I have a Man-crush on Pettigrew

[Schobel94]

And Mike Mayock was just deified by the pope. Turned out he has never been wrong. Mayock is good, but not perfect. And Mayock is probably assuming that he will be drafted by a team which has a defense which he would fit. Our defense primarily needs sacks from the front four. That's the reason we're even talking about DE, because we need one who gets us a lot of sacks. Ayers is excellent against the run but only decent at rushing the passer.

 

http://www.angelfire.com/ia3/colts/images/pic2.jpg

[PushthePile]

You are the one who's smoking crack if you believe that 11.5 number. The website that came up with that number had no idea who was supposed to be blocking who on what plays, counted the plays where the QB held onto the ball for more than 4 seconds before the sack against the LT and otherwise made their figures about half a step up from throwing a dart at a board. It had no validity.

 

On a recent thread, a poster, wish it was me, but it wasn't, put up footage of every sack with discussion. It was very clear that about 5 sacks were Peters's fault, and that most of those were early in the season. That 11.5 was nonsense. So, yeah, I can explain it, as can any observer with a half a lick of sense. What defenses did we play when Walker was LT again? Oh, yeah, some of the worst in the league.

 

If you want to compare numbers, compare Peters's numbers the last time he actually went to camp. One year and one-half of one sack. Philly is going to get Peters into camp.

 

And that is how we just got much much worse.

Those who support Peters, discredit that 11.5 number. Thats okay. What's not okay is assuming that Peters was shafted more than anyone else in the NFL. Use that number as a guideline and comparison to other LTs, who were graded under the same system as Peters. It would be safe to assume that these LTs all had some sacks rightly counted against them and some not. It's kind of dumb to act like that number means nothing.

 

We can all agree that those sacks came from our old left side.

[Thurman#1]

I have heard that argument over and over and it ignores one thing. Do you remember the teams we played early last season. The league's dregs. We looked OK against horrible competition. That's not a ringing endorsement.

 

Bell might indeed make an acceptable second-stringer this year. And by 2010 or 2011, who knows. But this year it's not happening. We absolutely need a good LT, and we don't have on right now.

 

Here is an article with a realistic look at the new situation at LT. It's an interview with a Scouts Inc. analyst. He's got it right. Walker is too stiff to be a good against speed rushers. Bell is inexperienced and it's just too early for him.

 

We need an LT in the draft. Early.

 

 

 

Oops. I wrote that, but didn't include the link. Here it is:

 

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/afceast/0-7-88/...on-Peters-.html

[Thurman#1]

Those who support Peters, discredit that 11.5 number. Thats okay. What's not okay is assuming that Peters was shafted more than anyone else in the NFL. Use that number as a guideline and comparison to other LTs, who were graded under the same system as Peters. It would be safe to assume that these LTs all had some sacks rightly counted against them and some not. It's kind of dumb to act like that number means nothing.

 

We can all agree that those sacks came from our old left side.

 

 

 

It is actually not safe at all. It is purely an assumption on your part. If you believe it to be true, go ahead and look at the play of some other LT, analyze his sacks and build an argument. If you don't do this, you're just guessing.

 

The main point, anyway, is that when Peters goes to training camp as he did in 2007, he plays as well as anyone in the league. One half of one sack in 2007. That's what we could have had. But now we don't. Now we have a very big stiff guy and a guy who has only played LT at any level for about two years.

 

We desperately need an LT and there's nowhere else to get a decent one at this point than in the draft.

 

Outtahere.

[Schobel94]

It is actually not safe at all. It is purely an assumption on your part. If you believe it to be true, go ahead and look at the play of some other LT, analyze his sacks and build an argument. If you don't do this, you're just guessing.

 

The main point, anyway, is that when Peters goes to training camp as he did in 2007, he plays as well as anyone in the league. One half of one sack in 2007. That's what we could have had. But now we don't. Now we have a very big stiff guy and a guy who has only played LT at any level for about two years.

 

We desperately need an LT and there's nowhere else to get a decent one at this point than in the draft.

 

Outtahere.

 

http://www.coedhumor.com/images/posters/600/retard-1.jpg

[Buffaloed in Pa]

But why do we need to take a LT in the 1st round at all?

 

When Walker was at LT and Chambers at RT, the line was more than good. The pass protection was excellent. Not to mention we also have Bell, who we hear is progressing really well. Sure, Bell hasn't played a down in this league, but neither has any tackle in the draft.

 

I think selecting a tackle in the 1st round would be dumb with our other needs.

Some NEVER get it.

[ans4e64]

It is actually not safe at all. It is purely an assumption on your part. If you believe it to be true, go ahead and look at the play of some other LT, analyze his sacks and build an argument. If you don't do this, you're just guessing.

 

The main point, anyway, is that when Peters goes to training camp as he did in 2007, he plays as well as anyone in the league. One half of one sack in 2007. That's what we could have had. But now we don't. Now we have a very big stiff guy and a guy who has only played LT at any level for about two years.

 

We desperately need an LT and there's nowhere else to get a decent one at this point than in the draft.

 

Outtahere.

 

Wait, so you honestly believe Peters was ever going to come back to the Bills the same?

 

He wasn't. He has been pissed at this organization for two years and his play and attitude showed it. He would have held out again, and even if we paid him, the relationship was sour.

 

We made the best of this situation. There was no way he was ever coming back to the Bills the same.

[PushthePile]

It is actually not safe at all. It is purely an assumption on your part. If you believe it to be true, go ahead and look at the play of some other LT, analyze his sacks and build an argument. If you don't do this, you're just guessing.

 

The main point, anyway, is that when Peters goes to training camp as he did in 2007, he plays as well as anyone in the league. One half of one sack in 2007. That's what we could have had. But now we don't. Now we have a very big stiff guy and a guy who has only played LT at any level for about two years.

 

We desperately need an LT and there's nowhere else to get a decent one at this point than in the draft.

 

Outtahere.

What's more of an assumption?

 

You: Jason Peters was unfairly tagged with those 11.5 sacks in 2008, and indeed played at an elite level. He was graded harsher than the average.

 

Me: Jason Peters might not have given up 11.5 sacks in 2008, but his numbers were graded from the same system as every NFL LT. His number any way you spin it, was one of the worst last year.

 

 

You can analyze the game film if you need to, I watched the games already.

[Buffaloed in Pa]

Wait, so you honestly believe Peters was ever going to come back to the Bills the same?

 

He wasn't. He has been pissed at this organization for two years and his play and attitude showed it. He would have held out again, and even if we paid him, the relationship was sour.

 

We made the best of this situation. There was no way he was ever coming back to the Bills the same.

Reading my mind,word for word. Scary.

[Schobel94]

What's more of an assumption?

 

You: Jason Peters was unfairly tagged with those 11.5 sacks in 2008, and indeed played at an elite level. He was graded harsher than the average.

 

Me: Jason Peters might not have given up 11.5 sacks in 2008, but his numbers were graded from the same system as every NFL LT. His number any way you spin it, was one of the worst last year.

 

 

You can analyze the game film if you need to, I watched the games already.

 

http://redriverautographs.files.wordpress..../redforeman.jpg

[ans4e64]

You are the one who's smoking crack if you believe that 11.5 number. The website that came up with that number had no idea who was supposed to be blocking who on what plays, counted the plays where the QB held onto the ball for more than 4 seconds before the sack against the LT and otherwise made their figures about half a step up from throwing a dart at a board. It had no validity.

 

On a recent thread, a poster, wish it was me, but it wasn't, put up footage of every sack with discussion. It was very clear that about 5 sacks were Peters's fault, and that most of those were early in the season. That 11.5 was nonsense. So, yeah, I can explain it, as can any observer with a half a lick of sense. What defenses did we play when Walker was LT again? Oh, yeah, some of the worst in the league.

 

If you want to compare numbers, compare Peters's numbers the last time he actually went to camp. One year and one-half of one sack. Philly is going to get Peters into camp.

 

And that is how we just got much much worse.

 

First of all, I'm not going to take statistics from nearly 3 years ago and ASSUME I'm getting the same as those, this year. That's absurd.

 

Second, how about the 1st week of the season when Chambers dominated one of the best pass rushers in the league? How about when Walker dominated Derrick Burgess? How about when every tackle we put in front of Quentin Groves handled him, and Peters couldn't?

[Flbillsfan#1]

And Mike Mayock was just deified by the pope. Turned out he has never been wrong. Mayock is good, but not perfect. And Mayock is probably assuming that he will be drafted by a team which has a defense which he would fit. Our defense primarily needs sacks from the front four. That's the reason we're even talking about DE, because we need one who gets us a lot of sacks. Ayers is excellent against the run but only decent at rushing the passer.

OK, I guess I'll take YOUR word over Mike's.

[PushthePile]

http://redriverautographs.files.wordpress..../redforeman.jpg

Thanks Schobel. Please never stop with those hilarious links. Your contributions are so witty.

[Schobel94]

First of all, I'm not going to take statistics from nearly 3 years ago and ASSUME I'm getting the same as those, this year. That's absurd.

 

Second, how about the 1st week of the season when Chambers dominated one of the best pass rushers in the league? How about when Walker dominated Derrick Burgess? How about when every tackle we put in front of Quentin Groves handled him, and Peters couldn't?

 

I am pretty sure this says it all. Now imagine him in an eagles jersey and us with our two first rounders...epic win!!!

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0cWIfTjfkc2T3/340x.jpg

[Buffaloed in Pa]

First of all, I'm not going to take statistics from nearly 3 years ago and ASSUME I'm getting the same as those, this year. That's absurd.

 

Second, how about the 1st week of the season when Chambers dominated one of the best pass rushers in the league? How about when Walker dominated Derrick Burgess? How about when every tackle we put in front of Quentin Groves handled him, and Peters couldn't?

Watch them run and hide now or he was out of shape and played much better toward the end. Which is a JOKE. Then the Mystery Injury the last 2 games. Soap in his eyes showering? Then ducks the PRO-BOWL again so he doesn`t look like a FOOL. Yeah I`m going to miss him, like a bad case of hemmoroids.

[Schobel94]

Thanks Schobel. Please never stop with those hilarious links. Your contributions are so witty.

 

http://randazza.files.wordpress.com/2009/0...ddle-finger.jpg

[Maddog69]

Wow. I couldn't wait to find one of the losers that thinks this way this year so I could make fun of them. I can't believe people actually say "I wouldn't draft this player at __ slot, but trade down 3-5 picks and I would."

 

What in the HELL sense does that make, honestly? You draft a player based on how good he is. If he's a good player, you draft him, and if he isn't, then you don't. It aint rocket science.

 

At pick 11 he's not good, but at 16 he all of a sudden is a good player now? Wtf?

 

Couldn't agree more. I am sick of the morons who cry about value and saw we should trade down a few spots to get the same player. 1.) If you identify a player as significantly more important to your team than anyone else around him, take him. 2.) Even if they could guarantee that the guy they want will be available 5 picks lower, who says the team 5 picks lower wants to trade with you ? And who says that once you found a trade partner and made the trade that someone else can't then jump ahead of you to take your guy ?

 

I am not saying they should grab a guy at 11 who is a 2nd rounder. I am saying that if they identify a guy as an immediate difference maker (which I think Pettigrew is) they should grab him and don't look back.

[Maddog69]

Pettigrew will fall to late first round,if Robert Ayers is there you thank God Almighty and grab him.He reminds me alot of Dwight Freeny.Ayers will be a force.

 

If he is so good, why is he the 4th or 5th best DE on the board ?