Astrobot Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 I have to submit the Bills' positional needs to DraftTek for their next consensus mock draft. I like to be a democratic despot; I'm willing to listen, discuss, debate, and then decide. We put P1 as a top priority at one position, and there can be only one top priority. You can elect to NOT have a P1. However, you can have multiple P2, P3, P4, or P9. There is no such thing as a P5, P6, P7 or P8. P9 basically means you don't want to draft that position. Cornerback, anyone? Here's what I am thinking: P1=OT P2=OLB, DT, DE P3=TE, OC P4=FS, SS, RB, WR P9=CB, OG Thoughts? I will post our needs at 9pm EST. Astro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVUFootball29 Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 I have to submit the Bills' positional needs to DraftTek for their next consensus mock draft. I like to be a democratic despot; I'm willing to listen, discuss, debate, and then decide. We put P1 as a top priority at one position, and there can be only one top priority. You can elect to NOT have a P1. However, you can have multiple P2, P3, P4, or P9. There is no such thing as a P5, P6, P7 or P8. P9 basically means you don't want to draft that position. Cornerback, anyone? Here's what I am thinking: P1=OT P2=OLB, DT, DE P3=TE, OC P4=FS, SS, RB, WR P9=CB, OG Thoughts? I will post our needs at 9pm EST. Astro 1. OT or OLB, best value available 2. Best player among OT,LB, DT 3. OL, WR, CB 4. Best skill position available Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murra Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 P1=DT, OT P2=OLB, DE P3=QB P4=WR P9=CB, OG, OC, TE, FB, S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share Posted October 27, 2009 P1=DT, OTP2=OLB, DE P3=QB P4=WR P9=CB, OG, OC, TE, FB, S. So far I like this the most, but I don't see how WR is ahead of more O-Line depth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murra Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 So far I like this the most, but I don't see how WR is ahead of more O-Line depth. You're probably right. I'm not really sure if we'll address the center position like you seem to think. That might be the right move, but if I'm predicting based on drafting habits, and our same guys are running this next draft, we'll look towards a TO replacement even though it will likely be a wasted late-round pick. As far as center goes, we're set at guard, and Hangartner isn't that old, so I could see us adding depth maybe in the later picks, but our need seems blaring only at the tackle positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share Posted October 27, 2009 You're probably right. I'm not really sure if we'll address the center position like you seem to think. That might be the right move, but if I'm predicting based on drafting habits, and our same guys are running this next draft, we'll look towards a TO replacement even though it will likely be a wasted late-round pick. As far as center goes, we're set at guard, and Hangartner isn't that old, so I could see us adding depth maybe in the later picks, but our need seems blaring only at the tackle positions. I thought we had trouble up the middle with the beefy DT's Carolina had (Hollis Thomas et al). I will bet we'll either see the move of Wood to OC and picking up a Day 2 OG or leave Wood where he is and get a backup OC, again Day 2. We don't know if we have TO's replacement b/c Steve Johnson and James Hardy have yet to see the field, and Justin Jenkins has size and speed as well. When will we start working these guys onto the field? How many TO faux-pas will it take? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cash Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Where's QB? I would put QB at P1, but our O-line is so bad, I'll go with: P1 = None P2 = QB, OT P3 = LB, DT P4 = TE, DE, OG P9 = FS, SS, RB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I have to submit the Bills' positional needs to DraftTek for their next consensus mock draft. I like to be a democratic despot; I'm willing to listen, discuss, debate, and then decide. We put P1 as a top priority at one position, and there can be only one top priority. You can elect to NOT have a P1. However, you can have multiple P2, P3, P4, or P9. There is no such thing as a P5, P6, P7 or P8. P9 basically means you don't want to draft that position. Cornerback, anyone? Here's what I am thinking: P1=OT P2=OLB, DT, DE Thoughts? I will post our needs at 9pm EST. Astro 1 & 2 are right on the money. You scared me with the thread title, no OT but QB listed first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cash Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 On second thought, I'd remove RB from P9. Too injury-prone a position to get complacent, plus late-round gems are often found at RB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 So far I like this the most, but I don't see how WR is ahead of more O-Line depth. I thought you said you couldn't have more than one #1 priority? I'm confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billnutinphoenix Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Need 2 Tackles.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share Posted October 27, 2009 Where's QB? I would put QB at P1, but our O-line is so bad, I'll go with: P1 = None P2 = QB, OT P3 = LB, DT P4 = TE, DE, OG P9 = FS, SS, RB I think this makes sense, especially given the array of great QB and OT's about where we pick. Also, since LB is deep in free agency, you have that priority right behind. I'd add WR either at P9 or P4, leading toward P9. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Rob Johnson Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Here's what I am thinking:P1=OT P2=OLB, DT, DE P3=TE, OC P4=FS, SS, RB, WR P9=CB, OG I disagree with DE at 2, should be after TE or C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share Posted October 27, 2009 I disagree with DE at 2, should be after TE or C. I think the thought here is that Denney's contract is up and Maybin isn't the run-stopper type DE. Agree our need is greater at TE, and (depending on Wood's ultimate position) OC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share Posted October 27, 2009 P1 = None P2 = QB, OT P3 = LB, DT P4 = TE, OC, DE P9 = FS, SS, RB, WR I think I'll submit this for DraftTek's next consensus draft. Feel dree to enter your own positional needs into their ODS Simulator where you can change draft order, make trades, etc. Thanks for the good contributions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 P1 = NoneP2 = QB, OT P3 = LB, DT P4 = TE, OC, DE P9 = FS, SS, RB, WR I think I'll submit this for DraftTek's next consensus draft. Feel dree to enter your own positional needs into their ODS Simulator where you can change draft order, make trades, etc. Thanks for the good contributions! Hey astro, I've got a name for you: Lindsey Witten - DE/UConn 7 games, 10 sacks, and he has a relatively famous brother... ...Donte Whitner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share Posted October 27, 2009 Hey astro, I've got a name for you: Lindsey Witten - DE/UConn 7 games, 10 sacks, and he has a relatively famous brother... ...Donte Whitner Good Call. Our Big Board guys have him ranked #135 in the draft right now, seeing him as a DE in a 4-3 or possibly an OLB in the 3-4, going possibly in RD#4 or #5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manbeast Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I have to submit the Bills' positional needs to DraftTek for their next consensus mock draft. I like to be a democratic despot; I'm willing to listen, discuss, debate, and then decide. We put P1 as a top priority at one position, and there can be only one top priority. You can elect to NOT have a P1. However, you can have multiple P2, P3, P4, or P9. There is no such thing as a P5, P6, P7 or P8. P9 basically means you don't want to draft that position. Cornerback, anyone? Here's what I am thinking: P1=OT P2=OLB, DT, DE P3=TE, OC P4=FS, SS, RB, WR P9=CB, OG Thoughts? I will post our needs at 9pm EST. Astro wow we are good on the D line p1 impact OLB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cash Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I think this makes sense, especially given the array of great QB and OT's about where we pick. Also, since LB is deep in free agency, you have that priority right behind. I'd add WR either at P9 or P4, leading toward P9. The only reason I wouldn't put WR at P9 is that there's a significant chance that all 3 of TO, Josh Reed, and Roscoe Parrish are gone this offseason. Reed will probably get re-signed, but you never know, and I'd be surprised to see either TO or Parrish on next year's opening day roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts