Lori Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 http://scottpitoniak.blogspot.com/ I'll give you two reasons why these instant draft assessments aren't worth the shellack Mel Kiper Jr. uses to hold his Tarzan hair in place. One of the reasons is named Mike Williams. You remember Big Mike. Taken by the Bills with the fourth overall pick in 2002 draft, the walking solar eclipse was a can't miss offensive tackle. People throughout the league called it a brilliant pick. Sadly, I was among the blind. I parrotted what every other so-called expert was saying. Well, we all know what happened there. Big Mike became the biggest draft bust in team history, with the ramifications of that personnel whiff still being felt by a franchise in search of a competent offensive line. The second reason I hesitate to pontificate about drafts that just occurred is named Tom Brady. Even Bill "The Genius'' Belichick wondered if Brady had the stuff to play quarterback in the NFL, waiting until the sixth round - a draft position normally reserved for clip-board-holding QBs - to select Gisele's hubby. The point is, despite the millions on top of millions on top of millions that NFL teams spend on investigating these pro prospects they still get it wrong an awful lot. And I'm cool with that because it tells me that no one has come up with a test to truly measure the athletic soul. There's a human element to this that's still not quantifiable. I hope it always stays that way. To be honest, he's got it right -- we can banter all we like, but none of us knows what the Bills have for sure until they actually suit up and play a few games. (Of course, where's the fun in saying, "Wait two years and I'll let you know"?) I do know one thing, though: It's good to see the former D+C columnist writing again. Welcome back, Scott.
DrDawkinstein Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 http://scottpitoniak.blogspot.com/ To be honest, he's got it right -- we can banter all we like, but none of us knows what the Bills have for sure until they actually suit up and play a few games. (Of course, where's the fun in saying, "Wait two years and I'll let you know"?) I do know one thing, though: It's good to see the former D+C columnist writing again. Welcome back, Scott. ive typed in a few posts here that while no one can grade the drat based on how well they think the players may or may not play, you CAN grade the draft right now based on how well the FO developed and stuck to it's plan for identifying and addressing holes in the lineup. based purely on filling positional needs, and not how you expect the players to perform, you can judge/grade drafts now. and in that way, the Bills FO did mighty well. this is honestly the draft I have been waiting 10+ years for. Pass rusher and nasty interior linemen early...
K-9 Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 A few games? Heck, I'll go further and say a few seasons. Pitoniak has a firm grasp of the obvious but that's a good thing in this case. No sense in grading a draft right away. But it sells so ... That said, the Bills selected positions (interior OL and DE) that are easier for rookies to come in and contribute. Why is it that when I look at Maybin and his measurables, I'm thinking C Bennett? Except he's taller, stronger, and more athtletic. Hmm. He's gonna get a crash course in pass coverage methinks. GO BILLS!!!
Fan in Chicago Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 http://scottpitoniak.blogspot.com/ To be honest, he's got it right -- we can banter all we like, but none of us knows what the Bills have for sure until they actually suit up and play a few games. (Of course, where's the fun in saying, "Wait two years and I'll let you know"?) I do know one thing, though: It's good to see the former D+C columnist writing again. Welcome back, Scott. I don't get it. You grade something incomplete if you believe the product/thesis/paper was not completed to the specifications that you needed or did not answer the question you asked. The draft is complete, the players have been selected. While I agree with the general thought that we should not grade players before a year or two in the NFL, I don't agree with the philosophy of first grading the draft and then awarding it an I. He could have well said that a draft is one event that does not lend itself to grading till a year or two down the NFL road.
DC Tom Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 http://scottpitoniak.blogspot.com/ To be honest, he's got it right -- we can banter all we like, but none of us knows what the Bills have for sure until they actually suit up and play a few games. (Of course, where's the fun in saying, "Wait two years and I'll let you know"?) I do know one thing, though: It's good to see the former D+C columnist writing again. Welcome back, Scott. He neglects to mention the third reason he's not pontificating: he's writing for his blog, not for an editorial staff that needs to run a column rating the draft.
Kelly the Dog Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 http://scottpitoniak.blogspot.com/ To be honest, he's got it right -- we can banter all we like, but none of us knows what the Bills have for sure until they actually suit up and play a few games. (Of course, where's the fun in saying, "Wait two years and I'll let you know"?) I do know one thing, though: It's good to see the former D+C columnist writing again. Welcome back, Scott. Saying you can't grade these drafts is like saying you can't have opinions, because that is all they are. After every year, you can look back on the draft and re-evaluate, and maybe (if not probably) come to a different conclusion and grade. But you do that with evaluations of all players and units and the teams. And we do.
Steely Dan Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 ive typed in a few posts here that while no one can grade the drat based on how well they think the players may or may not play, you CAN grade the draft right now based on how well the FO developed and stuck to it's plan for identifying and addressing holes in the lineup. based purely on filling positional needs, and not how you expect the players to perform, you can judge/grade drafts now. and in that way, the Bills FO did mighty well. this is honestly the draft I have been waiting 10+ years for. Pass rusher and nasty interior linemen early... Also, a draft can be judged on how much value a team gets. A guy who's projected to be a second rounder drafted in the fourth round is a good value for that team and gives them one reason for a good grade. If a team drafts a safety that a lot of teams have listed as a UDFA in the second round then that's one reason to downgrade their draft. The day after grades have nothing to do with a players performance. The grades are for projected performance.
Lurker Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 http://scottpitoniak.blogspot.com/I do know one thing, though: It's good to see the former D+C columnist writing again. Welcome back, Scott. He'd better not be too rational, though. You gotta 'play the game' and be controversial if you want to attract eyeballs.... Good to see his work again.
AJ1 Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 ive typed in a few posts here that while no one can grade the drat based on how well they think the players may or may not play, you CAN grade the draft right now based on how well the FO developed and stuck to it's plan for identifying and addressing holes in the lineup. based purely on filling positional needs, and not how you expect the players to perform, you can judge/grade drafts now. and in that way, the Bills FO did mighty well. this is honestly the draft I have been waiting 10+ years for. Pass rusher and nasty interior linemen early... I agree. Incomplete is about as big a copout as can be claimed. Why bother to write a column on the subject if your major point is no one knows?
Lv-Bills Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 http://scottpitoniak.blogspot.com/ To be honest, he's got it right -- we can banter all we like, but none of us knows what the Bills have for sure until they actually suit up and play a few games. (Of course, where's the fun in saying, "Wait two years and I'll let you know"?) I do know one thing, though: It's good to see the former D+C columnist writing again. Welcome back, Scott. Ummmm, ok, and this blog has any value in what way? He states the painfully obvious that you can't grade a draft right away. Well, no schitt. Hey Scott, make a prediction on how YOU think the Bills did, and then come back three years from now, and grade yourself on how much you knew. Otherwise, this is just another anti-grading of a teams draft early after it's over blog. Go out on a limb, and tell us how you think they did. Then, people can rip or praise you three years from now, when you revisit your grades. Weak!
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 I don't think we should criticize Scott's blog. It would be more prudent and level headed to consider it for a few months or even years and revisit it at a later date. It's really impossible to judge the possible truth of his words right now. Give it some time.
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 I don't think we should criticize Scott's blog. It would be more prudent and level headed to consider it for a few months or even years and revisit it at a later date. It's really impossible to judge the possible truth of his words right now. Give it some time. I'm not sure anyone should comment on San Jose's post, at this time. We should wait until we know whether or not Scott's blog post is correct a few weeks into the season, then we can offer a grade for San Jose's post that actually means something. You'll just have to wait, SJ. We'll let you know in a few months' time whether or not you're permitted to stay.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 I'm not sure anyone should comment on San Jose's post, at this time. We should wait until we know whether or not Scott's blog post is correct a few weeks into the season, then we can offer a grade for San Jose's post that actually means something. You'll just have to wait, SJ. We'll let you know in a few months' time whether or not you're permitted to stay. Alright Boone. I'll be waiting by the phone into September or whenever it becomes abundantly obvious to most that my post ended up having any merit based upon the accuracy of Scott's original blog post. God I hope he's right and that the epiphany that he is right becomes clear sooner rather than later. In the meantime I'll miss you guys.
SKOOBY Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 Based on us filling needs, he's all wet. We've been hurting on the lines for years and focused on that this draft and even after it with some UDFA we picked up.
BuffaloBill Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 I agree that we will not know what this draft has brought for at least 2/3rds of the way into the season and likely not until the end of the 2010 season. On paper, I would argue this is a good draft class that has the peotenial to be a great one. If we were to judge last year's draft right now, as another example, I would argue the Bills get a failing grade. However, if hardy, Johnson, Bowen and Bell contribute this year it could end up being a very solid draft class. You only learn what you have when they hit the field.
Magox Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 I don't think we should criticize Scott's blog. It would be more prudent and level headed to consider it for a few months or even years and revisit it at a later date. It's really impossible to judge the possible truth of his words right now. Give it some time. San Jose, i respect your opinions just about as much as anyone's, but Scott's blog was nothing more than stating the obvious. Of course you can't fully evaluate a draft until after the players have played after some time. I think pretty much everyone realizes that, it goes without saying. The issue is that he did say it, so I think it is fair game that people are criticizing him for being Captain obvious! Part of the fun of the draft is to evaluate on paper the players that were drafted.
Fan in Chicago Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 I'm not sure anyone should comment on San Jose's post, at this time. We should wait until we know whether or not Scott's blog post is correct a few weeks into the season, then we can offer a grade for San Jose's post that actually means something. You'll just have to wait, SJ. We'll let you know in a few months' time whether or not you're permitted to stay. So are you giving the blog an I ?
Fan in Chicago Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 San Jose, i respect your opinions just about as much as anyone's, but Scott's blog was nothing more than stating the obvious. Sarcasm meter off today, Magox ?
Recommended Posts