker?) that wound up with the Bucs -- and turned out to be a bust. That move was for an additional 2nd rounder, which TD later traded down again to garner an additional 4th. Thus, the trades netted us the following players: Clements, Henry and Brandon Spoon -- rather than just the OT that proved to be a bust anyway. I wouldn't go so far as to call Edwards a bust either. I think TD in addition to the overarching disasters which led to his dismissal and me being quite comfortable describing his term as a reign of error was some very good moves related to the draft, namely: 1. Downright raping Arthur Blank for a 1st in exchange for Peerless has to rank right up there as one of the great football felonies of all time. 2. I think the intent and a lot of the way the RB drafting turned out spoke fairly highly of TD- - he assessed correctly in drafting a Pro Bowl quality talent in Henry -realized the error he made though with the mental make-up of Henry as he got to know him and not only took advantage of Henry's drug addled nature to get an extra year of eligibility out of him but began looking to replace - folks hate WM because he too was an idiot, but not only did TD make the right call in replacing the first idiot when many derided the choice as unecessary because we were set at RB, but he made the correct call in trusting the Bills docs that WM could recover from a seeming career ending injury with a year off to rehab. -TD even proved to be a cool tough customer when some nattering Nancys were urging him to cut Henry or trade him for a late pick but he read the market to get a first day pick in exchange for Henry (who promptly got suspended afterwards for substance abuse. He definitely was not perfect handling the RB situations as he drafted two mental midgets, but they were mental midgets who became Pro Bowlers and c;early tons of folks did not see things as clearly as TD did for what he was trying to do.
Orton's Arm Posted October 18, 2008 Posted October 18, 2008 I think TD in addition to the overarching disasters which led to his dismissal and me being quite comfortable describing his term as a reign of error was some very good moves related to the draft, namely: 1. Downright raping Arthur Blank for a 1st in exchange for Peerless has to rank right up there as one of the great football felonies of all time. 2. I think the intent and a lot of the way the RB drafting turned out spoke fairly highly of TD- - he assessed correctly in drafting a Pro Bowl quality talent in Henry -realized the error he made though with the mental make-up of Henry as he got to know him and not only took advantage of Henry's drug addled nature to get an extra year of eligibility out of him but began looking to replace - folks hate WM because he too was an idiot, but not only did TD make the right call in replacing the first idiot when many derided the choice as unecessary because we were set at RB, but he made the correct call in trusting the Bills docs that WM could recover from a seeming career ending injury with a year off to rehab. -TD even proved to be a cool tough customer when some nattering Nancys were urging him to cut Henry or trade him for a late pick but he read the market to get a first day pick in exchange for Henry (who promptly got suspended afterwards for substance abuse. He definitely was not perfect handling the RB situations as he drafted two mental midgets, but they were mental midgets who became Pro Bowlers and c;early tons of folks did not see things as clearly as TD did for what he was trying to do. I strongly disagree with this post. First you appear to be giving TD credit for having made a good choice with Henry--a "Pro Bowl talent" in your words. Then you give TD more credit for "having realized the error he made . . . with . . . Henry," because of Henry's mental make-up. You're making it sound like there are two TD success stories here: the drafting Henry in the first place success story, and the moving on in a post-Henry era success story. I don't see how using two high draft picks on RBs, in the space of three years, can count as one success story, let alone two. We only got four years out of one RB and three years out of the other. Both the Henry and McGahee picks were symptomatic of TD's instinct to look for quick fixes and short-sightedness. A better GM would have seen the draft as a vehicle for building a long-term core of very good football players, and would have acted accordingly. The Bills' last Super Bowl appearance took place after the end of the 1993 season. Starting with the 1993 draft, the Bills used 6 first round picks on DBs, three first round picks on RBs, and only two first round picks on OL. Without exception, every first round DB taken during that time is either in his first contract, or else has gone first contract and out. Also during that span, no Bills' starting RB has been with this team for more than four years. The reason the Bills haven't had much success since the Super Bowl years is because we never built a core group of players that could compare to the Super Bowl teams' core. And the reason we failed to replace the Super Bowl era core is because so many first round picks were squandered at revolving door positions like RB and CB. There were some first round picks used on non CBs/RBs during that time. But because so many first round picks were being used on revolving door positions, there were very few picks left over to draft core players like Ruben Brown, Eric Moulds, or Lee Evans. With so much draft day potential being siphoned off by revolving door positions, this team didn't stand a chance of even coming close to rebuilding its Super Bowl core. TD was part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Recommended Posts