OCinBuffalo Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 You might as well be still arguing that The Surge didn't work. It's time to deal with the reality that The Surge did work and drafting Donte Whitner at 8 in 2006 was not only not a reach, it's lining up to be a steal. Let's start with this right here. A "great" player makes those around him better. How about a player that can replace those around him due to matchup or injury and improve the play at that position? Strike one. Let's look at who was drafted ahead of Whitner: 1 Houston Texans Mario Williams Defensive end 2 New Orleans Saints Reggie Bush Running back 3 Tennessee Titans Vince Young Quarterback 4 New York Jets D'Brickashaw Ferguson Offensive tackle 5 Green Bay Packers A. J. Hawk Linebacker 6 San Francisco 49ers Vernon Davis Tight end 7 Oakland Raiders Michael Huff Safety Who of the above is a better leader than Whitner? Who is, pound for pound, playing better at their position? Who is having a better effect on the players around them? Who can step in and play 3 other positions on the field? Strike two. Hawk, Davis, and Huff? It's not even a debate. I can see Ferguson, maybe, but Whitner's intangibles and versatility means he wins. Young? Please. Reggie Bush is starting to look like a 3rd down scat back. Marshawn has the same # of TDs, and 100 more yards on the ground. Mario Williams I can see, but again, he loses in terms of the overall player. Ferguson, Williams and even Bush are debatable, but even if you throw them in we still got the 4th best guy in the draft at the #8 slot, and that is a steal any way you cut it. 4 spots in the top ten = (to move from 8 to 4) costs you a #18 2nd round draft pick, or 2 #14 3rd round picks. Draft value chart here So, like I said, Whitner is an absolute steal. Finally, the other players ahead of Whitner have all probably peaked. They are what they are and they are as good as they are going to get. They average safety doesn't really hit their stride until 5-6 years in the league, and that means Whitner is only going to get better. I'm sure Vince Young is going to make a big comeback... Strike three. 3 strikes you're out. Here endeth the argument. Deal with it. And for those of you still trying to talk about Ferguson, please explain how the hell we were supposed to do a deal with a division rival over the guy they wanted. It's over. Be happy we didn't listen to you, and be happy that Marv Levy was running this team.
Don Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 They did the right thing. I have always thought that dynamic safeties are under rated and looking at the defense the Bills were installing, he was an awesome fit
lets_go_bills Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 Whitner has proven all the naysayers wrong. Every Bills fan absolutely loves this guy. Mario Williams is a stud. He had 14.5 sacks last year and so far has 6 sacks through six games this year. He actually was the right hoice at number one overall. AJ Hawk has shown flashes of potential and may get "there." Everyone else is worthy of the "bust" moniker.
nemhoff Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 Glad that they did their homework and didn't just go for the sexy pick ala Matt Millen.
mosuavea Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 You might as well be still arguing that The Surge didn't work. Thanks for playing
lets_go_bills Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 Glad that they did their homework and didn't just go for the sexy pick ala Matt Millen. No, no, you got it all wrong, Millen would've just taken a WR.
Steely Dan Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 I agree with you 100% but the argument will NEVER end. Whitner could make the pro-bowl and be MVP of the league and there are people who would argue they took him too soon or they should have taken someone else. Yada, Yada, Yada.
Coach Tuesday Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 I agree with you 100%, BUT, shouldn't we look at the players drafted AFTER Whitner (who would've been available at that pick), instead of the players drafted before him?
OCinBuffalo Posted October 21, 2008 Author Posted October 21, 2008 I agree with you 100%, BUT, shouldn't we look at the players drafted AFTER Whitner (who would've been available at that pick), instead of the players drafted before him? Why? My argument is based on the fact that the 7 teams in front of us could've picked Whitner and didn't = we stole from them. But, for the sake of argument let's look at the next 7.... 9 Detroit Lions Ernie Sims Linebacker 10 Arizona Cardinals Matt Leinart Quarterback 11 Denver Broncos (from St. Louis Rams) Jay Cutler Quarterback 12 Baltimore Ravens (from Cleveland Browns) Haloti Ngata Defensive tackle 13 Cleveland Browns (from Baltimore) Kamerion Wimbley Defensive end/Linebacker 14 Philadelphia Eagles Brodrick Bunkley Defensive tackle 15 St. Louis Rams (from Atlanta Falcons via Denver) Tye Hill Sims? Meh. Lineart? Almost Bust. Cutler? We'll see, but no way he is as good a leader, and he's a friggin QB? Plus he can't keep his mouth shut("I have a stronger arm than Elway" ), plus he looked terrible against us and last game. Ngata? This is the only real argument, but when you have a NOW top 4 player on the board, you take him, regardless of position. Wimbley? I have no idea who he is or what he is doing, and that can't be good. Bunkley? Bust. Hill? Bust. So, no, really no friggin way in hell are any of those guys better overall players than Whitner. None of them has had the net positive effect overall that he has, and most of them have done a hell of a lot worse.
Thurman#1 Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 I agree with you 100%, BUT, shouldn't we look at the players drafted AFTER Whitner (who would've been available at that pick), instead of the players drafted before him? Exactamundo. By looking at the guys above, you have just proven whether the teams above us made bad picks too. Or whether it was a terrible year. And you've certainly set out your qualifications about what makes up a good high-level pick. But your guidelines don't line up particularly well with what most people look for. But if we look using your standards, gotta admit that Donte measures up. Still haven't seen the game-changing plays. A lot of guys can play safety at a reasonable level.
freester Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 Why? My argument is based on the fact that the 7 teams in front of us could've picked Whitner and didn't = we stole from them. But, for the sake of argument let's look at the next 7.... 9 Detroit Lions Ernie Sims Linebacker 10 Arizona Cardinals Matt Leinart Quarterback 11 Denver Broncos (from St. Louis Rams) Jay Cutler Quarterback 12 Baltimore Ravens (from Cleveland Browns) Haloti Ngata Defensive tackle 13 Cleveland Browns (from Baltimore) Kamerion Wimbley Defensive end/Linebacker 14 Philadelphia Eagles Brodrick Bunkley Defensive tackle 15 St. Louis Rams (from Atlanta Falcons via Denver) Tye Hill Sims? Meh. Lineart? Almost Bust. Cutler? We'll see, but no way he is as good a leader, and he's a friggin QB? Plus he can't keep his mouth shut("I have a stronger arm than Elway" ), plus he looked terrible against us and last game. Ngata? This is the only real argument, but when you have a NOW top 4 player on the board, you take him, regardless of position. Wimbley? I have no idea who he is or what he is doing, and that can't be good. Bunkley? Bust. Hill? Bust. So, no, really no friggin way in hell are any of those guys better overall players than Whitner. None of them has had the net positive effect overall that he has, and most of them have done a hell of a lot worse. We should have taken Ngata and traded up for Whitner. Instead we reached tremendously for Mccargo. Ngata is an elite DT. I am very happy with Whitner, but for a high first 2nd and third, we only ended up with one good player (Whitner is not great or pro bowl level)
StupidNation Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 Exactamundo. By looking at the guys above, you have just proven whether the teams above us made bad picks too. Or whether it was a terrible year. And you've certainly set out your qualifications about what makes up a good high-level pick. But your guidelines don't line up particularly well with what most people look for. But if we look using your standards, gotta admit that Donte measures up. Still haven't seen the game-changing plays. A lot of guys can play safety at a reasonable level. The first 7 are off the table, end of discussion unless you want to compare the value of Williams to Whitner, which again is a non-discussion. So Ngata was not as a good of value as Whitner in the 8th? Most people wanted Ngata, and to this day will tell you (myself included) that a team is built from the lines and a great safety will never equal a pretty good DT. A pretty good DT will make the safeties look better, but a really good safety doesn't change games unless you are a once in a decade player, and it's never worth the investment to do so and gamble to see if they are. DTs change every game they are in, even extremely good safeties don't do that unless they are exceptional in pass coverage. Whitner is below average in pass coverage with his bend but don't break philosophy of giving up the pass with a cushion and try crushing the guy after they catch. Whitner is WAY above average on the run, but a good DT would do more for the run.
OCinBuffalo Posted October 21, 2008 Author Posted October 21, 2008 We should have taken Ngata and traded up for Whitner. Instead we reached tremendously for Mccargo. Ngata is an elite DT. I am very happy with Whitner, but for a high first 2nd and third, we only ended up with one good player (Whitner is not great or pro bowl level) I agree with you 100% but the argument will NEVER end. Whitner could make the pro-bowl and be MVP of the league and there are people who would argue they took him too soon or they should have taken someone else. Yada, Yada, Yada. So freester, if Whitner makes the pro-bowl this year, which is certainly in the running to do, will you finally abandon this nonsense? How can you say that he's not "great", when I specifically defined great = makes other players better, and then gave specific examples of Whitner doing just that? Hows about you provide something, anything, that proves that Whitner isn't already acting like a "great" player.
Dawgg Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 So freester, if Whitner makes the pro-bowl this year, which is certainly in the running to do, will you finally abandon this nonsense? How can you say that he's not "great", when I specifically defined great = makes other players better, and then gave specific examples of Whitner doing just that? Hows about you provide something, anything, that proves that Whitner isn't already acting like a "great" player. If he makes the Pro Bowl, then yes. The bottom line is that he's a good player NOT a great one. Your definition of "great" is awfully convenient in this case, but it's flat-out wrong. By your definition, Fred Jackson is a great player, as he certainly makes the players around him better. Great players at the safety position make game-changing plays. It's nice that he's versatile and it's wonderful that he's likes to talk the talk... but the bottom line is this: he has yet to show that he's an elite player at his position. Freester is right. In the 2006 draft, a high first, high second and high third were spent and the output of that is a good (and improving), versatile safety who is adept at PR.
OCinBuffalo Posted October 21, 2008 Author Posted October 21, 2008 The first 7 are off the table, end of discussion unless you want to compare the value of Williams to Whitner, which again is a non-discussion. So Ngata was not as a good of value as Whitner in the 8th? Most people wanted Ngata, and to this day will tell you (myself included) that a team is built from the lines and a great safety will never equal a pretty good DT. A pretty good DT will make the safeties look better, but a really good safety doesn't change games unless you are a once in a decade player, and it's never worth the investment to do so and gamble to see if they are. DTs change every game they are in, even extremely good safeties don't do that unless they are exceptional in pass coverage. Whitner is below average in pass coverage with his bend but don't break philosophy of giving up the pass with a cushion and try crushing the guy after they catch. Whitner is WAY above average on the run, but a good DT would do more for the run. And if this was 1985 I would agree with you. But it's not, is it? Since it's not 1985 and this league isn't dominated by the Bears and Giants running the ball 65% of the time, scores of 9 to 6, running for 4 yards a carry is a big deal, etc., boring-ass football, your argument falls apart. It's 2008 and that means: 1. This league passes the ball 65% of the time. 2. Your safety is your only hope in a Cover 2 of stopping the run, consistently, just look at the Colts with vs. without Bob Sanders. 3. The run is set up by the pass, not the other way around. Look at all the draws, and misdirection running plays this year. I have never seen as many as this year. Every single one of them set up by the pass. 4. Why do you think Miami's wildcat stuff was working so well? It makes big, fat, DTs who can't move irrelevant. This is a copy cat league, and the fat kids have been exposed. Next year everyone will be using that stuff, and it will be the SS, not the DT, whose job it is to stop it. Where in the heck do you get the idea that Whitner can't cover? Did you bother to read the article? We held the Bolts to 191 net passing yards, 100 less than average, and half of what they normally score. If Whitner "couldn't cover", how the hell did that happen? Magic?
C.Biscuit97 Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 If he makes the Pro Bowl, then yes. The bottom line is that he's a good player NOT a great one. Your definition of "great" is awfully convenient in this case, but it's flat-out wrong. By your definition, Fred Jackson is a great player, as he certainly makes the players around him better. Great players at the safety position make game-changing plays. It's nice that he's versatile and it's wonderful that he's likes to talk the talk... but the bottom line is this: he has yet to show that he's an elite player at his position. Freester is right. In the 2006 draft, a high first, high second and high third were spent and the output of that is a good (and improving), versatile safety who is adept at PR. He's the 4th Bills player in franchise history, and 1st defensive back ever, to record 100 tackles in his first 2 seasons.
Fingon Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 Whitner made quite a few open-field tackles, which if he missed... would have been big gains. He had one of these great plays on sunday.
BADOLBILZ Posted October 21, 2008 Posted October 21, 2008 Whitner is rounding into the player he is expected to be from that selection. With Bob Sanders injured he has a realistic chance to make his first Pro Bowl, IMO. That said, #8 overall is still very high to select a safety and safety is way down the list of positions of importance and traditionally a position teams find value at much later in the draft. The pick was rightfully questioned. Ngata seemed like the answer to the Bills leaky run defense and he's been very good while the Bills have been pretty much helpless against the run until trading for Stroud. As for Whitner being the 4th best player in the draft.......maybe eventually, but it will be a tall order in a draft featuring TANDEM picks like Ferguson and Mangold, Williams and DeMeco Ryans, Cutler and Brandon Marshall.......some really good players. In the end, did they reach for Whitner? Yeah, but he is turning out to be worth the risk. You might as well be still arguing that The Surge didn't work. It's time to deal with the reality that The Surge did work and drafting Donte Whitner at 8 in 2006 was not only not a reach, it's lining up to be a steal. Let's start with this right here. A "great" player makes those around him better. How about a player that can replace those around him due to matchup or injury and improve the play at that position? Strike one. Let's look at who was drafted ahead of Whitner: 1 Houston Texans Mario Williams Defensive end 2 New Orleans Saints Reggie Bush Running back 3 Tennessee Titans Vince Young Quarterback 4 New York Jets D'Brickashaw Ferguson Offensive tackle 5 Green Bay Packers A. J. Hawk Linebacker 6 San Francisco 49ers Vernon Davis Tight end 7 Oakland Raiders Michael Huff Safety Who of the above is a better leader than Whitner? Who is, pound for pound, playing better at their position? Who is having a better effect on the players around them? Who can step in and play 3 other positions on the field? Strike two. Hawk, Davis, and Huff? It's not even a debate. I can see Ferguson, maybe, but Whitner's intangibles and versatility means he wins. Young? Please. Reggie Bush is starting to look like a 3rd down scat back. Marshawn has the same # of TDs, and 100 more yards on the ground. Mario Williams I can see, but again, he loses in terms of the overall player. Ferguson, Williams and even Bush are debatable, but even if you throw them in we still got the 4th best guy in the draft at the #8 slot, and that is a steal any way you cut it. 4 spots in the top ten = (to move from 8 to 4) costs you a #18 2nd round draft pick, or 2 #14 3rd round picks. Draft value chart here So, like I said, Whitner is an absolute steal. Finally, the other players ahead of Whitner have all probably peaked. They are what they are and they are as good as they are going to get. They average safety doesn't really hit their stride until 5-6 years in the league, and that means Whitner is only going to get better. I'm sure Vince Young is going to make a big comeback... Strike three. 3 strikes you're out. Here endeth the argument. Deal with it. And for those of you still trying to talk about Ferguson, please explain how the hell we were supposed to do a deal with a division rival over the guy they wanted. It's over. Be happy we didn't listen to you, and be happy that Marv Levy was running this team.
OCinBuffalo Posted October 21, 2008 Author Posted October 21, 2008 If he makes the Pro Bowl, then yes. The bottom line is that he's a good player NOT a great one. Your definition of "great" is awfully convenient in this case, but it's flat-out wrong. By your definition, Fred Jackson is a great player, as he certainly makes the players around him better. Great players at the safety position make game-changing plays. It's nice that he's versatile and it's wonderful that he's likes to talk the talk... but the bottom line is this: he has yet to show that he's an elite player at his position. Freester is right. In the 2006 draft, a high first, high second and high third were spent and the output of that is a good (and improving), versatile safety who is adept at PR. Hey Dawgg Still think the Pats* D isn't old and/or their best, and final, shot wasn't last year? Fred Jackson sure as hell played like a "great" player last week. I wouldn't be surprised if he gets a look as an alternate pro-bowler. But, what does it matter? The fact is that he is a great part of this team, and we would certainly miss him if he was out. My definition is the exact same that you hear everyone else use when the talk about the draft, so why is it suddenly only "convenient" when it is applied to Whitner? Whitner made two game changing plays the first game he ever played. We are talking about a third year SS here, not a RB or a G, so let's realize that amount of mental work that goes into being elite at Whitner's position, especially in a Cover-2 based defense. We are coming up against teams/players Whitner has seen before, and let's see how he does. My bet is he's going to light them the f up. WTF does McCargo have to do with any of this? So drafting McCargo makes drafting Whitner a bad idea? We drafted Whitner first! You have a lot of explaining to do on that one.
Recommended Posts